The monumental remains of early empires always excite our wonder. The better documented histories leave no doubt that those regimes affected both their victims and their own peoples sharply. Yet critical appraisal opens questions as to what were the basic causes of imperialism and what, later, were the effects of such dramatic histories on the course of events in the longer run. Comparison of unrelated cases tests the proposition that ancient or archaic imperialism was a necessary phase in world history.
In this course, we look at the early Chinese regimes of the Qin and Han and the Incas of the Central Andes. Both inflicted themselves rapidly over diverse peoples throughout far-flung lands. Paradoxically, while both cultivated legends of the emperors’ divine qualities and prowess, both also claimed to preserve local traditions. In fact, both regimes invested so heavily in economic development and redistribution of population that local conditions were transformed widely, if not universally. In both cases, these achievements sprang from centralizing bureaucratic visions of government; and developed metropolitan and regional capital cities, accordingly, as images of world order.
Their might notwithstanding, both empires subsided in civil war. Yet, in China, the ancient precedents still affect how people expect to be governed. Probably owing to the later impact of European imperialism, Inca institutions had less effect in Peru but some commentators argue that the disruption of those institutions is itself a basic reason for the relative failure of development since the fall of the Inca empire.
What our students say
"Dr James's presentation allows the student to ponder and to digest what has been said, both in terms of personal knowledge and of course-context presentation."
