The Roman Empire ruled Europe, West Asia, and North Africa between 27BC and 476 AD. On the other hand, the Parthian Empire ruled ancient Iran between 247 BC and 224 AD. Fitzpatrick finds that these empires had a significant interaction that influenced their cultures and religions (30). This complex interplay shaped these worlds and was also associated with aspects of [political dominance, which fostered a concurrent existence. This comparison identifies how these empires’ cultural, religious and political factors influenced each other.
These empires had distinct cultures comprising different languages, art, and traditions. While language was well developed in Roma to be adopted into literature, in the Parthian empire, oral traditions were mostly used even in administering their laws. In addition, their architectural designs enhanced their ideologies and traditions. The difference was associated with the size of the architect and decorations. The Romans were huge compared to the Parthians.Ferguson suggests that the artistic motifs used by the Parthians influenced Roman architecture (17). The traditional practices, including the social norms, were districts where one relied on the hierarchical society while the other relied on the aristocracy. The connection between these two empires significantly impacted the cultures, especially in exchanging customs and traditions further; religion was another differentiating factor contributing to major influences between the two empires. The polytheistic nature of the two empires indicated that they believed and prayed to gods. In Rome, the Greek gods were significant religious practices based on the myths.
On the other hand, the Parthians also prayed to their gods and goddesses. However, these beliefs changed due to the introduction and spread of Christianity and Zoroastrianism. Christianity faced significant resistance from the Romans, which affected its progress in Rome.
On the other hand, the ideas of Zoroastrianism integrated with the traditional beliefs, leading to significant growth and impacting the religion. Millar notes that the religious aspect led to constant tension. However, the despair of this relationship had a major influence on both empires (43).
Since the empires existed concurrently, they had a major impact on trade and relationships. Typically, the growth and development of ancient civilization relied on trading. Therefore, both Rome and Parthia encouraged trade. Pollini acknowledged that the development of the Silk Road led to interaction between diverse cultures. This contributed to the influence and introduction of new ideas of living. While Rome traded precious jeweler and silk, their close counterparts, Parthia, were equipped with pottery and grain. Different trade routes were developed, including Palmyra. These empires led to the development of strategic positions for both empires.
In politics, these empires had a different approach to ensuring their power was balanced. Therefore, the use of diplomatic relationships was central to ensuring long-term success. Their political interest in different dynamics also led to wars that took centuries to solve, which indicated major rivalry, including the Roman Parthian wars (Millar, 29). These wars directly impacted the territories and ideologies between the empires. They influenced each other’s decisions, which shaped historical events. Balancing political power led to neither empire becoming a dominant state over the other.
Works Cited
Ferguson, R. James. Rome and Parthia: Power politics and diplomacy across cultural frontiers. Bond University, 2005.
Fitzpatrick, Matthew P. “Provincializing Rome: The Indian Ocean trade network and Roman imperialism.” Journal of World History (2011): 27-54.
Millar, Fergus. Rome, the Greek world, and the East: Volume 2: Government, society, and culture in the Roman Empire. Univ of North Carolina Press, 2005.
Pollini, John. From republic to empire: rhetoric, religion, and power in the visual culture of ancient Rome. Vol. 48. University of Oklahoma Press, 2012.
write