This paper addresses the methodological challenges of comparing the iron industries in the Qin-Han and Roman empires by creating "modeling domains" as a pragmatic and utilitarian approach. These domains, built from literary and archaeological evidence, represent generalized rules and frameworks, paired with diachronic, fragmented landscapes that depict the progressive acquisition and integration of lands with established metallurgical traditions. The paper argues that simply reaching this step is not enough, as each domain should be understood as part of a larger aggregative set, with an "external" dimension. The paper further discusses the distancing effect and the need for caution in cross-domain discussions, emphasizing the importance of historical and social specificity. The Roman-Parthian and Han-Nanyue examples are used to illustrate these challenges and opportunities. The paper concludes that the comparative approach should be ever-expanding, leading to a continual dialogue between domains and a deeper understanding of the dynamics of control, trade, and technological exchange in different historical and social contexts.  

This study examines the socio-political landscape of the ancient city of Amastris (modern Amasra) through the lens of its road infrastructure, with a particular focus on the construction and significance of Aquila’s roads. Situated in the challenging terrain of northern Anatolia’s Küre Mountains, Amastris served as a vital maritime hub, linking diverse inland and coastal communities within Paphlagonia. Employing a multidisciplinary approach that integrates ancient literary analysis, archaeological evidence, and geospatial modeling, this paper reconstructs the network of primary and secondary Roman roads emanating from Amastris. The research highlights the dual role of these roads in fostering territorial coherence and enhancing regional connectivity, supporting both local autonomy and imperial governance. Key findings demonstrate that Aquila’s roads were not merely infrastructural projects but strategic undertakings that blended private investment with public utility. These projects reflect the intricate interplay between individual agency and state interests in Roman provincial administration. Furthermore, the study explores the broader cultural and economic impacts of road construction on Amastris, illustrating how connectivity shaped civic identity, social integration, and territorial integrity. The paper concludes that Aquila’s road-building initiatives were instrumental in sustaining Amastris’s strategic significance and functionality within the Roman Empire. By examining the dynamic relationship between local and imperial priorities, this study offers insights into how infrastructure functioned as a nexus of governance, economic development, and regional integration in ancient Anatolia.

As recent trends in comparing the Han and Roman empires from primarily the point of view of literary evidence has brought forth new frameworks and opportunities of research, one asks how these developments could contribute to the comparison of governance behaviors, such as the administration of the iron industry. The paper first surveys the Han and the Roman literary sources regarding the iron industry governance, with which to establish parameters of the modus operandi in the respective imperial domains, and, when possible, identifies problems articulated by ancient authors. An interesting contrast is how Han sources showed particular concern for the impact of the iron industry on agricultural performance, while the primary concerns of Roman administrators were performances in leasing and taxation. Among the items known are mines, nails, and recycled iron. Both imperial administrations took a spatially oriented approach, establishing offices and bureaus across their respective domains to address their different concerns. Mapping iron production and administration sites in the Han and the Roman empires spatially further illustrate the governance behaviors identified above. Focused discussions on new excavations in the Martys (80km NW of Narbo) and Taicheng (90km W of Chang'an) further provide local frames of reference to interrogate the priorities and challenges highlighted. The preliminary results suggest that while concerns may differ between the two imperial governments, there are similarities in governance behaviors that are not technologically related, as some scholars suggest. Both imperial governments seemed to have been capitalizing on existing iron industry communities through managerial posts, at times bureaucratizing them. While the Han empire, in particular, attempted to bureaucratize iron production and distribution wholesale, the eventual scaling back of such mobilization marks the shared limitations of imperial control on the traditional culture of production and distribution of this basic commodity.