Roman Empire vs Han Empire

[Audio]

Halberd still far superior. Even Europe adopted the Halberd but only hundreds of years later.
A Halberd can hook the opponent neck or leg and slash in addition to stabbing like a spear.

A Warring States period halberd.

That would be near useless in hand to hand melee combat with no room to wield. And i doubt that's halberd anyway, looks more like dagger axe. Looks also the kind of tool to pull marauding horsemen off their mounts.

Dagger-axe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, it seems it was replaced by a normal spear in Chinese imperial military...so...couldn't have been that ground breaking.

Imho, you prolly watched some Chinese movie where the hero kills 50 enemies with a halberd alone, using all the functions of it, slash, thrust, slap (with broad side), hook, thrust with sharpened bottom, using it as defense etc etc in spectacular fashion.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Sure, but you said it in a way that implies they were just rehashing knowledge from Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece. They expanded on that knowledge quite a bit actually.

Ever heard of the learning curve? The Romans learnt a great deal from the Greeks and other great civilisation before they, too, strated to build great monuments. Just look at the Roman architectural style, they are practically a 1:1 copy of much older Greek architecture.

Classical Greek

Classical Roman

 

[Nan Yang]

Han Dynasty swords.






Compared with the short Roman swords.

 

[Audio]

Ever heard of the learning curve? The Romans learnt a great deal from the Greeks and other great civilisation before they, too, strated to build great monuments. Just look at the Roman architectural style, they are practically a 1:1 copy of much older Greek architecture.

Sure, i agreed on this before, but there were hardly only columns here. Dome and arch are unique Roman features for example.

And this was then expanded with canalization, running water, heating through floors
etc....these were unique features unheard of before.

 

[MarkusS]

Halberd still far superior. Even Europe adopted the Halberd but only hundreds of years later.
A Halberd can hook the opponent neck or leg and slash in addition to stabbing like a spear.

A Warring States period halberd.

This would be totally useless against a roman soldier. The neck protected from metal shields and the body from a large shield. The testudo formation makes this weapon useless.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Sure, i agreed on this before, but there were hardly only columns here. Dome and arch are unique Roman features for example.

And this was then expanded with canalization, running water, heating through floors
etc....these were unique features unheard of before.

Running water and canalisation were already known in much older Assyria and Greece if we only look at civilizations that are near Rome, predating Rome by 700 years. Even the much older Indus culture (in Pakistan) had sophisticated canlisation in their cities.

Floor heating is nothing new in other civilizations: Ondol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[MarkusS]

Running water and canalisation were already known in much older Assyria and Greece if we only look at civilizations that are near Rome, predating Rome by 700 years. Even the much older Indus culture (in Pakistan) had sophisticated canlisation in their cities.

Floor heating is nothing new in other civilizations: Ondol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You do realize that rome started as a greek colony and developed on this base?

And no, greece and assyria did not have running cold and hot water. And let me teach you the strongest and most powerful invention in rome. Individualism. Ancient cultures are all anonymous. You only know the king. The people are nameless masses.

 

[Audio]

Running water and canalisation were already known in much older Assyria and Greece if we only look at civilizations that are near Rome, predating Rome by 700 years. Even the much older Indus culture (in Pakistan) had sophisticated canlisation in their cities.

Floor heating is nothing new in other civilizations: Ondol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

None of them had it all, and none of them had it on such a scale.

 

[powastick]

That would be near useless in hand to hand melee combat with no room to wield. And i doubt that's halberd anyway, looks more like dagger axe. Looks also the kind of tool to pull marauding horsemen off their mounts.

Dagger-axe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, it seems it was replaced by a normal spear in Chinese imperial military...so...couldn't have been that ground breaking.

Imho, you prolly watched some Chinese movie where the hero kills 50 enemies with a halberd alone, using all the functions of it, slash, thrust, slap (with broad side), hook, thrust with sharpened bottom, using it as defense etc etc in spectacular fashion.

The Dagger-axe are not a long pike used by hoplite. They are mainly use to hook\maim behind your legs and necks. I would say Dagger-axe would win against sword and shield troops, while doing terribly against hoplite phalanx formation (severely out range). Chinese had shield and sword, used during siege warfare rather than open field battle.
Why spears? Cause barely anyone is using swordman to fight and calvary from the steppe is the major threat.

Probably what you saw was Guan Dao, very difficult to use and not used by infantry.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

You do realize that rome started as a greek colony and developed on this base?

And no, greece and assyria did not have running cold and hot water. And let me teach you the strongest and most powerful invention in rome. Individualism. Ancient cultures are all anonymous. You only know the king. The people are nameless masses.

There is no evidence that Rome was founded as a Greek colony. Not even the languages suggest any close relationship, although Greek and Latin belong to the Indo-European language family.

It would be sad, if after centuries of learning from the Greek teachers the Romans weren't able to develop further. The principle of running water was the same though.

Oh really, how come archaeologists have found names from 1000s of ordinary people from Egypt who lived 4000 years ago. We even know quite a lot of their every day life. They were ordinary craftsmen.

None of them had it all, and none of them had it on such a scale.

Again, after 700 years of learning and adopting, it would have been quite embarrassing if the Romans didn't advance at all.

 

[Brainsucker]

Your post shows that you have not read classical Chinese history or East Asian Military History. For one, simply seizing one state's capital does not necessarily mean said state would collapse. For one, during China's Zhanguo Shidai -- 戰國時 (Warring States Period), conquest of one state meant defeating the enemy's army, eradication of rebel forces, and the forced occupation of all cities, towns, forts of said state.

During Japan's own Sengoku Jidai -- 戦国時代 (Warring States Period), the unification of Japan was through the complete and total military subjugation of all the Feudal Domains (cities, towns, keeps, forts, castles) as seen through the works of Oda Nobunaga , then his successor Toyotomi Hideyoshi, then later again by Tokugawa Ieyasu.

The point: simply taking the state's capital does not equate to the conquest of said state. The latter can only be realized by the total and absolute occupation of all strong holds, and when one has laid waste to the enemy's military force.

I disagree. It was not about to occupy the whole towns, forts, etc. But to beat the leader. For China, it was the Emperor and his family. Nobunaga was never complete the unification of Japan. He never beat Mori. His eastern campaign was only reached Uesugi and Takeda. I never heard about his military campaign against the northern lords

But you're right, as long as the leader was still free, capturing the capital was useless. For China, it was proven by the war between Wu and Chu. The king of Wu, with the help of Sun Tzu beat the Chu army and conquer their capital. But the emperor was able to escape. So the war was practically still not over. The king of Chu capable to gather his subordinates again and did a counter attack, and then kick the Wu army out of his country.

Edit, on topic :
I understand why the Western People glorified the Roman Empire... and even Alexander the Great. They said that the "legacy" of these glorious faction was influenced the world even today. But... still, both of them are just the past glory. Their descendants are no longer has the "greatest" of their ancestor. Look at Italy. Compared to the Roman Empire they are nothing. They can't even take back their ancestor land and reunited Europe.

It is different to the Han Empire. Their descendant still live in their "whole" land, and proudly call themselves as the Han Ethic. So, I can say that The Roman Empire is a past glory that will never be reclaimed by their descendant. It was only an euphoria, a past tense. While the Han Empire is a progress. They are still here, even with different name and government model. The Chinese are Han people, while the Han is their ancestor. Nobody who live in the Han Empire ex-territory don't call themselves Chinese. But in the other hand, British is British, German is German, they are not the Roman Empire descendant, and not even call themselves Italian.

 

[magic-007]

as i said, your ancestors must be dwarfs if you speak like that. considering the low level of science, style and gratness they achieved, i assume that punishs you till today.



hey buddy, i wonder why you attack me but not the idiotic chinese guy right above you? racist much?



actually mot. its called development. china is unable to develop from within. it always needs to be forced from outside. we have the european union, which pretty much has same structure as the roman empire.

Don't pretend to know what you don't know . I think it still necessary for you to study with an open mind now.

 

[jammersat]

There is no evidence that Rome was founded as a Greek colony. Not even the languages suggest any close relationship, although Greek and Latin belong to the Indo-European language family.

It would be sad, if after centuries of learning from the Greek teachers the Romans weren't able to develop further. The principle of running water was the same though.

Oh really, how come archaeologists have found names from 1000s of ordinary people from Egypt who lived 4000 years ago. We even know quite a lot of their every day life. They were ordinary craftsmen.



Again, after 700 years of learning and adopting, it would have been quite embarrassing if the Romans didn't advance at all.

Romans came from northern Africa , earlier depictions of roman kings suggest they all looked like north African berbers , with an afro hair , today's Italy too has afro hair , best Italian players like toti are known for their afro; wherever they came from they weren't native to Europe ... Afro , long ear they are non-European traits

 

[Audio]

Edit, on topic :
I understand why the Western People glorified the Roman Empire... and even Alexander the Great. They said that the "legacy" of these glorious faction was influenced the world even today. But... still, both of them are just the past glory. Their descendants are no longer has the "greatest" of their ancestor. Look at Italy. Compared to the Roman Empire they are nothing. They can't even take back their ancestor land and reunited Europe.

It is different to the Han Empire. Their descendant still live in their "whole" land, and proudly call themselves as the Han Ethic. So, I can say that The Roman Empire is a past glory that will never be reclaimed by their descendant. It was only an euphoria, a past tense. While the Han Empire is a progress. They are still here, even with different name and government model. The Chinese are Han people, while the Han is their ancestor. Nobody who live in the Han Empire ex-territory don't call themselves Chinese. But in the other hand, British is British, German is German, they are not the Roman Empire descendant, and not even call themselves Italian.

This is a weak argument. In between China was raped numerous times, but due to the power of it's culture, the rapists managed to identify with it (similarly to what happened to Egyptians, their conquerors up to Roman time also took their culture).
On top of this China decided for a civilizational state, while here in the west we decided on a state based on nations.

Similarly weak was 4Gorrillas apesomething comment a few pages earlier, he claims that a guy from ancient times could have easily spoken and read newspaper in modern Beijing. He says it like it's a strong point, in some sense i do agree, but on another level, that's a sign of stagnation for the past millenium.
Stagnation evident from the fact that the people who descended from this Roman empire had to pull you out from the unenviable position (through FDI, tech transfer etc etc) in which you have found yourselves in due to the divine "wisdom" of your emperors of old and the unmatched wisdom of Mao.

As for past glory, Latin is the language of science and medicine, remnants of Roman law are still in use throughout the western world, go see any judicial building and i bet 10€'s it has Roman architectural elements in it (even the modern ones).

They are mainly use to hook\maim behind your legs and necks.

The problem is, Roman shield goes all the way down to the ground and if needed a person carrying it can hide behind it. Like this:

I suspect Romans would come up with a tactic to combat these roughly looking like:

first row would advance with shields, when people with hooks/dagger axes would emerge and thus expose themselves, a second line of legionaires would probably start throwing lances (each one had 2 which they threw before engaging in hand to hand combat) or alternatively the lances would be used to spear incoming infantry. This is also the way i suspect they would have tried to deal with long sword equipped infantry @Nan Yang

^^ standard legionaire. Note the two pilums (lances)

 

[Speeder 2]

You're also forgetting Rome's technological advantage: artillery/siege weaponry. If Han units could be immobilized or slowed they could be bombarded from outside crossbow range. Fortresses and cities were even more vulnerable.

technological advantage? don't kid yourself. Han China was at the forefront of human technological advancement at a time - many key technologies of the Han were literally 100s years ahead of anything the Romans, and the rest of the world for that matter, could come up with.

Roman artileries? what are you talking about? siege weaponaies? - go youtube the Han empire siege weaponaries which would make the Roman ones look like childplay.

Thank you for praising my ancestor, I can see you are an excellent man in histroy ,and a sophisticate man know about china histroy.Certaintly the Roman was nor nothing compare to The Han ,it was also very advanced civilization in ancient times . I mean not to go on being outspoken in that ,i'm just case by case！

You're welcome, panda. But my ancestors were amongst them, too!

View attachment 161804

^^ standard legionaire. Note the two pilums (lances)

Now go educate yourself and compare it with the true technological superpower at a time- the Han (Note that the following was only Qin empire - The Han was much more powerful and larger than Qin):

Terracotta Army was an awesome fighting machine with weapons so powerful they could kill an enemy with a single arrow | Daily Mail Online

Making Weapons for the Terracotta Army | Martinón-Torres | Archaeology International

Exquisite Weaponry Excavated from Terra Cotta Warriors Pits

China's Terra-Cotta Army: 5 Things You Should Know | TIME.com

What’s so special… and spatial… about the Terracotta Army?

Ancient Impossible (2014) s01e04 Episode Script | SS

Gentlemen,

Let's all please get back to the subject matter and refrain from posting derogatory comments. Please, and Thank You for your consideration.


Regards,

but to defend their white master, the Indians here have gone bananas.



======

Some Indians bragged here that "the Romans had more individualism, and freedom" than the Han. My ar$e!

The Roman empire was a slavery society. Europe was still primarily a slavery society as much later as during European Renaissance for god's sake.

In comparison, the Han empire was the world's first major civilisation that has abolished slavery by civil laws and was therefore based on freewill peasantry! Han Empire society was even more advanced than a typical feudal society, the feat Europe didn't achieve until quasi-modern time around the French Revolution many centries later.

Hence in today's terminology the Han Empire was a much , but much more "democratic, free and progressive" society at a time than what the Romans could have been or even dreamed of!

Roman legionaires were primarily based on forced slave soidiers from 4 corners of conquered lands, while the Han's army was based on nationwide free-will peasants whose fighting power, spirit, motivation, and patrotism (or an early form of nationalism) were leagues ahead of the Roman legionaires, apart from technological superiority.

Acutally a major reason for the fall of Rome was precisely due to its slavery empire characteristics. It consisted of countless Africans(the Blacks and Berbers), MEers etc. and the half-breeds between the original Romans and their conquered slaves, destroying the original Rome genes. Indeed, widespead miscegenation with the slaves is widely recognised by the historians as one of the major reasons of the fall of the Roman empire.