Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789
Results 161 to 169 of 169

Thread: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

  1. #161

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    I would not take these numbers as granted, since ancient sources almost invaribly exaggerated. It's not rare to read in ancient Chinese texts that armies could be up to one-million-man strong. However, I do agree that Han dynasty was able to field a considerable cavalry force to answer the threats from the nomadic Xiongnu empire.

    If these large forces would be effective against Roman legions, is another matter. Countless times, Rome defeated enemies with much superior cavalry forces. In many battles of the Mithridatic wars, most notably Tigranocerta, relatively small Roman force soundly defeated their Armenian/ Pontic enemies with 50,000 of cavalry. It indicated that the bulk of these cavalrymen were light cavalry, useful for scouting and raiding but less so in battlefield. AFAIK, China didn't use armoured heavy cavalry in large number until the period of Three Kindoms.

  2. #162

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Tigranocerta is overexaggerated. The Armenians were said to field 200,000 infantry. Keep in mind a Parthian force of just 60,000 was able to force Mark Antony's army of 120,000 to a bloody retreat.

    The Chinese army that attacked in Xiongnu territory was 50,000 horsemen attacking west, and another 50,000 penetrating East. Many probably dismounted to utilize that high powered crossbows to outrange the Xiongnu. They had a huge infantry column in the rear, but mostly they were logistical support personnel rather than combat troops.

    Keep in the Roman army was no "national army" in a modern sense. They were provincial entities bought by politicians. It had no "high command" or "central command" or a system of chain of command that linked legions together. It wasn't really a centralized entity till the Late Roman Empire. Roman generals were not career soldiers, they were senators. It was not really till the 3rd century that being a career general existed.
    Last edited by HuangCaesar; July 05, 2014 at 07:25 PM.

  3. #163
    Dracula's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    If we ceded Judea and Phoenicia to China, we would have won at any time.

  4. #164

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Rome!


  5. #165
    The Wandering Storyteller's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    I wash my hands of this weirdness!
    Posts
    4,509

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Someone just make a mod out of this.





















































  6. #166

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Personally I'll say that Sun Zi and Zhuge Liang were the best Chinese generals.

  7. #167

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Oda Nobunaga View Post
    I'd say the best Han generals are Cao Cao and Han Xin against say Julius Caesar and Scipio?
    Cao Cao got tricked by Zhuge Liang almost everytime he fought against Liu Bei.

  8. #168

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ancient World View Post
    Someone just make a mod out of this.
    It would be nice tp play wouldnt it? But No Total war mod takes account of attrition and without attrition no game could simulate what would truly happen because logistics would have played such an important part in any conflict between the two. If the two powers had ever gone to war for real my belief is that they would fight mainly in Iran until they both realised they were too far apart for one to conquer the other.
    Result a draw with all the lands between them devastated and an eternal peace signed

  9. #169

    Default Re: The Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty China

    Quote Originally Posted by xjlxking View Post
    ... Mongols also destroyed China. In fact, they destroyed it without much seige.
    First, it was Song dynasty in the south and Jing dynasty in the north when Mongol came. Second, a lot of sieges happened, for example, the siege of Xiangyang, lasted for 7 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Xiangyang. Third, it took Mongol 0 years to conquer China

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •