Hypothetical - Ancient Rome vs Han China

[retaxis]

Its interesting because both were at their peak power at roughly the same few hundred years. So who would have won a war if the country were closer together and could fight against one another? Of course we will never know because Rome hasn't existed in a long time but we can still imagine.

1. Land area was about equal at their height around 2000 years ago.
2. Population was about equal at 65million as well. However Rome had tens of millions of slaves who often rebelled e.g. spartacus rebellions so that has to be taken into consideration too.
3. Both were military mights of their time and conquered their neighbours. China conquered the far east and the mongol-xiongnu people as well as subdued the vietnam etc. Rome conquered much of Europe.
4. Both were very good at siege warfare and had advanced weapons for their time
5. China relied more on horse archers/cavalary especially fighting against the proto-turk/xiongnu/mongols etc while rome was more infantry.
6. Both had the strongest militaries of their era in their side of the world
7. Economy was equal as well from what I have read.
8. Both had a history of civil wars in terms of civilisations so they fought against their own people in walled cities as well adding adaptation to combat experience

So who do you think would have had the upper hand?

Edit: As discussed in thread the following was reviewed
China had:
1. Superior recurve bows which can shoot further and penetrate shields and armour
2. Saddles on horses which allowed Chinese to fight much better on horse back and shoot arrows while galloping
3. Crossbows and repeating crossbows which Europe didn't have for another 1000years
4. Greater mobility and far number of horses and horsemen
5. Collosal city walls over 10metres in height and over 6 metres thick of solid stone. Compared to thin wooden 10foot roman walls. Much better siege defence.
6. Unified ethnic group without a massive slave population who often rebels e.g. serville wars etc

 

[Maula Jatt]

Romans faced a shit load of enemies, the Germanic barbarians, Persian empire, Carthaginians, on and on
and on top of that controlled diverse people groups from ME to Europe to north Africa

But than there's a case of eurocentrism , Chinese probably were more scientifically advanced than the romans , so I don't know interesting nonetheless

 

[Beast]

..... and FYI posters below
if you say Ancient Rome retaxis will call you low IQ and somehow take the conversation towards how Han Chinese are superior high IQ people
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Topic

Romans faced a shit load of enemies, the Germanic barbarians, Persian empire, Carthaginians, on and on
and on top of that controlled diverse people groups from ME to Europe to north Africa

But than there's a case of eurocentrism , Chinese probably were more scientifically advanced than the romans , so I don't know interesting nonetheless

The Han army need to face the mighty XiongNu (Hun) and kick them to central Asia. While the Roman army simply crumble when face the Hun.

 

[LakeHawk180]

Its interesting because both were at their peak power at roughly the same few hundred years. So who would have won a war if the country were closer together and could fight against one another? Of course we will never know because Rome hasn't existed in a long time but we can still imagine.

1. Land area was about equal at their height around 2000 years ago.
2. Population was about equal at 65million as well. However Rome had tens of millions of slaves who often rebelled e.g. spartacus rebellions so that has to be taken into consideration too.
3. Both were military mights of their time and conquered their neighbours. China conquered the far east and the mongol-xiongnu people as well as subdued the vietnam etc. Rome conquered much of Europe.
4. Both were very good at siege warfare and had advanced weapons for their time
5. China relied more on horse archers/cavalary especially fighting against the proto-turk/xiongnu/mongols etc while rome was more infantry.
6. Both had the strongest militaries of their era in their side of the world
7. Economy was equal as well from what I have read.
8. Both had a history of civil wars in terms of civilisations so they fought against their own people in walled cities as well adding adaptation to combat experience

So who do you think would have had the upper hand?

Rome without a doubt.

 

[etylo]

Rome without a doubt.

Any surprise, you indians would vote for anyone opposed to China.

 

[Maula Jatt]

You know a more interesting topic than this cause I think as an empire Romans were ahead just because how challenging it was to be in their position
but as a "civilization" of 2000-4000 years Chinese were without a doubt ahead of probably anyone only competition being Persians

I would put indic civilizations in there but it's not in the category of Chinese, Persians who were "one" or earliest forms of a nation-state
it wasnt a great, singular empire/ power, it was like western/central Europe etc not like the Chinese or Persians so just like them it should be its own, separate category

Chinese went through hanization of people groups, Arabs did Arabization , Turks did Turkification

Why didnt a dominant power in Europe made the whole culture one, the same as south Asia, why didn't on singular power emerged in these regions to make it one and bigger like hans, turks, arabs

Hans were not a tribal society like the Turks or Arabs, more of a plains people

 

[retaxis]

The Han army need to face the mighty XiongNu (Hun) and kick them to central Asia. While the Roman army simply crumble when face the Hun.

To be fair, the romans were far past their peak by then and were divided between Eastern Roman Empire and Western Roman Empire and in this case we are focusing more on the earlier Roman empire when it was still united and powerful. Obviously the Chinese would run railroad thru the East or West Roman Empire without a second thought so its not really up for discussion in this instance.

 

[IblinI]

This is a forever ongoing topic, one thing in common is that people know much more about Rome than Han, so, there is not much to talked about to begin with.

 

[nahtanbob]

Its interesting because both were at their peak power at roughly the same few hundred years. So who would have won a war if the country were closer together and could fight against one another? Of course we will never know because Rome hasn't existed in a long time but we can still imagine.

1. Land area was about equal at their height around 2000 years ago.
2. Population was about equal at 65million as well. However Rome had tens of millions of slaves who often rebelled e.g. spartacus rebellions so that has to be taken into consideration too.
3. Both were military mights of their time and conquered their neighbours. China conquered the far east and the mongol-xiongnu people as well as subdued the vietnam etc. Rome conquered much of Europe.
4. Both were very good at siege warfare and had advanced weapons for their time
5. China relied more on horse archers/cavalary especially fighting against the proto-turk/xiongnu/mongols etc while rome was more infantry.
6. Both had the strongest militaries of their era in their side of the world
7. Economy was equal as well from what I have read.
8. Both had a history of civil wars in terms of civilisations so they fought against their own people in walled cities as well adding adaptation to combat experience

So who do you think would have had the upper hand?

Romans lived in a rougher neighborhood. China did not have to worry for the most part -- Siberia in the North, deserts of Central Asia, Himalayas in the South-Central and Pacific Ocean in the East.
Romans benefited a lot from the innovations of ancient Greece, Egypt and Middle Easterners

Romans had a greater impact in the sense that Modern Europe is built on the foundations of Roman Empire. China's influence was limited to Korea, Japan and maybe Vietnam.

This is a forever ongoing topic, one thing in common is that people know much more about Rome than Han, so, there is not much to talked about to begin with.

for good reason I may add

 

[Maula Jatt]

Romans benefited a lot from the innovations of ancient Greece, Egypt and Middle Easterners

yes they kinda leached off of other smaller, homogenous civilizations but scientifically weren't as advanced as either them or the Chinese

 

[retaxis]

You know a more interesting topic than this cause I think as an empire Romans were ahead just because how challenging it was to be in their position
but as a "civilization" of 2000-4000 years Chinese were without a doubt ahead of probably anyone only competition being Persians

I would put indic civilizations in there but it's not in the category of Chinese, Persians who were "one" or earliest forms of a nation-state
it wasnt a great, singular empire/ power, it was like western/central Europe etc not like the Chinese or Persians so just like them it should be its own, separate category

Chinese went through hanization of people groups, Arabs did Arabization , Turks did Turkification

Why didnt a dominant power in Europe made the whole culture one, the same as south Asia, why didn't on singular power emerged in these regions to make it one and bigger like hans, turks, arabs

Hans were not a tribal society like the Turks or Arabs, more of a plains people

Nations which desire to go to war constantly and expand are all gone from history whether its the Assyrians, Carthaginians, Romans, Babylonians etc. China was around before those empires and are still around today. Even to the Romans, China was an ancient empire to them.

Countries that want to survive in perpetuity has to focus on assimilation and wealth accumulation thru business and education. War with others only when you have no choice but to go to war otherwise focus on yourself, that has been the China's primary thought process for thousands of years

 

[IblinI]

I highly recommened Kings and general channel on Youtube, not totally accurate but maybe the best channel covering Chinese history/events on Youtube.

 

[retaxis]

Romans lived in a rougher neighborhood. China did not have to worry for the most part -- Siberia in the North, deserts of Central Asia, Himalayas in the South-Central and Pacific Ocean in the East.
Romans benefited a lot from the innovations of ancient Greece, Egypt and Middle Easterners

Romans had a greater impact in the sense that Modern Europe is built on the foundations of Roman Empire. China's influence was limited to Korea, Japan and maybe Vietnam.


for good reason I may add

I know you are biased and trolling but I will educate the rest of the people. China started off as a small nation as well and had to fight and conquer other nations eventually reaching and subdueing the Vietnamese, Koreans and even Central Asians and Proto-Mongols and Turks.

You snidely forgot to mention the hundreds of nomadic tribes that China fought for against for a Millenia from the Jurchens, Mongols, Khitans, Turks, Xiong nu etc. All of those are stronger than any force the Romans ever encountered.

 

[beijingwalker]

Before firearms were invented, it's almost almost the east beating the west in the history, with just a couple of exceptions.

 

[IblinI]

People can talked about the Battle of Carrhae, Bella punica, Rome-Sassanid war
for days, but how many have ever heard of the century long war between Han and Xiongnu empire?
With it peaked at The battle of Mobei, largest cavalry campaign before Mongol conquest, when Wudi sent 100k pure cavalry, 50k each by both of his best general, crossing the Gobi desert to seeks for Xiongnu proper led by Chanyu himself.