|
Who would have won in a war between Imperial Rome and Han Dynasty? 若罗马帝国和汉朝开战，谁能获胜? Quora评论翻译： Willy Dai, student in Michigan and future (electrical) engineer Rome's troops probably had heavier armor than the Han dynasty's troops but… The Han Dynasty had several major advantages over Rome: ·The Han Dynasty was able to field and sustain larger armies. ·The Han Dynasty had technological advantages such as the… oPivot catapult / traction trebuchet oRepeating Crossbow 罗马军队的装甲可能比汉朝军队重，但是… 汉朝比罗马有几个主要优势： ·能够派遣并维持更庞大的军队 ·技术优势，如石弩/牵引投石器、连弩 The ignorant eggheads who say that Rome would win because of “strategy” need to get their brains checked. Rome did have its share of brilliant generals but people often forget that China also had brilliant generals during ancient times. 一些无知的书呆子们说罗马会凭“战略”取胜。罗马确实有一些杰出的将军，但中国古代也有杰出的将军。 The Han Dynasty had brought a powerful nomadic confederation (The Xiongnu) to its knees. 汉朝打败了强大的游牧民族联盟(匈奴)。 Rome wouldn't really have an advantage due to “strategy” because both sides would have competent military leaders. 在“战略”上，罗马并没有真正的优势，双方都有出色的军事领导人。 Extra: Another critical factor about this scenario is Persia. I know that the OP sets up the hypothetical scenario without Persia but I still want to address it. Persia was a powerful intermediate empire between Rome and China in the ancient world. Any outbreak of hostilities between Rome and China would've involved Persia but Persia was simply too powerful and large to be gobbled up by either. 另一个关键因素是波斯。波斯是在罗马和汉朝之间的强大帝国。罗马和汉朝之间爆发的敌对行动会牵涉到波斯，但波斯太过强大，任何一方都无法将其吞并。 Persia would've sided with the Han Dynasty because Ancient Persia and Ancient China maintained friendly relations. On the other hand, relations between Persia and Rome were never too peachy. 波斯可能会站在汉朝一边，因为古代波斯和古代中国保持着友好关系。另一方面，波斯和罗马的关系从来都不太好。 Edit: Depictions of the traction trebuchet and the repeating crossbow 牵引投石器、连弩
Jack Montgomery, Logistics is the key to warfare, both modern and past. Well, I can give you two answers, 我可以给你们两种回答： In the short term, the Han win, in the long term, the Romans win. 从短期来看，汉朝获胜；从长期来看，罗马人获胜。 Since there is no Persia, this solves a lot of problems for the Romans, for many reasons, most blatantly logistics, they could not get over that hump, while China did not maintain hostile relations with the Parthians (I am assuming they are the Parthians since the map you are referring to, at least from what I have found, is of the 1st year Anno Domini.) and more of a mercantile one. So we do not know how exactly they would handle such a far enemy. 由于没有波斯加入，这为罗马人解决不少麻烦。原因有很多，最明显的是物资运输，他们无法越过波斯这个门槛。而中国并没有和帕提亚人敌对（我假设是帕提亚人，因为你是所指的是公元元年前后)，更多的是保持商业关系。我们不知道他们会怎样对付这么远的敌人。 Now both empires’ were by far the two most advanced civilizations of their time, the Han having China’s first scientific golden age, while the Romans have assimilated, adopted, and adapted their way to the top. Both were advanced, Han was higher up. Militarily, Rome was better quality while China was more quantity, the legions would fair better disciplined, trained, and better led, but the hordes of China were by far more vast and they could easily support it, a huge flaw in the Roman army. 这两个帝国都是当时最先进的两个文明，汉朝拥有中国第一个科学黄金时代，而罗马人已经采用和适应了他们的方式，登上了顶峰。二者都很先进，但是汉朝更胜一筹。在军事上，罗马军队的素质更高，而中国军队的数量更多，军队纪律、训练和领导也会更好。中国军队要庞大得多，而且能够保证供给，这是罗马军队的一大缺陷。 译文来源：三泰虎 http://www./46234.html 译者：Jessica.Wu Now let’s get down to business, the real battle. So I don’t know how, maybe a trade deal gone wrong, a little subterfuge, who knows, but Rome and the Han are at war. Quickly, Rome activates it’s legions to the front, they make it there (Persia, the battleground of the century) far before the gigantic peasant army being led by Han nobles arrive. Slowly the Romans run low on food, water, and other necessities as the now collapsed Parthians have left ravaged and poor remains of once great cities, then the Han forces arrive. The Romans fight bravely, knowing they are far outnumbered prepare a great defense. At first their prospects look good, but a devastating move utterly destroys the Roman forces, taking a general or two captive. The Romans retreat, the Han army in triumph. 言归正传，来谈谈真正的战斗（假设）。不知道出于什么原因，或许是贸易出问题了，罗马和汉朝处于交战状态。很快，罗马派遣军团赶赴前线，在汉朝贵族领导的庞大农民军队到来之前，他们就已经到达了前线(波斯，世纪战场)。慢慢地，罗马人的食物、水和其他必需品都用完了，而崩溃的帕提亚人也离开了曾经的大城市，留下了贫穷的遗迹，然后汉朝军队到了。罗马人知道自己在人数上远远落后，他们英勇作战，准备了一场伟大的防御。起初，他们的势头看起来不错，但一个毁灭性的行动彻底摧毁了罗马军队，一两个将军被俘。罗马人撤退，汉军胜利。 The following confrontations follow this pattern, the Romans, out numbered, and without good logistics are thrown into defeat, not losing any territory, but paying large amounts of war reparations and the prestige of the once invincible empire taking a huge toll. But, then comes in Rome’s greatest ability, they adapt. Throughout history this was the greatest weapon, when they could not defeat an enemy, the Romans would take their weapons and make them better, and turn these new war machines on the enemy. For years the Roman army builds up, using many of the technology taken from the battlefields, they make better weapons. 接下来的对抗是这样的，罗马人寡不敌众，加上没有良好的后勤保障，他们被打败了，但并没有失去任何领土，而是支付了大量的战争赔款，失去了曾经不可战胜的帝国的威望，付出了巨大的代价。罗马不能击败敌人，他们会改良武器，并把这些新武器用来对付敌人。多年来，罗马军队不断壮大，利用从战场上获得的技术，造出了更好的武器。 To the surprise of the Han, their furthest western outpost is attacked, and utterly destroyed. Soon a Han army retaliates, over confident from their last victory, and they befall the fate of the outpost. One by one the Romans take down pieces and parts of the Han’s forces in the middle east, playing to their inability to move quickly and a new strategy not seen by the Han. Eventually the Han are beaten back to mid-Asia, utterly dumbfounded at their loss so far, and when offered with peace, albeit humiliating, they accept. Little do they know, the Roman Empire is barely maintaining their campaign, the distance from suitable farmlands to feed the legions and other required supplies once again their achilles heel. 令汉朝惊讶的是，他们最西边的前哨遭到攻击，并被彻底摧毁。很快，汉朝军队进行了报复，由于上次的胜利，他们过于自信，前哨的命运也随之降临。罗马人一个接一个地摧毁了汉朝在中东地区的部分势力，由于汉军不能快速移动，最终被击退到中亚，他们对这次的失败完全目瞪口呆。尽管是一次羞辱，但得到了和平，所以他们还是接受了。他们不知道，罗马帝国几乎无法维持他们的战役，后勤供给还是他们的致命弱点。 [!--empirenews.page--] Michelle Zhou In large scale wars, I will put my money down on Han Dynasty victory. 大规模开战，我赌汉朝赢。 The Han dynasty had direct trade access to Central Asia which provided supply of high-quality horse breeds including the famed Ferghana horse. By the time of Emperor Wu’s reign (141–87 BC), Han army’s horses amounted to well over 450,000 and with stirrup. 汉朝与中亚直接通商，为他们供应了优良马种，包括著名的大宛馬。到汉武帝时期(公元前141年至公元前87年)，汉朝军队的马匹数量已经超过了45万匹，还配备马镫。 Eastern Han Heavy Calvary 东汉重装骑兵 Western Han Ge Cavalry 西汉马战骑兵 Western Han Armor-Spear Cavalry 西汉破甲矛骑兵 Emperor Wu also reinforced his strategic asset by establishing commanderies and constructing fortified wall in the western regions. Colonized the area with 700,000 Chinese soldier-settlers using the Tuntian system (military-agricultural settlements ) where soldiers on distant expeditions were set to work converting and farming the conquered land provide food for the army and to convert the region into one based around agriculture. 汉武帝在西域设郡，修建了防御工事，加强了自己的战略资产。70万中国士兵实行“屯田制”，在这片土地上定居，远征军的士兵们将占领的土地改造为耕地，为军队提供粮食，并将该地区改造成为农耕区。 The Art of Wars 战术 Rightly speaking, China has two masterpieces of Art of Wars; The military tactics and strategies by Sun-Tzu and the military methods and army formations by Sun-Bin (direct decedent of Sun-Tzu). 中国有两本战术杰作：《孙子兵法》、《孙膑兵法》 One of the Chapters in Sun Bin's Art of War was the “Organization of Military Posts” 《孙子兵法》中有一章关于军事哨所的组织。 Sun-Bin’s Art of War helped ancient Chinese armies to move/fight in large numbers. That’s why Chinese civil wars were massive like this Battle of Red Cliffs in the late Eastern Han dynasty, which had a total of 850,000 military personnel participated in the battle. 《孙膑兵法》的指导下，中国古代军队得以大规模出征/作战。这就是为什么中国内战的规模如此之大，就像东汉末年的赤壁之战，当时总共有85万军人参加。 The Han & Tang Dynasty were the times when China had superb military power. 汉唐是中国军事实力最强的时期。 [!--empirenews.page--] Bai Ming, studied at Zhejiang University Han beat the Huns, The Huns beat Germanic, The Germanic beat The Roman Empire. 汉朝打败了匈奴，匈奴打败了日耳曼，日耳曼打败了罗马帝国。所以结论就是罗马嗝屁。
Richard Leclercq, works at Retired/Disabled Not to be overly simplistic, but, whoever has to cross the wasteland first will lose the initial campaign. If Rome sends a big force, the Han will hit them at the wrong end of a long supply line. With the loss of several legions, Rome will be much weaker when the Han troops arrive. The Han will travel down great roads, supplied by Rome, and take advantage of all the infrastructure again supplied by the enemy. If the Han attack first, Rome will destroy the attacking army and then attack down the Han built roads. Sun Tzu said that if you must fight a war after a long journey, let the enemy make that journey. Neither power will be able to use their navies. Neither power will have a rational attitude about losing. The most likely outcome is mutual destruction after years of brutal war. 不要过分简单化，谁先穿过荒漠，谁就会输。 如果罗马派出一支大部队，汉军会在补给线的另一端攻击他们。由于失去了几个军团，当汉军到来时，罗马军队将会变得更加脆弱。汉朝将沿着罗马走过的大路前进，并利用敌人提供的基础设施。 如果汉朝先发起进攻，罗马就会消灭来犯的军队，然后进攻汉朝修筑的道路。 孙子说过，如果不得不在长途跋涉后打仗，那就让敌方去跋涉。 两军都不能使用他们的海军。都不会对失败保持理性的态度。 最可能的结果是，经过多年的残酷战争后，两败俱伤。
Michel McGill, My parents are WWII veterans. Han Dynasty would have won. As Han Dynasty defeated Xiongnu that Xiongnu fled to Europe as Attila the Huns, who in turn defeated Rome and was responsible for the collapse of Rome Empire. 汉朝会赢。汉朝打败匈奴后，匈奴王阿提拉逃往欧洲，打败了罗马，对罗马帝国的崩溃负有责任。
Steve Roberts It would probably have ended in a stalemate. I don't think either side would have been able to support a victorious campaign in the other's territory. The Romans had a hard enough time subjugating the Gauls, who were right on their doorstep and much less numerous and technologically sophisticated than the Han. Ditto for the Han with regards to the Xiongnu, for example. The logistics of waging a war so far from home against a technologically advanced civilization with a population in the tens of millions in that era were just too challenging. 可能会以僵局告终。我认为任何一方都无法在对方的领土上维持一场胜战。罗马人在征服高卢人的过程中困难重重，高卢人就在他们家门口，比汉军数量少，战术也不及汉军。汉朝对匈奴也是如此。对于一个拥有数千万人口、技术先进的国家来说，在如此遥远的距离内发动一场战争，其后勤工作实在是太具有挑战性了。
Robbe Nagel, Logical reasoning is one of my hobbies It would be a very close call, as Han Dynasty was winning in numbers, but I see Imperial Rome winning in strategy. Also the location where they fight makes a difference. And the army of Han Dynasty was better used to that enviroment. I still think Imperial Rome would’ve won eventually (because of strategy) 势均力敌，汉朝在数量上领先，但罗马帝国在战略上领先。 此外，交战地点也很关键。汉朝的军队更能适应环境。 但我还是认为罗马帝国最终会获胜(鉴于战略)
Jim Duyer, Cryptographer, Semiotician, historian, writer. How were the Japanese able to take and control a large part of China, with such a small force, during the years leading up to and including WWII? Because the Chinese have always had problems in staying loyal. The Japanese bought the Chinese generals and had spies tell them their plans in advance. Rome paid off the Celts, when they invaded in about the 280’s B.C. In fact they paid the leaders weight in gold plus the weight of his sword, added in to sweeten the deal, in order to get them to leave. So the Romans, if they would not be able to beat them, which due to their organized warfare probably would anyway, would simply buy them off, or at least enough to swing the battle. 在二战之前的几年里，日本是如何能够以如此小规模的兵力占领和控制中国的大部分地区的?因为中国人不够忠诚，日本人收买了中方将领，并且有间谍提前泄露了中国的计划。公元前280年凯尔特人入侵时，罗马贿赂了他们。事实上，他们向首领支付了同等重量的黄金。所以如果他们不能打败凯尔特人，罗马人便会收买他们，至少能扭转战局。
Raphael Mael, I'm good at imagining stuff I'm not sure actually but let's get into this. A disadvantage Rome has is language the Han army all speak the same language and faith in the Roman army languages differ from the different provinces and countries, that stuff.This is sort of a big thing because being united will take down your biggest threat easily 我不确定。罗马的一个劣势是语言，汉军都说统一的语言，而罗马军队的语言和信仰因省份而异。这点很重要，统一可以轻松化解最大的威胁。 The Emperors Right the Roman emperors power depended on too much people to be secure in the Han’s sitch he was a God.The Roman emperors (for lack of a better word )likeness(I know it's not a word)credibility (that's the word ) will be hurt far more than Hans.The Hans army are bigger but they won't just really on brute force they have strategists(so don't go saying that Romans are better because they have better strategists) too and superior tech 皇帝 罗马皇帝的权力依赖于太多的人而得不到保障，而在汉朝，皇帝犹如神一般的存在。罗马皇帝的权威不如汉朝皇帝。汉军更庞大，但他们并不只靠蛮力，他们还有战略家而且有更高级的战术(所以不要以为罗马军队更强是因为他们有更好的战略家)。 They don't know each other's tactics or stratigies so they are fighting blind the han attack and the Romans are put on defence and they do well to fend off but the weaponry is just too much some are killed but they are holding off very well but the han have strategies too and better weapons and pure size the Romans have got strategy so… The Han win 他们都不知道彼此的战术战略，只能盲目交战。汉军进攻，罗马人武器多善于防守，但汉军也有策略，也有优良武器，而且军队规模大。所以最终汉朝赢。
Russell Darst, read some books I vote for Rome. Looking at the map, Rome would have the shorter supply lines. Han reinforcements from the Chinese heartland would have to march all the way across Asia, while Roman reinforcements could sail most of the way there. Technology might give China an early edge, but the Romans were adaptable and could afford to lose a few armies. Local allies would be crucial, and Rome had more gold to buy them than China did. Finally, Rome was better at assimilating conquered peoples. Within a few generations, Persians ruled by Rome would consider themselves Romans, while Han-ruled Persians would remain Persians. 我支持罗马。看看地图，罗马的补给线更短。来自中国腹地的汉人增援部队将不得不一路行军穿过亚洲，而罗马的增援部队则可以一路航行到那里。战术可能会给中国带来早期优势，但罗马人具有适应能力，可以承受损失一些军队。当地盟友将至关重要，罗马比中国更有钱，可以收买他们。最后，罗马更擅长同化被征服的民族。几代之内，被罗马统治的波斯人会认为自己是罗马人，而汉朝统治的波斯人将还是波斯人。 |
|
|
