Rome vs Han China

Those caucasians are probably Eurasian Steppe Nomads. I mean parts of Eastern Europe have Asian DNA from various Asian nomads (huns, mongols, etc)

Click to expand...

The Hunnic migration from east Asia to east Europe took place much later (post-AD) than the dating of the Tarim mummies (pre 1000BC). Which means Caucasoids were long present in Chinese prehistory and ancient history several centuries, maybe millennia before the first Huns started moving towards Europe. Heck, that's even a long time before the possibility of Romans coming to China. Bulk of the Mongolic-Turkic migration to central Asia and eastern Europe took place around the Medieval period.

Agree with the above however the Tokharians didn't become extinct they
sought sanctuary with the Pashtun tribes in afghanistan/pakistan and were assimilated
and that's family history by the way

Click to expand...

The Tocharians actually spread out in all directions, and a lot of them merged with the Uighyurs and other Turkish tribes living in present day Xinjiang.

You are also probably identifying the Tocharians with the Kushans, aka Yuezhi. The two groups are probably related.

IMO, Causasoid genetic markers in Chinese are probably due from Tocharians/Yuezhi, though Asian steepe nomads may also be part of it.

although two empires have same populations but most people in Han were chinese and in Rome there are mix people you can't expect non-rome borned citizen to fight to death for rome but chinese can die for their own contry with no deoubt.So compare the total number of rome you will see the difference. Also a huge battle will not fight in one day more troop means you can cut other's supple and trap them with huge army until they don't have food. No one is superman only can fight such period after serval days hard fighting a warrior can't win a woman. More troop means more attack ability in day and night.Han's army can easily replace their tired troop and send fresh to attack how could you rome don't sleep to fight. Even the sound of drum can make you rome can sleep in the night.In the same number you rome maybe strong but outnumber by 5 to one will be easily destroyed.All the enemies rome have face will not has enough archers to form a real rain of arrows so that there shield can protect them when you face a large army even their archers are more than your soliders how could you win the battle.When rome charge there archers they must first face rain of arrows then the spear wall ,shieldwall even to face which the han army can easily built a mud wall in hours befor the battle.Even in the worset case rome army can charge into han army frontline but we can shoot both romes and front line han troop together by useing reserve archers beacuse you are outnumber we don't care the same casualty as rome beacuse that means we will win in the fianl.And rome don't have chance to flee beacuse horseman can easily kill running away rome.

Hmm. It's hard to say whether or not being "mixed" will affect an army's effectiveness and/or will to fight (see the US Military?)...

Of course the situation was a bit different back then, there were conscript slave armies which obviously didn't have much motivation to fight (the reason to generally was that they'd actually stand a chance fighting against the enemy as opposed to being killed for deserting) but in this hypothetical I would imagine that Rome would send out its best legions, if it intended to invade a large empire like China.

On a side note, while I assume that English is *probably* not your first language, it would really make your posts more comprehensible if you used some line breaks, periods, and punctuation... just a pointer. It's just really hard to read right now as it is...

I am not sure but i think that some factors in a clash between Rome and China are missing:

A: Roman auxillarys:
Roman auxiallarys where no cannon fodder, in fact, troops like the Sarmatian cavalry or Germanic heavy infantry fought a bit differently but not worse than the Romans.
In addition, the thing with the roman auxiallarys was that they could became romans if they fought well.
Former "auxillarys" like Arminius became, although born Germans/Gauls/Sarmatians, "knights" of the Roman empire.
The fact that the roman legions werent conscripts was one of their main advantadges.

B: Height
In addition, after my own experience in China, i think that the height difference may also be a factor.
As far as I know, the average roman was bigger than the average Chinese, while a Germanic/Gaulish auxiallary was significantly bigger.
Its not so much of a factor in actual combat, but its quite effective in a psychologic way.

C: Running away:
I have read the 3 Kingdoms, as well as similiar works like the Gallic Wars or Germania by Caesar or Tacitus.

The theme of the commanding officer beeing killed or even only forced of in a preliminary duel, followed by a rout of his army, was extremly more frequent in the three Kingdoms.
Prelimanry duels did not happen in Rome (They sometimes happened in fights between Barbarian tribes, but also rarely. In addition they ended with one guy getting killed instead of one guying beeing forced back). Also, Romans did not flee that much when their general was killed.

D: Tactically:
The Chinese could counter the superior Roman infantry by using their sophisticated shooting tactics, the Romans could counter by attacking at night or doing other things to disrupt the chinese order.
Both armys had the neccesary means of dealing with the enemy, it would come down to the individual commander.


E: Logistics:
However, a real war between these nation would have ended in a draw.
There is no way to supply forces big enough to be a threat in such a distance from your own base of power.
Can you imagine the logistic nightmare of having to ferry 100.000s of chinese troops from the Yangtze to Byzantium?
Or getting Heavy Germanic/Gaulic auxilia through Persia without pissing off the entire population?
There could have some limited border clashes, a Legion getting shot to pieces, a chinese detachmen getting ambushed but not much more.

Mightypeon said:

I am not sure but i think that some factors in a clash between Rome and China are missing:

E: Logistics:
However, a real war between these nation would have ended in a draw.
There is no way to supply forces big enough to be a threat in such a distance from your own base of power.
Can you imagine the logistic nightmare of having to ferry 100.000s of chinese troops from the Yangtze to Byzantium?
Or getting Heavy Germanic/Gaulic auxilia through Persia without pissing off the entire population?
There could have some limited border clashes, a Legion getting shot to pieces, a chinese detachmen getting ambushed but not much more.

Click to expand...

The furthest West a Chinese army ever came was under General Ban Chao. In 91 AD, he lead a 70,000 men army through the Silk Road to pacify the Xiongnu. He reached as far as the Caspian Sea. He made an alliance with Parthia where he esetablished some forts a few days march from the Parthian Capital of Csitephon. In 117, Emperor Trajan captured Csitephon and came to within 1 days march to these Chinese forts.

Mightypeon said:

B: Height
In addition, after my own experience in China, i think that the height difference may also be a factor.
As far as I know, the average roman was bigger than the average Chinese, while a Germanic/Gaulish auxiallary was significantly bigger.
Its not so much of a factor in actual combat, but its quite effective in a psychologic way.

Click to expand...

ALL people were pretty short back then. even short people in present day would be considered tall 2000 years ago, it's all got to do with nutriention. chinese armies don't believe in the whole if you are huge, you'll win. they believe more in skills over size.

Mightypeon said:

C: Running away:
I have read the 3 Kingdoms, as well as similiar works like the Gallic Wars or Germania by Caesar or Tacitus.

The theme of the commanding officer beeing killed or even only forced of in a preliminary duel, followed by a rout of his army, was extremly more frequent in the three Kingdoms.
Prelimanry duels did not happen in Rome (They sometimes happened in fights between Barbarian tribes, but also rarely. In addition they ended with one guy getting killed instead of one guying beeing forced back). Also, Romans did not flee that much when their general was killed.

Click to expand...

the three kingdoms you are thinking of is a FICTION based on history, in fact general duals never happened. most generals stay in the back and command their troops, and by the Han dynasty a well defined officer ranking is already invented, so if the highest guy dies, his second in command can take over.

Mightypeon said:

D: Tactically:
The Chinese could counter the superior Roman infantry by using their sophisticated shooting tactics, the Romans could counter by attacking at night or doing other things to disrupt the chinese order.
Both armys had the neccesary means of dealing with the enemy, it would come down to the individual commander.

Click to expand...

fighting at night and skimishes are nothing new, everyone use it. in war, it's not about following previous set rules, it's about who can win. every nation used it and will continue to use it. so don't depend on the romans to be the only ones attacking at night.

Mightypeon said:

E: Logistics:
However, a real war between these nation would have ended in a draw.
There is no way to supply forces big enough to be a threat in such a distance from your own base of power.
Can you imagine the logistic nightmare of having to ferry 100.000s of chinese troops from the Yangtze to Byzantium?
Or getting Heavy Germanic/Gaulic auxilia through Persia without pissing off the entire population?
There could have some limited border clashes, a Legion getting shot to pieces, a chinese detachmen getting ambushed but not much more.

Click to expand...

read idont's post

PiSigma said:

ALL people were pretty short back then. even short people in present day would be considered tall 2000 years ago, it's all got to do with nutriention. chinese armies don't believe in the whole if you are huge, you'll win. they believe more in skills over size.

Click to expand...

I would just like to say, I have reason to believe that Chinese people are traditionally taller and bigger than Caucassions. As you stated, it had to do with nutrition.

It's a shame that I can't find it any more. But I had a book that indicated that at the turn of the last century, the average height in China is roughly 2 inches higher than both New York and London. But obviously, that changed in the next century.

Good thing is though, height is increasing dramatically once again.

Last Centurys Chinese beeing taller than Europeans? Pretty unlikely, as reports from last centurys western diplomats in China claim them as beeing petty small.


Comparisons between Germanic and Roman skulls has shown that, although both where smaller than today, the height difference was the same.
Bones from the battlefield of Noreia (Germans vs Romans) led to the verified assumptions of an average height of 1.74 meters for a Ancient Kimber (German tribe).


Actually, Chinese 1on1 fighting systems like WuShu also claim that, assuming roughly equal skill, the bigger guy will win.
In a fight, height is a positive factor, and can get pretty important in a mellee.

To the logictic issues:
Yes, they where within one day from each other, however, they could not expand much more because they just reached the end of their possible expansion.
The size of the army one can succesfully keep in the field dircetly depends on the distance from the own base of power.

Mightypeon said:

To the logictic issues:
Yes, they where within one day from each other, however, they could not expand much more because they just reached the end of their possible expansion.
The size of the army one can succesfully keep in the field dircetly depends on the distance from the own base of power.

Click to expand...

Trajan went as far as the Persian Gulf. Think of how far the Caspian sea is from the westernmost province of Han China vs. the Persian Gulf from the Roman Province of Syria. From this assumption, clearly Han had superior logistics.

Alexander made it as far as Bactria and Sogdiana (near Caspian Sea) 400 years earlier.

The Terracotta Army demonstrated that soldiers measuring 5'11" (1.8 meters) were almost the norm during the Qin Dynasty. Average height of these supposedly life-size replicas is in the neighborhood of 5'10" (1.78 meters). That is taller than the average American male population today, and similar to that of the American military of today. With such a large population base, finding a few strong men has never been a problem for China. Just look at Yao.