Did Ancient China have a good Army

Originally posted by Rome    Hey I would just like to know if the Ancient Chinese had a good Military.

Heck yea. 

Not many could stand in the path of the Chinese Empire.

The Battle of Talas, in which a Chinese force under a Korean geneal employed by the Emperor, lost to the rising Abassids in Central Asia, actually did not affect the Tang Empire.  The total amount of forces garrisoned by the Tang Empire in its borders in AD 751 was around 300,000-400,000, while the number stationed in its garrisons in Central Asia was only 20,000.  The Tang maintained it hold on garrisons in Central Asia after the Battle of Talas, and logistically had the ability and versatility to quickly absorb its losses.  It was the Anlushan Rebellion two years later, in 753, that destroyed China's ability logistically to provide for its garrisons in Central Asia.  Many people attribute the Battle of Talas as decisive and a sign of the Tang Empire's beginning decline - its wasn't and was far from catastrophic.

Different ancient Chinese militaries compared differently with their Western contemporaries.  I opinion is that the Roman Army was slightly better, in organization and infantry quality, to the Han Dynasty Army of roughly the same period (the same army that drove some Huns out of Central Asia).  The Tang Dynasty Army was not as tough as the Han Dynasty Army, but ran virtually unopposed after defeating Turkic armires of Northern and Central Asia.  As to the Ming Dynasty Army, here is the funny thing: soldiers in the 16th century actually wore armor made of PAPER!!!???

Originally posted by poirot The Battle of Talas, in which a Chinese force under a Korean geneal employed by the Emperor, lost to the rising Abassids in Central Asia, actually did not affect the Tang Empire.  The total amount of forces garrisoned by the Tang Empire in its borders in AD 751 was around 300,000-400,000, while the number stationed in its garrisons in Central Asia was only 20,000.  The Tang maintained it hold on garrisons in Central Asia after the Battle of Talas, and logistically had the ability and versatility to quickly absorb its losses.  It was the Anlushan Rebellion two years later, in 753, that destroyed China's ability logistically to provide for its garrisons in Central Asia.  Many people attribute the Battle of Talas as decisive and a sign of the Tang Empire's beginning decline - its wasn't and was far from catastrophic. Different ancient Chinese militaries compared differently with their Western contemporaries.  I opinion is that the Roman Army was slightly better, in organization and infantry quality, to the Han Dynasty Army of roughly the same period (the same army that drove some Huns out of Central Asia).  The Tang Dynasty Army was not as tough as the Han Dynasty Army, but ran virtually unopposed after defeating Turkic armires of Northern and Central Asia.  As to the Ming Dynasty Army, here is the funny thing: soldiers in the 16th century actually wore armor made of PAPER!!!???

It was that battle that influenced the anlushan revolt. And yes, the chinese did use paper armour.

Originally posted by Maju Is it true that, though they were the inventors of gunpowder, they did not use it for weapons until modern times and found it only useful for fireworks? Paper armors + gunpowder for fun only is not the type of logic that fits in the Western mind easily, I must say.

I don't think Paper Armour was too popular after the invention of Gunpowder.  Isn't Paper Armour more like Tang-ish?

As for not using gunpowder for weapons....that's not true at all.  Just look at all the firelances and cannons that old dynasties have left behind...not to mention those exploding bomb thingies...wicked.

The Chinese had excellent technology to build its army from infantry to siege equiptment. For example in the Qin Dynasty, they had the ability to make Bronze swords with a Chromium plating, which made it sharper than most Iron swords. Such weapons have remained sharp for two thousand years until their discovery, wheras Greeks swords that were also made of Bronze are now fragile and have "turned Green." Another example is the crossbow, which was superior in technology to what the western armies had at that time. As to whether they had a good army depended on the quality of the Government at that time and how well it maintained the Army. The Han did not have the widespread professional soldier system that the Romans had, but even the Romans learned that professional soldiers might not be the most efficient system over a long period of time.

Quote: Romans learned that professional soldiers might not be the most efficient system over a long period of time. Can you elaborate?

Probably because that until more modern times (and even in modern times) people who make war for a living tend to be very prone to rebell and cause political problems in general that would eventrually destroy their original governments. Rome's share of revolts after Marian is a good example, they were eventrually crushed by their own mercenaries, Tang dynasty in China (along with quiet a few others) also fell to military revolts .           ;           ;      

Edited by RollingWave

Rome had to rely on Barbarian foederati during the Late empire because the Legions were too hard to maintain. The Pay of troops had risen during the course of the empire.

obviously you missed this part of his post

[/sarcasm]

meaning that he was being ironic/joking.

I think China's army was good in Asia....

�Rome was strong only against weaks, just see what Hannibal, Pirus, Suren, Attila and etc. didi with Roman Army????????????�

All grate armies suffered grate losses!!!!

Well the Roman technology went under when the Huns came, but still the Roman beet the Huns in one meager battle. And the Roman general (I for got his name) could have killed Attilda and smash his army but did not. He was very much cruised for it!

�China, in ancient times, had the most smart strategical and military schools. And the generals that they gave to the history were more strategists than any Roman noble, I HAVE TO TELL AGAIN�

And the Romans did have military schools too.... LOL, then why were the Romans so clever?

For example:

Roman War Dogs: Roman war dogs can screw up an enemy�s formation if you ask me.

This is obviously unconventional�.

They organized the first field medics in there army (this is the first time in history).
The Roman medic were white, had medical supplies, and had standard armor, and helmets. The Roman's medical officer was "medicus" and their equivalent of modern-day enlisted medic were called the "medicus ordinarius". The medicus ordinarious was drawn from the ranks of soldiers, and trained by the Roman army�. �Our own armed forces traditionally train and employ technicians to care for troops in the field just as the early Romans did.�

 

"And if Roman armies is so fantastic, then there will
be at least 1.2 billion of Ethnic Roman survived today
rather than Ethnic Han people. "

Then why is Roman ideas and culture is so heavily influents today?

Almost every body in Europe, north Africa, North America, South America, and Mid East people are Roman dissent. Dude I�m Roman dissent my last name is Latin also can trace it back to the Romans, I have friends that can trace there last name back to the Romans some have changed because of languages like Arthur�.

I mean DUDE LOOK AT LONDEN IT WAS BILT BY THE ROMANS!!!

�Another example is the crossbow, which was superior in technology to what the western armies had at that time.�

Umm, the crossbow was in the West in 400bc.

The Romans invited the catapult.

I can say that the Roman armor was way, way better then the Chinese armor. And?

Plisse guys do not �dog� the Romans.  I think China was the rock in Asia....

 

Edited by Praetorian

Originally posted by guo hua Originally posted by Cywr Obviously not, they would have built a big Empire otherwise[/sarcasm] And if Roman armies is so fantastic, then there will be at least 1.2 billion of Ethnic Roman survived today rather than Ethnic Han people. Powerful armies will continued to live till today and bad armies already been eliminated 1500 years ago. And please tell me, who or which empire can maintain and secure their huge vast of land until today for thousand of years

1. Buy a Dictionary and look up 'Sarcasm'
2. Where did i mention anything about Romans?

Any proof that Roman invented crossbow and catapult.

He didn't claim Romans invented the Crossbow.

Anyway are you trying to tell us that all whites are Romans

No he's not, learn to read, or go pick fights on another forum.


Edited by Cywr