Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongegod
I think Rome can take China. The Romans were conquerors by definition and created their whole civilization through conquest. China has never had to conquer anything and is not used to conquest. And from what little I know of history (compared to certain persons on this board), China lost more fights than Rome did. For some reason it just strikes me as being that whenever China fights someone that isn't China, China always loses.
|
China was created through the conquest of six other warring states through a period of 300 years.
China was expanded through the conquest of "barbarians", either infantry based (Vietnam, Korea, and Southern China) or cavalry based (Xiongnu).
Most of the armies the Roman Legions fought were either barbarian tribes or professional (Phalanx and other legions). When faced with someone that knows how to employ cavalry, they tend to have a hard time. The only way the Romans improve their army to meet a particular threat was to increase the size of the auxilia (allied cavalry, archers, slingers, etc). The core of the heavy legionaire remained.
China on the other hand had vastly different armies that are recruited to fight vastly different foes. There armies are not built around a single core professional soldiers but are built to meet a particular army. During the Han-Chu contention after the fall of the Qin dynasty, the armies were composed mostly of infantry armed with crossbow, sword/shield, and halbeards. When fighting against the Xiongnu, Han Wudi created an army consisting entirely of cavalry.