Warfare
Current paper is devoted to the analysis and comparison of the approaches to warfare of the Ancient Chinese and Roman societies. It should be stressed that both civilizations possessed the highly sophisticated road system and war machines. It allowed them being flexible in solving their warfare problems. Both civilizations were characterized by the strong system of government and control. In fact, warfare in almost all countries of the world was directly related to the relationships between two or more governments. Land and natural resources were present in both cultures, as well. The populations of both empires were large, and it created the foundation for massive warfare campaigns. These empires were the dominant economic and warfare powers in their continents and their period of time.
However, their approaches to warfare were not identical. Ancient China was always operated either by a King or a Queen. Therefore, the style of governance was autocratic and even despotic. Ancient Rome enjoyed more flexible system regarding styles of government. In some periods of history, Rome had an Emperor system. However, in other periods of history, the government was under the control of Republic. Thus, in the period of Emperor, the styles of Ancient China and Rome were similar while in the period of Republic, the styles were significantly different. The Republican style was more democratic and less cruel in comparison with the autocratic style.
At the same time, women were sometimes in power in Ancient China. Such examples were absent in the history of Ancient Rome. As men are generally more inclined to warfare, the warfare policies of Ancient Rome were more consistent than that of Ancient China. Chinese leaders and representatives...
... middle of paper ...
...
The sixth principle is unity of command. Unity of command and effort should be reached. Both civilizations were aware of this principle. However, Ancient China was more structurally organized, and its unity of command was almost perfect. The seventh principle is security. The enemy should not be permitted to acquire any strategic advantage. Romans were more skillful in implementation of this objective. The eighth principle is surprise. Military actions should be organized in a way that is unexpected for an enemy. Romans were more efficient in such military surprises. The ninth principle is simplicity. All plans should be clear and concise. Ancient China was more successful in fulfilling this principle. Thus, both civilizations had their own warfare strengths and weaknesses, and their experience and strategies may be useful for modern military specialists, as well.
Han China was an empire that expanded over a vast territory and Classical Athens was only a small city-state. Inevitable, there were differences in all aspects of life. The documents provided plenty of information on demographics, government structures, individual roles and duties of a citizen, an view on physical life. Overall, the 64 million differences in population, the democracy that arose in Athens, the importance of a father-son relationship in Han China, and the interests in nature by the Hans were the key facts in the two’s differences.
The Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire were two grand empires that rose out of preexisting territories and provided relative peace over wide areas. The collapse of the Qin Dynasty (221-206 BCE), which was the first great land-based empire in East Asia, came after a period of war, confusion, and tyrannical rule. Due to the political disorder that stemmed from the early dynastic activity, the emergence of the Han Dynasty (206 BCE- 228 CE) sprung to focus on restoring order. On the other hand, the rise of the Roman Empire (44 BCE- 476 CE) originated from consolidating authority over aristocratic landlords and overriding the democratic elements of the earlier Republic. Instead, the Roman Empire redefined the concept of “citizen” as subjects to the Roman emperor. Both empires shared similar agendas to exploit their vast territories and resources, which helped them expand their political dominance; however, despite having similar political goals and foundations, their government system, cultural ideologies and imperial expansionist natures diverged.
China was peaceful and had major influenses to those civilizations around them, While Persia also influesned others relied on warfare. These
When comparing different societies in ancient history you may not think that Han China and Ancient Rome had a lot in common. These two great societies had many similarities and differences, especially in their social structures. These similarities and differences are all due to Han China’s and Ancient Rome’s governments, family structures and religions. Both of these wonderful empires lasted for approximately 400 years and had lasting effects on the lands they conquered.
The Han dynasty in China was similar to the Imperial Rome. They shared common features, such as strong militaries. However they also had their differences. The Han dynasty rule was passed down among families. With the Imperial Rome, rule was based upon votes.
Luttwak, Edward. The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: from the First Century A.D. to the Third. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1979. Print.
The Han dynasty and the Roman Empire were both powerful empires during their era. However, the ways they obtained their power varied greatly because they used different methods that involved their political structures, which revolved around their centralized governments. The Han dynasty and the Roman Empire acquired very unique techniques that allowed them to control social and political. For example, the Han dynasty adopted a religion known as Confucianism, which monitored everything in the lives of the Chinese. Contrary, the Roman Empire established a monarchy but allowed its residents more freedom as compared to the Han. Nevertheless, the two empires were similar in political structures in that the power was depended on the wealthy that were in authority, the peasants struggled with their lives because of concerning issues such as food supply. The empires were able to create and preserve a peaceful and sustainable lives for a long time, unlike the past empires. Social distribution were under the control of the wealthiest and they could effortlessly impact community viewpoints and interactions among the residents. These two empires existed during the Classical Period had comparable and various social, political, religions, as well as economical values and practices. However, they both possessed differences and similarities in their economic and social perspectives even though the two empires were established around the same era.
Ancient Greece, Sparta especially, and Ancient Rome were best known for their military tactics and strategies. In the Greek city-state Sparta, military went as far as making every male citizen a hoplite, warriors of Ancient Greece, and go through a mandatory training program, agoge, or put through public humiliation (Park and Love). It is impossible to say that both Rome and Sparta neglected the idea of implementing warfare into their daily lives.
Ancient China was a striving place for new eras to arise and succeed leading to new ones. The Qin and Han were successful for their region and time. They both had to utilize the land and what they were given. By doing this they were able to conquer land and other peoples surrounding them. All in all both had a similar governments and a strict social ladder the had different
Sun Tzu’s strategy on war is still a very respected and influential book. The book breaks down war in a very strategic and intelligent way that gives extremely useful advice to those reading it. The book emphasizes the importance of strategy and positioning
Samuel B. Griffith’s translation of “Sun Tzu: The Art of War” is an inside look at military practices of today. I did not find one technique that is not or would not be utilized in modern military maneuver, leadership, or training. The most astounding fact is that the Art of War was written well over two thousand years ago, even at the most conservative date. Although most of the techniques in this text are already in practice today, the value of “The Art of War” is a never-ending treasure chest of knowledge, and it deserves a place as a required reading for anyone seeking knowledge about war fighting or the history of war.
Well, first of all, China is still alive today. China was the one still alive today. Greece fell and went into Rome, but they both fell. To make a civilization you need rules, the one who enforces the rules are the rulers(called emperors in China) According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_of_China , from the Qin to Qing dynasty there were 557 emperors!!! This suggests significant work got done since there were so many people ruling. Greece is more of a split of monarchy and democracy(considering the fact that there were Athens And Sparta, the 2 sides of Greece) China is more of a monarchy since the emperor can use his subjects to do his bidding. For example, at https://www.travelchinaguide.com/attraction/shaanxi/xian/terra_cotta_army/history.htm Claimed first emperor Qin Shi Huang told his subjects to build the terracotta soldiers. Did you know Greece was involved in over 100 wars! Well, I think Greece and China don’t have to win… they win the totally different
In the classical period of world history, the Han Dynasty of China and the Republic of Rome both went through periods of massive growth and prosperity as well as devastating downturns, collapses, and eventually dissolution. These two sprawling entities, although similar in certain aspects, were also profoundly different and it is these differences and similarities that had a major impact on the development of their regions throughout history and even the modern world today. There were major similarities and differences between Han China and Rome in regards to aspects such as the civil service exams, political system of governance, and commerce. Overall, there are more differences between China under the Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire than similarities.
In conclusion, the Roman and Ottoman Empire had many similarities and differences even though, they were ruled at disparate places and times. They had strong rulers, efficient militaries and bureaucracies. Furthermore, the empires were wide and had a long existence. However, the Roman and the Ottoman Empire differ in government systems, religions, rulers, and weapons. Therefore, having knowledge of the history of empires, how they lived, their religions and government systems is crucial so that we learn from their cultures and achievements, and avoid recurring their