192 replies to this topic

[Mei Houwang]

I'll be looking forward to it.

[superquarterback]

My goodness, Romans did not come up with much? The Roman Baths were out off this world.  So were their highways. Roman ships were equally impressive.

Their stone buildings and structures survived to this day.  How many Han buildings made it?

I am not to say Romans are better, I think we are doing Guan Gong Fight QinQiong here. Both are very advanced comparing to the rest of the world.

 

Roman is only better in glass technique. Casting iron technology in Han China was more advanced. During Han, Chinese also invented seismograph. I think Chinese crossbows was more advanced that their counterpart. Han infrastructure was quite impressive too. Agriculture is more advanced in Han China. One Han farmer could feed another 10 to 12 people whereas a Roman farmer could only feed 3 other persons. We have to take climate into account too in that case. If your farmer can feed more people, then there should be more people available to do anything else.
Therefore science progress in China was faster than elsewhere in the world.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

There is a difference between technological advances and the whole development of the society; technological sophistication is only restricted to the field of technology. The development of the whole society includes literacy rate, art, urbanization, philosophy and social developments. Both the Han and Roman Empire had their respective leads in physical technology. And when we talk about which is more "civilized", it becomes even more subjective.

Edited by Borjigin Ayurbarwada, 22 April 2011 - 11:32 PM.

[Alexander39]

Roman is only better in glass technique. Casting iron technology in Han China was more advanced. During Han, Chinese also invented seismograph. I think Chinese crossbows was more advanced that their counterpart. Han infrastructure was quite impressive too. Agriculture is more advanced in Han China. One Han farmer could feed another 10 to 12 people whereas a Roman farmer could only feed 3 other persons. We have to take climate into account too in that case. If your farmer can feed more people, then there should be more people available to do anything else.
Therefore science progress in China was faster than elsewhere in the world.

 

Chinese crossbows were more advanced by the simple reason that they used them activlly.
Roman Infra structure must be said to generally superior on land and sea but that is just as much a case of geography, and what is important too the empires in quistions as actually capabillities in that direction.
one man feeding three??. that very much depends on were in the Roman empire you talk about, Egypt had no problems reaching the same heights of produktivity as the Han, but they also had ideal growing seasons and maybe the worlds most fertile land to grow their corn due to the Nile. and her annual floodings.
Only glass?? What about concrete...
What about general shipbuilding...
What about Architecture.... Lasting that is.
Dont sell the Romans short there Quarterback.

There is a difference between technological advance and the whole development of the society, technological development is simply on the field of technology. While the development of the whole society includes literacy rate, art, urbanization, philosophy and social developments. Han did have a general technological lead. But when we talk about which is more "civilized" there are really no definite answer.

 

For once we whole heartely agree Warhead. Congrat...

Edited by Alexander39, 16 August 2005 - 04:16 AM.

[Too hi Fat]

I think that Politically, the Romans are ahead (mainly with the republic ideas). The romans were definately more effective in thier social engineering and thier ability to contral a vast area with a suprisingly small military force.

China on the other hand was miles ahead in Metullargy and General bricka brack technology (e.g Paper, Silk, Ultra fine pottery, crude oil distillation and oil rigs)

I have to note that Chinese had Stainless Steel in 220BC. They were also able to use electro-chrome plating to coat thier swords. China is know to have use pyrometullargy to refine nickel.

Concrete ... Chinese had something similar too ... note that the bricks on the great wall were mortared. I am not sure if it is the same quality as Romans though. Chinese architecture did not last couse chinese has a bad habit.

They had a bad habit of "cleansing" the old. Everytime there's a change in Dynasty, almost everything from the previous is annihilated. We do love to blow things up you know ... after all we invented gun powder. Kinda like red necks

To put it in simple terms as not to bore people ...
Europe (about Romans) never had that major problem. The greek stuff (let's call it stuff to make it simple) were preserved by romans couse the romans liked the greeks. Then when rome fell, the germans liked the romans as well so a lot of roman stuff was preserved. Then the germans (and christians) formed the holy roman empire (du'h they love romans) so stuff was preserved. Then after that there are all these european powers that come who all love the romans so things are preserved. When the modern age came along ... a lot of the roman stuff are still standing.

With this it can be easily concluded that even if Han empire was far far more superior then roman .... there are almost nothing left couse of the bad habit.

[ShanXiYan]

I have to note that Chinese had Stainless Steel in 220BC. They were also able to use electro-chrome plating to coat thier swords. China is know to have use pyrometullargy to refine nickel.

Did the ancient Chinese really have stainless steel? I've only ever heard they had steel back then, but not stainless steel...

[Kenneth]

Nope; no stainless steel. That's for sure. It's a **** shame but the earliest Chinese steels are now rather unattractive corroded and coming apart in layers like puff pastry. They need SEM analysis or microphotography to unlock how advanced they were......steel existed in very limited number in the warring states period but it is not untill the Han that metallurgy expands enough to allow the final replacing of bronze...which was well underway by Wendi, and by Wudi it appears bronze weapons have largely vanished.
There was no Chinese concrete, and structures are re-interpreted by the base areas of rammed earth platforms and contemporary descriptions only.
Rammed earth was durable and tough enough to perform well in the lifetime of the dynasties, but not to stand up to erosion and rain over mellenia. Marble and concrete wins out for durabliity beyond human lifetimes...but the Chinese (Han) do have huge stone statues of gaurdian beasts that have survived well. It is hard to make comparisons but archaeolgists do a good job of providing information on former splendour of their structures.
In this way the palaces of Han were certainly a match for Roman architecture at the time, but have no such 'everlasting' nature.
Ceramic roof tiles and postholes and drains in rammed earth are all that is left.

[Too hi Fat]

Ok ... I should clearify my stainless steel thing ...

I work in the nickel industry. I had the privilage to attend a bunch of conference in the nickel industry and one of them had a presentation on the steel found in the terra cotta warrior tombs.

The steel if I remember correctly (this is from a few years back and It was after a good night of drinking Bai Jiu) it has 6-7% nickel content 3% vanadium and 2% chrome ... carbon content was 0.5% (or was it 0.9%) and silicon content was 1%. It can be classified as a very low grade stainless steel due to the nickel content. It is definately better at resisting corrosion when compare to modern automotive grade alloys.

Modern stainless (c**p quality) is about 12%-13% Nickel. The good stuff that you can smoke is about 18%.


... One thing ... Is Marbel as a resource common in China ? I know granite is but granite is hella hard to work with compare to marbel.

[thirdgumi]

Were Chinese sewer pipes made of lead? 

There were poterry pipes digged from Zhou ruins of in Shan Xi (陕西) province.

[Kenneth]

Ok ... I should clearify my stainless steel thing ...

I work in the nickel industry. I had the privilage to attend a bunch of conference in the nickel industry and one of them had a presentation on the steel found in the terra cotta warrior tombs.

The steel if I remember correctly (this is from a few years back and It was after a good night of drinking Bai Jiu) it has 6-7% nickel content 3% vanadium and 2% chrome ... carbon content was 0.5% (or was it 0.9%) and silicon content was 1%. It can be classified as a very low grade stainless steel due to the nickel content. It is definately better at resisting corrosion when compare to modern automotive grade alloys.

 

You are obviously mislead, or remembering the speech incorrectly. Check ANY book at random, or even a google search and the poorest of sites on QIn (and some are poor) will not record steel in there.
Iron was very rarely found around Qin era tombs....and the weapons are bronze.
That the bronze included TIN that allowed it to be as hard as steel, and they have chrominium on the bronze is well known.
There are NO steel weapons with the buried armies, and NO stainless steel at all in ancient China.
This is plain fact and the next step is for your to provide evidence to the contrary.
As I said, check any text at random with even a passing mention of the Qin buried army and it should confirm what I said.

The only qualification I should add to my earlier post is that bronze weapons for battlefield use can still be found from mid-West Han sites too, but by this time they are the exception to the rule as the steel and iron working in China had expanded dramatically. Iron foundrys around the West Han captial CHangan show the immense size and output of some.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

"For once we whole heartely agree Warhead. Congrat..."

I believe thats twice.
You forgot the Mongol thread.

"that very much depends on were in the Roman empire you talk about, Egypt had no problems reaching the same heights of produktivity as the Han,"

It also depends on which part of the Han empire you are talking about. The most productive part is the Yangze valley, provinces such as Honan. The Yan Gun and He Xi is a lot less productive.
Yes, Egypt is the most productive province of Rome due to its natural rivers and products. It probably almost reached the level of an average Han province in the central plains.
One of the major advantage of Han's agriculture is that it grows millet while Most of Roman empire grows wheat which was less productive.
Other than that is the more complex Han irrigation, farming equipment and techniques. (Although the exception is probably animal power, but again that is also due to climate and geography)


"I think that Politically, the Romans are ahead (mainly with the republic ideas). "

No, the old Republic is far from stable, Han had a much more efficient Bureucracy, and is much more stable. Rome is filled with military coupes and change of dynasties or central power. No Roman dynasty ever lasted more than a few generations. Most didn't even pass two.


"The romans were definately more effective in thier social engineering and thier ability to contral a vast area with a suprisingly small military force."

On the contrast, their less centralized government is filled with rebellions and Rome never had the ability to take a efficient empire wide census which the Han did.



"I have to note that Chinese had Stainless Steel in 220BC. They were also able to use electro-chrome plating to coat thier swords. China is know to have use pyrometullargy to refine nickel."

These are bronze, not steel weapons.



"They had a bad habit of "cleansing" the old. Everytime there's a change in Dynasty, almost everything from the previous is annihilated. We do love to blow things up you know ... after all we invented gun powder. Kinda like red necks
"

No, Han virtually copied all of the Qin institution with some minor adjustments.

[Merchant]

For those who think little of Roman technologies, I recommend you go to Italy and see the Roman ruines. If you get a chance to go to Pompey please go. It will change your mind about Roman technologies. I was very impressed.

[ih8eurocentrix]

The reason for tombs having bronze swords is becasue they knew of its lasting effects it doesnt corrode easily,why would a nation whose economy is biggest in the world with division of labour in making weapons use bronze weapons when lesser economys are arming their men with Iron like romans.

[luhai167]

The documentary "Lost legions of Qin" suggested that qin used bronze because of weapon standardizations. As weapon found in the tomb has millimeters of difference. Since ironworking is not as advance as bronzeworking at the time, qin choose bronze because it can have better tolerances.

P.S. Steel is quite well know in the period. as Zhao, Yan, and wei have steel swords and many farm tools of qin are made of iron.

[TMPikachu]

For those who think little of Roman technologies, I recommend you go to Italy and see the Roman ruines. If you get a chance to go to Pompey please go. It will change your mind about Roman technologies. I was very impressed.

I do not think any of us really think little of Western achievements. More like... since the world more readily recognises western historic achievements, our praise of our own history/culture/advancements is a little louder due to feeling that it's not heard enough.