edited from; http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...00#entry4763568
...Based on a paraphrased incident from a Han era account of Chen Tang's campaign of only polearms it becomes in some opinions a suggestion that beyond an incident it was the dominating order of battle the Han relied on (but see Chao Cuo below), I now put forward for the forum to consider the following;
This is not denying that the Han had spearmen (or more correctly mixed halberdiers and spearmen as long polearms) as clearly they do but I dont think the Han are done justice by simply saying the spear is a dominant weapon. This is at odds with the statements of Yang Hong (who emphasises the ji) & also glosses over other considerations.
Based on this Han era account some are lead to believe the Han used the spear as clearly the major/dominant weapon. I would like to see where the Han attribute their military success to lines of spearmen or a phalanx type arrangement. .
I believe in circumstances this would be 100% correct!
In others, it is not.
Han warriors can have short swords in some instances for self defense...and clearly they had long sword armed warriors too that acted as pure swordsmen.
These sword armed warriors from Yangling buried army are from two different pits, and in either grouping there is not a spear in sight. Two formations of swordsmen.
*see Yangling warriors)
&
Yang Hong; Ancient Chinese weapons; Primary source.
Chao Cuo to Emperor Wendi (quote)
QUOTE
'''''pp223"...on grassland which offers manoeuvrability it is best to use soldiers with long hafted halberds {ji}, one of whom is better than 3 fighting men armed with double edged swords and shields; a field overgrown with weeds and bamboo, wood thickets and dense grass is the place to use soldiers with short handled spears {yan} one of whom is better than two men with long hafted halberds; a terrain of winding roads, dangerous corners and passes is the place to use double edged swords and shields, one of whom is better than 3 archers..{etc.}
.....In his analysis of the strong and weak points of the Han...he pointed out emphatically the importance...of co-ordinating the operation of units armed with different weapons.""'''Chao Cuo also calls the Han army 'armored soldiers carrying sharp, long and short weapons' and refers to fighting the Xiongnu with 'double edged swords and halberds' {ji}.
In this way what the Han used depended on circumstances, but in general any formation would be mixed, halberdiers and swordsmen in this case..
Like the Zhou era accounts they might on occasion even dispense with long weapons and rush the enemy. It is not correct in that instance to say 'spear dominanted' or 'major weapon' even though the troops carry them.
CJ Peers; Ancient Chinese armies;
QUOTE
''''''By 500bc the sword was beginning to gain popularity, and from this time swords start to predominate over bows in battle narratives, sword & shield being apparently regarded as a superior combination for infantry fighting to the spear and dagger axe. In 520bc a Ch'i army routed the troops of Hua by throwing away its long weapons and charging on foot with swords, a move which no doubt gained a moral advantage as it implied a greater eagerness to risk close combat.''''''
I would instead note the difference vis-a-vis North and South weaponry at this time as the southerners fought more often with swords.
The point here is that that the Han military is just as capable of dispensing with long weapons in some instances altogether, as is borne out by literature and physical evidence. It has also been commented on there is a 'Northern' and 'Southern' Han army in Jingdis time. These likely are outfitted for different roles.
In terrain based situations the discussion of Chao cuo suggests they would simply deploy swordsmen in preference in some instances. (see figure of river battle. Click to enlarge)
Yang Hong; Ancient Chinese weapons;
QUOTE
''''''pp212 We can see that aside from bows and arrows the principal weapon used by the contending armies is the ring handled long broadsword accompanied by rectangular shield. Whether the foot soldiers engaging in a fierce battle at the head of the bridge or the cavalrymen charging to the left , they each have a shield in the left hand and a broadsword in the right hand. This picture vividly depicts the use of the ringed handled long broad sword and shows that it was the principal short handled weapon in the Eastern Han dynasty.''''''
{there are also a few spear and even long hafted axes around the chariot to the right but the scene is clear. In this instance it wouldnt be correct to say the military was dominated by the spear.}Spears alone are not simply a central Han weapon when in other instances they may not even factor in over missile fire or mounted units or swordsmen at other times. The crossbow for instance according to other Han sources is praised as the decisive weapon in battles against the Xiongnu.
It would also be worth pointing out the ji/halberd is a more useful tool and of the long polearms would be more desirable.
A quick scan of Yang Hong mirrored my impression.
QUOTE
'''''pp 205 The most important of {Han} weapons with shafts used for fighting at close quarters...was the ji (halberd)....This kind of ji had already appeared in the state of Yan in the last years of the warring states...{some} shafts up to 2m long.... The shape of the iron ji remained the same as in West Han except they were larger and heavier"'''
{this is in agreement with my earlier feelings that the ji is a more useful weapon, and also as a more typically 'Han' style weapon}The physical and literary evidence is that Han had variations of infantry. Armoured, unarmoured. Light armour & heavy armour/helmeted.
Long polearms (including spears, but not restricted to spears) were outfitted. Some polearmed warriors were outfitted with shorter close defense weapons. Some soldiers were purely swordsmen armed with long dao or jian & shields. Some polearmed infantry had quivers on their backs and were also archers.
as this figure; (compare to the Osprey reconstruction again)
If these Han warriors have long polearms (note; this includes weapons other than just 'spears') and they have swords and/or shields and they also have quivers on their backs...are these archers? are they spearmen? could they be used as swordsmen?
They are Han warriors, and work by a 'combination' of arms and they are employed in the situation that suits them best.
Spearmen are cheaper to outfit than swordsmen and useful too. They are not simply the be-all-end-all of weapons.
http://www.miamivalley.info/brickbarn/warriorinfo.html
QUOTE
'''''A total of 24 pits have been revealed near Jing Di’s tomb, eight of which have been investigated to date. {now more}
Of the relatively intact pits, each has a different theme. Pit #17 contains 70 terracotta soldiers marching behind carriages drawn by wooden horses. The soldiers, toppled by a cave-in years ago, carry iron swords slung at their hips, halberds {ji}, and wooden shields. The wooden horses have decayed, but bronze bits and carriage axles remain. Oddly, the pit was filled ten feet high with wheat, corn, and millet, and may have served as a granary.''''''
http://www.silkroadguide.com/xian/xian10.htmOf the relatively intact pits, each has a different theme. Pit #17 contains 70 terracotta soldiers marching behind carriages drawn by wooden horses. The soldiers, toppled by a cave-in years ago, carry iron swords slung at their hips, halberds {ji}, and wooden shields. The wooden horses have decayed, but bronze bits and carriage axles remain. Oddly, the pit was filled ten feet high with wheat, corn, and millet, and may have served as a granary.''''''
QUOTE
'''''''In these two halls the main exhibits are the colour-painted pot-
tery warriors unearthed in a Han tomb in Yang Jiawan.
This tomb is one of the satellite tombs of the Changling Mau-
soleum, where Emperor Liu Bang was buried. About 70 meters
south of the tomb, a large number of colour-painted pottery figures
were discovered in 1965. There, archaeologists sorted out 3,000
pieces of terra-cotta warriors from ten pits in the tomb. They were
known as "an army of three thousand horseback warriors". There
are four pits with standing figures and six pits with cavalryman fig-
ures. The warrior figures all had long spears and shields in hand, swords on
their backs and suits of armours on their bodies. The armour was
made up of two types :large and small(It seemed then that it was at
the point of turning the large armour pieces into the smaller ones. ).
.... The discovery of cavalryman figures in six pits out of the ten indicates that the cavalrymen had an
important place in the composition of the army and were a major
arm of the services then. .....From the layout of these Han terra-cotta warriors and horses,
we can see that the then military formation was quite different from
that of the Qin Dynasty. The battle formation of the Qin Dynasty
was to have the infantrymen as vanguards together with war chari-
ots, which was an attacking force. The battle formation of the Han
Dynasty was to have the infantrymen as vanguards with cavalrymen
as an attacking force. War chariots were only used as a commanding
tool.''''''
tery warriors unearthed in a Han tomb in Yang Jiawan.
This tomb is one of the satellite tombs of the Changling Mau-
soleum, where Emperor Liu Bang was buried. About 70 meters
south of the tomb, a large number of colour-painted pottery figures
were discovered in 1965. There, archaeologists sorted out 3,000
pieces of terra-cotta warriors from ten pits in the tomb. They were
known as "an army of three thousand horseback warriors". There
are four pits with standing figures and six pits with cavalryman fig-
ures. The warrior figures all had long spears and shields in hand, swords on
their backs and suits of armours on their bodies. The armour was
made up of two types :large and small(It seemed then that it was at
the point of turning the large armour pieces into the smaller ones. ).
.... The discovery of cavalryman figures in six pits out of the ten indicates that the cavalrymen had an
important place in the composition of the army and were a major
arm of the services then. .....From the layout of these Han terra-cotta warriors and horses,
we can see that the then military formation was quite different from
that of the Qin Dynasty. The battle formation of the Qin Dynasty
was to have the infantrymen as vanguards together with war chari-
ots, which was an attacking force. The battle formation of the Han
Dynasty was to have the infantrymen as vanguards with cavalrymen
as an attacking force. War chariots were only used as a commanding
tool.''''''
Like the Tang era arsenals where we see there are spears enough to equip every man in an army (as spears are cheaper weapons to produce) but we know in some instances the swordsmen can carry the battle instead.
In one Tang era record (Li Guan's Tai Bai Yin Jing) we see a force of 12,500 men.
It is equipped with 12,500 spears, 12,500 bows, and 12,500 swords (2,500 being cavalry swords). Yang Hong pp 259.
What can we make of such combined arms? Options?
Here is an example of weapons found in one Han army of ceramic warriors...ji...mao/spear...and jian all represented in one group.
Scoffing at 'looking at paintings' and such shows a reluctance to accept the insight they provide when the actual type of armour used, say for instance Tang era horse armour, may not have a single surviving shred ever found and all reconstruction is based on the armour depicted in tomb ceramics. The Han Shu is not the only source of information...and in particular one moment in time is clearly not the rule for a dynasty.
CJ Peers; Imperial Chinese Armies makes an odd claim here since it is hard to find specific descriptions of any weapons in Sima Qian's battle accounts but other Han records mention swordmen, art shows swordsmen and accounts where swords were used in ancient battles over spears do also exist. I can't figure what he means by the Sima Qian evidence but neither does Sima Qian spell out the other minutae of battle and material equipment;
QUOTE
''''''pp 43 "The sword was also an important weapon in the Han period, being used by both infantry and cavalry, and featuring in many of Sima Qian's battle accounts"''''
Qin relied on bronze for weapons and making a sword is very costly compared to iron. Iron was not of superior quality untill the Han period. Swordmaking improves dramatically during Han.
Chen Tang's campaign where troops formation were only polearms (note; not just 'spears' presumably) is quite agreeable to me. It makes sense, again even from Chao cuo's comments.
That is only one campaign but not a comment on the Han dynasty! Take a look at other Han commentary about battling the Xiongnu, or look at a Han era depictation of a battle, or look at what actually comes out of Han buried armies hands.
A combination of arms was availble to the Han and each suited to a different tactical situation.
Ji armed warrior.
