Rome vs Han essay- want get some opinions

[Eleatic Guest]

... the fact that a most military defeats means nothing but a loss of men/horses means that their defeats pale in comparison to sedentary defeats.

The loss of a man in a nomad society weighs much more, because he is not only a warrior, but also a family father, who gives protection to his wife(s) and numerous children. Thus, human losses can be socially less tolerated than in sedentary societies, especially those which follow the concept of a standing army, where the negative repercussions to the rest of the society are at a minimum.

They do not have an economy that can become strained due to an defeat, and they do not have a land that can be pillaged.

It is not if a nomad is living from the air. In case of defeat, he can get away with his horse, but his cattle will be left behind, since cattle is not moving much faster than even a walking man. But without cattle, his basis of life, he is practically dead.

And if the nomads keep the cattle far behind the front, it is always in danger of being seized by another group. In any case, the proportion of covering troops for his cattle, wife and children must be much greater than in sedentary societies, because of the complete lack of fortifications.

Women can herd sheep despite that their husband is dead, while for sedentary sociities and their sexist attitudes a family without a man = death.

I would rather say it is the other way round. In a sedentary, agricultural society there is better care for the wife and children and of killed, because other relatives are usually living in the same village to take care of them. In nomad society, where tens of thousand people move from pasture to pasture over large stretches of land, the risk of losing touch, locally and emotionally, to relatives is far greater.

A nomad can move to another land without any economical strain. A farmer or city dweller cannot.

I think you may be under te mistaken premise that the steppe is a void place which enough space to go anywhere any time. Kind of moon, only with air to breath. In fact, nomad movement are subject to a strict rhythm and that with a good reason. Nomads move from summer to winter pasture, from spring to spring with their cattle, so if a group gets defeated at the fringe of the steppe by a sedentary society, they just CAN'T retreat to any place on the steppe to their liking, but have to respect the movements of all other tribes, being in circular motion. If not, then another round of fighting breaks out immediately.

In a word, nomad societies are not at all as mobile as you may think. The Han were very well confronting an enemy who had his own strategical and tactical worries and limitations. The nomad bonus to Han China is less than you might think, more so, since it was the only real enemy, and the Han had therefore the luxury of concentrating the deployment of their forces, the training, weepons and equipment of their troops, on a single type of enemy. Rome, in contrast, had to build up an army which could cope with all types of enemies

As for the Han not having formidable enemies... what's that all about? ...Each state of the Warring States had their own style of warfare, and the most powerful state changed over the yrs due to constant war that many call China's military industrial revolution

The warring states are a zero-sum-consideration, and therefore not really relevant for any assessment of Han military might. What the one Chinese state wins in military glory and skill, the other necessarily loses.

If the Greek city-states had been forever battling among themselves, no historian would have realised the full military potential of the Greek hoplite armies. Yes, one could have made general inferences from the general level of warfare, but the real evidence for the military potential of the Greek city-states only came when they did beat the Persian superpower repeatedly and, overall, convincingly.

Such 'proof'', however, lacks in the case of Han China almost completely. The first high civilisations with which the Chinese had to deal with, were the Arabians in 751 and that resulted promptly in a defeat.