Julius Caesar vs Sun Tze...
-
Btw.. from shows (Discovery Channel Documentaries included ), I realized that the Roman Legionaries move slowly and steadily, pushing forward a wall of soldiers that's approaching the enemy.
On the other hand, the Chinese charge towards the enemy in no fixed direction.
Seems like the Chinese battle method is much quicker and aggresive while the Romans are slower and more defensive.. -
I read a novel about the Eastern Legion of the Romans fighting the Huns..was quite an interesting read..
forgot the title though.. -
Where did you get the book? Sounds interesting though.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I read a novel about the Eastern Legion of the Romans fighting the Huns..was quite an interesting read..
forgot the title though..
-
In history, the ancient Chinese have never decisively taken and controlled the territory of another foreign nation whilst the Romans on the other hand managed to conquer many foreign lands. Thus the Romans would seem to have the upper hand when it comes to war with a foreign foe.
Physique-wise, I would think the Romans were fitter than the Chinese, and though the ancient Chinese might have more sophisticated weapon-craftsmanship, they lacked the iron discipline and sheer brutality of the Roman legionnaire at melee combat.
Also Julius Caesar was a proven warrior who led his army to victory over his foes and taken territories - and was made the dictator of Rome before his assassination - leaving behind a great legacy and an Empire, whilst Sun Tzu was reported to be merely an advisor with no real decisive territorial conquest to his name and certainly did not leave behnd an empire that lasted as long as Rome....I think Rome outlasted any single dynasty in China (not sure about this...must check).
Finally, when it comes down to man-to-man personal combat between just the two of them, I think Julius Caesar would kick Sun Tzu's a** and ram his sword up his groin-guard. -
Sun will surely redraw(redraw not lose) from the fight. Firstly the fight is not profitable, the land they are fighting over are mostly useless as its far off from the capital. Secondly the odds are not tilted in either side the outcome will be a brutal battle. Brutal battles = high casualty a fight better to avoid as its best to win a war with minimum casualty so that u will not be open to the attacks of other enemies.
Julius is neither stupid. He only continue his conquest because he know that his army is superior and he knew that his opponent are weak. When meeting a relative unknown country like the chinese. He will most probably observe first and not be the first to rush into battle. If a fight is inevitable, i will say draw considering the area they are fighting over is a level plain, ceteris paribus. -
I think the above mentioned method of comparing these commanders are quite immatured. Its as though military command is an ability that can be quantified and compared in a numerical sense.
On a side note, I do start to see people starting to compare Roman's military ability versus Chinese military capability. Allow me to extend this comparison the Chinese versus European military ability. As most will know, until the Opium war of 1839, the Chinese and the Europeans (other than the Russians) never directly compete with each other militarily before. Two historical indirect competition however, took place and could perhaps provide an interesting insight of the military capabilities of both civilisations.
After years of trying, the Han Chinese finally managed to defeat their nothern nomadic enemy and drove them west out of Asia. Centuries later, these nomads were still unable to return to Asia but created havoc in Europe instead under their leader by a certain name of Attila.
During the Tang Dynasty, the Chinese were in trouble with a certain northern nomadic tribe again. After years of war, the nomadic tribe split into two with the stronger faction surrendering to the Chinese while the weaker faction moved west. This faction of nomads went into Europe and again created quite a bit of a stir, eventually craving for themselve an Empire under the banner of Ottoman and today still occupy land in Europe under the state Turkey.
Both examples are of course unfair comparisons as they pit the Chinese's golden age against the western civilisation's less glorious time. But after reading years of colonial history about how good and strong the westerners are, it feels good to know that a while ago, there were Asians that can really kick the butt of the Europeans. -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War#Military_applications
Sun Tze Bing Fa... The Art of War..
-
Umm, according to history records, Caesar is a very weak man who often fall sick. But oh well, who cares about history right? You made up all the things you said above without giving any historical support.Originally posted by Ibram Gaunt:In history, the ancient Chinese have never decisively taken and controlled the territory of another foreign nation whilst the Romans on the other hand managed to conquer many foreign lands. Thus the Romans would seem to have the upper hand when it comes to war with a foreign foe.
Physique-wise, I would think the Romans were fitter than the Chinese, and though the ancient Chinese might have more sophisticated weapon-craftsmanship, they lacked the iron discipline and sheer brutality of the Roman legionnaire at melee combat.
Also Julius Caesar was a proven warrior who led his army to victory over his foes and taken territories - and was made the dictator of Rome before his assassination - leaving behind a great legacy and an Empire, whilst Sun Tzu was reported to be merely an advisor with no real decisive territorial conquest to his name and certainly did not leave behnd an empire that lasted as long as Rome....I think Rome outlasted any single dynasty in China (not sure about this...must check).
Finally, when it comes down to man-to-man personal combat between just the two of them, I think Julius Caesar would kick Sun Tzu's a** and ram his sword up his groin-guard.
-
Originally posted by Ibram Gaunt:
you obviously dont know anything about chinese history, it is full of wars. China itself was once many country states that constantly fought.
[b]In history, the ancient Chinese have never decisively taken and controlled the territory of another foreign nation whilst the Romans on the other hand managed to conquer many foreign lands. Thus the Romans would seem to have the upper hand when it comes to war with a foreign foe.
you would think? NPNT.
Physique-wise, I would think the Romans were fitter than the Chinese
Do you even know who Sun Tzu is? and the Roman empire was not founded by Julius Caesar, so why credit the empire to him?
whilst Sun Tzu was reported to be merely an advisor with no real decisive territorial conquest to his name and certainly did not leave behnd an empire that lasted as long as Rome....I think Rome outlasted any single dynasty in China (not sure about this...must check).
you think? NPNT.
Finally, when it comes down to man-to-man personal combat between just the two of them, I think Julius Caesar would kick Sun Tzu's a** and ram his sword up his groin-guard. -
huh?
i think pikachu will win. -
the romans will prevail, if anyone is into roman military history and stradegy they should know. :p cheers ! based on roman history campaigns.
want to let a sparta stick up your ass? lol -
i prefer ghekis khan then sun tzu. read more about ghekis khan campaigns :p
-
this guy is obviously an expert in history and strategy, we all dont need to discuss anymore.Originally posted by zichuan:the romans will prevail, if anyone is into roman military history and stradegy they should know. :p cheers ! based on roman history campaigns.
want to let a sparta stick up your ass? lol -
Alexander the Great owns them all!
-
Originally posted by alexkusu:Alexander the Great owns them all!
-
Sparta is actually Greek.... and by the time the Roman Empire rose, Sparta was already only a fraction of their pastOriginally posted by zichuan:the romans will prevail, if anyone is into roman military history and stradegy they should know. :p cheers ! based on roman history campaigns.
want to let a sparta stick up your ass? lol -
Some ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_caesar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Tzu
The Chinese chauvinists here will never admit it...but Julius Caesar achieved much more than than Sun Tzu ever did......even after his assassination, a long-lasting empire was set up in Caeser's name (in fact, Caesar was considered a god: "In 42 BC, Caesar was formally deified as "the Divine Julius" (Divus Iulius), and Caesar Augustus henceforth became Divi filius ("Son of a God").
), whereas Sun Tzu or his descendants never did manage to overcome and unite the fractious states in China. Yes, China has engaged in many conflicts, but most of these conflicts are among themselves...and let us not forget that the Chinese too were defeated by barbarians like the Mongols and the Manchurians.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_Julius_Caesar
"Historians place the generalship of Julius Caesar (100 BC-44 BC) on the level of such geniuses as Alexander the Great, Scipio Africanus, Napoleon Bonaparte and Erwin Rommel. Although he suffered occasional tactical defeats such as Gergovia during the Gallic War and Dyrrhachium during the Civil War, Caesar's tactical brilliance was highlighted by such feats as his circumvallation of Alesia during the Gallic War, the rout of Pompey's numerically superior forces at Pharsalus during the Civil War, and the complete destruction of Pharnaces's army at Zela.
Caesar's successful campaigning in any terrain and under all weather conditions owes much to the strict but fair discipline of his legionaries, whose admiration and devotion to him was proverbial. Caesar's infantry and cavalry was first rate, and he made heavy use of formidable Roman artillery; additional factors which made him so effective in the field were his army's superlative engineering abilities and the legendary speed with which he maneuvered (Caesar's army sometimes marched as many as 40 miles a day).
Caesar levied several Roman legions and most of them remained strategically important until the 5th century. They were: Legio I Germanica, III Gallica, IV Macedonica, V Alaudae, VI Ferrata, VII Claudia, VIII Augusta, IX Hispana, X Equestris (his favorite legion), XI Claudia, XII Fulminata and XIII Gemina (which accompanied him across the Rubicon)."