Taizong

Nope; Osprey is right. The gastrophetes ("belly-shooter') quoted by MPC were presumably the first crossbows in the Meditherranean area and they appeared circa 400 BC. Hero of Alexandria left the best detailed description in his work Belopoeica (Βελοποιικά), among other war machines like catapults. Oh! Isee what does he mean! THanks But is it a siege weapons? By hand-held crossbow, I mean something like this one: http://www.weblo.com/asset_image/456349/62...estofchina.com/ Also how strong such a crossbow is (gastrophetes)?

But isn't it true that Romans did not encounter any kind of armies who had powerful bows like the Huns (known also Xiongnu in the East)? Is this the reason why Early Roman Army did not fight in loose formation? Also, I thought that cataphracts in those days did not have massive effects as seen in later period since the lack of stirrup? I think the Osprey makes a mistake, since crossbow should appear in Europe no lesser than 9th-10th century. The only powerful hand-held crossbows with magnificent trigger mechanism is of Qin-Han Empire, who possessed an entire different style of warfare to the Romans.

This question has wondered around my head for a long time. Anyone could please answer such a question? I have known, however, that Roman army seemed to rely on shock impact rather than using powerful missile troops as their mainstay, is this assessment true?

The state monopoly of Salt and Iron in Western Han could be reflected in the primary source Yan Tie Lu (Discourse on Salt and Iron). For particularly currency, you can refer to this site for translation: http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/saxon/servle....lang=bilingual It is indeed very interesting to study both Han and Rome, since they were two giants of the time, both were equally powerful in their own times.

Hi! On the issue of Han coins, it must emphasise that not until the Tang dynasty that China fully used money for exchange. However, taxes in Han would be very different from Rome, as labour and regular military training were required. The Han army, therefore, were largely included universal consciption. On the issue of population, chinese records provided more quantitable elements than Western counterparts. I do not remember the registered households in High Han (Wudi), was about 53 million, without counting jimifuzhou (minor ethinics who did not register.) There is still, however, something I do not satisfy with the paper, primarily on living standard of both Empires. I do not know for certain the Roman living standard under, let say, Augustine's reign, but there exists several estimations for Han done by economic Chinese historian Wu Hui. Anyhow, my purpose for this thread is simply provide a site for Roman economics.

Chang'an, capital of Han Empire, by all means, equalled to that of any cosmopolitan in Rome.

Walter Scheidel , a professor at Stanford University, has proposed a list of interesting working papers on Roman History and Cross-Cultural Study between Roman and Han Empire. I think this site is useful. For those who are interested in this subject, this may be a place for bed-time readings.

Hello all forumites! I am very new in Roman History. I would like to join the community for further understandings of the Empire.