Additional info/correction Additional info The Han empire did a census in 2 AD, it says they had a population of 57,671,400. We know the Romans also did censuses but none of the results survive till today...but modern estimates put their population similarly over 50 million people. Correction -The dates at 7:38 (All dates written on screen should be AD not BC) I wrote BC instead of AD and somehow did not notice & fix sorry.
Can you do a video about the ancient Nubian civilizations, from Kerma which was established in 2500 BC to the fall of Alodia which dissolved in 1506 AD?
Thanks for offering the correction. Sometimes, as humans we miss or overlook things, that we correct later. This you've done & we're the better for it. Love, love, love your videos & the work you put creating them!🤗
Fun Fact: Han dynasty Chinese name for Rome was Daqin, literally "Great Qin" ~ essentially "The other us." or the other great empire. The prefix da (大) or "great" signified that the Roman Empire was on par with the might of the Qin dynasty
That is a true "FUN FACT" stirs the imagination so much to think of all the info they had on each other besides the few surviving accounts...I think a missing link would be Persia(Parthians & Sassanids) I think it is highly probable that multiple Persian(or Kushan)merchants did trips to both empires in their life. Many of those accounts probably survived up until the time of Tamerlane...is so sad we cannot know(unless some buried accounts are found :D
@@aljosapecilj3183 Not really. As far as we know based on the writings of people like Pliny and Marcellinus, all the Romans knew of the Chinese was that they lived to the east of the Scythian grasslands, were good traders and weren't savages like their neighbours. The Romans also knew that the mysterious Eastern land on the other end of the Silk Road is where silk comes from and where much of their economy goes to die to fuel Roman hunger for said silk.
"The foundation of the world lies in the nation. The foundation of the nation lies in the family. The foundation of the family lies in the individual" - MengTzu (孟子)
@@ADogNamedStay that's kinda racist homie. From the Norte-Chico and Olmec to Aztec and Inca, there were consistently very well organized indigenous polities throughout American history.
@@liviavaleria1342 His comments speak more about him and his ignorance than reality. Don't forget the Mayan empires (though they remained city-states through much of their history)!
This is what I like - comparison videos looking at similarities and differences and explaining how each got to where they are. Very different from WHO IS STRONGER videos.
Han have Calvary archers with crossbows. Roman focus on heavy infantry. Read Sun Tze the art of war. In an one of match in an open areas, Han will have significant advantages.
@@hidemyname3683 and? neither of them want to invade each other, so this is plain dummy debate. Second of all, how battle turn out will be depend on the commander so this is another utterly useless comment
The production quality is getting insanely high for these videos I love it. Tons of drawings for every single thing, tons of maps, it’s great man keep it up.
Fun fact: Han praised Rome by saying 'they are just like us' At that age, Han people was so proud of themselves, saying some other country and its citizens are like Han prople is the highest praising they can give to a foreign nation.
This is usually how it goes. When the Byzantines heard of the Great Tang empire, the Byzantines said Xian must be Alexandria Eschate. They are the decendents of Greeks. Lmao, empires of those times believed their success was because they were just simply better than everyone else.
所居城邑，週圜百餘裡，城中有五宮，相去各十里。宮室皆以水精為柱，食器亦然。其王日遊一宮，聽事五日而後遍。常使一人持囊隨王車，人有言事者，即以書投囊中，王室宮發省，理其枉直。各有官曹文書。置三十六將，皆會議國事。其王無常人，皆簡立賢者。國中災異及風雨不時，輒廢而更立，受放者甘黜不怨。其人民皆長大平正，有類中國，故謂之大秦。 The city where the Romans lived had a wall circumference of more than one hundred chinese miles (the Chinese unit of length). There were five palaces in the city, each ten chinese miles apart. The palace rooms are all made of water essence as pillars, and the same goes for the food utensils. The king travels one palace every day and can hear all state affairs every five days. A person is often sent to accompany the king's car with a bag. If someone talks about state affairs, he will drop a book into the bag, and the king will return to the palace to clarify the facts of the incident. (Various matters of the state) Each has its own officials and secretaries. Thirty-six generals were appointed to discuss state affairs. There are no ordinary people among its kings, but only sages. There are often disasters and storms in the country, so the king is often deposed and a new king is installed, but the deposed king will not be resentful. The people here are all tall and good-looking, much like ours in China, so they are called Da Qin.
Liu Bang was probably one of the most underrated Chinese historical figure in the west. People know Qin Shi Huang and Han empire, but not many know how the Han gained power, and that Liu Bang was an ordinary peasant and had no noble bloodline or connection to became an emperor. This was the first time that such thing happened in Chinese history and probably even in the entire world history.
Liu bang is shit a person but capable of listening to good advice and change when being wrong, Xiang yu on the other hand was, a great honorable, friendly but cruel guy and incapable of listening to good advice
@@ayami123 This set the standard for all future Chinese leaders. You can be dumb and not capable yourself, but you need to give power and trust to capable people, and should listen to their advice even if they disagree with you. It's the basis of the Chinese meritocratic bureaucracy for the following 2000 years. In some way it still lives now.
@@ayami123 kind of a one sided way to look at a guy who lived 2500 years ago. He was a man of his age who used his mind as much as his swords. He was well loved by the soldiers and common folk. Those kind of people wouldn’t like you if you were a shit person
@@SeanHiruki If Liu Bei really revive the "3rd Han", then the Liu family would probably be believed as divinely protected and are destined to rule China forever. They would evolve into something like the Japanese Tenno family.
@@EpimetheusHistory Were they Warlords ? The Zhou King only gave titles to his family members and other important peoples. All the states were all Marches , Duchies and Principalities
From a very generalized point of view Rome put more emphasis on the external (ex. adopting foreign gods, an army focused on constant conquest and glory, Emperors being very public figures often with a popular personality cult, successors could be anyone with sufficient influence) while the Han were very much focused on the internal (one state religion with mere toleration of others, an army focused on rapid response over continual defense, Emperors being more distant from their subjects, successors having to be from the family). Rome was bordered by another powerful empire, the Parthians and later the Sassanians as well as the Germans that would often form large confederations; while the Han had no such rivals with their main ones just being the large Xiongnu confederations of nomads in the north but no other centralized power presented a constant threat and so the greatest continual threat was rebellions rather than foreign invasion.
@@SammyCee23 Are you serious? No one in China deared to sell the post of the Emporer, while the Roman protoerians iterally were selling the heads of the emporer to the highest bidder. Han China was a lot more stable than Rome because it's social structure was a lot more stratified. Romans had way more civil wars than Han China in the same spann of time.
@@lolasdm6959 The Chinese officials knew unless they were willing to commit the highest act of treason and get everyone hating you it’s better to just control the emperor as a puppet. Very few of the Chinese emperors had a steady reign as your comment would suggest, most constantly fought wars, then the generals from those wars, and then finally their own family until usually they were overthrown.
*One measure of salt costs 20 coins to carry for 100 Li. 1.73 measures of salt carried for 100 Li comes out to ~35 coins. However, since the actual measure of Li is 80, the man must be paid ~28 coins.* 40/2 = 20 1.73x20 = 34.7 34.7x.8 = 27.7
It is crazy to think that China rivaled almost all empires after the fall of Summer, Ancient Egypt and Mesoptamia. The Chinese rivaled Persia, Greece, Rome, The Calliphate, The Russian empire, The British Empire and now the US.
To solve the problem at 23:11, I defined the total labor of the task of carrying _s_ measures of salt a distance of _l_ li to be s*l (comparable to man-hours). Therefore, the pay rate for the task is _c_ coins per (s*l). 40 coins; 2 measures; 100 li 40/(2*100) = 0.2 coins per measure-li _c_ coins; 173 measures; 80 li c/(1.73*80) = 0.2 c/(138.4) = 0.2 c = 27.68 coins Edit: I did not see the decimal point in 1.73, mistaking it for *173.* What a fool I am. I have adjusted the calculus accordingly.
@@MMadesen Part of what makes it so insane to me is that there were SO many more "states" back then and a much smaller global population (not sure how the ratio lines up compared to now)
@@samwill7259 Well you know every modern nation you see on the maps currently is pretty much results of conquests or confederations. People used to live in a different polity for every equivalent of a country sized peice of land.
1 in 3 seems suspect to me .. all of North and South America , all of India, Persia. Japan, a third of Europe, Russia and every state below Russia Africa below the Dessert, as a guess China and Rome are a 10th of the worlds land mass even adjusting for population density a 3rd of all people living there seems a bit high, but it can only be a estimate we just don`t know.
I adore your videos, they're reliable, interesting and give wonderfully vivid visual impressions if the times and places your are talking about. Thank you! Are there any plans to complete last year's series about the Persian empires in antiquity with a video about the Sassanians? I would love to see your take on the 'last oriental empire' (before the rise of Islam).
The biggest problem with Empires is people. So the secret to success is to have an empire without people. That means that animal farmers are the wisest rulers in the land.
Both were massive agrarian empires that were at the mercy of the climate. During the third century and the fifth, they were massive world wide famines caused by century wide climate change.
Interesting thought that the Chinese approach to military was very different to the Romans, because they saw the military as an internal threat. Makes me ponder how these compare with a 3rd approach from the Bristish Empire, where the Regiment system had smaller units of soldiers loyal to their Colonel rather than any General. Once read a throry that this system may have helped prevent major coups from happening...
@@rueisblue It's called having modern institutions, maintain the authority of the civilian government separate from the military, rotate commanders from posts and cut off any possible source of funding that is separate from the government.
Simply put, the Han expected as far as a sedentary state possible could, it has unarable desert and steppe to its north, desert and mountains to its west and noxious jungle to its south. There simply isn't more conquering new province that could be done, no more military glory to be won, merely sustaining a military on those lands are a massive economic burden. So the military mostly sits around for decades at a time with its spears pointed inwards.
19:00. Well I think it have to do with geography. The Roman Empire was in Europe it's a continent that's a peninsula made up of other peninsulas surrounded by two continents close up. Also Rome was located in a peninsula of Italy. The Han Empire was located in China land mass in the corner of the content of Asia. That's the thing the Romans needed a really high skilled & very well equipped military while China not so much. Just look at all the borders at the Romans have to guard, the Romans had to guard the North, the East and the South, also with different crazy terrains, islands, and peninsulas basically the Romans have to protect themselves from all directions. The Han Empire of the Chinese in general never had this problem, the Chinese just really have to worry about the North.
I have to disagree. Romans didn't have any other power nearby to challenge their rule. The south? Sahara desert. The north? Unorganized tribes with inferior tech, population and armies. The west? A big ocean with nothing that can threaten them. The east? The weakened Persian empire. Romans had it very easy to move troops and provisions through their territory by ship thanks to the Mare Nostrum. Romans also didn't have to deal with insurrection from different warlords. Meanwhile, China had big mountainous land that made moving troops hard. They had internal problems like several warlords with huge armies and several external enemies like the powerful Xiongnu/mongol tribes in the north (why do you think they spent thousands of years building a Great Wall?), the Goguryeo in the north east, the proto tibetans in the east, the Ming Yue and Nan Yue in the South. The XiongNu were the same nomadic tribes that later terrorized Europe, pushed the germanic tribes to toe south and caused the fall of the Roman Empire
Well it makes sense; Empire simply means many Nations under one state or it can mean many states with at least some foreign states that are controlled by one big state. China has always been a civilization that wanted to be an Empire, thus has had many different Empires that came and go, the Romans were a Empire that always wanted to be a civilization but ended up being an governmental Institution that controlled territories.
Not being a patreon member, the thanks at the end of the video really makes my day. That said, I probably have that experience at least five times a day due to how much content you put out!
When it comes to comparing the legal systems and historical contexts of Rome and China during the first millennium BC, we can find some interesting parallels and differences. In the case of China, specifically the Zhou Dynasty, their legal system, as described in the "Zhou Li" or "Rites of Zhou," highlighted a process for handling civil disputes arising from contracts. Prior to litigation, both parties were required to submit a security deposit, and the actual trial would commence three days later. The Zhou Dynasty also had a system of judicial review, ensuring that judges who made incorrect rulings were punished. This system aimed to prevent wrongful convictions and placed a strong emphasis on fact-finding and the defendant's right to present their case. Capital punishment cases were particularly scrutinized and required the highest judicial authorities to review them in the court of the public. Comparing this to Rome, which was founded in 753 BC, roughly during the Spring and Autumn period in China, we see that Rome was a relatively latecomer in terms of its establishment. Just seventeen years before the founding of Rome, the Western Zhou Dynasty was under attack by the Rong people. During that period, the state of Zheng, under several generations of rulers, was gradually gaining strength and was known as a minor hegemon during the Spring and Autumn period. In 509 BC, Rome had just expelled its kings and established the Roman Republic. In the same year, power struggles between the states of Jin and Chu were ongoing, and the famous Chinese historical figure Wu Zixu had sought refuge in the state of Wu. Confucius was already 36 years old, and his teachings were being developed in the state of Lu. Around 440 BC, Rome published its first written law, the "Twelve Tables," while China was experiencing the end of conflicts like the War of the Zhao, Wei, and Han states against the state of Zhi Bo. It was 73 years before China's own first legal document, the "Xing Zhu Shu" or "The Book on Punishments," was publicly released. In 221 BC, China was unified under the Qin Dynasty, while Rome was still in the early stages of expansion. By 202 BC, Liu Bang had defeated Xiang Yu, and China's Han Dynasty was expanding significantly. Rome was simultaneously defeating the Phoenicians and expanding into Greece and Asia Minor. Around 100 BC, during the Han Dynasty, China had about 5.5 million square kilometers of territory and a population of 30 million, while Rome had approximately 2 million square kilometers and a population of 10 to 20 million. At this point, in terms of population and territory, China clearly surpassed Rome. In 2 BC, a year before the fall of the Western Han Dynasty, China had around 5.5 million square kilometers of territory and an official census counted 59.75 million people, with estimates by historians ranging from 60 to 70 million. In contrast, Rome had about 4 million square kilometers of territory, and there is no official population census data, with historians estimating a population ranging from 30 to 80 million. It was only during the Eastern Han Dynasty that the Roman Empire's territory roughly equaled that of China, with the population possibly surpassing that of Eastern Han. It's important to note that many people underestimate the material and living standards of the Warring States and Han periods in China. The ancient saying "Kaifeng City, city stacked on city" demonstrates the historical development of cities. Below the city of Kaifeng in the Ming and Qing dynasties are the ruins of the Warring States period's capital of Daliang, which was even larger than Kaifeng. The population of the Wei state was only around 3 million, yet Daliang had a population exceeding 100,000. Two thousand years later, the population of Henan had reached over 10 million, but the provincial capital, Kaifeng, still had a population of around 100,000. Some research suggests that the urbanization rate and per capita grain ownership in the Ming Dynasty were lower than during the Han period, and in the Qing Dynasty, they were lower than during the Warring States. The ruins of Handan, the capital of the Zhao state, covered an area of 16 square kilometers, even larger than the city of Babylon at the time. Not until the Northern and Southern Dynasties period did a city in the Jizhou region surpass Handan in size. The most remarkable is the Yandu, which was 4-6 kilometers wide, 8 kilometers long, with an area of 40 square kilometers, approximately the size of two Roman cities or seven to eight Tang Dynasty cities. The eastern wall of Yandu was 18 kilometers long. Keep in mind that the state of Yan was the weakest among the Seven Warring States, with a population of less than 2 million, and 200,000 of them lived in Xiangping, over 1,500 miles away from the capital. A country with just over a million people constructed a city capable of accommodating half a million. The Yandu site also yielded high-carbon steel weapons, indicating an advanced level of craftsmanship. There is also the Jingguan site within Yandu, comprising 14 Jingguan tombs, each with 2,000 to 3,000 skulls, totaling approximately 30,000. Archaeologists speculate that these remains date back to the time of King Kui of Yan, during a period of internal turmoil in Yan when the army of the state of Qi invaded.
Next idea up for a long video like this... How was the Byzantine/Eastern Roman empire so successful in surviving for so long for over 1100 years? = over twice as long as the roman empire... while its western counterpart failed. Building construction + diplomacy, economics, politics and military & reforms, as well as government structure and leadership in what they did right... from the crisis of the 3rd century in its pre-history, to the very end at 1453. Trade, countering invasions and counter attacks... as well as the crusades leading up to it, as well as what went wrong throughout leading to the end. As well as mentioning some legendary units in the byzantine army = from Greek fire, to the Varangian guard and more so. 😎😉🤞
While such a video would be interesting, I'd just like to point out that the Romans of Constantinople did not last "twice as long as the Roman Empire", but it was *the* Roman Empire.
There was no such thing as an "eastern" or "western" empire, it was one nation. The Western provinces were more poor and less developed. Also, the Germanic tribes that migrated bordered the western half, not so much the east. These tribes were also given land in the west partly because it was not highly populated.
The Byzantine Empire was only part of the HRE the Eastern Roman Empire The Holy Roman Empire was the First Reich Its our Empire today People still believe in Jesus and we use Maritime Admiralty Law
A little hard to say which empire had the most effective in the organization. They were some things that the Han empire did very well, however the Han Empire didn't last as long as the Romans...so I may have to give it to the Romans over all. Saying that it will be ideal to have a mix of both ideas to make a great ancient empire thrive.
The successor regimes to han empire lasted to mid 6th century. As a whole that persists temporally the classical sinitic empire has a long history too. Sometimes the conventions historians get used to can be confusing.
If you consider Roman Empire as a whole, the equivalent would be the "first Chinese empire" which goes from Qin to Jin dynasty. (221BC-311AD), and that is the shortest way to put it. (and by this standard a unified Rome only lasted until 395AD from 27BC) If you consider different ruling families of Roman Empire as different dynasties, most of them are pitifully short compare to the Chinese ones
@@Lyserus Using Family would be extremely inappropriate for Rome, since relatedness of the people in the elected positions or between emperors was irrelevant to the continuation of the state. In fact, I'd argue the fact that Rome did not rely on family lineage as the sole measure of a leaders legitimacy was a major strength of the Roman system over hereditary monarchies and helps to explain why it was able to continue so long (although it did come with downsides, mostly in the form of insufficient mechanisms to prevent civil war). China's major strength was in the size and highly meritocratic nature of its beurocracy. The desire for reunification combined with the ability to do so without interference from large outside powers also helped. 27 BC is a weird cutoff for Rome too because the transition from Republic to Empire was gradual, not sudden, to an average person, or beurocrat in Rome there was little change in their lives between 28BC, and 27BC. The Decline of Rome was similarly very gradual making simplistic assessments hard. This is quite different from the sudden fracturing seen in china and other states where the continuation of the state is reliant on the line of succession of the monarch.
@@flyingeagle3898 I agree with you on the Roman not really relying on dynasties. However, just wanted to point out that if we are not going with dynasties, the equivalent of Roman Empire would be the first Chinese empire and not just Hang dynasty, as the dynasties of the first empire also have a lineage (the same "tianming" or heavenly favor if you will), as the break time between each one is short and government structure remain unchanged fundamentally. The decline of the first Chinese empire is also not sudden, Jin dynasty declined to ruling only half of China for quite some time and there are few dynasties after that (southern dynasties), but I didn't count them as I didn't count the time after Rome split to western and eastern
That's because Chinese Empires valued family control over everything. A Dynasty belonged to only one dynasty. The Jin Dynasty that reunited China after the Han were from a different family , so they were seen as a different Dynasty. This is different from the Roman perception
I wonder how difficult a byrocrat would have considered the salt carring problem to be. It's always interesting to imagine what kind of mathematical thinking ancient people had. Simple aritmetics we teach to children usesed to be an impossibility for thousands of years.
Actually that's an easy problem even for Chinese standards, the main issue would be dealing with big numbers, espacially with no decimal system and no zero
You didn't mention the Imperial Cult in the section on Roman religion. The Roman Emperors were treated as divine representatives of the Heavens on earth, not that different from ancient Chinese Emperor worship really.They tolerated other religions as long as they could contextualize it with their own gods and as long as those peoples submitted to the Divine Caesars. That's why Christians were persecuted so much, they refused to give sacrifices to the Emperors. Which the Romans did not tolerate.
The Christians were also relatively new to the scene and were treated as a Jewish cult. The Jews themselves were not persecuted as brutally because their religion was ancient, and as such was grandfathered in as the red headed stepchild of polytheism.
@@starman4840 The Jews were a loyal autonomous region, but the Christains once attempted Israeli separatism.... At least this is what the Jewish kings were telling the Romans.
Amazing! Epimetheus, could you make other comparative vídeos of the governamental structures and problems like that using the Mughals, Qings and Mings, Mongols, Guptas, Ottomans, Abassid and Achemids, Britishes or even the Holy Roman Empire?
You're by far the most the decently accurate narrator world history Yet to this day we are still ruled by this two empire economically and socially in education, politics, agriculture, resources greed and technology and etc. Very often people are arrogant in understanding and too deaf and blind and Ignorant to these facts.
While comparing the two civilizations we've to keep in mind that China reached its actual peak of culture and political influence not in antiquity but in the early medieval period with the Tang Dynasty
Good video, but I am a little disappointed how while the Roman illustrations are more or less accurate to their respective periods, the Chinese illustrations are an anachronistic style mix. The Kings of Shang and Zhou for example are wearing hats and clothing from the later Ming Dynasty (14th to 17th centuries). This makes charting the style evolutions confusing. For future reference, there are surprisingly some pinterest galleries that have very well organized collections based on eras of history. You can find them by searching for Boards by typing in a specific dynasty, preferably also in Chinese, rather than pin search, which just gives you random shop fronts. I would name some of them but unfortunately YT comments have autodeleted all comments where I had
So glad my humanities professor insisted upon Meditations as required reading. A very interesting read to place alongside the known history of the man.
Civil Service math problem answer: 27.68 or more likely, just 27, since he hadn't done the work to get to the 28, even if .68 is closer to the next round number up than down. Math as follows: 40g for 2 Measures (ME going forward) for 100 Li 40g/2ME = 20g for 100li 20g/100Li = .2g per 1ME per 1Li Then Xg for 1.73ME for 80Li 1ME = .2g per Li .2g*80Li = 16g Leaving use with .73ME. Since .73 can also be used as a percentage, we can easily apply it to 73% of 2, which is 146. Add back the decimal of the 2 gives us .146g per .73m per 1Li .146g*80Li - 11.68g for .73ME for 80Li. Giving you 27.68. I had done it in my head first, just trying to visualize the numbers, and then redid it using a calculator while I typed this out just to be sure. Probably took me longer than they'd have liked, but tbf, its been years since I have actually had to do math like that since leaving highschool, and I didn't use pencil and paper that they likely would have had for this exam.
Well it's hard to say, Both allow the user to hold: Castles and Cities Settlments But with Roman Imperial you get to elect rules, keeping the game easier, and you get duchy viceroyalties at game start! And like Chinese Imperial you need the Jade Dragon DLC, And honeslty the +1 Piety per month it's not that worth it.........
Crusader kings 2 doesn't really simulate Chinese feudalism, where there isn't really such things as "Castles" in China, every city is a fortress in iteself.
In reply to the additional information in the pinned comment, I find it fascinating that we are even able to put together so much of the Roman empire given that no official census survived. Props to our historians. It's crazy to think that we can't deny such a empire existed but that we can also not deny that our speculations surrounding the scale of its greatness could just be a story to justify European colonialism.
Hi, can you make a video on why when China breaks apart, it always become reunited again eventually. You don't see the same thing happening to other empires.
That's because when the Han conquered other people they assimilate them culturally, because of this everyone just thinks of themselves as "Han Chinese" that's why it's a lot easier to reunite the empire.
@@dayangmarikit6860 The Han identity rose later on during the Southern Song dynasty to unify the people against the northern nomadic threat. Han peoples during the Han dynasty would differ themselves culturally by provinical lines, provincial prejudices exist even today. Romans had similar cultural cohesions during their time as well, everyone is technically a Roman citizen by the middle of the empire era, but they are still culturally different province to province. And they also had provincial prejudices, for example someone from the Italian provinces would look down on Romans from Gaul.
@@hydrolito not as much as the Chinese empire, to simplified it, with China unite and divide is like changing clothes, they can do it whenever they feel like it, while with rome it's like taking a leap of faith, they never know if the bottom is water or hard concrete. Which is why rome is dead and China survive.
Regarding the question posed I answer thusly. The video was an unexpected (pleasant) surprise, reinforcing the good record of this channel. Overall, in regards to military or economic capability, I think Han is decisively superior on per capita basis. For instance in areas thought to be Roman advantage, Iron, Han production of steel in general was stunningly high. It was the norm in Han to employ iron/steel tools in civilian setting. Other areas, for instance, use of casting to facilitate mass production of bronze/steel armaments. Where the wealth of Rome was employed less wisely, sophisticated bureaucracy, which predated Han, made better use of resources. It helped that they simply had more. Thus I think it is not a contention. To begin with Rome had to fight the uphill battle of relatively underdeveloped Mediterranean. As for some trivia. The misconception that Xiongnu is Hunnic is simply out of a similarity of names. They are clearly different (ie head binding versus non) when viewing the evidence. However the similar names reflect a kind of shared ... Nomadic identity of the times. In my opinion there is quite some potential for a lost world to the north. The Xiongnu is admittedly the strongest influence because of their cities, fortresses, and palaces, all part of a highly centralized Empire with a capable administration. (Said to be more centralized than early Han) The topic covered previously, such as bronze age collapse, is rather suggestive in this event. I would further add that it is rarely accurate, regarding steppe peoples such as Xiongnu, as nomadic. Neither should one view Mongolian Empire as peak of "Nomadic strength". But rather it's swan song, as they were not nomadic to begin with, but rather became that way as aftermath of calamity.
If your army is controlled by two guys, both of whom are rivals and are also rarely allowed to communicate with each other, I think that could and does have disastrous effects on an army. Sure having steel is cool, Romans also had steel but that’s beside the point, if your two guys in charge are rivals mad dogging each other and have the potential to disagree with each other for the sake of it, that could turn out quite poorly.
They both had homogeneous, highly nationalistic cultures at a time and place where both things were rather fluid. China in particular saw great success in that regard. So much so that invaders would abandon their own culture and sinicize themselves, becoming defacto Chinese. The Tartars take over and make the Northern Jin, the Mongols take over and make the Yuan Dynasty, the Manchu's take over and make the Qing Dynasty. None of them ever considered supplanting the middle kingdom. Rome saw that too near the end with Vandals and Goths all taking over the Western Roman Empire. Though unlike in China, a majority of Europe's population didn't really identify themselves or their culture as Roman. Nor was Rome considered as fundamental to society as the Son of Heaven was in China. Though in a similar vein, there were countries all the way up into the 1900's in Europe claiming to be the rightful heirs to Rome. It's just there was no interest in continuing Rome itself.
It's not that there was no interest, being roman was never a matter of ethnicity, being roman had a civil and legal meaning, it was very different from being chinese as far as I understand it. That's the reason why people in the middle ages did not see themselves as different from the romans. I also can't really see a moment in roman history when the empire was homogenus.
For romans I would argue against the homogeneous part. It was akin to Americans and being a "true" American citizen. There was a level of culture similarities and of course the language. But being a Roman meant more than blood. And I think that's what made them strong. If one was willing to join Rome and become Roman. It made them and the empire better off for it.
Russian leader called Czar also spelled Tsar pronounced Zar and meant Ceasar family name Romanov, German leader was named Kaiser. A country is named Romania.
Is the maurya empire significant in these calculation? I know little about them, so i don't know if they were comparatively too small or short lived to be in this.
27.68 coins. If you don't have a smaller denomination of money, you round off. As a pay master, whether you round up or down is dependent upon whether or not the man is armed.
Additional info/correction
Additional info
The Han empire did a census in 2 AD, it says they had a population of 57,671,400.
We know the Romans also did censuses but none of the results survive till today...but modern estimates put their population similarly over 50 million people.
Correction
-The dates at 7:38 (All dates written on screen should be AD not BC) I wrote BC instead of AD and somehow did not notice & fix sorry.
Can you do a video about the ancient Nubian civilizations, from Kerma which was established in 2500 BC to the fall of Alodia which dissolved in 1506 AD?
Thanks for offering the correction. Sometimes, as humans we miss or overlook things, that we correct later. This you've done & we're the better for it. Love, love, love your videos & the work you put creating them!🤗
Are you sure the invention of paper helped create bureaucracy, rather than the demand for paper by the bureaucracy lead to the invention of paper?
What is the name of the song at the start
It’s all good Epimetheus!!!!
Fun Fact: Han dynasty Chinese name for Rome was Daqin, literally "Great Qin" ~ essentially "The other us." or the other great empire. The prefix da (大) or "great" signified that the Roman Empire was on par with the might of the Qin dynasty
That is a true "FUN FACT" stirs the imagination so much to think of all the info they had on each other besides the few surviving accounts...I think a missing link would be Persia(Parthians & Sassanids) I think it is highly probable that multiple Persian(or Kushan)merchants did trips to both empires in their life. Many of those accounts probably survived up until the time of Tamerlane...is so sad we cannot know(unless some buried accounts are found :D
Meanwhile rome viewed china as just another barbarian country on the other side of the world that was just waiting for rome to conquer it
@@aljosapecilj3183 Not really. As far as we know based on the writings of people like Pliny and Marcellinus, all the Romans knew of the Chinese was that they lived to the east of the Scythian grasslands, were good traders and weren't savages like their neighbours. The Romans also knew that the mysterious Eastern land on the other end of the Silk Road is where silk comes from and where much of their economy goes to die to fuel Roman hunger for said silk.
@@EpimetheusHistory isn't it talked about in the dead sea scrolls?
What about the Sassanide Empire ? And the Gupta as well being the buffer of Rome and Han lands?
"The foundation of the world lies in the nation. The foundation of the nation lies in the family. The foundation of the family lies in the individual" - MengTzu (孟子)
Philosophy of two Empires
Han Wudi : Let's talk better mileage
Trajan : Kill the b***tards
@@hannibalburgers477 Ha! That's so true!🤩
@@hannibalburgers477 That's is a measure of personality, remember not every Roman is Trajan nor is every Chinese a Confucious.
Fuck them nations dawg, they ain't got shit on me
So why are the elites destroying the nuclear family?
It just boggles my mind that empires so large and efficiently run existed so long ago.
Well yeah, when compared with the central and south American empires pre European interbreeding, it would look efficient.
There were also many empires that lasted for centuries most people never heard of see longest lasting empires videos.
@@ADogNamedStay that's kinda racist homie. From the Norte-Chico and Olmec to Aztec and Inca, there were consistently very well organized indigenous polities throughout American history.
@@ADogNamedStay Also wtf no-one was talking about that
@@liviavaleria1342 His comments speak more about him and his ignorance than reality.
Don't forget the Mayan empires (though they remained city-states through much of their history)!
This is what I like - comparison videos looking at similarities and differences and explaining how each got to where they are. Very different from WHO IS STRONGER videos.
Han have Calvary archers with crossbows. Roman focus on heavy infantry. Read Sun Tze the art of war. In an one of match in an open areas, Han will have significant advantages.
@@hidemyname3683 and? neither of them want to invade each other, so this is plain dummy debate. Second of all, how battle turn out will be depend on the commander so this is another utterly useless comment
The production quality is getting insanely high for these videos I love it. Tons of drawings for every single thing, tons of maps, it’s great man keep it up.
Fun fact: Han praised Rome by saying 'they are just like us'
At that age, Han people was so proud of themselves, saying some other country and its citizens are like Han prople is the highest praising they can give to a foreign nation.
love
This is usually how it goes. When the Byzantines heard of the Great Tang empire, the Byzantines said Xian must be Alexandria Eschate. They are the decendents of Greeks. Lmao, empires of those times believed their success was because they were just simply better than everyone else.
But isn't every major civilisation like that?
所居城邑，週圜百餘裡，城中有五宮，相去各十里。宮室皆以水精為柱，食器亦然。其王日遊一宮，聽事五日而後遍。常使一人持囊隨王車，人有言事者，即以書投囊中，王室宮發省，理其枉直。各有官曹文書。置三十六將，皆會議國事。其王無常人，皆簡立賢者。國中災異及風雨不時，輒廢而更立，受放者甘黜不怨。其人民皆長大平正，有類中國，故謂之大秦。
The city where the Romans lived had a wall circumference of more than one hundred chinese miles (the Chinese unit of length). There were five palaces in the city, each ten chinese miles apart. The palace rooms are all made of water essence as pillars, and the same goes for the food utensils. The king travels one palace every day and can hear all state affairs every five days. A person is often sent to accompany the king's car with a bag. If someone talks about state affairs, he will drop a book into the bag, and the king will return to the palace to clarify the facts of the incident. (Various matters of the state) Each has its own officials and secretaries. Thirty-six generals were appointed to discuss state affairs. There are no ordinary people among its kings, but only sages. There are often disasters and storms in the country, so the king is often deposed and a new king is installed, but the deposed king will not be resentful. The people here are all tall and good-looking, much like ours in China, so they are called Da Qin.
Liu Bang was probably one of the most underrated Chinese historical figure in the west. People know Qin Shi Huang and Han empire, but not many know how the Han gained power, and that Liu Bang was an ordinary peasant and had no noble bloodline or connection to became an emperor. This was the first time that such thing happened in Chinese history and probably even in the entire world history.
Liu bang is shit a person but capable of listening to good advice and change when being wrong,
Xiang yu on the other hand was, a great honorable, friendly but cruel guy and incapable of listening to good advice
@@ayami123 This set the standard for all future Chinese leaders. You can be dumb and not capable yourself, but you need to give power and trust to capable people, and should listen to their advice even if they disagree with you.
It's the basis of the Chinese meritocratic bureaucracy for the following 2000 years. In some way it still lives now.
@@ayami123 kind of a one sided way to look at a guy who lived 2500 years ago. He was a man of his age who used his mind as much as his swords. He was well loved by the soldiers and common folk. Those kind of people wouldn’t like you if you were a shit person
It’s a shame his distant relative Liu Bei couldn’t copy all of Liu Bang’s success
@@SeanHiruki If Liu Bei really revive the "3rd Han", then the Liu family would probably be believed as divinely protected and are destined to rule China forever. They would evolve into something like the Japanese Tenno family.
Damn, the artworks keep getting even better and better
Yes! But the Pig made an appearance!
Very interesting subject. Your illustrations of the chinese emperors and warlords are quite beautiful.
Thank you :) Glad you like them!
@@EpimetheusHistory Were they Warlords ? The Zhou King only gave titles to his family members and other important peoples. All the states were all Marches , Duchies and Principalities
From a very generalized point of view Rome put more emphasis on the external (ex. adopting foreign gods, an army focused on constant conquest and glory, Emperors being very public figures often with a popular personality cult, successors could be anyone with sufficient influence) while the Han were very much focused on the internal (one state religion with mere toleration of others, an army focused on rapid response over continual defense, Emperors being more distant from their subjects, successors having to be from the family). Rome was bordered by another powerful empire, the Parthians and later the Sassanians as well as the Germans that would often form large confederations; while the Han had no such rivals with their main ones just being the large Xiongnu confederations of nomads in the north but no other centralized power presented a constant threat and so the greatest continual threat was rebellions rather than foreign invasion.
Romes greatest enemies were outside while China was inner
@@SammyCee23 Are you serious? No one in China deared to sell the post of the Emporer, while the Roman protoerians iterally were selling the heads of the emporer to the highest bidder.
Han China was a lot more stable than Rome because it's social structure was a lot more stratified. Romans had way more civil wars than Han China in the same spann of time.
@@lolasdm6959 The Chinese officials knew unless they were willing to commit the highest act of treason and get everyone hating you it’s better to just control the emperor as a puppet. Very few of the Chinese emperors had a steady reign as your comment would suggest, most constantly fought wars, then the generals from those wars, and then finally their own family until usually they were overthrown.
/one state religion with mere toleration of others,/ Oh ffs
HUUUUUUUUUUURRR DURRRR Rome Literally forced Christians to swear to Roman God Emperors or fed to lions or lit on fire.
*One measure of salt costs 20 coins to carry for 100 Li. 1.73 measures of salt carried for 100 Li comes out to ~35 coins. However, since the actual measure of Li is 80, the man must be paid ~28 coins.*
40/2 = 20
1.73x20 = 34.7
34.7x.8 = 27.7
it's 27.7 to be more precise 27.68.
@@vericulum6810 I genuinely wonder if you were to round up would it be seen as a slight error if another student chose not to.
I figure your paying for the delivery, regardless of the amount of salt, so 32 coins.
That’s the base pay, but what were you expected to tip your porter in Han China?
I hereby appoint you to the position of my accountant! At least for a year to see how good you really are. After that I may start to pay you
Idk why this video didn’t get as much videos as your other ones it’s by far some of the best content you’ve made yet
Glad to have you back Epimetheus you were sorely missed.
It is crazy to think that China rivaled almost all empires after the fall of Summer, Ancient Egypt and Mesoptamia. The Chinese rivaled Persia, Greece, Rome, The Calliphate, The Russian empire, The British Empire and now the US.
The Chinese have been around for a lonnnnnng time. lol
Not the same thing china is 70 years old
You adopted a wrong view about history
@@ChristianAuditore14 I think China is a lot older than that. Are you talking about Communist China?
“Rival” is a very strong word
I love to see Chinese history, it isn’t covered very often. Also, amazing video, keep up that great work!
Chinese histories are all fake man, is just so fake that it is so obvious
@@booaks2980 are you saying 2000+ years of history are fake???
@@booaks2980 cry us a river
@@TrafficPartyHatTest he just doesn't like china.
@@tannen3339 he's just racist
To solve the problem at 23:11, I defined the total labor of the task of carrying _s_ measures of salt a distance of _l_ li to be s*l (comparable to man-hours). Therefore, the pay rate for the task is _c_ coins per (s*l).
40 coins; 2 measures; 100 li
40/(2*100) = 0.2 coins per measure-li
_c_ coins; 173 measures; 80 li
c/(1.73*80) = 0.2
c/(138.4) = 0.2
c = 27.68 coins
Edit: I did not see the decimal point in 1.73, mistaking it for *173.* What a fool I am. I have adjusted the calculus accordingly.
I love Rome and China! Such awesome histories. Thanks for the video!
One out of three people under the control of only 2 states in a world with far, FAR more polities than we have now. That's insane.
Well to be fair every third person on our current world still lives in only two states. China and India.
@@MMadesen Part of what makes it so insane to me is that there were SO many more "states" back then and a much smaller global population (not sure how the ratio lines up compared to now)
@@samwill7259 Well you know every modern nation you see on the maps currently is pretty much results of conquests or confederations. People used to live in a different polity for every equivalent of a country sized peice of land.
1 in 3 seems suspect to me .. all of North and South America , all of India, Persia. Japan, a third of Europe, Russia and every state below Russia Africa below the Dessert, as a guess China and Rome are a 10th of the worlds land mass even adjusting for population density a 3rd of all people living there seems a bit high, but it can only be a estimate we just don`t know.
@@steve.k4735 China and Rome easily had more than half of the total human population on earth.
I adore your videos, they're reliable, interesting and give wonderfully vivid visual impressions if the times and places your are talking about. Thank you!
Are there any plans to complete last year's series about the Persian empires in antiquity with a video about the Sassanians? I would love to see your take on the 'last oriental empire' (before the rise of Islam).
The biggest problem with Empires is people. So the secret to success is to have an empire without people. That means that animal farmers are the wisest rulers in the land.
Well not really the animals can't do things for you you have to do everything for them.
Great video man, great to have you back.
Epimetheus once again proves that he’s the greatest historian in the world!!!!!
Its crazy that both China and Rome struggled in the 3rd century only to be united again at around the same time.
Both were massive agrarian empires that were at the mercy of the climate. During the third century and the fifth, they were massive world wide famines caused by century wide climate change.
Very interesting! Learned a lot!
Great artwork and photos!
Interesting thought that the Chinese approach to military was very different to the Romans, because they saw the military as an internal threat. Makes me ponder how these compare with a 3rd approach from the Bristish Empire, where the Regiment system had smaller units of soldiers loyal to their Colonel rather than any General. Once read a throry that this system may have helped prevent major coups from happening...
Romans also saw the military as an internal threat????? Lmao that is every empire with localized military command.
Well whatever the anglosphere has done with their militaries must have worked. Bc neither the British nor Americans have had anything like that happen
@@rueisblue It's called having modern institutions, maintain the authority of the civilian government separate from the military, rotate commanders from posts and cut off any possible source of funding that is separate from the government.
@@rueisblue they didnt last long enough to have one
Simply put, the Han expected as far as a sedentary state possible could, it has unarable desert and steppe to its north, desert and mountains to its west and noxious jungle to its south.
There simply isn't more conquering new province that could be done, no more military glory to be won, merely sustaining a military on those lands are a massive economic burden. So the military mostly sits around for decades at a time with its spears pointed inwards.
Man I was thinking when you were gonna upload yesterday and watching some of your old vids, and today you uploaded. Cant wait to watch this one
Your artwork is awesome! I know how time consuming it is!
I like how the Hans and Latins are polar opposite of each other's continents. And each other's empires.
Excellent overview. I like the comparative format.
Epimetheus is back
Oh, yeah!
In pog form!
Totalwar need to make a game that based on these 2 empires collided.
Parthia would like to divert on such welterweights
Also, here's a quote "Haul back to work, peasant! We need more rice!"
-Serpent Enforcer Budo
19:00. Well I think it have to do with geography. The Roman Empire was in Europe it's a continent that's a peninsula made up of other peninsulas surrounded by two continents close up. Also Rome was located in a peninsula of Italy. The Han Empire was located in China land mass in the corner of the content of Asia.
That's the thing the Romans needed a really high skilled & very well equipped military while China not so much.
Just look at all the borders at the Romans have to guard, the Romans had to guard the North, the East and the South, also with different crazy terrains, islands, and peninsulas basically the Romans have to protect themselves from all directions. The Han Empire of the Chinese in general never had this problem, the Chinese just really have to worry about the North.
You really need to look at china geography before you say that.
I have to disagree. Romans didn't have any other power nearby to challenge their rule. The south? Sahara desert. The north? Unorganized tribes with inferior tech, population and armies. The west? A big ocean with nothing that can threaten them. The east? The weakened Persian empire. Romans had it very easy to move troops and provisions through their territory by ship thanks to the Mare Nostrum. Romans also didn't have to deal with insurrection from different warlords.
Meanwhile, China had big mountainous land that made moving troops hard. They had internal problems like several warlords with huge armies and several external enemies like the powerful Xiongnu/mongol tribes in the north (why do you think they spent thousands of years building a Great Wall?), the Goguryeo in the north east, the proto tibetans in the east, the Ming Yue and Nan Yue in the South. The XiongNu were the same nomadic tribes that later terrorized Europe, pushed the germanic tribes to toe south and caused the fall of the Roman Empire
游牧部落在冷兵器时期比任何国家或者联盟都强大的多，这就是汉朝耗费国力打败了匈奴，而匈奴残部却能轻松灭亡罗马
Yay, a new video! I've been anxiously waiting for one. I always learn so much from you! Thanks always!🤩
excellent video having recently went down that imperial roman rabbit hole this video has made me interested in imperial Chinese history
Glad you said Rome had an empire before it had an emperor
Well it makes sense; Empire simply means many Nations under one state or it can mean many states with at least some foreign states that are controlled by one big state.
China has always been a civilization that wanted to be an Empire, thus has had many different Empires that came and go, the Romans were a Empire that always wanted to be a civilization but ended up being an governmental Institution that controlled territories.
Very interesting...great are/ photos!
Learned a lot!
"Rome had an empire long before it had an Emperor" - sounds familiar.
Ah yes, British.
@@hannibalburgers477 The Queen was also the "emporer of India"
@@lolasdm6959 yet they had an Empire, before an Emperor, or an "Empress" in this case
@@hannibalburgers477 The thing is her title is called emperor not empress for some reason.
Not being a patreon member, the thanks at the end of the video really makes my day. That said, I probably have that experience at least five times a day due to how much content you put out!
You don’t know how much I enjoy you work dude please on going
Amazing and informative video + amazing art = I subbed
Thanks!
Thank You American Eagle :)!
Awesome video as all ways!
Epimetheus back at it, good job
When it comes to comparing the legal systems and historical contexts of Rome and China during the first millennium BC, we can find some interesting parallels and differences.
In the case of China, specifically the Zhou Dynasty, their legal system, as described in the "Zhou Li" or "Rites of Zhou," highlighted a process for handling civil disputes arising from contracts. Prior to litigation, both parties were required to submit a security deposit, and the actual trial would commence three days later. The Zhou Dynasty also had a system of judicial review, ensuring that judges who made incorrect rulings were punished. This system aimed to prevent wrongful convictions and placed a strong emphasis on fact-finding and the defendant's right to present their case. Capital punishment cases were particularly scrutinized and required the highest judicial authorities to review them in the court of the public.
Comparing this to Rome, which was founded in 753 BC, roughly during the Spring and Autumn period in China, we see that Rome was a relatively latecomer in terms of its establishment. Just seventeen years before the founding of Rome, the Western Zhou Dynasty was under attack by the Rong people. During that period, the state of Zheng, under several generations of rulers, was gradually gaining strength and was known as a minor hegemon during the Spring and Autumn period.
In 509 BC, Rome had just expelled its kings and established the Roman Republic. In the same year, power struggles between the states of Jin and Chu were ongoing, and the famous Chinese historical figure Wu Zixu had sought refuge in the state of Wu. Confucius was already 36 years old, and his teachings were being developed in the state of Lu.
Around 440 BC, Rome published its first written law, the "Twelve Tables," while China was experiencing the end of conflicts like the War of the Zhao, Wei, and Han states against the state of Zhi Bo. It was 73 years before China's own first legal document, the "Xing Zhu Shu" or "The Book on Punishments," was publicly released.
In 221 BC, China was unified under the Qin Dynasty, while Rome was still in the early stages of expansion. By 202 BC, Liu Bang had defeated Xiang Yu, and China's Han Dynasty was expanding significantly. Rome was simultaneously defeating the Phoenicians and expanding into Greece and Asia Minor.
Around 100 BC, during the Han Dynasty, China had about 5.5 million square kilometers of territory and a population of 30 million, while Rome had approximately 2 million square kilometers and a population of 10 to 20 million. At this point, in terms of population and territory, China clearly surpassed Rome.
In 2 BC, a year before the fall of the Western Han Dynasty, China had around 5.5 million square kilometers of territory and an official census counted 59.75 million people, with estimates by historians ranging from 60 to 70 million. In contrast, Rome had about 4 million square kilometers of territory, and there is no official population census data, with historians estimating a population ranging from 30 to 80 million.
It was only during the Eastern Han Dynasty that the Roman Empire's territory roughly equaled that of China, with the population possibly surpassing that of Eastern Han.
It's important to note that many people underestimate the material and living standards of the Warring States and Han periods in China. The ancient saying "Kaifeng City, city stacked on city" demonstrates the historical development of cities. Below the city of Kaifeng in the Ming and Qing dynasties are the ruins of the Warring States period's capital of Daliang, which was even larger than Kaifeng. The population of the Wei state was only around 3 million, yet Daliang had a population exceeding 100,000. Two thousand years later, the population of Henan had reached over 10 million, but the provincial capital, Kaifeng, still had a population of around 100,000. Some research suggests that the urbanization rate and per capita grain ownership in the Ming Dynasty were lower than during the Han period, and in the Qing Dynasty, they were lower than during the Warring States.
The ruins of Handan, the capital of the Zhao state, covered an area of 16 square kilometers, even larger than the city of Babylon at the time. Not until the Northern and Southern Dynasties period did a city in the Jizhou region surpass Handan in size. The most remarkable is the Yandu, which was 4-6 kilometers wide, 8 kilometers long, with an area of 40 square kilometers, approximately the size of two Roman cities or seven to eight Tang Dynasty cities. The eastern wall of Yandu was 18 kilometers long. Keep in mind that the state of Yan was the weakest among the Seven Warring States, with a population of less than 2 million, and 200,000 of them lived in Xiangping, over 1,500 miles away from the capital. A country with just over a million people constructed a city capable of accommodating half a million. The Yandu site also yielded high-carbon steel weapons, indicating an advanced level of craftsmanship. There is also the Jingguan site within Yandu, comprising 14 Jingguan tombs, each with 2,000 to 3,000 skulls, totaling approximately 30,000. Archaeologists speculate that these remains date back to the time of King Kui of Yan, during a period of internal turmoil in Yan when the army of the state of Qi invaded.
欧洲落后中国几千年
在最近几百年超越了中国
如果中国的人本主义不传到欧洲
恐怕欧洲不会那么快抛弃宗教进入文艺复兴
Very informative and great work as always. Thanks.
Interesting! Thank you! I was looking for history on China and Caesar…looking at current developments..
LOL, I was literally just dreaming about this... when I woke up, I saw this recommended in my notifications.
The legend uploaded! Let’s go!
Geography made quite the difference there as well
Brilliantly done, no messing.
Roman Empire was a club. Han Dynasty a family business.
Thank you for these videos. We are blessed to have you as a scholar.
Just casually dropping a great video.
Long have I awaited for this day for epimethus to return
Next idea up for a long video like this... How was the Byzantine/Eastern Roman empire so successful in surviving for so long for over 1100 years? = over twice as long as the roman empire... while its western counterpart failed.
Building construction + diplomacy, economics, politics and military & reforms, as well as government structure and leadership in what they did right... from the crisis of the 3rd century in its pre-history, to the very end at 1453.
Trade, countering invasions and counter attacks... as well as the crusades leading up to it, as well as what went wrong throughout leading to the end.
As well as mentioning some legendary units in the byzantine army = from Greek fire, to the Varangian guard and more so. 😎😉🤞
While such a video would be interesting, I'd just like to point out that the Romans of Constantinople did not last "twice as long as the Roman Empire", but it was *the* Roman Empire.
I'd definitely watch a video covering it up to the point where it couldn't really be called an empire, towards the end it was basically a city-state
There was no such thing as an "eastern" or "western" empire, it was one nation. The Western provinces were more poor and less developed. Also, the Germanic tribes that migrated bordered the western half, not so much the east. These tribes were also given land in the west partly because it was not highly populated.
The Byzantine Empire was only part of the HRE
the Eastern Roman Empire
The Holy Roman Empire was the First Reich
Its our Empire today
People still believe in Jesus
and we use Maritime Admiralty Law
Yes pls lord epimetheus grace us with this idea or another, gj and keep it up
That's a nice shift towards longer documentaries
Nice Han crossbow drawings
Thank you so much 😀
@@EpimetheusHistory i made a han crossbow (in real life), thought you would be interested to see
@@HistoricalWeapons Super cool loved the video.
Fantastic again. Best telling voice ever.
I'm not sure if "Lady for Miscellaneous Uses" or "Lady Without Impurity" is the most sus imperial title of all time LOL
Fascinating and insightful as always. 👏
An ancient Pontus/mithridates episode would be interesting.
A little hard to say which empire had the most effective in the organization. They were some things that the Han empire did very well, however the Han Empire didn't last as long as the Romans...so I may have to give it to the Romans over all.
Saying that it will be ideal to have a mix of both ideas to make a great ancient empire thrive.
The successor regimes to han empire lasted to mid 6th century. As a whole that persists temporally the classical sinitic empire has a long history too. Sometimes the conventions historians get used to can be confusing.
If you consider Roman Empire as a whole, the equivalent would be the "first Chinese empire" which goes from Qin to Jin dynasty. (221BC-311AD), and that is the shortest way to put it. (and by this standard a unified Rome only lasted until 395AD from 27BC)
If you consider different ruling families of Roman Empire as different dynasties, most of them are pitifully short compare to the Chinese ones
@@Lyserus Using Family would be extremely inappropriate for Rome, since relatedness of the people in the elected positions or between emperors was irrelevant to the continuation of the state.
In fact, I'd argue the fact that Rome did not rely on family lineage as the sole measure of a leaders legitimacy was a major strength of the Roman system over hereditary monarchies and helps to explain why it was able to continue so long (although it did come with downsides, mostly in the form of insufficient mechanisms to prevent civil war).
China's major strength was in the size and highly meritocratic nature of its beurocracy. The desire for reunification combined with the ability to do so without interference from large outside powers also helped.
27 BC is a weird cutoff for Rome too because the transition from Republic to Empire was gradual, not sudden, to an average person, or beurocrat in Rome there was little change in their lives between 28BC, and 27BC. The Decline of Rome was similarly very gradual making simplistic assessments hard. This is quite different from the sudden fracturing seen in china and other states where the continuation of the state is reliant on the line of succession of the monarch.
@@flyingeagle3898 I agree with you on the Roman not really relying on dynasties.
However, just wanted to point out that if we are not going with dynasties, the equivalent of Roman Empire would be the first Chinese empire and not just Hang dynasty, as the dynasties of the first empire also have a lineage (the same "tianming" or heavenly favor if you will), as the break time between each one is short and government structure remain unchanged fundamentally.
The decline of the first Chinese empire is also not sudden, Jin dynasty declined to ruling only half of China for quite some time and there are few dynasties after that (southern dynasties), but I didn't count them as I didn't count the time after Rome split to western and eastern
That's because Chinese Empires valued family control over everything. A Dynasty belonged to only one dynasty. The Jin Dynasty that reunited China after the Han were from a different family , so they were seen as a different Dynasty. This is different from the Roman perception
This was really interesting. Thanks for your hard work!
I wonder how difficult a byrocrat would have considered the salt carring problem to be. It's always interesting to imagine what kind of mathematical thinking ancient people had. Simple aritmetics we teach to children usesed to be an impossibility for thousands of years.
Actually that's an easy problem even for Chinese standards, the main issue would be dealing with big numbers, espacially with no decimal system and no zero
Another great video!💪🏻💪🏻
You didn't mention the Imperial Cult in the section on Roman religion. The Roman Emperors were treated as divine representatives of the Heavens on earth, not that different from ancient Chinese Emperor worship really.They tolerated other religions as long as they could contextualize it with their own gods and as long as those peoples submitted to the Divine Caesars. That's why Christians were persecuted so much, they refused to give sacrifices to the Emperors. Which the Romans did not tolerate.
The Christians were also relatively new to the scene and were treated as a Jewish cult. The Jews themselves were not persecuted as brutally because their religion was ancient, and as such was grandfathered in as the red headed stepchild of polytheism.
Chinese emporers ruled as divine mandates, that is since Heaven is too posh and snob to deal with earthly affairs, the emporer does it for them.
@@starman4840 The Jews were a loyal autonomous region, but the Christains once attempted Israeli separatism.... At least this is what the Jewish kings were telling the Romans.
Keep up the great videos!
Amazing! Epimetheus, could you make other comparative vídeos of the governamental structures and problems like that using the Mughals, Qings and Mings, Mongols, Guptas, Ottomans, Abassid and Achemids, Britishes or even the Holy Roman Empire?
Very good presentation.
27,68 coins... Damn you. you made me count in my head for like 5 mins
You're by far the most the decently accurate narrator world history Yet to this day we are still ruled by this two empire economically and socially in education, politics, agriculture, resources greed and technology and etc. Very often people are arrogant in understanding and too deaf and blind and Ignorant to these facts.
While comparing the two civilizations we've to keep in mind that China reached its actual peak of culture and political influence not in antiquity but in the early medieval period with the Tang Dynasty
True
Mongolian Empire under Kublai Khan moved their capital into Area that is now China. Mongolians had largest land empire in the world.
@@tcxnt5442 Mongolian Empire under Kublai Khan moved their capital into area that is now China. Mongolia had the largest land empire in the world.
I think that China had multiple golden ages... (Han, Tang, Song and Ming Dynasties). Throughout its history, China had cycles of decline and recovery.
@@dayangmarikit6860 Yeah China lasted a long time, every nation has rise and falls.
This will be the most interesting video ever made
Good video, but I am a little disappointed how while the Roman illustrations are more or less accurate to their respective periods, the Chinese illustrations are an anachronistic style mix. The Kings of Shang and Zhou for example are wearing hats and clothing from the later Ming Dynasty (14th to 17th centuries). This makes charting the style evolutions confusing.
For future reference, there are surprisingly some pinterest galleries that have very well organized collections based on eras of history. You can find them by searching for Boards by typing in a specific dynasty, preferably also in Chinese, rather than pin search, which just gives you random shop fronts.
I would name some of them but unfortunately YT comments have autodeleted all comments where I had
Really interesting. Learn something new every time I watch your show. Good stuff 👍😊
Can you do an in depth video on the Rise and Fall of the Tang Empire?
As China's zenith and second golden age I feel it dosen't get much love.
So glad my humanities professor insisted upon Meditations as required reading. A very interesting read to place alongside the known history of the man.
Controlling the emperor in China? Dong Zhou springs to mind. I think u would love a video game called total war three kingdoms Epimetheus
Civil Service math problem answer: 27.68 or more likely, just 27, since he hadn't done the work to get to the 28, even if .68 is closer to the next round number up than down.
Math as follows:
40g for 2 Measures (ME going forward) for 100 Li
40g/2ME = 20g for 100li
20g/100Li = .2g per 1ME per 1Li
Then Xg for 1.73ME for 80Li
1ME = .2g per Li
.2g*80Li = 16g
Leaving use with .73ME.
Since .73 can also be used as a percentage, we can easily apply it to 73% of 2, which is 146. Add back the decimal of the 2 gives us .146g per .73m per 1Li
.146g*80Li - 11.68g for .73ME for 80Li. Giving you 27.68.
I had done it in my head first, just trying to visualize the numbers, and then redid it using a calculator while I typed this out just to be sure. Probably took me longer than they'd have liked, but tbf, its been years since I have actually had to do math like that since leaving highschool, and I didn't use pencil and paper that they likely would have had for this exam.
Well it's hard to say,
Both allow the user to hold: Castles and Cities Settlments
But with Roman Imperial you get to elect rules, keeping the game easier, and you get duchy viceroyalties at game start!
And like Chinese Imperial you need the Jade Dragon DLC, And honeslty the +1 Piety per month it's not that worth it.........
🤣
🤣
Crusader kings 2 doesn't really simulate Chinese feudalism, where there isn't really such things as "Castles" in China, every city is a fortress in iteself.
Awesome video. Thank you
around han dynasty the most important crop in northern china was not wheat but millet.
There are these TH-camrs that if they post a video, it is always a joy to watch it. Thanks for another great video!
In reply to the additional information in the pinned comment, I find it fascinating that we are even able to put together so much of the Roman empire given that no official census survived. Props to our historians. It's crazy to think that we can't deny such a empire existed but that we can also not deny that our speculations surrounding the scale of its greatness could just be a story to justify European colonialism.
He’s back
Hi, can you make a video on why when China breaks apart, it always become reunited again eventually. You don't see the same thing happening to other empires.
The Roman Empire did that also more than once.
That's because when the Han conquered other people they assimilate them culturally, because of this everyone just thinks of themselves as "Han Chinese" that's why it's a lot easier to reunite the empire.
Geography.
@@dayangmarikit6860 The Han identity rose later on during the Southern Song dynasty to unify the people against the northern nomadic threat. Han peoples during the Han dynasty would differ themselves culturally by provinical lines, provincial prejudices exist even today.
Romans had similar cultural cohesions during their time as well, everyone is technically a Roman citizen by the middle of the empire era, but they are still culturally different province to province. And they also had provincial prejudices, for example someone from the Italian provinces would look down on Romans from Gaul.
@@hydrolito not as much as the Chinese empire, to simplified it, with China unite and divide is like changing clothes, they can do it whenever they feel like it, while with rome it's like taking a leap of faith, they never know if the bottom is water or hard concrete. Which is why rome is dead and China survive.
Another banger. Thanks.
Regarding the question posed I answer thusly.
The video was an unexpected (pleasant) surprise, reinforcing the good record of this channel.
Overall, in regards to military or economic capability, I think Han is decisively superior on per capita basis.
For instance in areas thought to be Roman advantage, Iron, Han production of steel in general was stunningly high. It was the norm in Han to employ iron/steel tools in civilian setting.
Other areas, for instance, use of casting to facilitate mass production of bronze/steel armaments.
Where the wealth of Rome was employed less wisely, sophisticated bureaucracy, which predated Han, made better use of resources. It helped that they simply had more.
Thus I think it is not a contention.
To begin with Rome had to fight the uphill battle of relatively underdeveloped Mediterranean.
As for some trivia. The misconception that Xiongnu is Hunnic is simply out of a similarity of names. They are clearly different (ie head binding versus non) when viewing the evidence.
However the similar names reflect a kind of shared ... Nomadic identity of the times.
In my opinion there is quite some potential for a lost world to the north.
The Xiongnu is admittedly the strongest influence because of their cities, fortresses, and palaces, all part of a highly centralized Empire with a capable administration.
(Said to be more centralized than early Han)
The topic covered previously, such as bronze age collapse, is rather suggestive in this event.
I would further add that it is rarely accurate, regarding steppe peoples such as Xiongnu, as nomadic.
Neither should one view Mongolian Empire as peak of "Nomadic strength". But rather it's swan song, as they were not nomadic to begin with, but rather became that way as aftermath of calamity.
If your army is controlled by two guys, both of whom are rivals and are also rarely allowed to communicate with each other, I think that could and does have disastrous effects on an army. Sure having steel is cool, Romans also had steel but that’s beside the point, if your two guys in charge are rivals mad dogging each other and have the potential to disagree with each other for the sake of it, that could turn out quite poorly.
magnificent video, my friend!
They both had homogeneous, highly nationalistic cultures at a time and place where both things were rather fluid.
China in particular saw great success in that regard. So much so that invaders would abandon their own culture and sinicize themselves, becoming defacto Chinese. The Tartars take over and make the Northern Jin, the Mongols take over and make the Yuan Dynasty, the Manchu's take over and make the Qing Dynasty. None of them ever considered supplanting the middle kingdom.
Rome saw that too near the end with Vandals and Goths all taking over the Western Roman Empire. Though unlike in China, a majority of Europe's population didn't really identify themselves or their culture as Roman. Nor was Rome considered as fundamental to society as the Son of Heaven was in China. Though in a similar vein, there were countries all the way up into the 1900's in Europe claiming to be the rightful heirs to Rome. It's just there was no interest in continuing Rome itself.
It's not that there was no interest, being roman was never a matter of ethnicity, being roman had a civil and legal meaning, it was very different from being chinese as far as I understand it.
That's the reason why people in the middle ages did not see themselves as different from the romans. I also can't really see a moment in roman history when the empire was homogenus.
@@leonardoferrari4852 I think he meant culturally homogeneous, but even then I think that's a big stretch
@@ennuiii yeah I don't really see it personaly
For romans I would argue against the homogeneous part. It was akin to Americans and being a "true" American citizen. There was a level of culture similarities and of course the language. But being a Roman meant more than blood. And I think that's what made them strong. If one was willing to join Rome and become Roman. It made them and the empire better off for it.
Russian leader called Czar also spelled Tsar pronounced Zar and meant Ceasar family name Romanov, German leader was named Kaiser. A country is named Romania.
"Choose your own adventure" had me lol.
Is the maurya empire significant in these calculation? I know little about them, so i don't know if they were comparatively too small or short lived to be in this.
They were from 322 BC - 184 BC
For almost all of the Han and Roman Imperial periods the Maurya Empire did not exist
In their time the two big empires were the Maurya and Seleucid Empires.
11:49 "Having those guys like you was important." Hahaha!
In Loving memory of "Wang Mang"
Thanks for your hard work
Where might I read more about the left & right general system that the Chinese had?
官员制度对于大多数中国人也是很复杂的，如果你感兴趣可以直接看古书《汉仪》《史记》《汉书》《三国志》《后汉书》《全唐诗》《陔馀丛考》😂Its so difficult
27.68 coins. If you don't have a smaller denomination of money, you round off. As a pay master, whether you round up or down is dependent upon whether or not the man is armed.
(1.73 measures of salt / 2 measures of salt) * (80 Li / 100 Li) = 27.68 which would round to ~27.7 and then to ~28, no?
Really cool how you could get Adam Jensen to do narration for your videos
i mean between the two countries only one still exists today lmao