美知乎讨论：匈奴、突厥为何最终都被中国王朝打败甚至臣服？
正文翻译
评论翻译
Jason.kete Follow
This is actually normal. The ancient Chinese Central Plains dynasty, or the so-called Han Dynasty, was often far superior to the nomads in terms of military technology, organization, and economy. Many times, only when the Chinese dynasty itself was in turmoil did the nomads have the opportunity to invade or even successfully control some regional cities.
And many times, nomads, such as the xiongnu, often adopted guerrilla warfare and harassment tactics. The reason why the Chinese invented the Great Wall is that nomads often like to choose to harass and rob on the border, but many times you can't catch up with them. Nomads generally don't have a fixed place to live, so the Great Wall was born.
Back to the topic itself. The Han Dynasty and the Tang Dynasty are recognized as one of the most glorious dynasties in Chinese history. Whether in military technology, military size or economic strength, they were one of the most powerful empires in the world at that time. It is also normal that the xiongnu and Turks were eventually defeated, and some of them eventually surrendered and served in the Chinese army.
这其实很正常。古代中国的中原王朝，即所谓的汉朝，在军事技术、组织和经济方面往往远远优于游牧民族。很多时候，只有当中国王朝本身陷入动荡时，游牧民族才有机会入侵甚至成功控制一些地区城市。
很多时候，像匈奴这样的游牧民族经常采用游击战和骚扰战术。中国人发明长城的原因是因为游牧民族经常选择在边境进行骚扰和抢劫，但很多时候你无法追上他们。游牧民族通常没有固定的居住地，因此长城应运而生。
回到话题本身。汉朝和唐朝被认为是中国历史上最辉煌的王朝之一。无论是在军事技术、军队规模还是经济实力上，它们都是当时世界上最强大的帝国之一。匈奴和突厥最终被击败，甚至其中有些人最终投降并服务于中国军队，这也是很正常的。
This is actually normal. The ancient Chinese Central Plains dynasty, or the so-called Han Dynasty, was often far superior to the nomads in terms of military technology, organization, and economy. Many times, only when the Chinese dynasty itself was in turmoil did the nomads have the opportunity to invade or even successfully control some regional cities.
And many times, nomads, such as the xiongnu, often adopted guerrilla warfare and harassment tactics. The reason why the Chinese invented the Great Wall is that nomads often like to choose to harass and rob on the border, but many times you can't catch up with them. Nomads generally don't have a fixed place to live, so the Great Wall was born.
Back to the topic itself. The Han Dynasty and the Tang Dynasty are recognized as one of the most glorious dynasties in Chinese history. Whether in military technology, military size or economic strength, they were one of the most powerful empires in the world at that time. It is also normal that the xiongnu and Turks were eventually defeated, and some of them eventually surrendered and served in the Chinese army.
这其实很正常。古代中国的中原王朝，即所谓的汉朝，在军事技术、组织和经济方面往往远远优于游牧民族。很多时候，只有当中国王朝本身陷入动荡时，游牧民族才有机会入侵甚至成功控制一些地区城市。
很多时候，像匈奴这样的游牧民族经常采用游击战和骚扰战术。中国人发明长城的原因是因为游牧民族经常选择在边境进行骚扰和抢劫，但很多时候你无法追上他们。游牧民族通常没有固定的居住地，因此长城应运而生。
回到话题本身。汉朝和唐朝被认为是中国历史上最辉煌的王朝之一。无论是在军事技术、军队规模还是经济实力上，它们都是当时世界上最强大的帝国之一。匈奴和突厥最终被击败，甚至其中有些人最终投降并服务于中国军队，这也是很正常的。
Tao Huang· Feb 12
Your non - continuous civilizations simply can't understand our culture. In each of our dynasties, the history of the previous dynasty was recorded, and these records are known as the Twenty - Four Histories (compiled by government - organized efforts). What changes is the ruling and administrative organization, but the main culture represents China. Whether it is the Yuan Dynasty ruled by the Mongols or the Qing Dynasty ruled by the Manchus, they all called themselves China. Countries without continuous civilizations can only understand that the government represents the country. In Chinese civilization, the government is just a ruling and administrative organization. It doesn't represent all the elements of China; it is merely a management organization. If this management organization fails to manage properly, the Chinese people will overthrow it and elect a new management organization. That's why there have been many dynasties in China.
你们不连续的文明根本就理解不了我们的文化。我们每一个朝代，都记载了前一个朝代的历史，这些记载被称为二十四史（由政府组织编纂）。变化的是统治和行政机构，但主体文化始终是中华文化在传承。无论是蒙古人统治的元朝，还是满族统治的清朝，都称自己为中国。没有连续文明的国家只能理解政府代表国家。在中国文明中，政府只是一个统治和行政机构。它并不代表中国的所有要素；它只是一个管理机构。如果这个管理机构管理不善，中国人民就会推翻它，选举一个新的管理机构。这就是为什么中国会有很多朝代。
Your non - continuous civilizations simply can't understand our culture. In each of our dynasties, the history of the previous dynasty was recorded, and these records are known as the Twenty - Four Histories (compiled by government - organized efforts). What changes is the ruling and administrative organization, but the main culture represents China. Whether it is the Yuan Dynasty ruled by the Mongols or the Qing Dynasty ruled by the Manchus, they all called themselves China. Countries without continuous civilizations can only understand that the government represents the country. In Chinese civilization, the government is just a ruling and administrative organization. It doesn't represent all the elements of China; it is merely a management organization. If this management organization fails to manage properly, the Chinese people will overthrow it and elect a new management organization. That's why there have been many dynasties in China.
你们不连续的文明根本就理解不了我们的文化。我们每一个朝代，都记载了前一个朝代的历史，这些记载被称为二十四史（由政府组织编纂）。变化的是统治和行政机构，但主体文化始终是中华文化在传承。无论是蒙古人统治的元朝，还是满族统治的清朝，都称自己为中国。没有连续文明的国家只能理解政府代表国家。在中国文明中，政府只是一个统治和行政机构。它并不代表中国的所有要素；它只是一个管理机构。如果这个管理机构管理不善，中国人民就会推翻它，选举一个新的管理机构。这就是为什么中国会有很多朝代。
Mark Nobles· Feb 12
Sure they did. Different people, speaking different languages, took rurns conquering each other. Your claim of continuous culture makes as much sense as saying that no matter who was in charge, Europe was still
当然。不同的人，说着不同的语言，轮流征服对方。你所说的文化连续性，就如同说无论谁掌权，欧洲也是如此。
Sure they did. Different people, speaking different languages, took rurns conquering each other. Your claim of continuous culture makes as much sense as saying that no matter who was in charge, Europe was still
当然。不同的人，说着不同的语言，轮流征服对方。你所说的文化连续性，就如同说无论谁掌权，欧洲也是如此。
Tao Huang· Feb 13
Europe is different. Europe doesn't have a unified civilization as its foundation. China, on the other hand, is based on Chinese civilization. The Mongols and the Manchus who came to rule China mainly focused on inheriting and developing Chinese culture. Therefore, they followed the systems and traditions of the previous dynasties, made extensive use of Confucian - minded officials, and continued to promote the educational system of Chinese civilization. Many Confucian academies emerged during the Yuan Dynasty, and the same was true for the Qing Dynasty.
Europe is a different story. In Europe, countries are independent, and religions are exclusive, which has led to many religious wars. It's a black - and - white situation where people only believe in their own gods and need to eliminate others' gods. The famous Crusades are a prime example.
In Chinese civilization, co - prosperity is emphasized, and harmony is highly valued. Just like in the theory of yin and yang and the Taiji diagram, there is white in black and black in white. Chinese people don't think that all things are one - sided. There is good in bad and bad in good, and there is no absolute right or wrong. So, China doesn't export its experience, unlike the West, which likes to export its democratic civilization and believes that its own is the only good one. Every civilization needs a solution that suits it. Thus, the situation in Europe is completely different.
Here is another difference. China has many different religions, such as Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, etc., but there have never been any religious wars because religion has never been able to influence politics. This has avoided the emergence of extreme ideas.
欧洲则不同，欧洲没有统一的文明作为基础，而中国则以中华文明为基础，蒙古、满族统治中国后，主要着眼于继承和发展中华文化，因此沿袭前朝的制度和传统，大量任用儒家学者为官员，继续推行中华文明的教育制度，元朝出现了许多书院，清朝也是如此。
欧洲则不同。在欧洲，国家独立，宗教排他，导致了许多宗教战争。这是一个非黑即白的局面，人们只相信自己的神，需要消灭别人的神。著名的十字军东征就是一个典型的例子。
中国文明强调共荣，高度重视和谐。就像阴阳理论和太极图一样，黑中有白，白中有黑。中国人不认为所有事物都是片面的。好中有坏，好中有坏，没有绝对的对错。所以，中国不输出自己的经验，不像西方喜欢输出自己的民主文明，认为自己的文明才是最好的。每个文明都需要一个适合自己的解决方案。因此，欧洲的情况完全不同。
这是另一个不同之处。中国有佛教、道教、伊斯兰教等多种宗教，但从来没有发生过宗教战争，因为宗教从来就不能影响政治，这就避免了极端思想的产生。
Europe is different. Europe doesn't have a unified civilization as its foundation. China, on the other hand, is based on Chinese civilization. The Mongols and the Manchus who came to rule China mainly focused on inheriting and developing Chinese culture. Therefore, they followed the systems and traditions of the previous dynasties, made extensive use of Confucian - minded officials, and continued to promote the educational system of Chinese civilization. Many Confucian academies emerged during the Yuan Dynasty, and the same was true for the Qing Dynasty.
Europe is a different story. In Europe, countries are independent, and religions are exclusive, which has led to many religious wars. It's a black - and - white situation where people only believe in their own gods and need to eliminate others' gods. The famous Crusades are a prime example.
In Chinese civilization, co - prosperity is emphasized, and harmony is highly valued. Just like in the theory of yin and yang and the Taiji diagram, there is white in black and black in white. Chinese people don't think that all things are one - sided. There is good in bad and bad in good, and there is no absolute right or wrong. So, China doesn't export its experience, unlike the West, which likes to export its democratic civilization and believes that its own is the only good one. Every civilization needs a solution that suits it. Thus, the situation in Europe is completely different.
Here is another difference. China has many different religions, such as Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, etc., but there have never been any religious wars because religion has never been able to influence politics. This has avoided the emergence of extreme ideas.
欧洲则不同，欧洲没有统一的文明作为基础，而中国则以中华文明为基础，蒙古、满族统治中国后，主要着眼于继承和发展中华文化，因此沿袭前朝的制度和传统，大量任用儒家学者为官员，继续推行中华文明的教育制度，元朝出现了许多书院，清朝也是如此。
欧洲则不同。在欧洲，国家独立，宗教排他，导致了许多宗教战争。这是一个非黑即白的局面，人们只相信自己的神，需要消灭别人的神。著名的十字军东征就是一个典型的例子。
中国文明强调共荣，高度重视和谐。就像阴阳理论和太极图一样，黑中有白，白中有黑。中国人不认为所有事物都是片面的。好中有坏，好中有坏，没有绝对的对错。所以，中国不输出自己的经验，不像西方喜欢输出自己的民主文明，认为自己的文明才是最好的。每个文明都需要一个适合自己的解决方案。因此，欧洲的情况完全不同。
这是另一个不同之处。中国有佛教、道教、伊斯兰教等多种宗教，但从来没有发生过宗教战争，因为宗教从来就不能影响政治，这就避免了极端思想的产生。
Wei Shi· Feb 15
Their land were same size, but north China population out number them near 5–10 times, the only time Chinese in inferior manpower compare to Barbarian were 5 Barbarians period (and they already relocated inside of great wall prior Rebellion.).
他们的土地面积相同，但华北的人口数量却比他们多出近 5-10 倍，中国唯一一次人力上不如蛮族的时期是 五胡乱华时期（而且他们在叛乱之前就已经迁移到长城内了）。
Their land were same size, but north China population out number them near 5–10 times, the only time Chinese in inferior manpower compare to Barbarian were 5 Barbarians period (and they already relocated inside of great wall prior Rebellion.).
他们的土地面积相同，但华北的人口数量却比他们多出近 5-10 倍，中国唯一一次人力上不如蛮族的时期是 五胡乱华时期（而且他们在叛乱之前就已经迁移到长城内了）。
Hikmet CihanFollow
If the Chinese were so successful why did they had to build this?
如果中国人如此成功为什么他们要建造这个？（长城）
吃肉喝酒 · Feb 17
If the Chinese were so successful why did they had to build this?
如果中国人如此成功为什么他们要建造这个？（长城）
吃肉喝酒 · Feb 17
cuz why not the han can afford it when u got the resources what bout the ottomans more than millenium later the ottomans still does not have anything close to the great wall of china
its kind of hilarious some fake turks wants to become chinas enemy most of the real turks has either been absorbed fled or wiped out throughout history
when i see fake turks acting tough i remind them they look no different than a mixbag of greek and arab instead of claiming ottomans territory back they claim central asia into to china
dont bite off more than u can chew turkey still in nato faking bout the turks solidarity without nukes them real turks arent stupid when shit hit the fan
因为汉朝有足够的资源，为什么不能这么做呢？而奥斯曼帝国呢？一千年后，奥斯曼帝国仍然没有任何接近中国长城的东西。
有点可笑的是，一些假突厥人想成为中国的敌人，而历史上大多数真正的突厥人要么被同化，要么逃亡，要么被消灭。
当我看到假突厥人装强硬时，我会提醒他们，他们看起来和希腊人与阿拉伯人的混血没什么区别。他们不去争取奥斯曼帝国的领土，反而声索中亚甚至中国的领土。
别贪多嚼不烂，土耳其还在北约里装模作样地谈突厥团结，却没有核武器。真正的突厥人可不傻，当事情变得糟糕时，他们知道该怎么做。
its kind of hilarious some fake turks wants to become chinas enemy most of the real turks has either been absorbed fled or wiped out throughout history
when i see fake turks acting tough i remind them they look no different than a mixbag of greek and arab instead of claiming ottomans territory back they claim central asia into to china
dont bite off more than u can chew turkey still in nato faking bout the turks solidarity without nukes them real turks arent stupid when shit hit the fan
因为汉朝有足够的资源，为什么不能这么做呢？而奥斯曼帝国呢？一千年后，奥斯曼帝国仍然没有任何接近中国长城的东西。
有点可笑的是，一些假突厥人想成为中国的敌人，而历史上大多数真正的突厥人要么被同化，要么逃亡，要么被消灭。
当我看到假突厥人装强硬时，我会提醒他们，他们看起来和希腊人与阿拉伯人的混血没什么区别。他们不去争取奥斯曼帝国的领土，反而声索中亚甚至中国的领土。
别贪多嚼不烂，土耳其还在北约里装模作样地谈突厥团结，却没有核武器。真正的突厥人可不傻，当事情变得糟糕时，他们知道该怎么做。
Jason.kete· Feb 17
However, according to historical records, the Han Dynasty did defeat the xiongnu, the Tang Dynasty did defeat the Turks, and some xiongnu and Turks surrendered and served in the Chinese army. Some fled to Europe. This is the essence of the question, you did not answer this question
但是根据史料记载，汉朝确实打败了匈奴，唐朝也确实打败了突厥，而且有一部分匈奴和突厥投降了，进入了中国军队，有一部分逃往欧洲，这才是问题的本质，你没有回答这个问题。
However, according to historical records, the Han Dynasty did defeat the xiongnu, the Tang Dynasty did defeat the Turks, and some xiongnu and Turks surrendered and served in the Chinese army. Some fled to Europe. This is the essence of the question, you did not answer this question
但是根据史料记载，汉朝确实打败了匈奴，唐朝也确实打败了突厥，而且有一部分匈奴和突厥投降了，进入了中国军队，有一部分逃往欧洲，这才是问题的本质，你没有回答这个问题。
Goodi Shang · Feb 17
Barbarian success: killing, invading, plundering.
The success of Chinese people: living and working in peace and contentment, living in peace and happiness.
When you talk about success, you must be thinking of looting and killing.
When I talk about success, I think about whether people have peaceful, happy lives.
China built the Great Wall to protect a peaceful and happy life. We did not destroy the surrounding enemies, not because we are weak, but because we are in a more advanced civilization.
蛮夷的成功：杀戮、侵略、掠夺。
中国人的成功：安居乐业，生活安宁幸福。
你讲成功，想的一定是抢劫杀戮。
我讲成功，想的则是人民是否过着安宁、幸福的生活。
中国修建长城，就是为了保护和平幸福的生活。我们没有消灭周围的敌人，不是因为我们弱，而是因为我们处于更先进的文明。
Barbarian success: killing, invading, plundering.
The success of Chinese people: living and working in peace and contentment, living in peace and happiness.
When you talk about success, you must be thinking of looting and killing.
When I talk about success, I think about whether people have peaceful, happy lives.
China built the Great Wall to protect a peaceful and happy life. We did not destroy the surrounding enemies, not because we are weak, but because we are in a more advanced civilization.
蛮夷的成功：杀戮、侵略、掠夺。
中国人的成功：安居乐业，生活安宁幸福。
你讲成功，想的一定是抢劫杀戮。
我讲成功，想的则是人民是否过着安宁、幸福的生活。
中国修建长城，就是为了保护和平幸福的生活。我们没有消灭周围的敌人，不是因为我们弱，而是因为我们处于更先进的文明。
Yili Jin· Feb 17
There’re two major versions of the wall historically:
The version 1 built in 3rd century BC was to defend against the xiongnus, which has demonstrated to be Proto-Turkic by linguistic researches. Built with mud bricks, It has been almost completely worn by time and disappeared.
By the fall of the Tang dynasty (early 10th century AD) all Turks accessible to China have being Sinified or converted to allies like Shatuo Turks and Yenisei Kyrkyz. From then on the only nomadic threat was from the Mongolic groups in the north east direction, firstly Khitans, and then Mongols. The version 2 of the wall was built in 15th century to defend against Mongols after they were driven away from inland China. It’s what’s shown in picture, build with stone bricks and still stands out today.
The wall was a very inefficient strategy to defend against the nomad invasions and wasn’t worth the efforts invested for the constructions in terms of being a fortification. However, it might also serve another two purposes: 1. exploit the labor to reduce the chance of peasant revolts (although it always worked in the other way in the end) 2. prevent Han Chinese to escape the tyranny and migrate to join the nomads and spread the labors and technologies there.
历史上长城有两种主要版本：
第一种版本建于公元前 3 世纪，用于防御匈奴，语言研究表明匈奴属于原始突厥语。长城用泥砖建造，几乎完全被时间磨损并消失了。
到唐朝灭亡（公元 10 世纪初），所有进入中国的突厥人都被汉化或皈依为沙陀突厥和叶尼塞吉尔吉斯人等盟友。从那时起，唯一的游牧威胁来自东北方向的蒙古族，首先是契丹人，然后是蒙古人。第二种版本的长城建于 15 世纪，用于防御被赶出中国内陆的蒙古人。它就是图片中展示的长城，用石砖建造，至今仍屹立不倒。
修筑长城是抵御游牧民族入侵的一种非常低效的策略，作为防御工事并不值得付出努力。但是，它也可能起到另外两个作用：1. 剥削劳动力以减少农民起义的可能性（尽管最终总是起到相反的作用）2. 防止汉人逃离暴政并迁移到游牧民族，并在那里传播劳动力和技术。
There’re two major versions of the wall historically:
The version 1 built in 3rd century BC was to defend against the xiongnus, which has demonstrated to be Proto-Turkic by linguistic researches. Built with mud bricks, It has been almost completely worn by time and disappeared.
By the fall of the Tang dynasty (early 10th century AD) all Turks accessible to China have being Sinified or converted to allies like Shatuo Turks and Yenisei Kyrkyz. From then on the only nomadic threat was from the Mongolic groups in the north east direction, firstly Khitans, and then Mongols. The version 2 of the wall was built in 15th century to defend against Mongols after they were driven away from inland China. It’s what’s shown in picture, build with stone bricks and still stands out today.
The wall was a very inefficient strategy to defend against the nomad invasions and wasn’t worth the efforts invested for the constructions in terms of being a fortification. However, it might also serve another two purposes: 1. exploit the labor to reduce the chance of peasant revolts (although it always worked in the other way in the end) 2. prevent Han Chinese to escape the tyranny and migrate to join the nomads and spread the labors and technologies there.
历史上长城有两种主要版本：
第一种版本建于公元前 3 世纪，用于防御匈奴，语言研究表明匈奴属于原始突厥语。长城用泥砖建造，几乎完全被时间磨损并消失了。
到唐朝灭亡（公元 10 世纪初），所有进入中国的突厥人都被汉化或皈依为沙陀突厥和叶尼塞吉尔吉斯人等盟友。从那时起，唯一的游牧威胁来自东北方向的蒙古族，首先是契丹人，然后是蒙古人。第二种版本的长城建于 15 世纪，用于防御被赶出中国内陆的蒙古人。它就是图片中展示的长城，用石砖建造，至今仍屹立不倒。
修筑长城是抵御游牧民族入侵的一种非常低效的策略，作为防御工事并不值得付出努力。但是，它也可能起到另外两个作用：1. 剥削劳动力以减少农民起义的可能性（尽管最终总是起到相反的作用）2. 防止汉人逃离暴政并迁移到游牧民族，并在那里传播劳动力和技术。
Tao Huang· Feb 17
Nomadic tribes would invade or plunder the borders of the Central Plains dynasties, but they did not occupy the territories. Therefore, the construction of defensive structures served the same purpose as European castles – as a measure of defense. These European castles also couldn't prevent the Mongol invasions, so the idea is similar. Offense and defense are common in warfare, as seen in the wars between the Han Dynasty and the xiongnu. The Han Dynasty defended for nearly a century, but eventually, Emperor Wu's counterattacks drove the xiongnu into Central Asia and Europe, and they disappeared from history. The wars between the Tang Dynasty and the Turks were similar. Emperor Taizong of Tang stabilized relations with the Turks through marriage alliances, and once his power grew strong, the Turks were driven out of the Mongolian Plateau and retreated to Central Asia and the Middle East. It's like a spear and a shield—do you think the spear is more powerful, or the shield? Now, you should realize that your answer is immature and lacks depth.
游牧民族会入侵或掠夺中原王朝的边境，但并不占领领土，所以防御工事的建造和欧洲的城堡是一样的，都是防御手段。欧洲的城堡也无法阻挡蒙古人的入侵，所以思路是类似的。攻守是战争的常态，汉朝与匈奴的战争就是明证，汉朝防守了近百年，但最终被汉武帝的反攻，将匈奴赶入中亚和欧洲，从此在历史上销声匿迹。唐朝与突厥的战争也是类似的，唐太宗通过联姻稳定了与突厥的关系，在唐朝强大起来后，突厥被赶出蒙古高原，退守中亚和中东。就像矛和盾，你觉得矛厉害，还是盾厉害？现在，你应该意识到你的回答不成熟，而且缺乏深度。
Nomadic tribes would invade or plunder the borders of the Central Plains dynasties, but they did not occupy the territories. Therefore, the construction of defensive structures served the same purpose as European castles – as a measure of defense. These European castles also couldn't prevent the Mongol invasions, so the idea is similar. Offense and defense are common in warfare, as seen in the wars between the Han Dynasty and the xiongnu. The Han Dynasty defended for nearly a century, but eventually, Emperor Wu's counterattacks drove the xiongnu into Central Asia and Europe, and they disappeared from history. The wars between the Tang Dynasty and the Turks were similar. Emperor Taizong of Tang stabilized relations with the Turks through marriage alliances, and once his power grew strong, the Turks were driven out of the Mongolian Plateau and retreated to Central Asia and the Middle East. It's like a spear and a shield—do you think the spear is more powerful, or the shield? Now, you should realize that your answer is immature and lacks depth.
游牧民族会入侵或掠夺中原王朝的边境，但并不占领领土，所以防御工事的建造和欧洲的城堡是一样的，都是防御手段。欧洲的城堡也无法阻挡蒙古人的入侵，所以思路是类似的。攻守是战争的常态，汉朝与匈奴的战争就是明证，汉朝防守了近百年，但最终被汉武帝的反攻，将匈奴赶入中亚和欧洲，从此在历史上销声匿迹。唐朝与突厥的战争也是类似的，唐太宗通过联姻稳定了与突厥的关系，在唐朝强大起来后，突厥被赶出蒙古高原，退守中亚和中东。就像矛和盾，你觉得矛厉害，还是盾厉害？现在，你应该意识到你的回答不成熟，而且缺乏深度。
Hikmet Cihan· Feb 17
It is the way of things, don’t complain, Nomads does not have the resources the Chinese had. Not enough water to irrigate farms. Steppes are hard. They have to constantly hunt, graze their animals and move and migrate. They eat mostly meat, become larger and better fighters. And yes nomads raid loot and steal from sedentary peaceful people.
It is the law of nature. Wolves eat sheep. That doesn’t make wolves evil, or sheep good. It is nature.
The question was in condescending nature. I answered asking a simple question and the Chinese in the comment section went nuts. An shallow answer to a shallow question.
If you were so high and mighty why did you had to build that bigass wall?
We all know the answer to the question. Chinese all too well, judging on the reactions.
事情就是这样，别抱怨，游牧民族没有中国人那样的资源。没有足够的水来灌溉农田。草原生活很艰难。他们必须不断狩猎、放牧动物、迁徙。他们主要吃肉，体型更大，战斗力更强。是的，游牧民族会劫掠和偷窃定居的和平人民。
这是自然法则。狼吃羊。这并不意味着狼是邪恶的，羊也不是善良的。这是自然规律。
这个问题带有一种居高临下的性质。我回答了一个简单的问题，评论区的中国人都疯了。对一个肤浅问题的肤浅回答。
如果你如此高高在上，为什么要建那么大的墙？
我们都知道这个问题的答案。中国人太了解了，从反应来看。
It is the way of things, don’t complain, Nomads does not have the resources the Chinese had. Not enough water to irrigate farms. Steppes are hard. They have to constantly hunt, graze their animals and move and migrate. They eat mostly meat, become larger and better fighters. And yes nomads raid loot and steal from sedentary peaceful people.
It is the law of nature. Wolves eat sheep. That doesn’t make wolves evil, or sheep good. It is nature.
The question was in condescending nature. I answered asking a simple question and the Chinese in the comment section went nuts. An shallow answer to a shallow question.
If you were so high and mighty why did you had to build that bigass wall?
We all know the answer to the question. Chinese all too well, judging on the reactions.
事情就是这样，别抱怨，游牧民族没有中国人那样的资源。没有足够的水来灌溉农田。草原生活很艰难。他们必须不断狩猎、放牧动物、迁徙。他们主要吃肉，体型更大，战斗力更强。是的，游牧民族会劫掠和偷窃定居的和平人民。
这是自然法则。狼吃羊。这并不意味着狼是邪恶的，羊也不是善良的。这是自然规律。
这个问题带有一种居高临下的性质。我回答了一个简单的问题，评论区的中国人都疯了。对一个肤浅问题的肤浅回答。
如果你如此高高在上，为什么要建那么大的墙？
我们都知道这个问题的答案。中国人太了解了，从反应来看。
Jason.kete· Feb 17
Nomadic peoples are generally shorter than Chinese people. Even the average height of Mongolians today is obviously shorter than that of Chinese people. There were also such excavations and measurements in ancient times. I hope you have done the most basic research before making ridiculous remarks.
游牧民族普遍比中国人矮，就连今天蒙古人的平均身高也明显比中国人矮，古代也有这样的发掘和测量，希望大家在发表可笑言论之前，先做最基础的研究。
Nomadic peoples are generally shorter than Chinese people. Even the average height of Mongolians today is obviously shorter than that of Chinese people. There were also such excavations and measurements in ancient times. I hope you have done the most basic research before making ridiculous remarks.
游牧民族普遍比中国人矮，就连今天蒙古人的平均身高也明显比中国人矮，古代也有这样的发掘和测量，希望大家在发表可笑言论之前，先做最基础的研究。
Tao Huang· Feb 17
Firstly, the fact that the question itself is based on historical reality is undeniable. However, your response reeks of sourness and pettiness. The elimination and expulsion of the xiongnu and Turks from the grasslands do not necessarily prove that the other side had stronger combat capabilities. This is also part of the natural law. Since it is a natural development, you should answer directly and squarely. Hiding and evading cannot erase the facts.
It's important to note that historical events are complex and multi - faceted. We should view them obxtively and comprehensively, rather than making one - sided and narrow - minded judgments. China's history is filled with a rich tapestry of interactions, not just simple conquests or defeats. These historical processes are the result of a combination of various factors such as politics, economy, culture, and military strategies, not something that can be simply explained away with such simplistic views.
We demand an obxtive and respectful attitude towards history, rather than such dismissive and inaccurate remarks.
首先，这个问题本身有历史事实，这一点毋庸置疑，但你的回答却透着一股酸溜溜的、小气的意味。匈奴和突厥被消灭、赶出草原，并不代表对方战斗力更强，这也是自然规律，既然是自然发展，就应该直言不讳，掩盖和回避不能抹杀事实。
需要注意的是，历史事件错综复杂，我们应该客观全面地看待，而不是片面、狭隘地判断。中国历史充满了丰富的互动，不是简单的征服或失败，是政治、经济、文化、军事战略等多种因素共同作用的结果，不是用这种简单的观点就能解释清楚的。
我们要求客观、尊重历史，而不是发表这种轻视、失实的言论。
Firstly, the fact that the question itself is based on historical reality is undeniable. However, your response reeks of sourness and pettiness. The elimination and expulsion of the xiongnu and Turks from the grasslands do not necessarily prove that the other side had stronger combat capabilities. This is also part of the natural law. Since it is a natural development, you should answer directly and squarely. Hiding and evading cannot erase the facts.
It's important to note that historical events are complex and multi - faceted. We should view them obxtively and comprehensively, rather than making one - sided and narrow - minded judgments. China's history is filled with a rich tapestry of interactions, not just simple conquests or defeats. These historical processes are the result of a combination of various factors such as politics, economy, culture, and military strategies, not something that can be simply explained away with such simplistic views.
We demand an obxtive and respectful attitude towards history, rather than such dismissive and inaccurate remarks.
首先，这个问题本身有历史事实，这一点毋庸置疑，但你的回答却透着一股酸溜溜的、小气的意味。匈奴和突厥被消灭、赶出草原，并不代表对方战斗力更强，这也是自然规律，既然是自然发展，就应该直言不讳，掩盖和回避不能抹杀事实。
需要注意的是，历史事件错综复杂，我们应该客观全面地看待，而不是片面、狭隘地判断。中国历史充满了丰富的互动，不是简单的征服或失败，是政治、经济、文化、军事战略等多种因素共同作用的结果，不是用这种简单的观点就能解释清楚的。
我们要求客观、尊重历史，而不是发表这种轻视、失实的言论。
Q-X Sun Feb 17
Because ancient China had very advanced steel smelting technology.
In the Warring States Period, Chinese princes had mastered steelmaking technology. Although the cost of smelting steel for the entire weapon was too high, using steel on the blade could effectively increase the power of the weapon and more easily penetrate the armor that was popular at the time. The hardness and toughness of steel far exceeded that of bronze, and it was not easy to break. At this time, the Chinese princes began to have a technical advantage over the "barbarians".
During the Han Dynasty, there was a saying that "one Han is five Hu(barbarians)". Of course, a Han person could not compare with five "barbarians" in terms of strength, but the advancement of weapons and armor could offset these gaps. In the Han Dynasty, iron armor was able to equip some elite troops. In order to maintain its technological advantage over nomadic peoples, strict trade control was implemented on the border since the Han Dynasty. Iron weapons are strictly prohibited from export. Violators will be charged with treason and will be subject to very cruel death penalty (such as beheading, etc.).
因为古代中国拥有非常先进的钢铁冶炼技术。
在战国时期，中国的诸侯已经掌握了炼钢技术。虽然为整个武器冶炼钢铁的成本太高，但在刀刃上使用钢铁可以有效增加武器的威力，并更容易穿透当时流行的盔甲。钢的硬度和韧性远远超过青铜，而且不容易断裂。此时，中国的诸侯开始对“野蛮人”拥有技术优势。
在汉朝，有一种说法是“一汉当五胡”。当然，一个汉人在力量上无法与五个“胡人”相比，但武器和盔甲的进步可以弥补这些差距。在汉朝，铁甲已经能够装备一些精锐部队。为了保持对游牧民族的技术优势，自汉朝以来，边境实施了严格的贸易控制。铁武器严禁出口，违者将以叛国罪论处，并处以非常残酷的死刑（如斩首等）。
Because ancient China had very advanced steel smelting technology.
In the Warring States Period, Chinese princes had mastered steelmaking technology. Although the cost of smelting steel for the entire weapon was too high, using steel on the blade could effectively increase the power of the weapon and more easily penetrate the armor that was popular at the time. The hardness and toughness of steel far exceeded that of bronze, and it was not easy to break. At this time, the Chinese princes began to have a technical advantage over the "barbarians".
During the Han Dynasty, there was a saying that "one Han is five Hu(barbarians)". Of course, a Han person could not compare with five "barbarians" in terms of strength, but the advancement of weapons and armor could offset these gaps. In the Han Dynasty, iron armor was able to equip some elite troops. In order to maintain its technological advantage over nomadic peoples, strict trade control was implemented on the border since the Han Dynasty. Iron weapons are strictly prohibited from export. Violators will be charged with treason and will be subject to very cruel death penalty (such as beheading, etc.).
因为古代中国拥有非常先进的钢铁冶炼技术。
在战国时期，中国的诸侯已经掌握了炼钢技术。虽然为整个武器冶炼钢铁的成本太高，但在刀刃上使用钢铁可以有效增加武器的威力，并更容易穿透当时流行的盔甲。钢的硬度和韧性远远超过青铜，而且不容易断裂。此时，中国的诸侯开始对“野蛮人”拥有技术优势。
在汉朝，有一种说法是“一汉当五胡”。当然，一个汉人在力量上无法与五个“胡人”相比，但武器和盔甲的进步可以弥补这些差距。在汉朝，铁甲已经能够装备一些精锐部队。为了保持对游牧民族的技术优势，自汉朝以来，边境实施了严格的贸易控制。铁武器严禁出口，违者将以叛国罪论处，并处以非常残酷的死刑（如斩首等）。
Halfman Huang Follow
About xiongnu
xiongnu started rising in the same period which Qin Dynasty finished unifying of China, And during the establishment of the Han Dynasty, due to its involvement into a civil war of Han Dynasty, it fell into a regional power struggle with the Han Dynasty that lasted for hundreds of years, until the Han Dynasty completely won to end. After the falling of the Han Dynasty and Jin Dynasty, although some descendants of the xiongnu people once established regional power in northern China, but those xiongnu rulers were no longer the true xiongnu people, but Sinicized xiongnu warlords. The regional regimes they established were in no different from other Chinese warlord regimes at the same time.
As for the reason for the defeat of the xiongnu, it is actually very simple. They were unable to defeat the Han army in a long-term war. Although the early xiongnu gained absolute mobility advantage in warfare through their astonishingly large cavalry corps, they were never able to win the face to face combat. Generally, only with a numerical advantage of at least three times or more can the xiongnu army defeat the regular army of the Han Dynasty.
关于匈奴：
匈奴的崛起与秦朝统一中国的时间相同，而在汉朝建立期间，由于匈奴卷入了汉朝的内战，它与汉朝陷入了持续数百年的地区权力斗争，直到汉朝完全获胜为止。在汉朝和晋朝灭亡后，尽管一些匈奴后裔曾在中国北方建立了地区政权，但这些匈奴统治者已不再是真正的匈奴人，而是汉化的匈奴军阀。他们建立的地区政权与当时其他中国军阀政权并无不同。
至于匈奴失败的原因，其实很简单。他们无法在长期战争中击败汉军。尽管早期的匈奴通过其庞大的骑兵部队在战争中获得了绝对的机动性优势，但他们从未能在正面战斗中获胜。通常，匈奴军队只有在至少三倍或更多的数量优势下才能击败汉朝的正规军。
About xiongnu
xiongnu started rising in the same period which Qin Dynasty finished unifying of China, And during the establishment of the Han Dynasty, due to its involvement into a civil war of Han Dynasty, it fell into a regional power struggle with the Han Dynasty that lasted for hundreds of years, until the Han Dynasty completely won to end. After the falling of the Han Dynasty and Jin Dynasty, although some descendants of the xiongnu people once established regional power in northern China, but those xiongnu rulers were no longer the true xiongnu people, but Sinicized xiongnu warlords. The regional regimes they established were in no different from other Chinese warlord regimes at the same time.
As for the reason for the defeat of the xiongnu, it is actually very simple. They were unable to defeat the Han army in a long-term war. Although the early xiongnu gained absolute mobility advantage in warfare through their astonishingly large cavalry corps, they were never able to win the face to face combat. Generally, only with a numerical advantage of at least three times or more can the xiongnu army defeat the regular army of the Han Dynasty.
关于匈奴：
匈奴的崛起与秦朝统一中国的时间相同，而在汉朝建立期间，由于匈奴卷入了汉朝的内战，它与汉朝陷入了持续数百年的地区权力斗争，直到汉朝完全获胜为止。在汉朝和晋朝灭亡后，尽管一些匈奴后裔曾在中国北方建立了地区政权，但这些匈奴统治者已不再是真正的匈奴人，而是汉化的匈奴军阀。他们建立的地区政权与当时其他中国军阀政权并无不同。
至于匈奴失败的原因，其实很简单。他们无法在长期战争中击败汉军。尽管早期的匈奴通过其庞大的骑兵部队在战争中获得了绝对的机动性优势，但他们从未能在正面战斗中获胜。通常，匈奴军队只有在至少三倍或更多的数量优势下才能击败汉朝的正规军。
Dan.Peter Follow
The conquest of China by nomads was an extremely accidental event. For thousands of years, the only nomads who completely conquered China were the Mongols. But don't forget that Kublai Khan himself was a thoroughly sinicized Mongol. He used a large number of Han warlords to defeat the Mongolian people and then conquered China. It took the Mongols nearly half a century to conquer China (Song Dynasty).
The Manchus were not nomads, but fishing and hunting tribes from Northeast Asia; secondly, the Manchus did not even destroy the Ming Dynasty, and China (Ming Dynasty) was destroyed in serious civil strife.
So, thinking about it this way, it is not surprising that the Huns or Turks eventually lost to the Chinese or even surrendered. In the final analysis, the Chinese dynasty was always one of the most powerful empires in the world during its heyday and when there was no civil strife. Hard power itself is indeed stronger than that of nomads, but every Chinese dynasty will have serious civil strife.
游牧民族征服中国是一个极其偶然的事件。几千年来，唯一一次彻底征服中国的牧民族是蒙古人。但别忘了忽必烈本人是一个彻底中国化的蒙古人。他利用大量汉族军阀击败了蒙古人民，然后征服了中国。蒙古人用了近半个世纪才征服了中国（宋朝）。
满族不是游牧民族，而是来自东北亚的渔猎部族；其次，满族甚至没有灭亡明朝，中国（明朝）在严重的内乱中亡国。
所以，这么一想，匈奴或者突厥最终败给中国人，甚至投降，非常不足为奇了。归根结底，中国王朝鼎盛时期，没有内乱的时候，一直都是世界上最强大的帝国之一。硬实力本身确实比游牧民族强，但每个中国王朝都会有严重的内乱。
The conquest of China by nomads was an extremely accidental event. For thousands of years, the only nomads who completely conquered China were the Mongols. But don't forget that Kublai Khan himself was a thoroughly sinicized Mongol. He used a large number of Han warlords to defeat the Mongolian people and then conquered China. It took the Mongols nearly half a century to conquer China (Song Dynasty).
The Manchus were not nomads, but fishing and hunting tribes from Northeast Asia; secondly, the Manchus did not even destroy the Ming Dynasty, and China (Ming Dynasty) was destroyed in serious civil strife.
So, thinking about it this way, it is not surprising that the Huns or Turks eventually lost to the Chinese or even surrendered. In the final analysis, the Chinese dynasty was always one of the most powerful empires in the world during its heyday and when there was no civil strife. Hard power itself is indeed stronger than that of nomads, but every Chinese dynasty will have serious civil strife.
游牧民族征服中国是一个极其偶然的事件。几千年来，唯一一次彻底征服中国的牧民族是蒙古人。但别忘了忽必烈本人是一个彻底中国化的蒙古人。他利用大量汉族军阀击败了蒙古人民，然后征服了中国。蒙古人用了近半个世纪才征服了中国（宋朝）。
满族不是游牧民族，而是来自东北亚的渔猎部族；其次，满族甚至没有灭亡明朝，中国（明朝）在严重的内乱中亡国。
所以，这么一想，匈奴或者突厥最终败给中国人，甚至投降，非常不足为奇了。归根结底，中国王朝鼎盛时期，没有内乱的时候，一直都是世界上最强大的帝国之一。硬实力本身确实比游牧民族强，但每个中国王朝都会有严重的内乱。
Mehmet Uçar Follow
Many good answers under this question, free of Chinese and Turkic bias.
If we summarize it:
Sedentary, farming, hierarchical societies eventually but certainly defeat nomadic, herder, anarchic societies.
The above fact is what happened between Hunnic/Turkic Steppe Confederations and Chinese Empires under various dynasties.
That is called sociology.
Sedentary, farming, hierarchical societies can be defeated only by natural and internal reasons: a civilisation wiping natural disaster, under-population disaster or internal civil collapse.
这个问题下有很多很好的回答，没有中国和突厥的偏见。
如果我们总结一下：
定居、农耕、等级社会最终必然会击败游牧、放牧、无政府的社会。
上述事实就是匈奴/突厥草原联盟与各朝代中国帝国之间发生的事情。
这就是社会学。
定居、农耕、等级社会只能被自然和内部原因击败：导致文明毁灭的是自然灾害、人口不足的灾难或内部崩溃。
Many good answers under this question, free of Chinese and Turkic bias.
If we summarize it:
Sedentary, farming, hierarchical societies eventually but certainly defeat nomadic, herder, anarchic societies.
The above fact is what happened between Hunnic/Turkic Steppe Confederations and Chinese Empires under various dynasties.
That is called sociology.
Sedentary, farming, hierarchical societies can be defeated only by natural and internal reasons: a civilisation wiping natural disaster, under-population disaster or internal civil collapse.
这个问题下有很多很好的回答，没有中国和突厥的偏见。
如果我们总结一下：
定居、农耕、等级社会最终必然会击败游牧、放牧、无政府的社会。
上述事实就是匈奴/突厥草原联盟与各朝代中国帝国之间发生的事情。
这就是社会学。
定居、农耕、等级社会只能被自然和内部原因击败：导致文明毁灭的是自然灾害、人口不足的灾难或内部崩溃。
On Demand Reporter Follow
The Defeat of the Huns (xiongnu) and Turks by Chinese Dynasties: An Academic Research Report
Introduction
The Huns, also known as the xiongnu, and the Turks were formidable nomadic empires that posed significant threats to various Chinese dynasties over centuries. Their eventual defeat and surrender to these dynasties can be attributed to a combination of military strategies, diplomatic maneuvers, and internal divisions within the nomadic confederations. This report explores the historical context, key battles, and strategic factors that led to the downfall of these powerful nomadic groups.
匈奴和突厥被中国王朝击败：学术研究报告（链接）
引言
匈奴和突厥是强大的游牧帝国，几个世纪以来对各个中国王朝构成了重大威胁。他们最终被这些王朝击败并投降，可以归因于军事战略、外交手段和游牧联盟内部的分裂。本报告探讨了导致这些强大游牧群体衰落的历史背景、关键战役和战略因素。
The Defeat of the Huns (xiongnu) and Turks by Chinese Dynasties: An Academic Research Report
Introduction
The Huns, also known as the xiongnu, and the Turks were formidable nomadic empires that posed significant threats to various Chinese dynasties over centuries. Their eventual defeat and surrender to these dynasties can be attributed to a combination of military strategies, diplomatic maneuvers, and internal divisions within the nomadic confederations. This report explores the historical context, key battles, and strategic factors that led to the downfall of these powerful nomadic groups.
匈奴和突厥被中国王朝击败：学术研究报告（链接）
引言
匈奴和突厥是强大的游牧帝国，几个世纪以来对各个中国王朝构成了重大威胁。他们最终被这些王朝击败并投降，可以归因于军事战略、外交手段和游牧联盟内部的分裂。本报告探讨了导致这些强大游牧群体衰落的历史背景、关键战役和战略因素。
Ayz King Follow
China had already achieved a common language before Christ, was organized as a single state, and was perhaps the most technologically superior society in the world until the 15th-16th centuries. It had an abnormal population and very rich underground and aboveground resources in every period.
The Turks and Huns were very powerful. The nomads who came to Europe were the weakest in the steppe. Each of them (except the Golden Horde) had lost the power struggle in the east and fled to the west to save their lives. The strongest were in Mongolia. The successes of weaker groups in the west than their relatives in the east can give an idea of how strong those who remained in the east were. And yet... China's power was abnormal even for them. The fact that the Hsiung-nu and the Turks had even temporarily gained an advantage over the united Chinese states was a great success. They had little chance against an organized human force that was more than 30 times their size and lived on rich lands.
中国在公元前就已经实现了语言统一，组织成一个单一的国家，并且在15-16世纪之前可能是世界上技术最先进的社会。它在每个时期都有异常多的人口和非常丰富的地下和地上资源。
突厥和匈奴非常强大。来到欧洲的游牧民族是草原上最弱的。他们中的每一个（除了金帐汗国）都在东部的权力斗争中失败，逃到西部以保全性命，最强大的则留在蒙古草原。西部较弱的群体的成功可以让人想到留在东部的那些人是多么强大。然而……中国的力量对他们来说也是非同一般的。匈奴和突厥甚至暂时获得了对统一的中国国家的优势，这是一个巨大的成功。他们几乎没有机会对抗一个规模是他们30倍以上、生活在富饶土地上的有组织的人类力量。
China had already achieved a common language before Christ, was organized as a single state, and was perhaps the most technologically superior society in the world until the 15th-16th centuries. It had an abnormal population and very rich underground and aboveground resources in every period.
The Turks and Huns were very powerful. The nomads who came to Europe were the weakest in the steppe. Each of them (except the Golden Horde) had lost the power struggle in the east and fled to the west to save their lives. The strongest were in Mongolia. The successes of weaker groups in the west than their relatives in the east can give an idea of how strong those who remained in the east were. And yet... China's power was abnormal even for them. The fact that the Hsiung-nu and the Turks had even temporarily gained an advantage over the united Chinese states was a great success. They had little chance against an organized human force that was more than 30 times their size and lived on rich lands.
中国在公元前就已经实现了语言统一，组织成一个单一的国家，并且在15-16世纪之前可能是世界上技术最先进的社会。它在每个时期都有异常多的人口和非常丰富的地下和地上资源。
突厥和匈奴非常强大。来到欧洲的游牧民族是草原上最弱的。他们中的每一个（除了金帐汗国）都在东部的权力斗争中失败，逃到西部以保全性命，最强大的则留在蒙古草原。西部较弱的群体的成功可以让人想到留在东部的那些人是多么强大。然而……中国的力量对他们来说也是非同一般的。匈奴和突厥甚至暂时获得了对统一的中国国家的优势，这是一个巨大的成功。他们几乎没有机会对抗一个规模是他们30倍以上、生活在富饶土地上的有组织的人类力量。
Anglo Edu Follow
They could not get enough grazing pasture for their main work animals, horses and the yurt oxen. Then the Bubonic plague started to destroy city trading centers throughout parts of Egypt, the Middle East, Balkans, Central Asia, and parts of the Mediterranean.
China had used bathing rituals as a means of warding off skin diseases and rheumatism or arthritis.
The Huns or xiongnu and Central Asian Turks were semi nomadic peoples that hardly used fully nude bathing rituals.
The Bubonic plague, carried by fleas feasted on European, African, and Middle eastern cultures that shunned bodily bathing and or personal hygiene. The French during the Renaissance were famous for using perfume to hide bodily odors due to the cultural lack of bathing and hygiene. Sailors were also notoriously gross when it came to using communal seaship bathrooms. Most could swim but failed to take care of personal hygiene like the nomadic cultures of the Eurasian landscape.
他们无法为他们的主要工作动物——马和蒙古牛——获得足够的牧场。然后，鼠疫开始摧毁埃及、中东、巴尔干、中亚和地中海部分地区的城市贸易中心。
中国使用沐浴的方式作为预防皮肤病和风湿病或关节炎的手段。
匈奴和中亚突厥人是半游牧民族，几乎不使用完全裸体的沐浴方式。
鼠疫由跳蚤传播，肆虐于那些回避身体沐浴或不保持个人卫生的欧洲、非洲和中东文化。文艺复兴时期的法国人以使用香水掩盖体臭而闻名，这是由于文化上缺乏沐浴和卫生。水手在使用公共船用浴室时也以粗俗著称。大多数人会游泳，但未能像欧亚大陆的游牧文化那样照顾个人卫生。
They could not get enough grazing pasture for their main work animals, horses and the yurt oxen. Then the Bubonic plague started to destroy city trading centers throughout parts of Egypt, the Middle East, Balkans, Central Asia, and parts of the Mediterranean.
China had used bathing rituals as a means of warding off skin diseases and rheumatism or arthritis.
The Huns or xiongnu and Central Asian Turks were semi nomadic peoples that hardly used fully nude bathing rituals.
The Bubonic plague, carried by fleas feasted on European, African, and Middle eastern cultures that shunned bodily bathing and or personal hygiene. The French during the Renaissance were famous for using perfume to hide bodily odors due to the cultural lack of bathing and hygiene. Sailors were also notoriously gross when it came to using communal seaship bathrooms. Most could swim but failed to take care of personal hygiene like the nomadic cultures of the Eurasian landscape.
他们无法为他们的主要工作动物——马和蒙古牛——获得足够的牧场。然后，鼠疫开始摧毁埃及、中东、巴尔干、中亚和地中海部分地区的城市贸易中心。
中国使用沐浴的方式作为预防皮肤病和风湿病或关节炎的手段。
匈奴和中亚突厥人是半游牧民族，几乎不使用完全裸体的沐浴方式。
鼠疫由跳蚤传播，肆虐于那些回避身体沐浴或不保持个人卫生的欧洲、非洲和中东文化。文艺复兴时期的法国人以使用香水掩盖体臭而闻名，这是由于文化上缺乏沐浴和卫生。水手在使用公共船用浴室时也以粗俗著称。大多数人会游泳，但未能像欧亚大陆的游牧文化那样照顾个人卫生。
Bharat Bhushan Wadhwa Follow
The Huns (xiongnu) and various Turkic groups were formidable steppe nomads, but over time, many of them were defeated or assimilated by Chinese dynasties. Several key reasons contributed to their downfall or eventual surrender:
Internal Fragmentation & Civil Wars
xiongnu: After a period of dominance, the xiongnu Confederation fractured due to internal disputes, leading to the split between the Southern xiongnu (who later submitted to the Han dynasty) and the Northern xiongnu (who were pushed westward).
Turks: The Göktürk Khaganate was weakened by internal power struggles, with rival factions often allying with the Chinese Tang dynasty.
Chinese Diplomatic & Military Strategies
The Han and Tang dynasties effectively used divide-and-rule tactics, forming alliances with rival factions within nomadic groups.
The Chinese also relied on a combination of military campaigns and economic incentives, offering titles and wealth to steppe leaders who agreed to submit.
匈奴和各种突厥族群是强大的草原游牧民族，但随着时间的推移，他们中的许多人被中国王朝击败或同化。几个关键原因导致了他们的衰落或最终投降：
内部分裂和内战：
匈奴：在一段时期的统治后，匈奴联盟因内部争端而分裂，导致南匈奴（后来归顺汉朝）和北匈奴（被赶到西方）的分裂。
突厥：突厥汗国因内部权力斗争而削弱，敌对派系经常与中国唐朝结盟。
中国的外交和军事战略：
汉朝和唐朝有效地使用了分而治之的策略，与游牧群体内部的敌对派系结盟。
中国还依靠军事行动和经济激励的结合，向同意归顺的草原领袖提供头衔和财富。
The Huns (xiongnu) and various Turkic groups were formidable steppe nomads, but over time, many of them were defeated or assimilated by Chinese dynasties. Several key reasons contributed to their downfall or eventual surrender:
Internal Fragmentation & Civil Wars
xiongnu: After a period of dominance, the xiongnu Confederation fractured due to internal disputes, leading to the split between the Southern xiongnu (who later submitted to the Han dynasty) and the Northern xiongnu (who were pushed westward).
Turks: The Göktürk Khaganate was weakened by internal power struggles, with rival factions often allying with the Chinese Tang dynasty.
Chinese Diplomatic & Military Strategies
The Han and Tang dynasties effectively used divide-and-rule tactics, forming alliances with rival factions within nomadic groups.
The Chinese also relied on a combination of military campaigns and economic incentives, offering titles and wealth to steppe leaders who agreed to submit.
匈奴和各种突厥族群是强大的草原游牧民族，但随着时间的推移，他们中的许多人被中国王朝击败或同化。几个关键原因导致了他们的衰落或最终投降：
内部分裂和内战：
匈奴：在一段时期的统治后，匈奴联盟因内部争端而分裂，导致南匈奴（后来归顺汉朝）和北匈奴（被赶到西方）的分裂。
突厥：突厥汗国因内部权力斗争而削弱，敌对派系经常与中国唐朝结盟。
中国的外交和军事战略：
汉朝和唐朝有效地使用了分而治之的策略，与游牧群体内部的敌对派系结盟。
中国还依靠军事行动和经济激励的结合，向同意归顺的草原领袖提供头衔和财富。
Md Imtiaz Alam Follow
The Huns (xiongnu) and the Turks (Göktürks, later Turkic groups) were formidable nomadic confederations that clashed with Chinese dynasties over centuries. Despite their military prowess, they were eventually defeated or forced to surrender due to a combination of internal and external factors.
1. Internal Division & Civil War
xiongnu: After reaching their peak in the 2nd century BCE, they suffered from internal power struggles. In 51 BCE, the xiongnu split into northern and southern factions. The southern xiongnu submitted to the Han Dynasty in 48 BCE, while the northern xiongnu were pushed further west.
Göktürks: The First Turkic Khaganate collapsed in 583 CE due to internal disputes. The Second Turkic Khaganate (682–744 CE) faced similar factionalism, making it vulnerable to Chinese manipulation.
2. Chinese Diplomatic & Military Strategy
The Han Dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE) mastered the art of playing nomadic factions against each other. They allied with the southern xiongnu to weaken the northern ones.
The Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) employed divide-and-conquer tactics against the Turks, often supporting rival claimants to the throne.
Strategic alliances with other nomadic groups, such as the Uighurs, helped weaken the Turks.
3. Economic Dependence on China
Many nomadic groups relied on Chinese trade, particularly for silk, grain, and luxury goods. When Chinese dynasties cut off trade or imposed economic pressure, it destabilized nomadic economies.
Some nomadic leaders chose submission in exchange for Chinese titles, land, or financial incentives.
4. Chinese Military Superiority & Adaptation
By the Tang Dynasty, China had powerful cavalry forces, often integrating defeated nomads into its army.
The Great Wall and frontier fortifications hindered large-scale nomadic invasions.
The Tang military campaigns (630s-650s CE) led by General Li Jing crushed the Eastern Turkic Khaganate.
5. Climate Change & Migration Pressures
Droughts and resource shortages pushed some nomadic groups further west, leading them to abandon direct conflict with China.
The northern xiongnu, for example, migrated toward Central Asia and Europe, where they merged with other nomadic groups.
Conclusion
While the xiongnu and Turks were militarily powerful, their downfall was due to a combination of internal fragmentation, Chinese strategic diplomacy, economic dependency, and superior Chinese military adaptation. Despite this, the legacy of the xiongnu and Turks continued, influencing later steppe empires like the Mongols.
匈奴和突厥（后来的土耳其人）是强大的游牧民族联盟，几个世纪以来一直与中国王朝发生冲突。尽管他们军事实力强大，但由于内外因素的综合作用，他们最终被击败或被迫投降。
1. 内部分裂与内战
匈奴：在公元前 2 世纪达到顶峰后，他们遭受了内部权力斗争。公元前 51 年，匈奴分裂为南北两派。南匈奴于公元前 48 年向汉朝臣服，而北匈奴则被进一步赶往西方。 突厥：第一突厥汗国因内部纠纷于公元 583 年崩溃。第二突厥汗国（公元 682-744 年）也面临类似的派系斗争，使其容易受到中国操纵。
2. 中国的外交和军事战略
汉朝（公元前 206 年 - 公元 220 年）精通了挑拨游牧派系相互对抗的艺术。他们与南方的匈奴结盟，削弱北方的匈奴。 唐朝（公元 618-907 年）对突厥人采取了分而治之的策略，经常支持争夺王位的竞争对手。 与其他游牧民族（如维吾尔族）的战略联盟有助于削弱土耳其人。
3. 对中国的经济依赖
许多游牧民族依赖中国贸易，尤其是丝绸、粮食和奢侈品。当中国王朝切断贸易或施加经济压力时，就会破坏游牧经济的稳定。 一些游牧领袖选择屈服以换取中国的头衔、土地或经济激励。
4. 中国的军事优势和适应
到了唐朝，中国拥有强大的骑兵部队，经常将战败的游牧民族纳入军队。 长城和边境防御工事阻碍了大规模游牧民族的入侵。 由李靖将军领导的唐朝军事战役（公元 630 年代至 650 年代）摧毁了东突厥汗国。
5. 气候变化和移民压力
干旱和资源短缺迫使一些游牧民族进一步向西迁移，导致他们放弃与中国的直接冲突。 例如，北方的匈奴向中亚和欧洲迁移，在那里他们与其他游牧民族融合。
结论 虽然匈奴和土耳其人在军事上很强大，但他们的垮台是由于内部分裂、中国战略外交、经济依赖和中国优越的军事适应性等因素的综合作用。尽管如此，匈奴和突厥人的遗产仍在继续，影响了后来的草原帝国，如蒙古人。
The Huns (xiongnu) and the Turks (Göktürks, later Turkic groups) were formidable nomadic confederations that clashed with Chinese dynasties over centuries. Despite their military prowess, they were eventually defeated or forced to surrender due to a combination of internal and external factors.
1. Internal Division & Civil War
xiongnu: After reaching their peak in the 2nd century BCE, they suffered from internal power struggles. In 51 BCE, the xiongnu split into northern and southern factions. The southern xiongnu submitted to the Han Dynasty in 48 BCE, while the northern xiongnu were pushed further west.
Göktürks: The First Turkic Khaganate collapsed in 583 CE due to internal disputes. The Second Turkic Khaganate (682–744 CE) faced similar factionalism, making it vulnerable to Chinese manipulation.
2. Chinese Diplomatic & Military Strategy
The Han Dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE) mastered the art of playing nomadic factions against each other. They allied with the southern xiongnu to weaken the northern ones.
The Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) employed divide-and-conquer tactics against the Turks, often supporting rival claimants to the throne.
Strategic alliances with other nomadic groups, such as the Uighurs, helped weaken the Turks.
3. Economic Dependence on China
Many nomadic groups relied on Chinese trade, particularly for silk, grain, and luxury goods. When Chinese dynasties cut off trade or imposed economic pressure, it destabilized nomadic economies.
Some nomadic leaders chose submission in exchange for Chinese titles, land, or financial incentives.
4. Chinese Military Superiority & Adaptation
By the Tang Dynasty, China had powerful cavalry forces, often integrating defeated nomads into its army.
The Great Wall and frontier fortifications hindered large-scale nomadic invasions.
The Tang military campaigns (630s-650s CE) led by General Li Jing crushed the Eastern Turkic Khaganate.
5. Climate Change & Migration Pressures
Droughts and resource shortages pushed some nomadic groups further west, leading them to abandon direct conflict with China.
The northern xiongnu, for example, migrated toward Central Asia and Europe, where they merged with other nomadic groups.
Conclusion
While the xiongnu and Turks were militarily powerful, their downfall was due to a combination of internal fragmentation, Chinese strategic diplomacy, economic dependency, and superior Chinese military adaptation. Despite this, the legacy of the xiongnu and Turks continued, influencing later steppe empires like the Mongols.
匈奴和突厥（后来的土耳其人）是强大的游牧民族联盟，几个世纪以来一直与中国王朝发生冲突。尽管他们军事实力强大，但由于内外因素的综合作用，他们最终被击败或被迫投降。
1. 内部分裂与内战
匈奴：在公元前 2 世纪达到顶峰后，他们遭受了内部权力斗争。公元前 51 年，匈奴分裂为南北两派。南匈奴于公元前 48 年向汉朝臣服，而北匈奴则被进一步赶往西方。 突厥：第一突厥汗国因内部纠纷于公元 583 年崩溃。第二突厥汗国（公元 682-744 年）也面临类似的派系斗争，使其容易受到中国操纵。
2. 中国的外交和军事战略
汉朝（公元前 206 年 - 公元 220 年）精通了挑拨游牧派系相互对抗的艺术。他们与南方的匈奴结盟，削弱北方的匈奴。 唐朝（公元 618-907 年）对突厥人采取了分而治之的策略，经常支持争夺王位的竞争对手。 与其他游牧民族（如维吾尔族）的战略联盟有助于削弱土耳其人。
3. 对中国的经济依赖
许多游牧民族依赖中国贸易，尤其是丝绸、粮食和奢侈品。当中国王朝切断贸易或施加经济压力时，就会破坏游牧经济的稳定。 一些游牧领袖选择屈服以换取中国的头衔、土地或经济激励。
4. 中国的军事优势和适应
到了唐朝，中国拥有强大的骑兵部队，经常将战败的游牧民族纳入军队。 长城和边境防御工事阻碍了大规模游牧民族的入侵。 由李靖将军领导的唐朝军事战役（公元 630 年代至 650 年代）摧毁了东突厥汗国。
5. 气候变化和移民压力
干旱和资源短缺迫使一些游牧民族进一步向西迁移，导致他们放弃与中国的直接冲突。 例如，北方的匈奴向中亚和欧洲迁移，在那里他们与其他游牧民族融合。
结论 虽然匈奴和土耳其人在军事上很强大，但他们的垮台是由于内部分裂、中国战略外交、经济依赖和中国优越的军事适应性等因素的综合作用。尽管如此，匈奴和突厥人的遗产仍在继续，影响了后来的草原帝国，如蒙古人。
很赞 29
收藏