Why did Wei Qing and Huo Qubing indirectly lead to the demise of the Western Empire and the emergence of Hungary?

If I remember correctly, it seems that this statement was first put forward by western historians. At first, it was said that China's construction of the Great Wall of Wan Li made it difficult for nomadic people to succeed, and finally it had to go west to explain that Rome died of barbarians. This statement is obviously the result of a little knowledge of the history of China. China suffered from the harassment of nomadic people and died several times, so that it was called "a country established by invaders and conquered people" by Zhao sleepless. Thus, the role of the Great Wall of Wan Li in border defense has been greatly overestimated. Then this statement spread to China, and people who know the domestic history echoed it, and linked Attila with Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, thus forming the above viewpoint. It is not difficult to see that although these two viewpoints use different historical facts, their internal logic is exactly the same. The awakening of national consciousness in modern China laid the foundation for the popularity of this statement. "Didn't the modern west originate in Rome? Rome can't even beat our defeated soldiers in the Han Dynasty. " In fact, this spirit of Ah Q is an inevitable reflection that China's superior countries can't beat foreign devils.

Similarly, China people are always proud of Genghis Khan and think that we China people have done something to Europe, which is even reflected in Jin Yong's Duke of Lushan (see jaxa Peace Talks). Little did they know that China was just one of several conquered countries in Mongolia, while Kublai Khan (I can admit that he was from China) and Yuan Dynasty (also a dynasty in China) were just one of several khanates in Mongolia after the split, and there were also many countries with equal status, such as Golden Tent (Catholicism), ilhan (Muslims) and Chagatai (Buddhism). Although Kublai Khan claimed to be a great Khan, because he did not follow the rules left by Genghis Khan, other khanates did not recognize his Khan status, did not obey his orders, and did not even fight with him (Haidu rebellion), so Yolanda was unable to interfere in the war between several other khanates. In addition, the Yuan Dynasty was not integrated into China culture like other invaders, but was deported and once again became the main frontier of the Ming Dynasty. This shows that modern China, like Russia and Arabia, as the successor of Genghis Khan, has no special status. Compared with the modern Russians and Arabs who are ashamed of being conquered by the Mongols, I can't help but feel that the modern Ah Q who is proud of Mongolia's brilliant record is both sad and ridiculous.

In a word, the social root of this similar statement is the contradiction between the awakening of China's national consciousness and China's low international status.

Start with disproof.

Assuming that the above argument holds, it is not difficult to deduce the following inference:

First, the Han Dynasty really beat the Huns.

After Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, China was no longer threatened by Xiongnu.

C, the extent and timeliness of this attack in the Han Dynasty was enough to lead to the demise of the Western Roman Empire.

D. The migration of nomadic people is mainly due to the pressure of agricultural people.

None of these points can be established.

First, the Han Dynasty really beat the Huns.

This view is generally accepted, but careful examination of books seems to be different. The biggest and most successful attack of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty on the Huns was a large-scale crusade with Wei Qing and Huo Qubing as the main commanders in 1 19 BC, which was called "Mobei War" in history. This time, 500,000 people including140,000 cavalry (50,000 cavalry in Wei Qing and 50,000 cavalry in Huo Qubing) were mobilized to go deep into Mobei, the hinterland of Xiongnu, in order to find the target of the enemy's main battle. The so-called "sealing the wolf to the profession" refers to this time, and this time Li Guang committed suicide because he got lost. This time, the main battle was successful. Huo Qubing's troops beheaded "70,000, level 443" and arrived in the northeast of Ulaanbaatar today; However, the losses were also very heavy, with 6.5438+0.3 million cavalry, only 30,000 were returned. (See "Three Biographies of Hanshu" above) In this case, I boldly estimate the loss. The loss rate of the Han army should be close to 60%, that is, about 300,000 people died, and Huo Qubing achieved outstanding results in this campaign, far exceeding that of Wei Qing. We assume that the overall success rate is 1/2, and after deducting the civilian losses, the Xiongnu army lost less than 65,438+10,000. According to the loss ratio, even if this account wins, it is definitely a residual victory.

Don't consider the loss, just look at whether the campaign goal is achieved. So did this blow stop the Huns from suffering, but began to move westward? Let's look at the historical data, but this is not the case. In 99 AD, the Han Dynasty attacked the Huns again with Li Guangli as the general, but failed to win, and the damage ratio reached 70%. The surrender of Li Ling (which led to the castration of Sima Qian) and the rise of Zhao Chongguo were both battles. As can be seen from the battle process, there are 80,000 people besieging Li Ling in tarquin. It can be seen that even if Xiongnu was injured in the battle of Mobei, it would never be fatal, and it was still an important threat to the Han Dynasty. (See "Han Zhao Chongguo Li Ling Biography")

After the death of Hanwu, Zhao Chongguo was the main frontier general in the Han Dynasty. According to Zhao Han Guo Chong's biography, in about 70 AD, the Huns sent an army of 654.38+10,000 cavalry to fight against Zhao Chongguo's "40,000 cavalry". Subsequently, the Qiang people rose at the border of the Han Dynasty, and Zhao Chongguo also suggested in 63 BC to take advantage of the contradiction between the Qiang people and the Xiongnu, which was not adopted by Xuan Di, the Emperor of the Han Dynasty. As a result, the Qiang people formed an alliance with the Huns, and the Han Dynasty was so uneasy that Zhao Chongguo, 76, had to be used as the main measure again, but it only formed a stalemate and did not achieve great results. Moreover, there was no large-scale foreign war in the Han Dynasty.

As can be seen from the above, A's argument is very problematic. Even though the Han Dynasty did strike at the Huns, such a strike was far from solving the problem of border troubles, let alone forcing them to move westward.