Talk:Chang'an

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Population

The Chinese Wikipedia says it's 4 times the size of Rome during the Han dynasty，true or false?--209.89.123.152 07:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

FALSE, arqueological evidence poins to an estimated population of 240,000, while rome had rougly 1.5 million, 6 times larger.--RafaelG 20:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Please don't violate WP:NPA. Plus, your assertion is not accurate if you count only Rome proper (the Seven Hills). Based on what your definition of Chang'an was (just Chang'an County? Jingzhao Commandery? Jingzhao, Fufeng, and Fengxiang Commanderies?) and what your definition of Rome was (again, the Seven Hills? the entire Latium region?) your assertion is easily false. Please don't make overly general statements. --Nlu (talk) 17:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I misunderstood this user 209.89.123.152 in about what would be defined as the size of the city, I though that he was refering to population not to land area. In terms of land area the city of Chang'an, in ancient times, had a total walled area about 3 times the walled area of Rome's Aurelian Walls.

We do not know the extend of Rome's urban area during the its height, but its population estimates are vastly larger(in the order of over 1 million), also, Rome was a coastal city and this enabled the transport of bulk goods to sustain such population, Chang'an was a city deep inland making transport of bulk products, like food, making impossible to sustain a comparable population. --RafaelG 20:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

However, the Guanzhong region was, in ancient times, considered to be the richest soil in all of China due to its flood plain soil and its extensive irrigation system. It was not really until the Tang Dynasty that the Guanzhong region became dependent on food supplies from outside the region, rather than vice versa. And again, you run into issues of how big of an area that we're defining Rome and how big of an area we're defining Chang'an. Even back in the Han Dynasty, as I pointed out, "Chang'an" could refer to just Chang'an county, the commandery containing it, or the three commanderies (sanfu 三輔). --Nlu (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Well in terms of population Rome certainly was vastly larger. Babylon with had probably a larger population than Chang'an imported food produced 200 kilometers off the city, by river, Rome, with was much larger than Babylon, imported all its food from the provinces, some 3000 kilometers away by sea (with was 10 times cheaper than transport by river), because it had to sustain a exceptional population. Since Chang'an (the city itself) imported food by land from its local region, its population could not be much larger than 200,000 (to sustain a population comparable to Rome's it would need to be in a region in with its population density would be rougly 4000 per square kilometer with is impossible).

In the area question am arguing in the sense of the size of the urban area of the city. --RafaelG 20:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Instead of arguing about size why doesn't someone write the rest of this article? Straitgate 08:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what's going on here but I'm going to burninate that 240,000 figure because I know it's much larger than that. Hell, the later Han capital was larger than that. 500,000, straight from the mouth of my Chinese history prof. The size of Rome does not reflect the size of Chang'an.

[edit] Merger?

Shouldn't this article be merged with Xi'an? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fishal (talk • contribs) .

In my opinion, no; this article refers to the historical Chang'an, which is different than an article about the modern city of Xi'an. --Nlu (talk) 17:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tibetan relations

i was wondering if there is a stone slab in chang'an, that declares tibetan independence. i believe that one exists in lhasa, tibet. the stone slab or tablet is written in both tibtan and chinese.