【歷史】古羅馬人為什麼沒有發明並使用戰車呢？_風聞

【來源龍騰網】

Zebedee

Chariots had been invented thousands of years before Rome rose to power. The Sumerians used the first onager-drawn battle carts about 5,000 years ago. They may have been fairly effective against lightly-armed foes and people in loose formations. Its possible they were retain as transport and status symbols after they ceased to be effective.

Chariots wouldn’t be much used off-road in a mountainous or broken terrain, like much of Europe. Chariots also fared poorly against heavy infantry and cavalry were much more flexible than chariots.

戰車在羅馬崛起之前已有數千年曆史。蘇美爾人大約在5000年前開始使用由野馬拉動的戰車。這些戰車可能對輕裝敵人和散兵遊勇頗具效果。它們在失去效力後可能被保留作為交通工具和地位象徵。

戰車在像歐洲大部分地區那樣的山地或崎嶇地形中不太適用。戰車也不如重步兵表現出色，而騎兵比戰車更加靈活。

評論原創翻譯：

Jonathan Utsu Undelikwo

Chariots had already been invented long before Rome came to power. By the time of Rome, war chariots were already an archaic/fading technology. Chariots were replaced with something better Cavalry.

The Romans did fight against war chariots, e.g Julius Caesar during the Gallic wars, Gaius Suetonius Paulinus during the Boudican Revolt.

二輪戰車一直存在，直到羅馬崛起之前。戰車在羅馬時代已經是一種過時的技術。戰車被更好的騎兵所取代。

羅馬人曾與戰車作戰，例如在高盧戰爭期間的凱撒大帝，以及在博迪卡叛亂期間的蓋烏斯-蘇埃託尼烏斯-保利努斯

The ability to quickly move around the battlefield is very advantageous and the reason chariots came before cavalry, is simply because horses were not good enough to make cavalry a viable option. Efficient horse breeding made made better chariots which in turn made chariot excel as an instrument of war. A time reached where horses were strong enough to carry men on their backs into battle.

在戰場上快速移動的能力非常有利，戰車之所以在騎兵之前出現，僅僅是因為馬匹的能力不足以使騎兵成為可行的選擇。高效的馬匹繁殖使得戰車得以改良，進而使戰車在戰爭中表現出色。隨着時間的推移，馬匹足夠強壯，能夠揹負士兵進入戰鬥。

Cavalry were simply better than chariots, they were more flexible, efficient use of man power, more maneuverable and better in the uneven terrain and thick forests of Europe. Instead of two horses pulling one driver and one archer, you now had two horses carrying two archer or two men with sword and lances

騎兵簡單來説比戰車更優越，它們更加靈活，更高效地利用人力，機動性更強，在歐洲不平整的地形和茂密的森林中表現更佳。現在，不再是兩匹馬拉動一個駕駛員和一個弓箭手，而是兩匹馬可以搭載兩名弓箭手或兩名配備劍和長矛的士兵。

Stronger horses made chariots obsolete as an instrument of war. But chariot racing was popular into the time of the Roman Empire.

Sure archery is a good sport, you wouldn’t find any modern army equipping their soldiers with longbows, as instruments of war it is obsolete. That’s quite similar to war chariots and Rome

更強壯的馬匹使戰車在戰爭中變得過時。但戰車賽仍然在羅馬帝國時期很受歡迎。

確實，射箭是一項很好的運動，但你不會在任何現代軍隊中看到士兵裝備長弓，因為長弓在作為戰爭工具時已經過時。這與戰車和羅馬類似。

Rok Ružič

Because by the time Rome became a significant state, war chariots were already obsolete.

War chariots were a military innovation at the time, where horses were not yet large enough for a human to ride in war. Therefore they were used to pull chariots.

By the time Rome became a powerful state, cavalry already existed, and the usefulness of chariots was much diminished. Rome had cavalry instead.

因為當羅馬成為一個重要國家時，戰車已經過時了。 戰車是當時的一個軍事創新，因為馬匹尚未足夠大以供人類在戰爭中騎乘，所以它們被用來拉戰車。 當羅馬成為一個強大國家時，騎兵已經存在，戰車的實用性大大減弱。羅馬取而代之的是騎兵。

Martin J Pitt

Because chariots had already been invented, and were limited to places where wheels would work (parts of Egypt, for example, not much of Europe). The Romans did much better. They invented the war horse.

因為戰車已經被髮明，並且限制在能使用輪子的地方（例如埃及的一些地方，但歐洲大部分地區都不適合）。羅馬人做得更好。他們發明了戰馬。

Firstly by breeding bigger horses, and secondly by developing accessories, notably the saddle tree. This is the wooden structure which gives shape, and is a huge advantage over a blanket or leather pad, as it spreads the rider’s weight and gives a firmer base for actually fighting, rather than just riding to war. Thus the first Roman cavalry were lancers. (The chariot often had a driver and a fighter on the platform.)

首先通過繁殖更大的馬，其次通過發展配件，特別是馬鞍。這是一種木結構，給騎手提供形狀，並且比毯子或皮革墊子有巨大的優勢，因為它能分散騎手的重量，併為實際戰鬥提供更堅固的基礎，而不僅僅是騎往戰場。因此，最早的羅馬騎兵是長槍兵。（戰車上通常有一個駕駛員和一個站在平台上的戰士。）

The saddle of this form also allowed things to be hung upon it.

The bit and bridle and spurs allowed control with one hand.

If only they had invented the stirrup they would have been like modern horsemen. This is often regarded as the greatest military invention ever, greatly increasing control, reducing fatigue and allowing different fighting methods.

(Despite what is shown on films and TV ancient Greeks did not ride around with all the equipment of a modern cowboy.)

這種形式的鞍座也允許東西掛在上面。

馬嚼子、繮繩和馬刺可以讓人單手控制。

如果他們發明了馬鐙，他們會像現代騎士一樣。這通常被認為是有史以來最偉大的軍事發明，極大地增加了控制力，減少了疲勞，並允許不同的戰鬥方法。

(儘管電影和電視上都有介紹，但古希臘人並沒有像現代牛仔那樣騎着馬到處跑。）

Jean Makewell

If you took the Roman infantry formations with heavy interlocked shields, there want much a chariot could do except stand off at a distance and throw javelins or arrows that would be blocked.

如果你考慮到羅馬步兵的重型互鎖盾牌編隊，戰車實際上無法做太多事情，除了遠距離投擲標槍或箭矢，而這些可以被擋住。

The Briton Boudicca and her army demonstrated how the Roman killing machine was impervious to a great many things except perhaps another trained Roman legion. The Roman experience in Teutoberg forest in modern Germany also showed a fatal weakness. Stretched out in a thin line within dense forests, Roman tactics were useless and tribes were able to close in from both sides. Two legions were destroyed almost to a man.

不列顛女王布狄卡及其軍隊展示了羅馬的殺傷機器幾乎對一切都有抵擋之能，除了也許另一個經過訓練的羅馬軍團。羅馬在現代德國的條頓堡森林的經歷也顯示出致命的弱點。在茂密森林中以稀疏的隊形展開，羅馬的戰術毫無用處，而當地部落能夠從兩側包圍進攻。兩個軍團幾乎全軍覆沒。

Giorgio Bellini

Because they were worthless. Many historians believe that the chariots mentioned in the Iliad were anachronisms at the time of Homer already, and even in those early times the Greeks had long got rid of them.

因為它們是毫無用處的。許多歷史學家認為，《伊利亞特》中提到的戰車在荷馬時代已經過時，甚至在那個早期時期，希臘人早已摒棄了它們。

Shay Dessie

1- chariots and good quality chariots are Very expensive. Pursay 2 horses can pull a 1–2 person chariot. (The chariot itself would cost around 2 horses worth plus 2 pulling it). Not bad.

but 4 horse chariots that can hold 4–5 people are quite expensive being able to afford more cavalry units with armour and weapons vs a single unit with more units exposed.

戰車和高質量的戰車非常昂貴。普遍説來，兩匹馬可以拉動一個可容納1到2人的戰車（戰車本身的成本大約相當於兩匹馬的價值再加上兩匹拉車）。這還算不錯。但是能容納4到5人、由4匹馬拉動的戰車非常昂貴，而用同樣的成本可以買更多配備盔甲和武器的騎兵部隊，而不是暴露更多部隊。

2- chariots could only pull off certain maneuvers anyway. 1- chariots CANT do sharp turns. Nor can they handle super tough terrain. They can’t support the infantry formations like a man on horse can. Nor can they be scouts or anti-spears.

Javelins are direct counters to chariots.

不管怎樣，戰車只能執行特定的機動。首先，戰車不能進行急轉彎，也不能應對極端崎嶇的地形。它們無法像騎在馬上的人一樣支持步兵編隊，也不能充當偵察員或對抗長矛。標槍是戰車的直接剋星。