Battle of Sogdiana, 36 BC???

[Alexandros Maximus]

I recently found out about a battle which occured between Han Dynasty troops and Roman Legionaries, in the later part of the EB timeframe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Ro...f_Central_Asia

which states:

"The Chinese campaigned in Central Asia on several occasion, and direct encounters between Han troops and Roman legionaries (probably captured or recruited as mercenaries by the Xiong Nu) are recorded, particularly in the 36 BC battle of Sogdiana.
It has been suggested that the Chinese crossbow was transmitted to the Roman world on such occasions, although the Greek gastraphetes provides an alternative origin.
R. Ernest Dupuy and Trevor N. Dupuy suggest that in 36 B.C., a "Han expedition into central Asia, west of Jaxartes River, apparently encountered and defeated a contingent of Roman legionaries. The Romans may have been part of Antony's army invading Parthia. Sogdiana (modern Bukhara), east of the Oxus River, on the Polytimetus River, was apparently the most easterly penetration ever made by Roman forces in Asia. The margin of Chinese victory appears to have been their crossbows, whose bolts and darts seem easily to have penetrated Roman shields and armor."

So, since M2TW contains crossbow units, could it be scripted that, if the Romani have a General-led Army in the province of Sogdiane in 36 BC, a Hostile Eleutheroi "Han Army" with chinese troops including crossbowmen, will appear for you to fight????

[beatoangelico]

I doubt that they will spend time to make a script like this

[Moros]

This isn't going to happen. They are not going to make tht many units and a script for one historical oddity. There might also not be enough data about it.
So I can safely say it won't make it.

[Alexandros Maximus]

[Alexandros Maximus]

they scripted in the yuezhi, why not this too?

i mean, its not like EBII is coming out tomorrow or sumthin

[Alexandros Maximus]

well, if this cant be done in EB II, is it possible for it to be done in Asiaton Barbaron?????

[abou]

It's possible, but it is a stretch. This takes place very, very far into the game and likely not to be worth it - especially since it involves a power that does not play much of a military role on our map.

[MeinPanzer]

This is a myth which has been put to rest before but which is now unfortunately being propagated by Wikipedia. The following information is a summary of an article written by Karl Heinz Ranitzsch entitled "Roman Legionaries in Central Asia" which was published in Slingshot No. 151, September 1990, pp. 18-21.

The whole idea is based on a string of tenuously-linked pieces of information. The primary one is a single passage from the Han-shu which mentions that on the Hsiung-nu side in 36 BC there were "more than a hundred foot-soldiers lined up...in a fish-scale formation to show their military skill." A later mention of a wooden palisade is taken to be a sign of foreign influence. After the battle, it is mentioned that 145 prisoners were taken alive out of a thousand that surrendered and later historical texts mention the new foundation of a city in China in 5 AD named Li-Kan, which is a name used by the Chinese for the region of Syria and the areas around it; in 9 AD this city was renamed to Chieh-lu, which is translated as "prisoners translated in the storming of a city."

The line of thought goes like this: After Carrhae in 53 BC, Roman legionaries were taken prisoner by the Parthians and settled in Margiana (Pliny, Nat. Hist. 6.18; Horace, Odes 3.5.5). These Romans then somehow ended up moving to Sogdia. There, they served as mercenaries or were enlisted by the new ruler of the region, the Shan-yu. They were then captured at this battle in 36 BC by the Chinese because they were a unique sight to them and taken to China, where they were settled in a special city named after them in 9 AD.

However, this is full of many holes. Firstly, there is the problem of how a large enough group of Roman soldiers reached Sogdia, which is some 500 miles away from Margiana. Next, the interpretation of the word for the formation as "fish-scale formation," thought to describe the testudo, is very uncertain. A similar word appears in Zhou texts to describe some sort of mixed formation of troops that some think resembled a school of fish, and so it could even refer to some sort of formation familiar to the Chinese. The argument that troops fighting in close order with locked shields would have to be Romans is preposterous as the Bactrian Greeks obviously had a tradition of fighting in the phalanx as well. Finally, the use of wooden palisades is common to many peoples, including the Greeks, and is by no means indicative of Roman military influence.

So, in conclusion, there is no solid historical basis for arguing that Romans fought for the Hsiung-nu

[Ludens]

they scripted in the yuezhi, why not this too?

i mean, its not like EBII is coming out tomorrow or sumthin

It seems a bit of a waste to script in a battle that only occurs if a Roman army is in Sogdiane at a set-time deep into the game, especially since they never reached Sogiane in the first place. A Han invasion could be scripted, but it isn't the same thing as the Yuezhi one. The Yuezhi were driven away and came to settle. The Han were just exploring and would have gone home. Han China wasn't particularly interested in the west.

[Sarkiss]

The primary one is a single passage from the Han-shu which mentions that on the Hsiung-nu side in 36 BC there were "more than a hundred foot-soldiers lined up...in a fish-scale formation to show their military skill."

i actually read an article where author suggested that "fish-scale" was referring to their armor not the formation, supposedly Lorica Segmenta. but then again it wasnt introduced until Octavian

[MeinPanzer]

i actually read an article where author suggested that "fish-scale" was referring to their armor not the formation, supposedly Lorica Segmenta. but then again it wasnt introduced until Octavian

I'm no linguist, so I have to rely on what others have written, but the actual characters are yu-lin-chen, which apparently only appear together in ancient literature this one time. However, yu-li chih chen appears as an adjective describing military formations in the Zhou period, which referred to a formation looking like a school of fish.

Sounds like an interesting interpretation, and doesn't seem unlikely considering that the other infantry fighting for the Shan-yu are referred to a few times as being armoured. Would you be able to give me a citation for that article, please?

[Sarkiss]

I'm no linguist, so I have to rely on what others have written, but the actual characters are yu-lin-chen, which apparently only appear together in ancient literature this one time. However, yu-li chih chen appears as an adjective describing military formations in the Zhou period, which referred to a formation looking like a school of fish.

Sounds like an interesting interpretation, and doesn't seem unlikely considering that the other infantry fighting for the Shan-yu are referred to a few times as being armoured. Would you be able to give me a citation for that article, please?

sorry, but that was years ago, it was in Russian too.

[Watchman]

...plus "fish-scale armour" would most likely refer to scale armour for fairly obvious reasons. It's a commonly and widely enough used descriptor for that kind of defense.

And scale, due to its ease of manufacture and resistance to most things, was obviously a very widely used form of armour, being made out of everything from hide, leather and horn (or horse hooves) to various copper alloys and iron. Former Roman POVs ending up as mercenaries in Central Asia would naturally to a large degree employ locally available gear, doubly so as the popular forms of armour were pretty much the same as back home anyway.

Not that the Iranians were particularly without a close-order infantry traditions of their own either...

[MeinPanzer]

...plus "fish-scale armour" would most likely refer to scale armour for fairly obvious reasons. It's a commonly and widely enough used descriptor for that kind of defense.

Oh, I think it's pretty obvious that it simply refers to scale armour and not lorica segmentata- that is just an association from a scholar who is only familiar with Roman warfare during this time period, which is pretty common.

And scale, due to its ease of manufacture and resistance to most things, was obviously a very widely used form of armour, being made out of everything from hide, leather and horn (or horse hooves) to various copper alloys and iron. Former Roman POVs ending up as mercenaries in Central Asia would naturally to a large degree employ locally available gear, doubly so as the popular forms of armour were pretty much the same as back home anyway.

Not that the Iranians were particularly without a close-order infantry traditions of their own either...

If one were to interpret the word as fish-scale armour, then there is really no reason to assume that these are Romans. In that case, I think it's pretty clear that they are some sort of local elite infantry.

[mcantu]

i took 'fish scale formation' as referring to the checkerboard formation not scale armor...

[paullus]

if there were only 100 of them, they wouldn't be in a checkerboard. the viable interpretations seem to be:
1) that a shieldwall, or in particular a testudo, might look a bit like fishscales
2) that scale armor might be described as looking like fish scale
option 2) seems preferable to me, if it works linguistically. However, if the phrase means specifically a "fishscale formation" rather than "fishscale troops" or some other more generic phrase, I don't think the scale armor interpretation would work.

[Parallel Pain]

How has the discussion turned to armor?

"Fish-scale formation" is just a tight-packed, possibily shield-wall, rough wedge, at least as the East Asians used it.

[MeinPanzer]

if there were only 100 of them, they wouldn't be in a checkerboard. the viable interpretations seem to be:
1) that a shieldwall, or in particular a testudo, might look a bit like fishscales
2) that scale armor might be described as looking like fish scale
option 2) seems preferable to me, if it works linguistically. However, if the phrase means specifically a "fishscale formation" rather than "fishscale troops" or some other more generic phrase, I don't think the scale armor interpretation would work.

I believe the exact number of soldiers captured alive was 145, and even then there is really no connection between the "fishscale" soldiers and those captured other than if you want to believe that those soldiers were in some way special and worthy of being taken alive. There could potentially have been way more than 145 "fishscale" soldiers, or potentially less if those 145 included other "special" prisoners as well.

How has the discussion turned to armor?

"Fish-scale formation" is just a tight-packed, possibily shield-wall, rough wedge, at least as the East Asians used it.

Because this is a linguistic issue. The particular word in question could be referring to the formation of troops, but it seems (at least according to that source that Sarkiss mentioned, which I haven't read) that it could also refer to armour. In any case, the adjective is related to some attribute of fish.

I don't think this issue can be settled until a dedicated linguist of ancient Chinese addresses it, unfortunately.

[alatar]

So this battle "may" have had some roman mercenaries (though VERY unlikely).
Why would this be a comparable script to the yeuzi?

The Romans may have been part of Antony's army invading Parthia.

I doubt that.


The problem with history is that a little phrase like that could mean anything, but people with a preset conclusion take that and use it for their point.

[Parallel Pain]

Well the word used to describe the formation in Han Shu was 夾門魚鱗陳 (jia men yu lin cheng, in modern ping ying though I suck at ping ying but give you a rough idea even if I messed up)

So the word 陳 (cheng) was used in Sun Bin's Art of War 八陳 (ba cheng) to describe his eight formations. And from the scripts dug out in recent years the same word was used to describe 十陳 (shi cheng) or 10 formations talked about by an unknown author that was at first attributed to Sun Bin but the linguists say it's not now.

And in the very same chapter of Han Shu, the word 步兵 (bu bing) is used to refer to infantry, while 兵 (bing) is used to refer to troops. At the same time in Zhang Guo Ce, written not long before Han Shu, the word 甲 (jia) is used to refer to armor, and not 陳 (cheng)

So the chances that 夾門魚鱗陳 (jia men yu lin cheng) refers to armor is highly unlikely.

I think 夾門魚鱗陳 (jia men yu lin cheng) refers to something specific that the general had seen before, possibily like Caesar's use of the word phalanx when he saw a helvetii shield wall-spear. 魚鱗陳 (yu lin cheng) later to became the formation for a rough wedge (at the time of the Han Shu I am not sure). But in any case it probably refered to a formation. The arguement is not 夾門魚鱗陳 (jia men yu lin cheng) was troops wearing Roman armor, but that it was the testudo, and in the same section talked about wooden palisade and dirt wall defences with troops from the inside shooting out which caused quite some casualties.

But of course that doesn't really say anything.

[keravnos]

Thank you for those, but still there is a question to be asked...

Why is that hard to accept that there were Baktrians living in the vincinity?
The region is called Ta-Yuan (or "Great Ionia", Ionians, aka Yuna/Yauna was the name Persians had given the greeks, which all asian peoples used from that point on, Indians "Yavana/Yona", Chinese "Yuan"). Alexandros refounded Kyropolis and Alexandreia Eschate. He also created an unnumbered number of cities to replenish the Achaimenid persian 5 forts he burnt during his fighting of the Native Baktrians insurgency (also called the Yparchoi revolt) from 329-327 BCE.

It is possible that Romani did get that far, but it is FAR MORE possible that Hellenes were there, and would be used as infantry.

On another text that mentions the region, when the Han tried to grab some "Heavenly horses" aka Heavy nissean breeds in Eul'che I think (possibly Kyropolis according to Tarn) they would be fought by very ingenious stratagems, and it has been considered that those directing the fighting on the walls and counter siege strategy were Hellenes. NOT Romans.

Romans winning all has led to some "interesting" theorems...
Case in point...
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...89&postcount=4

[russia almighty]

Kern, how large would have the Hellenic population been by then? Not saying it's possible, but, if all that was left was a small Hellenic nobility, I'd doubt they'd be infantry.


Hellenized Iranians led by Greeks is a whole other story though. That is much more likely.

[MeinPanzer]

Thank you for those, but still there is a question to be asked...

Why is that hard to accept that there were Baktrians living in the vincinity?
The region is called Ta-Yuan (or "Great Ionia", Ionians, aka Yuna/Yauna was the name Persians had given the greeks, which all asian peoples used from that point on, Indians "Yavana/Yona", Chinese "Yuan"). Alexandros refounded Kyropolis and Alexandreia Eschate. He also created an unnumbered number of cities to replenish the Achaimenid persian 5 forts he burnt during his fighting of the Native Baktrians insurgency (also called the Yparchoi revolt) from 329-327 BCE.

It is possible that Romani did get that far, but it is FAR MORE possible that Hellenes were there, and would be used as infantry.

On another text that mentions the region, when the Han tried to grab some "Heavenly horses" aka Heavy nissean breeds in Eul'che I think (possibly Kyropolis according to Tarn) they would be fought by very ingenious stratagems, and it has been considered that those directing the fighting on the walls and counter siege strategy were Hellenes. NOT Romans.

Romans winning all has led to some "interesting" theorems...
Case in point...
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...89&postcount=4

That is the usual theory which is brought up when discussing this passage and is the one generally accepted by scholars who are more familiar with the military history of the region.

[cherryfunk]

Roman descendants found in China?

Residents of a remote Chinese village are hoping that DNA tests will prove one of history's most unlikely legends — that they are descended from Roman legionaries lost in antiquity.

Scientists have taken blood samples from 93 people living in and around Liqian, a settlement in north-western China on the fringes of the Gobi desert, more than 200 miles from the nearest city.

They are seeking an explanation for the unusual number of local people with western characteristics — green eyes, big noses, and even blonde hair — mixed with traditional Chinese features.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...2/wroman02.xml

[MeinPanzer]

This claim has come up again several times in news stories, and it's all based on this story. It's basically a way to drum up media and thus tourist attention.

[antisocialmunky]

There is tenative evidence for some white people in China from those red-headed desert mummies. Since the settlement is so small(and probably historically small assuming the same carrying-capacity), a small influx of genetic material would spread through the community quickly with the whole population exhibiting all sorts of crazy traits.

[Alexandros Maximus]

Kern, how large would have the Hellenic population been by then? Not saying it's possible, but, if all that was left was a small Hellenic nobility, I'd doubt they'd be infantry.


Hellenized Iranians led by Greeks is a whole other story though. That is much more likely.

well, is it generally accepted that the Hellene population of Baktria, Margiana and Sogdiana was a minority by 36 BC????

BTW...it DOES make a crapload more sense that the Han army would be fighting Greeks and not romans, i just never thought of that possibility.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

There is tenative evidence for some white people in China from those red-headed desert mummies. Since the settlement is so small(and probably historically small assuming the same carrying-capacity), a small influx of genetic material would spread through the community quickly with the whole population exhibiting all sorts of crazy traits.

That isn't exactly China (China of today but far from what was China at the time). Those mummies were found in or near the region that is Xiyu on the EB map (the Tarim Basin). They were probably just steppe nomads that had wandered over the mountains...

[abou]

Kern, how large would have the Hellenic population been by then? Not saying it's possible, but, if all that was left was a small Hellenic nobility, I'd doubt they'd be infantry.


Hellenized Iranians led by Greeks is a whole other story though. That is much more likely.

Greeks, Makedonians, Thraikians, etc would certainly be a minority, but there were quite a lot there. Places like Baktria offered enough social mobility that several thousand made the trip and they wouldn't just disappear.

[Elminster12]

I've read in books that the Han Chinese did have a few small-scale skirmishes with the Parthians and they did indeed launch an expedition to explore the region(they were looking for Yuezhi people, with the intent of convincing them to attack the Xiong Nu. They were also probably aware or at least wary of Parthia buying their silk for the sole purpose of selling it to some one for a lot more than they paid for it. Oh, and they probably wanted to cow a few small states into paying tribute, because that was basically the national past-time.) They were certainly around, but the number of assumptions you have to make to say they fought a Roman legion is pretty big. You have to assume the Parthians let them have relatively free-reign, that enough of them actually survived in fighting shape for ~15 years to be a decent mercenary force, and that they moved 500+ miles because, y'know, they FELT like it, and that they even happened across a Chinese expedition that was relatively small.