assuming they were geographically close, who would win in a war between the peak armies of the Roman Empire and han dynasty of china

heavenlykaghan said:

I believe you are talking about the Yuezhi as being Kushans, not the Dayuan. However, Han Shu mentioned that Dayuan had 300,000 people, which is a comparable population to that of ancient Attica. Furthermore, Dayuan probably had better cavalries than Attica as it had more and better horses, and had long contact with Central Asian cavalries. Also, Han Shu explicitly stated that Dayuan was militarily weak, and when Chen Tang stated that one Han soldier was the equivalent of 5 Hu soldiers, these Hu soldiers might very well have referred to the Greek Hoplites from Ferghana that his army potentially faced (in fact, I suspect that these infantries was what he had in mind over the nomadic cavalries, for its hard to imagine him comparing a Han infantry to a cavalrymen like that).

Click to expand...

Yes the Yuezhi were the rulers of the Dayuan, the latter being Greeks. And the Kushans were just the Yuezhi empire, and I'd say there's sufficient evidence presented thus far they adopted hoplite infantry (most likely from the Dayuan) based on excavated Kushan coins and art showing people equipped as hoplites.

I would disagree that Chen Tang was directly comparing Han infantry to hoplites though. The context of the quote was him comparing Han soldiers to those of the Wusun. From the Book of Han:
后数岁，西域都护段会宗为乌孙兵所围，驿骑上书，愿发城郭敦煌兵以自救。丞相王商、大将军王凤及百僚议数日不决。凤言：“汤多筹策，习外国事，可问。”上召汤见宣室。汤击郅支时中塞病，两臂不诎申。汤入见，有诏毋拜，示以会宗奏。汤辞谢，曰：“将相九卿皆贤材通明，小臣罢癃，不足以策大事。”上曰：“国家有急，君其毋让。”对曰：“臣以为此必无可忧也。”上曰：“何以言之？”汤曰：“夫胡兵五而当汉兵一，何者？兵刃朴钝，弓弩不利。今闻颇得汉巧，然犹三而当一。又兵法曰‘客倍而主人半然后敌’，今围会宗者人众不足以胜会宗，唯陛下勿忧！且兵轻行五十里，重行三十里，今会宗欲发城郭敦煌，历时乃至，所谓报仇之兵，非救急之用也！”
A few years later, Duan Huizong, the Protector of the Western Regions, was surrounded by Wusun soldiers. Yiqi wrote a lettered proposal, wanting to send Dunhuang soldiers to save himself. Prime Minister Wang Shang, General Wang Feng and hundreds of officials discussed it for several days without making a decision. Feng said: "[Chen] Tang has many plans and is familiar with foreign affairs. Ask him." He summoned [Chen] Tang to meet in the proclamation room. At the time [Chen] Tang was extremely sick and cannot straighten either of his arms. [So] when [Chen] Tang came to see him, there was an edict in which he [Chen Tang] did not have to conduct the [ritual of] paying homage and presenting the memorial for the meeting. Tang thanked him and said: "The generals, ministers and nine ministers are all talented and bright, and the small ministers are weak, and they are not enough to carry out big things." He said: "The country is in urgent need, and and the lords must not give in." He said to him: "I think nothing should be done for this." The emperor said: "Why do you say that?" Tang said: "Five Hu soldiers is equivalent to one Han soldier, why? Because [their] military blades are simple and blunt, [while their] bows and crossbows have no power. I heard that at present time [they] adopted the skills of the Han, but it still takes three [Wusun] to be equivalent to one [Han].....[goes on to talk about the distance traveled and the time it'll take]

So he's definitely comparing Han soldiers to Wusun ones. The Wusun was a nomadic power but unlike the Yuezhi I don't see any evidence of the Wusun having hoplites. To be fair there's no evidence of what their infantry is like. Albeit the Orlat Plaque of the Kangju, a nomadic federation situated adjacent to the Wusun, depicts heavily armored cavalry, light cavalry archers and heavily armored foot soldiers, but not in the manner of hoplites:



On the other hand the Kushans with their hoplites were next to the Wusun too, the belt buckle of Tillya-Tepe showing a pair of hoplites wasn't that much further away than the Orlat Plaque, and the hoplite coin of Kampir Tepe was probably a little closer to the Wusun than the Orlat Plaque, so I may be committing a double standard here. Either way these [Orlat Plaque] all are indirect evidence AT BEST, and not proof of what Wusun soldiers would have looked like.

heavenlykaghan said:

Hackneyedscribe already addressed the technological differences between the Greek grastraphetes and the ancient Chinese crossbow in post 25. The former is limited by a user's own weight, which means the draw is typically not much over 100 lb.

Click to expand...

Another thing for the gastraphetes is that the stock is hollowed out to make room for the slider, which would weaken the compressive strength of the stock. I'm not sure how much draw weight it could support in that context (what if the stock snaps or the slider snaps off) while still having the weapon being small enough to be ergonomic for handheld use. For the same draw weight the gastraphetes needs to have a bulkier stock. For siege engines it's not that big a deal, but for handheld weapons it could be after a certain point.

HackneyedScribe said:

Yes the Yuezhi were the rulers of the Dayuan, the latter being Greeks. And the Kushans were just the Yuezhi empire, and I'd say there's sufficient evidence presented thus far they adopted hoplite infantry (most likely from the Dayuan) based on excavated Kushan coins and art showing people equipped as hoplites.

I would disagree that Chen Tang was directly comparing Han infantry to hoplites though. The context of the quote was him comparing Han soldiers to those of the Wusun. From the Book of Han:
后数岁，西域都护段会宗为乌孙兵所围，驿骑上书，愿发城郭敦煌兵以自救。丞相王商、大将军王凤及百僚议数日不决。凤言：“汤多筹策，习外国事，可问。”上召汤见宣室。汤击郅支时中塞病，两臂不诎申。汤入见，有诏毋拜，示以会宗奏。汤辞谢，曰：“将相九卿皆贤材通明，小臣罢癃，不足以策大事。”上曰：“国家有急，君其毋让。”对曰：“臣以为此必无可忧也。”上曰：“何以言之？”汤曰：“夫胡兵五而当汉兵一，何者？兵刃朴钝，弓弩不利。今闻颇得汉巧，然犹三而当一。又兵法曰‘客倍而主人半然后敌’，今围会宗者人众不足以胜会宗，唯陛下勿忧！且兵轻行五十里，重行三十里，今会宗欲发城郭敦煌，历时乃至，所谓报仇之兵，非救急之用也！”
A few years later, Duan Huizong, the Protector of the Western Regions, was surrounded by Wusun soldiers. Yiqi wrote a lettered proposal, wanting to send Dunhuang soldiers to save himself. Prime Minister Wang Shang, General Wang Feng and hundreds of officials discussed it for several days without making a decision. Feng said: "[Chen] Tang has many plans and is familiar with foreign affairs. Ask him." He summoned [Chen] Tang to meet in the proclamation room. At the time [Chen] Tang was extremely sick and cannot straighten either of his arms. [So] when [Chen] Tang came to see him, there was an edict in which he [Chen Tang] did not have to conduct the [ritual of] paying homage and presenting the memorial for the meeting. Tang thanked him and said: "The generals, ministers and nine ministers are all talented and bright, and the small ministers are weak, and they are not enough to carry out big things." He said: "The country is in urgent need, and and the lords must not give in." He said to him: "I think nothing should be done for this." The emperor said: "Why do you say that?" Tang said: "Five Hu soldiers is equivalent to one Han soldier, why? Because [their] military blades are simple and blunt, [while their] bows and crossbows have no power. I heard that at present time [they] adopted the skills of the Han, but it still takes three [Wusun] to be equivalent to one [Han].....[goes on to talk about the distance traveled and the time it'll take]

So he's definitely comparing Han soldiers to Wusun ones. The Wusun was a nomadic power but unlike the Yuezhi I don't see any evidence of the Wusun having hoplites. To be fair there's no evidence of what their infantry is like. Albeit the Orlat Plaque of the Kangju, a nomadic federation situated adjacent to the Wusun, depicts heavily armored cavalry, light cavalry archers and heavily armored foot soldiers, but not in the manner of hoplites:

On the other hand the Kushans with their hoplites were next to the Wusun too, the belt buckle of Tillya-Tepe showing a pair of hoplites wasn't that much further away than the Orlat Plaque, and the hoplite coin of Kampir Tepe was probably a little closer to the Wusun than the Orlat Plaque, so I may be committing a double standard here. Either way these [Orlat Plaque] all are indirect evidence AT BEST, and not proof of what Wusun soldiers would have looked like.

Click to expand...

I don't really think Chen Tang gave it that much thought of the differences between Hoplites and non-Hoplites, to him, they are all Hu infantries and with similar melee and missile weapons and were all inferior to Han weapons. The situation he was encountering at the time of his speech might pertain to the Wusun, but his direct experience was in Dayuan. So he might have had Kangju/Wusun cavalry in mind, but the Dayuan infantry in mind as well.

heavenlykaghan said:

I don't really think Chen Tang gave it that much thought of the differences between Hoplites and non-Hoplites, to him, they are all Hu infantries and with similar melee and missile weapons and were all inferior to Han weapons.

Click to expand...

If he was asked an offhand question about Wusun battle capabilities this could certainly be a possibility. But given the context in which he presented his argument, in which the court was hanging onto his word and his decision seemed to be the ultimate deciding factor to break a political deadlock, I'd bet he put a little more thought into it than that.

heavenlykaghan said:

The situation he was encountering at the time of his speech might pertain to the Wusun, but his direct experience was in Dayuan. So he might have had Kangju/Wusun cavalry in mind, but the Dayuan infantry in mind as well.

Click to expand...

I only considered that Chen Tang fought the Xiongnu, but didn't consider that the location of the siege was in Dayuan. This lends more weight to the "fish-scale formation" that he fought against to be hoplites.

Translation of the battle as found in the Book of Later Han from the now dead CHF forum:

The next day, the Han army advanced to Zhizhi's fort on the bank of the Talas River, and set up camp three li (about 1.5 kilometres) from the fort.
They saw five-coloured banners flying from the Chanyu's fort, and several hundred men in armour defending its ramparts. More than a hundred cavalry rode back and forth in front of the fort, and more than a hundred infantry performed drills at its gates in fish-scale formation.
The Xiongnu defending the fort taunted the Han army, shouting, "Come and fight!"
The Xiongnu cavalry charged the Han camp, but all the Han crossbowmen had their weapons loaded and aimed, so the cavalry backed off.
The Han crossbowmen then moved in several times and shot volleys at the Xiongu cavalry and infantry at the gate of the fort, forcing them to withdraw into the fort.
Han Generals Gan Yanshou and Chen Tang ordered the army to charge to the walls of the fort at the sounding of the drums and surround it on all four sides. Each unit would perform the task assigned to it: some digging tunnels under the walls, some blocking up the arrow ports in the walls. The pavises advanced in front, and the halberdiers and crossbowmen behind them. The crossbowmen laid down a suppressing fire on the ramparts, driving the defenders off the walls.
But there were also two wooden stockades outside the fort, from which the Xiongnu shot arrows at the Han attackers, killing or wounding many of them.
The attackers then brought up torches and burned the stockades down.
That night, several hundred Xiongnu cavalry attempted to break out of the siege (and seek reinforcements), but were wiped out by the Han crossbows.
At first, the Chanyu had thought of fleeing to Kangju (a tributary state of the Xiongnu) upon hearing of the arrival of the Han army. But he then suspected that the king of Kangju would betray him to the Han as revenge for past grievances. He also heard that Wusun and all the other Central Asian states (that had once been dominated by the Xiongnu) had contributed troops to the Han expeditionary force, and realized that he had nowhere to run.
(Before the battle) Zhizhi Chanyu had already evacuated the fort, but then returned to it, saying, "Why not hold out? The Han army has travelled far, and its supplies cannot sustain a long siege."
The Chanyu then put on his armour and took his place on the walls, and even his queen and several tens of concubines took bows and shot at the besiegers.
One of the Han crossbowmen shot the Chanyu in the nose, and many of his concubines were also shot dead.
The Chanyu then came down from the walls and mounted his horse, directing the defense from his headquarters within the fort.
By midnight, the stockades had been destroyed, but the Xiongnu defenders came up onto the rammed-earth walls of the fort and yelled battle cries.
At this point, more than ten thousand Kangju cavalry arrived (the Kangju king had remained loyal to the Xiongnu after all) and deployed in more than ten places around the fort in support of the Xiongnu.
In the night, they attacked the Han camp several times, but were beaten back each time.
At dawn, fires were raised all around the fort, and the Han soldiers scaled the walls in high spirits and shouting their battle cries. The sound of bells and drums shook the earth.
The Kangju reinforcements disengaged and fled the scene.
The Han soldiers advanced behind pavises on all sides of the fort, and stormed it en masse.
The Chanyu, with more than a hundred men and women in his entourage, retreated into his headquarters.
The Han army set fire to the headquarters and then charged in. The Chanyu suffered severe wounds and died.
An officer named Du Xun cut off the Chanyu's head. Inside the headquarters, the Han soldiers found two captive Han envoys, as well as the letter that Gu Ji (a Han envoy whom Zhizhi Chanyu had executed, provoking the Han expedition against him) and his mission had presented to the Chanyu.
All the Han soldiers were allowed to keep whatever booty they found.
The Xiongnu queen, crown prince and aristocrats were all beheaded, about 1,518 people in all. 145 Xiongnu were captured in battle, and more than a thousand surrendered. These prisoners were bestowed upon the kings of the fifteen Central Asian kingdoms who had participated in the expedition.

I bolded the part where it showed Cheng Tang would have been familiar with Wusun troops, as they fought under him before.

HackneyedScribe said:

If he was asked an offhand question about Wusun battle capabilities this could certainly be a possibility. But given the context in which he presented his argument, in which the court was hanging onto his word and his decision seemed to be the ultimate deciding factor to break a political deadlock, I'd bet he put a little more thought into it than that.



I only considered that Chen Tang fought the Xiongnu, but didn't consider that the location of the siege was in Dayuan. This lends more weight to the "fish-scale formation" that he fought against to be hoplites.

Translation of the battle as found in the Book of Later Han from the now dead CHF forum:

The next day, the Han army advanced to Zhizhi's fort on the bank of the Talas River, and set up camp three li (about 1.5 kilometres) from the fort.
They saw five-coloured banners flying from the Chanyu's fort, and several hundred men in armour defending its ramparts. More than a hundred cavalry rode back and forth in front of the fort, and more than a hundred infantry performed drills at its gates in fish-scale formation.
The Xiongnu defending the fort taunted the Han army, shouting, "Come and fight!"
The Xiongnu cavalry charged the Han camp, but all the Han crossbowmen had their weapons loaded and aimed, so the cavalry backed off.
The Han crossbowmen then moved in several times and shot volleys at the Xiongu cavalry and infantry at the gate of the fort, forcing them to withdraw into the fort.
Han Generals Gan Yanshou and Chen Tang ordered the army to charge to the walls of the fort at the sounding of the drums and surround it on all four sides. Each unit would perform the task assigned to it: some digging tunnels under the walls, some blocking up the arrow ports in the walls. The pavises advanced in front, and the halberdiers and crossbowmen behind them. The crossbowmen laid down a suppressing fire on the ramparts, driving the defenders off the walls.
But there were also two wooden stockades outside the fort, from which the Xiongnu shot arrows at the Han attackers, killing or wounding many of them.
The attackers then brought up torches and burned the stockades down.
That night, several hundred Xiongnu cavalry attempted to break out of the siege (and seek reinforcements), but were wiped out by the Han crossbows.
At first, the Chanyu had thought of fleeing to Kangju (a tributary state of the Xiongnu) upon hearing of the arrival of the Han army. But he then suspected that the king of Kangju would betray him to the Han as revenge for past grievances. He also heard that Wusun and all the other Central Asian states (that had once been dominated by the Xiongnu) had contributed troops to the Han expeditionary force, and realized that he had nowhere to run.
(Before the battle) Zhizhi Chanyu had already evacuated the fort, but then returned to it, saying, "Why not hold out? The Han army has travelled far, and its supplies cannot sustain a long siege."
The Chanyu then put on his armour and took his place on the walls, and even his queen and several tens of concubines took bows and shot at the besiegers.
One of the Han crossbowmen shot the Chanyu in the nose, and many of his concubines were also shot dead.
The Chanyu then came down from the walls and mounted his horse, directing the defense from his headquarters within the fort.
By midnight, the stockades had been destroyed, but the Xiongnu defenders came up onto the rammed-earth walls of the fort and yelled battle cries.
At this point, more than ten thousand Kangju cavalry arrived (the Kangju king had remained loyal to the Xiongnu after all) and deployed in more than ten places around the fort in support of the Xiongnu.
In the night, they attacked the Han camp several times, but were beaten back each time.
At dawn, fires were raised all around the fort, and the Han soldiers scaled the walls in high spirits and shouting their battle cries. The sound of bells and drums shook the earth.
The Kangju reinforcements disengaged and fled the scene.
The Han soldiers advanced behind pavises on all sides of the fort, and stormed it en masse.
The Chanyu, with more than a hundred men and women in his entourage, retreated into his headquarters.
The Han army set fire to the headquarters and then charged in. The Chanyu suffered severe wounds and died.
An officer named Du Xun cut off the Chanyu's head. Inside the headquarters, the Han soldiers found two captive Han envoys, as well as the letter that Gu Ji (a Han envoy whom Zhizhi Chanyu had executed, provoking the Han expedition against him) and his mission had presented to the Chanyu.
All the Han soldiers were allowed to keep whatever booty they found.
The Xiongnu queen, crown prince and aristocrats were all beheaded, about 1,518 people in all. 145 Xiongnu were captured in battle, and more than a thousand surrendered. These prisoners were bestowed upon the kings of the fifteen Central Asian kingdoms who had participated in the expedition.

I bolded the part where it showed Cheng Tang would have been familiar with Wusun troops, as they fought under him before.

Click to expand...

I was thinking of Zhizhi's infantry earlier rather than Dayuan (got mixed up since Greek Hoplites came up), but it shows that Greek style Hoplites should be rather common in the area and probably didn't make a difference to him. When he said Hu, he clearly lumped all western armies into one, for if they were of different quality, he would have singled out the Wusun as being different.

HackneyedScribe said:

3. The Han did reach far beyond its borders. During the reign of Wudi he expanded the empire to twice its size. He wasn't just fighting the Xiongnu, he was fighting basically everybody that shared a border (and even some who didn't share a border) and at a great drain to the treasury.

Click to expand...

I also want to add that far more than the Roman Empire, Han influence reached far beyond the borders of its empire (the vassal states which received Han titles and seals would nearly double the area of the formal territorial extent of the Han empire). Not only did it reach the Xiongnu in Mongolia and Southern Siberia, it reached across Central Asia as far as the Aral Sea with the Kangju being its vassal. Recent scholarship reveal that Han influence also for a time, reached Afghanistan with the Yuezhi (and later Kushan) receiving Han titles (Han diplomat even interfered in the local succession affairs of Jibin around Gandhara).
See : Kujula Kadphises and His Title Kushan Yavuga by Joe Cribb

The various Yuezhi and the early Kushan received the Han title of Xihou 翕侯, which Cribb has identified to have the Greek equivalent of ΗΙΑΟΥ (Heraus), as recorded in the region. In fact, it was the sole title of the Kushans until the time of Kujula Kadphises in the late 1st century AD. Given that Han policies caused a geographic shift in Central Asia and Afghanistan, which indirectly led to the eastern invasion of Parthia (leading to the death of 2 Parthian kings, and the lost of Parthia's eastern territory) and conquest of much of northern India, as well as the later Hunnish invasions of Western Europe, it was far more of the driver of world geo-strategic changes than the contemporary Roman Empire, which was largely confined to the Mediterrean area and at best somewhat influenced Persia.