I think he was talking about the Ussuri and Amur acquisitions in the 1860s.
Alexander the Great vs. China
- Thread starter Archbob
- Start date
- Status
I think he was talking about the Ussuri and Amur acquisitions in the 1860s.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
We might imagine him dealing with this problem, which was a question of loyalty (the pezoi felt he was becoming too culturally Eastern IIRC) the same way he dealt with the problem in Sogdia of the Thessalian Cavalry after Parmenio's death, which was simply to send them home. He had proved in Arachosia that he was not against training local levies in Greek warfare, while they certainly would not have been Pezhetairoi, they could have performed reasonably well. Of course, they wouldn't have had the incredible faith his Greek soldiers did...
Then its silly for him to say "Siberia" then isnt' it?
Hmm they didn't manage to capture Europe, though they certainly could, i agree. They also didn't manage to capture Russia, for the simple reason as there was no Russia at that point but a number of small feudal states much like in Japan or South Germany, it wasn't really much of a task to capture. But Russia is a good point - never fight a land war in Asia eh. R. has proven to resist just about everything thrown at it. And the last thing you look at is strength of the army or weapons. Same here but turned around. This is a thread about China vs Alexander right? Or is this a thread about" measuring".
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Except for the Mongols and the Varangians, of course, although I suppose you could argue that, prior to the Rus, they were just the "East Slavic tribes" and not Russia per se.
Don't forget those wacky imperial Germans: helping spark socialist revolutions since 1917.
Dida
YHWH
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2003
- Messages
- 3,434
And how could primitive mongols conquest china?
With strategy perhaps....
It is a common mistake for folks to assume that because the Mongols were considered barbarians, they must also had been technologically inferior. The Mongolian army at the time was not only far bigger but also far more technologically advanced than the Chinese.
Even so, it took the Mongols more than 50 years to conquer the whole of China, and during this time the Chinese controlled only a small portion of their former empire south of the Yangtze while the Mongols ruled over vast territories stretching from Northern China all the way into Europe.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
They worked so well, they even did it to themselves!
At some points Alexander recruited many Asians into his army, however, China is so vast. In any case it would have been the Chinese chariots against the Phalanx. Not sure about the outcome, but Darius's chariots did not fare so well.
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
It would have been far more than that. It would have been Chinese tactics, suited to Chinese terrain, versus Alexander's tactics. China fighting on its home turf against some upstart Greek. Alexander wouldn't have stood a chance.
Your probably right but who cares it is still interesting to think about
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
I agree with the peoples here saying this is the number one problem.
Logistics and disease, and maybe morale issues would prevent Alexander marching on China.
Yes but what if they fought, can you imagine East mets West and ungodly carnage.
Battle of Talas doesn't count for you?
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,377
The persians also fought on their own turf...
(but to be fair I really thing that Darius could have done better, had it not been for his precarious hold in power - the persians might have bankrupt Alexander right in Asia Minor with a scorcher earth policy, except that the local satraps were not willing to do it)
I'm gonna say the original premise of this thread is to idealize a situation where Alexander embarks on an invasion of China, not force him into it at the extremity of his logistical supply line with a relatively small, exhausted army in mutiny, which kills the whole point of the discussion.
So sticking with logical events, instead of drinking himself to death while he's sick with malaria, he does consolidate his empire, picking up the coastal states of Arabia, and launching his land/sea campaign against Carthage, winning the allegiance of the western Greeks. He uses his experience and the example of his father when he marches through the territory of the Gauls and Celt-Iberians, or the lower Danube, winning some over by sword and persuasion. He is about to avenge the death of his uncle at Pandosia, in Italy.
By this time he is probably 10 years older, but I will point out that his veterans of the Macedonian conquest were vaunted prizefighters in the Wars of the Diadochi for more than 10 years after his death. (They would have been experience level 5 or higher in Civ4 terms). Rome and Samnium would have put aside their multi-generational war and presented a formidable opponent. However, the fact that Pyrrhus fought Rome to a draw 50 years years later, and Alexander holds mastery of the sea, with a highly professional army supplemented by specialist corps from every major culture of the Mediterranean Basin (much like the Thessalians, Thracians, Illyrians, etc. were integrated in Philip's army), leaves little doubt as to the outcome.
Now he's ready to turn back to the east, even if some of the western Mediterranean is only nominally held in his name, the core of his empire is safe, and his reputation even more legendary. He's probably pushing 50 now, and assuming he is still whole after the hard living that killed him when he was 33, most of his elite core are either dead or allowed to retire, but they've raised a new generation army trained in the same traditions, with the most experienced officers in the world. I'll also point out, that Alexander's generals fought eachother in the wars of the Diadochi until they were 80+ years old.
What keeps him moving quickly is Alexander doesn't bother stripping his frontiers of militia and reserve troops, or calling a general levy, and that's not his style anyway. His reputation and direct command is enough to ensure the best troops are at his beck and call when he announces another expedition to the east, this time to reach the Ocean. By this time he's received enough intelligence to realize the far shore is not on the other side of India, other great fabled lands lie farther to the east. I would estimate 100,000 to 150,000 men, mostly veterans, accompany him into Asia, while a fleet sets sail from the Persian Gulf. Any wavering allegiance in this part of the world is quickly restored, and Alexander gathers large numbers of middle eastern horsemen and skirmishers, along with the siege expertise of Greek subordinates and sons of subordinates like who would be Demetrius Poliorcetes.
The big question is whether he goes after India first. The Mauryan Empire founded by Chandragupta I is very powerful, but he had been quite impressed by Alexander on his first visit - I think he would have offered some kind of allegiance or submission. If not, then Alexander's last great conquest would be the Indian sub-continent, much like the Greco-Bactrians did a century later. With the aid of a fleet, I have little doubt he would succeed, but this would consume his Asian expedition, and he would get hopelessly bogged down crossing the successive mountain ranges and rivers of Burma, jungles of SE Asia, just to reach the rugged southern doorstep of China, as an earlier poster suggested. But why would anyone choose to go that way ?
If India can be pacified and/or left to a subordinate ally, Alexander gathers his army in Baktra, the largest concentration of Greeks east of the Tigris, which happens to sit near the entrance to western China through the Tarim Basin. In typical Greek fashion, Alexander leaves a third of his prize army behind under a trusted general to guard his back, with orders to follow with a supply train in 2 or 3 years if the situation is stable, or when he sends word. He would be in an extremely precarious position so far from his center of power, to leave his hinge of departure unguarded. When he moves out let's assume he has a core army of 120,000 infantry with the medium-heavy cavalry, siege and supply train, plus a scouting force of 40,000 light cavalry from his Asian allies, without overstretching the logistical resources of his vast empire.
He may have to deal with Scythian and Ugric tribesmen first, who are hard to bring to battle. It is also probable that word of this would precede him and some of the Chinese states would prepare a reception for him. As in history, European armies of the day were usually ill-suited to warfare on the open steppes, but he would have some experience of that from his Asian conquests, and quite likely include a few hundred war elephants in his inventory that tended to cause panic among enemy horses. Furthermore, this is not the Han Dynasty of a hundred years later when they actually took the offensive successfully against the Hsing-Nu and other steppe nomads. This is the Warring States period, and quite certainly he would take advantage of their division to form an alliance with at least some disaffected states.
If Alexander follows the old Silk Road along the oases and river valleys in Sinkiang, there are few natural bottlenecks that will hold him up for long. What happens next I think depends largely on how an outsider like Alexander is perceived within China. As a cruel 'barbarian', the resistance, even of poorly armed and trained militia, might be fanatical or even suicidal. As an enlightened warlord-emperor, which comparatively speaking Alexander was, he may quickly establish a reputation with a few successful battles. I doubt that a scorched earth policy would be uniformly prosecuted, most of China was too populous to sustain such a practice, depending on multiple harvests a year. Once he has the Tarim Basin/Sinkiang region he could pick his enemies and objectives before crossing the last stretch of desert along the Nanshan Mountains to China proper. Rivers flow here in most seasons and nowhere would he have to go for a long stretch without water.
It's a very interesting scenario to hypothesize on - because I could see someone like Alexander actually attempting this. I'm not necessarily impressed that 2 or 3 of the Chinese states might present an army of 3-400,000 to Alexander's advance, unless they were forced to fight to the death by the enforcement of royal decree, or by having no avenue of retreat. Logistics works both ways and such forces could not be sustained in the field indefinitely. But at least a third of them would be a hard-core trained elite, equivalent in size to Alexander's. From reading a bit of the Warring States period, some of their generals employed quite subtle methods as alluded to in the Art of War, and there was no lack of experience in China at this time. Any attempt by Alexander's fleet to explore and find a way to support him in China would be inconsequential. I can see it hopping along both coasts of India for awhile before being scattered by a monsoon, or swarmed by sampans and junks in SE Asia. Unless Alexander knew how to build galleons I can't see a galley based fleet, even with some sailing capability, being of much help (maybe some Arab dhows).
I've set the scenario up now someone else can finish it. I don't think the chariots (heavy war carts) of the Chinese would be very effective against the phalanx, which could leave open gaps for them to be channeled through, or stand their ground with 21' pikes. If the Chinese had large numbers of light horsemen I think they are a bigger threat in harassing his march and cutting him off from supplies. Much is made of the Chinese crossbowmen, but the repeating Cho-ko-nu is not the same crossbow that appeared in Europe 1500 years later, with 150+ lb. draw capable of piercing plate steel. I would point out that even such crossbowmen as the Genoese were only effective to about 150 yards with fairly flat trajectories, and were annihilated any time they encountered longbows with their longer trajectories, but the Cho-ko-nu could achieve a reasonably high rate of fire in support or defense of an infantry assault. Alexander may have some early Indian equivalent longbowmen, and many composite archers, but he had also mastered the use of light skirmishers with shields in open formation, who could close the range quickly and release high volumes of missile fire from javelins and slings before withdrawing.
Finally there is Alexander himself, and his ability to adapt to any tactical situation. By this time he wouldn't be in the front line getting himself killed, therefore I think it is plausible that he would succeed in establishing a protectorate over a part of China, and perhaps enter into the balance of power with the other 5-7 leading states. I don't think he would succeed in conquering all of China - the Warring States period proves just how difficult that was. It would have been the first real encounter between east and west and may have left a closer cultural tie, instead of the isolationism that was finally broken by the Opium Wars, a far less worthy impression in the west's first significant military encounter with China.
So sticking with logical events, instead of drinking himself to death while he's sick with malaria, he does consolidate his empire, picking up the coastal states of Arabia, and launching his land/sea campaign against Carthage, winning the allegiance of the western Greeks. He uses his experience and the example of his father when he marches through the territory of the Gauls and Celt-Iberians, or the lower Danube, winning some over by sword and persuasion. He is about to avenge the death of his uncle at Pandosia, in Italy.
By this time he is probably 10 years older, but I will point out that his veterans of the Macedonian conquest were vaunted prizefighters in the Wars of the Diadochi for more than 10 years after his death. (They would have been experience level 5 or higher in Civ4 terms). Rome and Samnium would have put aside their multi-generational war and presented a formidable opponent. However, the fact that Pyrrhus fought Rome to a draw 50 years years later, and Alexander holds mastery of the sea, with a highly professional army supplemented by specialist corps from every major culture of the Mediterranean Basin (much like the Thessalians, Thracians, Illyrians, etc. were integrated in Philip's army), leaves little doubt as to the outcome.
Now he's ready to turn back to the east, even if some of the western Mediterranean is only nominally held in his name, the core of his empire is safe, and his reputation even more legendary. He's probably pushing 50 now, and assuming he is still whole after the hard living that killed him when he was 33, most of his elite core are either dead or allowed to retire, but they've raised a new generation army trained in the same traditions, with the most experienced officers in the world. I'll also point out, that Alexander's generals fought eachother in the wars of the Diadochi until they were 80+ years old.
What keeps him moving quickly is Alexander doesn't bother stripping his frontiers of militia and reserve troops, or calling a general levy, and that's not his style anyway. His reputation and direct command is enough to ensure the best troops are at his beck and call when he announces another expedition to the east, this time to reach the Ocean. By this time he's received enough intelligence to realize the far shore is not on the other side of India, other great fabled lands lie farther to the east. I would estimate 100,000 to 150,000 men, mostly veterans, accompany him into Asia, while a fleet sets sail from the Persian Gulf. Any wavering allegiance in this part of the world is quickly restored, and Alexander gathers large numbers of middle eastern horsemen and skirmishers, along with the siege expertise of Greek subordinates and sons of subordinates like who would be Demetrius Poliorcetes.
The big question is whether he goes after India first. The Mauryan Empire founded by Chandragupta I is very powerful, but he had been quite impressed by Alexander on his first visit - I think he would have offered some kind of allegiance or submission. If not, then Alexander's last great conquest would be the Indian sub-continent, much like the Greco-Bactrians did a century later. With the aid of a fleet, I have little doubt he would succeed, but this would consume his Asian expedition, and he would get hopelessly bogged down crossing the successive mountain ranges and rivers of Burma, jungles of SE Asia, just to reach the rugged southern doorstep of China, as an earlier poster suggested. But why would anyone choose to go that way ?
If India can be pacified and/or left to a subordinate ally, Alexander gathers his army in Baktra, the largest concentration of Greeks east of the Tigris, which happens to sit near the entrance to western China through the Tarim Basin. In typical Greek fashion, Alexander leaves a third of his prize army behind under a trusted general to guard his back, with orders to follow with a supply train in 2 or 3 years if the situation is stable, or when he sends word. He would be in an extremely precarious position so far from his center of power, to leave his hinge of departure unguarded. When he moves out let's assume he has a core army of 120,000 infantry with the medium-heavy cavalry, siege and supply train, plus a scouting force of 40,000 light cavalry from his Asian allies, without overstretching the logistical resources of his vast empire.
He may have to deal with Scythian and Ugric tribesmen first, who are hard to bring to battle. It is also probable that word of this would precede him and some of the Chinese states would prepare a reception for him. As in history, European armies of the day were usually ill-suited to warfare on the open steppes, but he would have some experience of that from his Asian conquests, and quite likely include a few hundred war elephants in his inventory that tended to cause panic among enemy horses. Furthermore, this is not the Han Dynasty of a hundred years later when they actually took the offensive successfully against the Hsing-Nu and other steppe nomads. This is the Warring States period, and quite certainly he would take advantage of their division to form an alliance with at least some disaffected states.
If Alexander follows the old Silk Road along the oases and river valleys in Sinkiang, there are few natural bottlenecks that will hold him up for long. What happens next I think depends largely on how an outsider like Alexander is perceived within China. As a cruel 'barbarian', the resistance, even of poorly armed and trained militia, might be fanatical or even suicidal. As an enlightened warlord-emperor, which comparatively speaking Alexander was, he may quickly establish a reputation with a few successful battles. I doubt that a scorched earth policy would be uniformly prosecuted, most of China was too populous to sustain such a practice, depending on multiple harvests a year. Once he has the Tarim Basin/Sinkiang region he could pick his enemies and objectives before crossing the last stretch of desert along the Nanshan Mountains to China proper. Rivers flow here in most seasons and nowhere would he have to go for a long stretch without water.
It's a very interesting scenario to hypothesize on - because I could see someone like Alexander actually attempting this. I'm not necessarily impressed that 2 or 3 of the Chinese states might present an army of 3-400,000 to Alexander's advance, unless they were forced to fight to the death by the enforcement of royal decree, or by having no avenue of retreat. Logistics works both ways and such forces could not be sustained in the field indefinitely. But at least a third of them would be a hard-core trained elite, equivalent in size to Alexander's. From reading a bit of the Warring States period, some of their generals employed quite subtle methods as alluded to in the Art of War, and there was no lack of experience in China at this time. Any attempt by Alexander's fleet to explore and find a way to support him in China would be inconsequential. I can see it hopping along both coasts of India for awhile before being scattered by a monsoon, or swarmed by sampans and junks in SE Asia. Unless Alexander knew how to build galleons I can't see a galley based fleet, even with some sailing capability, being of much help (maybe some Arab dhows).
I've set the scenario up now someone else can finish it. I don't think the chariots (heavy war carts) of the Chinese would be very effective against the phalanx, which could leave open gaps for them to be channeled through, or stand their ground with 21' pikes. If the Chinese had large numbers of light horsemen I think they are a bigger threat in harassing his march and cutting him off from supplies. Much is made of the Chinese crossbowmen, but the repeating Cho-ko-nu is not the same crossbow that appeared in Europe 1500 years later, with 150+ lb. draw capable of piercing plate steel. I would point out that even such crossbowmen as the Genoese were only effective to about 150 yards with fairly flat trajectories, and were annihilated any time they encountered longbows with their longer trajectories, but the Cho-ko-nu could achieve a reasonably high rate of fire in support or defense of an infantry assault. Alexander may have some early Indian equivalent longbowmen, and many composite archers, but he had also mastered the use of light skirmishers with shields in open formation, who could close the range quickly and release high volumes of missile fire from javelins and slings before withdrawing.
Finally there is Alexander himself, and his ability to adapt to any tactical situation. By this time he wouldn't be in the front line getting himself killed, therefore I think it is plausible that he would succeed in establishing a protectorate over a part of China, and perhaps enter into the balance of power with the other 5-7 leading states. I don't think he would succeed in conquering all of China - the Warring States period proves just how difficult that was. It would have been the first real encounter between east and west and may have left a closer cultural tie, instead of the isolationism that was finally broken by the Opium Wars, a far less worthy impression in the west's first significant military encounter with China.
I looked into this a little more, and in China at the time (309 BC), the Qin kingdom in the upper reaches of the rivers is where Alexander would appear first. Qin had survived early defeats in the Zhou-Wei dominance of the Warring States Period, but still overawed the local nomadic tribes. It was a widespread rugged state, with a big 'backyard'. While other states fought one climax of these destructive wars, Qin was consolidating and reforming with a new legalism civic under Shang Yang, who was treated like a common criminal and eventually executed by Alexander's contemporary King Huiwen, but the growth and stability of Qin continued. This was the state that would eventually build the Terra Cotta Army towards the end of Qin Shi Huang's reign (the Dragon Emperor of Mummy infamy) in 210 BC, whose empire was buried with him, literally and figuratively.
here it is Ancient Chinese Soldiers. thanks KD
Some heavy infantry have fully scale-armored torsos and arms with what look like solid pikes, others have kind of an apron with shoulders covered, and handy narrow-bladed swords, mounted archers with similar armor, and some fairly powerful-looking recurved bows amongst the lightly armoured foot as well. There are also unarmoured spearmen with small falchions or axes. What proportions I would not know but assuming 1/3 of their levy was a professional trained army, this would be a pretty formidable force if Chinese metal was as refined as others have said. Greek Bronze armour and iron spear-points were good enough, the iron xiphos or Kopis were heavier but clumsier compared to those steel blades. However, by this time Alexander would have been exposed to Gallic longswords and the Samnium Gladius, and I strongly suspect some Hypaspist-type or auxillary infantry would have these. The weight and reach of his phalanx may tell, but lighter armed troops would have a hard time getting around those archers. His medium-heavy cavalry would be successful in a charge against the Chinese horsemen if they got close enough, but would need some support or diversion from the light horsemen against the chariots. And it is reasonable to assume he would have a sizable force of elephants, since around this time Seleukus obtained 500 in a treaty with Chandragupta.
The closest time-frame battle I have a record of is Yique in 293 BC; 120,000 Qin defeated 240,000 Wei and Han, which were trying to avoid this 'divide and conquer' strategy but ended up giving up some lands. The victor was the legendary Bai Qi, whom I would think is one of the greatest old school Chinese generals. I would assume this to be an engagement of professional armies that can be supported on campaign, not one of the bigger bloodfests that took place at climactic moments in the heart of a kingdom, often involving 2 or more states invading. These battles decided the possession of fortified frontiers.
So Qin is a strong centralized state with a field army about equivalent to Alexanders, even assuming they had an equal one and reserves to guard their rivals. The Yuezhi and Qiang were other semi-barbaric cultures on the western approaches - the future Han dynasty would not stretch this far till the fall of Qin in 206 BC. Alexander might be able to take advantage of some dissatisfaction there, if not, he might have a tough time, but the Shu are barely pacified, and I don't see Qin trying to intercept him in the Tarim Basin/Sinkiang region. Looks like a pretty worthy match-up.
This is what Alexander would be marching into: I doubt the other states would help Qin at this time, they still held their own, but in history would not be able to contain Qin. The first state that seriously challenged them was Chu, and they were still around when the warring states were reduced to 3 by 225 BC. But Qin would found the first true, albeit shortlived, Chinese Imperial Dynasty by 221 BC., after some of the most gigantic battles like Changping, and executions, recorded in ancient history. I believe there is a history article that illustrates what some Qin and Warring States soldiers looked like, so you can start to see some details.
here it is Ancient Chinese Soldiers. thanks KD
Some heavy infantry have fully scale-armored torsos and arms with what look like solid pikes, others have kind of an apron with shoulders covered, and handy narrow-bladed swords, mounted archers with similar armor, and some fairly powerful-looking recurved bows amongst the lightly armoured foot as well. There are also unarmoured spearmen with small falchions or axes. What proportions I would not know but assuming 1/3 of their levy was a professional trained army, this would be a pretty formidable force if Chinese metal was as refined as others have said. Greek Bronze armour and iron spear-points were good enough, the iron xiphos or Kopis were heavier but clumsier compared to those steel blades. However, by this time Alexander would have been exposed to Gallic longswords and the Samnium Gladius, and I strongly suspect some Hypaspist-type or auxillary infantry would have these. The weight and reach of his phalanx may tell, but lighter armed troops would have a hard time getting around those archers. His medium-heavy cavalry would be successful in a charge against the Chinese horsemen if they got close enough, but would need some support or diversion from the light horsemen against the chariots. And it is reasonable to assume he would have a sizable force of elephants, since around this time Seleukus obtained 500 in a treaty with Chandragupta.
The closest time-frame battle I have a record of is Yique in 293 BC; 120,000 Qin defeated 240,000 Wei and Han, which were trying to avoid this 'divide and conquer' strategy but ended up giving up some lands. The victor was the legendary Bai Qi, whom I would think is one of the greatest old school Chinese generals. I would assume this to be an engagement of professional armies that can be supported on campaign, not one of the bigger bloodfests that took place at climactic moments in the heart of a kingdom, often involving 2 or more states invading. These battles decided the possession of fortified frontiers.
So Qin is a strong centralized state with a field army about equivalent to Alexanders, even assuming they had an equal one and reserves to guard their rivals. The Yuezhi and Qiang were other semi-barbaric cultures on the western approaches - the future Han dynasty would not stretch this far till the fall of Qin in 206 BC. Alexander might be able to take advantage of some dissatisfaction there, if not, he might have a tough time, but the Shu are barely pacified, and I don't see Qin trying to intercept him in the Tarim Basin/Sinkiang region. Looks like a pretty worthy match-up.
Yes I'm not suspecting he would take down China, but this is the Warring States period so do you think he'd get a piece of it ? Genghis Khan got a pretty big piece of it before he went and conquered Central Asia and Persia, with raids further west and south, and came back for more. I agree though, I think Alexander would have to make some kind of strong constructive contact within other Chinese states to maintain himself.
The ascendancy of Qin became so disproportionately powerful that for over half of the 3rd century BC two opposing schools of philosophers and strategic advisors circulated the country either promoting Hezong (alliance against Qin) or Lianheng (alliance with Qin), and apparently Qin was good at keeping those two philosophies competing for a long time. Alexander's arrival is before Qin's climb to dominance, but some other events from the same time frame are:
I think if Alexander played his cards right he would beat Qin's army - and make a deal with western nomads or disaffected Shu. The other Qin forces may come to terms and he would establish a strong political power base. Or, facing well defended Qin cities as well as an army in the field, he involves the other states in the struggle, who knows maybe him and his army end up serving as mercenaries in the Warring States.
- In 316 BC, Qin conquered the Shu area.
- The first official native Chinese cavalry unit was formed in 307 BC by King Wuling of Zhao. But the war chariot still retained its prestige and importance, despite the tactical superiority of cavalry.
- Around 300 BC, Qi was almost totally annihilated by a coalition of five states led by Yue Yi of Yan (Qin were among those five).
- Iron became more widespread and began to replace bronze. Most armour and weapons of this period were made from iron.
- Crossbow was the preferred long range weapon of this period due to many reasons. The crossbow could be mass-produced easily, and mass training of crossbowmen was possible. These qualities made it a powerful weapon against the enemy.
- Infantrymen deployed a varieties of weapons, but the most popular was the dagger-axe. The dagger-axe came in various length from 9–18 ft, the weapon comprising a thrusting spear with a slashing blade appended to it.
I think if Alexander played his cards right he would beat Qin's army - and make a deal with western nomads or disaffected Shu. The other Qin forces may come to terms and he would establish a strong political power base. Or, facing well defended Qin cities as well as an army in the field, he involves the other states in the struggle, who knows maybe him and his army end up serving as mercenaries in the Warring States.
Aegis
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2005
- Messages
- 3,970
- Status
Similar threads
