Romans in China

[NP300]

I don't like using the term 'Aryan', mainly because of certain people barstardising in Europe in the last 100 or so years.

They called themselves Aryans so I call them Aryans.

Roughly 3000 years ago - maybe longer (it was before the establishment of Buddhism and Hinduism-proper) Indo-Europeans overran the Indian subcontinent. They were of lighter colouring than the natives/locals, they established themselves as the ruling class and begun the caste system as a means of maintaning racial 'purity'.

Correct, which is why the certain people in Europe "bastardized" it. The "certain people in Europe" admired the caste system and Hindu culture because they believed it was set-up to maintain "racial purity".

These 'Aryans' obviously made their mark across Central & Eastern Asian area, since the name Iran is derived from it. Also I beleive that Persian Emporers [Kings of Kingses?] up until the time of Alexander the Great called themselves "Light of the Aryans" as a title in their personal nomenclature
eg. Darius, King of Kings, Light of the Aryans, etc, etc

So, as I read elsewhere: there are people living in India, Pakistan & Iran with dark hair, dark eyes and brown skin; with more right to be called 'Aryan' than any blonde-haired, blue-eyed, white-skinned European.

Yes, I think the King of Iran used to go by the title of "Lord of the Aryans" or something like this. Incidentally, Iran changed its official name from Persia to Iran in 1936, although they have always called their country "Iran".

Well, strictly speaking, "Aryan" is a linguistic term more than a racial term. The modern people closest genetically to the ancient Indo-Europeans are the modern people of Ukraine and Southern Russia. Slavic (with Baltic) is also the closest Indo-European langauge to the original Aryan language.

 

[NP300]

The Chinese were never 'enemies' of the Persians. Our one and only true enemy were the horsemen fr the steppes - not one of any landed polities.

And the legions never penetrated so far east, into C Asia, unless you count those who're prisoners of the Parthians and sent further eastwards in small groups.

Well, I read about them fighting the Persians ina texbook. Unfortunately, I don't have it available now.

I said that they met in the Caspian Sea region, on the eastern shores, if I recall correctly. The Romans certainly penetrated as far east as the Caspian, since they ruled Armenia and Armenia has a shore on the western Caspian. So it's not hard to believe that a legion might have gone into western Central Asia and it isn't hard to believe that the Chinese were maneuvering in Central Asia.

 

[FriendlyFire]

off topic:

Curiously have a question I've been wondering for some time

When did china first have its Million men armies ???
I recall reading about army sizes where Europan armies numbered a mear 20,000.

Staggers the mind to think that chinese were using Million men armies at this era.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

off topic:

Curiously have a question I've been wondering for some time

When did china first have its Million men armies ???
I recall reading about army sizes where Europan armies numbered a mear 20,000.

Staggers the mind to think that chinese were using Million men armies at this era.

In total, China might have armies approaching the 1 million mark, but there's no way to field a one-million men army at any one time. The logistics, supply, administration and leadership would be impossible, in pre-modern times.

I'm not sure if China ever have armies in the millions, before modern times. You'd also have to remember, in China, soldiers aren't just warriors and fighters; they're also labourers for imperial public works projects, transport and operations corps on the Grand Canal, military colonists in the frontiers etc. Soldiers serve many purposes in Imperial China.

So in total it could add up to 1 million, but a large proportion won't be actual combat troops.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Well, I read about them fighting the Persians ina texbook. Unfortunately, I don't have it available now.

I said that they met in the Caspian Sea region, on the eastern shores, if I recall correctly. The Romans certainly penetrated as far east as the Caspian, since they ruled Armenia and Armenia has a shore on the western Caspian. So it's not hard to believe that a legion might have gone into western Central Asia and it isn't hard to believe that the Chinese were maneuvering in Central Asia.

No actual Chinese army actually reached the Caspian. Although the Later Han general Ban Zhao extended Chinese reach all the way there (nominally), it was thru incredibly deft handling of local factions and natives and occasional projection of the spectre of Chinese power. Ban Zhao did lead a reported 70000-strong army in the region almost reaching the Caspian at one time, but these were almost entirely native troops; Central Asians, nomads etc.

And I doubt Roman legionnaires actually sailed across the Caspian; after all, there's nothing on the other side. 'Sides, Armenia is a Roman client; rather than an actual Roman province.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

It was conquest. The Vedas describe it as conquest. If it wasn't conquest then how could they impose their language/culture over such a vast region?

Well, someone told me the story, I don't have a link or anything.

The Vedas only covered the Indian section of the story. Even that's suspect - some Indian scholars think the first Aryans were just pastoralists moving into the land vacated by the Indus civilisation (collapsed for some reason, perhaps climatic); then spreading further eastwards and southwards.

For the other movements (into Europe, Anatolia etc), we really had little to go on.

 

[Vietcong]

if i rember right wasnt it the chines u sent an expadtion not the romans u came back reporting men in sandles wearing white cloths over ther sholders or what not??