Talk:Battle of Baideng

Numbers

Numbers, from what source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.217.70.80 (talk) 19:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

400.000 ? ? ? Mongolia and central asia have got 2 milion people(including kids womans and old people) in bc 200-300 chinese authours don't telled truth.

According to history records, 400,000 includes almost the entire army from Xiong nu clans and Han State of Han Dynasty (under King Xin of Han who betrayed Han Dynasty) 175.142.127.104 (talk) 08:29, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Faulty source

The second source that the Huns were 30-40 thousand is wrong. I checked the source. There is no phrase "30-40 thousand". Ch'unwei9 (talk) 03:08, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Faulty source

Gumilev does not call the Hun army 30-40 thousand, but 20-40 thousand. Ch'unwei9 (talk) 03:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Faulty source

I checked the third source. Han doesn't just call his army 320 thousand. It says 320-400 thousand. Ch'unwei9 (talk) 03:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Siege, not battle

According to Liu Kun, Lu Chen, and Their Writings in the Transition to the Eastern Jin, David R. Knechtges, "Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles", Reviews (CLEAR), Vol. 28 (Dec., 2006), pp. 1-66, this wasn't a battle, but a siege. Also, this wasn't a Xiongnu victory, but a defeat since their siege was unsuccessful.

• "Baideng refers to Baideng Mountain, located northeast of modern Datong, Shanxi. It was here where the Xiongnu surrounded the Former Han emperor Gaozu for seven days. Using a strategy devised by Chen Ping, he was able to relieve the siege. Chen Ping was later enfeoffed as Marquis of Quni. See Shiji 56.2057, Han shu 40.2045."--Kansas Bear (talk) 17:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Number of the Xiongnu army

The Xiongnu Army recorded in Chinese chronicles like Han Shu or Sima Qian's Shi-ji, which is said to be 400.000, is clearly an exaggeration;

We can provide some sources based on the Strength of Xiongnu in other battles of the state and simple math calculations and geography knowledge.

According to Nicola Di Cosmo, who is an expert on East Asian History, Xiongnu army was 10 times exaggerated;

“This is an obviously exaggerated number, especially because not all the northern nomadic peoples had yet been included in the Hsiung-nu confederation. On the basis of later military encounters, I would estimate that this figure is inflated by a factor of ten.”

Another important source written by Lev Gumilev, The Hsiung-nu (1960), original version in Russian does a simple math calculation with the help of geography knowledge. Although Chinese historians write that the number of the Xiongnu army was 400,000, this number is greatly exaggerated, since the total population of the nomads would not be enough to raise such an army, and since each soldier had at least two horses and these horses would be scattered around the castle and fed with grass during the siege, the size of the Xiongnu army should have been roughly limited by the amount of meadows. Accordingly, the number of the Xiongnu army must be between 20,000 and 40,000.

I've read the other historians books, and some of them claimed the Xiongnu's army as 400.000 but these claims were based on Shi-ji or Han Shu, i think it is wrong to put debunked and exaggerated army numbers in the Battle Box. @Underbar dk Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 16:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@History of Iran Here is the explanation i hope you can understand this because while there are wrong and exaggerated information in this page, i feel bad. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 16:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

If this user won't reply to these arguments, i will change the strength again with more information. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@historyofiran Can you please explain why would Chinese chronicles exaggerate their own army numbers? There is no logical explanation for that i mean why would they want to make their defeat look bigger? Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 17:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Also @HistoryofIran you can screenshot the pages from the Gumilev's book and translate the image, i did that and compared it with the Turkish Print of the book. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 17:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran I explained why Xiongnu army cannot be 400.000 before, Here is the explanation about Han Army:

'On the other hand, Sima Qian shows the Chinese army as 320 thousand warriors (this is an accurate figure, as it also includes the eastern armies, which constitute half to four-fifths of the entire army), and the Huns as 400 thousand cavalry, which is a clear exaggeration.'

Source: Gumilev, Lev (1960). The Hsiung-nu. p. 78-79

Also a lot of historians considers the Han army is 320.000 while they point that the Xiongnu army is most probably exaggerated.

Logically, why would Sima Qian, a Chinese Historian, would exaggerate the strength of his own nation/country? I mean was he trying to make their defeat look bigger?

It is not logical and reliable to use old sources written in that time to learn about the enemy army's strength, because they usually try to make their defeat less tragic or make their victory bigger by exaggerating the enemy's strength.

And while there are sources to prove that the Xiongnu Army was probably between 20.000-40.000, based on simple geopgraphy and math knowledge, it would be more accurate to use them instead of a greatly exaggerated number.

'Although Chinese historians write that the number of the Xiongnu army was 400,000, this number is greatly exaggerated, since the total population of the nomads would not be enough to raise such an army, and since each soldier had at least two horses and these horses would be scattered around the castle and fed with grass during the siege, the size of the Xiongnu army should have been roughly limited by the amount of meadows. Accordingly, the number of the Xiongnu army must be between 20,000 and 40,000.'

“This is an obviously exaggerated number, especially because not all the northern nomadic peoples had yet been included in the Hsiung-nu confederation. On the basis of later military encounters, I would estimate that this figure is inflated by a factor of ten.” Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 21:50, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Also @HistoryofIran you can screenshot the pages from the Gumilev's book and translate the image, i did that and compared it with the Turkish Print of the book.

How? Also, we should look for more sources, rather than just dismissing everything in favor of 1960 Soviet source. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:21, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, there is Ancient China and Its Enemies, written by Nicola Di Cosmo and published by Cambridge University Press.

“This is an obviously exaggerated number, especially because not all the northern nomadic peoples had yet been included in the Hsiung-nu confederation. On the basis of later military encounters, I would estimate that this figure is inflated by a factor of ten.”

Let me check if i can find more sources. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 09:04, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Let me check if i can find more sources.

This is what you said, so naturally, I'm going to wait and not respond. Yet you just resumed your edit warring [1]. Revert yourself or I will report you to WP:ANI. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay i will revert it. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, i checked and couldn't find it, the sources claiming the strength of Xiongnu as 400.000 is based on the Chinese Chronicles (i.e. Han Shu, Shi Ji) and nothing else. I think the most fair way would be to keep 400.000 (according the Han Shu and Shi Ji) and write the other argument made by Nicola Di Cosmo and lev Gumilev. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 18:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I'll try to look into some WP:RS, give me a day or two. HistoryofIran (talk) 19:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay but let me tell you, most of the sources claim it as 400,000 referencing Shi Ji. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 16:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)