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&#39;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&#39;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&#39;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 . 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)
 * I'm going to look for sources for both numbers. It's not fair/neutral only going for one of them when they have the same amount of (incredibly high) digits. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way according to Shi Ji the Xiongnu army was 400.000 while Han Shu claims it as 300.000, i just realized that Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to follow what WP:RS says, it doesn't really matter whatever it's related to Han Shu, Shi Ji, etc or not. I've been a bit busy, will try to get it done before the end of this week. You're welcome to help looking. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * What I found so far;
 * "At Baideng, not far from today's Datong, Modu suddenly attacked with 400,00 horsemen, surrounding the imprudent emperor." - p. 12, History of Central Asia, The: 4-volume set, Bloomsbury Publishing, Christoph Baumer. The author is not really the best for this, not really his area of expertise, but the same goes for Lev Gumilev, whose cited source here has still not been verified.
 * ..."where they camped on the flat peake of White Top (Baideng) Hill, just northeast of modern Datong. There, according to the story, he was immediately encircled by 400,000 picked Xiongnu cavalry and for seven days cut off from his larger army in a tense standoff." -p. 38, Northern Wei (386-534): A New Form of Empire in East Asia, Oxford University Press, Scott Pearce
 * Unfortunately Scott Pearce simply narrates the story, he doesn't give his opinion on the number, so not really of use, but I thought it was worth mentioning. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Well i am also trying to find sources, Here's what i found:
 * This is about the population of the Nomads and Han China, which can be related to Di Cosmo's opinion:
 * "Even though at the time the population of China was about 60 million people whereas the total population of nomads did not reach 1.5 million people, the Xiongnu managed to withstand, on equal terms, the Qin and Han dynasties. They also forced the Chinese to arrange for large payments of silk, handicraft articles and products of settled agriculture under the pretense of gifts (Barfield 1981; Di Cosmo 2002; Kradin 2002)."
 * Source: Competing narratives between nomadic people and their sedentary neighbours : papers of the 7ᵗʰ International Conference on the Medieval History of the Eurasian Steppe, Nov. 9-12, 2018, Shanghai University, China / edited by Chen Hao. p. 150
 * We can use Nicola di Cosmo's opinion to support Kradin Nikolay's claim about the populations:
 * “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.”
 * Source: Di Cosmo, Nicola (2002). Ancient China and its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 192.
 * Di Cosmo points out that not all the northern nomadic peoples had yet been included in the Xiongnu Confederation.
 * If we consider that the Nomads' total population was not even 1.5 million (Kradin 2018) and Xiongnu Confederation doesn't include the entire nomadic people, it is not valid to believe that Xiongnu's strength was 400.000 (probably like half of the population). Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 20:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Why is it only you care about quickly finding a consensus regarding the numbers of Xiongnu, when the Han numbers are in the same digits? And who is Kradin Nikolay? There isn't a citation from him here. Please also be aware of WP:SYNTH. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:10, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * "Even though at the time the population of China was about 60 million people whereas the total population of nomads did not reach 1.5 million people, the Xiongnu managed to withstand, on equal terms, the Qin and Han dynasties. They also forced the Chinese to arrange for large payments of silk, handicraft articles and products of settled agriculture under the pretense of gifts (Barfield 1981; Di Cosmo 2002; Kradin 2002)."
 * This is the part written by Kradin Nikolay in the book 'Competing narratives between nomadic people and their sedentary neighbours' which i mentioned.
 * 'Why is it only you care about quickly finding a consensus regarding the numbers of Xiongnu, when the Han numbers are in the same digits?'
 * Answer: I already i explained you why Han Dynasty's strength can be that much, lemme explain again:
 * '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 you are telling me that if Xiongnu army is exaggerated, then Han's strength also can be exaggerated and i will ask you two things,
 * Why would Chinese Historians (Sima Qian) or the Dynastic Historical Records (Han Shu)
 * would exaggerate their strength?
 * And there is no logical explanation of your argument unfortunately, Han Dynasties strength can be 320.000 due to its population which is 60 million, but Xiongnu's strength can't be, again due its population. Nikolay Kradin tells us that the entire nomadic population hadn't reached 1.5 million people, Di Cosmo points out that not all the northern nomadic peoples had yet been included in the Xiongnu Confederation (During the Battle of Baideng). They wouldn't use like half of the confederation's population for a campaign am i right? Conclusion: 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.
 * And i downloaded 6-7 PDF's, i will check them. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 08:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Answer: I already i explained you why Han Dynasty's strength can be that much, lemme explain again:
 * In Wikipedia we follow WP:RS, not our own personal deduction, nor a mix of it with WP:RS, that would be WP:SYNTH. That Gumilev citation is still unverifiable. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, another explanation is that the Han population was more than 60 million while the entire Nomadic population didn't even reach 1.5 million. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 13:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry what? Please re-read my previous comment. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry my bad. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 14:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry what? Please re-read my previous comment. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry my bad. Hunnic Enjoyer (talk) 14:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Strength of Xiongnu
Well, Xiongnu's strength was most probably exaggerated since the total population of the Northern Nomads didn't even reach 1.5 million, and as Di Cosmo, who is an expert on these topics, points that not all the northern nomadic peoples had yet been included in the Xiongnu confederation.

ChanyuofXiongnu (talk) 15:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2024
Johnle9822345667 (talk) 12:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

32k xiongnu vs 320,000
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2024 (UTC)