12-30-2014, 06:47 AM
john m roberts wrote:
While silk was probably the main source of income for the traders involved, there were numerous other goods traded on the silk routes of Central Asia & trade was a 2 way series of routes for the benefit of many. China itself desired many products for its military & domestic needs such as horses, exotic animals, ivory, salt, copper, tin, gold, gems, glass, furs, dates, fruits, vegetables such as string beans, carrots, cucumbers, figs, spices, frankincense, myrrh, carpets & various woollen products so it would have been in her interest to at least maintain the free flow of goods, either through diplomacy, bribery & if necessary military intervention when required. Her interest was to control the various nomadic tribes of Central Asia to help keep her merchants & traders happy & promote wealth & taxation to maintain her courts.
Other products besides silks exported by China were jade, ceramics, porcelains, medicines, iron & lacquer which was very popular among the various steppe groups for their leather & horse gear & to a smaller extent weapons & armour. Much later paper was also traded as there was a lot of demand from Europe. But China gave silk as well as Chinese brides, who were treated as status symbols amongst steppe leaders, to the steppe tribes like the Xiong-nu, Yuezhi & Wusun in return for livestock, horses, goods, peace & security on the northern & north-western borders & the leaders of these tribes would in turn barter the silk with a western neighbour for products like furs & luxury goods that they desired to maintain loyalty of their subjects & so the silk would travel westward & other products travelled eastward. I dont think the Chinese realised till the end of the Xiong-nu confederacy much later on how desirable silk was to the west & I don't think they ever dealt directly with the Romans, lots of middlemen & traders, although they jealously protected their silk production.
Control of Central Asian routes & oases would have been crucial to keep the trade flowing both ways so the Chinese would have been very keen to keep the various routes open as they had to keep the product moving. They were involved in a war with Ferghana for the “Heavenly Horses" although I suspect the war was fought to ensure loyalty from the Ferghana leadership to maintain trade routes stayed open rather than the acquiring of a few dozen horses for the Han emperor & in the days of the Han I don't think long distance sea trade would be as viable as the ships would have to skirt SE Asia & India to reach western markets unlike much later on with the Muslims, Portuguese, Spanish & Dutch who could bypass ports & duties for longer distances (mainly coastal trade between local ports in those days before caravels).
The Seluecids & the Parthians after them allocated a lot of their military resources to maintenance of their eastern borders & the Chinese did likewise on their western borders. Most of the time military resources & goods were to appease the troublesome nomadic tribes like the Saka, Xiong-nu & other groups to keep the routes clear.
I seriously doubt that Rome would have been militarily capable of controlling these routes as they would have had to wipe out the Parthians or Sassanids to do this. Sea trade would have been her best alternative to bypass her eastern enemies but she would have faced same problems as the Chinese in that long distance sea travel was not feasible so lots of port stops & lots of duties to be paid for port entry making sea trade a lot more expensive than land travel:?
Would be an interesting what if movie though & I am curious to see how Chinese depict Roman armour & weapons. I have noticed in a lot of Chinese movies that the actors always ride their horses with stirrups even in movies set in much earlier times so the purists wont like that.
Regards
Michael Kerr
Quote:I'm wondering about why China would fight anyone over "control" of the Silk Road. Silk was produced in China. It was sold to merchants who would take it along the Silk Road and eventually some of it ended up in the Roman Empire. Once sold, it was of no interest to China who had it or what they sold it for, or to whom. Why should they care who "controlled" the silk Road? As long as they did not invade China to get the silk at its source, it was a matter of no interest to the Chinese.
While silk was probably the main source of income for the traders involved, there were numerous other goods traded on the silk routes of Central Asia & trade was a 2 way series of routes for the benefit of many. China itself desired many products for its military & domestic needs such as horses, exotic animals, ivory, salt, copper, tin, gold, gems, glass, furs, dates, fruits, vegetables such as string beans, carrots, cucumbers, figs, spices, frankincense, myrrh, carpets & various woollen products so it would have been in her interest to at least maintain the free flow of goods, either through diplomacy, bribery & if necessary military intervention when required. Her interest was to control the various nomadic tribes of Central Asia to help keep her merchants & traders happy & promote wealth & taxation to maintain her courts.
Other products besides silks exported by China were jade, ceramics, porcelains, medicines, iron & lacquer which was very popular among the various steppe groups for their leather & horse gear & to a smaller extent weapons & armour. Much later paper was also traded as there was a lot of demand from Europe. But China gave silk as well as Chinese brides, who were treated as status symbols amongst steppe leaders, to the steppe tribes like the Xiong-nu, Yuezhi & Wusun in return for livestock, horses, goods, peace & security on the northern & north-western borders & the leaders of these tribes would in turn barter the silk with a western neighbour for products like furs & luxury goods that they desired to maintain loyalty of their subjects & so the silk would travel westward & other products travelled eastward. I dont think the Chinese realised till the end of the Xiong-nu confederacy much later on how desirable silk was to the west & I don't think they ever dealt directly with the Romans, lots of middlemen & traders, although they jealously protected their silk production.
Control of Central Asian routes & oases would have been crucial to keep the trade flowing both ways so the Chinese would have been very keen to keep the various routes open as they had to keep the product moving. They were involved in a war with Ferghana for the “Heavenly Horses" although I suspect the war was fought to ensure loyalty from the Ferghana leadership to maintain trade routes stayed open rather than the acquiring of a few dozen horses for the Han emperor & in the days of the Han I don't think long distance sea trade would be as viable as the ships would have to skirt SE Asia & India to reach western markets unlike much later on with the Muslims, Portuguese, Spanish & Dutch who could bypass ports & duties for longer distances (mainly coastal trade between local ports in those days before caravels).
The Seluecids & the Parthians after them allocated a lot of their military resources to maintenance of their eastern borders & the Chinese did likewise on their western borders. Most of the time military resources & goods were to appease the troublesome nomadic tribes like the Saka, Xiong-nu & other groups to keep the routes clear.
I seriously doubt that Rome would have been militarily capable of controlling these routes as they would have had to wipe out the Parthians or Sassanids to do this. Sea trade would have been her best alternative to bypass her eastern enemies but she would have faced same problems as the Chinese in that long distance sea travel was not feasible so lots of port stops & lots of duties to be paid for port entry making sea trade a lot more expensive than land travel:?
Would be an interesting what if movie though & I am curious to see how Chinese depict Roman armour & weapons. I have noticed in a lot of Chinese movies that the actors always ride their horses with stirrups even in movies set in much earlier times so the purists wont like that.
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
