234 Chinese Clay Figures 



phracti responsible for the appearance of metal armor in China, and 

 when I am inclined to trace the perfection in the organization of the 

 cavalry among the Huns and Chinese to a movement issuing from Iranian 

 quarters, it should be pointed out, on the other hand, that the cata- 

 phracti do not seem to have exerted any directly imitative influence on 

 Huns and Chinese, or that these two nations did not absolutely copy or 

 adopt in all particulars this peculiar mode of warfare. At least, there 

 is no direct documentary testimony to this effect, save the rock-carved 

 lancer on the Yenisei (Fig. 35), which thus far represents an isolated case. 

 The "battle of the Huns" above referred to displays Central- Asiatic 

 horsemen armed with long halberds amidst equestrian archers, and 

 could possibly be invoked as attesting, on the part of the Huns, cavalry 

 charges in the manner of the cataphracti. In the Chinese Annals, 

 however, as far as I know, no instance of a charge of horsemen with 

 spears, 1 on the part of either the Chinese or the Huns, is on record; nor 

 do I find any mention of armored horses in the Han period. The 

 earliest palpable evidence for an armored warrior astride a caparisoned 

 horse is represented by a clay figure pointing to the T'ang epoch. 2 

 Several references in the Annals allude to such caparison in the sixth and 

 seventh centuries of our era. As the facts are, neither the Huns nor the 

 Chinese could have had any use for the more specific tactics of the 

 cataphracti. These were directed against heavy-armed infantry lined 

 up in regular files. The Huns did not possess any infantry; and the 

 Chinese employed theirs against the Huns only in the experimental 

 stage of their operations, and with such disastrous results that it deterred 

 them from further experiments. On the whole, Hunnic-Chinese 

 expeditions were cavalry wars conducted with light brigades. The 

 long marches, the wretched roads, the difficulty of the field of operations, 

 the uncertainty of supplies and forage, and the exhausting Central- 

 Asiatic climate, formed a serious handicap in the equipment of troops, 

 man and horse, with heavy armament; so that a selective method 

 in what western progress in the art of war had to offer became indis- 

 pensable. 



In the Ming period mail-clad cavaliers managing lances and war-clubs 



1 Spears are not mentioned in the Han documents translated by M. Chavannes, 

 but the conclusion would not be warranted that they were then not used by the 

 Chinese army. The renowned General Li Ling, who in B.C. 99 advanced into the 

 territory of the Huns with a small army of five thousand foot soldiers, in the first 

 encounter with the enemy, arrayed his ranks in such a manner that the front line 

 was formed by those armed with spears and bucklers, while the archers and arbalists 

 occupied the rear. The Huns, as well as the T'u-kue and Uigur of later date, accord- 

 ing to the Chinese records (Pei shi, Chs. 97, p. 5; 99, p. 2), had spears. 



2 See Chapter VII and Fig. 51. 



