Bosporan trade routes

[Asdf]

So I started a campaign as Kimmerios Bosporos, and while things have been going pretty well (took Maiotia and Taurike, which was just enough to stabilize my economy), the trade route events threw me off. I accepted them, and while the cost isn't that big of a deal, I haven't really experienced any visible benefit. There was a revolt when I accepted the second event, but that's about it. Is there something happening in the background to represent the grain trade with Athens and the slave trade with the Skythians?

[Maroslav]

Those are similar with Saka Rauka events once you take Kushi. You pay something about 2000 for maybe +-8 yield per turn, which is logical when Kushi is bordering just one potential trade partner + some trade bonuses being map end city. Those events would benefit you( Bosphoros) a lot more, if you get them later in a game, when you will have a lot more trade partners and biger port and better roads.

[QuintusSertorius]

Look at the province building in Pantikapaion - there's a new trade bonus that wasn't there before.

[Asdf]

Okay, I see that for the second event (the bonus appeared the moment I accepted it). Is the grain route somewhere else, or do I have to do something past the initial investment to complete it?

[Roma_Victrix]

Those are similar with Saka Rauka events once you take Kushi. You pay something about 2000 for maybe +-8 yield per turn, which is logical when Kushi is bordering just one potential trade partner + some trade bonuses being map end city. Those events would benefit you( Bosphoros) a lot more, if you get them later in a game, when you will have a lot more trade partners and biger port and better roads.

To be honest, the Saka, if by the late 2nd century BC they still hold Kushi and the westernmost fringes of what is today's Xinjiang region of northwestern China, then they should rightfully get a huge economic bonus. That's the era when the Western Han dynasty Chinese diplomat Zhang Qian ventured into Central Asia looking for military allies against the Xiongnu. He failed to secure an alliance with the Yuezhi, but opened up relations with numerous other nations and opened China's eyes to a previously unknown civilized world in Persia, Mesopotamia, and South Asia (India + Pakistan + Bangladesh).

The "Silk Road" trading network, which kind of existed beforehand, was basically cemented by this point, with Han Chinese embassies sent to the Parthian Empire, Rome's chief rival. By the end of the 1st century BC, within our EBII time frame, the Romans were sailing back and forth from Roman-controlled Egypt (with the fall of the Ptolemies) to India as well as Burma, in order to purchase Indian spices and Chinese silk there in huge quantities. The Indian Ocean trade was just one part of this new network, though, since the overland route through Central Asia was nearly as lucrative. The Sogdians became the chief benefactors of that.

[Jurand of Cracow]

To be honest, the Saka, if by the late 2nd century BC they still hold Kushi and the westernmost fringes of what is today's Xinjiang region of northwestern China, then they should rightfully get a huge economic bonus. That's the era when the Western Han dynasty Chinese diplomat Zhang Qian ventured into Central Asia looking for military allies against the Xiongnu. He failed to secure an alliance with the Yuezhi, but opened up relations with numerous other nations and opened China's eyes to a previously unknown civilized world in Persia, Mesopotamia, and South Asia (India + Pakistan + Bangladesh).

I think the last statement (opening eyes) in the last sentence is true and, therefore, the postulate from the first sentence is not a really good one since there was no extensive trade between China and the "West" (starting with Transoxania/Sogd) at that time. The goods would appear in the markets in Baktria but not in large numbers.

The "Silk Road" trading network, which kind of existed beforehand, was basically cemented by this point, with Han Chinese embassies sent to the Parthian Empire, Rome's chief rival. By the end of the 1st century BC, within our EBII time frame, the Romans were sailing back and forth from Roman-controlled Egypt (with the fall of the Ptolemies) to India as well as Burma, in order to purchase Indian spices and Chinese silk there in huge quantities. The Indian Ocean trade was just one part of this new network, though, since the overland route through Central Asia was nearly as lucrative. The Sogdians became the chief benefactors of that.

The intensive trade betwen Rome and India is also likely to be exaggerated by the authors, we don't have really solid evidence. Definitetly, the Chinese silk wouldn't come in huge quantities. The main source was (an inferior in quality) Indian silk, and perhaps in limited numbers.
The Silk Road to was also marginal and would perhaps be somewhat bigger in 1-3 centuries AD when the Chinese garrisons would appear in the Tarim basin.

I think watching the two movies are useful to understand the phenomena and timing: Valerie Hansen and Peter Brown. And Valerie Hansen's book is definitely worth reading.

The problem of many historians was they're looking for "Late Antiquity in the Silk Road", not "The Silk Road in Late Antiquity". Forget "Classical Age" or "Early Antiquity" in the Silk Road...