Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Ancient History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Ancient History Ancient History Forum - Greece, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and all other civilizations of antiquity, to include Prehistory and Archaeology discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:46 PM   #821
Archivist
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 228

the answer is simple, we developed, we leave it and others took it and they developed it and once again we brought it we develop further

this is the same for every technology

there was mention of using needles for medicine in some parts of siddha medicine and what we know practicing is acupuncture ( a chinese invention)
vinothindie is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:48 PM   #822
Archivist
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 228

As I said it is fact that for over 90% of history China has exceeded India in every way possible.//

actually its quite reverse

we are slightly influenced by chinese philosphies and arts whereas they are greatly influenced from India in all ways

chinese scriptures mentioned a lot about indian influence in their medicine, martial arts etc
vinothindie is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 10:00 PM   #823

kauchenvinci-0's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: On a chain of Extinct Volcanoes
Posts: 1,503
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guaporense View Post
Colonial empires are mostly useless for the countries that own them. The population of the UK only had to pay for the burden of maintaining the vast colonial possessions and the military required to hold these possessions.


..
were you serious ????
kauchenvinci-0 is online now  
Old November 24th, 2012, 10:06 PM   #824
Archivist
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 105

Quote:
Originally Posted by manas teja View Post
..
were you serious ????
Most likely not I dare say
No Bias FTW is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 10:31 PM   #825
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,034

Quote:
Originally Posted by manas teja View Post
..
were you serious ????
Translation from guaporensese: "non white people are useless for the countries that own them. The population of the UK only had to pay for the burden of maintaining the vast mobs of brown people and the military required to hold these possessions."

You get what he's getting at? Look at his posting history.

Chinese han and tang dynasty colonized white indo european tocharians in the tarim basin. They too were a massive drain on the han and tang treasuries and the chinese military to hold them. I can't think of any significant contribution they made to han or tang china.

The Tamil mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan was born in british india and contributed alot to western mathematics when he moved to britain.

The british acquired the design and idea for congreve rockets from indian muslims like tipu sultan who launched thousands of rockets at them. It was only with these congreve rockets that they defeated china in the opium wars by blowing up war junks so fast. Guaporense is wrong again, like when he claimed han china used only pig iron.

A History of Chinese Civilization - Jacques Gernet - Google Books

A History of Chinese Civilization - Jacques Gernet - Google Books

A History of Chinese Civilization - Jacques Gernet - Google Books

A History of Chinese Civilization - Jacques Gernet - Google Books

A History of Chinese Civilization - Jacques Gernet - Google Books

Last edited by deke; November 24th, 2012 at 11:41 PM.
deke is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 10:20 AM   #826

SNascimento's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 106

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricey View Post
.
Interesting video... I have to observations:

1) One of the things I have problem with chinense history is that sometimes it's hard to know when something was built. The Grand Canal for example, in the video the woman says it was dug between the 6th and 8th (18th?) century. That is a lot of time. I know tradition to build canals go back way before that, but showing a picture of the canal today does not necessarily represents what it was in the Qin or Han Dynasty. Same thing with the Great Wall.

2) About Romans not being able to cover a river with a single arch bridge. That is false. Just see the "Puente de Cangas de Onís" in Spain (left), or the Severan Bridge, in Turkey (right).

Click the image to open in full size. Click the image to open in full size.

The first is actually very similar to the one in the videos. And notice how it also goes up instead of being leveled. That happens because they want the arch to be perfect circular. That is why the romans used mostly multiple arches, so the bridge could be flat. But of course, this only makes sense if you don't have big ships crossing the river.

Of course, you could also make it a segmental arch brige. Although the romans used mostly semicircular ones. A big exception was Trajan's Bridge. Also, there is this one:

Click the image to open in full size.

Not Roman though, chinese. Anji Bridge in China. It's a couple centuries older than the romans' bridges (it was built between 595-605) but no matter. This is the most fantatic bridge I've found in China. If anyone can point me to others as great as this one, I would be greatful.
SNascimento is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 02:12 PM   #827

Guaporense's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,135
Blog Entries: 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by deke View Post
Translation from guaporensese: "non white people are useless for the countries that own them. The population of the UK only had to pay for the burden of maintaining the vast mobs of brown people and the military required to hold these possessions."

You get what he's getting at? Look at his posting history.
Your ad hominen attacks are nauseating. I am only explaining the simple facts of history.

Like it or not, the simple undeniable fact in world history is that Western civilization was technologically and socially more complex than other cultures for most of history which resulted into the Westernized planet that we have today.

It is a very simple fact that is not hard to understand or notice. And there is no need to use racial hypothesis to understand the European domination of the planet. As there is no need to deny the obvious historical fact that European civilization has proceeded to dominated the entire planet since the 15th century.

The denial of this reality is the result of emotion, not reason. Notice how emotional you get about this subject. This emotion clouds your capacity for reasoning.

A scientific explanation for European world domination can be articulated as follows:

1 - Agriculture and towns were first invented in Turkey and the Levant.

2 - They spread around these areas thousands of years before they were invented in other places.

3 - The three largest arable regions in Eurasia are China, India and Europe. The dominant civilization had to come out of one of these three places. The Middle East was the most advanced place for the first few thousands of years after the development of civilization but due to its limitation given by the lack of arable land, the middle east became increasingly peripheric to Europe and by the 17th and 18th centuries, the last great Middle Eastern Empire, the Ottomans, became a de facto third world country.

4 - Of these three, Europe was next to the Levant and turkey while India and China were thousands of kilometers away. Therefore, agriculture and towns (thus civilization) reached Europe before they reached

5 - Europe also had access to the mediterranean and to the atlantic seas and had a greater number of natural harbours than India or China, facilitating sea travel. Sea travel was the only cheap way of carrying out commerce before the invention of the railroad in the 19th century. Therefore, Europe had a much better geography for trade

6 - These factors combined lead to the historical reality that for most of human history (let's say, for 4,500 years of the last 5,300 years), Europe & the Mediterranean consisted of the most advanced region of the planet and this highly sophisticated civilization expanded and came to assimilate all other civilizations creating a single global civilization by the mid 20th century.

Overall we can understand European world domination as the result of geographical factors. People in Europe are like people everywhere else but only in Europe they had the most favorable geography.

Quote:
The british acquired the design and idea for congreve rockets from indian muslims like tipu sultan who launched thousands of rockets at them. It was only with these congreve rockets that they defeated china in the opium wars by blowing up war junks so fast. Guaporense is wrong again, like when he claimed han china used only pig iron.
I never claimed that Han China only used pig iron and I never claimed that Europe never assimilated any technology from regions outside itself. I very much noticed the fact that corn and potatoes were agricultural technologies imported from the Amerindian civilizations.

Don't put words into my mouth.

And no, you have not proven me wrong in any way shape or form. The simple fact is that at the time of the Opium Wars, Europe was so much more advanced than China that a medium sized European country could easily defeated the whole of China in war without any difficulty at all. Just in the same way that the US can defeat Guatemala in war without any difficulty at all.

Any denial of the discrepancy between Europe and China in the degree of social, economic, technological and political development in the early to mid 19th century should be taken as seriously as the denial of the holocaust or of the moon landings in 1969. It is just ludicrous.

What we can do is to formulate rational explanations for what happened. It doesn't make sense to deny what happened, instead we must accept reality and deal with it rationally.
Guaporense is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 03:49 PM   #828

cladking's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 624

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guaporense View Post
Overall we can understand European world domination as the result of geographical factors. People in Europe are like people everywhere else but only in Europe they had the most favorable geography.
I don't so much disagree with you as I see everything from a different perspective. I believe that western civilization is simply founded on Greek thought. This is probably because this thinking is what is most suited to nature at the current point in time.

But Greek thought is an amalgam of the races they conquered and they owe much to those civilization (especially Egypt). It should also be noted that Greek thought is probably less adaptive than much more ancient beliefs.

Something had to prevail and it just happened to be Greek even though it's not as Greek in origin.
cladking is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 04:02 PM   #829
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guaporense
Colonial empires are mostly useless for the countries that own them. The population of the UK only had to pay for the burden of maintaining the vast colonial possessions and the military required to hold these possessions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by manas teja View Post
..
were you serious ????
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Bias FTW View Post
Most likely not I dare say
Yup, our Guaporense is deadly serious here, based as usual on hard facts and figures.

The filthy amount of money earned from the infamous opium trade in China (which was actually strictly speaking no colony) at the expense of the opium produced largely in European colonies was the exception, not the rule.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deke
Translation from guaporensese: "non white people are useless for the countries that own them. The population of the UK only had to pay for the burden of maintaining the vast mobs of brown people and the military required to hold these possessions."
Even if that was not exactly what our Guaporense said, the "translation" is actually surprisingly exact regarding the vast majority of the Colonialism (European or otherwise) of the XIX-XX centuries.

Amazing as it may sound, colonialism was as a whole objectively a terrible business.
That is exactly the main reason why it fundamentally exists no more.

Last edited by sylla1; November 25th, 2012 at 04:12 PM.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 04:03 PM   #830
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,034

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guaporense View Post
Your ad hominen attacks are nauseating. I am only explaining the simple facts of history.

Like it or not, the simple undeniable fact in world history is that Western civilization was technologically and socially more complex than other cultures for most of history which resulted into the Westernized planet that we have today.

It is a very simple fact that is not hard to understand or notice. And there is no need to use racial hypothesis to understand the European domination of the planet. As there is no need to deny the obvious historical fact that European civilization has proceeded to dominated the entire planet since the 15th century.

The denial of this reality is the result of emotion, not reason. Notice how emotional you get about this subject. This emotion clouds your capacity for reasoning.

A scientific explanation for European world domination can be articulated as follows:

1 - Agriculture and towns were first invented in Turkey and the Levant.

2 - They spread around these areas thousands of years before they were invented in other places.

3 - The three largest arable regions in Eurasia are China, India and Europe. The dominant civilization had to come out of one of these three places. The Middle East was the most advanced place for the first few thousands of years after the development of civilization but due to its limitation given by the lack of arable land, the middle east became increasingly peripheric to Europe and by the 17th and 18th centuries, the last great Middle Eastern Empire, the Ottomans, became a de facto third world country.

4 - Of these three, Europe was next to the Levant and turkey while India and China were thousands of kilometers away. Therefore, agriculture and towns (thus civilization) reached Europe before they reached

5 - Europe also had access to the mediterranean and to the atlantic seas and had a greater number of natural harbours than India or China, facilitating sea travel. Sea travel was the only cheap way of carrying out commerce before the invention of the railroad in the 19th century. Therefore, Europe had a much better geography for trade

6 - These factors combined lead to the historical reality that for most of human history (let's say, for 4,500 years of the last 5,300 years), Europe & the Mediterranean consisted of the most advanced region of the planet and this highly sophisticated civilization expanded and came to assimilate all other civilizations creating a single global civilization by the mid 20th century.

Overall we can understand European world domination as the result of geographical factors. People in Europe are like people everywhere else but only in Europe they had the most favorable geography.



I never claimed that Han China only used pig iron and I never claimed that Europe never assimilated any technology from regions outside itself. I very much noticed the fact that corn and potatoes were agricultural technologies imported from the Amerindian civilizations.

Don't put words into my mouth.

And no, you have not proven me wrong in any way shape or form. The simple fact is that at the time of the Opium Wars, Europe was so much more advanced than China that a medium sized European country could easily defeated the whole of China in war without any difficulty at all. Just in the same way that the US can defeat Guatemala in war without any difficulty at all.

Any denial of the discrepancy between Europe and China in the degree of social, economic, technological and political development in the early to mid 19th century should be taken as seriously as the denial of the holocaust or of the moon landings in 1969. It is just ludicrous.

What we can do is to formulate rational explanations for what happened. It doesn't make sense to deny what happened, instead we must accept reality and deal with it rationally.
I don't remember ever saying that china had an advanced economy or technology in the 19th century. China used matchlocks but it had up to date artillery since it adopted artillery from jesuits in the 17th century to defeat the russians at albazin.

In the ming dynasty, after the portuguese were defeated twice at tamao in 1621 and 1622 (by chinese junks with inferior cannon), the chinese copied and reproduced portuguese cannon they captured since they were superior.

Chinese junks armed with inferior chinese designed cannon also forced the dutch who had superior cannon out of the pescadores in the 1620s into taiwan, and then defeated the dutch at the battle of fort zeelandia in 1662.

China had inferior military technology but that was not why china lost. The vastly inferior, underdeveloped afghans managed to rip the british army to shreds using matchlocks and swords against more advances british technology. Afghanistan and china had the same military technology. China lost because its military training and discipline decline sharply after decades of no war.

China's military was made out of manchu bannermen whose position was hereditary and a poorly trained green standard army. The bannermen received a stipend for doing nothing at all, and often gambled and engaged in other activities.

The qianlong emperor noted that a hundred years before chinese bannermen were only slightly inferior to manchu bannermen, and in his time, the quality had declined drastically. The same thing happaned to the manchu bannermen. They didn't bother training at all after the initial manchu conquest of china. The green standard army were given inferior weapons and military training in china was very lax.

The white lotus rebellion erupted in 1794 and took ten years for the rebels to be put down. The eight trigram rebels themselves broke into the forbidden city and nearly killed the emperor since the military discipline broke down severely.

China's Last Empire: The Great Qing - William T. Rowe - Google Books

Since training was bad, in the first opium war, sometimes chinese soldiers inside forts and junks did not bother firing their artillery at all at the british.

In the second opium war in 1859, when the gunners at taku forts actually fired back at the british they managed to sink and destroy the enemy gunboats.

Britain won because it went up against a poorly trained and lax enemy.

Chinese pirates hired as mercenaries by the chinese government (they spent their entire lives fighting unlike bannermen in the chinese army) managed to wipe out portuguese pirates off the chinese coast in the 1850s.

Last edited by deke; November 25th, 2012 at 04:09 PM.
deke is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Ancient History

Tags
advanced, antiquity, civilization


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
coming from civilization or the fall of civilization? athena General History 2 June 18th, 2010 08:53 AM
The most advanced mind of it's time Kronos General History 54 July 31st, 2009 10:29 PM
US advanced all the way into Baghdad kevinthecool Speculative History 18 August 11th, 2008 07:17 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.