Is Chinese history overrated?

Chinese history overrated?

  • Yes

    Votes: 19 19.8%
  • No

    Votes: 77 80.2%

  • Total voters
    96
Oct 2018
56
Toronto/Shanghai
the technique, as called as 提花 in chinese, definitely is not from turkic people who love motifs.
I already noted before, that both weft-biased and warp-biased techniques were found in Ancient China. I am talking about a specific change in style, weaving technique, and of motif under Turko-Persian influence beginning in the northern dynasties. That there existed different motifs in the Shang is completely irrelevant.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,285
China
I already noted before, that both weft-biased and warp-biased techniques were found in Ancient China. I am talking about a specific change in style, weaving technique, and of motif under Turko-Persian influence beginning in the northern dynasties. That there existed different motifs in the Shang is completely irrelevant.
you have talked about some influence on style

you have NOT talked about influence on weaving technique, or I should say: no evidence.

the 提花 technique intrinsically makes patterned motifs.
as one would notice 提花 techniques (either from china or from other places), is conceptually similar to a programmed chip. they work in a pre-defined way to created patterns.
 
Oct 2018
56
Toronto/Shanghai
Zhang Qian was sent to the West to learn about the state of the West, in order to gain allies against the Xiongnu. Otherwise he wouldn't have left a detailed account of every state he came across. He wanted to open trade routes too, but in order to do that he needed to LEARN about potential trade routes. It may not be learning for learning's sake, but it's learning. He brought back knowledge about the geography and culture of states which would otherwise be unknown to China.

The primary reason Jesuits went to China wasn't for the sake of learning a foreign culture, it was for converting said culture to Christianity. Learning about the different culture is a strategy employed to convert said different culture. But you don't see me saying that "it doesn't count" because of that. Because the point of contention wasn't about Why they learned, but Did they learn.
True to an extent, though I am unsure how Du Halde exactly fits in, and how other enlightenment thinkers (though often wrong) being preoccupied with China fit into this as well.

As for Zheng He being called back for financial reasons -- this argument is not universally accepted. I believe the current theory is he was sent out to find a lost Ming Prince, and, upon not finding him, the Ming court abandoned the enterprise. Even so, the financial troubles of the Ming had not happened yet, and he could have easily helped expand commercial territories given the chance. The Ming, for example, after Zheng He continued their large scale wars with the Mongols.

But this is digression. We can nitpick examples all day, but if the most literate culture in the world has not produced as much material on other cultures as lesser, smaller countries have produced about it, it says there is a general trend wherein there is less of an interest in looking outward than inward -- hence my original point about there being no logical reason China wouldn't focus on Chinese things, or that Europe would not be preoccupied with Europe. And my original point that it is harder for me to justify the Canadian government paying for me to research China than it is for them to research Canada. That there are a few exceptions to the general self-imposed intellectual isolationism is not really the point of this discussion.
 
Oct 2018
56
Toronto/Shanghai
you have talked about some influence on style

you have NOT talked about influence on weaving technique, or I should say: no evidence.
What do you mean no evidence. The looming technologies itself changed to accommodate the shift from Warp to Weft. This is the evidence. The weaves switch directions. This is the evidence. The motifs mimic earlier motifs found in Persia that do not appear in China before this, and the technology changes to create these motifs -- that is the evidence. Read any of the books I mentioned, I am not going to transcribe them for you. Your arguments, opinions, and logic are completely ignorant and you refuse to listen. I at first put it up to illiteracy in English, but now I suspect it is perhaps jingoism. Either way it is ignorance and I do not have time to debate common knowledge. These arguments I have made are neither controversial, nor refuted by anyone in the academic community or literature.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,285
China
True to an extent, though I am unsure how Du Halde exactly fits in, and how other enlightenment thinkers (though often wrong) being preoccupied with China fit into this as well.

As for Zheng He being called back for financial reasons -- this argument is not universally accepted. I believe the current theory is he was sent out to find a lost Ming Prince, and, upon not finding him, the Ming court abandoned the enterprise. Even so, the financial troubles of the Ming had not happened yet, and he could have easily helped expand commercial territories given the chance. The Ming, for example, after Zheng He continued their large scale wars with the Mongols.
does not matter whether there are true financial problems.

zhenghe is a eunuch. you should be aware of conflicts between eunuch and officials, and conflicts between ming emperor and officials.
zhenghe's gaining is "potential" and "soft", not exactly counted by dollars. officials on the hand, asked for records of in coming dollars.

surly, official's demand cannot be satisfied. and zhenghe or any follower have to stop

But this is digression. We can nitpick examples all day, but if the most literate culture in the world has not produced as much material on other cultures as lesser, smaller countries have produced about it, it says there is a general trend wherein there is less of an interest in looking outward than inward -- hence my original point about there being no logical reason China wouldn't focus on Chinese things, or that Europe would not be preoccupied with Europe. And my original point that it is harder for me to justify the Canadian government paying for me to research China than it is for them to research Canada. That there are a few exceptions to the general self-imposed intellectual isolationism is not really the point of this discussion.
a chinese writer had said,
1. chinese in china better research Tagore
2. indian in india better research Li Bai
 
Oct 2018
56
Toronto/Shanghai
you need to prove the mimic of looming machine.....not motif.....
that is what technique concerns.....
Nobody talks about mimicking the Machines, though the Machines did develop substantially for the sake of adapting to the new weft-biased motifs. Any history of looms will say as much, but Chinese Silks gives a clear breakdown. If you want, you can also go to the museum in Hangzhou, or go on their website, and see the development of the Loom and factor in the changes in what was being produced yourself. As I said, this is already established consensus in the academic community. I am not going to transcribe the book because you seem obsessed with believing me wrong.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,285
China
Nobody talks about mimicking the Machines, though the Machines did develop substantially for the sake of adapting to the new weft-biased motifs. Any history of looms will say as much, but Chinese Silks gives a clear breakdown. If you want, you can also go to the museum in Hangzhou, or go on their website, and see the development of the Loom and factor in the changes in what was being produced yourself. As I said, this is already established consensus in the academic community. I am not going to transcribe the book because you seem obsessed with believing me wrong.
for record, i saw an argument that most silk produced in a not particular cultural area of tang. then i saw another argument that the silk technique was told to evolve under a turkic influence.

i am not sure what is the "this" in "this is already established consensus".
is that about the silk productions received influence from outside china? i acknowledge it. but that is a different story.
i search for evidences to support the mentioned arguments. i did not see.
i am obsessed with what? i am obsessed that i should see corresponding evidences for corresponding arguments.
 
Oct 2018
56
Toronto/Shanghai
"for record, i saw an argument that most silk produced in a not particular cultural area of tang. then i saw another argument that the silk technique was told to evolve under a turkic influence. "

Both of those points have already been substantiated.
 

Similar History Discussions