>>3106 >Privatization of State Industries >Abolition of forced labor >2% Agricultural Tax >1.5% Commercial Tax >Rebuilt the Great Wall to be actually somewhat effective until some fuck let the Manchu in Ming China is Trump's China.
>>3423 Han is interesting was a clusterfuck. First you have a semifeudal state with all of Liu Bang's generals becoming warlords, and suddenly his first wife rips his concubine's legs off and poisons half his descendants. Then being keked constantly by Xiongnu until the world's first marxist fucked everything up. It was an interesting age but hardly the best dynasty.
The Song are basically just a continuation of the Tang, so they were solid but fairly boring.
>>3439 >invaded the Vietnamese >fought with the Koreans against the Japanese >fucking pirates >development of gunpowder technology >3 of China's 4 great classics >Fucking Pirates >boring Ming is about as interesting as it gets without being incredibly embarrassing for Chinese people (See: Yuan, Qing).
>>5696 Yeah but the Romance goes all fucking out. >Generic MC Liu Bei >Some chinese concubine's gay fanfiction shipping Guan Yu and basically half of Cao Cao's men and also Cao Cao himself >OC character son of Guan Yu who never appears again (Guan Suo) >Self-insert best at everything Onii-sama Zhuge Liang with a contrived flaw that doesn't matter when he's in charge >Sun Ce fedora tips an actual wizard so hard that he fucking dies >Cao Cao fedora tips an actual wizard so hard that he almost dies except a soothsayer shows up and just tells him that it was all in his head >Meng Huo is comic relief
>>6268 Yuan was a failure, I don't see Qing as one, they lasted pretty well and had some cool Emperors. You could argue they entered and decadence and fucked everything but that's literally the history of every Chinese dynasty.
>>6268 Qing was based for the first half. They effectively neutralized the nomadic thread that all Chinese dynasties before had been struggling with (aside from Yuan), continued the shift away from agrarian-focused economy to a more commercialized one that gave more initiatives to private merchants.
In the traditional texts, they get criticized a lot for failing to modernize, but in the more recent examinations that have come out in the last 3 decades, you realize how impressive they actually were, despite being heavily understaffed in administration.
I remember reading somewhere years ago that the Song Dynasty was pretty close to an industrial revolution on the same level of the Europeans. How true is this, or is this another one of those assumptions like "guys the greeks could've had an industrial revolution since they had a prototype of a steam-based machine"?
>>6754 You're right in that they were nomadic, but you're wrong in assuming that would automatically allow them to conquer the nomads. Go see what happened to the Jin dynasty. How'd they fare in neutralizing the steppes? Oh that's right, they got buttfucked by the fucking Mongols.
With the Qing, the pushed Chinese frontiers farther West than ever before and actually subdued the various Mongol tribes as well as Tibet.
>>6818 That depends on your views of what factors were necessary to sustain an industrial revolution. If things like pure industrial output and usage of coal power is more important to you, then sure. If capitalist and financial institutions are more important to you, than no, not quite as China never developed the concept of public debt which some would argue was crucial to Britain's industrialization.
>>7017 You can't have an industrial revolution without a systematic science on which to base advancement, which China simply did not have. Europe industrialized because of the scientific method and academia as much as because of capitalist institutions.
>>7398 Sorry, I see industrial revolution as when changes in the manufacturing processes, allowing for massive changes in the production process (factories), economy, income and society. What you said went hand to hand with the European one but I don't really see it inherently required.
>>7445 Try out the History of Imperial China series for something not too in-depth but not too cursory either. Short series of books with each one focusing on one major dynasty. They're mostly analyses of government, law, family, etc., so if you're more interested in narrative history for the human drama, you may find yourself bored.
>>7922 >Wei Yan is going to betray us after I'm fucking dead because he killed an incompetent governor who was about to kill his most loyal subordinate because of delusions of conspiracy >Ma Su is amazing and should be entrusted with holding the linchpin of my assault strategy They couldn't even figure out whether he was a good judge of character or a bad one.
>>7990 They say the same thing about Ming becoming a fully gunpowder-based capitalist society before it was crushed prematurely by Mongol Conquest, but I would take those with a grain of salt. Industrialization is more than just the technologies themselves.
>>3106 I personally am a fan of the Southern Song dynasty. It gets a lot of bad reputation for being military unsuccessful (relatively speaking) but that was actually because it was facing much tougher enemies. It developed a lot of significant military technology and was overall prosperous. The tribute it paid to the Jurchen, Xi Xia, etc. was also largely irrelevant. The profits it made off trade with the same people more than made up for tribute costs.
I also find the Han through Tang dynasties interesting. The interim dynasties between the Han and the Tang were largely disastrous and unstable, but fascinating to study imo as they represented a major transition in Chinese ethnicity, culture and religion.
>>8402 Everyone did shit like that. I think the problem has more to do with communications. China is like a whole different world, and it's hard to find English translations of a lot of their writing.
Just as a random example, I found this gigantic Buddha statue carved out of a cliff face while looking around Google Earth. If that existed in Japan or India or pretty much anywhere else it would be easy to find literature about it, but looking it up I couldn't find a single piece of English information about it. And there are countless other monuments like that.
>>8643 It does suck that's not translated, but to be fair we have Dr. Rafe de Crespigny's translations, kongming.net, Empresses and Consorts and the combination of de Crespigny's and Achilles Fang's translations of the relevant chapters of the Zizhi Tongjian (which sometimes draws verbatim from the SGZ).
>>8792 I was quite amazed when travelling in China by the level of historical culture they have there in the form of temples, palaces, monument and other historical sites, its truly on a whole other level from any other nation.
>>8315 The Manchu were much more accommodating to Chinese traditions than the Mongols. For one they kept the traditional imperial administration. Really the greatness of the Ming only came from their size. Their re institution of traditional Chinese insularity, which was then taken up by the Qing, doomed them to irrelevancy. The Song, however, had a powerful trade network and outward looking mindset, which could have allowed them to perhaps begin the age of colonialism centuries earlier.
>>9091 >Their re institution of traditional Chinese insularity, which was then taken up by the Qing, doomed them to irrelevancy. That was a governmental decision, not a private one. Merchants in the Ming Dynasty actively traded with the New World (introducing most of the new world crops to Chinese cuisine) through trade with the Phillippines; Chinese pirates jostled with the Dutch in the Indies, and the Chinese actively imported portugese musket designs. Even if the government of Ming China was insular, society at large wasn't.
I recall that they kind of reoriented themselves toward Central Asia (especially Mongolia) when they moved the capital from Nanjing to Beijing, though. I think the literati were worried about the overseas expeditions overextending Chinese resources which they reckoned would need to be used to contain the Mongols. The Chinese kind of had a complacent view that they basically had everything they needed and didn't really need to bother with overseas expeditions, so from the cost/benefit perspective of the literati, the expeditions were a drain of resources which amounted to little. Practically speaking there was probably a lot to be gained through overseas trade and contact, but the officials at court didn't see it that way.
>>9007 No, scrapping Zheng He's voyages was the right thing to do as it was only done for political, not actually useful fiscal, purposes. If you look at the early Ming's budgetary concerns, you'll see how important the Northern nomadic threat cost to combat and it makes sense to cut non-productive ventures that only served to make an emperor who usurped his throne to feel more legitimate. Zheng He's voyages were completely different from the kinds of voyages the Portuguese or Spanish monarch funded in the age of exploration.
That being said, early Ming was fucked over by the emperor's devotion to creating an agrarian regime based on the independent farmer, and not openly embracing commercial enterprises. The government should have spent more money to motivate merchants to go out and conduct private trade instead of putting up arbitrary restrictions on and off for over a century, which only served to encourage privacy and make wealth gained from trade escape government hands.
>>9007 probably true, though its understandable why it happened. After the capture and ransom of the Zhengtong Emperor by the Oirat Mongols spending on the army was vastly increased so there wasn't as much money to spend on lavish expeditions. This I think combined with the conservative character of Ming emperors themselves who were more interested in a return to chinese traditions after disastrous foreign rule.
>>9061 To bad all the real historic stuff is being submerged in a sea of fake replicas.
The worst I've seen is Datong, a city with a number of really amazing medieval temple complexes. The whole historic part of the city was demolished (except the temples themselves, luckily) and rebuilt as a cheap orientalist replica of an old city. The genuinely old temples are now submerged inside modern complexes and overshadowed by fake pagodas (and I mean fake, they're not even run as monasteries).
It's the equivalent of building Disneyland around Notre Dame.
>>6268 I think the Yuan was disastrous. Some of the others weren't so bad. The Northern Wei laid a lot of important foundations for example. The Qing were very strong early on until later in Qianlong's regime, and the Manchus assimilated better than the Mongols.
The Jurchen Jin were not so bad either, despite having a golden age of only about 40 years.
A lot of the interim conquest dynasties like the ones between Jin and Tang were shitty (exception of some like Northern Wei). The Shatuo (sic?) Turk dynasties between Tang and Song weren't all that great either.
I've always found it amusing that there's a monument to Lin Zexu in NYC's chinatown with an inscription that reads "pioneer in the war against drugs". He really didn't care that much about Opium but rather the strength it gave the british over china.
The reason it says that is because the chinese council of new york got the money to build it from George Pataki because all you needed to get money from him was to say it was going to anti-drug efforts.
>>9452 It's not limited to there either, the build this fake stuff everywhere. I don't have a problem with building traditional buildings in traditional styles, but there's nothing traditional about this new stuff.
It's pretty sad really. The Chinese seem to really regret destroying so much in the 20th century, but now they're just going in the opposite direction and making things even worse.
Yea, a lot of the younger Chinese are wanting to become more traditional as well, but they don't really know how. I visited one of the large temples in Hangzhou with my girlfriend and as she said, basically everyone there wasn't praying the right way or observing Buddhist customs. A lot of younger ones also look with envy at Japan since they've kept their traditions alive very well.
>>9159 >That was a governmental decision And the government held tremendous influence over the course of the nation. Imperial law forbade the construction of ships with more than one mast essentially banning long distance trade. Burning the Chinese fleet, preventing any government communications and long distance trade agreements from being passed with more technologically and economically advanced nations. Furthermore, government prevention of exploration and trade ended any possibility of Chinese colonial and imperial expansion.
>>10404 > Imperial law forbade the construction of ships with more than one mast except either nobody listened or the law was quickly amended, because 15th century European accounts all list Chinese junks in the Indian Ocean with multiple masts (pic related). >Burning the Chinese fleet Only the Treasure Fleets, which again is irrelevant in terms of the private enterprise which abounded during the Ming >preventing any government communications and long distance trade agreements from being passed with more technologically and economically advanced nations. No Chinese country ever did this, and again this had nothing to do with commercial trade and development, purely governmental. > Furthermore, government prevention of exploration and trade The trade ban lasted only a decade or so. >ended any possibility of Chinese colonial and imperial expansion. Bullshit, the Ming continued to attempt to expand into Vietnam, and Zheng Zhilong, a guangdong merchant and pirate captain, was more than capable of maintaining control of Taiwan (along with later Ming Loyalist Koxinga) against the Dutch without any assistance by the Ming government.
>>10796 Right, the government policies only really affected the Ming government's (in)ability to capture a good % of wealth from taxing trade that the European nations of that era were getting better at. Private merchants and citizens of Southern China for the most part said fuck it and always was connected to the greater Southeast Asian trade and there were plenty of Chinese communities springing up in Southeast Asia on their own initiatives.
>>9801 In recent years there's been a few books by Chinese authors suggesting that China implement a more Confucian-style government
I have a few .pdfs, but I haven't read them or know whether there is actual significant Chinese interest in bringing Confucianism back, or if it's just fringe circlejerking like Mencius Moldbug and other monarchists in the alt-right
Also, I apologise for any derailing but does anyone know much about the Kongsi federations of Malaysia?
>The Chinese kongsi federations of Southeast Asia, also known as kongsi democracies or republics, were political entities that functioned like self-governing states. They were formed from the unions of mining kongsi (Chinese: 公司; pinyin: gōngsī), commercial organizations consisting of members that provided capital and shared profits. By the mid-nineteenth century, the kongsi federations were the only states governing western Borneo.
>>11006 Warring States period is more interesting, since it's the period where various states were actively sponsoring and trying out different philosophical traditions to state policy, as well as intense competition spurring the decline of feudalism and consolidation of centralized rule and meritocracy. And then, of course, there's all the war.
>>12014 >A merchant who had sold goods on credit and not been paid could, if he wished, report his debtor to the district magistrate for the crime of swindling him—but once he had done so, the case was out of the merchant's hands. The magistrate, if convinced of the justice of the claim, might compel repayment—usually only partial repayment. He might do nothing. He might even conclude that the merchant was the one at fault and sentence him to a beating.
>>16131 I agree honestly, though it kind of depends. Sometimes eunuchs were horribly corrosive to the dynasty and corrupt. At other times the gentry landlords or powerful officials at court were dangerous, or else just individuals favored by the Emperors.
>>17305 Yes. Caligula is a perfect example of extreme slandering. If Caligula was so bad and ran the treasury to the ground, there is no way his successor Claudius would have been able to wage war soon after he took power.
>>17407 The thing about eunuchs that made them trustworthy for the emperors was that they had no descendants and therefore had less of an incentive to pocket money for themselves. Generally, they were not as competent as the bureaucrats but at the same time, corrupt eunuchs usually did less damage than corruption in the bureaucracy.
Thread replies: 108 Thread images: 18
Thread DB ID: 68704
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.