The Menzies 1421 web site
Eric Stevens
http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=12
1. DNA tests show that in the Americas today there are 18 peoples
whose forebears were settlers from Zheng He’s fleets. These people
have lived separate lives to other native Indian peoples from that day
to this. Many still understand Chinese and practise Chinese customs.
China had thus settled the Americas before Columbus set sail - and
done so on a grand scale.
2. By 1424 the Chinese has set up a world wide trading Empire. Not
only did the first European explorers have maps (based on earlier
Chinese ones), which showed them the way to the New World, but also
they found an established international trading system when they got
there.
3. There is extensive Chinese heritage (genes) in Native American
Indian populations - far more than has hitherto been accepted. Some
American Indian people’s DNA is so close to Chinese they could be
deemed to be Chinese.
4. The Maya of the Yucatan peninsular are Chinese (DNA) Late Maya art
of Yucatan is often Chinese art.
5. The Incas of Peru and Chile are Chinese (DNA) The Inca hierarchy,
notably Viracocha, was made up of Zheng He’s Admirals. Their secret
language was Phaspa (books destroyed by Bishop Landa). Fernando Llosa
Porras and Reverend Ranking were correct. Chile or “Chi-Le” was a
directly ruled dependency of China. The “Giants” of Patagonia were
Mongolians.
6. It is arguable that the Aztec Montezuma was a Chinese Admiral - the
birth of the Aztec Nation coincided with the Arrival of Zheng He’s
fleets.
etc
Eric Stevens
Inger Johansson
you might be right but I am not totally convinced from point nr 4 on
forward.
Inger E
"Eric Stevens" <er...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:lfkunv842q75hd4at...@4ax.com...
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>Here ia one to keep Philip Deitiker amused:
... and one which amuses me
Observation platforms used by the Chinese in 1421-2
OBSERVATION PLATFORMS USED BY THE CHINESE 1421-2
[ ... ]
New Zealand (Komowin Hill) 175º 52’ E 38º 59’ S
Apart from the fact this he seems to have invented an entirely new
name for the locality, that position seems to be just up the back of
the Hautu Prison Farm, a few kilometres south of Lake Taupo. Right
smack bang in the middle of the North Island, hundreds of difficult
kilometres from the sea through a land populated by probably hostile
Maori.
Eric Stevens
Duncan Craig
> Here ia one to keep Philip Deitiker amused:
>
> http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=12
>
> 1. DNA tests show that in the Americas today there are 18 peoples
> have lived separate lives to other native Indian peoples from that day
> to this. Many still understand Chinese and practise Chinese customs.
> China had thus settled the Americas before Columbus set sail - and
> done so on a grand scale.
The Asian elements of myth, art motifs, calendrics, mirrors, drinking
ceremonies, dances, instruments, burial rituals, firewalking, healing,
and rain-making rituals, etc.......are correspondences that have been
present in Mesoamerica since the Olmec. So there seems to be no middle
ground. Either
China was deeply involved, or not.
>
> 2. By 1424 the Chinese has set up a world wide trading Empire. Not
> only did the first European explorers have maps (based on earlier
> Chinese ones), which showed them the way to the New World, but also
> they found an established international trading system when they got
> there.
Well, this isn't conjecture. Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in 1100
ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
dynasty.
>
> 3. There is extensive Chinese heritage (genes) in Native American
> Indian populations - far more than has hitherto been accepted. Some
> American Indian people?s DNA is so close to Chinese they could be
> deemed to be Chinese.
But how and when did they get here...
>
> 4. The Maya of the Yucatan peninsular are Chinese (DNA) Late Maya art
> of Yucatan is often Chinese art.
This isn't revelatory.... Miguel Corravubias, Joseph Campbell,and Paul
Chou
among many. I seem to remember Catherwood and Stephens commenting on
this.
>
> 5. The Incas of Peru and Chile are Chinese (DNA) The Inca hierarchy,
> notably Viracocha, was made up of Zheng He?s Admirals. Their secret
> language was Phaspa (books destroyed by Bishop Landa).
The Maya had the secret language of Zuyua. The Taoist priesthood also
spoke
in a secret language.
Fernando Llosa
> Porras and Reverend Ranking were correct. Chile or ?Chi-Le? was a
> directly ruled dependency of China. The ?Giants? of Patagonia were
> Mongolians.
Stretch. Like other things in the book like jade being unknown in
Mesoamerica, that the Newport Tower was Chinese, that they were so
inept as sailors that there are thirty-one wrecks in New Zealand, that
there's a Chinese ship up the sacramento River,and that they cruised
Antarctica. But it seems to me that if this scenerio is valid, the
fleet had a base latitude of 22 degrees north. There is a lot thrown
at the wall to see what'll stick.
>
> 6. It is arguable that the Aztec Montezuma was a Chinese Admiral - the
> birth of the Aztec Nation coincided with the Arrival of Zheng He?s
> fleets.
>
> etc
Interesting. But the leaps of faith, speculation and lapses in logic
can't obscure the fact that this fleet made seven voyages. It has been
written
about before, being the source of the "Seven Voyages of Sinbad".
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>Eric Stevens <er...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message news:<lfkunv842q75hd4at...@4ax.com>...
>> Here ia one to keep Philip Deitiker amused:
>>
>> http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=12
>>
>> 1. DNA tests show that in the Americas today there are 18 peoples
>> whose forebears were settlers from Zheng He?s fleets. These people
>> have lived separate lives to other native Indian peoples from that day
>> to this. Many still understand Chinese and practise Chinese customs.
>> China had thus settled the Americas before Columbus set sail - and
>> done so on a grand scale.
>
>The Asian elements of myth, art motifs, calendrics, mirrors, drinking
>ceremonies, dances, instruments, burial rituals, firewalking, healing,
>and rain-making rituals, etc.......are correspondences that have been
>present in Mesoamerica since the Olmec. So there seems to be no middle
>ground. Either
>China was deeply involved, or not.
I don't know that there is much doubt about whether or not China has
been involved from early times. The question is as to the part (if
any) that the 1421 voyage played in all of this.
>
>
>>
>> 2. By 1424 the Chinese has set up a world wide trading Empire. Not
>> only did the first European explorers have maps (based on earlier
>> Chinese ones), which showed them the way to the New World, but also
>> they found an established international trading system when they got
>> there.
>
>Well, this isn't conjecture. Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in 1100
>ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
>dynasty.
Well, yes and no. CEratainly it was a major economic centre but it had
minimal direct influence on the financial or trading policies of
Europe. At that time it had virtually no influence on the Americas.
>
>>
>> 3. There is extensive Chinese heritage (genes) in Native American
>> Indian populations - far more than has hitherto been accepted. Some
>> American Indian people?s DNA is so close to Chinese they could be
>> deemed to be Chinese.
>
> But how and when did they get here...
... and what does Philip Deitiker say to this? Bearing in mind that
the gene flow which he has been discussing largely come from a period
when nothing resembling China existed. Its a bit like discussing the
Norse of 3000 BC.
>
>>
>> 4. The Maya of the Yucatan peninsular are Chinese (DNA) Late Maya art
>> of Yucatan is often Chinese art.
>
>This isn't revelatory.... Miguel Corravubias, Joseph Campbell,and Paul
>Chou
>among many. I seem to remember Catherwood and Stephens commenting on
>this.
Aah - but 1421?
>
>
>>
>> 5. The Incas of Peru and Chile are Chinese (DNA) The Inca hierarchy,
>> notably Viracocha, was made up of Zheng He?s Admirals. Their secret
>> language was Phaspa (books destroyed by Bishop Landa).
>
>The Maya had the secret language of Zuyua. The Taoist priesthood also
>spoke
>in a secret language.
>
>
>
>
> Fernando Llosa
>> Porras and Reverend Ranking were correct. Chile or ?Chi-Le? was a
>> directly ruled dependency of China. The ?Giants? of Patagonia were
>> Mongolians.
>
>Stretch. Like other things in the book like jade being unknown in
>Mesoamerica, that the Newport Tower was Chinese, that they were so
>inept as sailors that there are thirty-one wrecks in New Zealand, that
>there's a Chinese ship up the sacramento River,and that they cruised
>Antarctica. But it seems to me that if this scenerio is valid, the
>fleet had a base latitude of 22 degrees north. There is a lot thrown
>at the wall to see what'll stick.
That's the problem.
>
>>
>> 6. It is arguable that the Aztec Montezuma was a Chinese Admiral - the
>> birth of the Aztec Nation coincided with the Arrival of Zheng He?s
>> fleets.
>>
>> etc
>
> Interesting. But the leaps of faith, speculation and lapses in logic
>can't obscure the fact that this fleet made seven voyages. It has been
>written
>about before, being the source of the "Seven Voyages of Sinbad".
Agreed. That's why I think Menzies is doing a disservice to the real
accomplishments by burying them in speculative rubbish.
Eric Stevens
Duncan Craig
Such may be the view of Gibbons, but it doesn't hold water. There is
ample evidence for a Bronze age world economic system in which East
and West were mutually affective. See 'Rome and China: A Study of
Correlations in Historical Events' Teggert 1939 University of
California Press. And that was but the first salvo in a barrage that
has disturbed the isolationist view. That the crusaders were rebuffed
in the Levant was a tribute to Eurasian political strength, a
robustness that was derived from its position as a western outlier of
China.
The near simultaneous fall of Rome and the Han can be traced in the
demise concurrently (200-500ad) of the Indian Kushan, Parthian, and
East African Axum empires.
Discoveries of Central Asian cities, with their hybrid
Hellenistic-Asian cultures,has further eroded the view that
interaction between Rome and China has been 'minimal', even if
indirect. The entire age of European expansion and discovery can be
attributed to the desire to overtake the economic superiority asnd
capital accumulation of the Far East. That the market economy began
with Adam Smith is a belief held only by those with a Eurocentric
slant on history.
Inter-regional trade relationships seem to be given short shrift in
archaeology.
For as Feinman said, "The fact that most archaeologists can only dig
here and now, at least at any one time, is not sufficient reason to
justify their intuitive bias to focus more locally."
At that time it had virtually no influence on the Americas.
Remains to be seen. Certainly if one applies comparisons of
civilization declines and dynastic changes, some confluences are
apparent;
Shang and Olmec, Huang Ti and Teotihuacan, fall of the Han and
population growth in the Peten, Golden Age of the T'ang and Classic
Maya, fall of Teotihuacan and An Lu rebellion, terminal classic and
end of T'ang, founding of Ming dynasty and founding of the Aztecs....
There is no influence on the Americas because there has been no work
done to examine the possibility. As Andre Frank put it: "Fail also
must all those archaeologists who-to their peril and ours-ignore or
disdain interregional exchange networks out to their farthest reaches
[empirically to be investigated]
reaches."
> snipped
Duncan
>
>
Eric Stevens
wrote:
Surely that argues for the Eurasian region being sandwiched between
two major speres of influence, with neither one dominant? I doubt if
Suleiman the Magnificent ever saw the Ottoman Empire as an outlier of
China.
>The near simultaneous fall of Rome and the Han can be traced in the
>demise concurrently (200-500ad) of the Indian Kushan, Parthian, and
>East African Axum empires.
Which argues even more strongly for China not being a major power on
its own. However, at the risk of introducing my hobby horse of
catastrophism, there is incontrivertible evidence of a major worldwide
climatic down turn in the years circa 536-540AD and it is at least
reasonable to argue that it was this that simultaneously did for (or
at least severely knocked) the Romans, Kushan, Partian, East African
and Chinese empires. No doubt there were similar problems in the
Americas but I know little about those cultures.
>Discoveries of Central Asian cities, with their hybrid
>Hellenistic-Asian cultures,has further eroded the view that
>interaction between Rome and China has been 'minimal', even if
>indirect. The entire age of European expansion and discovery can be
>attributed to the desire to overtake the economic superiority asnd
>capital accumulation of the Far East. That the market economy began
>with Adam Smith is a belief held only by those with a Eurocentric
>slant on history.
I'm aware of all that but my original point was not that there was no
significant interaction but that there was minimal direct influence.
>Inter-regional trade relationships seem to be given short shrift in
>archaeology.
Not if they were carried out with pots. :-)
>For as Feinman said, "The fact that most archaeologists can only dig
>here and now, at least at any one time, is not sufficient reason to
>justify their intuitive bias to focus more locally."
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At that time it had virtually no influence on the Americas.
>
>Remains to be seen. Certainly if one applies comparisons of
>civilization declines and dynastic changes, some confluences are
>apparent;
>Shang and Olmec, Huang Ti and Teotihuacan, fall of the Han and
>population growth in the Peten, Golden Age of the T'ang and Classic
>Maya, fall of Teotihuacan and An Lu rebellion, terminal classic and
>end of T'ang, founding of Ming dynasty and founding of the Aztecs....
>There is no influence on the Americas because there has been no work
>done to examine the possibility. As Andre Frank put it: "Fail also
>must all those archaeologists who-to their peril and ours-ignore or
>disdain interregional exchange networks out to their farthest reaches
>[empirically to be investigated]
>reaches."
>
>> snipped
> Duncan
>
>>
>>
Eric Stevens
David
> Here ia one to keep Philip Deitiker amused:
>
> http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=12
>
from it in a previous thread.) He comes off, in the interview, as pretty much of a
complete jerk. He states that he looks for what the "establishment" believes and then
deliberately goes in the opposite direction.
He is either completely credulous or more likely, accepts anything that fits his stated
speculation.
Whether or not he actually believes this nonsense is probably moot, more likely his
greatest interest is selling books.
I predict that we can expect to see a sequel based on the nonsense that we see on the
website. I especially like the part about the Aztec Montezuma having been a Chinese
Admiral!
Seppo Renfors
Eric Stevens wrote:
>
[..]
> Surely that argues for the Eurasian region being sandwiched between
> two major speres of influence, with neither one dominant?
...and those regions of influence would have been the Atlantic and
Pacific.....
Eurasia = Europe + Asia
[..]
--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
norpinal
Wrong !
Chinese invented paper money in 9 century AD, established
government currency reserve bank in 1023 AD. Paper money and reserve
bank system
had profound influence on world economy, including Europe and America.
Germany was the first to establish a bank in Hamburg, followed by
Swede. America followed in 1690, France in 1720, England in 1797.
Chinese invention of paper money and reserve bank profoundly
influeced financial system of Europe and America.
martin
Eric Stevens
That'scertainly an influence but not a direct influence. By 'direct
influence' I meant the ability of the Chinese Emporer say 'jump' and
have the Roman Empire 'jump'. It didn't work that way.
-- snip ---
Eric Stevens
Ross Clark
If it took 500 years for the idea to get from China to Europe, that
hardly sounds like the "centrre of world economic power", as was
claimed.
Ross Clark
Duncan Craig
I always thought that the name of Cortes, mistress sounded Chinese. Ma Lin Che.
Duncan Craig
I don't see how the first part of your statement has anything to do
with the last part. It also took six hundred years for matches to be
used in London, and nine hundred years until toilet paper made its
European debut. Read "The Asian Based World Economy 1400-1800" AG
Frank. Or "World System Cycles in the Bronze and Iron Age" Current
Anthropology 1992.
Hangzhou was the economic center of the world by any measure. That
innovations took so long to be adopted by Europe isn't relevent.
Duncan
norpinal
> Eric Stevens <er...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message news:<lfkunv842q75hd4at...@4ax.com>...
> > Here ia one to keep Philip Deitiker amused:
> >
> > http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=12
> >
> > 1. DNA tests show that in the Americas today there are 18 peoples
> > whose forebears were settlers from Zheng He?s fleets. These people
> > have lived separate lives to other native Indian peoples from that day
> > to this. Many still understand Chinese and practise Chinese customs.
> > China had thus settled the Americas before Columbus set sail - and
> > done so on a grand scale.
>
> The Asian elements of myth, art motifs, calendrics, mirrors, drinking
> ceremonies, dances, instruments, burial rituals, firewalking, healing,
> and rain-making rituals, etc.......are correspondences that have been
> present in Mesoamerica since the Olmec. So there seems to be no middle
> ground. Either
> China was deeply involved, or not.
>
>
> >
> > 2. By 1424 the Chinese has set up a world wide trading Empire. Not
> > only did the first European explorers have maps (based on earlier
> > Chinese ones), which showed them the way to the New World, but also
> > they found an established international trading system when they got
> > there.
>
> Well, this isn't conjecture. Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in 1100
> ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
> dynasty.
>
At Zhin dynasty and North and South dynasties, 265-589 AD, China
already
extensive trading network with Funan (now Cambodia), India, Linyi( now
central
Vietnam), Champa (southern Vietnam), Roman Empire, Lion
state(Srilanka), Kasmir, Southern Thailand, Panhuang( Malay penisula),
Boli( Bali of Indonisia,
Korodan( Java) Persia.
By Song dynasty( 960-1279 AD) the trading network of China expanded
to include more than fifty countries, including Mecca (Saudi),
Muranpi (Southern Spain),Cairo Egypt, Somali, Chenba (now Tanzania ),
Bada (Bagdag Iraq), Ilu( Iraq),Roma, Bengal, Kurum(India), Pulilu(
Manila, philippines), Aman, Moyi ( philippines), Boni (Kalimantan),
Kelantan (Malaysia), Pahang (Malaysia),
Lingasga (Sumatra ) Timor, Three Islands ( Philipine Luzon), Vietnam,
Zhengla (Cambodia), Pugan ( Burma ) Loho (Southern Thailand ) and
Somali ...
martin
norpinal
At 1023 AD, Europe was still very underdeveloped barbarians, not included
in China's vast trading network encompassing more than fifty countries.
martin
norpinal
It took more than two thousand years before Europe adopted iron ploug from
China, took 2000 years for Europe to learn manufacturing of steel from cast iron
took 400 years before removeable block printing was 'revented' in the west...
Yes, China was several centuries advanced than the west at that time.
The West was very backward, still the land of barbarians
martin
norpinal
That was not what the Chinese view. The Chinese called
all foreign countries 'Barbarians" in historical annals and books.
China was not only a major power, but a superpower in military
might, economic power and technology.
martin
Ross Clark
Thanks for the references. It is relevant since those innovations were
offered as evidence that Hangzhou was the centre of some world-wide
economic system. I think it's bizarre to call something an "economic
system" where it takes 500 years for a message to get from the centre to
the periphery. There may well be evidence to support the claim that
Hangzhou was the economic centre of the world at some period, but I
don't think things like paper money and matches are part of it.
Ross Clark
Ross Clark
This may or may not be so. (Does not such a long time gap weaken the
case for influence and suggest the possibility of independent
re-invention?) But these alleged influences were offered as evidence of
a world-wide economic system *at a particular period* of which China was
the centre. What kind of an "economic system" is it where innovations
take 2000 years to reach the provinces?
Ross Clark
Ross Clark
Ah, so the "world" economic system did not include some parts of what we
would now consider "the world".
In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
familiar, and has nothing to do with the Menzies' grotesque parody of
historical research.
Ross Clark
Eric Stevens
China was a major power. There is no doubt about that. It was not the
only major power. That was my point. Hence my use of the expression
"major power on its own".
--- snipped ---
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
>> If it took 500 years for the idea to get from China to Europe, that
>> hardly sounds like the "centrre of world economic power", as was
>> claimed.
>>
>> Ross Clark
>
> At 1023 AD, Europe was still very underdeveloped barbarians, not included
>in China's vast trading network encompassing more than fifty countries.
From your own words, there was a major part of the world not part of
the so-called "centrre of world economic power". Europe would not
have been the only part of the world not included.
Eric Stevens
Duncan Craig
Is this an oblique reference to the Americas? Betty Meggers and Alice
Kehoe
may have something to say on that. In any case, the extent of Asian
economic influence at least extended throughout your part of the world
(Pacific).
>
> In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
> familiar,
...and familiarity breeds what? Sinologists can become shrill in the
face of
the overwhelming smug Eurocentrism that permeates history, economics,
social theory and archaeology. The 'history began with the Greeks and
Romans' attitude is maddening because it is so at odds with the
empirical facts. The renaissance Italian city-states were western
outposts of the Asian network, not the eastern
glory of a rising Mediterranean mercantilism. You appreciate
references:
"Mogul Indian trade with all the Eastern nations is ten times as
much as ours and all European nations put together."
Sir Joshua Childe Director of the East India Company
There are a number of works that give an idea of just how misshapen
our conceptions of global history is: like the winner of the 1998
Booker Prize in History, "ReOrient" by Andre Gunder Frank, and noted
that even after the age of discovery when Asian was on the decline,
that "in 1750 the about 66 percent of the world population who lived
in Asia produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP."
and has nothing to do with the Menzies' grotesque parody of
> historical research.
Of course not, and I agree about it being a grotesque parody. However,
what is also grotesque is the one-sided, chauvinistic, provincial view
of even the learned among westerners. If Menzies can at least expose
more to a more balanced
perspective of history by causing inquiry (into what part is
historical and what part parody)... good for him.
Duncan
>
> Ross Clark
Eric Stevens
wrote:
We are discussing your claim that " Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in
1100 ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
dynasty.". This has nothing much to do with whether or not there had
been contact between China and the Americas. Clearly there had been.
But that didn't make any part of China the center of world economic
power.
>
>>
>> In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
>> familiar,
>
>...and familiarity breeds what? Sinologists can become shrill ....
No demonstration is required :-)
> ... in the face of
>the overwhelming smug Eurocentrism that permeates history, economics,
>social theory and archaeology. The 'history began with the Greeks and
>Romans' attitude is maddening because it is so at odds with the
>empirical facts. The renaissance Italian city-states were western
>outposts of the Asian network, not the eastern
>glory of a rising Mediterranean mercantilism. You appreciate
>references:
> "Mogul Indian trade with all the Eastern nations is ten times as
>much as ours and all European nations put together."
> Sir Joshua Childe Director of the East India Company
Which establishes that Mogul Indian trade was large. But you have yet
to explain what that has to do with Hangzhou or any other part of
China being THE center of world economic power. Come to think of it,
it might be a good idea for you to explain what you exactly mean when
you say " the center of world economic power". What do you have in
mind.
>
>There are a number of works that give an idea of just how misshapen
>our conceptions of global history is: like the winner of the 1998
>Booker Prize in History, "ReOrient" by Andre Gunder Frank, and noted
>that even after the age of discovery when Asian was on the decline,
>that "in 1750 the about 66 percent of the world population who lived
>in Asia produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP."
>
>
> and has nothing to do with the Menzies' grotesque parody of
>> historical research.
>
>Of course not, and I agree about it being a grotesque parody. However,
>what is also grotesque is the one-sided, chauvinistic, provincial view
>of even the learned among westerners. If Menzies can at least expose
>more to a more balanced
>perspective of history by causing inquiry (into what part is
>historical and what part parody)... good for him.
It is more likely he will expose relevant scholarship to contempt.
Eric Stevens
norpinal
China was leading the world for several thousand years, was
overtook
by the west only in the last three hundred years.
Things may turn around in 21th century.
China is now considered to be the number one military, economic
adversary.
Pretty soon, China will send her astronauts to space and join the
spaceclub and leaving europe far behind I hope we don't hear chorus of
"China threat".
At economy front, America is constantly pressuring China to
appreciate the value of RMB while debase the green back.
Nah, China is not a power.
RMB is not a threat, neither the Shenzhou spaceship.
martin
Ross Clark
No, it's a direct reference to martin's statement that Europe was "not
included" in China's vast trading network.
Betty Meggers and Alice
> Kehoe
> may have something to say on that.
Meggers claimed a cultural input from Japan to NW South America. This is
not the same thing as an operating economic empire.
In any case, the extent of Asian
> economic influence at least extended throughout your part of the world
> (Pacific).
Could you give a concrete account of what you would mean by "Asian
economic influence" on, say, New Zealand, in, say, 1500 AD?
>
> >
> > In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
> > familiar,
>
> ...and familiarity breeds what? Sinologists can become shrill in the
> face of
> the overwhelming smug Eurocentrism that permeates history, economics,
> social theory and archaeology.
Well, in my life experience, tales of "The Chinese invented this or
that" have been a commonplace since childhood. Familiarity just breeds
"Yes, we know that, have you got something new to tell us?"
The 'history began with the Greeks and
> Romans' attitude is maddening because it is so at odds with the
> empirical facts. The renaissance Italian city-states were western
> outposts of the Asian network, not the eastern
> glory of a rising Mediterranean mercantilism. You appreciate
> references:
> "Mogul Indian trade with all the Eastern nations is ten times as
> much as ours and all European nations put together."
> Sir Joshua Childe Director of the East India Company
I trust that your "outposts" claim is not meant to follow from Sir
Joshua's statement.
> There are a number of works that give an idea of just how misshapen
> our conceptions of global history is: like the winner of the 1998
> Booker Prize in History, "ReOrient" by Andre Gunder Frank, and noted
> that even after the age of discovery when Asian was on the decline,
> that "in 1750 the about 66 percent of the world population who lived
> in Asia produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP."
This kind of thing may well be true, and anything styling itself "global
history" would obviously need to be based on it. What I'm questioning is
whether at earlier periods there was an all-encompassing "world economic
system". And from there it is still a long reach to claims about
world-ranging voyages of discovery in 1421. I don't think any of these
things should be argued primarily on the basis of indignation about
historical injustice.
Ross Clark
Ross Clark
I don't think that China replacing the USA as the sole world superpower
would be any advantage to the world as a whole. But we are trying to
have a discussion about the past (even "archaeology"!), not bang the
drums about who's a greater nation or who's had a tough time.
Ross Clark
Duncan Craig
snipped
> >
> We are discussing your claim that " Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in
> 1100 ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
> dynasty.". This has nothing much to do with whether or not there had
> been contact between China and the Americas. Clearly there had been.
> But that didn't make any part of China the center of world economic
> power.
Of course it did. The same market forces were at work.
"China had a consistently favorable balance of trade and was
the 'sink' that attracted perhaps half of the worlds silver to pay for
Chinese exports."
(Frank 1996).
This statement was valid even before the Spanish galleons began
hauling silver to the east.
"Without Chinas World economic demand for silver, there would
have been no rise and fall of the Spanish Empire."
(Flynn 1996)
Hangzhou was the economic center of the entire region...a region that
produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP. I don't know how to say it any
clearer.
> >
> >>
> >> In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
> >> familiar,
> >
> >...and familiarity breeds what? Sinologists can become shrill ....
>
> No demonstration is required :-)
>
> > ... in the face of
> >the overwhelming smug Eurocentrism that permeates history, economics,
> >social theory and archaeology. The 'history began with the Greeks and
> >Romans' attitude is maddening because it is so at odds with the
> >empirical facts. The renaissance Italian city-states were western
> >outposts of the Asian network, not the eastern
> >glory of a rising Mediterranean mercantilism. You appreciate
> >references:
> > "Mogul Indian trade with all the Eastern nations is ten times as
> >much as ours and all European nations put together."
> > Sir Joshua Childe Director of the East India Company
>
> Which establishes that Mogul Indian trade was large. But you have yet
> to explain what that has to do with Hangzhou or any other part of
> China being THE center of world economic power.
Whom do you think that Mogul India was trading with? India was a
peripheral trading partner of the core, i.e. China. See Franks on-line
essays.
Come to think of it,
> it might be a good idea for you to explain what you exactly mean when
> you say " the center of world economic power". What do you have in
> mind.
Oh, about 80 percent of the worlds production would qualify.
> >
> >There are a number of works that give an idea of just how misshapen
> >our conceptions of global history is: like the winner of the 1998
> >Booker Prize in History, "ReOrient" by Andre Gunder Frank, and noted
> >that even after the age of discovery when Asian was on the decline,
> >that "in 1750 the about 66 percent of the world population who lived
> >in Asia produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP."
> >
> >
> > and has nothing to do with the Menzies' grotesque parody of
> >> historical research.
> >
> >Of course not, and I agree about it being a grotesque parody. However,
> >what is also grotesque is the one-sided, chauvinistic, provincial view
> >of even the learned among westerners. If Menzies can at least expose
> >more to a more balanced
> >perspective of history by causing inquiry (into what part is
> >historical and what part parody)... good for him.
>
> It is more likely he will expose relevant scholarship to contempt.
I doubt that he has that power. On the other hand, he may instigate
some relevant scholarship that provides a more realistic world-view.
>
>
> Duncan Craig
>
ELurio
influence' I meant the ability of the Chinese Emporer say 'jump' and
Except once. Emperor Wang Mang pretty much managed to corner the world's gold
supply, and the Romans felt it directly.
eric l.
ELurio
in China's vast trading network encompassing more than fifty countries.
martin >><BR><BR>
At 1023 AD, China had broken up into two warring parts, the Song having
collapsed to some extent.
The Song would be one of the great dynasties, but not until later.
eric l.
ELurio
> Ross Clark wrote
<< Betty Meggers and Alice
> Kehoe
> may have something to say on that.
Meggers claimed a cultural input from Japan to NW South America. This is
From a time there were NO Japanese living in Japan. The alleged pottery motifs
were from THOUSANDS of years ago.
eric l.
ELurio
<< Roman Empire, >><BR><BR>
<< ,Roma, >><BR><BR>
<< Persia. >><BR><BR>
<< Bada (Bagdag Iraq), >><BR><BR>
Ilu( Iraq)
""At Zhin dynasty and North and South dynasties, 265-589 AD" Persia and Baghdad
were part of the same country: Sassnid empire.
<< India, >><BR><BR>
<< Kasmir, >><BR><BR>
<< Kurum(India), >><BR><BR>
<< Somali, and
Somali ... >><BR><BR>
Not proof at all.
eric l.
ELurio
only major power. That was my point. Hence my use of the expression
TANG China was a major power. The Yaun dynasty WASN'T China. The Song had the
"whole country" under it's control only briefly.
The Chinese in the 2nd millenium CE didn't care all that much about foreign
trade The "Silk Road" was controlled by the Sogdions in Central Asia. Southeast
Asia was mostly HINDU, and showed vast INDIAN influence, not Chinese.
eric l.
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>
>
> China was leading the world for several thousand years, was
>overtook
>by the west only in the last three hundred years.
Who invented the first steam powered device then?
[SNIP]
Doug
--
Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply
Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Eric Stevens
It wasn't necessary for China to corner *all* of the worlds gold
supply to do that. They only had to corner part of it. Just look how
the whims of Saudi Arabia acting on its own can override the policies
of Opec.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>Eric Stevens <
>
>snipped
>> >
>> We are discussing your claim that " Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in
>> 1100 ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
>> dynasty.". This has nothing much to do with whether or not there had
>> been contact between China and the Americas. Clearly there had been.
>> But that didn't make any part of China the center of world economic
>> power.
>
>Of course it did. The same market forces were at work.
> "China had a consistently favorable balance of trade and was
>the 'sink' that attracted perhaps half of the worlds silver to pay for
>Chinese exports."
>(Frank 1996).
>This statement was valid even before the Spanish galleons began
>hauling silver to the east.
> "Without Chinas World economic demand for silver, there would
>have been no rise and fall of the Spanish Empire."
> (Flynn 1996)
>
>Hangzhou was the economic center of the entire region...a region that
>produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP. I don't know how to say it any
>clearer.
Your original claim was that China " was the center of world economic
power since at least the Sui dynasty". The The Sui Dynasty lasted from
580 to 618 AD which considerably predates the arrival of the Spanish
in America. Please tell me what economic influence China weilded in
the Americas prior to the arrival of Columbus.
>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
>> >> familiar,
>> >
>> >...and familiarity breeds what? Sinologists can become shrill ....
>>
>> No demonstration is required :-)
>>
>> > ... in the face of
>> >the overwhelming smug Eurocentrism that permeates history, economics,
>> >social theory and archaeology. The 'history began with the Greeks and
>> >Romans' attitude is maddening because it is so at odds with the
>> >empirical facts. The renaissance Italian city-states were western
>> >outposts of the Asian network, not the eastern
>> >glory of a rising Mediterranean mercantilism. You appreciate
>> >references:
>> > "Mogul Indian trade with all the Eastern nations is ten times as
>> >much as ours and all European nations put together."
>> > Sir Joshua Childe Director of the East India Company
>>
>> Which establishes that Mogul Indian trade was large. But you have yet
>> to explain what that has to do with Hangzhou or any other part of
>> China being THE center of world economic power.
>
> Whom do you think that Mogul India was trading with? India was a
>peripheral trading partner of the core, i.e. China. See Franks on-line
>essays.
They were all trading with each other.
>
> Come to think of it,
>> it might be a good idea for you to explain what you exactly mean when
>> you say " the center of world economic power". What do you have in
>> mind.
> Oh, about 80 percent of the worlds production would qualify.
It would make them the major economic power if that were correct.
However, by my definition, to be the centre of the world economic
power they would have to have been in a position to use that power.
The evidence of Marco Polo is that Europe barely knew of China at that
stage, let alone felt their economic power. The Americas were even
more isolated from China's economic power.
>
>> >
>> >There are a number of works that give an idea of just how misshapen
>> >our conceptions of global history is: like the winner of the 1998
>> >Booker Prize in History, "ReOrient" by Andre Gunder Frank, and noted
>> >that even after the age of discovery when Asian was on the decline,
>> >that "in 1750 the about 66 percent of the world population who lived
>> >in Asia produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP."
>> >
>> >
>> > and has nothing to do with the Menzies' grotesque parody of
>> >> historical research.
>> >
>> >Of course not, and I agree about it being a grotesque parody. However,
>> >what is also grotesque is the one-sided, chauvinistic, provincial view
>> >of even the learned among westerners. If Menzies can at least expose
>> >more to a more balanced
>> >perspective of history by causing inquiry (into what part is
>> >historical and what part parody)... good for him.
>>
>> It is more likely he will expose relevant scholarship to contempt.
>
>I doubt that he has that power. On the other hand, he may instigate
>some relevant scholarship that provides a more realistic world-view.
Lets hope so.
Eric Stevens
Duncan Craig
snipped
> In any case, the extent of Asian
> > economic influence at least extended throughout your part of the world
> > (Pacific).
>
> Could you give a concrete account of what you would mean by "Asian
> economic influence" on, say, New Zealand, in, say, 1500 AD?
Only within the context of an overall Asian influence vis-a-vis the
other
islands of the Pacific: the Polynesian chiefdoms being borne from
island Southeast Asia and the Lapita expansion. Although New Zealand
did have a commodity (that the other islands didn't) which was highly
esteemed throughout Chinese history and pre-history: nephrite jade.
The 1500 Ad date would be problematical for any island in the Pacific
because a series of Imperial decrees
beginning in 1434 forbade the construction of any ship with more than
two masts upon penalty of death for the shipwright, his family and his
sons to the third generation. The capture of the Emperor in 1448 by
the Mongols resulted in more decrees defining Ming insularity,
culminating in (1477) with the burning of Zheng Hes logs (Needham) and
the issuance of an order that 'all who deemed themselves subjects of
the Son of Heaven' were to leave all foreign lands and return home
immediately." By 1500, trade was conducted by intermediaries, an
example of which is the Spanish silver galleons picking up porcelein,
silk, etc. in Manila.
> >
> > >
> > > In any case, all this "China advanced, Europe backward" stuff is very
> > > familiar,
> >
> > ...and familiarity breeds what? Sinologists can become shrill in the
> > face of
> > the overwhelming smug Eurocentrism that permeates history, economics,
> > social theory and archaeology.
>
> Well, in my life experience, tales of "The Chinese invented this or
> that" have been a commonplace since childhood. Familiarity just breeds
> "Yes, we know that, have you got something new to tell us?"
Point well taken...Was it Harry Truman who said, "There's nothing new
under the sun, except the history that we don't know."?
>
> The 'history began with the Greeks and
> > Romans' attitude is maddening because it is so at odds with the
> > empirical facts. The renaissance Italian city-states were western
> > outposts of the Asian network, not the eastern
> > glory of a rising Mediterranean mercantilism. You appreciate
> > references:
> > "Mogul Indian trade with all the Eastern nations is ten times as
> > much as ours and all European nations put together."
> > Sir Joshua Childe Director of the East India Company
>
> I trust that your "outposts" claim is not meant to follow from Sir
> Joshua's statement.
>
> > There are a number of works that give an idea of just how misshapen
> > our conceptions of global history is: like the winner of the 1998
> > Booker Prize in History, "ReOrient" by Andre Gunder Frank, and noted
> > that even after the age of discovery when Asian was on the decline,
> > that "in 1750 the about 66 percent of the world population who lived
> > in Asia produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP."
>
> This kind of thing may well be true, and anything styling itself "global
> history" would obviously need to be based on it. What I'm questioning is
> whether at earlier periods there was an all-encompassing "world economic
> system".
Ok, I'll try to make my case. In the past few years there have been an
number of forensic advances and archaeological discoveries that have
led to the formation of a World Systems Theory.
Lithic analysis and obsidian hydration analysis have revealed trade
networks that are far more extensive than previously imagined. I don't
have the refs at hand, but they are available.
Mitochondrial DNA studies by Hegelsdorf, Cann and others have
indicated ongoing back-and-forth migrational patterns, hence trade
movements.
Discoveries of heretofore unknown cities and civilizations in the
Taklamakan
and Indus River valleys. (NASA has some interesting SIR photos of a
very large ancient canal on the Chang Tsang plateau).
The finds of Shang dynasty bronze foundries and factories along the
Yangtze and Yellow rivers just in the past twenty years has revealed
the advanced state of commercial production as far back as the late
neolithic.
These are a few factors (off the top of my head) that have impelled
the formation of an emerging picture of a Bronze Age global system
dating back to the third millenium BC. World Systems theory and
analysis is the study of the trade relationships among ancient complex
societies. Some of the work done:
Centre and Periphery in the Ancient World, editors Rowlands,
Larsen and Christiensen 1987
Assyrian Colonies in Anatolia: A World System Perspective,
Mitchell Allen
1986
World Systems Analysis and the Roman Empire, Greg Wolf 1990
Core, Periphery and Margin: Perspectives on the Bronze Age,
Andrew Sherrat
1992
Here are some basic hypothesis:
"During a short time around 3000 BC, apparently sophisticated
complex systems appeared across an area stretching from the Nile and
Aegean in the West,
to Central Asia in the east." Leon Marfoe 1987
"In the forth millenium BC already there was 'highly developed
commercial exchange' and the export of 'huge quantities' of copper and
gold from mining and metallurgical centers in Thrace and the
Carpo-Balkan region to ore-less consuming regions in Moldavia and the
Ukraine. However, from the middle or second half of the fourth
millenium 'an extensive chain of copper age cultures began to break
up' with the significant drop of metal production in the early Bronze
age. The disappearance of this complex and its replacement...was as
unexpected as its appearance." (Kohl 1984)
Kohl also suggests that the archaeological record speaks of some form
of pre-historic 'silk route' connection to China two thousand years
before the classic one (which traditionaly was thought to have opened
in the first century of our era). It is also refered to in the Chinese
records (Frank 1992).
China florished during the Bronze Age because of several factors. They
had existing bellows and casting technology developed for pottery and
adapted to bronze making, and they had access to both copper and tin.
Kohl also notes that 'profit-motivated trade extended far beyond the
political borders of any state and connected them into a single world
system'.
"Foreign trade in the mid third millenium BC was an exceedingly
complex process, involving the movement of finished luxury
commodities, raw materials and staple products, and was conducted by
both state agents and by private entrepeneurs...it does show that
developments in Southwestern Asia were not limited to alluvial plains
and that widely seperated communities were linked by complex,
well-defined exchange networks." (Kohl 1978:466)
Like Gills and Frank (1991, 1992) Edens and Kohl suggest that a
major criterion of participation in a single world system is near
simultaneity or synchronism of expansion and contraction, which,
"suggests the action of an interrelated set of transregional
social forces operative over vast regions of western Asia from the mid
third thru mid second millenium BC. The existence of an ancient world
system is postulated by the largely synchroneous processes of rise and
collapse recorded throughout this area; it is difficult to deny that
one here is witnessing historically connected processes." (Eden, Kohl
1992)
See Introduction to the Five Thousand Year World System (Frank 1992)
The Asian Based World Economy (Frank 1992)
The New World History editor Ross Dunn 2001
Abuses and Some Uses of World System Theory in Archaeology (Frank
1995)
And from there it is still a long reach to claims about
> world-ranging voyages of discovery in 1421.
It isn't a long reach within the context given above. Zheng Hes great
ships and technology didn't arise from a vacuum, but wetre the end
product of several millenia of development.
I don't think any of these
> things should be argued primarily on the basis of indignation about
> historical injustice.
I agree totally. Political correctness, or redress of grievences has
no place in the attempts to sort out history, or any academic endevour
for that matter.
>snipped
>
> > Duncan
> >
> > >
> > > Ross Clark
Duncan Craig
snipped
> >Hangzhou was the economic center of the entire region...a region that
> >produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP. I don't know how to say it any
> >clearer.
>
> Your original claim was that China " was the center of world economic
> power since at least the Sui dynasty". The The Sui Dynasty lasted from
> 580 to 618 AD which considerably predates the arrival of the Spanish
> in America. Please tell me what economic influence China weilded in
> the Americas prior to the arrival of Columbus.
I've written about the Chinese-Mesoamerican relationship: its origins,
mechanisms, even the shipping schedule,... many times. You likewise
have an opinion formed (i.e. neither Europe nor Americas were affected
by Chinas economic power)...articulated in your next paragraph.
And that position would be where? On the shores of the Mediterranean?
:-)
> The evidence of Marco Polo is that Europe barely knew of China at that
> stage, let alone felt their economic power.
Lets see, Marco Polo came from was it Genoa? Vermicelli and quality
Italian silk were economic benefits derived from China. In any case,
its not necessary to 'know' the economic powers that wield influence
over our lives. At that time, there were countless 'middle men'. Do
you know the names of the interlocking directorates and holding
companies that sell you products and purchase your labor?
The Americas were even
> more isolated from China's economic power.
Like Europe, they may have been isolated from the knowledge of Chinas
economic power. After the Spanish 'discovery' of the 'New World', The
Americas were profoundly aware of the economic strength of China due
to the Acapulco to Manila
trade.
> >
> Duncan
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>Eric Stevens
>
>snipped
>> >Hangzhou was the economic center of the entire region...a region that
>> >produced 80 percent of the worlds GNP. I don't know how to say it any
>> >clearer.
>>
>> Your original claim was that China " was the center of world economic
>> power since at least the Sui dynasty". The The Sui Dynasty lasted from
>> 580 to 618 AD which considerably predates the arrival of the Spanish
>> in America. Please tell me what economic influence China weilded in
>> the Americas prior to the arrival of Columbus.
>
>I've written about the Chinese-Mesoamerican relationship: its origins,
>mechanisms, even the shipping schedule,... many times.
That may well be true. But I've seen no evidence of that in the
present thread.
>You likewise
>have an opinion formed (i.e. neither Europe nor Americas were affected
>by Chinas economic power)...articulated in your next paragraph.
You seem to think that the brush of a Chinese buuterfly's wing equates
to the butterfly being "the center of world economic power" with or
without the limitations of the Sui dynasty. May I put it to you that
in your own way you are overstating your claims almost as much as
Graham Menzies is overstating his and, in your own way, doing the
historical role of China almost as much of a disservice.
It would have to be significantly felt there-yes. Also the Baltic, the
Gulf of Mexica Also the Olmecs. Can you produce evidence for such
all-pervading influence?
>
>
>> The evidence of Marco Polo is that Europe barely knew of China at that
>> stage, let alone felt their economic power.
>
>Lets see, Marco Polo came from was it Genoa? Vermicelli and quality
>Italian silk were economic benefits derived from China. In any case,
>its not necessary to 'know' the economic powers that wield influence
>over our lives. At that time, there were countless 'middle men'. Do
>you know the names of the interlocking directorates and holding
>companies that sell you products and purchase your labor?
Fudge.
>
> The Americas were even
>> more isolated from China's economic power.
>
>Like Europe, they may have been isolated from the knowledge of Chinas
>economic power. After the Spanish 'discovery' of the 'New World', The
>Americas were profoundly aware of the economic strength of China due
>to the Acapulco to Manila
>trade.
Your claim applied **before** the Spanish 'discovery' of the 'New
World',
There is no better way to ensure the destruction of a claim than to
overstate it.
Eric Stevens
Ross Clark
>
> Ross Clark <
>
> snipped
>
> > In any case, the extent of Asian
> > > economic influence at least extended throughout your part of the world
> > > (Pacific).
> >
> > Could you give a concrete account of what you would mean by "Asian
> > economic influence" on, say, New Zealand, in, say, 1500 AD?
>
> Only within the context of an overall Asian influence vis-a-vis the
> other
> islands of the Pacific: the Polynesian chiefdoms being borne from
> island Southeast Asia and the Lapita expansion.
The fact that the distant ancestors of the Polynesians came from Asia
cannot be equated with an ongoing influence, economic or otherwise.
Although New Zealand
> did have a commodity (that the other islands didn't) which was highly
> esteemed throughout Chinese history and pre-history: nephrite jade.
There is no evidence that the Chinese ever got any of it from there.
> The 1500 Ad date would be problematical for any island in the Pacific
> because a series of Imperial decrees
> beginning in 1434 forbade the construction of any ship with more than
> two masts upon penalty of death for the shipwright, his family and his
> sons to the third generation. The capture of the Emperor in 1448 by
> the Mongols resulted in more decrees defining Ming insularity,
> culminating in (1477) with the burning of Zheng Hes logs (Needham) and
> the issuance of an order that 'all who deemed themselves subjects of
> the Son of Heaven' were to leave all foreign lands and return home
> immediately." By 1500, trade was conducted by intermediaries, an
> example of which is the Spanish silver galleons picking up porcelein,
> silk, etc. in Manila.
Fine. I would have settled for any earlier date. As you know, there is
no evidence that the Maori had any idea where China was, or had any
contact with China (or Asia generally) in pre-European times, or that
their economy was in any way connected with Asia. Indeed it would be
hard work to show economic connections with anywhere else.
With somewhat more qualifications I would say the same of the entire
Pacific Island world, and Australia and New Guinea would be only
peripherally connected at the furthest extremities of resource
exploitation networks deriving from Asia (bird of paradise feathers,
trepang).
[snip -- thanks for references, some interesting stuff, but "global"
still seems like pushing it even on the strength of the evidence you
mention. Indeed there is a kind of Eurasian-centrism going on here, like
the people who talk grandly about the "Pacific rim" and more or less
ignore the islands in between]
>
> And from there it is still a long reach to claims about
> > world-ranging voyages of discovery in 1421.
>
> It isn't a long reach within the context given above. Zheng Hes great
> ships and technology didn't arise from a vacuum, but wetre the end
> product of several millenia of development.
No, it's a long reach from saying they had the wealth and technological
capacity to showing that they actually did it.
Ross Clark
norpinal
China also plans to put a Hubble space telescope into orbit in 2005
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/51858/1/.html
China also planning to built the first man made sun by nuclear
thermofusion. China is leading the world in thermofusion research,
being able
to achieve sustained thermofusion in the lab for 16 minutes, while the
world
record is only 4 minutes.
China is contruction the longest suspension bridge in the world.
China's hydropower station is the largest in the world
China is No 1 steel producer in the world.
..................
The dragon is awakening.
martin
Duncan Craig
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2003_10/08/content_1118767.htm
David
> being able
> world
> record is only 4 minutes.
A. learn to snip your posts
B. if the world record is only 4 minutes the Chinese could not have achieved sustained
thermofusion in the lab for 16 minutes
Sounds like we have another Inger wannabe
norpinal
> Use of fraud: Counting countries TWICE.
>
> << Roman Empire, >><BR><BR>
> << ,Roma, >><BR><BR>
>
>
You are rather ignorant.
Roma was NOT Roman Empire.
> << Persia. >><BR><BR>
> << Bada (Bagdag Iraq), >><BR><BR>
> Ilu( Iraq)
Bagdag, Irag, Mosul, Basra were all different at Yuen dynasty
Apparently you never read Rockhill's translation of Zhou Ru Kua's book
"Description of Barbarians"
martin
> ""At Zhin dynasty and North and South dynasties, 265-589 AD" Persia and Baghdad
> were part of the same country: Sassnid empire.
>
>
> << India, >><BR><BR>
> << Kasmir, >><BR><BR>
> << Kurum(India), >><BR><BR>
>
>
> << Somali, and
> Somali ... >><BR><BR>
>
> Not proof at all.
>
You better read up Rockhill and Hirsh
> eric l.
norpinal
Simple, the Chinese broke the world record. Chinese has the most
advance
thermofusion technology in the world.
Don't panic when China built the first man made sun on earth.
China is fast catching up with USA and Russia in space technology,
and
leaving Great Britain, Germany, France, in the dust.
Shenzhou 5 spacecraft with astronaut Yang Li Wei is circling the
world on top of your head right now .
China is aiming to set up a permanant manned station on the moon
within
ten years.
There is already talk of a "Red moon"
A bit of history.
Who invented rocket propelled spacecraft ?
China
Ming dynasty inventor Wan Hu invented rocket propelled spacecrat 600
hundred years ago.
The same Ming dynasty which was not only the superpower on the blue
sea(Admiral Zheng He who discoverd America before Columbus ), but also
produced the first rocket spacecrat scientist Wan Hu.
martin
norpinal
> << At 1023 AD, Europe was still very underdeveloped barbarians, not included
> in China's vast trading network encompassing more than fifty countries.
>
> martin >><BR><BR>
>
> At 1023 AD, China had broken up into two warring parts, the Song having
> collapsed to some extent.
Totally wrong.
China was note "broken up into two warring parts" in 1023 AD.
When Song dynasty established in 960 AD, with its captital at
Kaifeng, Song coexisted with the kingdom of Liao at the north, with
XieXia at the West.
In 1115 AD Nuzhen tribal leader founded Jin Kingdom at the north,
in 1125
AD Jin army vanquished Liao, in next year, Jin army took Kaifeng and
vanquished Song. That was the end of North Song.
South Song was founded in 1127 AD at Nanjing, later moved capital
to Hangzhou.
>
> The Song would be one of the great dynasties, but not until later.
Wrong again
Two greatest Chinese inventions the removeable block printing and
magnitic compass were invented at North Song.
martin
>
> eric l.
Eric Stevens
> Who invented rocket propelled spacecraft ?
>
> China
>
> Ming dynasty inventor Wan Hu invented rocket propelled spacecrat 600
>hundred years ago.
Rockets, perhaps, but 'spacecraft' no. At least not unless you can
show one of his rockets reached space.
Eric Stevens
Duncan Craig
> >
> > The Song would be one of the great dynasties, but not until later.
>
> Wrong again
> Two greatest Chinese inventions the removeable block printing and
> magnitic compass were invented at North Song.
>
> martin
>
>
Duncan
norpinal
Wrong !
Rocket was invented a few hundred years earlier (no later than 1130
AD)
By 1300 AD, rocket with constricted orifice to increase speed of
propulsion was invented in China, this application of 'Venturi'
principle
was 500 years before Venturi.
Wan Hu ( around 1500 AD )invented the first spacecraft for flying to
the moon.
Wan Hu tied 47 high power rockets to an arm chair, he himself sat on
the
chair. That was the first manned rocket propelled spacecraft.
It was a true spacecraft even though he did not suceed. ( An
exploded Apollo was still a spacecraft.)
A crater on the moon was named Wan Hu to honor this pioneer of
spacetravel
Wan Hu reached the moon !
martin
norpinal
> << China was a major power. There is no doubt about that. It was not the
> only major power. That was my point. Hence my use of the expression
> "major power on its own". >><BR><BR>
>
> TANG China was a major power. The Yaun dynasty WASN'T China.
That is racist view.
Yuan was China just as Ching was China.
> The Song had the
> "whole country" under it's control only briefly.
>
> The Chinese in the 2nd millenium CE didn't care all that much about foreign
> trade The "Silk Road" was controlled by the Sogdions in Central Asia.
Why it is called "Silk Road" not " rug road " ?
>Southeast
> Asia was mostly HINDU, and showed vast INDIAN influence, not Chinese.
There were multiple influences in SE Asia, it is not that simple.
Ancient India had great religious influences, even in ancient
China, but it was not a mighty military economic power.
Further, you cannot find many indian records on its relations with
surrounding nations.
In contrast, there are plentiful records of China's foreign
relation in
chinese historical records. As an example, if you want to study
ancient history
of Cambodia, you cannot find anyting in Indian records, you find them
in ancient Chinese annals, books.
martin
>
> eric l.
norpinal
Ancient China's dominance can be guaged by the number of foreign
countries
whoe send envoys to china, and pay tributes to China court, no other
country
in history had accepted foreing tributes to such an extend as ancient
China.
Tang dynasty:
Champa sent envoys and tribtue to Tang court 623 AD.
Zhengla (Cambodia to day) sent envoys and rhinoceros, elephant
as tribute
Srivjaya sent evoys and tribute many times
Doba ( now Java) sent envoys and tribute
Kingdom of Pia ( now Burma) sent envoys in Zhenquan 18th year.
Kingdom of the Lion ( now Srilanka ) sent envoys in Tang Gao
Zhong Zhongzang the 3rd year.
Tianzu ( now India) sent envoy and tribute to Tang court in
Zhengquang
15th year.
From Zhenguang onward, Persia sent envoy to China 34 times
during one
hundred years span.
Tazi sent envoy to China 39 times in 147 years.
East Roman Empire send evoy to China in 643 AD, and sent red
glass
as tribute .
Other coutries who pay tribute to Tang court included Dandan,
Panpan
( in now central Thailand), Poli( now Bali), Luyue ( now Johore in
Malaysia)
Nepal etc.
benlizross
Envoys are not tribute.
Indeed, a gift is not necessarily "tribute".
But apparently Chinese emperors were not concerned with such
distinctions.
They probably set some world records for arrogance, too.
Ross Clark
norpinal
Actually by 1225 AD, China had already set up a vast trading empire,
here is only a partial list of the various kingdoms traded with China:
Jiaozi kingdom ~ Honoi ,
Campa kingdom ~central Vietnam
Panduranga kingdom
Zhenla kingdom
Loho kingdom
Tuluma kingdom
Bengsno kingdom
Sampo kingdom-- Laos
Chanlibu kingdom
Malewun kingdom
Pugan kingdom- Bangkok
Srivijaya kingdom
Kelantan kingdom
Lingga kingdom
Tambralinga kingdom
Fuloan kingdom
Santo kingdom
Kampi kingdom
Lambri kingdom
Ceylon kingdom
Dopa kingdom
Sujidan kingdom- @ Kalimantan
Timor kingdom
Tanjonpura kingdom
Bankaji kingdom
Malika kingdom
Bali kingdom
Namburi kingdom
Kulan kingdom
Gujarat kingdom
Malava kingdom
Chola kingdom
Bengal kingdom
Bangala kingdom
Viramala kingdom
Roman Empire
Tazi kingdom
Bindonlon kingdom
Meca kingdom
Zanibar kingdom
Berbera kingdom
Morbat kingdom
Zhongli kingdom
Oman kingdom
Kish kingdom
Bagdag kingdom
Basra kingdom
Ghizninh kingdom
Mosul kingdom
Lumi kingdom
Murabitum kingdom
Misr kingdom
Iskanderiah kingdom
Andaman kingdom
Kunlunzenki kingdom
Mait kingdom
Brunei kingdom
Tiuman kingdom
Three Island kingdom
Pulilu kingdom(
Kamajan kingdom
Liuqiu kingdom
Sila kingdom
Wo kingdom - Japan
China import goods: spices, precious stones, exortic animals, glass,
plants, flowers, amber, pearls, ivory, snake skin, coral, crystal, totoise
shell, wax etc
Chinese exports: porcelain, silk, tea, gold, silver,, lead, iron, sugar
Books, military hardware were not allow to export.
Ref:
Zhao Ru Kua : Zu Fan Zhi: 1225 AD
Friedrich Hirsh and W.W. Rockhill translation: Chau Ru Kua: His Work on
the Chinese and Arab trade in the Twelfth and Thirteen centuries, entitled
Chu fan chi.
martin
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BlueSilkRoad/
norpinal
Yes, the discovery of natural magnet and later made into compass
was rather
early. However during the grinding process, the natural magnetism
could be
weakened.
Artifical magnetism was invented in North Song( 960-1132 AD), at
first, the
artificial magnet was shaped like a fish and floated on water.
Great Song scientist Shen Kua invented thread mount magnetic needle
compass
and discovered that the magnetic north is slightly different then the
geographic north.
By 1098 AD, some ships in Quanzhou already equipmed with compass
for navigation. One Song writer wrote that "Ship navigator watched
the star at night, watched the sun at day, and watched the compass
during cloudly days"
"During cloudy and rainy days, we depends only on compasses"
At that time, usually there were two compasses, one at the front of
ship
one at the back.
The technological advantage of compass navigation, propelled Song
into
a prosperous and powerful sea power. Song gained enormously by trading
with
barbarians
martin
norpinal
Song dynasty also set up well managed bureaus for the management of
foreign trade.
A special goverment bureaus called Shiposhi, (Bureau of Trade and
Shipping)
were set up in Guangzhou, Hangzhou, Ningpo, Wenzhou, Quanzhou, Mizhou
and Huatinghai (nowShanghai). Among them, the most important ports
were Quanzhou and Quanzhou (
known as Zaitung ).
The functions of Song Bureau of Trade and Shipping included
1) Taxation. Import goods were taxed from 7% to 40%, ( 10% was
norminal )
2) Buyout. After taxation, Song goverment could bought out the rest
according to goverment established price, then resold to the public by
the
goverment . Many imports such as tortoise shell, pearl, rhinocero
horn, coral, amber, snake skin etc were monopolized by the government,
and not permitted
to sold privately under heavy penalty.
Taxed or bought out goods were transported to the Song capital
under heavy
military guards (five hudnred armed soldiers )
3) Issue export and transportation permit. Any one caught export or
transport goods without permit, would risk all goods confiscated
4) Welcome ceremony for foreign merchants. Song treated foreigner
merchants well, when they arrived, Shiposhi treated them with banquet
and guest houses.
5) Export control, copper coins, military hardware, were not
permited to
export
The Song court reaped huge profit by foreign trade and monopoly of
imported
goods. South Song emperor Song Gauzhong said "The profit from Shiposhi
is huge,
easily millions "
Song court even send trade misssions to countries in the South Seas
to
promote foreign trade.
Foregn merchants came to China in huge number, in one record,
there were
as much as one hundred twenty thousand Arab merchants living in
Guagzhou at
at one time. Arabl and other foreing merchants lived in spacial
districts
called Fanfang, (Barbarian district ), one barbarian chief was elected
for each Fanfang. Many Arab merchants settled down in China, some
became
millionaires
Ref: Guan Lu Quan: Song Dai Guanzhou de Haiwai Maoyi (Foreign
Trade in
Song dynasty Guangzhou 1991, ISBN 7 218 01423-2/F
martin
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BlueSilkRoad
norpinal
> On 11 Oct 2003 02:13:19 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
> [SNIP]
> >
> >
> > China was leading the world for several thousand years, was
> >overtook
> >by the west only in the last three hundred years.
>
> Who invented the first steam powered device then?
>
> [SNIP]
>
> Doug
The double action piston was invented in China in 4th century BC, 1900
years before James Watt !
martin
norpinal
> On 10 Oct 2003 01:39:41 -0700, norp...@yahoo.ca (norpinal) wrote:
>
> >> If it took 500 years for the idea to get from China to Europe, that
> >> hardly sounds like the "centrre of world economic power", as was
> >> claimed.
> >>
> >> Ross Clark
> >
> >in China's vast trading network encompassing more than fifty countries.
>
> the so-called "centrre of world economic power". Europe would not
> have been the only part of the world not included.
>
There was nothing to trade ! The goods then China wanted were from Arabs
and South Seas.
martin
>
>
> Eric Stevens
David
"norpinal" <norp...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:d53e159d.03101...@posting.google.com...
> "David" <dro...@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:<3f8ae968$0$52116$a046...@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> > . China is leading the world in thermofusion research,
> > > being able
> > > to , while the
> > > world
> > > record is only 4 minutes.
> >
> > A. learn to snip your posts
> > B. if the world record is only 4 minutes the Chinese could not have achieved sustained
> > thermofusion in the lab for 16 minutes
> >
> > Sounds like we have another Inger wannabe
>
> Simple, the Chinese broke the world record. Chinese has the most
> advance
> thermofusion technology in the world.
>
Then the world record is 16 minutes not 4 minutes! Therefore, by definition the Chinese
have established a NEW world record. That is if this claim is true. Have you any other
proof other than your own asseration?
Doug Weller
Why did you leave off the word bellows? Steam wasn't involved.
I wasn't thinking of Watt but Heron. Dionysius Papin, much later,
designed the fist steam engine meant for real work. Watt improved upon it.
Duncan Craig
Ok, thanks. But what is meant by 'artificial magnetism'? I was
referrring to the knowledge of magnetic ores and the 'south-pointing
spoon', which were very early.
Duncan
Doug Weller
Where can I read about Chinese thermofusion technology? Or just
thermofusion technology?
Duncan Craig
snipped
> Envoys are not tribute.
> Indeed, a gift is not necessarily "tribute".
> But apparently Chinese emperors were not concerned with such
> distinctions.
No, they weren't. Even the term 'tribute-bearing missions' is
ambiguous as to who was paying tribute to whom.
> They probably set some world records for arrogance, too.
>
> Ross Clark
That is an understatement. Hitlers 'Thousand Year Reich' was
small-minded compared to Shih Huang Dis proclamation that, "My dynasty
will last ten thousand generations". Sons of Heaven were not only the
geographic and spiritual center of the 'Middle Kingdom', but the
central cosmological pivot of heaven, earth and the underworld....
Duncan
Duncan Craig
>
>
> China import goods: spices, precious stones, exortic animals, glass,
> plants, flowers, amber, pearls, ivory, snake skin, coral, crystal, totoise
> shell, wax etc
> Chinese exports: porcelain, silk, tea, gold, silver,, lead, iron, sugar
> Books, military hardware were not allow to export.
>
> Ref:
>
> Zhao Ru Kua : Zu Fan Zhi: 1225 AD
> Friedrich Hirsh and W.W. Rockhill translation: Chau Ru Kua: His Work on
> the Chinese and Arab trade in the Twelfth and Thirteen centuries, entitled
> Chu fan chi.
>
>
> martin
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BlueSilkRoad/
Martin,
I'm not sure of your punctuation here. The Chinese currency was the
silver tael and every source I've read says that China imported about
half of the worlds silver production at this time, which is how the
world paid for the porcelein and silk. I can't picture them exporting
books, either. Could you clarify?
Duncan
Eric Stevens
Which seems to negate Duncan Craig's original claim that " Hangzhou
(population 2,000,000 in 1100 ad) was the center of world economic
power since at least the Sui dynasty." You are saying that China was
not interested in the entire world which supports my original response
that "Certainly it was a major economic centre but it had minimal
direct influence on the financial or trading policies of Europe. At
that time it had virtually no influence on the Americas."
I don't think you and I have an argument.
Eric Stevens
norpinal
> >
> >
> > China import goods: spices, precious stones, exortic animals, glass,
> > plants, flowers, amber, pearls, ivory, snake skin, coral, crystal, totoise
> > shell, wax etc
> > Chinese exports: porcelain, silk, tea, gold, silver,, lead, iron, sugar
> > Books, military hardware were not allow to export.
> >
> > Ref:
> >
> > Zhao Ru Kua : Zu Fan Zhi: 1225 AD
> > Friedrich Hirsh and W.W. Rockhill translation: Chau Ru Kua: His Work on
> > the Chinese and Arab trade in the Twelfth and Thirteen centuries, entitled
> > Chu fan chi.
> >
> >
> > martin
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BlueSilkRoad/
>
> Martin,
> I'm not sure of your punctuation here. The Chinese currency was the
> silver tael and every source I've read says that China imported about
> half of the worlds silver production at this time, which is how the
> world paid for the porcelein and silk. I can't picture them exporting
> books, either. Could you clarify?
>
> Duncan
> >
The main Song currency was copper coins, silver taels were
supplementary.
China did import gold and silver, however, because of massive
import
of luxury goods such as amber, cat eye stones etc in Song, huge
amount of gold, silver and copper coins flowed out to foreign
countries.
Particular serious was the lost of copper coins. Song government
set up
law to ban the export of copper coins abroad with heavy penalty--two
guan jailed one year, five guans decapitation; one guan was a string
of one thousand copper coins - but to no avail.
The massive outflow of copper coins caused sever currency crunch,
that gave rise to the invention of paper currency as subsitute, and
subsequent
inflation.
Export books.
Chinese written langaugae was used by many S.E Asia countries at
that time, in particular, the Lee dynasty and Li dynasty,in now
southern Vietnam, Sri Vijaya, now in south east Sumatra, hence there
were demand for export of Chinese books abroad.
The export of Song block printed books into Vietnam greatly helped
the
development of Vietnam's printing technology.
Books except banned, military, goverment document,geography,
yingyang technique, calculation of calender were allowed to export.
Ref: Guan Lu Quan: Foreign Trade in Song Dynasty Guangzhou. 1991.
martin
norpinal
Duncan
Artificial magnet was invented in Song dynasty by rubbing iron
needle
with natural magnet lodestone.
The follwing is quoted from Robert Temple: The Genius of China,
chapter 7
" Song scientist Shen Kua wrote in Dream Pool Essay: "Magician rub
the point
of a needle with the lodestone; then it was able to point south.. it
may be
balanced on the tip of finger nail or on the rim of a cup, where it
can be
made to turn easily.... It is best to suspend it by a single coccon
fibre
of new silk attached to the center of the needle by a piece of was
the size of mustard seed, then hang it in windless place, it will
always point to the south.... some point to the north. I have both
kind of needle by me."
About Shen Kua's book.
Dream Pool Essay-- Meng Qi Bi Tan -- was written by Song scientist
Shen Kua(1030-1095 AD) in 1166 AD. This is an encyclopedic book
encompassing art of war, literature, musics astronomy, geography,
geology, mathematics, optics, magnetism, medicine, technolgy, art, in
natural and humanitarian sciences.
Joseph Needham called Dream Pool Essay "A milestone in the Chinese
science history".
I am not aware of any English translation of this book. Pity.
A very difficult book to translate.
martin
Doug Weller
I'm afraid I wouldn't trust Temple because of other things he has written,
and Martin has exaggerated so often I would always check him also.
I don't know how accurate this web page is but it is certainly
interesting.
http://www.fengshuiseminars.com/articles/lopan.html
norpinal
I think Duncan meant Hangzhou was a major center of world economy.
Song traded with more than fifty countries and regions, including
Da Qin-- then at East end of Roman Empire, Murabitum (southern Spain)
and Sicily.
It was indeed a major center of world trade, if not the only center.
I don't think any other countries at that time had such wide trading
network and powerful and lasting influence as Song. In 10 to 11
centuries, cities in northern France, Netherland, England, and German
cities on the Rhine were regional centers, not on the same league as
Hangzhou.
The one dynasty that had everlasting influence on Euorpe and the
world was
none other than Song dynasty.
Song silk and porcelain was in demand throughout the world,
including Europe.
Throught the intermediary of Arabs, major Chinese inventions such
as gunpowder, removeable block printing, and compass navigation
technology were propagated to Europe and throught out the world at
Song dynasty. Without gunpowder and compasses there would be no gun
boats and no european powers.
You simply cannot list any 10-13 century European invention that
as
as much everlasting world wide influence as Song dynasty's paper,
removable
block printing and compass navigation.
martin
norpinal
> On 17 Oct 2003 04:26:15 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
>
> >Doug Weller <dwe...@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<4begovcl0t0uqrqq7...@4ax.com>...
> >> On 11 Oct 2003 02:13:19 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
> >> [SNIP]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > China was leading the world for several thousand years, was
> >> >overtook
> >> >by the west only in the last three hundred years.
> >>
> >> Who invented the first steam powered device then?
> >>
> >> [SNIP]
> >>
> >> Doug
> >
> > The double action piston was invented in China in 4th century BC, 1900
> >years before James Watt !
>
> Why did you leave off the word bellows? Steam wasn't involved.
>
> I wasn't thinking of Watt but Heron. Dionysius Papin, much later,
> designed the fist steam engine meant for real work. Watt improved upon it.
>
> Doug
Chinese first discovered the use of petroleum as power souce, which proves
to be much better than steam.
martin
norpinal
It is not an assertion, Academy Sinica is currently building the
first
sustainable nuclearfusion reactor in Hefei of Anhuai using special
shape superconduct magnet device and other proprietary technology.
martin
Doug Weller
They used it as a fuel very early, I'm not sure I would count that as a
power source in the same way as steam. They also used natural gas and
coal first.
Duncan Craig
> Hi Duncan,
>
> I'm afraid I wouldn't trust Temple because of other things he has written,
> and Martin has exaggerated so often I would always check him also.
Is that the same Temple who wrote the Sirius mystery thing about the
dogon?
He shoulda stuck with Needham.
>
> I don't know how accurate this web page is but it is certainly
> interesting.
>
> http://www.fengshuiseminars.com/articles/lopan.html
>
> Doug
It is a good article. The geomantic arts are really interesting.
Although so much good science has been dismissed in the West by
calling the taoists 'priests' or 'magicians', or 'shaman'. But as
Needham has pointed out,
their 'astrology' was based on careful, long term astronomic
observations.
There is a structure called the Tower of Chou Kung fifty miles from
Loyang, that was considered to be the center of the world by ancient
Chinese astronomers and was used to measure the suns shadow at
solstice. The sun shone thru an aperature at the top onto a forty foot
gnomon. It looks astonishingly like temple number one at Tikal.
But Chinese eco-technics (as Needham has named them) were
proto-sciences.
I couldn't help but be struck by the descriptions of the turtle with
the magnetic head and how it sounded like the one at Izapa as detailed
by Malmstrom.
But thats just me.
Duncan
led to
norpinal
There is a report in Chinese Academy of Science News, dated Oct 13,
2003
Title:" Our Country is building the worlds first full Superconductor
Artifical
Sun Experimental Installation"
http://www.cas.ac.cn/html/Dir/2003/10/13/2399.htm
Here are translation of some paragraphs: :" Scientists hope for
controlled
release of nuclear fusion power..... The Plasma Research Institude of
Academy
Sinica's EAST installation is just such a machine....
"According to expert, all the artifical sun installations in the
world, the steady operation of plasma are all very short, from a few
seconds to the longest
which is only four minutes. In the EAST machine, because advance
techniqic such as non circular section and full superconductor is
used, plasma can operate
steadily for as long as 16 minutes, this is the longest running
artificial sun
to date.... full installation is expected to complete in 2005"
Clearly the scientists of Academy Sinica is on the cutting edge of
nuclear fusion research.
martin
Duncan Craig
> On 17 Oct 2003 04:26:15 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
>
> >Doug Weller <dwe...@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<4begovcl0t0uqrqq7...@4ax.com>...
> >> On 11 Oct 2003 02:13:19 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
> >> [SNIP]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > China was leading the world for several thousand years, was
> >> >overtook
> >> >by the west only in the last three hundred years.
> >>
> >> Who invented the first steam powered device then?
> >>
> >> [SNIP]
> >>
> >> Doug
> >
> > The double action piston was invented in China in 4th century BC, 1900
> >years before James Watt !
>
> Why did you leave off the word bellows? Steam wasn't involved.
>
> I wasn't thinking of Watt but Heron. Dionysius Papin, much later,
> designed the fist steam engine meant for real work. Watt improved upon it.
>
> Doug
Here is a table
TABLE 1. Transmission of mechanical and other techniques from China to
the West
Approximate lag in centuries
(a) Square-pallet chain-pump 15
(b) Edge-runner mill 13
Edge-runner mill with application of water-power 9
(c) Metallurgical blowing-engines, water-power 11
(d) Rotary fan and rotary winnowing machine 14
(e) Piston-bellows. c.14
(f) Draw-loom 4
(g) Silk-handling machinery (a form of flyer for laying thread evenly
on reels appears in the +11th century, and water-power is applied to
spinning mills in the +14th) 3-13
(h) Wheelbarrow 9-10
(i) Sailing-carriage 11
(j) Wagon-mill 12
(k) Efficient harness for draught animals:
Breast-strap (postilion) 8
Collar 6
(1) Cross-bow (as an individual arm) 13
(m) Kite c.12
(n) Helicopter top (spun by cord) 14
Zoetrope (moved by ascending hot-air current) c.10
(o) Deep drilling 11
(p) Cast iron 10-12
(q) "Cardan" suspension 8- 9
(r) Segmental arch bridge 7
(s) Iron-chain suspension bridge 10-13
(t) Canal lock gates 7-17
(u) Nautical construction principles >10
(v) Stern-post rudder c. 4
(w) Gunpowder 5- 6
Gunpowder used as a war technique 4
(x) Magnetic compass (lodestone spoon) 11
Magnetic compass with needle 4
Magnetic compass used for navigation 2
(y) Paper 10
Printing (block) 6
Printing (movable type) 4
Printing (metal movable type) 1
(z) Porcelain 11-13
Source: SCC, Vol. 1, p. 242.
Eric Stevens
He meant THE major centre. The argument started when I said A major
centre.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
> Chinese first discovered the use of petroleum as power souce, which proves
>
>to be much better than steam.
>
Example please.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
Not too sure about any of these.
Eric Stevens
norpinal
> Hi Duncan,
>
> I'm afraid I wouldn't trust Temple because of other things he has written,
> and Martin has exaggerated so often I would always check him also.
>
> I don't know how accurate this web page is but it is certainly
> interesting.
>
> http://www.fengshuiseminars.com/articles/lopan.html
>
> Doug
Obviously you never read Robert Temple: The Genius of China.
Joseph Needham wrote an introduction to this book, in which he
wrote:
"I should like to give a warm welcome to this book by Robert Temple.
It is,
in its own way, a brilliant distillation of my Science and
Civilization in China
published by Cambridge University Press, a work which will be
completed in
twenty five volumes and of which fifteen have now appeared or are
passing through the press"
That pretty much summed up the nature and source of Robert Temple's
book.
Of course, it is best to have access of have Joseph Needham's book
in
your own library; failing that, the five volume abridgement :"The
Shorter Science & Civilization in China" by Joseph Needham and Colin.
A. Ronan" is
very good.
martin
norpinal
Read Joseph Needham: Science & Civilization in China, if you are serious.
martin
norpinal
> > On 17 Oct 2003 04:26:15 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
> >
> > >Doug Weller <dwe...@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<4begovcl0t0uqrqq7...@4ax.com>...
> > >> On 11 Oct 2003 02:13:19 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
> > >> [SNIP]
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > China was leading the world for several thousand years, was
> > >> >overtook
> > >> >by the west only in the last three hundred years.
> > >>
> > >> Who invented the first steam powered device then?
> > >>
Actually, the essentials of the steam engine was invented in China
long before James Packard.
Joseph Needham traced the invention of steam engine back to a
flour shifting
machine in Loyang in 530 AD. That Loyang machine had a circular wheel
attached
through rods connected to an eccentric lug on the wheel. The wheel was
powered
by hydraulic force in a river, the rotary energy was converted into
rectliniear
movement of a shaft which in turn operated a flour shifting machine.
Later, also in sixth century, architect Kao Lung Chi designed a
hydraulic
powered bellow engine for use in metallurgy. It was built on the
same principle as the Loyang machine, water powered wheel drove a
shaft, which operated a bellow continuously. These type of machine
were used for provide
air blasts for making steel.
Through intermediaris (Agnostino Ramelli 1598, this type of machine
were
introduced into Europe.
By 1757. John Wilkinson patented a hydraulic blowing machine, which
was
basically the same as Chinese hydraulic metallurgic bellow machine of
Kao Lung Chi in 6th century.
James Pickard (1780) steam machine was a Wilkinson machine
in reverse, instead of a rotary wheel propels a shaft which blowed
air,
steam was fed into the bellow which moved the shaft which drove a
wheel.
Hence, European steam engine had its ancestor seven hundred years
earlier
in China.
Ref: Robert Temple: The Genius of China. Part III, Engineering,
chapter 23:
Essentials of Steam Engine.
martin
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>
>wheel.
> Hence, European steam engine had its ancestor seven hundred years
>earlier
>in China.
Although Heron's aeolipile was about 100 CE.
It really depends upon what you call 'ancestor'. What the Chinese did was
extremely innovative, but the first use of steam to move something seems
to have been Heron's.
Eric Stevens
In other words, you can't support your claim with an example.
Instead, you mask your inability by directing me to the multi-volume
work by Needham.
That they used petroleum products as a source of heat is correct but I
am sceptical that they discovered how to use them as a power source.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
You can make just as good a connection to the piston pump of
Ctesibius, 3rd century BC. No doubt he wasn't the first either.
Eric Stevens
Duncan Craig
> >
> > I think Duncan meant Hangzhou was a major center of world economy.
>
> He meant THE major centre.
I meant THE major center.
The argument started when I said A major
> centre.
No argument,...everyones got an opinion.
London 1150 ad population 18,000
one stone bridge, rudimentary sanitation, filthy sanitation and a
death rate twice the birth rate
Paris 1150 ad population sixty thousand
Hangzhou 1150 ad population 1.75 million, 12,000 stone bridges,
running water,
sewers..
>
Duncan
>
>
>
>
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>Eric Stevens;
>> >
>> > I think Duncan meant Hangzhou was a major center of world economy.
>>
>> He meant THE major centre.
>
>I meant THE major center.
>
>
>The argument started when I said A major
>> centre.
Not so. See Message-ID:
<a37f0d1c.03100...@posting.google.com>
"Well, this isn't conjecture. Hangzhou (population 2,000,000 in 1100
ad) was the center of world economic power since at least the Sui
dynasty".
I am sure you will agree that "the center of world economic power" is
not synonymous with "A major center of economic power". If you had
made the latter statement I would have had no disagreement with you.
>
>No argument,...everyones got an opinion.
>
>London 1150 ad population 18,000
>one stone bridge, rudimentary sanitation, filthy sanitation and a
>death rate twice the birth rate
>
>Paris 1150 ad population sixty thousand
>
>Hangzhou 1150 ad population 1.75 million, 12,000 stone bridges,
>running water,
>sewers..
>>
>Duncan
>>
>>
>>
>>
Eric Stevens
benlizross
Not really a fair comparison, is it? Try Constantinople or Bagdad for a
"western" centre. What was Shanghai like in 1150?
Ross Clark
norpinal
Hangzhou was the capital of South Song, at that time, the city was
named
Ling An. There were four hundred fourteen different type of wholesale
marketplaces: rice market, meat market, vegetable market, medicinal
herb market, fabric market, flower market, fowl market, fish market.
In the retail market district, shops after shops open for business
from
early morning till after midnight, crowded with people haggling,
shouting, from early morning till midnight...day after day non stop.
There were all sorts of entertainment establishments: Chinese opera,
comedian talk show, history talk show, troupes....
martin
Doug Weller
Baghdad is estimated at a million and a half by the tenth century (which
given the roughness of these estimates is probably within the same
population range as Hangzhou.). It had paved streets, running water and
sewerage systems.
I'm not sure how much any of these figures can be trusted. Duncan says
1150, but this site says that figure was reached by 1275.
http://objectix.com.au/nuhorizons/hangzhou.html
And look at this site:
http://geography.miningco.com/library/weekly/aa011201a.htm
This is a review of "Tertius Chandler's compilation of the population of
cities throughout history, Four Thousand Years of Urban Growth: An
Historical Census"
These are the largest cities at certain points in time (a selection from
the site). It doesn't match Duncan's figure:
Changan (Xi'an), China 637 400,000 (622); 600,000 (800)
Baghdad, Iraq 775 First over 1 million; 700,000 (800)
Cordova, Spain 935
Kaifeng, China 1013 400,000 (1000); 442,000 (1100)
Constantinople (Istanbul), Turkey 1127
Merv (Mary), Turkmenistan 1145 200,000 (1150)
Constantinople (Istanbul), Turkey 1153
Fez (Fes), Morocco 1170
Hangzhou, China 1180 255,000 (1200); 320,000 (1250)
Cairo, Egypt 1315
Hangzhou, China 1348 432,000 (1350)
Nanking, China 1358 487,000 (1400)
Beijing, China 1425 600,000 (1450); 672,000 (1500)
Constantinople (Istanbul), Turkey 1650 700,000 (1650 & 1700)
And in the year 1000:
Top 10 Cities of the Year 1000
Name Population
1 Cordova, Spain 450,000
2 Kaifeng, China 400,000
3 Constantinople (Istanbul), Turkey 300,000
4 Angkor, Cambodia 200,000
5 Kyoto, Japan 175,000
6 Cairo, Egypt 135,000
7 Baghdad, Iraq 125,000
8 Nishapur (Neyshabur), Iran 125,000
9 Al-Hasa, Saudi Arabia 110,000
10 Patan (Anhilwara), India 100,000
China has only 1 city in the top 10 then, and that is number 2 (but we can
call it more or less a tie perhaps).
By 1500 China's cities have become very crowded (well, big, but maybe they
were crowded -- might not be a good thing):
1 Beijing, China 672,000
2 Vijayanagar, India 500,000
3 Cairo, Egypt 400,000
4 Hangzhou, China 250,000
5 Tabriz, Iran 250,000
6 Constantinople (Istanbul), Turkey 200,000
7 Gaur, India 200,000
8 Paris, France 185,000
9 Guangzhou, China 150,000
10 Nanjing, China 147,000
No one has ever said China's population is small. :-)
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>marketplaces: rice market, meat market, vegetable market, medicinal
>herb market, fabric market, flower market, fowl market, fish market.
> In the retail market district, shops after shops open for business
>from
>early morning till after midnight, crowded with people haggling,
>shouting, from early morning till midnight...day after day non stop.
> There were all sorts of entertainment establishments: Chinese opera,
>comedian talk show, history talk show, troupes....
Like any other big city then, like Rome in its heyday, etc. What's your
point?
Duncan Craig
> Duncan Craig wrote:
> >
> > Eric Stevens;
> > > >
> > > > I think Duncan meant Hangzhou was a major center of world economy.
> > >
> > > He meant THE major centre.
> >
> > I meant THE major center.
> >
> > The argument started when I said A major
> > > centre.
> >
> > No argument,...everyones got an opinion.
> >
> > London 1150 ad population 18,000
> > one stone bridge, rudimentary sanitation, filthy sanitation and a
> > death rate twice the birth rate
> >
> > Paris 1150 ad population sixty thousand
> >
> > Hangzhou 1150 ad population 1.75 million, 12,000 stone bridges,
> > running water,
> > sewers..
> > >
> > Duncan
>
> Not really a fair comparison, is it?
No, it's not. It is jarring. My point is the vacuousness of the
Eurocentric historical perspective.
Try Constantinople or Bagdad for a
> "western" centre.
Ok. Constantinople and Baghdad were major trading centers due to their
proximity to Asia. Not really 'fair' to deem either one a 'western
center', is it Ross?
Either one of these cities certainly (by any measure) are better off
than any city in Europe, they still fall way short of Hangzhou in
terms of amount of trade, population, and degree of civility. Baghdad
was only founded in 762 ad.
What was Shanghai like in 1150?
Shanghai, like Hong Kong was little more than a fishing village. Their
flourescence was due to the Chinese desire to keep the European
barbarians
at arms length. The large tracts of land that were to become the
modern powerhouse of Shanghai, were owned by the Hsu family. Paul Hsu
became a Christian convert and friend of Matteo Ricci. He left the
Jesuits his land.
Nice try, but no dim sum. If there is another city of the twelfth
century that rivals Hangzhou outside of China, I'm not aware of it.
Duncan
>
> Ross Clark
benlizross
>
> benlizross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message news:<3F93CD...@ihug.co.nz>...
> > Duncan Craig wrote:
> > >
> > > Eric Stevens;
> > > > >
> > > > > I think Duncan meant Hangzhou was a major center of world economy.
> > > >
> > > > He meant THE major centre.
> > >
> > > I meant THE major center.
> > >
> > > The argument started when I said A major
> > > > centre.
> > >
> > > No argument,...everyones got an opinion.
> > >
> > > London 1150 ad population 18,000
> > > one stone bridge, rudimentary sanitation, filthy sanitation and a
> > > death rate twice the birth rate
> > >
> > > Paris 1150 ad population sixty thousand
> > >
> > > Hangzhou 1150 ad population 1.75 million, 12,000 stone bridges,
> > > running water,
> > > sewers..
> > > >
> > > Duncan
> >
> > Not really a fair comparison, is it?
>
> No, it's not. It is jarring. My point is the vacuousness of the
> Eurocentric historical perspective.
>
I wonder if it's vacuous because it's an inflatable dummy?
> Try Constantinople or Bagdad for a
> > "western" centre.
>
> Ok. Constantinople and Baghdad were major trading centers due to their
> proximity to Asia. Not really 'fair' to deem either one a 'western
> center', is it Ross?
They'll do as far as I'm concerned. Their "proximity" to Asia may have
been one factor, but it leaves several thousand km. in which I do not
see a steady increase in size and prosperity of cities thanks to
increasing closeness to Hangzhou.
> Either one of these cities certainly (by any measure) are better off
> than any city in Europe, they still fall way short of Hangzhou in
> terms of amount of trade, population, and degree of civility. Baghdad
> was only founded in 762 ad.
I don't want to deny Hangzhou its world records, just to make the
picture more realistic.
>
> What was Shanghai like in 1150?
>
> Shanghai, like Hong Kong was little more than a fishing village. Their
> flourescence was due to the Chinese desire to keep the European
> barbarians
> at arms length. The large tracts of land that were to become the
> modern powerhouse of Shanghai, were owned by the Hsu family. Paul Hsu
> became a Christian convert and friend of Matteo Ricci. He left the
> Jesuits his land.
> Nice try, but no dim sum.
Well, if you're awarding the prizes I guess there's no appeal. My point
was that your choice of London and Paris, for rhetorical effect, because
we know that several centuries later they became big and important
cities, was as unfair as comparing Shanghai for the same reason.
Ross Clark
zolota
Hey, we have a chinatown here too. A bunch of people shouting is NOT
civilization.
> There were all sorts of entertainment establishments: Chinese opera,
> comedian talk show, history talk show, troupes....
>
> martin
Bordello's Martin, tell us about the bordellos. No place was anything until
it had bordellos.
I notice that you give no mention of education or medical facilities. Was
that an oversight or there wern't any?
Z
Duncan Craig
> > snipped
>
> I wonder if it's vacuous because it's an inflatable dummy?
;-) Easy for a Kiwi to say...
>
> > Try Constantinople or Bagdad for a
> > > "western" centre.
> >
> > Ok. Constantinople and Baghdad were major trading centers due to their
> > proximity to Asia. Not really 'fair' to deem either one a 'western
> > center', is it Ross?
>
> They'll do as far as I'm concerned. Their "proximity" to Asia may have
> been one factor, but it leaves several thousand km. in which I do not
> see a steady increase in size and prosperity of cities thanks to
> increasing closeness to Hangzhou.
Due to the forbidding topography of the Gobi. Given the immense amount
of traffic on the silk road, the prosperity and growth of cities in
Asia Minor
is much more attributable to its economic relations with the east than
with Europe. Martin is right in that there was nothing from Europe
that Asia wanted,
and to this day has had an overwhelming trade imbalance with Europe.
Meanwhile, the 'Great Age of Exploration' was prompted by the appetite
that Europe developed for Asian porcelein and silk. The success
stories of European manufacturing are laced with merchants importing
not the articles of Asian manufacture, but the techniques; the
Englishman who adapted celedon ceramic methods for Weldwood China, the
Italian who brought back the secondary treatment for making fine silk,
Bessemer adapting Chinese metalworking technology, etc.,
the nautical advances of compartmentalized bulkheads and compasses. So
the economic benefits aren't immediately apparent, but the
underpinnings of the industrial revolution owe a great deal to Asia.
It was only when the English brought opium into China that any inroads
were made in what was euphemistically called 'trade'.
And to the west, in 1150 ad, we have?
>
> > Either one of these cities certainly (by any measure) are better off
> > than any city in Europe, they still fall way short of Hangzhou in
> > terms of amount of trade, population, and degree of civility. Baghdad
> > was only founded in 762 ad.
>
> I don't want to deny Hangzhou its world records, just to make the
> picture more realistic.
Exactly. I don't want to join the Hangzhou Chamber of Commerce,
either,
but my attempt at rhetorical flourish is a call to a more realistic
view also;
a sense of proportion given the ( I dislike using this word so much)
'Eurocentrism' that pervades a lot of disciplines.
>
> >
> > What was Shanghai like in 1150?
> >
> > Shanghai, like Hong Kong was little more than a fishing village. Their
> > flourescence was due to the Chinese desire to keep the European
> > barbarians
> > at arms length. The large tracts of land that were to become the
> > modern powerhouse of Shanghai, were owned by the Hsu family. Paul Hsu
> > became a Christian convert and friend of Matteo Ricci. He left the
> > Jesuits his land.
> > Nice try, but no dim sum.
>
> Well, if you're awarding the prizes I guess there's no appeal.
Trust a linguist to make a pun.
My point
> was that your choice of London and Paris, for rhetorical effect, because
> we know that several centuries later they became big and important
> cities, was as unfair as comparing Shanghai for the same reason.
Well, no. I was comparing the best of Europe vs. the best of Asia.
Should I have used Rome? Or Berlin? Actually, Shanghai would stack up
pretty well when compared with London circa 1150. ...as it does today
using whatever economic parameters.
Duncan
>
>
norpinal
> On 20 Oct 2003 06:07:10 -0700, in sci.archaeology, norpinal wrote:
> [SNIP]
> >There were four hundred fourteen different type of wholesale
> >marketplaces: rice market, meat market, vegetable market, medicinal
> >herb market, fabric market, flower market, fowl market, fish market.
> > In the retail market district, shops after shops open for business
> >from
> >early morning till after midnight, crowded with people haggling,
> >shouting, from early morning till midnight...day after day non stop.
> > There were all sorts of entertainment establishments: Chinese opera,
> >comedian talk show, history talk show, troupes....
>
> Like any other big city then, like Rome in its heyday, etc. What's your
> point?
>
> Doug
Not the same thing.
China's techology at Song was hundreds of years, a head of any
other nation or city on earth. Its economy was far more advanced.
Hangzhou was best described in Marco Polo's words: "City of
Heaven".
martin
norpinal
Shanghai in 1150 was known as the Small Hangzhou.
Here is a brief history:
The ancient name of Shanghai was Hua Ting Hai.
During the Three Kingdoms peroid( 220-280 AD) the King of Wu built
his Blue Dragon battleships at Hua Ting Hai.
In Song Sheng Zhong Xi Ning 7th year, (1074 AD), Song
Emperor established a Maritime Trading Bureau at Hua Ting Hai to
manage the
large number of foreign commercial boats which crowed here to
trade, and gave Hua Ting Hai a new name: Shanghai.
"At that time, Sea ships crowded in the port day and night,
Shanghai was a place where wealth merchants and powerful tycoons met.
People called Shanghai Small Hangzhou." (Record of Shanghai)
martin
norpinal
> [SNIP]
> >There were four hundred fourteen different type of wholesale
> >marketplaces: rice market, meat market, vegetable market, medicinal
> >herb market, fabric market, flower market, fowl market, fish market.
> > In the retail market district, shops after shops open for business
> >from
> >early morning till after midnight, crowded with people haggling,
> >shouting, from early morning till midnight...day after day non stop.
> > There were all sorts of entertainment establishments: Chinese opera,
> >comedian talk show, history talk show, troupes....
>
> Like any other big city then, like Rome in its heyday, etc. What's your
> point?
>
> Doug
Hangzhou had the most advance market economy if its time, mechants
traded with paper money.
martin
norpinal
> [SNIP]
> >There were four hundred fourteen different type of wholesale
> >marketplaces: rice market, meat market, vegetable market, medicinal
> >herb market, fabric market, flower market, fowl market, fish market.
> > In the retail market district, shops after shops open for business
> >from
> >early morning till after midnight, crowded with people haggling,
> >shouting, from early morning till midnight...day after day non stop.
> > There were all sorts of entertainment establishments: Chinese opera,
> >comedian talk show, history talk show, troupes....
>
> Like any other big city then, like Rome in its heyday, etc. What's your
> point?
>
> Doug
The point is, Hangzhou had a much more sophisticated market in the its
sheer number of variety, and most importantly WHOLESALE dealers.
Can you cite example of Rome had wholesale marketplaces ?
martin
Duncan Craig
snipped
Well, Chandlers figures for Hangzhou are abysmally low, when compared
to your other reference. A quarter of a million? Puts the rest of his
compilation in doubt, I'd say. But the population figures and the
stone bridge count were metaphors, Doug, meant to put a minor, just a
minor ding in the concept of European exceptionalism; a paradigm that
skewers evidence as Chandler has.
The metaphors of population and bridges and sewers point to the
economic reality that Asia in the middle ages, with 66 percent of the
worlds population accounted for 80 percent of the worlds GNP. See
Frank, On Economic History (2001) University of California or
http://web.mit.edu/21h.504/www/china_emod.htm
Even as late as 1750, Asias output of goods was five times that of
Europe and America (Gernet 1985).
Duncan
norpinal
Speaking of Hangzhou, it is interesting to note that the Bay of
Hangzhou is building the worlds longest trans ocean bridge 36 km
long, 11km longer than the King Fahd Causeway between Saudi Arabia
and Baharan
http://www.2003.com.cn/editor/Col-ShouYe/20036910159.htm
Hangzhou is seeking to build a high speed maglev train linking
Hangzhou
with Shanghai.
martin