-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Fair point, the Dutch don't get enough attention, and I hope to remedy that in my own way when I've finished with some current Roman studies. If it's any consolation Australia was officially discovered by Cook's Endeavour circa 1770, but my dad used to own some land on the Sth Australian Eyre Peninusla and I can assure you that circa 2008 the local pub at Ceduna had a gaming room called Gulden Liutpard(? sp.), while a little further on at Streaky Bay a rather elaborate public momument was in place with an inscription that the Dutch ship Golden Leopard surveyed this coastline in 1626. Which is a hellava long time before Cook. Anyhow some of the locals here are keenly interested in the real history of discovery and colonization.
On the Venetzy owners of big lineages and enormous fondi taken into England I believe it's the case that they remain in place today as some of the richest and most powerful, just under English sounding names. But haven't followed that one up either (yet)
Illuminati don't interest me much, nor the Freemasons, but the Reading Societies are another matter.
Off Topic is a completely different beast. Those threads can go from zero to you're a Nazi in minutes. Even the subforum rules have become a multi-part jumble because so many topics are banned; it gets really awkward when confused posters are moderated for simply repeating a candidate's stance on abortion without further comment. That subforum is a special kind of messy. Posts like in this thread, made in the OT, would be liable to quickly veer a discussion towards Nazis and anti-Semitism, Brexit, Denmark, Trump, immigration, Denmark, and then the holocaust, before being shut down. Here we can get a reasonably decent back and forth even when people go way out of the norm.
I try to keep my WPKing there to the GOT thread. Here, I deep down love the Mongol supermen and what if Rome did X and who was better discussions. They're fun. They're even usually informative. Basically, I like people like sleeperul and their like posting stuff that most people disagree with but that often spur on intelligent discussion. Heavy moderation here wouldn't be good the way it is in OT.
I try to keep my WPKing there to the GOT thread. Here, I deep down love the Mongol supermen and what if Rome did X and who was better discussions. They're fun. They're even usually informative. Basically, I like people like sleeperul and their like posting stuff that most people disagree with but that often spur on intelligent discussion. Heavy moderation here wouldn't be good the way it is in OT.
Also harmful, seeing how little traffic this history forum gets normally. 2-3 new threads per day, on a busy day maybe 5, some days none... if contrarians and non mainstream were heavily moderated this would probably dwindle to zero.
Chinese nationalists exaggerate the continuity, but it's definitely there. Even when China was conquered from outside the outsiders adapted to Chinese institutions very, very quickly and were at pains to emphasize their continuity with indigenous dynasties. You can see this as early as the Xianbei states in northern China during the Six Dynasties (5th-6th centuries). Later conquerors like the Yuan and Qing toed the line even faster. Tibetans and Japanese, on the other hand, never ruled any significant part of China proper until the Great Pacific War in the 20th century.
At any rate, the cultural, social and political continuities from antiquity to modern times are definitely much stronger in China than they are in the West. Chinese language was never displaced, neither was indigenous religion, their scholars always had access to sources from as far back as the Bronze Age and their political-philosophical model carried on with only incremental, endogenous changes until the 20th century. Compare that to how deep the changes in the West were just in late Antiquity.
- 2
It's not really possible to evaluate which culture has changed the least, nor should unchanging be a goal, but some points are:
- most of the parts of Western Europe that were part of the Roman empire still speak Romance languages today.
- Christianity was introduced to the west around the same as the rise of Daoism and introduction of Buddhism in China (then later on Confucianism was heavily reworked during the Tang and Song, while Communism, if it can be considered a religion/philosophy, is an import from the West)
- at the same time as there were major changes to society in Western Europe during the late antiquity period, Chinese society was undergoing heavy changes during the Six Dynasties period
and while indeed some texts have been in continuous transmission since the bronze age, by Han times they had major difficulties understanding what they meant
- most of the parts of Western Europe that were part of the Roman empire still speak Romance languages today.
- Christianity was introduced to the west around the same as the rise of Daoism and introduction of Buddhism in China (then later on Confucianism was heavily reworked during the Tang and Song, while Communism, if it can be considered a religion/philosophy, is an import from the West)
- at the same time as there were major changes to society in Western Europe during the late antiquity period, Chinese society was undergoing heavy changes during the Six Dynasties period
and while indeed some texts have been in continuous transmission since the bronze age, by Han times they had major difficulties understanding what they meant
Last edited:
- 1
Key difference is that the West never managed to restore Rome/Macedonia/Persia... or whatever the equivalent of China should be named.
Which is why the former territory of Roma is divided by two different civilisations that are built into the former civilisations achievements.
Plus those millenias of divisions due to the fragmentation of the mediterranean sea made each new "fragment" (state or ethnicity whatever) develop their own culture diverging from the others while China was undergoing a homogenisation.
No one can say with a straight face that we cannot say which culture has changed the least when we can easily compare regions that used to be part of say Rome with the modern ones and china and do not see the enourmous difference that happened in two millenias.
If you are not convinced just compare modern Greece and Turkey with their antiquities equivalent.
Nobody said that the Imperial legacy was lost in the West but Latin never recovered the place it had under Rome hegemony having to compete with Arabic and Greek and later became moribund when national language took over.
Christianity was not the only major religion that rose trough the mediterranean.
Which is why the former territory of Roma is divided by two different civilisations that are built into the former civilisations achievements.
Plus those millenias of divisions due to the fragmentation of the mediterranean sea made each new "fragment" (state or ethnicity whatever) develop their own culture diverging from the others while China was undergoing a homogenisation.
No one can say with a straight face that we cannot say which culture has changed the least when we can easily compare regions that used to be part of say Rome with the modern ones and china and do not see the enourmous difference that happened in two millenias.
If you are not convinced just compare modern Greece and Turkey with their antiquities equivalent.
Nobody said that the Imperial legacy was lost in the West but Latin never recovered the place it had under Rome hegemony having to compete with Arabic and Greek and later became moribund when national language took over.
Christianity was not the only major religion that rose trough the mediterranean.
maybe, but I don't see how that confirm that the modern Mediterranean is more different from the ancient Mediterranean than modern China is from ancient China
Well then, why would someone from ancient Athens waking up in modern Athens feel so much more confused than someone from ancient Chang'an waking up in modern Xi'an?
Classical Chinese is equally moribund
no, but so what?
In any case none of them got imported from India
- 1
What are the equivalent to Slavic/Germanic/Arabic/Turkish migration in China ?
As far as I am aware nothing of the sort happened.
Depending of the era an ancient athenian would probably wonder where did the Greek of Anatolia went to and why the "Huns" replaced them (if we are speaking of Roman era).
They would also wonder about this "Greek Nation" that replaced the city state or Rome.
An ancient chinese tough would probably be suprised at how big China got but not be surprised that it still exist. Perhaps pre-Imperial Chinese might be more so.
Classical Chinese is equally moribund
Does it not qualify has a big difference ?
Surely the rise of two religion that defined the middle age of the Mediterrenean sea and is still very relevent to this day not important. Especially since the idea that religion is more important than the Emperor/state was/is still very alien to the Chinese mindset ?
There was lot of Central Asian Turkic migration to China over different periods. Along with Mongols, Tungusic people etc and their imprint can be seen in northern China from the physical appearence between different areas to differences in languages. Mandarin has been heavily influenced by non-Han speakers while southern dialects like Cantonese or Hakka are closer to classical Chinese.
Their impact might not have been as large as that of European migration, true, but it wasn't minor blip either. Historiography often emphasises the process of Sinification of various non-Han people coming to China while downplaying the impact they made.
The massive migration of people from the Wei valley and the Central Plain into everywhere else?
It is now, but it only lost relevance in the 20th century. It was still the language of literature and administration in Japan until after the Meiji restoration, in Vietnam until the French abolished the exam system, and in Korea until colonization by Japan. Its use within China didn't decline until the Republican era and most people are still somewhat literate in it.
oh, and I think a third criteria to my two already stated should be added (the two being a - membership of the security council, and b - nuclear weapons)... that being a domestic manned space program.
China first achieved this in 2003, which is probably an appropriate inflection point to grant them "Great Power" status in the 21st century.
Russia might yet be the sick man of Earth, but it's still got all three of those criteria going for it, although massive American subsidies keep them in space. Adding the third criteria removes the UK and France from "Great Power" standing, which is probably appropriate in the Space Age.
China first achieved this in 2003, which is probably an appropriate inflection point to grant them "Great Power" status in the 21st century.
Russia might yet be the sick man of Earth, but it's still got all three of those criteria going for it, although massive American subsidies keep them in space. Adding the third criteria removes the UK and France from "Great Power" standing, which is probably appropriate in the Space Age.
- 1
Oh, this is actually fascinating because this is the original WPK, WPK long before anyone else thought of doing WPK. The Anglo-Venetian namedrop is the immediate tell. This isn't just any regular WPK, this is LaRouche WPK.
I didn't think these existed in the wild anymore.
- 2
What is all this talk about money not being created by the government? Last time I checked every central bank in existence was controlled by their respective governments.
There have been many times where "money" was made by other than "central bamks".
Central banks are actually fairly recent inventions. Prior to paper currency, anybody with the metal could mint coins.
After the advent of paper money, banks or sometimes large businesses issued scrip.
All banks create money. When you deposit $100 with your bank, the bank can use that to create loans worth $800-$900.