Which civilization was the world's most advanced in antiquity?

amazedkat said:

we need china to make our ipods. as they're excellent at following instructions

ermm the folks who came up with that Antikythera device.

Click to expand...

So are you implying a bigot notion that their your slaves?

Tehuti2999 said:

So are you implying a bigot notion that their your slaves?

Click to expand...

what?

if i get you right, then all i can say is i wish they were, then bloody ipods wouldn't cost as much as they do.

amazedkat said:

what?

if i get you right, then all i can say is i wish they were, then bloody ipods wouldn't cost as much as they do.

Click to expand...

The cost of your Ipod is only about marketing ploys and competition, typical of global marketing situation as are own. If the U.S. could stem its markets to per capita then your Ipod would be the price of just a music CD.

Your problem is the belief of higgs fields, you didn't discover anything so what are you saying?

Click to expand...

You are saying that the Higgs boson does not exist?

fascinating said:

You are saying that the Higgs boson does not exist?

Click to expand...

Yes, this field is nothing but your own existence. matter exposed to the -25 of proton particles, or allowable of detection of are own devices of our existence, you'll have a better chance of putting the collider in space. Think of someone shooting a gun from your back, but you were able to turn around and see the bullet being shot. Your closer at creating a time machine than finding a field were the bullet started. Are, or our scientist theory (Big Bang) is incorrect of how matter is produced. You don't understand Causation.

Tehuti2999 said:

Yes, this field is nothing but your own existence. matter exposed to the -25 of proton particles, or allowable of detection of are own devices of our existence, you'll have a better chance of putting the collider in space. Think of someone shooting a gun from your back, but you were able to turn around and see the bullet being shot. Your closer at creating a time machine than finding a field were the bullet started. Are, or our scientist theory (Big Bang) is incorrect of how matter is produced. You don't understand Causation.

Click to expand...

Yet particle physics has been able to create things like nuclear energy, so it must be doing something right.

By the way, what do you think the words "are" and "your" mean?

Tehuti2999 said:

Those were not true pyramids, they only look like pyramids, not quite pyramids though, but heh you tried. The Kemet (Egyptians) built those pyramids on an exact orientation of the planet itself, they were 2000 years ahead of the whole world. everyone else just following in their footsteps.

Click to expand...

I love Egypt and it's history but give me a break. 2000 years ahead of their time? They didn't even have the wheel when they built those things. And the whole reason the Egyptians built pyramids is because that's the only way they could build tall buildings with their technological limitations. If everyone was following in their footsteps we'd be talking about the Great Skyscrapers of Giza.

The lack of wonder among the Chinese is especially remarkable in light of the fact that Chinese civilization far outdistanced Greek civilization technologically. The Chinese have been credited with the original or independent invention of irrigation systems, ink, porcelain, the magnetic compass, stirrups, the wheelbarrow, deep drilling, the Pascal triangle, pound locks on canals, fore-and-aft sailing, watertight compartments, the sternpost rudder, the paddle-wheel boat, quantitative cartography, immunization techniques, astronomical observations of novae, seismographs, and acoustics. Many of these technological achievements were in place at a time when Greece had virtually none.

Click to expand...

For centuries China stood as a leading civilization, outpacing the rest of the world in the arts and sciences, but in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the country was beset by civil unrest, major famines, military defeats, and foreign occupation. After World War II, the Communists under MAO Zedong established an autocratic socialist system that, while ensuring China's sovereignty, imposed strict controls over everyday life and cost the lives of tens of millions of people. After 1978, MAO's successor DENG Xiaoping and other leaders focused on market-oriented economic development and by 2000 output had quadrupled. For much of the population, living standards have improved dramatically and the room for personal choice has expanded, yet political controls remain tight. China since the early 1990s has increased its global outreach and participation in international organizations.

Click to expand...

The world's first machine gun

China once Invented Machine Gun in Qing Dynasty | Mysterious China Blog

Why China didn't industrialize before Europe? Answer: lack of Greed (Confucianism regarded frugality as one of the most essential virtues of man), extreme conservatism, regarded harmony (nature, people) as being more important than progress.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t3QSGRN1-U&t=88m30s]Chinese Treasure Fleet - Adventures of Zheng He : Documentary - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4-eehcES3U&t=5m19s]Niall Ferguson: The Rise (and Fall?) of the West - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Pw1MEyT-qU&t=5m03s]Opium Wars - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYz2AHwEzo]Chinese History After the Opium War including the death of Consort Zhen ([/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHyspkeyIfs]Five Major Flaws in Guns, Germs, and Steel - Part 1 of 5 - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7deJXU4ZRG0]The Tainos Part 1 By Iroqua - YouTube[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujlqENq5S08&t=10m13s"]YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DJkE3zh6RE&t=23m02s]【New Frontier HQ】 Chinese Civilization (17) The Ming Dynasty / Part 01 - YouTube[/ame]

Chinese encyclopedias (biggest before Wikipedia)

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_comparisons]Wikipedia:Size comparisons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siku_Quanshu]Siku Quanshu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongle_encyclopedia]Yongle Encyclopedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_Civilisation_in_China]Science and Civilisation in China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

The previous pages have shown the development of Chinese machinery up to the
end of the seventeenth century. Let’s compare the designs of the previous automatons
with the reconstruction in Fig. 2.29 that is related to a fifth century BC chariot.
The mechanism that operates the legs to simulate the horse’s gait is remarkable,
even more if as the chariot transported heavy loads Marco Ceccarelli wrote in “An
Historical Perspective of Robotics Toward the Future” (2001), [33].
It is remarkable how each technical field evolved. Agricultural, hydraulic, military,
astronomical, or purely mechanical techniques evolved at a speed that was stimulated
by illustrated books as previously described by the examples in the pages of this book,
so revealing a technology that was barely accessible beyond its borders.
It is evident that Chinese technical know-how surpassed the engineering skills
in Europe or the Islamic world during the same period of time. It is also curious to
reflect that some of their discoveries did not reach us (or were not reinvented in the
West) until the middle or the end of the eighteenth century, being Chinese Society
not involved with those inventions or reinventions.

Click to expand...

Chinese Inventions and Machines - Springer

Why China didn't industrialize before Europe? Answer: lack of Greed (Confucianism regarded frugality as one of the most essential virtues of man), extreme conservatism, regarded harmony (nature, people) as being more important than progress.

Click to expand...

That's like saying the Europeans lacked greed due to Christianity. Neither Confucianism nor Christianity smiled upon greed, it still happened. In fact the ShiJi spent an entire chapter trying to use history to convince that one could still "strike green" while staying on the correct path. This wouldn't have been written unless people were trying to earn money by immoral means.

Many of these technological achievements were in place at a time when Greece had virtually none.

Click to expand...

The Greeks had plenty of technological improvements as well: [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_technology]Ancient Greek technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]. I know it's wiki, but it gives a general idea that the Greeks weren't just twiddling there thumbs.

Ricey said:

The world's first machine gun
Why China didn't industrialize before Europe? Answer: lack of Greed (Confucianism regarded frugality as one of the most essential virtues of man), extreme conservatism, regarded harmony (nature, people) as being more important than progress.

Click to expand...

China had plenty of greed, as the existence of Chinese pirates and rich Chinese merchants testifies to. What China lacked was the respect of the generation of wealth other than by agriculture. It was ok to be rich, as long as you didn't do it as a merchanrt or an industrialist. The Chinese elite did not take a vow of poverty. Merchants, and other grubby money makers such as industrialist who did not make their money from the land were looked down upon by the Chinese.

In the West, a rich industrialist or merchant, while he might never become part of the country's elite himself, could depend on his sons becoming the elite by sending them to the right schools, such as Oxford. A successful Merchant might use his money to obtain a knighthood. Merchants ruled influential places like Venice. Men like the Rothchild's, could, through commerical success, become part of the establishment in the West, something they never could do in China.

The other thing is that very Confucis frugality tended to discouraged the Chinese to borrow in the first place. The industrial revolutoin requires large sums of money to develop, and the Chinese reluctance to borrow discouraged the variety of finances you find available in the West. As the common saying goes, it "take money to make money", and Chinese were reluctant to take on the large scale debt required to finance the Industrial Revolution. An early example of the importance of capital is in Gutenberg creating of the printing press (not printing itself) - we know as much about him as we do, because of the court records of the substantial sums he had to borrow to develop his process. he had to borrow substantial his process. Without the ability to borrow large sums, he might never have been able to develop his printing press.

The Chinese borrowing resembled the borrowing of an individual, done only at the last resort, even at the highest levels. You can see that playing out in the inability of the ancient Chinese governments (Song, Ming) to borrow money to tide them over during times of financial crisis. No matter how fiscally sound a government is, over the course of centuries, it is bound to experience short term problems in financing due to natural (massive flooding, epidemic) or human (war) disasters.

The third type of instrument was long‐term or perpetual bonds. These bonds greatly expanded the debtfinancing capabilities of European governments.

In 1715, Holland’s national debt was twice its national income, while for England it was 0.8 times. Both nations mostly used long‐term public bonds to smooth fiscal challenges. For that year, England’s public debt was 60 million pounds,22 of which 16.4 million pounds was perpetual bonds, 12.6 million pounds was bonds with aturity terms of 32 and 99 years, and 11.4 million pounds lottery bonds with maturity terms of 32 years. For the lottery bonds, the average annual interest rate was about 6.84%, but the winners of the lottery would enjoy rates as high as 8% a year. The remaining debt was financed by other short term and long term instruments. After 1717, interest rates on perpetual and long‐term bonds fell to around 4%.

The Song, Yuan, and Ming Dynasties were not as lucky as Western European nations. For the Imperial courts, there was no possibility to issue perpetual bonds or bonds with maturity terms longer than one year, which might have saved them from collapsing. They were not even as lucky as the late Qing Dynasty. While the war reparations were severe burdens on the Qing, the Qing court at least had the option to borrow from foreign banks. These loans, arranged by HSBC and other banks between 1896 and 1902, were financed by bonds issued in Europe with maturity terms of 36 years at annual interest rates of 4 ‐ 5%, and they helped extend the life of the Qing Dynasty by several years and also save Manchuria and Shandong from becoming foreign colonies. While public borrowing and especially public borrowing with foreign banks did not rest comfortably with the Chinese population, it was far better than allowing parts of China to be a colony of foreign powers. http://www.nber.org/chapters/c12070.pdf ​

Click to expand...

Zheng He failed to pioneer a commercial empire on the scale of Portugal or Britain. Despite their commercial overtones, Zheng He’s voyages were mere extensions of Ming Empire’s tributary system, a system not based on profit. Emperor Hongwu established the Ming tributary system merely as a way for foreign countries to acknowledge the empire’s status – private profiteering by envoys was strictly denied. When Ming envoys refused to accept gifts from the Vietnamese, Hongwu applauded; when envoys from Korea used a trip to the Ming court to trade privately with Chinese merchants, Hongwu frowned. Under Emperor Yongle, the Ming tributary system expanded with Zheng He’s diplomatic expeditions, and became more flexible. Zheng He’s men sailed to the Strait of Malacca, Malay, Arabia, and East Timor, carrying the emperor’s official seal and banner, accompanied an array of grain ships, battle ships, horse carrying ships, troop transport ships, and even water tank ships (with on board aquariums). Yongle realized that trade and tribute were synonmous, and allowed foreign ambassadors who boarded Zheng He’s ships to profit. The emperor even set up markets in the Ming capital for these foreigner envoys to trade. Yet, while foreign envoys profitted, expeditions under Zheng He did not. Zheng He’s treasure ships aimed to bedazzle foreign princes – gold, silver, porcelain, silk, and other valuables were exchanged, in great quantities, for items less worthy, like giraffes that amused the emperor but provided little practical benefit. Even beginning economics students understand that with little return, any business venture, no matter how grand in scale, would be doomed to bankruptcy.

Click to expand...

Unlike China, Britain’s industrial revolution and overseas expansion was driven by a military policy. According to Hobson, during the period from 1688-1815 Great Britain was engaged in wars 52% of the time[3]. Whereas the Chinese relied on their open markets and their superior production and sophisticated commercial and banking skills, the British relied on tariff protection, military conquest, the systematic destruction of competitive overseas enterprises as well as the appropriation and plunder of local resources. China’s global predominance was based on ‘reciprocal benefits’ with its trading partners, while Britain relied on mercenary armies of occupation, savage repression and a ‘divide and conquer’ policy to foment local rivalries. In the face of native resistance, the British (as well as other Western imperial powers) did not hesitate to exterminate entire communities[4]. Unable to take over the Chinese market through greater economic competitiveness, Britain relied on brute military power. It mobilized, armed and led mercenaries, drawn from its colonies in India and elsewhere to force its exports on China and impose unequal treaties to lower tariffs. As a result China was flooded with British opium produced on its plantations in India – despite Chinese laws forbidding or regulating the importation and sale of the narcotic. China’s rulers, long accustomed to its trade and manufacturing superiority, were unprepared for the ‘new imperial rules’ for global power. The West’s willingness to use military power to win colonies, pillage resources and recruit huge mercenary armies commanded by European officers spelt the end for China as a world power. China had based its economic predominance on ‘non-interference in the internal affairs of its trading partners’. In contrast, British imperialists intervened violently in Asia, reorganizing local economies to suit the needs of the empire (eliminating economic competitors including more efficient Indian cotton manufacturers) and seized control of local political, economic and administrative apparatus to establish the colonial state.

Click to expand...

They were less greedy, because of their Confucian background. By they, I mean Chinese officials.

Militarism had nothing do with what are regardly regarded as key elements of the industrial revolution

1. Development of coal was dependent economic factors, and coal had little military significance until steam boats were development, well after the industrial revoluation was on its way.

2. Likewise, the development of the steam engine was driven by economic factors, not military. Trains, steam power ships, were all driven by civilian use first, and military only took advantage of inventions that were made for the commerical field. And it was internal economic requirements, not foreign, that drove the development of the steam engine. At best, all foreign trade did was to generate the profits to develop the steam engine, and even that could be debated.

3. The British did not blast their way into China until after the Industrial Revolution, and it was the technology created by it that gave them the decisive advantage over the Chinese. Steam boats, a product of the Industrial Revolution, allowed the British to defeat the Chinese in the Opium Wars. So the writer has it 100% backwards.

While the Opium War is nothing to be proud of, China has had its own history imperialism, as the Vietnamese and Koreans can testify. And the Ming, and especially Manchu, militarily expanded into the areas of what is now western China, so the claim that the Chinese were simply peace loving people is not entirely true.


PS - Why are we talking about the Opium wars and the Industrial Revolution? By any standard, they are not antiquity.

For a serious take on the industrial revolution I would recommend these books:

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/The-Enlightened-Economy-Economic-1700-1850/dp/0300124554/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1347859643&sr=8-2&keywords=the+enlightened+revolution"]The Enlightened Economy: An Economic History of Britain 1700-1850 (The New Economic History of Britain seri): Joel Mokyr: 9780300124552: Amazon.com: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51D%2B9to7idL.@@AMEPARAM@@51D%2B9to7idL[/ame]

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Bourgeois-Dignity-Economics-Explain-Modern/dp/0226556654/ref=sr_1_sc_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347859745&sr=1-1-spell&keywords=burgeious+dignity"]Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can't Explain the Modern World: Deirdre N. McCloskey: 9780226556659: Amazon.com: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51UsJSmH7XL.@@AMEPARAM@@51UsJSmH7XL[/ame]

The industrial revolution was caused by structural social change inside the European societies. It basically was a change of economic policy and culture towards entrepreneurial activity.

In the mid 19th century UK, entrepreneurial activity was respected and trade was free. In other parts of the world, such as Russia and China, trade was restricted and entrepreneurship was viewed as something wrong.

Bart Dale said:

3. The British did not blast their way into China until after the Industrial Revolution, and it was the technology created by it that gave them the decisive advantage over the Chinese. Steam boats, a product of the Industrial Revolution, allowed the British to defeat the Chinese in the Opium Wars. So the writer has it 100% backwards.

Click to expand...

Actually, most ships used in the Opium Wars were traditional sail based vessels and ground warfare was very similar to 18th century.

Overall, there is nothing really modern about the British army that defeated China in the Opium Wars. Just sail ships, riflemen, cavalry and cannons, the same way as Napoleon:




In fact, one could say that the first REALLY modern industrialized war was World War I.

PS - Why are we talking about the Opium wars and the Industrial Revolution? By any standard, they are not antiquity.

Click to expand...

Well, because history is continuous. If one civilization of the world was more advanced in the 19th century, therefore it would also tend to be more advanced in earlier centuries. It could not, as well, though the probability of being more advanced is greater than being less.

Overall, Western civilization, broadly speaking, nearly always had the edge over the rest of the world in nearly all areas. Even in the Early Middle Ages, for instance, the West still had the edge over China in terms of science: Arab scientists dominated science from the 8th to the 12th centuries, not Chinese scientists. Though China had the edge over the West during the Early Middle Ages in all other areas.

There is a reason we called the Middle East, Middle East. It is not "Western Civilization".

Guaporense said:

Overall, Western civilization, broadly speaking, nearly always had the edge over the rest of the world in nearly all areas.

Click to expand...

Past 75 pages of the same thread gives enough evidances and explanations to proove this statement wrong.

Guaporense said:

Actually, most ships used in the Opium Wars were traditional sail based vessels and ground warfare was very similar to 18th century.

Overall, there is nothing really modern about the British army that defeated China in the Opium Wars. Just sail ships, riflemen, cavalry and cannons, the same way as Napoleon:

Click to expand...

Actually, you are wrong here. The new steam powered iron clad Nemesis devasted the Chinese fleet:

British military superiority drew on newly applied technology. British warships wreaked havoc on coastal towns; the steam ship Nemesis was able to move against the winds and tides and support a gun platform with very heavy guns. In addition, the British troops were the first to be armed with modern muskets and cannons which fired more rapidly and with greater accuracy than the Qing firearms and artillery,

Click to expand...

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars"]Opium Wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

In fact, one could say that the first REALLY modern industrialized war was World War I.

Click to expand...

I would say the US Civila War. It was the first war where submarines, repeating rifles, machine guns, telegraphs, railroads, were used, and where technology made a critical difference. Also first war where we had extensive photographs of too. It was a war were both sides had massive numbers of civilian volunteers, and even the draft. The Ameria Civil War even had trench warfare that foreshadowed WWI. Maybe if the Europeans hadn't been so arrogant, they could a lesson or two about the dangers of trench warfare.

mingming said:

There is a reason we called the Middle East, Middle East. It is not "Western Civilization".

Click to expand...

It depends what direction you are looking at. From the East, India and China, the Middle East is to the West.

Also the Middle East shares a common culture heritage with the European civilization

1. Both Europe and the Islamic civilization inherented from the Greek Civilizaiton. Greek philosophers were important to both cultures

2. Islamic and European civilization both inherited much of their technology from their Greeks and Romans. Water clocks, ship building, dam buiding,

3. Both cultures had religions were derived in from the Jews, and they both shared a dominant Monetheistic religion, which had a common God, a number of common importance of old testament prophets (Abraham, Jacob, Solomn, Noah, etc.) Both share many of the same religious stories - the destruction of Sodom, the burning of the bush with Moses, the captivity of Joseph, the visit of the Queen of Sheba to Solomn, etc, even if they were told differently between the Muslims and Jews/Christians.

They did have great distinction between Islamic and Christian culture, so in the narrow sense of the word, the West is just Christian (former) Europe.

It is kind of like when you say Chicago, you can mean just the city of Chicago, or you can mean Chicago and the surrouding suburbs. For example, if I live in a suburb of New York, and someone from Chicago ask me where I live, I will say the suburb. But if I am overseas in a foreign country, and somewhere ask me where I am from, I could say Chicago, since I am from the greater metropolitan area of Chicago.

mingming said:

There is a reason we called the Middle East, Middle East. It is not "Western Civilization".

Click to expand...

That's an overstatement. The term Western Civilization does not necessarily mean that it is a "West-only" civilization.

By the way, Middle East was more culturally connected to Greece and Rome than it was Gaul, Britain, Iberia, etc. Technically speaking, many Greek cities that contributed significantly to what we call Western Civilization were placed in the Middle East (etc Alexandria). If you also include the Greek cities of Anatolia and the region of Ionia to the geographical term of "Middle East", then you have the main roots of Western Civilization placed right in there.