Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

historians.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 83 posts

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#71

Post by brailsafe »

bra4you wrote: post #47
brailsafe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that China isn't a civ because economic centres move from time to time? I'm also fairly sure you're not quite characterizing either western or eastern fairly during the years 0 to ~1500.

What is Chinese Culture? If nothing else, the writing system? Putonghua was only adopted in all of current China under Mao. I could also talk of the "western culture" and take Sanskrit and all indu-germanic languages that are descendant from it - so basically nearly all of the European languages" as "one culture".

I don't know a lot about the specific languages of either the "cultures" you mentioned, but you'd have to assert that culture didn't exist before writing for writing to be the definition of culture. That's not supported in cultural anthropology or history and is a bit contrived, perhaps unless your view is only that of a cunning linguist ;)

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#72

Post by LunaSea »

usrusr wrote: post #59
jacobush wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very fluffy definition. Also "China" was invaded all the time. You could argue that Europe and some kind of continuum over the Middle East / North Africa also preserved a civilization.

That's the entire point I think: Chinese cultural identity is broad enough to consider all those numerous competing kingdoms of its past predecessors in direct line. Contrast this with Europe, where almost everybody has at some point in time claimed succession to the Roman Empire but even something as small as a united Italy is actually a fairly recent invention, with forced language unification and all that. Egypt,…

Well even China has some disputes about succession with Taiwan as well as territorial disputes with Tibet, Hong Kong, Japan, etc.

So it would seem that the case for a continuous civilization isn't as clear cut.

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#73

Post by yorwba »

bra4you wrote: post #70
elfexec wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, this was after Rome, and while after the middle ages, still before the industrial revolution. I don't know what you are trying to say here. > The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. No. It says more about Europe than China. It shows that china had what europe needed/wanted/etc. Also, europe wasn't "exploring" at first. They were seeking a path to china/india/etc…

"I don't know what you are trying to say here." You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. But I mentioned this time frame myself and it was the only time. >> The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. > No. It says more about Europe than China. Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead, the culture had big weaknesses. So big, that they left the world…

> They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain)

Those products were superior in their respective categories of textiles, beverages and tableware in the sense that wealthy Europeans preferred them over locally made goods.

> they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology.

Already the Ming dynasty had bought Portuguese cannons and were using them very effectively at first against the invading Jurchens. Of course then the Jurchens got their own cannons, conquered all of China and renamed themselves Manchu, establishing the Qing dynasty. They kept buying Western weapons, ships etc. over the following centuries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Qing_dynasty#T...

However, it seems they didn't improve much on the bought technology, or didn't build up high enough production capacity. The British had started experimenting with adding steam engines to their sailboats in time for the First Opium War, which contributed to their defeat of the Chinese fleet (which included bought Western ships). If the Qing had put their energy into building an even larger fleet of steamboats, they might have been able to avoid a repeat of that defeat, but of course I have the benefit of hindsight.

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#74

Post by austincheney »

svaigsq wrote: post #62
austincheney wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continuous civilization only means the defining characteristics of civilization remain unbroken through regime change. Only China and India have had continuous civilization from the ancient to the present. That remains true even though the Yuan dynasty were foreign invaders. Contrast that to the Saxon invasion of Britain or the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs or the gothic conquest of Italy.

Oh, come on... maybe get some interest in history and dig through at least some of the things that you are touching. Paper is written in 1944. None of that was true for that time and does not apply to modern days at all. It seems to be influenced by pre-war mystical New Ageish movements in Europe, that claimed many things... like, that Europeans came from Tibet... I'm really confused about definitions here. What we d…

Here is the Wikipedia definition

> A civilization or civilisation (see English spelling differences) is any complex society characterized by urban development, social stratification imposed by a cultural elite, symbolic systems of communication (for example, writing systems), and a perceived separation from and domination over the natural environment.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization

In my college ancient history class I learned civilization was any group comprising the following:

* Fixed and defined geographical boundaries

* A systematically developed art/culture

* A government, even something as primitive as despotism

* A developed institution of one or more religions and/or science

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#75

Post by usrusr »

LunaSea wrote: post #72
usrusr wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the entire point I think: Chinese cultural identity is broad enough to consider all those numerous competing kingdoms of its past predecessors in direct line. Contrast this with Europe, where almost everybody has at some point in time claimed succession to the Roman Empire but even something as small as a united Italy is actually a fairly recent invention, with forced language unification and all that. Egypt,…

Well even China has some disputes about succession with Taiwan as well as territorial disputes with Tibet, Hong Kong, Japan, etc. So it would seem that the case for a continuous civilization isn't as clear cut.

I don't think that the Taiwan situation can count as a counterexample, actually I'd rather see it as a contemporary manifestation of "the idea of China is bigger than its governments". The way I see it the main issue preventing a normalization of relationships between continental and Taiwan is that they agree on one thing that is important to them: they both are far too Chinese to be anything but China. The fact that there is more than one operational government within China? Not that big of an issue, happened before, will likely happen again.

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#76

Post by haecceity »

usrusr wrote: post #57
haecceity wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bullshit and Chinese Propaganda with their "5000 years old culture". This is actually propaganda from the US War Department.

Propaganda nonetheless, and this is what makes it interesting. Was ror just a bit of the-enemy-of-my-enemy posturing to make Japan look bad (not much to do there in 1944 America), or were they mentally preparing for a possible intervention in China post VJ? Given the military presence America had on mainland China before the war this must have been a rather natural idea to some. The linked text is part of a bigger pu…

ROC government was, to put it lightly, extremely friendly with the US government.

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#77

Post by LunaSea »

usrusr wrote: post #75
LunaSea wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well even China has some disputes about succession with Taiwan as well as territorial disputes with Tibet, Hong Kong, Japan, etc. So it would seem that the case for a continuous civilization isn't as clear cut.

I don't think that the Taiwan situation can count as a counterexample, actually I'd rather see it as a contemporary manifestation of "the idea of China is bigger than its governments". The way I see it the main issue preventing a normalization of relationships between continental and Taiwan is that they agree on one thing that is important to them: they both are far too Chinese to be anything but China. The fact that…

In that case, couldn't you argue the same about the Roman empire?

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#78

Post by danieltillett »

cygx wrote: post #60
danieltillett wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. We have no idea how old indigenous culture is in Australia. By this I mean how stable it is over time. All we know is there wasn’t much technical innovation, but as for language, ritual, religion there is zero data for how old it is. 2. Civilisation != culture. Aboriginal culture might be 40,000 years, but aboriginal civilisation is a little over 200 years old. 3. There are hundreds of different Aboriginal culture…

We have no idea how old indigenous culture is in Australia It is suspected that aboriginal stories about eg sea level rise, comets, changes in flora and fauna are based on historical events. Some of those events can be dated, suggesting on oral tradition that goes back 10,000+ years.

Even if it is possible that Aboriginal people retain stories from long ago (unlikely in my opinion), this doesn’t prove that Aboriginal culture is unchanged for 40,000 years.

I am highly sceptical of all these stories of Aboriginal people retaining non-useful knowledge for thousands of years. It doesn’t happen anywhere else in the world. A really good counter example is the Tasmanian Aborigines forgetting how to fish. They fished (the waters of Tasmania are teeming with fish) until 4000 years ago and then for some reason stopped. If you lose highly useful information like how to fish, how likely is it that you will retain stories from 10,000 years ago of some comet?

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#79

Post by elfexec »

bra4you wrote: post #70
elfexec wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, this was after Rome, and while after the middle ages, still before the industrial revolution. I don't know what you are trying to say here. > The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. No. It says more about Europe than China. It shows that china had what europe needed/wanted/etc. Also, europe wasn't "exploring" at first. They were seeking a path to china/india/etc…

"I don't know what you are trying to say here." You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. But I mentioned this time frame myself and it was the only time. >> The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. > No. It says more about Europe than China. Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead, the culture had big weaknesses. So big, that they left the world…

> You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead.

Any time before the 1800s?

> Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead

I thought you said they were never ahead?

> the culture had big weaknesses.

Every culture has weaknesses.

> So big, that they left the world for Europe. What happened to Zheng He?

Oh god, no wonder. You learned pop fiction history. What about zheng he? Your comment is as silly as what happened to the US flights to the moon? It's been 50 years since the last moon landing. Why do you ask? Because there is no financial reason for it. The same thing with zheng he. It was a grand naval theatrical performance which didn't pay any dividends.

As for europe, you act like "culture" is why europe "explored". Why didn't europe "explore" in 1392 or 1292 or 592 or you get the idea. Didn't europe have culture back then? There was no incentive. It wasn't culture that pushed europe to "explore". It was financial incentive. The collapse of the byzantine empire and the end of the golden horde is why columbus sailed for what? Americas? No. He set sail for the east.

> They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) and only wanted to export but never buy anything.

A product can be unique and superior. The reason why silk and porcelain were desired was precisely because it was superior to anything in europe. Not only that europe had inferior porcelain knock-offs for hundreds of years. You know how like we have inferior chinese knock-offs today, there were inferior europe knock-offs of chinese products. It's why "fine china" was called "fine china".

> They always said, in the arrogance "we don't need anything!". After the military trouble with the west, they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology.

More pop fiction history nonsense you learned from a silly documentary. I watched the same documentaries as you. Might I recommend learning to research and think independently rather than parroting stuff you see on tv? Anyways, I'm sure you'll grow out of this phase eventually as you gain more knowledge and experience. Good luck to you with that.

Re: The Oldest Living Civilization (1944)

#80

Post by dang »

elfexec wrote: post #79
bra4you wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't know what you are trying to say here." You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. But I mentioned this time frame myself and it was the only time. >> The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. > No. It says more about Europe than China. Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead, the culture had big weaknesses. So big, that they left the world…

> You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. Any time before the 1800s? > Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead I thought you said they were never ahead? > the culture had big weaknesses. Every culture has weaknesses. > So big, that they left the world for Europe. What happened to Zheng He? Oh god, no wonder. You learned pop fiction history. What about zheng he? Your comment is as silly as wh…

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines. You can't attack others like this on HN, nor keep posting in the flamewar style.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

Post reply on HN