48 replies to this topic

[Wujiang]

I was just saying lamellar was more popular. I'm sure they had "some" variations of plate curiass armor used by the commanders/generals.create plate armor & full body plate armors.

Care to show a source for this ?

[Tibet Libre]

Also, the polygonal fortification was used hundreds of years after the Ming dynasty collapsed.

In an improved form, yes. But the beginnings of star shaped fortifications can be traced back to the late 15th century, to the days of di Giorgio Martini (d. 1502) who built one for the duke of Orbino and Albrecht Duerer (d. 1528) who wrote a treatise on the subject (beside many Italian engineer-artists).

[Wan Ren aka Danny]

Check this out, I think the west is starting to recognize the many contribution that China has offered the world.

[Yang Zongbao]

Check this out, I think the west is starting to recognize the many contribution that China has offered the world.

It wasn't too bad.

I remember they did some of the history homework on China wrong, but it was passable.

I found their claim that the "M16 and Tomahawk Missile originated in China" a bit outrageous and sensational. To say that the Chinese had equivalents and that these weapons were descended from Chinese weapons fine, but it still made me squirm to hear it, a little bit.

[shawn]

http://en.wikipedia....ttle_of_Zonchio

This occured in 1499. This is the 1st naval battle which 1st used cannons on ships and ever recorded in naval history. When did Ming China start using canons on their ships?

[Yang Zongbao]

http://en.wikipedia....ttle_of_Zonchio

This occured in 1499. This is the 1st naval battle which 1st used cannons on ships and ever recorded in naval history. When did Ming China start using canons on their ships?

Hmm, I distinctly seem to recall that the forces fighting for control of China during the civil war years after the Yuan dynasty mounted cannons on their ships. Chen Youliang was supposed to have plenty of good quality cannon aboard his, and the battle of Boyang Lake was fought with many chong.

Zheng He's ships mounted cannons, and he had been noted to bombard the walls of an African city state.

All of these events predate Zonchio.

[jubilee]

erm, since that's the case, Mr Yang, how come history recognises Zonchio as the 1st battle where canons were 1st used or recorded in written history? Since China had also written or recorded history?

[Yang Zongbao]

erm, since that's the case, Mr Yang, how come history recognises Zonchio as the 1st battle where canons were 1st used or recorded in written history? Since China had also written or recorded history?

That link proves that some people on wikipedia believe that Zonchio was the first battle where cannons were used in a naval setting. It doesn't prove that cannons were first used in battle then (being recorded earlier even in European history, to say nothing of Asian history), or even in naval combat.

Perhaps they had an outdated or rather Eurocentric sourcing. Historians have already noted Chinese use of cannons on their ships, ie Zheng He shelling Mogadishu (See When China Ruled the Seas, by Louise Levathes).

Also see the threads on the battle of lake Boyang (1363 CE).

http://www.chinahist...?showtopic=8150

http://www.chinahist...p...topic=8247

[Liang Jieming]

erm, since that's the case, Mr Yang, how come history recognises Zonchio as the 1st battle where canons were 1st used or recorded in written history? Since China had also written or recorded history?

Wikipedia... well... pinnacle of historical accuracy there.

Forget wikipedia, even history books are full of such errors. I had a similar argument on the History Channel forum only a week or two back. Someone argued that since he's never learnt about certain Chinese discoveries, it can't be all that important or even existed. Really, flawed logic there. Like I pointed out to him, just because he's never read about it or that it's not taught in schools doesn't mean it's not true. Take the example of catapults. Until today, you'll still get people screaming 399 B.C. syracuse as the very first date in history when catapults were invented despite Chinese textual evidence that they've had catapults predating 399 B.C. (not to mention circumstantial evidence of even older Indian catapults)... and this isn't just from run-of-the-mill internet forummers... just recently, two books on Catapults, one published 2006, and yet another just this year still propagate 399 B.C. and these book were written by History professors no less.

So my point, don't always believe what you read.

[snowybeagle]

I had a similar argument on the History Channel forum only a week or two back. Someone argued that since he's never learnt about certain Chinese discoveries, it can't be all that important or even existed. Really, flawed logic there.

You must have been in a real good mood to humour ... I mean, entertain ... I mean, educate ... him.

Unless he's like totally fresh, his drawback is usually not ignorance.

Edited: I found that thread ... his problem is not ignorance ...

Edited by snowybeagle, 15 July 2007 - 09:39 PM.

[Liang Jieming]

It's people like that that make the world so unpleasant. They refuse to even admit that there is another side to a story, let alone try and see/understand the balanced view.

[bucketball]

Can some one provide some insight into how the Manchus managed to conquer China in the face of Chinese superiority in advanced weaponry ?

[snowybeagle]

Can some one provide some insight into how the Manchus managed to conquer China in the face of Chinese superiority in advanced weaponry ?

In the face of Ming's superiority, you mean.

The Manchus made use of captured craftsmen to create their own cannons.

The Chinese wiki source cited that in AD 1631, Liu Han (刘汉), a captive of the Manchu, manufactured some cannons for the Later Jin in their capital, Shenyang, their version being an improvement over the Ming's through lost-wax process, annealing and quenching.

By AD 1639, they had 60 cannons and used them to win Battle of SongJin (松锦之战), where they captured the Ming general Hong ChengChou.

[Ironhand]

Very interesting weapons. A lot of them remind me of something out of anime. What you say is true generally of Westerners, but quite often the images we have are based from movies and its not just Chinese culture that suffers from this. 9 out of 10 people also couldn't tell the difference between a historic based Roman kit and a tin-can extra from Gladiator. The same goes for Viking stereotypes and most of the time you're lucky if the person knows horns on helms are not accurate. That goes for Medieval European movies and a score of other cultures and time periods. Honestly, quite a few people get their image of Chinese people from foreign television and movies. So basically it comes down to people in the movie industry who often care little and seem to purposely endeavor at times to make things as stereotypical and inaccurate as possible to help make changes. The American movie industry even continually rejects attempts by living history groups to assist them with knowledge, people, and even equipment. With the money they spend on inaccurate junk they could easily make accurate goods. I've seen some good foreign movies that seem to endeavor for accuracy, but from a foreign point of view sometimes that can only make it more confusing.
Lets face it, most people are just looking for entertainment and are not going to get a history degree just to watch Once Upon a Time in China. The bad thing is that are just out for a bit of fun, what they don't know better on people take in and believe it to a certain degree of logical sense and even beyond sometimes.

BTW: Sorry about changing the subject, but while I'm still following this interesting discussion, as a Westerner I felt obligated to comment not so much in defense but maybe to provide a bit of understanding.

Edited by Ironhand, 19 July 2007 - 01:11 AM.

[Wujiang]

Can some one provide some insight into how the Manchus managed to conquer China in the face of Chinese superiority in advanced weaponry ?

A non-han power defeating hans, as history shows, only happens when one key combination of factors apply.

(1) Corruption
(2) Political infighting
(3) Military's loss of support due to the above reasons.

'China' also had one more major problem to attend to which was being gutted by southern rebellions.
Remember that Qing did not defeat the Ming. Shun took down Ming. And Shun at that time was only in its fledgling state. No mature political or beaucratic infrustructure was in place which means China's resources had no coordination. Most of the southern lands were relatively authonomous and there was just no time for organize any decent defence against them. This is due to the fact that the rebel army had no more fight left in them because their mission was to topple Ming and they did that already. They were so psyched to just stretch out and relax after their 10 bloody years of war. The new gov's only hope was the border garrision on the great wall and we all know what happened there. Sadly, that also was not the whole story. Even if Qing did not have Wu Sangui's help, they would still have entered the central plains via the north-western route, although that would have been much more difficuit.