History questions not worth their own thread II

[Bill3000]

The Vernacular had shifted from classical Latin noticeably by 50 BC. 813 was well after the shift was on its way. The main features found in all romance languages (au -> o, us -> o, removal of neuter tense) can be seen on graffiti and a couple of individuals' names by this point. I think the next noticeable changes is the words used for yes (si, oc, oui) and the use of S for plural vs. the i/e thing in Italian.

Local languages did have an impact too, but I agree it was relatively minor. French does some weird Gallic thing for counting and probably has some German or Celtic words, Spanish eventually added some Arabic words. That's really about it, though.

Now I'm not saying that the language didn't change - just that's when the vernaculars were mutually unintelligible with classical Latin. That's what Xanikk's question was - when the divergence was far enough that there was mutual unintelligibly.

(as for mutual unintelligible romance languages today, some languages are still mutually intelligible!)

 

[Louis XXIV]

Yeah, that was part of my point. Ask different people and they'll still say they understand each other.

 

[Lord Baal]

What was the origin of the queue in Chinese hairstyles prior to the 1911 Revolution? All I know about it is that it was traditional; I don't know where the tradition originated, or why.

 

[Tee Kay]

What was the origin of the queue in Chinese hairstyles prior to the 1911 Revolution? All I know about it is that it was traditional; I don't know where the tradition originated, or why.

It's a Manchu tradition. Chinese people wearing them is a sign of submission to the Manchus.

 

[Lord Baal]

It's a Manchu tradition. Chinese people wearing them is a sign of submission to the Manchus.

That was quick. I thought it was a Manchu thing, which is why I confused myself when thinking about how most Chinese males wore their hair that way. What did it signify amongst the Manchus?

 

[Tee Kay]

That was quick. I thought it was a Manchu thing, which is why I confused myself when thinking about how most Chinese males wore their hair that way. What did it signify amongst the Manchus?

That I am not sure. This website thinks it's for spiritual reasons as well as convenience when riding a horse. In my uninformed opinion I think it might also be to encourage conformity and instill discipline, like modern uniforms.

 

[Lord Baal]

As someone who is an experienced horseman, I can safely say that it really isn't a convenient hairstyle for riding, so that explanation seems out. The others make sense though.

 

[Masada]

The Machus forced non-Machu, i.e. Mongol, troops to wear it even before they moved into China proper. I think its fair in those circumstances to think of it as a uniform analogue. It also made it difficult to flee

 

[Agent327]

That´s Manchu. It´s also BS.

This

It's a Manchu tradition. Chinese people wearing them is a sign of submission to the Manchus.

... is correct.

 

[Masada]

That´s Manchu. It´s also BS.

As a custom it pre-dates the conquest of China dude and it was imposed on client people including Mongols as a means of determining loyalty.

 

[Agent327]

The Machus forced non-Machu, i.e. Mongol, troops to wear it even before they moved into China proper. I think its fair in those circumstances to think of it as a uniform analogue. It also made it difficult to flee

As a custom it pre-dates the conquest of China dude and it was imposed on client people including Mongols as a means of determining loyalty.

i.e. isn´t quite the same as including

"It also made it difficult to flee" is BS.

The question was related to the custom in China.

Now, accepting that originally the custom was a means of determining loyalty, how did it become a sign of submission for the Chinese?

 

[Tee Kay]

i.e. isn´t quite the same as including

I think it's pretty clear he's talking about non-Manchu, non-Han nationalities, in the period before the Manchus moved into Ming territories.

"It also made it difficult to flee" is BS.

In a way, he's right. During the Conquest of China anyone who wasn't wearing the queue was considered to be a resistor. Your allegiance must be displayed in public or you were executed.

The question was related to the custom in China.

It's still a noteworthy aside.

Now, accepting that originally the custom was a means of determining loyalty, how did it become a sign of submission for the Chinese?

I think the link between the two is pretty clear.

 

[Lord Baal]

i.e. isn´t quite the same as including

"It also made it difficult to flee" is BS.

The question was related to the custom in China.

Now, accepting that originally the custom was a means of determining loyalty, how did it become a sign of submission for the Chinese?

Considering I'm the guy who asked the bloody question, I think I can decide for myself whether Masada's information was useful to me or not. It was. Now kindly butt out of the discussion if all you're going to do is start meaningless arguments.

Honestly dude, you're nitpicking about whether Masada's answer is correct based on the fact that I mentioned China in my first question - not even the second question, which is the one he was asking, in which I specifically mentioned the Manchus themselves - which is just frigging ridiculous, since obviously the information he offered is useful when establishing the context of a tradition imposed on the Chinese by the Manchus. If they also imposed it on other peoples, it's interesting and informative.

 

[LightSpectra]

Why did Italy agree to the Washington Naval Treaty?

 

[Karalysia]

Italy was probably one of the powers least well placed economically to be participating in the naval arms race. The increasing size of capital ships with dreadnoughts and super dreadnoughts with the vast quantities of steel they consumed along with the expenditure put far more strain on Italy's resources (and Japan) than it did on say Britain or the US. Italy was still not a fully industrialized country as least compared to France, Germany, UK it was in no position to be building ever increasingly large and costly warships.

 

[bombshoo]

The fact that Italy was given the same allowed tonnages as France, when France had to have two large fleets and Italy only one might have mattered. Really, Italy was the only country present with only a single major naval threat (the French) to them. Coupled with relatively few and minor overseas possessions to protect compared to the others, it doesn't seem that bad of a deal to me.

Perhaps not much of desire or need by the Italian to have aircraft carriers could be another factor?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Why did Italy agree to the Washington Naval Treaty?

Because we thought to include them in the Washington Naval Treaty.
For serious.
By law, the Naval treaty put them at parity with France. It de-facto recognized it as a great naval power, and this above all else was why they were eager to sign it. This combined with the fact that Italy was straining itself to keep the same proportions with France (while still behind them) with France not even concerned about naval armaments, and that France was at a natural disadvantage with Naval parity to Italy...it made perfect sense to sign the thing.

 

[Agent327]

I think it's pretty clear he's talking about non-Manchu, non-Han nationalities, in the period before the Manchus moved into Ming territories.

Which wasn´t what the question was about.

In a way, he's right. During the Conquest of China anyone who wasn't wearing the queue was considered to be a resistor. Your allegiance must be displayed in public or you were executed.

Yes, Chinese would want to flee China... The Ching dynasty actually succeeded in conquering all of China (and extending it) and ruling China with the cooperation of the Chinese - until the West showed up.

It's still a noteworthy aside.

Which is why I asked for details.

Considering I'm the guy who asked the bloody question, I think I can decide for myself whether Masada's information was useful to me or not. It was. Now kindly butt out of the discussion if all you're going to do is start meaningless arguments.

Honestly dude, you're nitpicking about whether Masada's answer is correct based on the fact that I mentioned China in my first question - not even the second question, which is the one he was asking, in which I specifically mentioned the Manchus themselves - which is just frigging ridiculous, since obviously the information he offered is useful when establishing the context of a tradition imposed on the Chinese by the Manchus. If they also imposed it on other peoples, it's interesting and informative.

Which is why I asked for details. This is what I found: the custom was first introduced when the Manchu started making the Eastern Mongols their vassals. Now, Southern Manchuria is largely Chinese and this was in part acquired with the assistance of local Chinese; but no mention is made of the custom being introduced here. (In fact, there was migration of Chinese into Southern Manchuria which the Manchu were anxious to stop to protect their ginseng monopoly.)

 

[Louis XXIV]

Because we thought to include them in the Washington Naval Treaty.

For serious.
By law, the Naval treaty put them at parity with France. It de-facto recognized it as a great naval power, and this above all else was why they were eager to sign it. This combined with the fact that Italy was straining itself to keep the same proportions with France (while still behind them) with France not even concerned about naval armaments, and that France was at a natural disadvantage with Naval parity to Italy...it made perfect sense to sign the thing.

Yeah, pretty much. Every other power who signed it did so to avoid crazy arms races. To Italy, it helped them even have a shot of keeping pace. Really no disadvantage to them.

 

[Tee Kay]

Yes, Chinese would want to flee China... The Ching dynasty actually succeeded in conquering all of China (and extending it) and ruling China with the cooperation of the Chinese - until the West showed up.

I use the verb "to flee" figuratively, meaning to resist the Manchu conquest.

There were those Chinese who cooperated with the Manchus, those who resisted, and those who switched sides back and forth. It took the Manchus almost forty years from the capture of Beijing to pacify all of China and Taiwan. And while the Manchus did rule China with the cooperation of (some) Chinese they were still seen as foreigners. The Manchus themselves practiced a sort of segregation against the Chinese populace. There were many revolts against the Qing even before "the West showed up" (the White Lotus is probably the most famous).

(In fact, there was migration of Chinese into Southern Manchuria which the Manchu were anxious to stop to protect their ginseng monopoly.)

How is this relevant to the Queue Order?