Not that subject...that one I am very well versed in. For a pithy and entertaining discussion of why the Xiongnu-Hun identification is foolish, see Heather (2005) or (2009).Dachs
You already admitted you don't know much on the subject
Why is Mongolia in and not Korea
- Thread starter tifa9292
- Start date
- Status
Verbose
Deity
Quite. The question was of the rhetorical kind. Plowing the earth with salt is a wonderful symbolic gesture. From the political economy side of things it has zero value. Never mind the complete impossibility of the kind of geopolitical use presumably alluded to.
It's very hard to translate, in some language, they distinguish between some fine nuance while in some language, they don't. Thank you for the post, I think it's good to educate. The words they use also change. I recall the word 狄 was used around Chou dynasty (before Confucius). I recall only encounter the word 倭 when it was used to refer to Japanese pirates during Ming dynasty. I think I see 蛮夷 often used together when it was referring to barbarian.
There are a lot more differences between Chinese and western concept. Chinese dynasty change often represent one group get power from another group. European kingdoms are different, due to feudalism, power can transfer hands due to marriage or war. England's monarchy had many "foreign" rulers, Scots, Hanover, Flander, quite a bit just from my memory. Chinese central authority often go through ups and downs even within the same dynasty. That's a concept "westerner" may not realize until they study quite a bit of Chinese history and see some of those differences.
Salt is very expensive and it was used to pay roman legionaire. Worth his salt. The word "salary" are all indication how expensive and treasure salt was. Salt was also very expensive in China. I think one poster pointed one, it was Song or perhaps another dynasty that lost the salt trade in northern China to the barbarian and had to go for sea commerce to make up for the shortfall. "history" alleges Rome salted Carthage, well, that was sure expensive gesture
I have a bit of skeptism on but I will accept it as true as I cannot find good rebuttal on that never happened.Some towns prospered on salt alone. Look up a town called Salzburg in Austria. That town thrived on its salt mine.
Salt became inexpensive as we industrialize, especially after USA discovered huge salt deposit and used huge machinery to mine those underground salt (salt basically covers a good portion of eastern USA, from the great lake area down to at least central USA. If I remember correctly, a good portion of USA was below the sea and filled with salt. It's an amazing amount of salt deposit within USA.
From the sources I've read, salt production in Ancient China (esp. in the north) was very high, the expense came predominantly from monopolies imposed by central.
Regardless, regular burnings would have been effective in cutting supply lines if extermination of all living non-allies (including women, children and babies) was not enough.
As for Dachs challenging me on when something like this has happened, something similar did happen under Ran Min's command- he more or less cleansed the various (Five Hu) foreign invaders out of North China after the North Chinese suffered their cruel and incompetent rule.
They weren't all killed, but the mass reprisals led to a huge exodus of their people, and set a historical precedent (subsequent occupiers would think twice about abusing the local populace).
The point is however that had they applied Ran Min's extermination order with say, Han-Xiongnu War logistics, on balance millions of civilian lives would have been saved.
Regardless, regular burnings would have been effective in cutting supply lines if extermination of all living non-allies (including women, children and babies) was not enough.
As for Dachs challenging me on when something like this has happened, something similar did happen under Ran Min's command- he more or less cleansed the various (Five Hu) foreign invaders out of North China after the North Chinese suffered their cruel and incompetent rule.
They weren't all killed, but the mass reprisals led to a huge exodus of their people, and set a historical precedent (subsequent occupiers would think twice about abusing the local populace).
The point is however that had they applied Ran Min's extermination order with say, Han-Xiongnu War logistics, on balance millions of civilian lives would have been saved.
Oh yes, the glorious nationalistic salt production figures (provided by Westerners), but those are a mere prelude to the even grander hypernationalist statistics such as yearly tin production during the late Song
Since you already admitted you don't know anything about Chinese history...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ran_Min
That account, along with genetic evidence (Northern Chinese gene pool showing next to no traces of speculated Five Hu admixture) corroborate each other
Since you already admitted you don't know anything about Chinese history...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ran_Min
That account, along with genetic evidence (Northern Chinese gene pool showing next to no traces of speculated Five Hu admixture) corroborate each other
I wasn't responding to your "salt production" or "tin production" statistics. Don't be ridiculous. I was talking about the "cleansing foreign invaders", "suffering under cruel and incompetent rule", and "they would think twice about abusing the populace" nonsense.
Plus, genetic "evidence" is notoriously poor at determining much at all about migrations, especially after the prehistoric period. Most of the time, analysis of haplogroups and mitochondrial DNA and attempts to apply such analyses to events after, say, 20,000 BC are more nationalistic posturing.
Plus, genetic "evidence" is notoriously poor at determining much at all about migrations, especially after the prehistoric period. Most of the time, analysis of haplogroups and mitochondrial DNA and attempts to apply such analyses to events after, say, 20,000 BC are more nationalistic posturing.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
They made a gesture. They salted a few fields said, "BEHOLD, YOUR FIELDS HAVE BEEN SALTED.""history" alleges Rome salted Carthage, well, that was sure expensive gesture
Sorry, I don't look fondly upon mass murderers be they Nazis, or Jie, or English settlers in the Americas. I know many historians like to pull the "those were the times" card, but killing innocent people never sits well with me regardless of how backwards and miserable your culture or society are at the time.
Long story short North Chinese are the natives of North China, foreigners move in and try to exterminate them and their culture, they face severe backlash which results in the nigh-total destruction of their clans.
It really is not, especially because these groups of people are attested to linguistically (from where you can draw genetic links) and genetic science has advanced so much that you can more accurately map the total ancestry (not just y-DNA/MTDNA) of individuals. In all data on N-Chinese I've seen, their ATDNA is overwhelmingly "North Chinese" or clustered with the Yi/Naxi/Eastern Tibetans; basically what you'd expect.
Next to no "Indo-European", a little "Yeniseian", barely any "Altaic" in them.
...if you're going to play the morality card, why is killing and raping and pillaging and murdering - and I honestly don't think that you can call what was going on "mass murder", even if it was bad for the people who were being screwed over - "Chinese" people a Bad Thing, but doing the same thing to "non-Chinese" people is okay and even obligatory? Either your system of morality is FUBAR, or you're just throwing out a red herring to justify your jingoism. Or both.
Wrong. Flat-****ing-out wrong. Stop right there. You get NOTHING! You LOSE. Good DAY, sir.lolno said:
^ clearly hasn't studied genetics at all What we know is that the North Chinese population is relatively "pure". They cluster, on ATDNA maps, with who you'd expect- various other Sino-Tibetans. So either the Five Hu were closely related to all of these groups or they were cleansed from the land. Or they had few descendants- means the same thing as the previous statement really.
They can do it because they're the natives, they're the injured party. It's called self-defense- and on balance, millions upon millions of lives would have been saved- including those of non-Chinese allies.
What we know is that the North Chinese population is relatively "pure". They cluster, on ATDNA maps, with who you'd expect- various other Sino-Tibetans. So either the Five Hu were closely related to all of these groups or they were cleansed from the land. Or they had few descendants- means the same thing as the previous statement really.They can do it because they're the natives, they're the injured party. It's called self-defense- and on balance, millions upon millions of lives would have been saved- including those of non-Chinese allies.
Actually, I'm voicing a fairly common criticism of attempts to employ genetic marker tracking in analyses of migrations throughout history. See, for instance, Halsall (2007), esp. p. 450-452. Frankly, I'm not surprised you're falling back on "lol u suk @ genetix", because that's been about the same as the tenor of your argument for the rest of the past few pages.^ clearly hasn't studied genetics at all
The fundamental problem here is that you assume that ethnicity is something you can genetically track; that's emphatically not the case, as one can easily see when one looks at the Roman state contemporary to the Later Han. Or, in an example that you might like better, the Manju in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.
I replaced "Chinese" there with "Armenians" and I just justified the murder of millions of Armenians at the hands of the Committee for Union and Progress and the Ottoman Army. In the exact same way that Mehmed Talaat Pasha did back in 1915. That sort of argument is morally contemptible.lolno said:
Except last I checked, Turkic speakers are not even native to Anatolia, nor is Islam, nor were the "Ottoman" rulers, and the Armenians have no history of slaughtering civilians for well, next to nothing.
So the better analogy would be the Armenians slaughtering the Ottomans as they were "setting up camp", or the various Amerind tribes along the East Coast killing off all the settlers that came from England until their ventures became unprofitable
And by "genetic markers" I assume you are talking about Y-DNA and MTDNA, which I agree tells you nothing- just one man out of the thousands of your male ancestors.
ATDNA is a different story, especially when you are using 200+ SNPs
So the better analogy would be the Armenians slaughtering the Ottomans as they were "setting up camp", or the various Amerind tribes along the East Coast killing off all the settlers that came from England until their ventures became unprofitable
And by "genetic markers" I assume you are talking about Y-DNA and MTDNA, which I agree tells you nothing- just one man out of the thousands of your male ancestors.
ATDNA is a different story, especially when you are using 200+ SNPs
Oh, I suppose you missed all those Armenians who joined up with the Russians, or the Armenians who sent information to Russian troops, and so forth. In a time of war, no less. Or do the rules just not apply to them because they're western barbarians?
Ohhhh, okayyyy. I see. So whenever a Roman decided to join up with Alareiks and his guys, he magically got Gothic ATDNA. And whenever a Russian decided to hang out with Nurhaci and the Bannermen, he got Manju ATDNA. And whenever a Vietnamese moves to the US and learns English, she gets American MTDNA. Left India to work as a migrant laborer in the UAE? No problem, it shows up in your ATDNA. Decided to sign up with a warlord that promised more plunder than your old one? Free ATDNA alteration as a signing bonus. Ended up dying on your monthlong vacation to London? Oops, sorry, looks like your dead body's cells will be full of ATDNA from the UK.lolno said:
I don't care if you've dug up ATDNA, XYZDNA, LOLDNA, or GGNOREDNA - none of it reflects what language you speak, what political group you're affiliated with, who your boss is, or whose portrait you kiss when you perform obeisance.
The overriding clause is that the Ottomans were not native to Anatolia. The total destruction of their state is thus always legitimate, and they have no moral grounds to punish such action.
Do you even know what ATDNA is or what we're even talking about? I said ATDNA corroborates the historical account of Five Hu being cleansed from Northern China, so I don't know why you started rambling on about who is hanging out or working with who.
If these Five Hu stayed around, they certainly did not leave any genetic evidence. Either that or they were "essentially" Sino-Tibetans themselves, which explains the remarkable absence of "foreign" genes in North China
You might want to check the source of your information a bit. I am going to try to stay out of this China history after this post on this particular thread as this thread was supposedly about Mongols and Korean. You are fairly coherent and better than some Korean posters, but you might want to read the sources a bit.
The English version of the wiki you cited did not protray RanMin in the same way as you did. Specifically, I avoided RanMin's website on purpose as I think it could be biased, just like the Korean exampls using obvious Korean bias websites, etc.
I looked up ZiZhi Tongjian, a source that I trust. I never read the whole work as it's too big and semi-classical Chinese is not that easy for me under time constraint.
I read book 98 and book 99 of ZhiZhi Tongjian, where RanMin was mentioned in those 2 books. It seems to me, RanMin's original edict was simpler and probably more self-motivating. I apologize for non-Chinese readers for the following quote as I need to quote in Chinese to make my point."
As far as I understand, RanMin aka ShiMin knows those "barbarian/hu" won't submit to his rule, he asked people of "Zhou" aka Chinese to kill all those barbarians. Min lead people of Zhou himself in extermination of barbarians, regardless of barbarian's social status, male or female, young or old, all killed, over 200,000 killed." I did not see mentioning of how the barbarian were afraid of exterminating "Chinese" afterwards, can you point me to passages from ZhiZhiTongjian or perhaps from sixteen country "spring autumn" book, along with reference so I can look them up easier?from ZiZhiTongjian said:
As far as I know, "barbarians" continue to massacre Chinese later on. The Mongols tried to exterminate probably about 20% of the Chinese population until non-Mongolian in power pointed out to them a lot of Chinese are serving under Mongol rule and that edict will kill a lot of Chinese serving the Mongols and the edict was repealed. Alas, a lot of Chinese have perished already as far as I know.
Waste of time to continue arguing...
Thread closed.
Thread closed.
- Status
Similar threads
