Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

60

Despite common misconception, both Hong Kong Island and the Kowloon Peninsula were ceded to the United Kingdom in perpetuity, via the Treaty of Nanking and the Convention of Peking, respectively. London was under no legal obligation to return them to China. However, most of the Crown Colony of Hong Kong actually consists of the New Territories. That was ...


17

Because China was actually pretty far from India. For most of the past millennia, China and India were not "neighbouring countries" in any meaningful sense of the word. Most Chinese empires did not actually stretch all the way to the Indian subcontinent. It seems you're considering China and India based on their modern borders, but that is misleading: ...


16

Well, the short answer is no, unless you define "always" to start at around 1683. Historically, Taiwan is in fact the ancestral home of the Austronesian language family. Prior to modern times, this was the world's most geographically diverse language family, with speakers ranged from Madagascar to Easter Island to Hawaii. There are several subgroups in ...


16

Gibraltar was defensible, but Hong Kong was not. In the 1990s, the distance from the UK would have made Hong Hong impossible to defend. Also, Hong Kong is primarily occupied by Chinese, unlike Gibraltar, which is occupied by UK citizens, many of whom are soldiers. Gibraltar is a fortress, and it is relatively close to the UK and hence easily suppliable. ...


14

And if you'd lived your life in the Republic of China you'd have learned that Taiwan is an independent nation, the one true China, and that the rebel government in Beijing is illegally in power there (that may have been toned down now, but that used to be the line in the ROC). Both are of course propaganda. Truth is Taiwan wasn't "always" part of China ...


11

The basis for the 5,000 years figure comes from tracing Chinese "history" to the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors. This figure includes over 1,000 years of legends. The next 1000 years are semi-legendary, being only somewhat corroborated by historical evidence. We start to have fragmentary historical records for a few centuries after that, but true ...


11

There's a PHD thesis and book chapter, both by Elizabeth McGuire on this matter. Soviet reaction was mixed, confused and ambiguous. The Cultural Revolution contained deeply anti-Soviet elements, and accused them of revisionism and deviation from Marxism-Leninism, but it came at a very inopportune time for USSR, which hampered any clear, official response. ...


10

China (at the time) was one of the "Big Four" Allies during World War II. (The "United Nations" originally meant the united, anti-Axis nations.) It's true that the "Big Three" were the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, but there were a number of much weaker, plausible "number four" states, including China, India, France, and Poland (the latter ...


9

It depends on the location and time. Using the number of chariots to denote the size of an army is most often a Spring and Autumn practice. During this period, the traditional, ritualistic formal system of the Chou Dynasty degraded and gave way to ad hoc reforms. Part of these reforms is changes in military organisation. The Chou dynasty prescribed ...


8

Yes, sort of. Illiterate people could "sign" using hand prints, which is a reasonably reliable biometric (totally anecdotal, but my university's experience was <10% false identification) that's a bit easier to authenticate by the naked eye. Prints of the finger (more than just the tip) could also be authenticated based on feature such as lengths between ...


7

Short Answer The Kidnapper is the United States/Roosevelt. The Hooligan is Britain/Churchill. The Bully was the Soviet Union/Stalin. For reference, this is the original passage from Chiang's diary: 聯合國中之四國,我為最弱,甚以弱者遇拐子、流氓與土霸為可危,也識知:人非自強,任何人亦不能為助。而國家之不求自強,則無論為敵為友,皆一汝為俎上之肉,可不戒懼? Of the four members of the United Nations, we are the weakest; it is ...


7

Tofu's origins are not conclusively known. The leading theory, however, is that it was invented during the Western Han Dynasty by Liu An, the king of Huai Nan. The earliest known reference to this is made in the Shiyi (a type of history book that is sort of an unofficial addendum to the official histories) written by a Liang Dynasty official, Xie Chuo ...


7

Well, to be factual, more like 4100 years+ of history is available for study. Xia Dynasty is dated back to cca 2100 BC - 1600 BC, numerous sites approves these dates. Before these days dates and historical records get more and more inaccurate and entering into the realm of legends. "5000 years" seems more like a generous rounding up, but it is not very far ...


6

There was a project earlier called the Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project, but because it's a sensitive matter for Chinese, as well as the political situation regarding the People's Republic of china, there's a ton of dispute about it. Even in Chinese texts, it doesn't all agree. The Shiji, for example, paints a starkly different picture than the Bamboo ...


6

There are no specific rules, it is completely up to the founders. Many dynasties ultimately took their names from one of the ancient states of China. In any case, usually the actual choice were made in one of six ways: Reviving an Ancient Name: the dynasty began where an ancient state existed, and took its name from its ancient predecessor. Examples ...


5

Good Fences Make Good Neighboors The answer consists of 1 word - Himalayas. Okay, let me add the second word: Tibet. Basically, the two cultures have been completely separated by an insurmountable barrier (not to mention that the fact that India and China share a border today is an artifact of the 20th century, when China annexed Tibet).


5

To begin with, the statistics shows China 44% of its time was under a unified rule. The number for Europe is 18%. So we want to know why (and hope this question makes sense). So it is a comparative history question. In order to establish a comparative history, much efforts have to be put before the blind comparison is made. On this topic, a very good ...


5

There is during the Han Dynasty a record of Gan Ying's travel to Europe. This is recorded in the Hou Han Shu. In the ninth year 97 CE, Ban Chao sent his Subordinate Gan Ying, who probed as far as the Western Sea, which is either the Persian Gulf or the Black Sea and then returned. Former generations never reached these regions. The Shanjing gives ...


5

The Old Chinese character for fertilisers is the same as the word as fecal matter. Thus, we cannot assume that the fertilisers mentioned in Spring and Autumn texts were actually excrement. It is known that at least in some cases, they were referring to (presumably compost) weed or grass. The earliest explicit reference of using human waste as fertilisers ...


5

They usually called them "Maoists" and made comparisons to fascism. But overall I would say there was no extensive coverage of the events in the press and propaganda. The majority of the people just did not know anything about the events. The things were not reported as very much important in the USSR, they were covered more like something happening far ...


5

I find interesting that many answers just belong to "armchair generals" that point only to the military power, logistics, *1 but forget to mention the issues that could lead to a war in the first place. Remember, war is the continuation of politics.... First of all, I would point the main issue would be noticing how these issues affect the internal ...


5

No. The Sino-Soviet split was motivated by fundamental differences in national interests, so there is little that a third party like the US could have done to influence it. Furthermore, US policy makers were wilfully ignorant of early signs of the split, which means that they did not exploit the situation until it had become abundantly clear, by the ...


5

Because they were not "better" or "more effective". There are generally poor reports of the People's Liberation Army's effectiveness against Japan during World War II. - Elleman, Bruce A. Modern Chinese Warfare, 1795-1989. Routledge, 2005. Keep in mind that comparisons are difficult to make because the Nationalists[1] bore the brunt[2] of all ...


4

Neither, really. The Zhou Dynasty classed its vassals into five ranks, 公 侯 伯 子 男, which are usually translated into English as Duke, Marquis, Count, Viscount and Baron. The State of Lu held a rank of Marquis (侯). Accordingly, its rulers are properly referred to as Marquis of Lu (魯侯). For example, Marquis Xi of Lu (魯侯戲) whose given name was Xi. However, ...


4

@lins314159's answer is correct: the Eastern Zhou's fall began with the demise of the Western Zhou. Importantly, as @lins314159 says, the Eastern Zhou was never able to control its vassals. I'd like to elaborate a bit on why that was the case though. Moral Authority Following the eastward move, Zhou's moral authority and general prestige crumbled. But this ...


4

I would say it's probably independently discovered. Since it's not a real stretch to put meat scraps together to not waste food. In fact in China, there's a 6th century agricultural manual that contained instructions for making sausages. So I think it's more plausible that the ancient Chinese discovered sausages by themselves so early in history. According ...


4

According to the book of Han, it's 100 plus some (百餘人). The full entry is as follows and pretty much matches the description on Wikipedia: 濟東王彭離立二十九年。彭離驕悍,昏莫私與其奴亡命少年數十人行剽,殺人取財物以為好。所殺發覺者百餘人,國皆知之,莫敢夜行。所殺者子上書告言,有司請誅,武帝弗忍,廢為庶人,徙上庸,國除,為大河郡。 http://ctext.org/han-shu/wen-san-wang-zhuan The translation on Wikipedia is acceptable so I'll reproduce here (with ...


4

Silk, being a fragile fabric, is going to be lost in virtually any archaeological context. THIS article says: SE′RICUM (σερικόν), silk, also called bombycinum. The first ancient author who affords any evidence respecting the use of silk, is Aristotle (H.A. V.19).a After a description, partially correct, of the metamorphoses of the silkworm (bombyx, ...


4

One other aspect to this discussion is water. Once the UK had returned the leased territories (as they would have had to do), all China needed to do was turn off the tap supplying water to the rest of HK. (Where do you think it came from?) It is unlikely that the rest of HK would have lasted more than a few days - no tanks (yes, I did see the pun) needed. ...


3

If you look at the map, you can see that there are highly mountainous regions covering northeastern India and Southwest China. So even if you draw a boundary line somewhere through these mountains, you can see that the desirability and likelihood of moving or fighting across these mountains is pretty slim (at least until 1962). They acted as a buffer zone ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible