Talk:Naval history of China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article...
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
A fact from Naval history of China appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 15 July 2007.
Wikipedia

What's an "archieve"?

-- Newhoggy | Talk 08:47, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

it is hard to find many english archieves, while in chinese there are numerous.Ksyrie 11:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Archive, Newhoggy. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 06:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
u r right,hope wiki makes sth like orthography in MS Office.Ksyrie 15:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
"Chinese naval technology was vastly superior to that of other nations until after the 15-16th centuries"

Don't delude yourself. Certainly at times it was, when there was stagnation in the West, most notebly during the Early Middle Ages and then again at points in the High Middle Ages but you'll find many historians would argue that it was not always the case and it's extremely hard to tell seeing as how the East only came into full contact with the West in the Late Middle Ages and how the maritime conditions were so different. Chinese technological superiority in this area has been greatly exaggerated since the discovery that the West only adopted inventions like fenestrated rudder and sealed compartments relatively late in history. Yet these were minor developments in comparison . If you took the care to look at European and Arabic naval history you'll see that they developed at the same pace. Authors on this subject have little knowledge of maritime technology. What appeals to them are the ideas that are easy to understand, such as rudders and and bulkheads, but little attention is paid to less "sexy" subjects like hull design. Even worse is the fact that most of these authors have an ulterior motive.

Don't delude yourself.
Vastly superior does sound like a strong POV statement, and should probably be removed or changed to fit reality. Lol.
Yet these were minor developments in comparison.
Minor? That's stretching it quite a bit, considering that Chinese rudders appeared in by the 1st century AD, and bulkhead compartments by at least the early 12th century with Zhu Yu's book.
If you took the care to look at European and Arabic naval history you'll see that they developed at the same pace.
Indeed, but don't forget Egypt and the Near East from the beginning.
but little attention is paid to less "sexy" subjects like hull design
Which author pays less attention to hull design? I thought if you wrote a comprehensive book on nautical technology you'd better include information on hull design. The larger Chinese junks were known not to fare well in very shallow water, but they have many impressive attributes, especially with the fore-and-aft rigging, shape and use of their batten sails, etc.
Even worse is the fact that most of these authors have an ulterior motive.
Again, which author are we talking about here? I am not a big fan of conspiracy theories about ultra-nationalist plots of the Chinese to somehow dominate over maritime history books (for what gain I have no idea).--PericlesofAthens 16:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New sections

I just added a new Notes and References section, due to someone putting a June fact check on the Song Dynasty navy being a permanent standing navy in 1132 AD. I was sort of puzzled by this, because the Song Dynasty article already states this with citation, I guess they didn't click the link and read that. In any case, I bothered adding the new sections for the single citation. If anyone wants me to improve this article, please ask, but I am more content with the nautics info I have posted about China in the Technology of the Song Dynasty article.--PericlesofAthens 16:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I just added the entire new History and Literature sections. Hope you enjoy the additional information, which represents about half the article now. Lol.--PericlesofAthens 16:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)