1421, The Year China Discovered the World or PseudoHistory?

[Frank Hipper]

Oh no, that was added by his descendants. Neither the 1493 original nor the 1502 (or was that 1503?) modification had the "nuevo mundo" ("new world") in it.

You sure?

Does this help? This is supposedly the earliest representation available, from the Book of Privileges, and the article says it was altered by Columbus to include the continent in addition to the islands seen.

[Lonestar]

I knew I was right!

[Kuroneko]

Oh no, that was added by his descendants. Neither the 1493 original nor the 1502 (or was that 1503?) modification had the "nuevo mundo" ("new world") in it.

You sure?

Pretty sure. The last revision of the Coat of Arms that was done by Columbus himself was in 1502 to the best of my knowledge. It still had no such text. I'm not certain when that was added, but it would be very strange that many sources have the 1502 date, but no reference to any modifications in the 1503-1506 period, which is the time until his death.

[Stormbringer]

Shep's crap has been dealt with.

[Kuroneko]

I knew I was right!

Hmm... I suppose the continent itself could be interpreted that way. Not conclusive, but pretty convincing. Alright.

[Frank Hipper]

I knew I was right!

Hmm... I suppose the continent itself could be interpreted that way. Not conclusive, but pretty convincing. Alright.

You're still technically correct as to when the wording was added, though.

[Peregrin Toker]

Voyages of exploration don't fit the Chinese character. Not even for this singular Admiral or his somewhat idiosyncratic Emperor.

Ethnic stereotypes don't make good counterarguments.

Care to show how insularity is NOT a characteristic of Chinese civilisation before and after this period?

Their leaders were insular and isolationist. That does not mean the rest of the populace were. Using your logic, Communism is an inherent part of the "Russian character" and any Russian who opposes Communism is automatically an "aberration". See the flaw in your logic?

Can you make a point as to how I'm stereotyping without regard to to historically proven, documented behavior?

See above.

And if it is proven, documented behavior on the part of a nation, does the term stereotype apply?

Yes - because you take the characteristics of the leaders of a nation, and think that those characteristics apply to the rest of the population as well.

[Howedar]

Such a huge expedition would likely have been government-funded at least in part. Given that the governments of the time were as much cults of personality as anything else, the stereotype applies.

[Kuroneko]

Their leaders were insular and isolationist. That does not mean the rest of the populace were. Using your logic, Communism is an inherent part of the "Russian character" and any Russian who opposes Communism is automatically an "aberration". See the flaw in your logic?

No, it means that Russian society was predominantly communist, which is completely true (for certain meanings of 'communist'). If I say "students at Oxford are better than those at Harvard," do I mean that any given Oxford student is better than any given Harvard student? Of course not! Insisting on universal quantification is just plain silly.

Furthermore, the word "character" need not refer to individuals at all, although that is its main connotation. In such a case, there is nothing wrong with using it to refer to the dominating traits of the culture as it interacts outwardly, which in such a centralized society would be that of the leaders. If the highly controlling government has an isolationist attitude, the the country can be said to have it as well. Again, there insisting on universal quantification over all of its population is silly.

Please don't construe a simple case of a poor choice of words as some sort of malice on Mr. Hipper's part. At worst, Mr. Hipper simply misspoke. As it does not change his actual point--since there would be no one to finance such voyages but the leaders--this is nothing but a nitpick. The dispositions of individual Chinese are completely irrelevant to this thread.

[MKSheppard]

Hey, a federal holiday is a federal holiday. I'll take the day off and drink to being fucked up the ass by Storm Rucker.

Alrighty, STOP it the FUCK NOW with the innenduo!

[Soulman]

Their leaders were insular and isolationist. That does not mean the rest of the populace were. Using your logic, Communism is an inherent part of the "Russian character" and any Russian who opposes Communism is automatically an "aberration". See the flaw in your logic?

If you took this to the extreme you'd have to name each member of the government who was isolationist (over a period of hundreds of years) as all would not have been and thusly you would have been generalising to say that the Chinese government had been isolationist. It is much easier and not much less accurate to say that China was isolationist for a long time.

[Darth Gojira]

Reminds me of a "what if" scenario I read about; What if China colonized the Americas?

[CaptainChewbacca]

One of my friends wrote a piece for an online Alternate History mag. He pulled an America analogue, with the fall of some dynasty prompting the North American colonies to break away.

In the 20th century you had a China running itself, indochina, the indies, and Australia, while "Zhangzou" was western North America and a lot of Pacific holdings.

[Frank Hipper]

Care to show how insularity is NOT a characteristic of Chinese civilisation before and after this period?

Their leaders were insular and isolationist. That does not mean the rest of the populace were. Using your logic, Communism is an inherent part of the "Russian character" and any Russian who opposes Communism is automatically an "aberration". See the flaw in your logic?

I see some flaws in logic, but they aren't especially mine.
The Soviet Union is a false analogy, or at best a poor one. I would be interested in seeing some proof that the Chinese people were held in isolation against their will by their government, and proof that Zeng He and Zhu Di were not solitary examples of expansionist thinking. Show me evidence of a popular desire to explore and expand.

Can you make a point as to how I'm stereotyping without regard to to historically proven, documented behavior?

See above.

I don't see it.

And if it is proven, documented behavior on the part of a nation, does the term stereotype apply?

Yes - because you take the characteristics of the leaders of a nation, and think that those characteristics apply to the rest of the population as well.

No-Those characteristics apply on a national level as well. Even into modern times. The soldiers who supressed the Tienamen Square demonstrations are a beautiful example of this. They didn't speak the same language, and came from an area that had been wracked with famine for decades until the communists managed to assuage it, and felt that the students were foreigners practically, due to THEIR isolation.

[Peregrin Toker]

I would be interested in seeing some proof that the Chinese people were held in isolation against their will by their government, and proof that Zeng He and Zhu Di were not solitary examples of expansionist thinking. Show me evidence of a popular desire to explore and expand.

They did not expand because their government was so centralized, their administration would collapse if they expanded.

No-Those characteristics apply on a national level as well. Even into modern times. The soldiers who supressed the Tienamen Square demonstrations are a beautiful example of this. They didn't speak the same language, and came from an area that had been wracked with famine for decades until the communists managed to assuage it, and felt that the students were foreigners practically, due to THEIR isolation.

The Tianamen (sp??) Square Massacre was the byproduct of communist ideology and totalitarian government, not an entire nationality being inherently isolationist.

[Frank Hipper]

I would be interested in seeing some proof that the Chinese people were held in isolation against their will by their government, and proof that Zeng He and Zhu Di were not solitary examples of expansionist thinking. Show me evidence of a popular desire to explore and expand.

They did not expand because their government was so centralized, their administration would collapse if they expanded.

Chinese government was, if anything, DE-centralized until the 20th century. Every governor, and petty warlord was practically a unit unto himself. They followed Beijing's lead and decrees, but their are many instances of their autonomy and distance from the capitol. And I'm not just talking physical distance, either.

No-Those characteristics apply on a national level as well. Even into modern times. The soldiers who supressed the Tienamen Square demonstrations are a beautiful example of this. They didn't speak the same language, and came from an area that had been wracked with famine for decades until the communists managed to assuage it, and felt that the students were foreigners practically, due to THEIR isolation.

The Tianamen (sp??) Square Massacre was the byproduct of communist ideology and totalitarian government, not an entire nationality being inherently isolationist.

I wasn't talking about causes, I was talking about how the inward-looking nature of China produced such a balkanized group that they could view students from their own capitol as foreigners.

[Slartibartfast]

Wow, how close is that to the actual number?

The actual number is about 25,000, so all things considered, its pretty damned close.

Probably has to do with the thing that Pi in those times was thought to be 22/7 or 25/8 or something.