Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
ArmenianSurvival
Chieftain
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Admiral Zheng-He and the Chinese Maritime Revolution Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 20:09 |
"In the early 1400's, the technology that had served sailors on the
friendly seas of the world were being developed to man the open waters
and dominate the ocean. Ships were being built to withstand the rough
waters of the open ocean in contrast to the calm, gentle waters of the
sea such as the Mediterranean. Compasses were being developed and
modified, making it easier for fleets to more accurately know which
direction they were headed. Sails were being further improved, giving
increased wind and control to sailors. It was during this time that the
Ming
Dynasty of China was growing curious as to what lay across the vast
Indian Ocean. They sent a Muslim-Chinese man by the name of Zheng-He on
voyages to explore the Indian Ocean and establish diplomatic and
commercial relations with newly-discovered port cities of the East.
Zheng-He went on what is today known as the '7 Indian Ocean Voyages', in
which he set up trade between Ming China and port cities in Eastern
Africa as well as India, sending massive fleets with Cavalry and
Infantry units as well as lavish gifts for the local rulers. When later
Ming rulers of China decided to stop funding maritime expeditions in
order to concentrate on internal affairs, the maritime technology and
knowledge that the Chinese held became obsolete without any backing
from the state"
How would things have changed if the Ming rulers of China kept
sponsoring voyages, opened up trade all around the Indian Ocean, and
possibly even gone to conquer foreign lands later on? Would they
have become the first people to "discover" the New World?
For one, the European dominance in the Indian Ocean would never have
commenced if the voyages were still sponsored by the Ming Dynasty. We
have to take a look at how Europeans got their hands on this new maritime technology developed by the Chinese.
After the Ming stopped
the voyages, the maritime technology became obsolete to the Chinese,
without the backing of their state. Italian merchants, still active in
China ever since Marco Polo opened up direct trade there (1271)
purchased it in order to start a Maritime Revolution of their own.
However, Italy did not have the backing of a unified state, as
independent city-states were the primary political entity on the
Italian Peninsula. The new technology became obsolete to the Italians
as well, and they, like the Chinese, sold it. This is how the
Portuguese and the Spanish got their hands on the technology that they
could actually put to use, most notably because the voyages had the
backing of a unified nation-state. If the Ming had continued to sponsor
their voyages, there would be no need to sell the information to
merchants, and it would have prevented Europe from dominating the
ocean, at least in the initial stages of the Maritime Revolution.
Another likely scenario is if Ming rulers continued the voyages, but
the Europeans were still able to get their hands on the maritime
technology. As Chinese ships dominated the Indian Ocean during the
voyages of Zheng-He (1405-1433), continued backing of the navy by the
state would only mean increased dominance by the time Europeans would
arrive in the late 1400's (Bartolomeu Dias---1488). With a dominant
Chinese navy the Europeans would have likely stood no chance in taking
important coast cities in the Indian Ocean, which would likely result
in peaceful trade between European merchants and the locals. Portuguese
fleets siezing Indian Ocean port cities (Goa, Daman, Diu,
Hormuz, Musqat, Aden, and Macao in China) would have been easily
repelled, as the Chinese fleet at the time of Zheng He (1433) was much larger
in terms of ships and men than the Portuguese and other European
fleets even in the time of Columbus (1492). This would mean vastly decreased revenues for European
merchants (and nations), because instead of siezing entire port cities, they would have to trade with them.
Also, after the discovery of the Americas, what role could China have
played in the colonization/exploitation of the land, and how could it
tip the scale in favor of an Indian Ocean-based world economy rather
than an Atlantic-based one?
Just some brainstorming....please ad or tell us how you think history
would have been different if the Ming Dynasty continued to sponsor its
maritime voyages.
Edited by ArmenianSurvival
|
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance
Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 04:14 |
The Ming would have gone bankrupt but at the same time China as a whole would benefit, casting aside the seemingly east Asian trademark of Confucian close mindedness for a mercantile nation that probably thus would be less stable but also not likely to fall behind the west.
Because of the withdrawal of effective foreign policy most of the people that left China for Malaysia, California and others (the mercantile class) would have stayed and streghtneed their nation. The Ming would have fallen earlier because the fleets were not profitable but the whole nation would benefit in the long run.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 05:42 |
One thing is for sure - N.A.M.Rodger's monumental 'Naval History of Britain' would have had an index reference to China, which it doesn't have in the two volumes published so far (up to 1815).
Does anybody know of a reference for Chinese ship design of the time?I'm currently under the impression that Chinese design lagged way behind Western design, at least from the time of the galleon and the caravel - effectively square-rig with a fore-and-aft driver, or schooner rig. I've only seen pictures of Chines ships with, in effect, lugger rigs.
How far it would have improved, or whether it would have improved as fast as Western design must, of course, be open questions.
|
|
ArmenianSurvival
Chieftain
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 21:44 |
Well the thing that would solidify Chinese domination of the Indian
Ocean in my eyes would be the sheer size of their fleet. During Zheng
He's voyages, I believe the size of the Chinese navy was 27,000 men,
while Columbus's original expedition a century later only had around
9,000 men. If China had established their dominance over the Indian
Ocean trade (China and India were the biggest supplier of goods for
export in the world), that original fleet of Zheng He's would have grew
substantially in size and strength due to their increased trade
profits. It would have made them unstoppable in the Indian Ocean.
Instead, they suspended basically all their naval activity for
centuries, allowing much smaller fleets of Portuguese and British
sailors to take very notable port cities all over the Indian Ocean. If
China had established its dominance early on (they would have had
almost a 100-year head start by the time the Europeans arrived in the
Indian Ocean) then it would have easily prevented European armed
trading in the Indian Ocean. That would have reduced their profits
immensely, and with China ruling the Indian Ocean, China would gain in
wealth and power, and it would have curbed the shift in wealth from
Asia to Europe to the point where Europe wouldnt be as dominant as it
really ended up being.
All this, and im not even getting into what
China could have done once the Americas were discovered. They had the
biggest advantage in terms of potential colonists they could have sent
to settle in the Americas, and they would have landed on the west
coast, where they would have only had to deal with the Spanish. Again,
this is where their massive fleets would have come into play.
So if they kept the voyages going from 1405-1492 (instead of 1405-1424,
1431-1433) they could have built up net profits over the course of 100
years from their Indian Ocean domination, and then use those profits to
make the fleets even larger, preventing European armed trade there.
Once the Americas were founded by Europeans in 1492, China would use
their immense navy and many potential settlers to colonize the western
Americas, where their navy would have decimated the Spanish by that
time.
I could be seeing things wrong but thats how the general course of
events would play out in my mind. There are also so many
disasters/surprises that arent taken into account that can easily make
my predictions go completely to waste. Just curious to see what you guys think could have happened.
Edited by ArmenianSurvival
|
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance
Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 22:00 |
Chinese ships of the exploration period were far in advance of those sad little Europeans caravels. They were about 5 times larger with more sophisticated rudders and greater storage space.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 11:36 |
Originally posted by Tobodai
Chinese ships of the exploration period were far in advance of those sad little Europeans caravels. They were about 5 times larger with more sophisticated rudders and greater storage space. |
It's keel, hull and sail design and gunnery I'm interested in. From what I've seen before, junks in general use centreboards and keel boards which can never be as stiff as a keel. And while lugsails are OK beating, they're not so good as square rig at other points of sailing, and they don't tack as fast as normal fore-and-aft rig.
Moreover the large 6, 7, 8, or 9 masted junks must have lost all their advantage before the wind when only a couple of them could draw properly, making them possibly sitting ducks for handier small, better-armed craft.
Size is by no means everything, as the Spanish found out. And, indeed, superiority in ship design isn't everything, as the French found out.
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke
Digital Prometheus
Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 13:21 |
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival
Well the thing that would solidify Chinese domination of the Indian Ocean in my eyes would be the sheer size of their fleet. During Zheng He's voyages, I believe the size of the Chinese navy was 27,000 men, while Columbus's original expedition a century later only had around 9,000 men. If China had established their dominance over the Indian Ocean trade (China and India were the biggest supplier of goods for export in the world), that original fleet of Zheng He's would have grew substantially in size and strength due to their increased trade profits. It would have made them unstoppable in the Indian Ocean. Instead, they suspended basically all their naval activity for centuries, allowing much smaller fleets of Portuguese and British sailors to take very notable port cities all over the Indian Ocean. If China had established its dominance early on (they would have had almost a 100-year head start by the time the Europeans arrived in the Indian Ocean) then it would have easily prevented European armed trading in the Indian Ocean. That would have reduced their profits immensely, and with China ruling the Indian Ocean, China would gain in wealth and power, and it would have curbed the shift in wealth from Asia to Europe to the point where Europe wouldnt be as dominant as it really ended up being.
All this, and im not even getting into what China could have done once the Americas were discovered. They had the biggest advantage in terms of potential colonists they could have sent to settle in the Americas, and they would have landed on the west coast, where they would have only had to deal with the Spanish. Again, this is where their massive fleets would have come into play.
So if they kept the voyages going from 1405-1492 (instead of 1405-1424, 1431-1433) they could have built up net profits over the course of 100 years from their Indian Ocean domination, and then use those profits to make the fleets even larger, preventing European armed trade there. Once the Americas were founded by Europeans in 1492, China would use their immense navy and many potential settlers to colonize the western Americas, where their navy would have decimated the Spanish by that time.
I could be seeing things wrong but thats how the general course of events would play out in my mind. There are also so many disasters/surprises that arent taken into account that can easily make my predictions go completely to waste. Just curious to see what you guys think could have happened. |
Columbus' expedition only had 90 men, not 9000.
What people fail to understand is that the sheer size of Zheng He's expeditions actually worked against them. Such a fleet costs enormous amounts of money to build and operate, and the returns from trade and tribute didn't even cover a third of the cost. By contrast, most small expeditions that the Europeans sent out turned up a solid profit. The Chinese sent out such a huge expedition for the sake of vanity and of asserting China's dominance over the rest of the world. They were not really interested in trading with the rest of the barbarous world. A radical change in mentality would have been needed for the Chinese to embark on small, profit-oriented expeditions which focused on trade and conquest, rather than asserting China's superiority. This kind of mentality was far more likely to emerge in the small, competing, and profit-driven European countries, rather than the monolithic Ming China.
Edited by Decebal
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte
Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 15:10 |
while Columbus's original expedition a century later only had around
9,000 men. |
Where did you get the 9000 figure from?
Columbus' expedition was selected to be a small fleet with smallish but
sturdy and long range ships (albeit a bit old, but thats all teh
Spanish crown was preparedto spend on him)), with a small crew. Its
role and mission was of an entire different kind than that of Zheng He.
Chinese ships of the exploration period were far in advance of those
sad little Europeans caravels. They were about 5 times larger with
more sophisticated rudders and greater storage space. |
But they weren't that much bigger than the biggest ships in Europe, the
galleys ploughing the med, and the flagships of megalomaniac kings.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 16:30 |
Originally posted by Cywr
Chinese ships of the exploration period were far in advance of those sad little Europeans caravels. They were about 5 times larger with more sophisticated rudders and greater storage space. |
But they weren't that much bigger than the biggest ships in Europe, the galleys ploughing the med, and the flagships of megalomaniac kings.
|
They were in fact bigger. Charles I's 'Sovereign of the Seas', something over 1,500 tons, was 125 or so feet long and about 45 across the beam, packing into that 102 guns on three decks. She wasn't just a "megalomaniac's" flagship but was pretty handy in battle: the Dutch nicknamed her the 'golden devil'.
Francois I's 'Le Grand Franais', nearly a century before, also came in at 1,500 tons and was indeed a bit of a megalomaniac's flagship. I don't know her other details, but she is said to have carried a crew of 2,000..
In contrast Zheng Zhe's ships ran up to around 440 feet long by about 180, which was considerably bigger. Great transports, but the issue would be how good they were at fighting, and a lot of that would depend on gunnery and handiness. If you're outranged and outsailed it doesn't matter how big you are.
(PS I've discovered since my earlier post that multi-masted junks stepped two masts alongside each other which would I guess reduce my criticism of their sailing capacities before the wind.)
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 17:24 |
One of the early Henry's (V?) had a 250 footer AFAIK, and that was in
the begining of the 1400s. England wasn't exactly at the cutting edge
of European ship building at the time.
The you had pretty big galleys in the Med.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 08:31 |
Originally posted by Cywr
One of the early Henry's (V?) had a 250 footer AFAIK, and that was in the begining of the 1400s. England wasn't exactly at the cutting edge of European ship building at the time.
The you had pretty big galleys in the Med.
|
Henry V's Grace Dieu is reckoned to be the biggest ship built (in the west) in the 15th and 16th centuries. I've seen estimates of her length up to around 180ft, but I gather Southampton University's current investigations (she sank near Southampton) show her to have been only 125 ft by 50. However
(a) there's some confusion about whether measurements are of her waterline or overall length
(b) she appears to have had a very high freeboard.
She is usually credited with having been around 1,500 tons.
Confusingly Henry VIII's biggest ship was Henry Grace Dieu, which appears to have been slightly smaller, but, not surprisingly, much more powerfully armed.
Relevantly, Victory. Nelson's flagship at Trafalgar, was at that time about 2,100 tons, 227 feet overall, 186 ft at the lower gun deck and 151ft at the keel, with a maximum beam around 51ft.
And what was reputably the largest clipper ship ever built, the mid-19th century American Great Republic, was 355ft long - still less than Zhe's biggest.
The thing is that there comes a point in wooden sailing ship construction where there's no point in building much bigger, certainly for fighting ships. (Not dissimilarly, there would appear to be no point in building military aircraft - apart from transports - any bigger than now.)
And I still am sceptical about the handling capabilities of Zhe's keel-less. multiple-masted junks in, let's say, Biscay or the Channel or the Caribbean.
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 12:41 |
Royal Naby's website claims 218 feet:
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/5807.html
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
Genghis_Kan
Knight
Joined: 01-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 58
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Dec-2005 at 17:49 |
Actually I read a book which say that Zheng He actually discover America already. Its quite convicing and interesting. I think it called something like "Zheng He 14XX-14XX" I forgot the fully name of it. sorry guys
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Dec-2005 at 14:46 |
personally, the Chinese doesn't Colonized.... until the Ching who demands tributes...
The Ming however only trades, and there's nothing wrong with their boat and ship design, it's the government who totally destroy the fleet, they set sail before the Europeans did.... and yes.... The Government were close-minded not becoz of confusiounism but something wat i call self-fish in any chinese something.... it's not i'd been racist or something eventho i myself is a chinese, it's a fact tat almost every chineses has a little self-fish thingi inside them and only confusionism or something can control them... self-fish thingi broke the fleet, self-fish thingi broke Ming China, self-fish thingi also broke Ching China...
and about discovering Americana, i still think the Norway's Viking discovered them first... LoL Eric the Red xD
so before saying any ill thingi about Zheng He and his great fleet, tries to read erm..... lemme think..... i'd found some books in my local library tat.... different point-of-view upon Zheng He's Great Fleet and the Discovery of the .... somewhere esle.... let's just say you guys can tries to read from point-of-view of the China, the point-of-view of the other countries example Malacca, and other countries which Zhen He visited.. and also read the maritime history of the Europeans before you guys just said something negative of unpleasant, coz you guys might hurt or offended somebody who does respect Zheng He.... or something
talking about firearms, the time between the colonization set by the Europeans and the ships of Zheng he is like totally different..... it's like 100 years different.... example the modern tommy gun and the sound beam thingi today..... imargine how fast technology evolve...
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Dec-2005 at 14:54 |
since there's no edit button i apologize as i'm posting the second post or something heh...
ok here's goes..... If Ming goes bankcrupt.... how China today got so rich and it might control the world economy of today..... according to science survey, the Chinese has that innovative thingi inside them which made them to create gunpowder, compass thingi and some other stuff which made them able to voyage out in the open sea or something...
|
|
Dragon
Janissary
Joined: 18-Nov-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Dec-2005 at 13:34 |
I'm sure you've all heard of 1421: The Year that China Discovered the World by Gavin Menzies. It has been talked about in other threads. Although alot of people seem to totally discredit it because it talks about Chinese basically circumnavigating the globe, it does have tons of useful information about the Chinese navy.
Menzies is a former member of the US or British navy, and seems to have some (certainly not all) convincing arguments regarding how the Chinese ran their navy.
If you're interested in this topic, its worth your time to give it a once over.
|
History is the study of the past that we may understand the present.
|
|
flyingzone
Caliph
Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 08:55 |
I think many of the premises of the book by Menzies have been largely discredited (e.g. the claim that Zheng He's fleet actually went beyond the coast of East Africa - which they did - and continued sailing around the Cape of Good Hope, went all the way up to the Azores, and then even crossed the Atlantic to the Eastern coast of North America!!!!). (He went as far as claiming that the Chinese had had some settlements in present day New England; but the evidence has been completely refuted by scholars and researchers.) Having said that, however, I still believe in one of the book's claims - that Zheng He, or at least members of his fleet - might have landed on Australia. Chinese artefacts of that era (the Ming Dynasty) have been found in the Northern Territories of Australia.
|
|
Degredado
Consul
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 366
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 13:50 |
Originally posted by Tobodai
Chinese ships of the exploration period were far in advance of those sad little Europeans caravels. They were about 5 times larger with more sophisticated rudders and greater storage space. |
Those sad little caravels were exploration ships. It would have been pretty stupid to make them big.
|
Vou votar nas putas. Estou farto de votar nos filhos delas
|
|
Dragon
Janissary
Joined: 18-Nov-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Dec-2005 at 15:16 |
Originally posted by flyingzone
I think many of the premises of the book by Menzies have been largely discredited |
As I indicated, Menzies ideas about circumnavigating the globe has been discredited. However, the information about the Chinese navy is still of use. As long as you are aware that the entire book is not "the truth."
By the way, lots of scholars have serious reasons for discrediting Menzies. If he turns out to be correct, then a lot of outstanding careers will turn out to be useless. If your entire career rested on discrediting one historian, you'd be damn sure to do all in your power to discredit that person. Just a thought . . .
|
History is the study of the past that we may understand the present.
|
|