Is this the most invaded region in History ?

>>2883156
that's not your mom's ass

>does where civilization began have the most history
gee idk

>>2883156
Ukraine got invaded a lot.

File: China_administrative_claimed_included.svg.png (168KB, 857x699px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 857x699px

Cry all you want, but from the Han Dynasty up until 16th or 17th century, China has been more technologically and socially advanced than Europe and the Middle East.

European supremacy has been a small little blip in history and within 10 years the Chinese economy will surpass the US's. India will surpass the US's soon after that.

I for one welcome are new squinty-eyed masters

>>2883541
That's very interesting but has literally nothing to do with this thread. That being said China IS a good contender for most invaded region, even if many of those invasions didn't result in long-term occupations or were even successful.

>>2883156
It may be but any open plain with civilizations is open to constant invasion.

>>2883541
Not really. Can you name anything that China had over Europe during it's entire history besides gunpowder that was pretty much useless in the hands of the Chinese until the Europeans devised a way to use it. China is just one big meme that never accomplished anything in it's history.

File: RapeOfProserpina.jpg (119KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1000x1000px

>>2883663
This
>>2883541
>From the 16 to the 17th century

Lol

You mean when Europeans literally came up with the scinetific method and floruished with hundreds of scientists and mathematicians?


You mean when European manieristic artists were unparalleled?

You mean when European sculptors such as Bernin came up with eternal masterpieces like pic related?

You mean when Europe colonized the old world?

Meanwhile China was stagnating in its own shit without science, with inferior art, military, technology and accomplishments.
Lol... pathetic.

Sicily is

File: HyperRealism.jpg (77KB, 640x389px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 640x389px

>>2883554
>>2883663
>>2883680
just realised I posted this in the wrong thread.

>>2883680
>He thinks that Europeans "literally" came up with the scientific method, even though a quick google search reveals that it was Arabs such as Ibn al-Haytham or Persians like Al-Biruni.
>If you want the earliest history then the prize goes to the Babylonians.
>"Literally" could not have picked the worst example

>You mean European materialist artists were unparalleled

... It's an art style that developed in Europe and was rediscovered in the Renaissance. Why did Europeans not build sarcophaguses for their emperors? It was not their culture.

Besides, have you never seen the terracotta warriors? Thousands of them built during the Han dynasty. They were lifelike and were all painted intricately.

regardless, Is art that is more life-like better than art that isn't? I suppose "hyper-realism" is the best art ever made then. If you think a Chinese or Japanese medieval painter could not draw a lifelike sketch of someone then you're fucking deluded. Any half-decent artist with the equipment can do a decent headshot.


>Europe colonised the old world
>*New world*

http://static.wixstatic.com/media/1d92f6_9fa655236c2bdcbae55a5370651250a6.jpg_srz_530_275_85_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srz

China could have colonised the Indies, East Africa or the Arabian Peninsula but chose not to. You need to look deeper into Chinese culture to understand why.

For example, when the British tried to set up a trade deal with China, who was far more wealthy than the British at the time, this was the response:

>Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own produce.
—Qianlong Emperor, Second Edict to King George III of England, 1792,

They didn't believe they needed colonies and it's not hard to understand why!

>>2883663
China actually started to industrialize 500 years before Europe

>>2883680
I actually think you might have misread my fucking post.

I said "UP until the 16th or 17th century". After that Europe took over.


Jesus fucking Christ, has the average IQ on his dropped or something? Regardless, if you do some research you'd see that historians generally regard China as having been the most technologically advanced nation from the Han Dynasty up until the 16th/17th century.

>>2883680
>Lol
>spews a bunch of shit that in no way contradicts what the person said
>Lol

Spot the retard.

>>2884187
wut

>>2884178
>terracotta warriors
You mean the ones believed to have been severely influenced by Greek sculpture? It was not an independent Chinese development.

>>2883156
Western Europe

>>2883663
I listed out all the most important ones but then stupidly closed this page when I was going back to the tab.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions

Don't even overlook the seemingly unimportant ones like the bristle toothbrush. Something like that would have increased public health drastically; think how bad teeth quality was in Europe after sugar and tobacco were introduced.

The most important ones, in my opinion:

>Gunpowder: Despite what you said, it was put to use to great effect as an armament and tool.
>Civil service examinations (which were meritocratic.
>Printing: Woodblock printing was sued in the han dynasty, and type printing in the 11th century.
>Paper: helpful with printing and civil service
>Compass (obvious)
>Tech advances in metallurgy
>Mathematics, astronomy, medicine, etc
>Philosophy, such as Confucianism, which shaped Chinese culture immensely.
>Silk, which helped china become a superpower


There's loads of others, just scroll through.

I'm sorry, but if you read what historians have actually said, then you'll see that the Chinese have been most advanced for most of history: from Han Dynasty up until the 16th or 17th century when Europe took the title.

>>2884269
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_industrialization

>The Song dynasty had one of the most prosperous and advanced economies in the medieval world. Song Chinese invested their funds in joint stock companies and in multiple sailing vessels at a time when monetary gain was assured from the vigorous overseas trade and domestic trade along the Grand Canal and Yangtze River.[130] Prominent merchant families and private businesses were allowed to occupy industries that were not already government-operated monopolies.[24][131] Both private and government-controlled industries met the needs of a growing Chinese population in the Song.[24][131]

It's true. Fucking MONGOLS ruined it though

File: Nefertiti.jpg (66KB, 614x899px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 614x899px

>>2884291
>Severely influenced
>Severe

What's so bad about artistic influence?

Regardless, I suppose realise Greek sculptures are not a European invention since the Egyptian busts preceded them.

File: IMG_1207.jpg (45KB, 895x361px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 895x361px

>>2884358
The Greeks invented sculpture in the round. There was no such concept in Egyptian art, every statue was meant to be viewed from a single point.

Your analogy falls flat because Greek artists were able to take influence from a foreign source (Egyptian statuary) and break out of that style into something entirely new (the introduction of contrapposto, realistic anatomy, subject pathos, etc). The terracotta army did nothing revolutionary of the sort.

>>2884427
Yeah true, fair enough. Regardless, the anon was implying that the Chinese (or other cultures) were incapable of making life-like works of art, which is obvious bullshit.