Talk:Ancient maritime history/Archive 1

Title and content...
On an unrelated note, I want to point out that this article reads more like "History of Naval Conflict" than "Ancient maritime history". Almost the entire article deals with wars, little mention is given to other types of maritime exploits. Also, the definition of "Ancient" is rather ignored here. I can't give a precise date on when things stop being "ancient", but I think history past the Classical era might not be appropriate for that definition. Should events from the middle ages to the 17th century count as "ancient"? The title and content of this article may need to be changed to reflect these concerns. AMorozov (talk) 22:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Is not the theme defined by an article in Ancient history --青鬼よし (talk) 14:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Japanese invasions of Korea
Cherry Blossom OK changed the source that I had offered. Unfortunately, his change is inaccurate. Therefore, I return it.

1. "the exploits of the Korean admiral Yi Sun-sin during this war were made famous with his military strategy and use of the armored turtle ship" Neither Yi Sun-sin nor turtle ship are completely written in the History of Ming. I set up "fact tag", but he tore off "fact tag". Of course, he did not present the grounds.

2. "Because Korean naval forces were annihilated" and Source "History of Ming (列傳第二百八外國一 朝鮮) Vol.208 Korea "萬暦 二十五年(1597)七月(July) 倭奪梁山·三浪, 遂入慶州, 侵閑山. 統制元均兵潰, 遂失閑山" were deleted without a reason by Cherry Blossom OK. Please explain the reason that deleted this part.

Supplementation "Full text in source" "萬暦 二十五年(1597)七月(July) 倭奪梁山·三浪, 遂入慶州, 侵閑山. 統制元均兵潰, 遂失閑山. 閑山島在朝鮮西海口, 右障南原, 爲全羅外藩, 一失守則沿海無備, 天津·登·萊皆可揚帆而至. 而我水兵三千甫抵旅順"

3. "Chinese navy operation that cut the supply line of Japan, and did the protracted struggle. and the marine was reinforced from Jiangnan of China." was rewritten in "Chinese navy aid to Korean navy's operation that cut the supply line of Japan, and did the protracted struggle. "

Please watch the source of History of Ming.

History of Ming (列傳第二百八外國一 朝鮮) Vol.208 Korea "邢玠以前役乏水兵無功, 乃益募江南水兵, 議海運, 爲持久計. 邢玠 is Minister of Defense in China. This is a conclusion of war council in China. Korea is not related at all. And, please explain the reason to delete "the marine was reinforced from Jiangnan of China".

4. "In Japan, Tokugawa Shogunate announced the Buke shohatto, and prohibited the building of the big ship to prevent the revolt of the warlords." Cherry Blossom OK put "fact tag" on this. I presented evidence. However, he deleted it, and put "fact tag" again. 

Cherry Blossom OK, Please explain the reason that you deleted. --青鬼よし (talk) 15:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC) -- I wantched all of your POV pushing edits, your edits are based on your own original Research and definitely POV Pushing.


 * 1. POV Pushing. History of Ming was foreign Chinese source, Yi Sun-sin was Korean. if History of Ming is not written Yi Sun-sin, then is not a existed fact??
 * Korean admiral and national hero whose naval victories were instrumental in repelling Japanese invasions of Korea in the 1590s. After passing the government examinations to become a military officer in 1576, Yi served at various army and navy posts. Although he was twice discharged after being falsely accused by jealous colleagues, in 1591 he was appointed commander of the naval forces in Left Chŏlla province, where he concentrated on training his men, stocking equipment and supplies, and developing the renowned kŏbuksŏn (“turtle ship”). 


 * 2. POV Pushing. How many times Japan won battle? Korea only one time lost naval battle, And, In that time, Won Gyun was commander, not admiral Yi. so your edit is definitely wrong.
 * 4. What? Don't tell a lie. OK? When you provide source? Check your edit again, You did not presented any evidence of "prohibited the building of the big ship". Please prove credible 2nd academic source. Again, your interpretation is highly pov pushing, there is no credible source backing up your own original theory. Cherry Blossom OK (talk) 17:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * @Cherry, Many historians recognise of Lee Soon-shin and his turtle ships, if you provide additional sources (i.e. more than just from the one place), there should be no issues regarding that. Additionally, there is no restriction that all sources must be primary sources; you may use secondary sources, provided that they are reliable and verifiable. Encarta or Britannica for one, if they are detailed enough, and meet verifiability guidelines. @Blue Ghost, are you able to provide WP:RS for details of this battleship? --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 23:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

--

青鬼よし, your problem is that the source you provided is a direct quote from the 1635 document itself. And Cherry, you're also doing the same thing with the Book of Sui on other pages. Wikipedia requires secondary, scholarly sources. Here is a better example of how to cite this fact:

"The second version of the Buke shohatto, which appeared under the aegis of Tokugawa Iemitsu, the third shogun, in 1635, was to define beyond all ambiguity the new relationship between the han and the central government. The thirteen clauses of the original were now expanded to twenty-one." "In two other areas, too, the bakufu was now prepared to extend its authority. An instruction issued to the southwestern han in 1609, to the effect that they were not to build large ships, was now made universal, with a blanket prohibition on the construction of any vessel with a capacity of more than five hundred koku."

Under footnotes: Hall (1991), pp. 194-195 Under references: Hall, John Whitney (1991). Cambridge History of Japan, Volume 4. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521223555.

I'm going to add this reference to this article and the Buke shohatto article. Hope this clears up that part of your dispute. AMorozov (talk) 21:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Ancient maritime history. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080509090417/http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/hilights/d_boat.htm to http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/hilights/d_boat.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Polynesians
Is there a reason there is no mention of Polynesians here? They had the most advanced maritime technology for some 5,000 odd years, using ocean-faring boats to colonise an area of roughly half the Earth's surface. Tobus (talk) 05:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Alexander the great and a submersible
Although there are a number of confused statements in various books about this, it doesn't come from Aristotle and wasn't about a boat. ''Forms of Knowledge in Early Modern Asia' Duke University Press ed by Sheldon Pollack:"his recalls the famous and widely distributed tale of Alexander descending in a glass diving bell. For examples, see (from the Greek) Stoneman, The Greek Alexander Romance, 118-19; (Latin) Kratz, The Romances of Alexander, 75-76; (Hebrew) van Bekkum, A Hebrew Alexander Romance, 188-91; and (Ethiopian) Budge, The Life and Exploits, 2:282-86. The story is well known too in the Iranian world through the Khamsa of Nizami (1141-1209), which was subsequently recast by Amir Khusrau" (next page not avaailable on GBooks). Just a legend.

You'll see sources saying that Aristotle wrote about Alexander using a submersible or diving bell. Rubbish. What is true is that the text of Problems (Aristotle) - author uncertain, text may date as late as the 6th c AD, does mention the use of a diving bell for sponge fishing. Doug Weller  talk 14:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Ancient maritime history. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151107023851/http://www.oxford-maritimehistory.com:80/ to http://www.oxford-maritimehistory.com

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:49, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism?
I just noticed there is a bit talking about how Some Egyptians gods were 'crowned best bronze noses' and then immediate mentions a carport. Not sure if it's vandalism or a translation error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.3.163.187 (talk) 00:37, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I'd say the latter, see the edit. I'll try to fix it when I get time. Well spotted. Doug Weller  talk 06:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

A split of this article
Perhaps its time to split this article along the West / East Eurasian routes distinction? This would help integrate maritime history articles in with regular history articles. -Inowen (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Some references from Indic traditional texts on sea travel
As erst for Tugra's son your car, sea-crossing, strong, was equipped and set amid the waters, So may I gain your shelter and protection as with winged course a hero seeks his army. Rig Veda 1.158.3

Lovers of sweetness, Rudras, she who streams with sweetness waits on you. When ye have travelled through the seas men bring you gifts of well-dressed food. Rig Veda 5.73.8

katham nu dArakA dInA dArakIr vAparAyaNAu vartinyante mayi gate bhinna-nAva ivodadhau

King PurajJana continued worrying: "After I pass from this world, how will my sons and daughters, who are now fully dependent on me, live and continue their lives? Their position will be similar to that of passengers aboard a ship wrecked in the midst of the ocean." Bhagavata Purana 4.28.21

vijita-hRSIka-vAyubhir adAnta-manas tura-gaM ya iha yatanti yantum ati-lolam upAya-khidaH vyasana-zatAnvitAH samavahAya guroz caraNaM vaNija ivAja santy akRta-karNa-dharA jaladhau

O Supreme Unborn! Those, who try to curb the horse of mind, unrestrainable for the conquerors of senses and vital airs even, by any means other than taking shelter at the feet of Sad-Guru, will find themselves attacked by hundreds of adversities, like merchant, travelling by sea and refusing the help of a helmsman. Bhagavata Purana 10.87.33

An incendiary, a prisoner, he who eats the food given by the son of an adulteress, a seller of Soma, he who undertakes voyages by sea, a bard, an oil-man, a suborner to perjury, Manu smriti 3.158

For a long passage the boat-hire must be proportioned to the places and times; know that this (rule refers) to (passages along) the banks of rivers; at sea there is no settled (freight). Manu smriti 8.406

Feel free to add the bibliographical info. Jan 89.24.48.157 (talk) 08:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Some parts of this article don't make a lot of sense.
Eg: "When Thutmose III achieved warships displacement up to 360 tons and carried up to ten new heavy and light to seventeen catapults based bronze springs, called "siege crossbow" – more precisely, siege bows. Still appeared giant catamarans that are heavy warships and times of Ramesses III used even when the Ptolemaic dynasty.[17]"--82.27.19.171 (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I can't find the quote. The text was originally added here. I'm not happy about the source, almost a century old. We know a bit more now. Doug Weller  talk 15:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Some stuff at Ancient Egypt might be useful here. Doug Weller  talk 15:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Missing footnote
Footnotes 2 and 11 both refer to "Denemark 2000:" which is not mentioned anywhere else. I found

Denemark, Robert Allen; el al. (2000). World System History: The Social Science of Long-Term Change. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-23276-7

which looks so likely to be the right reference that I will insert it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jethomas5 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Austronesian content: colonisation of the Marianas
The Marianas could not have been colonised from the Philippines because of a strong contrary wind and current that makes that journey difficult even in a high performance yacht. It is considered more likely that the first colonisers set out from the Bismarck Archipelago. This is suggested not only by the virtual impossibility of the route suggested in the article, but by detailed analysis of archaeological pottery finds in the Marianas and in possible destination locations. See Austronesian sailing to the northern Marianas, a comment on Hung et al. (2011) Olaf Winter1∗, Geoffrey Clark1, Atholl Anderson1 & Anders Lindahl2 ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:28, 30 August 2022 (UTC)