Talk:Naval history of China

Untitled
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 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)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 23 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yal256, CaesarinAmerica.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

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)

英國水師考: 一卷, Volumes 38-48  By John Fryer, 鍾天緯, 張蔭桓
Chinese book on the english navy during the qing dynasty

http://books.google.com/books?id=IVQqAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title	英國水師考: 一卷, Volumes 38-48 Volume 39 of 西學富强叢書: 兵學 英國水師考: 一卷, 鍾天緯 Authors	John Fryer, 鍾天緯, 張蔭桓 Publisher	鴻文書局, 1896 Original from	Harvard University Digitized	Jul 28, 2008

Rajmaan (talk) 13:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

This reeks of nationalistic and racist propaganda and is full of absurd claims with little to no credible evidence. Is Wikipedia to become the next venue for government-sponsored propaganda, historical revisionism and cultural aggression? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.249.77.31 (talk) 01:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Broader range of sources needed?
Not to minimize John Needham's great work, but this article seems overly dependent on a single source. Out of 18 citations, 16 of them cite the same source. Surely some other sources must also confirm these statements? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Naval history of China. 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/20091212012906/http://www.theglobalist.com/countryoftheweek/sample.htm to http://www.theglobalist.com/countryoftheweek/sample.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070403091924/http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/china.htm to http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/china.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:52, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:59, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Trebuchet ship.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:54, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Tower ship.jpg

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Covered swoopers.jpg
 * Koxinga's ships.jpg
 * Patrol boats.jpg
 * Wujing Zongyao flying barque.jpg
 * Wujing Zongyao sea hawk.jpg
 * Wujing Zongyao warship.jpg

Deliberate destruction of the Chinese navy?
Why doesn't the story mention the deliberate destruction of the Chinese navy (mostly by burning the ships) before 1525? Related to the failed attempts to invade Japan, as I recall. The intro of the Article starts by acknowledging it's a long history, but the body says "Not so much." Shanen (talk) 19:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Koxinga's ships.jpg