by Chan Island » Sun Apr 18, 2021 7:59 am
Conserative Morality wrote:"It's not time yet" is a tactic used by reactionaries in every era. "It's not time for democracy, it's not time for capitalism, it's not time for emancipation." Of course it's not time. It's never time, not on its own. You make it time. If you're under fire in the no-man's land of WW1, you start digging a foxhole even if the ideal time would be when you *aren't* being bombarded, because once you wait for it to be 'time', other situations will need your attention, assuming you survive that long. If the fields aren't furrowed, plow them. If the iron is not hot, make it so. If society is not ready, change it.
by Elwher » Sun Apr 18, 2021 12:37 pm
by Nakena » Sun Apr 18, 2021 12:45 pm
Elwher wrote:While it, like any work, has flaws it does offer a reasonable explanation of why the Western civilizations wound up in such a dominant position without any claims of White superiority. It is Eurocentric but any work attempting to explain the dominance of European cultures has to be.
Elwher wrote:To those who dismiss it, I ask what is your explanation of the dominance of European culture over the rest of the world?
by Punished UMN » Sun Apr 18, 2021 12:52 pm
by The Two Jerseys » Sun Apr 18, 2021 2:20 pm
by Ethel mermania » Sun Apr 18, 2021 2:38 pm
Nakena wrote:Elwher wrote:While it, like any work, has flaws it does offer a reasonable explanation of why the Western civilizations wound up in such a dominant position without any claims of White superiority. It is Eurocentric but any work attempting to explain the dominance of European cultures has to be.
Not necessarily. The Ming Empire could have pulled it off too if it wanted. They had the resources and the technology and more manpower even. Regardless Empires rise and fall all the time since the dawn of history.Elwher wrote:To those who dismiss it, I ask what is your explanation of the dominance of European culture over the rest of the world?
Because of the faustian spirit of the europeans that finally grew stronger than theocentrism.
Regardless theres no intrinsic law or so that european domination of the world was a necessary development of history.
Islamic and sinic civilizations were doing quite well around that time in comparisation and had theoretically too the potential.
by Baizou » Sun Apr 18, 2021 3:09 pm
Stories From Baizou
"A Revolutionary Compromise," starring Meikawa Tomoko. | More to come?
by Unstoppable Empire of Doom » Sun Apr 18, 2021 3:25 pm
by Elwher » Mon Apr 19, 2021 9:26 am
Baizou wrote:I weigh Guns, Germs, and Steel very cautiously. It's points aren't irrelevant points, and Diamond's recognition of the relevance of environment is useful, even meaningful. However, I tend to agree with critics who say that Diamond quite overstates his thesis and by so doing diminishes both human agency and the many meaningful accomplishments of the global south. Jared Diamond is a geographer by training and profession. Rather than take his work as a magnum opus on humanity, I prefer to treat his work as an insight into geographic influences on humanity. Specialization is both a blessing and a curse, and as a result Diamond is less familiar with—and therefore fails to account for—the human choices, from both the ordinary and the powerful, that also went into shaping human history.
For example, the Ming Empire was another vast land empire with all the same environmental advantages necessary for global dominance as its European counterparts. So why didn't the Ming conquer the world? Because Ming leaders and mass movements in society made choices. Ming leaders chose not to establish colonial settlements, according to some historians because of civil-political unrest on the homefront. Then, some years later, European kingdoms do choose to set forth in ships and build colonial settlements. European dominance was not environmentally determined, but a matter of different choices made at different times by different people.
by An Alan Smithee Nation » Mon Apr 19, 2021 9:55 am
by Major-Tom » Mon Apr 19, 2021 9:57 am
by Nouveau Yathrib » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:03 am
Major-Tom wrote:I think the book serves its purpose well in that it explains to the average reader that European dominance came not from some antiquated notion of "European superiority," but a variety of geographical, environmental, and cultural factors. Is it oversimplified and lacking a lot of nuance/alternative explanations? 100% yes. But the book is meant for a broad audience, from middle-aged dads to high school students, so if you're looking for an in-depth, truly fact-by-fact account of this phenomena, look for a dry graduate thesis paper, not for a bestseller.
by Punished UMN » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:08 am
Major-Tom wrote:I think the book serves its purpose well in that it explains to the average reader that European dominance came not from some antiquated notion of "European superiority," but a variety of geographical, environmental, and cultural factors. Is it oversimplified and lacking a lot of nuance/alternative explanations? 100% yes. But the book is meant for a broad audience, from middle-aged dads to high school students, so if you're looking for an in-depth, truly fact-by-fact account of this phenomena, look for a dry graduate thesis paper, not for a bestseller.
by Senkaku » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:17 am
by Feyrisshire » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:19 am
Froggy News | "People's Struggle Against Fake News and Disinformation" Campaign reach extreme heights: High Princess Ryeisse Schyi Yuri orders Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Tiktok users to be sent to labor camp and issues a bounty for the head of Elon Musk (Archive) | Update on pet food ban in Feyrisshire | Ban of "Bocchi the Rock" triggers debate on "socialist art" | Toilet paper banned in Feyrisshire
by Punished UMN » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:34 am
Feyrisshire wrote:It is an awful book. A more fitting term is "Guns, Germs and Generalizations".
One enormous pitfall is that Diamond over-estimated the importance of said "guns, germs andgeneralizationssteel" when technology wasn't really the momentous factor why Hernan Cortes was able to conquer the Mesoamerican nations. Technology simply wasn't a valuable force multiplier when the logistics and the numbers weren't simply stacked in the favor of Spanish conquistadors. We don't really need to mention how early gunpowder weapons are useless in the damp and wet jungles of Mesoamerica and how cavalry also isn't a useful multiplier in ruggy and hilled terrain (In contrast to the often peddled myth that the Aztecs and Mayans thought that the horse and its rider was a single person, they recognized cavalry for what it was pretty early on and adjusted their tactics).
The book misrepresents Hernan Cortes and his band of conquistadors as a macho group of pre-modern Navy Seals and Expendables able to curbstomp all existing native helpless opposition and it could be further than that from reality, when Hernan Cortes actually relied on his Tlaxcaltec allies for help. The Tlaxcaltecs provided him with 80,000 to 200,000+ soldiers which was the sole reason why Hernan Cortes was able to win against the Aztecs and the Tarascans. The reason is that the Tlaxcaltecs also didn't like the Aztecs and thought they could use Hernan Cortes to their advantage.
The history of the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica is less like a story of Civ-like Tech Tree advantage, and more of a Mesoamerican Game of Thrones with one white dude in which a Spanish conquistador was able to use the Mesoamerican complicated dynastic power struggle to his advantage to win out. Had the Tlaxcaltecs refused to help Hernan Cortes, he would undoubtedly have lost and history is full of Spanish conquistadors who failed and whose "superior technology" didn't help them either.
Another is that Diamond is prone to exaggerating and generalizing things. The showdown between Pizarro and Incan Emperor Atahualpa at Cajamarca for example, is depicted as proof of the superiority of gunpowder, when in reality Pizarro ambushed Atahualpa and Atahualpa and his camp retainers were unarmed. Once again, Diamond is prone to removing the story of the fascinating Incan Game of Thrones, failing to mention that Atahualpa was simply a rival claimant to the Incan throne, and Pizarro was once again playing an Incan GoT in complicated Andean dynastic politics.
In short, the premise of Diamond that the reason that the Spanish conquistadors was able to invade the Aztec, Mayan and Incan nations due to their superior technology was wrong, because the reason is that they played the Aztec, Incan and Mayan royal dynastic game and lucked out on being successful on that part.
I think this also could apply to other parts, such as his thesis that the reason China was unified because it is flat as also flat-out wrong, ignoring that China had lots of mountainous regions such as in Sichuan mountain ranges, and also has long periods of disunity and warring states.
by Heloin » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:44 am
by Feyrisshire » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:47 am
Punished UMN wrote:Not getting into the entire post because it's not entirely wrong, but you really need to read the actual first-person accounts of Cortes' expedition.
Punished UMN wrote:Cannons and horses were extremely important to his success,
Punished UMN wrote:and while they did realize the nature of cavalry, initially the Aztec did believe that horse and rider were one entity and Cortes used this as a means to intimidate Aztec diplomats early in the campaign, prior to his entrance to Tenochtitlan.
Froggy News | "People's Struggle Against Fake News and Disinformation" Campaign reach extreme heights: High Princess Ryeisse Schyi Yuri orders Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Tiktok users to be sent to labor camp and issues a bounty for the head of Elon Musk (Archive) | Update on pet food ban in Feyrisshire | Ban of "Bocchi the Rock" triggers debate on "socialist art" | Toilet paper banned in Feyrisshire
by Punished UMN » Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:56 am
Feyrisshire wrote:Punished UMN wrote:Not getting into the entire post because it's not entirely wrong, but you really need to read the actual first-person accounts of Cortes' expedition.
This is in fact one pitfall of Diamond as a non-professional historian which is uncritical use of primary sources. The actual first-person accounts were from Spanish conquistadors who wished to glorify their conquests for their personal interests, so biased.
The accounts written by the conquistadors were also written in a time period where the Spanish colonial government was trying to limit the autonomy given to the conquistadors so their accounts were skewed to make them more relevant than they are when they acted more like reserve shock troops to the native army core.Punished UMN wrote:Cannons and horses were extremely important to his success,
Once again, the conquistadors' accounts were biased to make them more amazing than they are. See above. Also, the conquistadors were not able to win unless they were able to get native allies of their own.
Hernan Cortes and Pizarro were outliers because they were able to get native support.
There are lots of conquistadors that failed, such as Juan de Grijalva and Francisco Cordoba who attempted to invade a Mayan city-state but failed due to lack of native support despite having cannons and horses.Punished UMN wrote:and while they did realize the nature of cavalry, initially the Aztec did believe that horse and rider were one entity and Cortes used this as a means to intimidate Aztec diplomats early in the campaign, prior to his entrance to Tenochtitlan.
The problem with the Aztecs believing that the horse and rider as one entity is that it only came from Spanish accounts which are biased, and the fact that it was not corroborated with Aztec and Mayan sources.
Aztec sources however do describe the horse of the Spanish as mazatl meaning "deer". If they thought that it was the same, they could have said as centaur, but they described it as "deer".
by Baizou » Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:08 am
Feyrisshire wrote:It is an awful book. A more fitting term is "Guns, Germs and Generalizations".
One enormous pitfall is that Diamond over-estimated the importance of said "guns, germs andgeneralizationssteel" when technology wasn't really the momentous factor why Hernan Cortes was able to conquer the Mesoamerican nations. Technology simply wasn't a valuable force multiplier when the logistics and the numbers weren't simply stacked in the favor of Spanish conquistadors. We don't really need to mention how early gunpowder weapons are useless in the damp and wet jungles of Mesoamerica and how cavalry also isn't a useful multiplier in ruggy and hilled terrain (In contrast to the often peddled myth that the Aztecs and Mayans thought that the horse and its rider was a single person, they recognized cavalry for what it was pretty early on and adjusted their tactics).
The book misrepresents Hernan Cortes and his band of conquistadors as a macho group of pre-modern Navy Seals and Expendables able to curbstomp all existing native helpless opposition and it could be further than that from reality, when Hernan Cortes actually relied on his Tlaxcaltec allies for help. The Tlaxcaltecs provided him with 80,000 to 200,000+ soldiers which was the sole reason why Hernan Cortes was able to win against the Aztecs and the Tarascans. The reason is that the Tlaxcaltecs also didn't like the Aztecs and thought they could use Hernan Cortes to their advantage.
The history of the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica is less like a story of Civ-like Tech Tree advantage, and more of a Mesoamerican Game of Thrones with one white dude in which a Spanish conquistador was able to use the Mesoamerican complicated dynastic power struggle to his advantage to win out. Had the Tlaxcaltecs refused to help Hernan Cortes, he would undoubtedly have lost and history is full of Spanish conquistadors who failed and whose "superior technology" didn't help them either.
Another is that Diamond is prone to exaggerating and generalizing things. The showdown between Pizarro and Incan Emperor Atahualpa at Cajamarca for example, is depicted as proof of the superiority of gunpowder, when in reality Pizarro ambushed Atahualpa and Atahualpa and his camp retainers were unarmed. Once again, Diamond is prone to removing the story of the fascinating Incan Game of Thrones, failing to mention that Atahualpa was simply a rival claimant to the Incan throne, and Pizarro was once again playing an Incan GoT in complicated Andean dynastic politics.
In short, the premise of Diamond that the reason that the Spanish conquistadors was able to invade the Aztec, Mayan and Incan nations due to their superior technology was wrong, because the reason is that they played the Aztec, Incan and Mayan royal dynastic game and lucked out on being successful on that part.
I think this also could apply to other parts, such as his thesis that the reason China was unified because it is flat as also flat-out wrong, ignoring that China had lots of mountainous regions such as in Sichuan mountain ranges, and also has long periods of disunity and warring states.
Punished UMN wrote:you're going too far in the opposite direction and basically saying the Spanish were a non-factor, which makes like zero sense.
Stories From Baizou
"A Revolutionary Compromise," starring Meikawa Tomoko. | More to come?
by Feyrisshire » Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:08 am
Punished UMN wrote:This would be a strong argument if the Aztec sources were contemporary to the conquest, while they were shortly after it, they were all written under Spanish rule, it makes sense they would know more than they did during the conquest.
Punished UMN wrote:The same first hand accounts of Conquistadors describe them being driven into the sea and leaving their own men behind to be killed and sacrificed because they don't have the forces to push back some rando tribe near where they landed.
Punished UMN wrote:Even when outnumbered, and before acquiring allies, the sources are pretty clear that the use of cannons, horses, and armor made the Spanish much more effective on a man-to-man level.
No one denies the importance of native allies, but you're going too far in the opposite direction and basically saying the Spanish were a non-factor, which makes like zero sense.
Froggy News | "People's Struggle Against Fake News and Disinformation" Campaign reach extreme heights: High Princess Ryeisse Schyi Yuri orders Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Tiktok users to be sent to labor camp and issues a bounty for the head of Elon Musk (Archive) | Update on pet food ban in Feyrisshire | Ban of "Bocchi the Rock" triggers debate on "socialist art" | Toilet paper banned in Feyrisshire
by Punished UMN » Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:15 am
Feyrisshire wrote:Punished UMN wrote:This would be a strong argument if the Aztec sources were contemporary to the conquest, while they were shortly after it, they were all written under Spanish rule, it makes sense they would know more than they did during the conquest.
This would be a stronger argument if we had at least Aztec sources that corroborate the centaur account, but the problem is that we simply don't have, and the only sources we have are two Spanish men - Bernal Diaz del Castillo and Gomara who are simply inserting an inner POV to the Aztecs and Mayans and also have no way of knowing what the Aztecs and Mayans truly thought of the horses.
Note that the mazatl is a strong argument that the Aztecs and Mayans is a strong argument that they are able to integrate the concept of cavalry to their native mental worldview quickly.
Deer is a common four-footed animal found in the region and it makes sense that is the closet analogue they could think for horse. And mazatl is actually an earlier Nahautl word, far earlier than the Spanish word cavallo. If the Aztecs first adopted the word "deer" mazatl to describe the concept of cavalry at first, then switched to the more approproate Spanish term cavallo, the concept of "man-centaur thing" simply can't be integrated in this linguistic framework.Punished UMN wrote:The same first hand accounts of Conquistadors describe them being driven into the sea and leaving their own men behind to be killed and sacrificed because they don't have the forces to push back some rando tribe near where they landed.
The account is straightforward, they lacked forces to defeat the Mayan nation. Technology didn't certainly benefit them here.Punished UMN wrote:Even when outnumbered, and before acquiring allies, the sources are pretty clear that the use of cannons, horses, and armor made the Spanish much more effective on a man-to-man level.
No one denies the importance of native allies, but you're going too far in the opposite direction and basically saying the Spanish were a non-factor, which makes like zero sense.
Once again, sources described by biased Spanish conquistadors.
We have already put forward accounts where the Spanish were defeated due to lack of forces.
To be straightforward here, I am in fact citing that the Spanish of course also played a role in playing the Mesoamerican Game of Thrones. However technology is a non-factor as the Spanish were defeated lots of times when they lack logistical support or cannot count on native allies as the tech parity between Spanish and Mesoamericans is not that high.
by Feyrisshire » Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:25 am
Punished UMN wrote:Except that Del Castillo was there and his book is a recollection of his first-person experience as a senior member of Cortes' expedition.
That they describe such accounts shows that they aren't exaggerating their military prowess that much, and in that account they did not have their horses or cannons. When they did have them, they defeated a large native force despite being dramatically outnumbered. The technology was a huge factor and force-multiplier. The fact that the natives felt the Spanish were an important enough part of their coalition to grant them effective military leadership of it shows that the natives regarded their military prowess immensely, as do numerous Spanish victories over the natives, including without the presence of allies.
You need to actually read Del Castillo's account.
Froggy News | "People's Struggle Against Fake News and Disinformation" Campaign reach extreme heights: High Princess Ryeisse Schyi Yuri orders Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Tiktok users to be sent to labor camp and issues a bounty for the head of Elon Musk (Archive) | Update on pet food ban in Feyrisshire | Ban of "Bocchi the Rock" triggers debate on "socialist art" | Toilet paper banned in Feyrisshire
by Punished UMN » Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:37 am
Feyrisshire wrote:Punished UMN wrote:Except that Del Castillo was there and his book is a recollection of his first-person experience as a senior member of Cortes' expedition.
That they describe such accounts shows that they aren't exaggerating their military prowess that much, and in that account they did not have their horses or cannons. When they did have them, they defeated a large native force despite being dramatically outnumbered. The technology was a huge factor and force-multiplier. The fact that the natives felt the Spanish were an important enough part of their coalition to grant them effective military leadership of it shows that the natives regarded their military prowess immensely, as do numerous Spanish victories over the natives, including without the presence of allies.
You need to actually read Del Castillo's account.
This adage can be simplified to "I have this one primary account".
The problem is that no historian accepts primary sources uncritically and accepts them free of bias and once again Del Castillo and Gomara certainly have fish to fry or at least exaggerate their achievements in portraying the Spanish conquistadors as more excellent than they are as they have personal interests too, such as conflict with the Spanish colonial government.
We also don't accept The Bible or the Quran as primary sources without critique, or even Herodotus, even if he reserves his judgement in a lot of places.
Other than the error of uncritically accepting the Spanish conquistadors' accounts at face value, this is dispelled by historian Matthew Restall in his work Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest - Chapter 3 the belief that the military operations were undertaken primarily by Spaniards when the actual military operations were undertaken by their native allies.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Asherahan, General TM, Google [Bot], Immoren, Singaporen Empire, The Holy Therns
Advertisement