samcster94
Banned
From what I understand about Japan, I remember their original development was closer to how Korea evolved. How would their culture likely would evolved if they never go the "Shogun and Samurai direction"???
You would need a way to make the earlier Heian reforms stick and keep revenue collection at the very least a near-exclusive right of Heian-kyo. Which probably means an entirely different mentality to the aristocrats of the capital, who were willing to farm out military and administrative responsibility to the OTL bushi, so they could make exquisite poetry instead.From what I understand about Japan, I remember their original development was closer to how Korea evolved. How would their culture likely would evolved if they never go the "Shogun and Samurai direction"???
Exactly. I am no expert, but what made Korea develop the way it did instead of being like Japan?You would need a way to make the earlier Heian reforms stick and keep revenue collection at the very least a near-exclusive right of Heian-kyo. Which probably means an entirely different mentality to the aristocrats of the capital, who were willing to farm out military and administrative responsibility to the OTL bushi, so they could make exquisite poetry instead.
Small size facilitated centralization, while pressure from Khitans in the 10th century made it clear to the Korean nobility that they needed a strong center to protect themselves. Both are factors impossible in Japan, an enormous island archipelago.Exactly. I am no expert, but what made Korea develop the way it did instead of being like Japan?
I don’t see why you’re always so aggressive about historical East Asia, but the Han did not conquer Japan for the same reason Rome did not conquer the Ukraine; Japan was extremely underdeveloped at the time and there literally was no point.Was Han naval technology so bad that it couldn't even build ships to invade Japan?
Because it's annoying how people project contemporary China and Japan into past China and Japan. Since both, with Korea and Taiwan, are now the second biggest economic block in the world after the West and overindustrialised to hell, then everything historical in East Asia must have been bigger and badder - the exaggerated descriptions of the Treasure Fleets are now true, Marco Polo's accounts are almost completely factual, East Asia was the most advanced "civilisation" in the Middle Ages and it ruled the world back then, crocks of hogwash that shouldn't be taken seriously but are by Great Divergence theorists and historical economists like Maddison Angus, to the point the Prime Minister of Australia himself gave a presentation peddling how China's "rise" is just a "return" to how "things were back then".I don’t see why you’re always so aggressive about historical East Asia
Indeed, Korea is not an island unlike Japan, so it makes sense they went with a centralized state. Proto Korea also got conquered by China early on iirc.Small size facilitated centralization, while pressure from Khitans in the 10th century made it clear to the Korean nobility that they needed a strong center to protect themselves. Both are factors impossible in Japan, an enormous island archipelago.
Small size facilitated centralization, while pressure from Khitans in the 10th century made it clear to the Korean nobility that they needed a strong center to protect themselves. Both are factors impossible in Japan, an enormous island archipelago.