TRY TO TAKE A FOUR-THOUSAND-YEAR-OLD CIVILIZATION AND REDUCE IT TO LESS THAN SEVEN HUNDRED PAGES! GOOD, NOW DO TWO FOUR-THOUSAND-YEAR-OLD CIVILIZATIONS!

 

A review of Conrad Schirokauer’s A Brief History of Chinese and Japanese Civilizations (1989)

(Rating 4 of 5)

                I first read this book as part of a class I had on China and Japan.  It is a good book and great introduction into the history of two important nations, with some additional throw-ins about Korea and Vietnam.  It is, however, a lot of information jam-packed into a relatively small volume.  It covers everything from the earliest days of civilization to modern communist China and democratic Japan.

                Reading this book, it is important to distinguish between China the modern state and China the civilization.  The reason is often on Western historical maps we will see the label “China” no matter what period is being displayed.  This gives the Westerner the impression “Wow, China is really old!” While failing to understand that the People’s Republic of China has as much to do with the Han Empire as European Union does with the Roman Empire.  Yes, they cover much of the similar landmass and the people are mostly their direct descendants but the very different “states’ to use a modern term. 

                Throughout much of its history China would go through periods of unification that would be interrupted by other periods of disunity.  This would occur when a dynasty got corrupted, pressure from external threats, or other domestic disturbances cause an empire to collapse.  Then everything is fragmented until a powerful leader or group commands enough support to put everything back together.  This would be called having a “Mandate of Heaven.”  China was in such a fractured state in the early half of the 20^th century.           

“The Qin (Ch’in) unification of China in 221 B.C. was the beginning of some 400 years of imperial rule, even though the Qin itself barely survived the death of its first emperor.  Building on Qin foundations, although overtly rejecting many of that regime’s polices, the Han erected a more lasting political structure.  Under the Han, Chinese civilization was reshaped, and China became a great imperial power comparable in achievements and historical to the Roman Empire.  Considering the importance of the period, it is perhaps not inappropriate that our English word “China” is ultimately derived from the name of this dynasty.  On the other hand, the Chinese refer to themselves ethnically as the Han people.” (pg. 51)

Han Empire (60 BC)

                Chinese civilization was so powerful and sophisticated that if a power was to come in and take over usually the conquerors would find themselves being more transformed by those who they had conquered.  New rulers would find themselves assuming traditional Chinese titles for their rule with only their own names substituted in, and their own people set up as the ruling class.  This would be true for both the Mongols (Yuan) and the Manchurians (Qing).   

“Within China the long and bitter struggle against the Southern Song left lasting wounds.  Chinese hatred and bitterness were matched by Mongol suspicion and distrust of the southerners.  A significant number of Chinese remained loyal to the old dynasty, continued to employ Song terminology, and dreamed of a Song restoration while refusing to serve the new power.  On the other hand, the Mongols relegated southerners to the lowest category in their fourfold division of society along ethnic lines. Highest status in this system was accorded to the Mongols.” (pg. 221)

  

Qing Empire

Unlike China, Japan’s throne was and is not considered something that someone outside the royal family could assume.  Dynasties cannot be replaced and presumed legitimate.  Only the ‘true’ family line can rule.  So, getting control of these emperors is the primary concern of any power holder.  One of the ways to do that is to have the current emperor tied up in so many religious ceremonies that they don’t have time for actual government duties.  If some emperors get fed up and abdicate in favor of their minor son as soon as they are finally able, so much the better.

     The Shogun, a position established in the twelfth century, becomes the default ruler of Japan for almost 700 years.  The position eventually becomes hereditary although, unlike the imperial throne, the position does change clans from time to time.   

“Legitimization for the new order came from the emperor, who in 1192 “appointed” Yoritomo shogun, or to use the full term, Seii Taishogun (Barbarian Suppressing General”).  Under the theoretical sovereignty of the emperor, the shogun’s government exercised substantial “delegated” power.  This was the beginning of an institution (the shogunate) that lasted until 1868.

“The most important power “delegated” to Yoritomo was legal control over the staffing of provincial posts, which enabled him to appoint his own men to administrative positions in the provinces.  He was also authorized to appoint his men to the newly created position of Land Steward or Overseer (jito) and Military Protector or Constable (shugo). “ (pg.266)

(The Shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu)

The Shogun office came to an end when the Meiji Emperor has decided to rule in his own right and with help of supporters overthrows the Shogun’s government.  They create a constitution based on the Constitution of the Kingdom of Prussia.   This means the country has a weak legislature and the monarch is practically all-powerful.

“In 1889 work on the constitution was completed, and it was promulgated as a “gift” from the emperor to his people.  It remained in force until 1945.  The emperor, father of the family state, retained the power to declare war, conclude treaties, and command the army.  He also had the right to open, recess, and dissolve the legislature; the right to veto the latter’s decisions and the right to issue his own ordinances.” (pg. 435)

The Meigi Emperor

                 While the Japanese Throne kept getting stronger the Chinese Throne kept getting weaker.  By 1912 the imperial system comes to end and China falls into the hands of warlords.  Ultimately multiple powers die down to just two in the Nationalists and the Communists, and then the Communists finally prevail.  

“The march itself, was a heroic accomplishment, a vindication of Mao’s belief in the power of the human will and determination.  In just over a year, the marchers covered some 6,000 miles, traversing snow-covered mountain passes where they froze in their thin clothes and crossing treacherous bogs and marshes.  To the hardships provided by nature was added the hostility of man, for there was rarely a day without some fighting.  At one point they had no alternative but to cross a mountain torrent spanned by a thirteen-chain suspension bridge from which the enemy armed and waiting on the other side had removed the planks.” (pg. 537)

Mao's Long March

             At the end of the book, we come to the ‘modern’ era:  Mao’s Communists in China and the democratic Japan.  China is opening and Japan is about to dominate the car and video game industry. Again, if you know nothing about this area of the world this book is a good introduction, but you fly through everything at record speed.  

AN UNSTOPPABLE FORCE

A review of Stephen Turnbull’s Genghis Kahn & the Mongol Conquests 1190-1400 (2003)
Part of the Essential Histories Series #57

(Rating 3 of 5)

I have always wondered when discussing the Mongol Empire if one should pluralize the word ‘empire.’ The Mongol Empire was the largest land continuous empire the world had ever seen before or since. Genghis Kahn had two things Alexander the Great did not: a longer life, and successors to continue the conquest. I have long believed that had Alexander lived, however, his empire would have stabilized and lasted, instead of dissolving away leaving the world almost sooner then it came. The Mongol Empire fragments into many empires and kingdoms and despite their many organizational enhancements they were not every good at governing what they had conquered. In many ways, those who were the conquered had a stronger effect, culturally, on those who conquered them the Mongols had on those they had conquered.

Stephen Turnbull’s work is a good look brief look into the juggernaut that was the Mongol Empire. He discusses some of the inaccuracies and misconceptions that are associated with the Mongol army. As I have stated in other reviews of this series, these books are very interesting because they are in an almost textbook format with out really having a textbook feel to them. In this book, there are maps, classical paintings of events, and art from various cultures that had to deal with the Mongol armies. One chapter even deals with horror ordinary people who were their victims had to experience.

“Throughout all the accounts of the Mongol conquests we can discern in the background an echo of great human suffering. Ordinary people from Poland to Java, who under any other circumstance might have lived lives that may have been short but were certainly uneventful, suddenly found their world turned upside down by a horde of demons apparently let loose from the depths of Hell.” p.76

The Mongol Empire had fought peoples all the way from Europe into Japan, a great deal of their success was owed to organization and their ability to change and adapt. This book serves as a good little into the Empire and Army of the Golden Horde.

{Video was from he History Channel's Barbarians, which is better then this book}

HOW THE GREAT POWERS GO ‘HYPER’!

A review of Amy Chua’s Day of Empire: How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance—And Why They Fall (2007)

(Rating 5 of 5)

In short, the secret ingredient to a power turning into a great ‘hyperpower’ is tolerance. Not that being tolerant makes a nation a great power but it was essential to these already established powers to become the predominant power of their day, or as Chua defines it a ‘hyperpower.’ More then a superpower, hyperpowers are completely dominant in their sphere of the world with no rivals. To become a hyperpower, a nation must become tolerant as a prerequisite, and pulling away from that tolerance is what causes the hyperpower to crack.

Now the word ‘tolerance’ is something that must be taken relatively. Relative to the world and civilizations around them during the hyperpowers’ time period, and how the each hyperpower allows for social mobility and meritocracy.

“Finally, the concept is relative tolerance. In the race for world dominance, what matters most is not whether a society is tolerant according to some absolute, timeless standard, but whether it is more tolerant than its competitors. Because tolerance is a relative matter, even the tolerated groups may be subject to harshly inequitable treatment. Russian Jews in the late nineteenth century found America a haven compared to the pogroms they were fleeing, but were still subjected to anti-Semitism and anti-Jewish quotas in the United States.

I am not arguing that tolerance is a sufficient condition for world dominance. No matter how tolerant, the Kingdom of Bhutan is unlikely ever to become a global hegemon. It is always a confluence of additional factors—geography, population, natural resources, and leadership, to name just a few—that leads to the rare emergence of a world-dominant power. Pure luck plays a part, too. Even in the most propitious circumstances, a society’s ability to achieve and maintain global dominance will also depend, for example, on the state of the competition.” p.xxiv

With each case she briefly exams the history of the particular hyperpower, comparing it with the other powers that existed during its time, and following each case from their inception to the moment they rise to become a hyperpower, and there eventual downfall. Chua examines what made these powers different from others and what was their great undoing. Moreover, the continuing theme is each of these powers is they are more tolerant than their rivals are. Some of the civilizations she discuses are as follows:

· The Achaemenid Persian Empire was, as Chua describes, was the world’s first real hyperpower. Crushing its opponents Assyria, Babylonia, and Egypt, Persia was far more powerful than anyone they came across. The Persians allowed the subjects to worship their local gods; even the King of Persia would pay homage to local gods in their own lands. This increased the King’s image and legitimacy with his own subjects. Even Alexander who brought that empire down would emulate that strategy.

(Persian Empire at its height, green is Greece that is not a part of that empire.)

· Ancient Rome, during the period known as the High Empire, is also sighted for its tolerance of its subjects, not only allowing local populations to worship their own gods but even extending their citizenship and their very definition of what a ‘Roman’ was. Rome was able to create a since of unity throughout their empire which allowed them to maintain their hold on such a large area.

(The Roman Empire)

· The Tang Empire of Ancient China, how the Emperor Gaozu allowed for the Han Chinese and ‘barbarians’ such as the Turks to intermix and marry and have it be socially acceptable. This allowed for a more inclusive empire and one that is far easier to govern.

(Tang Empire)

· The Mongol Empire broke down traditional clans into military units that would show loyalty to the army unit that they use to show with male blood ties. Genghis Kahn himself would recruit people into his army who had skills they lacked, regardless of that individuals background.

(Mongol Empire)

· The Dutch World Empire, Holland in becoming a refuge for victims of religious persecution, allowed the very tiny place to assume a huge brain trust. With almost all smart and talented people from various groups, they were able to build a massive colonial empire. Although they were nowhere near as nice to their colonial subjects as they were the people at home.

(Dutch World Empire)

· The British Empire mimicked much of what the Dutch did to achieve success. This was accomplished in part because of the overthrow of King James II and replacing him with King William III* who was also the Prince of Orange and Stadtholder of the Dutch Republic. Great Britain, much larger than tiny Holland would assume Dutch policies and create for itself an empire to which the sun would not set.

(The British Empire)

· And of course, the United States of America is the modern hyperpower. The United States attracted immigrants from all over Europe, American society allowed for a great deal of social mobility, allowing people such Alexander Hamilton to go from bastard immigrant to Secretary of the Treasury.

(The United States of America)

Now any student of history knows many of these ‘tolerant’ nations were not really that ‘tolerant’ as we would now define it. However as previously stated what matters is relative tolerance. In addition, through most of those examples tolerance was something that involved. The United States today is attractive place for people all over the world; that might not have been the case when we practiced legalized segregation.



The book also deals with what went wrong with the hyperpowers, often how turning away from their more tolerant traditions either caused or hastened their downfall. Chua also deals with some potential future hyperpowers, discussing some of their strengths and drawbacks. Whether any of these ‘potential powers’ will one day be able to challenge the United States remains to be seen.

Throughout the work, Chua also discusses her own life, family history, and relates her experiences to the material creating are very flowing narrative that intellectual but nevertheless is easy to understand. The book is very enjoyable and informative.

*Technically, Queen Mary II as well but it was really more William.

{Video is from Amy Chua at a conference explaining this book}