So we have northern barbarians pretending to be Chinese, southern tribesmen pretending to be Chinese, Chinese pretending to be Northern barbarians and everyone is interested in Buddhism from Afghanistan, right?
The second and perhaps best emperor of the Tang Dynasty - Tang Taizong (Li Shi Min) - if you don't mind him commiting fratricide to secure the throne of China interestingly has a Turk (northern) mother. (
So, if compared to English history, its alot like the Anglos in the south being engulfed by the viking settlements of the north until ultimately becoming a mix of all
Mmm not really. China is a huge country with a larger population and a much complex history. Also their world view and circumstances are completely different. So comparing the two countries wouldn't be accurate.
@@PrometheusOfSodom im drawing the terminology directly from Chinese sources. They are called 胡人。its how they are described through all of chinese history
@@PrometheusOfSodom savage is how they have always been described. Im giving you the actual chinese historical perspective on them and not the whitewashed politically correct version of the modern era
@@daveeygdoeschinese2546It's not about being politically correct, it's about knowing who they are. Acknowledging how they were perceived by the Chinese sources is important to acknowledge as it gives a fuller picture of what the world looked like and how the ppl saw each other but it is equally as important to acknowledge that just because Chinese sources perceived them that way doesn't mean that is what they are. To not acknowledge that gives too much credit to ancient sources and is not good history. Remember that even ancient sources had their own political/propaganda oriented agenda when writing it. So they are prone to lie, have biases, and spin events that make them look good and their rivals look like savages.
@@Reaper478 I just want the viewer to see things exactly as they were perceived at the time by the people of the time. To add to that, all sources about the barbarians Xianbei, Xiongnu, Tuoba tribes etc come from Chinese sources as they left practically nothing for us. Even if I wanted to insert my own opinion in there, the fact is sources from Rome, to medieval Europe, the middle east and ancient China all say steppe peoples were violent and savage by comparison to settled people. The predominant nature of their relationship with settled people for eons was to rape, loot and pillage. Read anything about the Mongols, Huns, Sythians or any other steppe people. I'm not saying they didn't have culture, or weren't intelligent, or didn't have a history, I'm simply in alignment with what the sources were saying about these people. And I agree with the ancient sources . Steppe nomads from the Mongols to the Xiongnu were utterly savage and barbaric. Maybe i should have gone into more detail about some of the atrocities of the 5 barbarians. You can look up the disaster of Yongjia for starters where the Xiongnu massacred 30,000 civilians after killing the emperor and all the ministers, ultimately ending the Western Jin dynasty.
@@daveeygdoeschinese2546 Are you a History major in Uni yet?? Cause this is not how historical analysis works and you should be learning how to read texts fairly soon in class if you are. Historians don't use terms like barbarians or savages when conducting research into a peoples and their history. That lack of objectivity compromises our ability to understand the past. Using subjective terms like that implies the author has an agenda/bias that will make them fixate on a subject, event, or people in such a way that they themselves are missing the full picture. A popular example of this is the book Guns, Germs, and Steel. Made waves in popular culture but not taken serious in academia. It is near impossible to rid ourselves completely of bias but we strive for it and then have our work peer reviewed by other experts. The problem with your reply here is you've admitted your bias against an entire peoples thus your ability to look at socio-economic, environmental, and cultural factors that cause conflict and events is compromised and not to be trusted as it doesn't have the rigor of traditional historical analysis. Which I'm sure you'll learn in class soon. Good luck.
The lorekeeper has spoken again!
Keep up man love your vid on chinese history!
Wow that was quick! Thanks, I will :)
So we have northern barbarians pretending to be Chinese, southern tribesmen pretending to be Chinese, Chinese pretending to be Northern barbarians and everyone is interested in Buddhism from Afghanistan, right?
Sadly, some Muslims blew up those irreplaceable statues of the Buddha there
Nice, the Disorder of the Eight Princes and the 16 Dynasties!
Welcome back my friend!
@@daveeygdoeschinese2546 Always good to see a new Chinese History video from you my friend.
The second and perhaps best emperor of the Tang Dynasty - Tang Taizong (Li Shi Min) - if you don't mind him commiting fratricide to secure the throne of China interestingly has a Turk (northern) mother. (
So, if compared to English history, its alot like the Anglos in the south being engulfed by the viking settlements of the north until ultimately becoming a mix of all
Mmm not really. China is a huge country with a larger population and a much complex history. Also their world view and circumstances are completely different. So comparing the two countries wouldn't be accurate.
@@user-hr5gq9hq6g☝️🤓 Um, actually, I want to sound smart while not doing any thinking whatsoever.
Being a barbarian and a savage is very different, semantically. You shouldn't use pejorative terms if you try to play the historian card.
@@PrometheusOfSodom im drawing the terminology directly from Chinese sources. They are called 胡人。its how they are described through all of chinese history
@@PrometheusOfSodom savage is how they have always been described. Im giving you the actual chinese historical perspective on them and not the whitewashed politically correct version of the modern era
@@daveeygdoeschinese2546It's not about being politically correct, it's about knowing who they are.
Acknowledging how they were perceived by the Chinese sources is important to acknowledge as it gives a fuller picture of what the world looked like and how the ppl saw each other but it is equally as important to acknowledge that just because Chinese sources perceived them that way doesn't mean that is what they are.
To not acknowledge that gives too much credit to ancient sources and is not good history. Remember that even ancient sources had their own political/propaganda oriented agenda when writing it. So they are prone to lie, have biases, and spin events that make them look good and their rivals look like savages.
@@Reaper478 I just want the viewer to see things exactly as they were perceived at the time by the people of the time. To add to that, all sources about the barbarians Xianbei, Xiongnu, Tuoba tribes etc come from Chinese sources as they left practically nothing for us. Even if I wanted to insert my own opinion in there, the fact is sources from Rome, to medieval Europe, the middle east and ancient China all say steppe peoples were violent and savage by comparison to settled people. The predominant nature of their relationship with settled people for eons was to rape, loot and pillage. Read anything about the Mongols, Huns, Sythians or any other steppe people. I'm not saying they didn't have culture, or weren't intelligent, or didn't have a history, I'm simply in alignment with what the sources were saying about these people.
And I agree with the ancient sources . Steppe nomads from the Mongols to the Xiongnu were utterly savage and barbaric. Maybe i should have gone into more detail about some of the atrocities of the 5 barbarians. You can look up the disaster of Yongjia for starters where the Xiongnu massacred 30,000 civilians after killing the emperor and all the ministers, ultimately ending the Western Jin dynasty.
@@daveeygdoeschinese2546 Are you a History major in Uni yet?? Cause this is not how historical analysis works and you should be learning how to read texts fairly soon in class if you are.
Historians don't use terms like barbarians or savages when conducting research into a peoples and their history. That lack of objectivity compromises our ability to understand the past.
Using subjective terms like that implies the author has an agenda/bias that will make them fixate on a subject, event, or people in such a way that they themselves are missing the full picture.
A popular example of this is the book Guns, Germs, and Steel. Made waves in popular culture but not taken serious in academia.
It is near impossible to rid ourselves completely of bias but we strive for it and then have our work peer reviewed by other experts.
The problem with your reply here is you've admitted your bias against an entire peoples thus your ability to look at socio-economic, environmental, and cultural factors that cause conflict and events is compromised and not to be trusted as it doesn't have the rigor of traditional historical analysis.
Which I'm sure you'll learn in class soon. Good luck.