EnclavedMicrostate在2022-11-14~2022-11-20的言论

2022-11-20 作者: EnclavedMicrostate 原文 #Reddit 的其它文章

926: What hygiene practices were used across the globe in the middle ages?, submitted on 2022-11-14 13:52:20+08:00.

—– 926.1 —–2022-11-14 16:41:04+08:00:

Hi there - unfortunately we have had to remove your question, because /r/AskHistorians isn’t here to do your homework for you. However, our rules DO permit people to ask for help with their homework, so long as they are seeking clarification or resources, rather than the answer itself.

If you have indeed asked a homework question, you should consider resubmitting a question more focused on finding resources and seeking clarification on confusing issues: tell us what you’ve researched so far, what resources you’ve consulted, and what you’ve learned, and we are more likely to approve your question. Please see this Rules Roundtable thread for more information on what makes for the kind of homework question we’d approve. Additionally, if you’re not sure where to start in terms of finding and understanding sources in general, we have a six-part series, “Finding and Understanding Sources”, which has a wealth of information that may be useful for finding and understanding information for your essay. Finally, other subreddits are likely to be more suitable for help with homework - try looking for help at /r/HomeworkHelp.

Alternatively, if you are not a student and are not doing homework, we have removed your question because it resembled a homework question. It may resemble a common essay question from a prominent history syllabus or may be worded in a broad, open-ended way that feels like the kind of essay question that a professor would set. Professors often word essay questions in order to provide the student with a platform to show how much they understand a topic, and these questions are typically broader and more interested in interpretations and delineating between historical theories than the average /r/AskHistorians question. If your non-homework question was incorrectly removed for this reason, we will be happy to approve your question if you wait for 7 days and then ask a less open-ended question on the same topic.

927: What was the mother tongue of Baldwin IV?, submitted on 2022-11-14 15:35:16+08:00.

—– 927.1 —–2022-11-14 16:41:22+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

928: Why Britain didn’t make Tibet into a protectorate?, submitted on 2022-11-14 17:03:35+08:00.

—– 928.1 —–2022-11-14 17:48:55+08:00:

Hey there,

Just to let you know, your question is fine, and we’re letting it stand. However, you should be aware that questions framed as ‘Why didn’t X do Y’ relatively often don’t get an answer that meets our standards (in our experience as moderators). There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, it often can be difficult to prove the counterfactual: historians know much more about what happened than what might have happened. Secondly, ‘why didn’t X do Y’ questions are sometimes phrased in an ahistorical way. It’s worth remembering that people in the past couldn’t see into the future, and they generally didn’t have all the information we now have about their situations; things that look obvious now didn’t necessarily look that way at the time.

If you end up not getting a response after a day or two, consider asking a new question focusing instead on why what happened did happen (rather than why what didn’t happen didn’t happen) - this kind of question is more likely to get a response in our experience. Hope this helps!

—– 928.2 —–2022-11-15 21:11:58+08:00:

Sorry, but we have removed your response. We expect answers in this subreddit to be comprehensive, which includes properly engaging with the question that was actually asked. While some questions verge into topics where the only viable approach, due to a paucity of information, is to nibble around the edges, even in those cases we would expect engagement with the historiography to demonstrate why this is the case.

In the context of /r/AskHistorians, if a response is simply “well, I don’t know the answer to your question, but I do know about this other thing”, that doesn’t accomplish this and is considered clutter. We realize that you have something interesting to share, but that isn’t an excuse to hijack a thread. If you have an answer without a question, consider making use of the Saturday Spotlight or the Tuesday Trivia in the future.

929: Who remembers the Bored Ape Yacht Club?, submitted on 2022-11-15 01:21:41+08:00.

—– 929.1 —–2022-11-15 17:10:16+08:00:

Apart from the part where it’s an ad for a different NFT collection.

930: Why did the US and most of the world institute a One China policy?, submitted on 2022-11-15 05:05:53+08:00.

—– 930.1 —–2022-11-15 21:12:05+08:00:

Sorry, but we have removed your response. We expect answers in this subreddit to be comprehensive, which includes properly engaging with the question that was actually asked. While some questions verge into topics where the only viable approach, due to a paucity of information, is to nibble around the edges, even in those cases we would expect engagement with the historiography to demonstrate why this is the case.

In the context of /r/AskHistorians, if a response is simply “well, I don’t know the answer to your question, but I do know about this other thing”, that doesn’t accomplish this and is considered clutter. We realize that you have something interesting to share, but that isn’t an excuse to hijack a thread. If you have an answer without a question, consider making use of the Saturday Spotlight or the Tuesday Trivia in the future.

931: The defeat of the Te (鄭) family., submitted on 2022-11-16 18:12:22+08:00.

—– 931.1 —–2022-11-16 23:10:06+08:00:

There were in fact many Tê families in Fujian (also, and more commonly these days, known by the Mandarin transcription Zheng), with the one I discussed in that answer being the lineage of one Zheng Shaozu, a local government clerk. One of his sons, Zheng Zhilong, who was born in 1604, took to sea at the age of 18, and became part of the fabric of maritime East Asia. His first journey was with a merchant who took him to Hirado in Japan, where he would base himself for the next couple of years. While there, he married a local woman, Tagawa Matsu, with whom he had three children, the oldest being a son, Zheng Sen, who was born in 1624.

In that year, Zheng Zhilong began what would become his primary calling, piracy. The Dutch East India Company had recently established a colony in southern Taiwan, and were eager for any help they could get. After a brief stint as a translator, Zhilong became a privateer for the Dutch, and rapidly established himself as one of the major players in the South China Sea, commanding supposedly as many as 400 ships by 1727 (yes, that’s just three years into the job). The next year, however, he switched allegiances: after defeating the Ming fleet, Zheng was, like many pirate captains in the late imperial period, offered a position of authority and invited to privateer for the Ming instead – in essence, the pirates became the navy. He secured his reputation when he defeated a Dutch fleet in 1633, and became probably the most powerful man in Fujian in the years following.

This would become particularly pertinent after the collapse of the Ming in 1644 and the subsequent invasion of China by the Manchus. Several cadet branches of the Ming ruling house claimed to be the legitimate continuation of the deposed court in Beijing, and this loose assembly of successor states, known collectively as the ‘Southern Ming’, would hold out well past the Manchus’ arrival in the north. While the Yellow and Yangtze River valleys had been taken over quite quickly, these remnants in the more mountainous south were able to put up at least a semblance of a defence. Well, mostly. Fujian did not, as in 1646, Zheng Zhilong declared for the Qing and allowed the Manchus into the provincial capital of Fuzhou. If Zheng expected all his forces to follow his lead, though, he was mistaken. Zhu Yujian, the self-styled Longwu Emperor, who had been enthroned in Fujian with Zheng Zhilong’s support the year before, retained considerable support from the rest of the Zheng family, especially Zheng Sen, who was an especial favourite of the pretender emperor. He was granted the use of a new personal name, Chenggong, and the slightly esoteric honorary title Guoxingye, ‘grandfather of the imperial surname’. Pronounced Kok-sèng-iâ in Fujianese Hokkien, the Europeans’ transcription of it as ‘Koxinga’ gave us the name by which he is best known in the Western world.

Koxinga refused to follow his father in supporting the Qing, and, with control over his father’s fleet and army, pledged his allegiance to a succession of short-lived Southern Ming emperors, all the while entertaining plans of launching a campaign to reclaim parts of China from the Manchus. In 1656 he attempted to make his decisive play by attacking Nanjing, but the siege proved a costly failure and he withdrew from the region. With Qing forces closing on his coastal strongholds, Koxinga fomented a new plan: in the closing months of 1661, he assembled a force to sail across the Taiwan Strait and seize control of the Dutch colony in the south. Following a ten-month siege of Fort Zeelandia, the Dutch garrison surrendered, and Taiwan fell under the control of the Ming loyalists. Koxinga briefly contemplated an attack on the Spanish Philippines, but died of malaria in June 1662, these plans unfulfilled.

Nevertheless, Zheng’s children continued his work on Taiwan, and the Qing watched closely, aware they could not afford to allow an alternative locus of power to exist for too long. This was especially the case in light of the Qing’s administrative arrangement in southern China, where they had split the region into three ‘feudatories’ ruled by the families of men who had defected to the Qing: the Wu family had Yunnan and Guizhou, the Geng family received Fujian and Zhejiang, and the Shang family received Guangdong and Guangxi. The Zheng family, at this time, still held onto a stretch of land around Chaozhou (Teochew), straddling the Guangdong-Fujian border. The feudatory lords were never entirely trusted by the Qing, and especially not the Kangxi Emperor, who formally acceded as a child in 1661 but would not come into his own until 1669; the reduction of the Zheng stronghold on Taiwan, the last vestige of the Southern Ming, was thus of especial importance in case the feudatory lords should reconsider their allegiances. In order to starve the Taiwan regime of raiding targets either at sea or on land, in 1661 the Qing instituted what was known as the Great Clearance, a policy of forced resettlement which prohibited anyone from residing within 50 li (around 25km) of the coast in the provinces of Guangdong, Fujian, Zhejiang, Jiangnan, and Shandong. While this policy was lifted again in 1669, that it had ever been in place at all is indicative of how seriously the Qing saw the regime on Taiwan as a threat.

To counter the Taiwanese threat, the Qing began a programme of naval expansion in 1662. The head of this programme was Shi Lang, one of Zheng Zhilong’s principal lieutenants. Shi had not joined Zhilong in surrendering in 1646, but instead had been cast out by Koxinga following a dispute in 1651. With Shi Lang supervising a major programme of shipbuilding and crew training, by 1683 the Qing could boast 300 warships manned by some 20,000 sailors and support crew. During this time, the three feudatory states revolted, though not all at once: Wu Sangui revolted in 1673, Geng Jingzhong revolted in 1674 after taking over from his father, and Shang Zhixin in Guangdong only revolted after Geng Jingzhong had been subdued in 1676. The involvement of Zheng Jing, who landed troops in Fujian in support of Geng Jingzhong in 1676, affirmed Qing fears over Taiwan, and so after the suppression of the revolt in 1681, Taiwan became a top priority. In 1683, the Qing ordered Shi Lang to destroy the Zheng fleet and subdue the Zheng regime, which was achieved in quite short order – helped along considerably by a storm which damaged the Taiwanese fleet in the Pescadores before the main battle, and infighting within the Zheng camp after the battle over whether to surrender or continue resistance.

At the time I wrote that answer, I had been led to believe, by commonly-held assumptions in the scholarship, that the Qing stopped really concerning themselves with naval matters after 1683. This turns out not to be entirely true. While the Qing didn’t build a major ocean-going fleet, they were very much interested in attempting to police piracy and shore up coastal defence, and so although there would be no major programmes of shipbuilding, there was plenty of maintenance and replacement going on to keep the anti-pirate fleets at least somewhat up to shape, as well as considerable fortification works to defend against hypothetical amphibious attacks, such as from the major pirate conglomerations that harried the late Ming. Nevertheless, this was evidently not quite enough to deal with the major confederation that emerged in the south at the turn of the nineteenth century.

Sources and Further Reading

  • Tonio Andrade, Lost Colony (2011)

  • Ronald Po, The Blue Frontier (2018)

932: How realistic would it be for Chinese villages to turn refugees away during WW2?, submitted on 2022-11-18 05:43:18+08:00.

—– 932.1 —–2022-11-18 07:11:11+08:00:

Hi there - we’re happy to approve your question related to your creative project, and we are happy for people to answer. However, we should warn you that many flairs have become reluctant to answer questions for aspiring novelists and the like, based on past experience: some people working on creative projects have a tendency to try to pump historians for trivia while ignoring the bigger points they were making, while others have a tendency to argue with historians when the historical reality does not line up with what’s needed for a particular scene or characterization. Please respect the answers of people who have generously given you their time, even if it’s not always what you want to hear.

Additionally, as amazing as our flair panel is, we should also point out that /r/AskHistorians is not a professional historical consultation service. If you’re asking a question here because you need vital research for a future commercial product such as a historical novel, you may be better off engaging a historical consultant at a fair hourly rate to answer these questions for you. We don’t know what the going rate for consultancy work would be in your locality, but it may be worth looking into that if you have in-depth or highly plot-reliant questions for this project. Some /r/AskHistorians flairs could be receptive to working as a consultant in this way. However, if you wish for a flair here to do this work for you, you will need to organize this with them yourselves.

For more general advice about doing research to inform a creative project, please check out our Monday Methods post on the subject.

933: Interest Group overflow issues: Trade Unions have no Clout and also hate me, because they’re just that powerful I guess?, submitted on 2022-11-18 06:03:55+08:00.

—– 933.1 —–2022-11-18 06:04:53+08:00:

R5: The Trade Unions should be a relatively strong group with very high approval, but some kind of overflow issue means they have 0% clout and a huge disapproval from Radicals.

934: When the Jurchens/Manchus began their conquest of China in the late 16th Century, they had no major technological advantage over the 13th century Mongols. During the 300 years of The Ming Dynasty, why did the Chinese military doctrine not evolve to effectively deal with nomadic cavalry tactics?, submitted on 2022-11-18 14:30:35+08:00.

—– 934.1 —–2022-11-18 17:36:25+08:00:

This question I think has just a few too many flaws to be answered as phrased. The thing is, the Manchus did have technological advantages over their 13th century forebears, just not in the 16th century phase of their expansion. The Ming did innovate technologically, but the Manchus represented a somewhat different kind of threat. I’m a bit strapped for time at the moment so apologies for mainly falling back on old answer links here; if you have more specific follow ups I can try to address them at the weekend.

This thread with myself, /u/Otisheet, and /u/JolietJakeLebowski, discusses the Ming-Qing case in particular, and as I note there, after an initial phase in which the Qing were able to overcome Ming gunpowder advantages with superior mobility and knowledge of terrain, there came to be a protracted stalemate in the late 1620s and early 1630s as the Ming adapted their tactics to optimally deal with the Manchus, while the Manchus built up their own gunpowder arm through the ujen cooha, or ‘heavy troops’.

It is worth also noting, as I do in this comment, that the Manchus were not nomadic, and their tactical and operational approach differed somewhat as a result, even if they were superficially similar.

There are also a couple of takeaways from Kenneth Swope’s book on the Imjin War that I think would be worth considering. Firstly, there were clear logistical limits on Ming military commitment in Northeast Asia – as true for Manchuria in the 1610s-30s as it was for Korea in the 1590s. There was only so much that could be funnelled through the Shanhai Pass to supplement local resources, and that meant that in the period up to about 1636 when the proto-Qing state was simply securing Manchuria, they were fighting a very limited segment of the Ming army. Secondly, the Ming military had a certain degree of regional specialisation: the northern armies were mainly set up to deal with nomadic cavalry, while the southern coastal armies were set up to deal with ‘Japanese’ pirates (who often weren’t Japanese, but were still pirates), typically armed with firearms as well as cold arms. What was discovered during the Imjin War was that the Ming armies in the north were really bad at dealing with gunpowder-heavy, infantry-based armies like those of the Japanese, and so the rotation of southern troops was an especial priority. While there had been organisational change since the 1590s, it lends credence to the idea that the Ming valued specialisation over flexibility in tactical doctrine at the regional level, and the adaptations that had taken place since that period may not have left the Ming armies well equipped to deal with the more hybrid tactics the Manchus adopted.

Finally of course, the actual collapse of the Ming came from within following revolts in 1644 with which the Manchus had virtually zero involvement. The Qing conquest of China was not a clash between a Ming Goliath and a Qing David, but rather a mopping-up campaign by the Qing, who had the largest and best organised army, against a series of fractured polities – one that did ultimately get bogged down for over a decade in southwest China against Ming remnants that got their act together. What the Qing ended up doing was not, by any means, an immediate steamroll of Asia’s premier power.

935: [Virtual Youtubers] Identities in discord: The termination of Uruha Rushia, submitted on 2022-11-20 03:50:43+08:00.

—– 935.1 —–2022-11-20 10:41:39+08:00:

They fixed it pretty fast in the event – I saw it not long after and there was no sign of the damage.

—– 935.2 —–2022-11-20 17:10:02+08:00:

The 2020 ‘Taiwan Incident’, discussed here: https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/jjkyoc/virtual_youtuber_the_hololive_taiwan_controversy/

—– 935.3 —–2022-11-20 17:11:26+08:00:

she wanted to try harder to break the wall between them

phrasing…

—– 935.4 —–2022-11-21 08:35:51+08:00:

What do you even mean by this? That no real people are watching and companies are creating bots to watch?

—– 935.5 —–2022-11-21 08:49:40+08:00:

I feel like there’s a lot of baked-in assumptions and stereotyping and this is undoubtedly the biggest one. This is not a squeaky anime child voice, nor are these; this isn’t, nor this, nor this. And that’s just examples from Hololive. Take Nijisanji’s Selen or indie VTuber Iida Pochi. I’m not going to insist that you have to like VTubers now, but the notion that it’s all apparently squeaky voices is a massive generalisation.

—– 935.6 —–2022-11-21 08:50:46+08:00:

It’s fascinating that someone can list 12 examples and those are the exception, while 3 examples are the norm.

—– 935.7 —–2022-11-21 08:53:57+08:00:

So Cover should lie publicly?

Look, in a situation like this in which one of your streamers is literally going to stop streaming for 2 weeks with absolutely no warning, you have four options:

  • Tell all – very likely to backfire because it reflects badly on all parties.
  • Divulge as much as is required – opens some speculation but fundamentally gets across the basic message.
  • Lie to the public – papers it over but if anyone outside finds out or anyone internal leaks, then it demonstrates you have lied to the public.
  • Say absolutely nothing – encourages rampant speculation over the sudden and random break someone took without announcement.

I don’t know, maybe a company can’t afford to casually lie to its customers and potential investors?

—– 935.8 —–2022-11-22 17:26:16+08:00:

I don’t know what to tell you, but you’re describing nigh-on nonexistent situations here. Did someone who signed up to a rigorous training program not end up having worked for it when they made it big? How much work counts as enough before you’re allowed a lucky break? Are brands not allowed to promote anyone? Because if so then the Beatles are the ultimate grifters by that definition.

In any event, it’s not even like most VTuber companies are promoting total non-entities. Despite the nominal commitment to anonymity, VTubers’ past on the internet can be pretty traceable, and at both major agencies (Hololive and Nijisanji) new talents are invariably existing content creators, some more popular and some more obscure. So I don’t know what the issue is. Is it that already-popular creators are getting a boost from the branding and that’s bad because…???? Or is it that obscure creators are getting a boost from the branding and that’s bad because…????

—– 935.9 —–2022-11-24 08:59:07+08:00:

Quality of mouth tracking can definitely be variable, and there’s four (sort of three) potential points of failure: is the rigging high enough quality to interpret the inputs properly, is the camera good enough to produce high-quality inputs (i.e. sensitive enough but not over-sensitive), is the streamer positioned optimally relative to the camera, and do they talk in a way that makes it easy for the whole setup to pick up (relatively significant mouth movements, not speaking too quickly, etc)? There are some examples of slicker tracking though: Froot and Silvervale stand out off the top of my head.

936: [Hobby Scuffles] Week of November 21, 2022, submitted on 2022-11-20 23:00:12+08:00.

—– 936.1 —–2022-11-23 04:39:04+08:00:

As far as I’m aware, those went up to Volume 8… which was the most recent one to come out.

文章版权归原作者所有。
二维码分享本站