Chinese Agriculture and why it did not have an industrial revolution

[cnleio]

You know China could have developed its own steam engine if there were an economic need. Technology doesn't need to be foreign.

Im sorry, there's no word "IF" in the history book. The steam engine only appear in China at the last time of Qing dynasty, but the kingdom collapsed.

 

[Kolaps]

You forget one independent variable, bro: a) population. As early as the 18th century, China's population already exceeded 200 million. China didn't really have to necessitate industrial revolution in the sense that Europe and the United States had to due to the shear size of man power readily available. Given, China's population in the mid 19th century was already over 400 million.

Graph 1: China's population increases from Han Dynasty to current epoch

Ming population was less than Song, but their economy output was multiple times higher than Song.

 

[Aepsilons]

Im sorry, there's no word "IF" in the history book. The steam engine only appear in China at the last time of Qing dynasty, but the kingdom collapsed.

The problem that led to the demise of the Qing Empire is due to several factors:

1) Modernization started late

2) Overly aggressive military policies that did not utilize alliance system

China had the Opium War with Britain as early as the early 19th century. But China, under the Qing, did not modernize or adopt western education and concepts , or even was open to the idea of the monarchy adopting the parliamentary system. It was resistant to change. Had China's Qing Dynasty done so, like what Japan had done in Meiji Revolution, China could have industrialized as early as the late 19th century. But it did not.

 

[Kolaps]

I understand what you're referring to, friend. China had experienced industrialization as far back as the Song Dynasty and Han Dynasty. But in regards to the context of OP, China's version of the 'Industrial Revolution' that was experienced by Europe, the United States and Japan was not until the late 1960s when Zhou Enlai was Premier. China had started late in regards to industrialization in the modern sense. Europe industrialized as early as the late 18th century, the United States industrialized during the early to mid 19th century; Japan industrialized in the mid to late 19th century.

It's a factory with modern machinery.

Just like China today modernizing their military.

 

[cnleio]

You are misinterpreting the OP meaning:

Chinese (was) Agriculture (civilization) and why it did not have an industrial revolution (unlike British)?

I just show u how a Industry Revolution is so important to Chinese in China history, buddy...

The West:
Silk Road ==> Industry Revolution ==> discover Ocean & search new Land ==> Setup colonies ==> dig raw materials & gold from colonies ==> Continue develop Industry Revolution ==> military race, strong warships & guns ==> f@ck China

Ancient China:
Silk Road ==> ................ ==> f@cked by foreigners with strong warships & guns.

This is not 19 century, but Human History just repeat over and over again ! And Agriculture Industrial Revolution come from the Industry Revolution.

 

[Aepsilons]

Ming population was less than Song, but their economy output was multiple times higher than Song.

You understand why there was a sharp drop in population during the Song Dynasty, right? The catalyst was the plague. In fact, the plague had ravaged millions of Chinese during the inter dynasty years of Song and Yuan. The Song dynasty, especially under the rule of Emperor Chunhua did develop medical formularies to combat plague, and most of all, invested in sewage systems that did help alleviate the human waste situation, in regards to urban planning policies. I would say that the Ming Dynasty, like the Yuan before it, had benefited much from civil administration and urban initiatives that were promulgated by the Song Dynasty.

Refere to this, please:

[The serious plague in Kaifeng in the... [Zhonghua Yi Shi Za Zhi. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI

 

[Kolaps]

I just show u how a Industry Revolution is so important to Chinese in China history, buddy...

The West:
Silk Road ==> Industry Revolution ==> discover Ocean & search new Land ==> Setup colonies ==> dig raw materials & gold from colonies ==> Continue develop Industry Revolution ==> military race, strong warships & guns ==> f@ck China

Ancient China:
Silk Road ==> ................ ==> f@cked by foreigners with strong warships & guns.

This is not 19 century, but Human History just repeat over and over again ! And Agriculture Industrial Revolution come from the Industry Revolution.

The real history is not like that.

That is Eurocentric version of history.

 

[Zsari]

Im sorry, there's no word "IF" in the history book. The steam engine only appear in China at the last time of Qing dynasty, but the kingdom collapsed.

Yes, like I said, the underlining economy is the determining factor in innovation, while more often than not, belief & tradition are merely the symptoms.

You are falling into the Eurocentric narrative trap.

Read history please!

A wealthy Chinese industrialist and merchant have several storage buildings to store their goods. It's not a small workshop, but a massive factory complex. You also need to search about Chinese water powered machinery too.

The reason why China missed steam engine, not because Chinese people was dumb, but at the time mass produced good by machine was not as good as made by hand. Chinese people at the time were wealthy enough to purchase hand made product.

Without China, there will be no British Industrial Revolution too, as modern economy model of Europe was a copy of Chinese economy model. From free market, good transportation to mass production. That gave British advantage over another European countries until the rise of Germany.

It's not true that China was just an AGRICULTURE civilization. China had a massive agriculture sector to feed their industrial sector and export on the Silk Road. Eurocentric historian just want to look one side of China, so they can claim the other industrial side of China as theirs.

Yes, I'm aware of the hydro powered machines in China, but they are limited by location and limited in usage. The abundance of cheap labor means to increase capacity, the merchants simply hire more people, instead of inventing or introducing more machines.

 

[DarkElf]

Yes, I'm aware of the hydro powered machines in China, but they are limited by location and limited in usage. The abundance of cheap labor means to increase capacity, the merchants simply hire more people, instead of inventing or introducing more machines.

You are forgetting Europe natural advantage. There's good reason why the steam engine is found in England where there's an abundant amount of dirt cheap coal (because the early steam engine is very inefficient) and natural barrier that can protect advancement from 'natural disaster' (Mongol) that can wipe out everything.

 

[Aegis DDG]

You understand why there was a sharp drop in population during the Song Dynasty, right? The catalyst was the plague. In fact, the plague had ravaged millions of Chinese during the inter dynasty years of Song and Yuan. The Song dynasty, especially under the rule of Emperor Chunhua did develop medical formularies to combat plague, and most of all, invested in sewage systems that did help alleviate the human waste situation, in regards to urban planning policies. I would say that the Ming Dynasty, like the Yuan before it, had benefited much from civil administration and urban initiatives that were promulgated by the Song Dynasty.

Refere to this, please:

[The serious plague in Kaifeng in the... [Zhonghua Yi Shi Za Zhi. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI

Imagine if the Song Dynasty continued. They produced 200-300,000 tons of Iron and steel in an single year, mostly in shantung peninsula (where one of the oldest cast iron pillars still stands to this day). They used hydrolic systems to power spinning mills that produced Value added goods textiles (with mostly silk threads as cotton textiles was not important to the Chinese and Central Asian/Indian/Middle Eastern market). They had state own factories that produced massive cast crankshafts, gears, levying machines that used metal cutting techniques like boring, milling, casting etc.An Arab traveller described Keifangs air as pitch black from soot. E.Asia would look very different today if Mongols never invaded.

 

[j20]

Imagine if the Song Dynasty continued. They produced 200-300,000 tons of Iron and steel in an single year, mostly in shantung peninsula (where one of the oldest cast iron pillars still stands to this day). They used hydrolic systems to power spinning mills that produced Value added goods textiles (with mostly silk threads as cotton textiles was not important to the Chinese and Central Asian/Indian/Middle Eastern market). They had state own factories that produced massive cast crankshafts, gears, levying machines that used metal cutting techniques like boring, milling, casting etc.An Arab traveller described Keifangs air as pitch black from soot. E.Asia would look very different today if Mongols never invaded.

宋朝的经济科技高度发展，可惜被北方游牧的蒙古人破坏，从此中国古典文明没落，欧洲却因为蒙古人的入侵从中世纪的愚昧中苏醒起来。
Economic technology development height of the Song Dynasty, unfortunately destroyed the northern nomadic Mongols, from classical Chinese civilizationdecline, but because of the Mongol invasion of Europe from the middle ages butawake.

 

[powastick]

High-level equilibrium trap - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The high-level equilibrium trap is a concept developed by environmental historian Mark Elvin to explain why China never underwent an indigenous Industrial Revolution, despite its wealth, stability, and high level of scientific achievement. Essentially, he claims that the Chinese pre-industrial economy was efficient enough as it was that there was no profit motive for the capital expense of technical improvements. Late imperial production methods and trade networks were so efficient and labor was so cheap that the economy reached an equilibrium point where supply and demand were well balanced, and there was thus no economic pressure to improve efficiency.

At the same time, an intellectual paradigm shift from Taoism to Confucianism among the intelligentsia moved the focus of academic inquiry from natural science andmathematics, which were conceived of under Taoism as investigations into the mystical nature of the universe, to studies of social philosophy and morality under Confucianism. According to Elvin, this produced an intellectual climate that was not conducive to technical innovation.

By comparison, the economy of Great Britain at the time of the Industrial Revolution was vastly smaller and less efficient than the late imperial Chinese economy. Labor was comparatively more expensive, and internal trade far less efficient than in China. This produced large imbalances in the forces of supply and demand, leading to economic problems which provided a large financial incentive for the creation of scientific and engineering advances designed to address them. At the same time, the Enlightenment had shifted the focus of academic inquiry towards natural sciences, providing the basis for many technical innovations.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I disagree with the high level equilibrium explanation. The Chinese economy was always large and had cheap labor - but didn't stop technological innovation before, due to the threats from external invaders (Europeans and northern nomads during the Ming, and northern nomads during the Song) and new ideas/products brought in by traders. In my guess, what really put an end to technological innovation during the Qing was the final conquest of the remaining northern nomads, the stabilization of the tribute system and the settlement of the border with the Russian Empire. There was no longer any motive, economic, diplomatic or military, for innovation.

I do not think that this phenomena will occur again - today's northern nomads are simply replaced by the rest of the world, and global economic competition has made it such that you can't stop innovating, or you'll fall behind. The Mongols are at the gates (mentally), permanently, and that sort of pressure - the desperate drive to survive - will ensure Chinese moves innovation forward.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

I disagree with the high level equilibrium explanation..

Plus manpower may not explain everything. You aren't going to beat a heavy train in a 100 mile race or a steamboat down the river no matter how many men you have.

 

[magic-007]

I understand what you're referring to, friend. China had experienced industrialization as far back as the Song Dynasty and Han Dynasty. But in regards to the context of OP, China's version of the 'Industrial Revolution' that was experienced by Europe, the United States and Japan was not until the late 1960s when Zhou Enlai was Premier. China had started late in regards to industrialization in the modern sense. Europe industrialized as early as the late 18th century, the United States industrialized during the early to mid 19th century; Japan industrialized in the mid to late 19th century.

TO some extent, china's industrialization can date back to Westernization Movement(洋务运动）the late qing dynasty (1861~1894) ,athough it faild, i suppose that is still industrial revolution,and later 1911-1949, in the period of kmt ruled , also has a creditable economic development,1927-1937 is called golden age .the later Mao ze dong's 大跃进 is also an industrilization,until 1978 china started reform and opening-up policies(ROP) .so ROP is not exactly start industrializing for china.Exactly, china's industrilization started from westernization movement,at the same time china 's neiqhbour ----janpan's meiji restoration has succeeded,and china's WM faild.the main reason was qing government corrupt and incompetent