3 ms·

>Rome, China and the North Indian kingdoms traded Yes, well established. But in limited amounts, and without much knowledge in either side about the other, not

>Rome, China and the North Indian kingdoms traded Yes, well established. But in limited amounts, and without much knowledge in either side about the other, not much influence, cultural, social, economic, military, and such. Which is way Marco Polo's journey, which happened close to a full millenium later after the final centuries of the Roman Empire, is still a landmark of the civilizational meeting between Europe and China. >This is as silly as claiming Rome was the centre of the world Not anywhere near as silly. For most of history, millenia before and after the Roman empire (until about the later modern era), China is considered by economists and historians to have been the top global economy. And that's not due to population (in fact, it was smaller than the Roman Empire population wise, even about half), but with impressive organization, culture, and infrastructure.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> millenia before and after the Roman empire (until about the later modern era), China is considered by economists and historians to have been the top global economy The list of largest cities tells the story succinctly [1]. Power went from the Levant and Egypt to China after the Bronze Age Collapse, returned to the Mediterranean with the rise of Rome, gradually traded away from Constantinople to China again through the first millennium CE (where it remained for much of the second millennium) before returning, suddenly and massively, to London following the Industrial Revolution. There is no basis for claiming the various civilisations of the Mediterranean, ranging from the Hittites to the Egyptians and Greeks and Romans, both Western and Eastern, to say nothing of the Parthians, were less “developed” or ”refined” than China at their respective heights. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_throughout_history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_throu...

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> millenia before and after the Roman empire (until about the later modern era), China is considered by economists and historians to have been the top global economy The list of largest cities tells the story succinctly [1]. Power went from the Levant and Egypt to China after the Bronze Age Collapse, returned to the Mediterranean with the rise of Rome, gradually traded away from Constantinople to China again through the first millennium CE (where it remained for much of the second millennium) before returning, suddenly and massively, to London following the Industrial Revolution. There is no basis for claiming the various civilisations of the Mediterranean, ranging from the Hittites to the Egyptians and Greeks and Romans, both Western and Eastern, to say nothing of the Parthians, were less “developed” or ”refined” than China at their respective heights. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_throughout_history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_throu...