3 ms·

Modern historians are now pretty sure there never was a "Silk Road" https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/jsb5my/comment/gbyl2uc/ https://www.reddit.

by jpm_sd 2y ago

Modern historians are now pretty sure there never was a "Silk Road" https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/jsb5my/comment/gbyl2uc/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/jsb5my/comme... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Name;_and_contested_significance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Name;_and_contested_...

AlotOfReading 2y ago
That's not quite correct. There are two major issues with the term "silk road". 1. It implies a singular road connecting end to end, when the reality is that there's was a vast network of routes across both land and sea. 2. It implies that the routes existed primarily to transport silk. They carried a lot of things and silk probably wasn't the original or most significant good transported. The article discusses both of these aspects, albeit imperfectly.
- namaria 2y ago
  It was more a mesh of overland routes that connected western China to Iranian highlands, steppe routes and from there over to the Black sea and Mesopotamia. This was not a direct trade route but rather a series of interconnections. Intensity probably varied a lot over time as well. The idea of a very lucrative direct connection between China and the Mediterranean is bunk, but the connectivity, people and goods movement was there for a long, long time, on and off.
  - pcthrowaway 2y ago
    Well then, who's to say the silk road doesn't still exist? Silk is still traded. There is still commerce between China and Iran. Perhaps the whole world and all the infrastructure are part of the silk road!
    - throwaway19972 2y ago
      Absolutely it does—China's belt and road project is marketed as "the new silk road" very intentionally.
sumo89 2y ago
Contesting the name based on silk not necessarily being the main cause for people to travel that way feels needlessly obtuse, exactly the kind of minor point scoring some people love when no one else cares.

by jpm_sd 2y ago

AlotOfReading 2y ago

That's not quite correct. There are two major issues with the term "silk road". 1. It implies a singular road connecting end to end, when the reality is that there's was a vast network of routes across both land and sea. 2. It implies that the routes existed primarily to transport silk. They carried a lot of things and silk probably wasn't the original or most significant good transported. The article discusses both of these aspects, albeit imperfectly.

namaria 2y ago
It was more a mesh of overland routes that connected western China to Iranian highlands, steppe routes and from there over to the Black sea and Mesopotamia. This was not a direct trade route but rather a series of interconnections. Intensity probably varied a lot over time as well. The idea of a very lucrative direct connection between China and the Mediterranean is bunk, but the connectivity, people and goods movement was there for a long, long time, on and off.
- pcthrowaway 2y ago
  Well then, who's to say the silk road doesn't still exist? Silk is still traded. There is still commerce between China and Iran. Perhaps the whole world and all the infrastructure are part of the silk road!
  - throwaway19972 2y ago
    Absolutely it does—China's belt and road project is marketed as "the new silk road" very intentionally.

sumo89 2y ago

Contesting the name based on silk not necessarily being the main cause for people to travel that way feels needlessly obtuse, exactly the kind of minor point scoring some people love when no one else cares.