Between Rome and China

[Anansasem]

As there is no thread for history, I'll just post this here.

I've been reading this book for a while, I enjoy history, and I thought this portion would hold some interest for this site. It is in regard to Rome and China, two massive empires that existed at the same time without coming to a conflict. What I found interesting here was the way they both seemed to work together while hardly knowing of the others existence. They are the basis for almost all of the modern day countries and nationalities. Their actions and conflicts directly influenced the flow of mankind through all of Asia, Europe, and Africa.

H.G. Wells (1866–1946). A Short History of the World. 1922.

XXXIV. Between Rome and China


THE SECOND and first centuries B.C. mark a new phase in the history of mankind. Mesopotamia and the eastern Mediterranean are no longer the centre of interest. Both Mesopotamia and Egypt were still fertile, populous and fairly prosperous, but they were no longer the dominant regions of the world. Power had drifted to the west and to the east. Two great empires now dominated the world, this new Roman Empire and the renascent Empire of China. Rome extended its power to the Euphrates, but it was never able to get beyond that boundary. It was too remote. Beyond the Euphrates the former Persian and Indian dominions of the Seleucids fell under a number of new masters. China, now under the Han dynasty, which had replaced the Ts’in dynasty at the death of Shi-Hwang-ti, had extended its power across Tibet and over the high mountain passes of the Pamirs into western Turkestan. But there, too, it reached its extremes. Beyond was too far. 1
China at this time was the greatest, best organized and most civilized political system in the world. It was superior in area and population to the Roman Empire at its zenith. It was possible then for these two vast systems to flourish in the same world at the same time in almost complete ignorance of each other. The means of communication both by sea and land was not yet sufficiently developed and organized for them to come to a direct clash. 2
Yet they reacted upon each other in a very remarkable way, and their influence upon the fate of the regions that lay between them, upon central Asia and India, was profound. A certain amount of trade trickled through, by camel caravans across Persia, for example, and by coasting ships by way of India and the Red Sea. In 66 B.C. Roman troops under Propey followed in the footsteps of Alexander the Great, and marched up the eastern shores of the Caspian Sea. In 102 A.D. a Chinese expeditionary force under Pan Chau reached the Caspian, and sent emissaries to report upon the power of Rome. But many centuries were still to pass before definite knowledge and direct intercourse were to link the great parallel worlds of Europe and Eastern Asia. 3
To the north of both these great empires were barbaric wildernesses. What is now Germany was largely forest lands; the forests extended far into Russia and made a home for the gigantic aurochs, a bull of almost elephantine size. Then to the north of the great mountain masses of Asia stretched a band of deserts, steppes and then forests and frozen lands. In the eastward lap of the elevated part of Asia was the great triangle of Manchuria. Large parts of these regions, stretching between South Russia and Turkestan into Manchuria, were and are regions of exceptional climatic insecurity. Their rainfall has varied greatly in the course of a few centuries. They are lands treacherous to man. For years they will carry pasture and sustain cultivation, and then will come an age of decline in humidity and a cycle of killing droughts. 4
The western part of this barbaric north from the German forests to South Russia and Turkestan and from Gothland to the Alps was the region of origin of the Nordic peoples and of the Aryan speech. The eastern steppes and deserts of Mongolia was the region of origin of the Hunnish or Mongolian or Tartar or Turkish peoples—for all these several peoples were akin in language, race, and way of life. And as the Nordic peoples seem to have been continually overflowing their own borders and pressing south upon the developing civilizations of Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean coast, so the Hunnish tribes sent their surplus as wanderers, raiders and conquerors into the settled regions of China. Periods of plenty in the north would mean an increase in population there; a shortage of grass, a spell of cattle disease, would drive the hungry warlike tribesmen south. 5
For a time there were simultaneously two fairly effective Empires in the world capable of holding back the barbarians and even forcing forward the frontiers of the imperial peace. The thrust of the Han empire from north China into Mongolia was strong and continuous. The Chinese population welled up over the barrier of the Great Wall. Behind the imperial frontier guards came the Chinese farmer with horse and plough, ploughing up the grass lands and enclosing the winter pasture. The Hunnish peoples raided and murdered the settlers, but the Chinese punitive expeditions were too much for them. The nomads were faced with the choice of settling down to the plough and becoming Chinese tax-payers or shifting in search of fresh summer pastures. Some took the former course and were absorbed. Some drifted north-eastward and eastward over the mountain passes down into western Turkestan. 6
This westward drive of the Mongolian horsemen was going on from 200 B.C. onward. It was producing a westward pressure upon the Aryan tribes, and these again were pressing upon the Roman frontiers ready to break through directly there was any weakness apparent. The Parthians, who were apparently a Scythian people with some Mongolian admixture, came down to the Euphrates by the first century B.C. They fought against Pompey the Great in his eastern raid. They defeated and killed Crassus. They replaced the Seleucid monarchy in Persia by a dynasty of Parthian kings, the Arsacid dynasty. 7

But for a time the line of least resistance for hungry nomads lay neither to the west nor the east but through central Asia and then south-eastward through the Khyber Pass into India. It was India which received the Mongolian drive in these centuries of Roman and Chinese strength. A series of raiding conquerors poured down through the Punjab into the great plains to loot and destroy. The empire of Asoka was broken up, and for a time the history of India passes into darkness. A certain Kushan dynasty founded by the “Indo-Scythians”—one of the raiding peoples—ruled for a time over North India and maintained a certain order. These invasions went on for several centuries. For a large part of the fifth century A.D. India was afflicted by the Ephthalites or White Huns, who levied tribute on the small Indian princes and held India in terror. Every summer these Ephthalites pastured in western Turkestan, every autumn they came down through the passes to terrorize India. 8
In the second century A.D. a great misfortune came upon the Roman and Chinese empires that probably weakened the resistance of both to barbarian pressure. This was a pestilence of unexampled virulence. It raged for eleven years in China and disorganized the social framework profoundly. The Han dynasty fell, and a new age of division and confusion began from which China did not fairly recover until the seventh century A.D. with the coming of the great Tang dynasty. 9
The infection spread through Asia to Europe. It raged throughout the Roman Empire from 164 to 180 A.D. It evidently weakened the Roman imperial fabric very seriously. We begin to hear of depopulation in the Roman provinces after this, and there was a marked deterioration in the vigour and efficiency of government. At any rate we presently find the frontier no longer invulnerable, but giving way first in this place and then in that. A new Nordic people, the Goths, coming originally from Gothland in Sweden, had migrated across Russia to the Volga region and the shores of the Black Sea and taken to the sea and piracy. By the end of the second century they may have begun to feel the westward thrust of the Huns. In 247 they crossed the Danube in a great land raid, and defeated and killed the Emperor Decius in a battle in what is now Serbia. In 236 another Germanic people, the Franks, had broken bounds upon the lower Rhine, and the Alemanni had poured into Alsace. The legions in Gaul beat back their invaders, but the Goths in the Balkan peninsula raided again and again. The province of Dacia vanished from Roman history. 10
A chill had come to the pride and confidence of Rome. In 270–275 Rome, which had been an open and secure city for three centuries, was fortified by the Emperor Aurelian. 11

[wuwei]

Obsessed about China much?

I know you love 'em Chinadolls, but try to keep it to yourself, we dont care about what non-Chinese think about China.

[kikiandlala]

Obsessed about China much?

I know you love 'em Chinadolls, but try to keep it to yourself, we dont care about what non-Chinese think about China.



Say what! Maybe I'm not getting what's going on here or at least I'm hoping I'm not...

I don't know if there's beef between you two, 'cause Anansasem has not posted anything in this thread that's offensive. And who's the "we" btw? Anyways I'm hoping your post was only in jest and just didn't come out looking right for 'net audiences.

[wuwei]

Say what! Maybe I'm not getting what's going on here or at least I'm hoping I'm not...

I don't know if there's beef between you two, 'cause Anansasem has not posted anything in this thread that's offensive. And who's the "we" btw? Anyways I'm hoping your post was only in jest and just didn't come out looking right for 'net audiences.

The guy is a troll who insists on posting shit on China when he is not posting fake stories about saving Asian Geishas in the bar, go look at his other thread on China and Darfur.

And "we" refers to people that can speak Chinese/have lived in China for extended periods of time, then their opinion/thoughts on China could be worth something, not some bozo who reads politicized English sources on China and thinks he knows a dam.

[Anansasem]

wuwei, click on my screen name, notice the option that says 'add this user to your ignore list?' Please, click it!

Your posts are meaningless to me, though I'd prefer not to have you as the cynical shadow on every single one of my threads.

The article itself? Anyone?

[Dimeron]

Hm... Ancient Rome and ancient China.

All I can think on top of my head is that Romans loved silk. Thought it grow on trees, tried to ban silk several times, and China was called Seres by the Romans.

Although I can't seem to find any article on it, but I do remember there was only (dubious) military conflict between Roman and Han dynasty. The Romans legionaries lost horribly because Chinese crossbow went right through their shield and armor. So the phalanx formation only worked to the Romans’ disadvantage by slowing all of them down.

[Vetrean]

Hmmm. That's interesting; I'd never heard of that.

EDIT: Referring to the 'crossbow' bit, not the article.

[Anansasem]

And both of you missed the point of the article completely. It never was about who's the better tyrannical empire. Anyone could argue China with it's superior organization and hold on it's people and influence, and anyone could argue Rome as it survived the epidemic and the Hun westward drive that destroyed China for over 600 years before it recovered.

The point of the article detailed how both these empires were integral to each other. With the existence of the silk road both empires benefited and worked together while hardly knowing of the others existence. I remember China sent an emissary to Rome very early after hearing from merchants about a great western empire. He made it all the way to the Caspian Sea where the Parthian's lied about the remaining length of his journey forcing him to give up and return. The middleman kingdoms were terrified that if both empires traded directly, their limits of influence would be able to spread and absorb the middle nations who benefited from trafficking the others goods to both of the empires.

Anyway, the main subject was how these powers worked directly to influence and drive the peoples and cultures that make up the modern day nations and seated conflicts. India is an aggregation of people displaced directly and indirectly by the advances and border wars of both empires. Every nation in Asia, Europe, and North Africa was shaped by the power and conflicts of these empires who worked in unknowing unison to drive the movements of mankind.

And you want to focus on some tiny skirmish with a crossbow. "China is better, they would have beat Rome!" Probably, not many doubt it, though most every historian also contends that Persia effectively rebuffed the Chinese several times while the Romans turned them into fragments. It's not really an issue, both empires were to far away for anything aside from trade to be of interest to either. Speaking about known nonexistent hypothetical events, is beyond useless, it can be theorized though no theory can answer all the unexpected variables that every single event would cause if the event didn't occur to begin with.

[ZhuBaJie]

published in 1922? if there's a more modern published work that compares the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire, i'd read it. there has probably been a lot of findings and discoveries since 1922.

a Russian friend/co-worker was asking me about why there are so many dialects in China, and i told him to imagine if Rome never fell apart. he understood right away. i would have to say that having a non-phonetic written language helped keep China unified in the end, despite having had so much war through the ancient and imperial ages.

[wuwei]

And both of you missed the point of the article completely. It never was about who's the better tyrannical empire. Anyone could argue China with it's superior organization and hold on it's people and influence, and anyone could argue Rome as it survived the epidemic and the Hun westward drive that destroyed China for over 600 years before it recovered.

The point of the article detailed how both these empires were integral to each other. With the existence of the silk road both empires benefited and worked together while hardly knowing of the others existence. I remember China sent an emissary to Rome very early after hearing from merchants about a great western empire. He made it all the way to the Caspian Sea where the Parthian's lied about the remaining length of his journey forcing him to give up and return. The middleman kingdoms were terrified that if both empires traded directly, their limits of influence would be able to spread and absorb the middle nations who benefited from trafficking the others goods to both of the empires.

Anyway, the main subject was how these powers worked directly to influence and drive the peoples and cultures that make up the modern day nations and seated conflicts. India is an aggregation of people displaced directly and indirectly by the advances and border wars of both empires. Every nation in Asia, Europe, and North Africa was shaped by the power and conflicts of these empires who worked in unknowing unison to drive the movements of mankind.

And you want to focus on some tiny skirmish with a crossbow. "China is better, they would have beat Rome!" Probably, not many doubt it, though most every historian also contends that Persia effectively rebuffed the Chinese several times while the Romans turned them into fragments. It's not really an issue, both empires were to far away for anything aside from trade to be of interest to either. Speaking about known nonexistent hypothetical events, is beyond useless, it can be theorized though no theory can answer all the unexpected variables that every single event would cause if the event didn't occur to begin with.


Blah blah blah.

CHINA DOLS!

[Anansasem]

published in 1922? if there's a more modern published work that compares the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire, i'd read it. there has probably been a lot of findings and discoveries since 1922.

a Russian friend/co-worker was asking me about why there are so many dialects in China, and i told him to imagine if Rome never fell apart. he understood right away. i would have to say that having a non-phonetic written language helped keep China unified in the end, despite having had so much war through the ancient and imperial ages.
There is definitely an ethnocentric mindset here. I'll say it clearly, China and Rome are not the central subject of the article. It professes an integral perception of the history and movement of mankind.

The passage was from H.G. Wells, his theories are radical even today. It wasn't specifically comparing either of the empires as it was showing the integrated way in which all of mankind is linked. No matter the nations, borders, cultures, or ethnicities each and every society is dependent on every other throughout the world. I'm not going to bother bringing up the events in the article again, as most seemed deadlocked in a China vs. Rome mindset. The message in the article was building a base work for and urges the case of an integrated global civilization.

[jook]

I read a NY Times article once which stated that trade indeed existed between Rome and China, along what is known as the Silk Road. Rome also had a large trade deficit with China. Some things don't change, even after 2000 years.

But seriously, what is the title of this HG Wells work? I'd like to check it out personally because it is very interesting.

[CJF]

^I'm not surprised at all. China is one of the most raw material and human powerfully rich countries in the world. ALways been a population center, whereas roman populations were greatly ruined by conquests etc.

[Anansasem]

jook, the book is there in the article. 'A History of the World' by H.G. Wells. I'd recheck that article you read, Rome and China never had direct trade. The trip took over 2 years along the Silk Road! Merchant Caravans from both empires would meet with Merchants partway, which led to the development of the Parthians and other Central Asian kingdoms. They hardly made direct contact with each other, especially not enough to acquire any sort of debt.

CJF, not exactly. Population, yes. Resources, no. They are especially lacking in Mineral resources, inspiring their sudden generosity towards Africa. Purely out of the goodness of their hearts, bless 'em.

Anyway, India has been larger in population historically and will again become the world most populous country in 2030 or so.

[ZhuBaJie]

CJF, not exactly. Population, yes. Resources, no. They are especially lacking in Mineral resources, inspiring their sudden generosity towards Africa. Purely out of the goodness of their hearts, bless 'em.

actually no. China is rich in natural resources, but it has also become a manufacturing centre, and its demands has outpaced its domestic supply.

Anyway, India has been larger in population historically and will again become the world most populous country in 2030 or so.

which is especially bad news for India, since it has less arable land and less drinkable water than China.

[Anansasem]

Zhubajie, my mistake. The only thing they lack is oil.

India, is a rising Asian power as well. If the government manages to make proper transitions and reforms, the country should be able to support their population.

You know, I find it amazing that many experts say the planet could support a much larger human population than it does now. The catch is that it cannot support divided and independent countries in the way they operate now. A unilateral global institution to provide food and vital resources for all people would be easy enough, if there wasn't the hopeless net of politics, ethnic, individual and personal interests to bog everything down.

[ZhuBaJie]

You know, I find it amazing that many experts say the planet could support a much larger human population than it does now. The catch is that it cannot support divided and independent countries in the way they operate now. A unilateral global institution to provide food and vital resources for all people would be easy enough, if there wasn't the hopeless net of politics, ethnic, individual and personal interests to bog everything down.

i haven't read exactly how they arrived at that conclusion, but these kinds of studies always assume that things will progress as they are progressing at the moment. i wonder if they factor in the fact that human waste has increased exponentially in the 150 years or so, and that it will likely continue to increase at an exponential rate. a lot of things can throw off these predictions - either positively or negatively.

[Anansasem]

Zhubajie, I'm speaking in present tense. Here, right now, it is said the planet could support an even larger human population.

Again, it isn't remotely likely with the bog of self, national, ethnic and religious interests making any form of cooperation, on that scale, inconceivable. Simply put, it's an entirely hypothetical reality. If suddenly every matter of conflict and contention among mankind was erased and we put our effort into coordinated advancement, it would be simple to preserve the environment while providing our necessities. However, we're more than mindless ants working for the better of the entire colony, so it's unrealistic. It's only said that it would be possible with that same level of cooperation toward a mutual goal.

[takedown]

I don't think China was ever destroyed by the Huns (if I read your comments correctly).... Throughout Chinese History the only two times that the Northern barbarians have ever taken over the entire country was during the Yuan (Mongol Empire) and the Qing dynasty (last dynasty of China). In other times where the barbarians invaded China has either successfully resisted their invasion or at least retreated to the South (reason why a lot of Chinese culture is preserved in Southern China). In fact, I think the Chinese (during the reign of Wudi of the Han dynasty) was the only ppls that have ever completely defeated and drove out the Huns in their own home. Legend has it that the Huns that escaped subsequently went westward and pretty much caused the fall of the Roman Empire.....although a few hundred years later...

[zhangfei]

I don't think China was ever destroyed by the Huns (if I read your comments correctly).... Throughout Chinese History the only two times that the Northern barbarians have ever taken over the entire country was during the Yuan (Mongol Empire) and the Qing dynasty (last dynasty of China). In other times where the barbarians invaded China has either successfully resisted their invasion or at least retreated to the South (reason why a lot of Chinese culture is preserved in Southern China). In fact, I think the Chinese (during the reign of Wudi of the Han dynasty) was the only ppls that have ever completely defeated and drove out the Huns in their own home. Legend has it that the Huns that escaped subsequently went westward and pretty much caused the fall of the Roman Empire.....although a few hundred years later...

After Han dynasty, various non-Chinese groups had found their small kingdom in China. (saving for Yuan and Qing). Depending on where they lived and who their rulers were, Chinese would become non-Chinese, and non-Chinese would Chinese. Over time, being Chinese wasn't about ethnicity anymore. For example, Sui's first emperor was half Chinese and half Xianbe. Tang's second emperor Li Shi Ming, one of the most well-known Chinese emperors, was more Xianbe than Chinese. His mother and grandmother were Xianbe.

Today, most Chinese are considered "Han" Chinese, but genetically "Han" Chinese(Sun Tzu, Lao-tzu, Confucius were "Han") don't exist anymore. DNA studies done by Chinese scientists show that many "Han" Chinese carry very little "Han" DNA -- in Yunan region, it is about 4%. in Shanghai area it is about 23%, which is the most out of all the regions. Basically "Han" Chinese have little of everything: Huns, Turks, Qidan/Khitan, Xianbe, Jurchen, and many others.

[ktkbs]

Romes relative power compared to the Han Dynasty in that period was similar to the PRC's compared to that of the US.

[Hawker]

ALways been a population center, whereas roman populations were greatly ruined by conquests etc.

That's a vague statement based on general ignorance of the Roman world and Roman empire building.

Romes relative power compared to the Han Dynasty in that period was similar to the PRC's compared to that of the US.

Absurd. Rome was equally if not more powerful than the Han Dynasty. It is also worth noting than the Roman Empire lasted about thousand years, but the Han fell only after 400 years of rule.

[kimtae]

That's a vague statement based on general ignorance of the Roman world and Roman empire building.



Absurd. Rome was equally if not more powerful than the Han Dynasty. It is also worth noting than the Roman Empire lasted about thousand years, but the Han fell only after 400 years of rule.
1000 years? The Byzantines weren't the same as the Roman empire, at least no more than the successors to the Han were the Han.

[Hawker]

1000 years? The Byzantines weren't the same as the Roman empire, at least no more than the successors to the Han were the Han.

I'm not talking about the Byzantines, they were more Greek than they were Roman. The Roman Empire began when Augustus established it in 31 BC and fell in 476 AD when the last Roman Emperor Romulus Augustus was overthrown by Odoacer.

[minbo]

Using your dates and events, unless my math is really really bad, that is not 1000 years of Roman empire.

[Hawker]

No you're right I'm thinking all the way back to the Republic which was established around 509 BC. I know that Rome did not officially become an empire until Augustus, but if you look at it, Rome was technically an empire during republic stage, as it was very aggressive and expansionist. Not much changed after the Senate took a more ceremonial role and the real power of the state shifted to the Emperor.

[kimtae]

I'm not talking about the Byzantines, they were more Greek than they were Roman. The Roman Empire began when Augustus established it in 31 BC and fell in 476 AD when the last Roman Emperor Romulus Augustus was overthrown by Odoacer.
You don't know much about history, do you? I hate dumb people because in this day and age there's just no reason for it if you have access to the internet, you know, that thing you're going typey typey on.
The Byzantines were also known as the Eastern Roman Empire. One could say the Byzantines, who were most decidedly not Greek despite later adopting the language as their official tongue, did last a thousand years and by keeping an unbroken line of emperors did keep the Roman empire going a thousand years but this is really stretching it.
I'm looking forward to seeing how you rewrite your history now. "Oh, I was talking about the nblah blah blah, the yackety smackety."
Don't lecture people unless you know your subject matter..
SPQR.

[Hawker]

You don't know much about history, do you? I hate dumb people because in this day and age there's just no reason for it if you have access to the internet, you know, that thing you're going typey typey on.
The Byzantines were also known as the Eastern Roman Empire. One could say the Byzantines, who were most decidedly not Greek despite later adopting the language as their official tongue, did last a thousand years and by keeping an unbroken line of emperors did keep the Roman empire going a thousand years but this is really stretching it.
I'm looking forward to seeing how you rewrite your history now. "Oh, I was talking about the nblah blah blah, the yackety smackety."
Don't lecture people unless you know your subject matter..
SPQR.

You sir are a half-wit and provide empirical proof that the fine art of debate is dead in the United States.

Yes, I am aware that the Byzantines were known at the Eastern Romans, the Eastern Roman Empire was their official title, the term 'Byzantine Empire' wasn't coined until the Renaissance. And if you are not aware, there are two schools of thought on the Eastern Roman Empire, one that once Rome fell they were the last bastion of Roman culture and tradition, and that the empire truly did not fall until 1453 when Constantinople was sacked by the Ottomans. Then there's the other one, which believes that the empire truly did end with the overthrow of Romulus, as the Eastern Empire later on became more Greek and favored Hellenist traditions over Roman ones. You would know this if you frequented history clubs and circles, which you obviously don't.

Now that I've presented my point, lets hear your retort. And don't act like an immature brat who thinks that his views are absolute, in the world of higher thinking everything is up to debate.

[kimtae]

You sir are a half-wit and provide empirical proof that the fine art of debate is dead in the United States.

Yes, I am aware that the Byzantines were known at the Eastern Romans, the Eastern Roman Empire was their official title, the term 'Byzantine Empire' wasn't coined until the Renaissance. And if you are not aware, there are two schools of thought on the Eastern Roman Empire, one that once Rome fell they were the last bastion of Roman culture and tradition, and that the empire truly did not fall until 1453 when Constantinople was sacked by the Ottomans. Then there's the other one, which believes that the empire truly did end with the overthrow of Romulus, as the Eastern Empire later on became more Greek and favored Hellenist traditions over Roman ones. You would know this if you frequented history clubs and circles, which you obviously don't.

Now that I've presented my point, lets hear your retort. And don't act like an immature brat who thinks that his views are absolute, in the world of higher thinking everything is up to debate.
Well, if you knew all that then why didn't you typey typey it in the first place instead of the stupidity that you tried to impress us with? Congrats on figuring out how Wikipedia works, dummy. Now, I want you to sum it all up in a five paragraph essay and don't forget to quote your sources.

[Hawker]

Well, if you knew all that then why didn't you typey typey it in the first place instead of the stupidity that you tried to impress us with? Congrats on figuring out how Wikipedia works, dummy. Now, I want you to sum it all up in a five paragraph essay and don't forget to quote your sources.

Is that? Is that your retort? I've heard smarter and cleverer things come from a retard child on acid. You boast the wit of of an average 4th grader and all the personality of a genital canker. And I know why you attacked me, it was not because of my lack of knowledge of the subject matter, but because I killed your raging hard-on for the Han Dynasty. If you wanted to talk history with me, I would of been happy to, but it's apparent that you don't, so go back to playing Dynasty Warriors and get out of the big kids table.

[kimtae]

Is that? Is that your retort? I've heard smarter and cleverer things come from a retard child on acid. You boast the wit of of an average 4th grader and all the personality of a genital canker. And I know why you attacked me, it was not because of my lack of knowledge of the subject matter, but because I killed your raging hard-on for the Han Dynasty. If you wanted to talk history with me, I would of been happy to, but it's apparent that you don't, so go back to playing Dynasty Warriors and get out of the big kids table.
Awww, I've hurt the feelings of our resident revisionist historian and now he wants to lash out and get in a name calling match. Go back to school, dummy. And no, I'm not the one the the Han Dynasty hard-on but I don't like dummies like you who think you can pontificate to others when it's clear by all of your revisions that you are absolutely a first class blowhard. You know nothing and you should be thanking me for correcting your errors. Back to Wiki land with you. I say good day!

[Hawker]

Awww, I've hurt the feelings of our resident revisionist historian and now he wants to lash out and get in a name calling match. Go back to school, dummy. And no, I'm not the one the the Han Dynasty hard-on but I don't like dummies like you who think you can pontificate to others when it's clear by all of your revisions that you are absolutely a first class blowhard. You know nothing and you should be thanking me for correcting your errors. Back to Wiki land with you. I say good day!

You've corrected me in nothing and you've proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that you're a half-wit, and in order to bolster your shriveling masculinity you attempt to own and school someone randomly out of the blue for trivial reasons with your appalling drivel. Oh and take my advice, update your trash talk, don't tell me that besides being a clueless idiot you're also a professional bore.

[Subwaybrum]

really, you were the one that started with the condescending tone and all that you were accusing kimtae of, so what sort of attitude from others did you expect?

[Hawker]

really, you were the one that started with the condescending tone and all that you were accusing kimtae of, so what sort of attitude from others did you expect?

I thought that I acted accordingly to fight the ethnocentric mindset prevalent in this forum as Anansasem as clearly stated. Don't mind my attitude it's something I've developed over time as I mostly deal with people who have a 'Prove it or shut up' approach to conversations. And if kimtae wants to act like a butt hurt little school girl and insult me for the sake of insulting me, I'm all game.

[Makulita]

Note: With an under title of "Uniting the Asian Conscience" some ethnocentrism's expected. Annie over there is just being Annie.

EDIT: Fine fine fine, skimm--*cough* read through the thread. Tsk! Kimtae, dude, we talked about this mang. D:< Stop diving into the pitcher when you don't know the flavor of the kool-aid.

[awong]

I thought that I acted accordingly to fight the ethnocentric mindset prevalent in this forum as Anansasem as clearly stated. Don't mind my attitude it's something I've developed over time as I mostly deal with people who have a 'Prove it or shut up' approach to conversations. And if kimtae wants to act like a butt hurt little school girl and insult me for the sake of insulting me, I'm all game.

so are you ananwhatshisface?

[nightshade]

LOL, some douche is taking a page from the "you're an American retard" book to try to school kimtae.

[kimtae]

Dummy, you were wrong and had to try and revise your postings twice. God I hate stupid people. Do your research before you typey typey next time, dummy.

[Hawker]

Dummy, you were wrong and had to try and revise your postings twice. God I hate stupid people. Do your research before you typey typey next time, dummy.

Well you know the old saying, "A mans greatest insult is often his greatest fear".

[kimtae]

Well you know the old saying, "A mans greatest insult is often his greatest fear".
And so that makes you what? According to your own words you would be
"a half-wit" with "shriveling masculinity", a "clueless idiot " and "also a professional bore" with the "wit of of an average 4th grader and all the personality of a genital canker."
See how words can hurt, especially if you're too dumb to know how to use them? So long, anasanwhatever.

[Hawker]

And so that makes you what? According to your own words you would be
"a half-wit" with "shriveling masculinity", a "clueless idiot " and "also a professional bore" with the "wit of of an average 4th grader and all the personality of a genital canker."
See how words can hurt, especially if you're too dumb to know how to use them? So long, anasanwhatever.

Personally I don't think those insults are very good, just adjectives that accurately describe your personality. But you misinterpret the saying, which is unsurprising, it means that the insult you use constantly are often your greatest fear. So according to you, you are a dummy. The word you use to attack me is laughable. There's this genuine fear you have isn't there? You are just terrified of getting vicious and mean. Seriously, fighting with you is like fighting with Mr. Rogers, all you do is throw a condescending sentence added with the words 'dummy', 'stupid' and 'typey', it's more amusing then it is offensive, all very lulzy.

[nightshade]

Hey Hawker,

I hate to break it to you, but you're looking extremely foolish at this point. Back away slowly and contribute to other threads. Or you'll probably be flamed and banned.