Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great... more Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great progress in their military and fiscal ability during the early modern period, which are largely unique to the west. They then believe such lead to the rise of western power against the rest of the world, and the delineation between pre-modern vs modern period in human history. Many scholars then began to look at cases from the "rest" of the world, either to confirm or to deny that such progress was unique to the West. Early Modern China (from Song onwards) was one of these cases.
In this research, I shall examine Northern Song, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operational level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great... more Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great progress in their military and fiscal ability during the early modern period, which are largely unique to the west. They then believe such lead to the rise of western power against the rest of the world, and the delineation between pre-modern vs modern period in human history. Many scholars then began to look at cases from the "rest" of the world, either to confirm or to deny that such progress was unique to the West. Early Modern China (from Song onwards) was one of these cases.
In this research, I shall examine either/both Northern Song and Late Ming period, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operation level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
This is the original esearch proposal I submitted to the University of Hull for my MA degree in H... more This is the original esearch proposal I submitted to the University of Hull for my MA degree in Historical Research. My final dissertation was quite different from what I proposed.
Nevertheless, this research proposal reflected my opinions of the military revolution framework then (back in 2013). I believed (and still do) the concept of Medieval/Early Modern transition, and the explanation of why and how it happened, is and will always be important in different areas of history. Military Revolution framework attempts to do so in the field the military history by explaining how the military was "early modernised", and how such interacted with its contemporary technological, political and economic changes. Unfortunately, the studies back then were too limited in focusing on a specific region (such as the Dutch Revolt), as well as favouring some specific technology as the centre of explanation (such as Trace Italienne). At the same time, few concepts that were introduced to express the success of Military Revolution, such as Jan Glete's ""complex society"" or "entrepreneur form of governing", are too vague.
I believe the first step to approach such problems, was instead of focusing on case examples that confirm the MR framework (such as the Netherland, who military revolutionized its army , had a successful fiscal structure, and became the "winner" of early modern history), we have to look at the cases that the framework have trouble explainings. I included the Northern Song (the Bombs), Duchy of Burgundy (the Bombards) and Hussites (the war wagons) as such latter cases example, because all had the element of a professional army with early modern tactics and drills, use of gunpowder technology and artillery, and some sort of state centralisation, basically a military revolution. Yet at the end none of them could be considered as cases of "success". Northern Song with the least gunpowder weaponry and technology fared the best with the strong state formation (which itself contradicts military revolution framework), Hussites and especially Burgundy were utterly destroyed as formal states in relatively short period of time, with the latter (despite having the best gunpowder weaponry), did not even achieved moderate military success.
---- Later during my research, I dropped the case studies of Burgundy and Hussites, not because they were irrelevant, but I rather wish to focus upon the amazingly early appearance of operational art in Northern Song dynasty. This did not happen in (most of) Early Modern Europe until the Napoleonic period, which allows a relatively status quo period of positional siege warfares often resulted in stalemates, between the Thirty Years War and French Revolution. How did early appearance of Operational art explained by the Military Revolution Framework? And how will it affect the progression and development of a state's military and socio-economy when such happened to it? And how did such affected the ultimate outcome of world history (such as the Great Divergence between West and the Rest)? This is what my current research is aiming to answer.
A rough draft of my research proposal explaining the importance of maritime comparative archaeolo... more A rough draft of my research proposal explaining the importance of maritime comparative archaeology in Iron Age studies
Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great... more Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great progress in their military and fiscal ability during the early modern period, which are largely unique to the west. They then believe such lead to the rise of western power against the rest of the world, and the delineation between pre-modern vs modern period in human history. Many scholars then began to look at cases from the "rest" of the world, either to confirm or to deny that such progress was unique to the West. Early Modern China (from Song onwards) was one of these cases.
In this research, I shall examine Northern Song, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operational level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great... more Both "Military Revolution" and Fiscal History framework believe the "West" has accomplished great progress in their military and fiscal ability during the early modern period, which are largely unique to the west. They then believe such lead to the rise of western power against the rest of the world, and the delineation between pre-modern vs modern period in human history. Many scholars then began to look at cases from the "rest" of the world, either to confirm or to deny that such progress was unique to the West. Early Modern China (from Song onwards) was one of these cases.
In this research, I shall examine either/both Northern Song and Late Ming period, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operation level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
This is the original esearch proposal I submitted to the University of Hull for my MA degree in H... more This is the original esearch proposal I submitted to the University of Hull for my MA degree in Historical Research. My final dissertation was quite different from what I proposed.
Nevertheless, this research proposal reflected my opinions of the military revolution framework then (back in 2013). I believed (and still do) the concept of Medieval/Early Modern transition, and the explanation of why and how it happened, is and will always be important in different areas of history. Military Revolution framework attempts to do so in the field the military history by explaining how the military was "early modernised", and how such interacted with its contemporary technological, political and economic changes. Unfortunately, the studies back then were too limited in focusing on a specific region (such as the Dutch Revolt), as well as favouring some specific technology as the centre of explanation (such as Trace Italienne). At the same time, few concepts that were introduced to express the success of Military Revolution, such as Jan Glete's ""complex society"" or "entrepreneur form of governing", are too vague.
I believe the first step to approach such problems, was instead of focusing on case examples that confirm the MR framework (such as the Netherland, who military revolutionized its army , had a successful fiscal structure, and became the "winner" of early modern history), we have to look at the cases that the framework have trouble explainings. I included the Northern Song (the Bombs), Duchy of Burgundy (the Bombards) and Hussites (the war wagons) as such latter cases example, because all had the element of a professional army with early modern tactics and drills, use of gunpowder technology and artillery, and some sort of state centralisation, basically a military revolution. Yet at the end none of them could be considered as cases of "success". Northern Song with the least gunpowder weaponry and technology fared the best with the strong state formation (which itself contradicts military revolution framework), Hussites and especially Burgundy were utterly destroyed as formal states in relatively short period of time, with the latter (despite having the best gunpowder weaponry), did not even achieved moderate military success.
---- Later during my research, I dropped the case studies of Burgundy and Hussites, not because they were irrelevant, but I rather wish to focus upon the amazingly early appearance of operational art in Northern Song dynasty. This did not happen in (most of) Early Modern Europe until the Napoleonic period, which allows a relatively status quo period of positional siege warfares often resulted in stalemates, between the Thirty Years War and French Revolution. How did early appearance of Operational art explained by the Military Revolution Framework? And how will it affect the progression and development of a state's military and socio-economy when such happened to it? And how did such affected the ultimate outcome of world history (such as the Great Divergence between West and the Rest)? This is what my current research is aiming to answer.
A rough draft of my research proposal explaining the importance of maritime comparative archaeolo... more A rough draft of my research proposal explaining the importance of maritime comparative archaeology in Iron Age studies
Uploads
Drafts by Gordon Tsang
In this research, I shall examine Northern Song, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operational level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
In this research, I shall examine either/both Northern Song and Late Ming period, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operation level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
Nevertheless, this research proposal reflected my opinions of the military revolution framework then (back in 2013). I believed (and still do) the concept of Medieval/Early Modern transition, and the explanation of why and how it happened, is and will always be important in different areas of history. Military Revolution framework attempts to do so in the field the military history by explaining how the military was "early modernised", and how such interacted with its contemporary technological, political and economic changes. Unfortunately, the studies back then were too limited in focusing on a specific region (such as the Dutch Revolt), as well as favouring some specific technology as the centre of explanation (such as Trace Italienne). At the same time, few concepts that were introduced to express the success of Military Revolution, such as Jan Glete's ""complex society"" or "entrepreneur form of governing", are too vague.
I believe the first step to approach such problems, was instead of focusing on case examples that confirm the MR framework (such as the Netherland, who military revolutionized its army , had a successful fiscal structure, and became the "winner" of early modern history), we have to look at the cases that the framework have trouble explainings. I included the Northern Song (the Bombs), Duchy of Burgundy (the Bombards) and Hussites (the war wagons) as such latter cases example, because all had the element of a professional army with early modern tactics and drills, use of gunpowder technology and artillery, and some sort of state centralisation, basically a military revolution. Yet at the end none of them could be considered as cases of "success". Northern Song with the least gunpowder weaponry and technology fared the best with the strong state formation (which itself contradicts military revolution framework), Hussites and especially Burgundy were utterly destroyed as formal states in relatively short period of time, with the latter (despite having the best gunpowder weaponry), did not even achieved moderate military success.
----
Later during my research, I dropped the case studies of Burgundy and Hussites, not because they were irrelevant, but I rather wish to focus upon the amazingly early appearance of operational art in Northern Song dynasty. This did not happen in (most of) Early Modern Europe until the Napoleonic period, which allows a relatively status quo period of positional siege warfares often resulted in stalemates, between the Thirty Years War and French Revolution. How did early appearance of Operational art explained by the Military Revolution Framework? And how will it affect the progression and development of a state's military and socio-economy when such happened to it? And how did such affected the ultimate outcome of world history (such as the Great Divergence between West and the Rest)? This is what my current research is aiming to answer.
In this research, I shall examine Northern Song, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operational level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
In this research, I shall examine either/both Northern Song and Late Ming period, not only on their military and fiscal ability but more precisely whether they had the ability to wage war at an operation level. If such is true, then it predated such alleged invention by the west in the French revolution and might shine some light in explaining the military and economical divergence of Chinese and Western history by the time of Industrial Revolution.
Nevertheless, this research proposal reflected my opinions of the military revolution framework then (back in 2013). I believed (and still do) the concept of Medieval/Early Modern transition, and the explanation of why and how it happened, is and will always be important in different areas of history. Military Revolution framework attempts to do so in the field the military history by explaining how the military was "early modernised", and how such interacted with its contemporary technological, political and economic changes. Unfortunately, the studies back then were too limited in focusing on a specific region (such as the Dutch Revolt), as well as favouring some specific technology as the centre of explanation (such as Trace Italienne). At the same time, few concepts that were introduced to express the success of Military Revolution, such as Jan Glete's ""complex society"" or "entrepreneur form of governing", are too vague.
I believe the first step to approach such problems, was instead of focusing on case examples that confirm the MR framework (such as the Netherland, who military revolutionized its army , had a successful fiscal structure, and became the "winner" of early modern history), we have to look at the cases that the framework have trouble explainings. I included the Northern Song (the Bombs), Duchy of Burgundy (the Bombards) and Hussites (the war wagons) as such latter cases example, because all had the element of a professional army with early modern tactics and drills, use of gunpowder technology and artillery, and some sort of state centralisation, basically a military revolution. Yet at the end none of them could be considered as cases of "success". Northern Song with the least gunpowder weaponry and technology fared the best with the strong state formation (which itself contradicts military revolution framework), Hussites and especially Burgundy were utterly destroyed as formal states in relatively short period of time, with the latter (despite having the best gunpowder weaponry), did not even achieved moderate military success.
----
Later during my research, I dropped the case studies of Burgundy and Hussites, not because they were irrelevant, but I rather wish to focus upon the amazingly early appearance of operational art in Northern Song dynasty. This did not happen in (most of) Early Modern Europe until the Napoleonic period, which allows a relatively status quo period of positional siege warfares often resulted in stalemates, between the Thirty Years War and French Revolution. How did early appearance of Operational art explained by the Military Revolution Framework? And how will it affect the progression and development of a state's military and socio-economy when such happened to it? And how did such affected the ultimate outcome of world history (such as the Great Divergence between West and the Rest)? This is what my current research is aiming to answer.