国外网民讨论 中国强盛时怎么没有扩张殖民

--------------------------------------------------
0、Krystian （英国）
Throughout most of history up until the17th or even 18th century the far East and especially the countries thatexisted in place of modern day Chinawere more developed or at least more organized, large as a population and hadadvanced naval technologies. Why didn't in that case they expand in anydirection? Why didn't they colonize the lands to the north for example, thatthe russians had to cross whole of Asia toreach? Why didn't they move in direction of Australiaand New Zealand or America? Theydid fight between each other and therefore surely would benefit from expansionand colonial possessions, so why didn't they do that? And my second question is- even if they didn't really need to expand, why weren't there at least privateadventurers that would venture into the unknown just out of curiosity or glorylike so many Europeans? Why didn't they care what lay beyond the ocean to theeast?
在17世纪甚至是18世纪之前的绝大多数历史时期中，远东尤其是曾经存在于现在中国版图的国家更为发达，至少他们更有秩序，拥有庞大的人口和先进的造船技术。在这种情形下，他们为什么没有进行扩张？他们为什么没有把北方的土地变成殖民地，这样一来俄罗斯人还能横贯整个亚洲吗？他们为什么不向澳大利亚、新西兰和美洲前行？他们彼此攻伐，当然也就会从扩张和殖民地中获取利益，那么他们为什么不这样做？第二个问题是，即便他们不需要扩张，为什么冒险家们不像很多欧洲人那样，仅仅是出于好奇心或者荣誉感而冒险进入未知世界？为什么他们不关心大洋的彼岸究竟是什么？
---------------------------------------------------
1、gaius valerius （比利时）
Why would they? They had no real reasonsand also no real motivation. Modern Day China is also roughly the same as past China. China did sendthe expeditions of Zheng He but finally lost interest in such endeavors. Whywouldn't they? They had no need to open up to the world, they had everythingthey wanted right there in what they considered the centre of the world. Andthere was largescale migration of Chinese as well mind you, but that was inSE-Asia, mind you again, that's a big region all the same. Unlike in Europe, Asia lacked those incentives that drove men to venturefar and wide. They did travel far and wide in Asia,illegally but that could hardly be stopped. Private ventures to sail across theocean are also something that would require a lot of preparation and wouldhardly go unnoticed.
他们为什么要这样做？没有理由，也没有动机。现代的中国和古代大致相似。中国的确派遣了郑和进行探险，但最终在这方面失去了兴致。他们为什么不这样做？他们不需要开辟世界，他们拥有一切想要的东西，并认为这里就是世界的中心。值得留意的是，中国也进行了大规模的移民，只不过目的地是东南亚，现在依然如此。与欧洲不同，亚洲缺少驱动人们进行广泛冒险的动因。他们在亚洲范围内进行贸易，虽然是非法的，但很难被禁止。冒险家们在横穿大洋之前必须做好充足的准备，这样一来肯定会引起注意（被人举报到官府，然后流产）。
----------------------------------------------------
2、bartieboy （荷兰）
there was nothing to get in the north, theydid raid vietnamevery now and then, and ehm... I gues an important factor was also that theysaw anyone who wasnt from Chinaas a barbarian and a bit like we see the chimpansee
北方一无所有，他们不时地敲打越南，还有一个很重要的原因…我猜是他们把中国以外的人看做未开化的蛮夷，或者好比我们看见大猩猩一样。
----------------------------------------------------
3、Zeno （比利时）
Because of the earth's rotation. Theprevailing winds blow east to west.
因为地球的洋流，季风从东向西刮。
 
The Chinese went as far west as the eastcoast of Africa under Zheng He and thetreasure fleet 1413-1430.
1413年到1430年间，郑和率领他的宝船队最远抵达了非洲的东海岸。
----------------------------------------------------
4、gaius valerius （比利时）
The Manila Fleet could do it couldn't they?So that's no sufficient explanation. If they really wanted it they should'vegone copy pasta with the Europeans.
菲律宾的舰队也可以做到，不是吗？所以这个理由并不充分。如果他们真的想这么做，他们就应该从欧洲人那里学会意大利面的做法？（最后一句话是说，中国的远洋舰队有能力绕过好望角抵达欧洲。不要纠结于意大利面是马可波罗经由中国带回欧洲的，还有种说法是意大利面源于古罗马）
-----------------------------------------------------
5、Milgod （英国）
I have always thought about why the Chinesedidn't decide to colonize/conquer. They certainly were advanced enough and hadthe manpower. As somebody else said though, they saw Europeans as lower thanthem, so why bother even talking with them if they didn't have to.
我总是在想为什么中国人没有去殖民和占领。毫无疑问他们更为先进，拥有充足的人力。正如有些人所说，欧洲人相较于他们来说还有差距，如果他们觉得没有必要，我们又有什么好说的。
-----------------------------------------------------
6、Krystian （英国）
If there was nothing to gain in the norththan why did the russians bother so much crossing that huge space to colonizethose territories? Weren't there natural resources such as iron, gold andbronze that were also valuable in China? And doesn't seeing the otherpeople as barbarians or chimpanzees actually encourage someone to expand,thinking it will be easy subjugating them and taking their land/resources likethe Europeans taught and eventually did with the native Americans and Africans?
（回复2号评论）如果北方真的是不毛之地，俄罗斯人又何必长途跋涉来殖民这些土地？难道中国不需要诸如铁、金、铜等自然资源吗？（中国人）没有把其他人看做蛮夷或者大猩猩，就不会鼓励扩张，不会像欧洲人那样轻易地征服他们并接管他们的土地和资源，并最终统治美洲的原住民和非洲人。
-----------------------------------------------------
7、Zeno （比利时）
Asians did expand, all across theIndonesian, Micronesian, Melanesian and Polynesian islands.They went to Americaearlier than any European did.
亚洲人进行了扩张，一直到印尼、密克罗尼西亚、美拉尼西亚和波利尼西亚群岛（后三者为太平洋三大岛群）。他们比欧洲人更早到达美洲。
----------------------------------------------------
8、infavilla （美国）
Well the voyages of Zheng He were primarilyaimed at contacting and squeezing tribute from new client kingdoms whileestablishing diplomatic connections; they weren't colonial in the same waylater European voyages were. Chinahad done fine for thousands of years as a relatively monolithic culture and hada quite simple way of gaining tribute. Early Han Chinese had conquered othergroups' land and had semi-colonial relations with parts of SE Asia, but therewas no real reason for Chinese to move as radically as we see in Europe. I'm not particularly familiar with the Chinesepolitical environment at the time of European colonization, but I would guessthere was not enough turmoil to warrant minority groups to want to settle inother lands similar to the religious minorities of Europe.
Europe's position was quite unique in thatit was divided into many nation states that were in competition with each otherand Europe's resources were quite bland. Inthe interests of trading for foreign goods, Europeans' colonization of theAmericas was important because the physical land of Europe didn't bring forthmany things that Indians or Chinese would really want to trade for, plus afterthe fall of Constantinople, Christendom's trading interests began to favor totake to the sea anyway.
Really the European circumstances wereunique. Political structures don't necessarily need to expand at all costs, butthe need to branch out in trade and turmoil after the reformation in Europegave European powers powerful incentives to set up subsidiary territories inthe Americas.
郑和航行的首要目标是与新的附属国进行接洽并勒索贡品的同时，确立外交关系，这不同于后来欧洲人通过航海来进行殖民的那一套。千年以降中国如法炮制，形成了一套相对完整的文化和非常简单的朝贡方式。汉族人曾经占领了其他种族的土地，并与东南亚保持着半殖民的关系，但这不是中国人像欧洲那样迁移的根本原因。我并不十分熟悉欧洲人殖民时期的中国政治环境，但我猜（中国的）少数民族不像欧洲的宗教少数派那样由于动荡不安而迁往其他地区。
欧洲的位置相当独特，它被分成了很多单一民族的国家，彼此之间互相竞争，欧洲的资源也相当匮乏。为了从贸易中获取利益，美洲的殖民者们变得十分重要，因为欧洲的土地并不出产印度和中国想要的东西，此外由于君士坦丁堡的陷落，基督教世界被迫向海路寻求贸易利益。
实际上欧洲的情况是非常独特的。（欧洲的）政体决定了他们没有必要进行不顾一切地扩张，但是出于扩展贸易和欧洲革命带来的动荡，刺激了欧洲诸强在美洲建立殖民地。
----------------------------------------------------
9、plutoboyz （印尼）
Asian did colonize Australia.specifically Makassarese from Gowa Kingdom. they colonizenorthern Australiafor sea cucumber. The Javanese also often raid northern Australian coast forslave. also don't forget that the Mongols were Asian too. and they did expand.
亚洲人没有殖民澳洲，特别是来自马卡沙利岛的戈瓦王国。他们为了海参殖民了澳大利亚北部。爪哇人经常袭击澳大利亚北部海岸抓获奴隶。还有，不要忘了蒙古人也是亚洲人。他们进行了扩张。
-----------------------------------------------------
10、scholar （美国）
I'm sorry, but the Asians did expand andcolonize. This is plainly available for all to see. The Ming and Qing Dynastyexpanded their borders and essentially colonized everything around them, whatthey didn't colonize fell under the tribute system. Taiwanwas never part of Chinaproper until the Ming remnants took over the Islandand later the Manchurian Qing fully incorporated it. The Japanese when from thecore Islands to taking over Ryukyu or Okinawa, much of Hokkaido remained under the grasp of theAinu, this changed radically following the coming centuries. Sakhalin and otherIslands joined with the Japanese, and if we include the late nineteenth centuryFormosa, Korea,Liaodong, and other territories. Then there is Siam and the Burmese. They definitelyexpanded and colonized, it's just that they did theirs on a local level insteadof a global one.
很抱歉，亚洲人的确进行了扩张与殖民。这是显而易见的。明清两朝扩张了他们的边界，并且殖民着他们周边的一切，甚至没有被他们殖民的也被纳入了朝贡体系。台湾在明朝遗民（指郑成功？）接管之前从来就不是中国的一部分，之后满清将其吞并。日本从本土占领了琉球和冲绳，北海道的大部还处于阿伊努（北海道原住民）人的控制之下，并在接下来的几个世纪彻底改变。库页岛和其他岛屿并入日本，如果算上十九世纪末期，还有台湾、朝鲜、辽东和其他领地。然后是暹罗和缅甸。他们（日本人）进行了扩张和殖民，只不过他们在地区范围内而不是全球。
------------------------------------------------------
11、Qymaen （美国）
There is a big difference betweencolonizing and conquering.
（回复10号评论）殖民和占领是两码事。
-------------------------------------------------------
12、Bismarck （新西兰）
Why would they? They had no real reasonsand also no real motivation. ...
 
他们为什么要这样做？没有理由，也没有动机。（引用）
As an explanation for the lack of Asiancolonial expansion in the last 500 years I don't think this is sufficient.After all, we have got no real need to go to the moon, and yet we went there.It has more to do with technology and opportunity than it has to do with anyinnate desire to conquer and expand. Plenty of individual Chinese made the tripto Indonesia, South Asia andIndia;so the motivation was not lacking. What was lacking was a state-sponsoredeffort. And the reasons for that are complex and varied. At the heart of it, Isuspect, was technology: the Europeans had better ocean-going vessels andbetter navigation systems.
我认为这些理由还不足以解释为什么过去500年亚洲没有进行殖民扩张。话说回来，我们不需要抵达月球，但我们已经去过了。所以，（进行扩张的）技术和机会比先天的占领和扩张欲更为重要。很多中国人都曾经去印尼、南亚和印度进行旅行，所以并不缺少动机。他们缺少的是国家的支持。原因是多方面的，这很复杂。而其中最为重要的，我想应该是技术：欧洲人拥有更好的远洋船只和更先进的导航系统。
-------------------------------------------------------
13、scholar （美国）
There was a great deal of Asian colonialismin the last 500 years Bismark. They may not have ventured to far flungcontinents... except for the Ming, but there was massive expansions and a greatdeal of colonization inside the last 500 years of history. Look at an atlas andturn the page. These wars were not akin to Europe,but more so to the American-Mexican war. Sure, it was warfare. Sure, it wasexpansion. But anyone who denies that Americans colonized the new territory isdenying reality itself. These wars were often massive and bloody leaving entirevillages and cities depopulated. Now from the relatively small amount ofwarfare and completely and total expansion with China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam,and a few others with each other from the Ming to the time when the Qing wasrendered irrelevant as a Hegemony by the European Powers, was because of thetributary vassal system of East Asia. The Entire east was under the Qing'sflag. One dominant nation over smaller ones who paid tribute and kept theirheads down. Even Japanwas not totally free of things. This is why there was only two wars between thefour named nations from the establishment of Ming as a dominant power till thefall of Qing by the West, and those were with Vietnam-China andJapan-Korea/China. Five hundred years of relative peace... internationally.Japan was normally too disorganized to do anything until Edo showed up, buteven then they never willingly and openly opposed China. It is a very peculiarsystem and there is a very good book about it called East Asia Before The West:Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute.
在过去的500年里，亚洲有很多奉行殖民主义的俾斯麦们。他们可能没有进取大洋彼岸的雄心…除了明朝，但它（明朝）还是进行了大量扩张，并在500年的时间里殖民了很多地方。看看地图册然后翻页（此人之前用很多图片说明了中国从夏朝开始的扩张历程），虽然与欧洲不尽相同，但与美国和墨西哥的战争类似。很明显，这是战争。很明显，这是扩张。但是否认美国殖民新领土的那些人否认了事实本身。战争频繁爆发，残酷而血腥，整个村庄和城市的人口锐减。从相对较小规模的战争，中国、日本、朝鲜、越南和其他国家的所有扩张以及明朝的内斗，到清朝被不相干的欧洲列强奉为盟主，都是因为东亚的朝贡藩属体系。整个东亚上空飘扬着大清的旗帜。一个占优势的国家凌驾于其它朝贡和俯首称臣的小国之上。即便是日本也要遵守游戏规则。这也就是为什么四个国家在从明朝建立直到清朝衰落期间，只发生了两场战争的原因，分别是越南同中国以及中国/朝鲜同日本。500年相对和平的国际环境，在欧洲人出现之前，日本人还算比较安分守己，甚至是之后也不情愿和公开地反对中国。这是一种非常特殊的体系，有关于这方面的书，一本书名字叫《西方之前的东亚：五个世纪的贸易与朝贡》。
----------------------------------------------------
14、Narses （加拿大）
No need, No wants = No action
没有需求，没有欲望，所以没有行动。
-----------------------------------------------------
15、Krystian （英国）
Scholar, all you mention is large-scalecolonization/conquest of nearby territories that were well known to thechinese. What i am also asking is why weren't there no explorers andadventurers from the far east that would simply try to find out more about theworld for no good reason, conquest or trade like the massive fleet in the 15thcentury for example. Europeans thought of the far east even worse things thanthat some barbarians lived there - in the middle ages they thought beasts,monsters and mythical creatures lurked in those parts of the world and yetwe've got people like Marco Polo venturing forth simply out of curiosity. We'vegot people like Magellan and Cook sailing just to prove a point or to be thefirst in something. So why weren't there any east asians with such passions forexploration of the unknown who would reach the far corners of the world?
Scholar，你所提到的都是（中国）对周围地区的大规模征讨攻伐，每个中国人都耳熟能详。我也时常在想，为什么远东的探索者和冒险家仅仅因为理由不充足便不去尝试探索世界，像15世纪的大多数船队那样去进行征服和贸易。欧洲人最糟也不过认为远东生活着一群野蛮人，在中世纪，他们认为那些地区潜伏着野兽、怪物以及神话人物。然而我们有着像马可波罗这样仅仅出于好奇心而勇往直前的人。我们有着像麦哲伦和库克的航海家。那么为什么东亚没有人想抵达世界的尽头，对探索未知世界充满执着？
------------------------------------------------------
16、scholar （美国）
I'm sorry, but that's just wrong. So verywrong. They were not Chinese then, they are only viewed to be Chinese now. It'ssomething like saying there was no British colonization of the Anglosphere, forthose territories are well known to already be in the Anglosphere. Chinawas not static. It did not proof into existence. The borders that it has todayare the product of five thousand years of history, they were not always there,nor will they be.
Actually there are a great deal of Chineseexplorers trying to find out about the world, for instance in the Han, Tang,and others. The reason why Zheng He is the only one anyone cares about isbecause of the incredibly inflated size of his ship and the possibilities itpresented. We have a man who went from Han China to the outskirts of Rome just to discover,just to see where things are in the world. His name was Gan Ying. He predatedthe west by millennium. He was sent by a general named Ban Chao to discover andcatalog the world to the west. He was the one who essentially coined Rome as Daqin to theChinese. Further there are a great many other individuals, many of them arelost to time or recorded only in Chinese texts. It is plainly ignorant to saythat there was no explorers from China. That post you made...probably should be edited. It sounds like you are making the Chinese into foolswhen the Chinese were in fact the most advanced people on the planet at thetime.
（回复15号评论）很抱歉，你说错了，大错特错。当时他们（指蛮夷）不是中国人，只是现在被看做中国人而已。这就好比英联邦的殖民地并不是英国人，只是因为他们同属英语世界而被世人所知。中国不是静止的。只有经得住考验，才会生存下来。中国五千年的历史造就了如今的版图，过去他们时而扩张时而收缩，将来也是一样。
事实上有很多中国的探险家想弄明白这个世界，比如说汉、唐、还有其他朝代的人。而郑和之所以会成为其中翘楚，是因为其船队规模之大旷古绝今，展现了明帝国烜赫的实力。我们发现从前汉朝有个人从中国出发来到了罗马的郊外，就是为了看看这个世界。他的名字叫甘英。他（的探索活动）比西方早了一千年。他奉班超将军之命前往西方，出使被中国人成为大秦的罗马。然而还有很多这样的人，其中一部分被遗忘在了时间的迷雾中，另一些则记载在中国的文献里。所以说中国没有探险家的人是在把无知当个性。你的帖子或许应该…编辑一下。那时的中国人是这颗星球上最先进的民族，而你似乎把他们当成了傻瓜。
-----------------------------------------------------
17、Bismarck （新西兰）
That post you made... probably should beedited. It sounds like you are making the Chinese into fools when the Chinesewere in fact the most advanced people on the planet at the time.
你的帖子或许应该…编辑一下。那时的中国人是这颗星球上最先进的民族，而你似乎把他们当成了傻瓜。（引用）
That's the whole crux of the question. Whydid Europeans explode across the world in 1492 and not the Chinese if, as yousay, they were the most advanced civilisation in the world?
如你所说，中国人是世界上最先进的文明，问题的关键在于，为什么在1492年遍布世界各地的却是欧洲人？
-----------------------------------------------------
18、scholar （美国）
Well that's actually a rather simplequestion that has a rather plain answer, but get's complicated by how muchinfluence each variable holds over the answer. So here's a complex, yet plain answerthat comes down to ten points:
1) The Ming destroyed it's treasure fleetand turned inwards due to corruption. This is one of the factors leadingtowards the decline of Ming's projection of power. Without a fleet capable ofexerting naval dominance over the Pacific it became a river and coastal fleetthat never really ventured very far.
2) The Chinese government had no realenemies in solidified states. It's only rivals were the steppe and Manchurianpeoples. This lead to a stagnation of the state. In it's history it only foughttwo wars with actual states. Vietnamand Japan.Vietnam was briefly occupiedand Koreawas defended from a Japanese invasion. This stagnation of military conflictslead to a further stagnation of military adaption of said technology. When youare a hegemony of a corrupt empire that knows of no real threat you don't seethe need to even keep current with the contemporary military technology. Infact, it reverted in many areas.
3) The Ming suffered massive famine,rebellion, and poor management of the Empire. This lead to massive rebellionsthat literally tore the state apart inviting the relatively minor threats tocome in.
4) The Ming, stagnate, corrupt, and facingmassive rebellions had no army to go up against the Manchurians, who came downinto Chinaand quickly swept the corrupt state away. There were remnants that stuckaround, but in the end Chinafell to the Manchurians and they lead the Qing Dynasty.
5) The Manchurians did not propel the stateforward. Instead, it merely conquered all the threats. The Mongols, Tannu Tuva,Central Asia, etc. They were all conquered.After that, there was peace. No wars to move things forward, no increase intechnology. In fact, things further reverted.
6) The Qing became corrupt. It did not faceMing like rebellions yet, but it would in time.
7) When The Qing came into contact with theWest they did not accept their advances. In fact, they did not accept them atall. They had no need for western goods, nor did they want it. They were"inwardly perfect" as some scholars have called it. The Qing wereshrewd enough sap tonnes of silver from the foreign powers. While this wouldseem good, it wasn't really. It lead to hyper inflation and made the Qing turnto copper coins instead, but damage had been done. The only thing the Qing gotfrom the West was wealth, and they got so much of it that their economycollapsed.
8) They refused to treat other Empires asequals. For their entire history the Qing ruled as a hegemon. It did notrecognize the idea of there being other Empires which could rival it. Theyclung blindly to that ideal.
9) Conservatism. The curse that destroyedthe Ottomans also destroyed the Qing and Ming. Military advances are all welland good but what about other advances? medicine, culture, etc.? Surely theremust have been something? Not really.
Conservatives literally blocked alladvancements. Want to go discover the world? No. That's frivolous. You shouldbe full of filial piety. You should not want for anything for luxury, only fora simple life. You must do your duty for your state, your father, your elderbrother, your mother, and your master. Then you die. I won't say this was whatcaused the downfall of China,because it also caused it's rise, but it was definitely a factor.
10) The Idea of China itself. China was themiddle Kingdom. The center of all things. There was the Emperor. The subjects.Foreign, subservient, vassal kingdoms, and then barbarian hordes. That was allthere was. This was the concept of Tianxia, or all under heaven. China couldhave expanded, could have had wars, could have accelerated into the world, butinstead it was content at being at the center. It was content with vassalsthrowing gold and concubines at the Emperor's feet. In the end this was theprimary reason for China'sfall. There were other powers equal or greater to China. Now odds are, if it was ableto control the entirety of Asia and bits ofthe world through colonization it could still be a hegemon of the world, butthat's all unknown. The British Empire, The Spanish, the Dutch, The Russians,they could all rival and even beat back China. Their refusal to adapt orremove this concept ultimately lead to their decline into ruin. They bouncedback, notably through actions taken by Japanand America,but their world was completely shattered by then. The new China is not the China that was made all thosecenturies ago.
（回复17号评论）这个问题很简单，答案也是显而易见的。但是由于某些不可知因素互相影响，使得结果变得异常复杂。这些复杂的问题，可以简单地归纳为以下十条：
1、 明朝摧毁了自己的宝船队，转而对内搜刮盘剥。这是导致明朝投送力量下滑的原因之一。舰队失去了支配太平洋的能力，变成了内河或者近海舰队，大门不出二门不迈。
2、 除了蒙古人和满族人，没有国家能对中国造成威胁。如此一来，国家停滞不前。有明一代，只同两个国家发生过战争，越南和日本。越南曾被短暂地占领，而朝鲜是为了抵抗日本的侵略。军事冲突的停滞又进一步导致了军事技术的停滞。当一个堕落的帝国身处霸主地位，而又没有真正的威胁，就会觉得维持同时代水准的军事技术没有必要。
3、 明帝国遭到了大规模饥荒和叛乱，国家陷入瘫痪。大规模的叛乱让整个帝国分崩离析，并将少数民族政权引了进来。
4、 明朝不思进取、日益衰颓，为了应付大规模的叛乱没有足够的军队来抵抗满人，他们迅速荡平四海，并止住了中国下滑的颓势。虽然残余势力还在苦苦挣扎，但中国最终还是落入了满人的手里，草创了大清。
5、 满人没有带领国家继续前进，仅仅消除了蒙古、唐努乌梁海（原清朝领土，后被割让，现属外蒙西北部）、中亚等所有威胁。这些国家俯首称臣。自此一直和平相处。没有了战争的刺激，技术也停滞不前了。事实上，甚至开始返祖。
6、 清朝逐渐开始走下坡路了。虽然没有明朝的诸多叛乱，但帝国的崩溃只是时间问题了。
7、 当清政府开始与西方打交道时，排斥他们的先进事物。事实上，他们油盐不进。他们不需要西方的商品，需要的（西方）没有。学者们说这是一个‘自给自足’的社会。清朝人精于算计，与外国贸易只进不出。看起来很美妙，其实不尽然。清政府想通过铸造钱币来抑制通货膨胀使，然而灾难已经酿成。清朝从西方唯一获得的就是财富，大量的财富使得他们的经济崩溃。
8、 他们拒绝与其他国家平起平坐。有清一代，他们都以天朝上国自居。他们认为寰宇之内，无人与之争锋。这种思想根深蒂固。
9、 保守主义。摧毁了奥斯曼帝国的祸源同样摧毁了明清两代。军事发展还算差强人意，其他方面又如何呢？医学、文化等等？可能有过一些发展吗？不一定。保守派完全阻滞了进步。想要去探索世界？不可以，这是违反伦常的。你应该做一个孝子。你应该无欲无求，过着简单的生活。你必须对你的国家、你的父亲、你的兄长、你的母亲和你的上级承担义务，直到死去。我不想说这就是中国覆亡的原因，他们同样因此崛起，但最起码这是其中的一个原因。
10、中国自身的想法。中国就是中央之国的意思。帝国位居中心，是主宰；接下来是附属国和外国，然后是蛮夷。这就是天下的概念。中国本可以继续扩张、继续发动战争，把势力范围蔓延到全世界，然而他们满足于身居中央，满足于诸侯向皇帝进贡黄金和女人。这便是中国衰落的主要原因。其他国家趁机赶上并超过中国。与现在相比，如果他们当时能控制整个亚洲，并在世界获得一些殖民地，那么他们现在还是‘天朝上国’，然而世事无常。大英帝国、西班牙、荷兰、俄罗斯，他们都可以与之匹敌，甚至击败中国。他们拒绝做出改变以及革新观念，最终使帝国从衰落走向了崩溃。他们很快涅槃重生，尤其是通过对日本和美国的行动，然而他们为此付出了极大地代价。新中国不再是几个世纪之前的中国了。
--------------------------------------------------------------
19、Bismarck （新西兰）
The new Chinais not the Chinathat was made all those centuries ago.
新中国不再是几个世纪之前的中国了。（引用）
Very impressive post, scholar. Those areall good and valid points you make. However, I do have one question: did theQing dynasty have no significant internal enemies?
这个帖子令人印象深刻。你的观点有理有据，令人折服。不过我还有一个问题：清帝国在世界上没有主要对手吗？
---------------------------------------------------------------
20、scholar （美国）
The Chinese themselves, the Manchurianswere outnumbered 30:1 and were fully assimilated into the Chinese culture bythe time the Qing was dismantled. Manchurian went extinct as a language in the1990s, but someone claimed to have been a speaker and it's gotten somepreservation notice now. Because of this the Manchurian essentially treated theHan Chinese as a lower caste to try to keep themselves separate. It was a vainand futile attempt and while there were dreams of the Han ethnicity removingthe Qing and forming a Chinese Dynasty, the very concept of Tianxia allowed forthe mandate of heaven to be held by a foreigner. It was more so the corruptionthat brought them down, and conservatism, along with Tianxia itself, ratherthan the fact that they were a minority that was rapidly losing the ability todistinguish itself between the people they were ruling. It's called sinocizing,and they are not the only ones. Many Mongolians, Most Jurchens, the Xiongnu,etc. all essentially became Chinese and lost their ability to distinguishthemselves from the people they ruled. It's a very popular topic among scholarsof East Asia.
（回复19号评论）（威胁是）中国人自己，满族人（和汉族人）比例高达1:30，并且在清朝灭亡之前被中国文化所同化吸收。满族文字在上世纪90年代被消灭，但有人要求保留说的权利，现在也引起了一些关注。这是因为满人把汉族人看做低等人，试图分而治之。然而这是徒劳无用的，本来想对汉族进行种族划分，结果却破旧立新，建立了中国人的新帝国，一个外国人（应该是指孙中山，很多人都喜欢拿国籍来说事）重新提出了‘天下’这个众望所归的概念。国家的衰落使他们（满人）连保守派以及‘天下’一同葬送，更因为他们是少数民族，失去了区分他们所统治的人民的能力。这便是所谓的汉化，不唯独他们，蒙古、女真、匈奴等等，最终都变成了中国人，失去了将他们自己同被统治的人民区分的能力。这种观点在东亚顶级学者中间极受欢迎。
--------------------------------------------------------------
21、RollingWave （台湾）
I don't dispute with the general reasoning,but some technical details are worth considering. I don't have much time rightnow so I'll just note two point first.
我不想就一般问题与你辩论，但一些技术细节还是值得商榷的。我的时间不多，先说两点。
1) The Ming destroyed it's treasure fleetand turned inwards due to corruption. This is one of the factors leadingtowards the decline of Ming's projection of power. Without a fleet capable ofexerting naval dominance over the Pacific it became a river and coastal fleetthat never really ventured very far.
1、 明朝摧毁了自己的宝船队，转而对内搜刮盘剥。这是导致明朝投送力量下滑的原因之一。舰队失去了支配太平洋的能力，变成了内河或者近海舰队，大门不出二门不迈。（引用）
There was also the issue of realistic cost,the way the Ming went about with it's expedition was clearly not a profitableenterprise, where as the Western exploration were obviously mostly drived on byeconomic factor, the same factor also played a role in the Ming NOT continuingsuch endeavors.
这同样是很现实的开销问题，明朝的探险并不能带来利润，而西方人的探险是受到了经济因素的刺激，同样的因素使得明帝国中断了这种努力。
2) The Chinese government had no realenemies in solidified states. It's only rivals were the steppe and Manchurianpeoples. This lead to a stagnation of the state. In it's history it only foughttwo wars with actual states. Vietnamand Japan.Vietnam was briefly occupiedand Koreawas defended from a Japanese invasion. This stagnation of military conflictslead to a further stagnation of military adaption of said technology. When youare a hegemony of a corrupt empire that knows of no real threat you don't seethe need to even keep current with the contemporary military technology. Infact, it reverted in many areas.
2、 除了蒙古人和满族人，没有国家能对中国造成威胁。如此一来，国家停滞不前。有明一代，只同两个国家发生过战争，越南和日本。越南曾被短暂地占领，而朝鲜是为了抵抗日本的侵略。军事冲突的停滞又进一步导致了军事技术的停滞。当一个堕落的帝国身处霸主地位，而又没有真正的威胁，就会觉得维持同时代水准的军事技术没有必要。
You mean in the MING's entire history, yourwording makes it sound kinda like the entire chinese history.
I would also raise up a different problem,the TYPE of enemy they were facing, the NATURE of warfare they were conductingwas vasting different, the Chinese quickly adopted some western weapons butdidn't adopt others during the Ming, for example the Portugese fast reloading SwivelCannon was quickly adopted and became a staple of the Ming both on land andsea. but the Arquebus did not become widely adopted despite some occasionaluse. The Dutch heavy cannons were again quickly adopted and widely used in theearly to mid 17th century but it's developement stalled after that.
There are perfectly good reasons for theseif you just look at who and what China was fighting against duringthis period.
In essence. Chinese armies during the Mingfaced the prospect of fighting light guerrilla warfares against enemies ontheir native terrain (be they pirates on the coasts. mountain tribesmen insouth western mountains or nomads on the steppes). Where as the primary prospectfaced by the same era European armies were similar large mix armies in largecampaigns and more importantly sieging heavily fortified castles and laterfortress.
The nature of these warfare are obviouslydifferent, one easy example is how the weapon development of the US armies overthe last decade have made a dramatic shift away from the previous decades... isit because of technological advance? only partly, the bigger part is the shiftin nature of war from the cold war to wars more like that of Afganistan, whichrequires different types of weapons.
Thus the Chinese (and also Turks)development (or even lack there of) on gunpowder weapon when put into thiscontext makes much more sense, the enemies they were facing simply isn'tsuitable for the general developing trend of the early gunpowder weapons. thatswhy you see most weapons Chinese developed, and those they adopted , mostlyfell onto the same catagory, they were light, mobile and anti personaloriented. it fits perfectlly with the general logic of their need, but itdoesn't really push the technological frontier. (much like the Predator Dronesisn't exactly pushing the unknowns of technology . it justs uses existing oncessomewhat differently.)
虽然你讨论的是明代的历史，但多少有点涵盖中国整个历史的味道。
我也有一个问题，他们所面对的敌人变了，战争的性质也就发生了根本的改变。中国人很快地接受了一些西式武器，比如说葡萄牙人的快速装填旋转加农炮很快被应用并成为了明帝国海陆两用的王牌，但是火绳枪并没有被广泛使用，只是偶尔友情客串一下。荷兰人的重型加农炮也被迅速采用，并且大规模的应用于17世纪早期到中叶，但是自那之后发展就停滞了。
如果你看一看这一时期中国在与谁交手的话，就明白这些理由的必要性了。
事实上有明一代，由于地理环境的限制，中国人同他们的敌人进行的都是轻型的游击战（海岸线上的海盗、西南山区的部落以及大草原上的游牧民族）。而同时期欧洲军队在大型战役上面对的是相同规模的混编军队，更重要的是围攻固若金汤的城堡和要塞。
这些战争的性质是不同的，举一个简单的例子，美国军队在过去十年间武器的研发上与先前几十年相比似乎另寻蹊径…这是因为技术进步吗？只是部分而已，更多是因为从冷战到阿富汗之类的战争的性质发生了改变，两者需要的武器类型不尽相同。
 
因此中国人（还有土耳其人）在火药武器上的发展（或者说匮乏）联系到实际当中，就产生了变数，早期火药武器的发展趋势不适用于他们所要面对的敌人。这就是为什么你会看到大多数中国人研制的武器和他们引进的武器基本上都是同一类型，轻便、易携带和针对个体。这与他们的需求逻辑相契合，但是这样并不能真正推进到科技前沿。（这就好比掠食者无人机并没有真正推进未知技术的发展，而是借助现有的某些特殊的科技）
---------------------------------------------------------
22、scholar （美国）
There was also the issue of realistic cost,the way the Ming went about with it's expedition was clearly not a profitableenterprise, where as the Western exploration were obviously mostly drived on byeconomic factor, the same factor also played a role in the Ming NOT continuingsuch endevors.
这同样是很现实的开销问题，明朝的探险并不是有利可图的事业，而西方人的探险是受到了经济因素的刺激，同样的因素使得明帝国中断了这种努力。（引用）
Of course. Pouring silver into anenterprise that really only gives you prestige doesn't do the nation much good,especially since it has it's own economic instability. But it is impossible todeny that the Ming didn't simply stop investing, they burned it all. Eradicatedit. They swept it all away when a New Emperor came to the throne, and it'simportant to note that this crippled the Ming's capacity to project it's poweracross the seas. Sure it still had a coastal fleet, but you don't travel todistant countries, even Indonesia,on Coastal Fleets.
没错，在一项事业上靡费巨万只能给你带来声望，而于国家无益，特别是当经济变得不稳定以后。但是不能否认，明朝并不是简单地停止发明，他们（将船队）付之一炬，连根拔起。当新皇帝坐上龙椅之后，它们被抛到了九霄云外，更重要的是严重损害了明帝国海外投送的能力。当然他们还有一支近海舰队，但不能到达遥远的国家，甚至是印尼。
I would also raise up a different problem,the TYPE of enemy they were facing, the NATURE of warfare they were conductingwas vasting different, the Chinese quickly adopted some western weapons butdidn't adopt others during the Ming, for example the Portugese fast reloadingSwirval Cannon was quickly adopted and became a staple of the Ming both on landand sea. but the Arquebus did not become widely adopted dispite some occasionaluse. The Dutch heavy cannons were again quickly adopted and widely used in theearly to mid 17th century but it's developement stalled after that.
我也有一个问题，他们所面对的敌人变了，战争的性质也就发生了根本的改变。中国人很快地接受了一些西式武器，比如说葡萄牙人的快速装填旋转加农炮很快被应用并成为了明帝国海陆两用的王牌，但是火绳枪并没有被广泛使用，只是偶尔友情客串一下。荷兰人的重型加农炮也被迅速采用，并且大规模的应用于17世纪早期到中叶，但是自那之后发展就停滞了。（引用）
But it's really important to note thatwhile the Ming tried to adopt weaponry of the west while it was failing, it waspretty much dead and gone by the time it was ready for significant use. TheMing became too corrupt, too disorganized, and was pretty much doomed. It'simportant to note my ten reasons are reasons for why either Ming or Qing neverrose to the top. Their attempts near their fall is irrelevant and so areisolated incidents of adopted use. Mid 17th century was around the 1650s, yes?By then the Ming was far gone. Hell, by the thirties I would say the Ming wasalmost beyond repair. As for the Portuguese cannons I would say they their onlysignificant usage was against themselves and against Japanese raiders.
值得一提的是，尽管明朝试图采用西方的武器，结果却失败了，然而在沉寂许久之后（这些武器）又派上了更大的用场。明帝国变得腐化堕落、紊乱无序，一切都已是明红注定。值得注意的是我的十个理由解释的是明清两朝为什么没有走到巅峰。他们的努力和衰落并不相干，与采用（西方的）技术也是孤立没有关联的。17世纪中叶就是公元1650年左右，对吧？这时的明王朝已经积重难返了。该死，我应该说在30年代明帝国就已经无可救药了。至于葡萄牙人的加农炮，我想说他们只在对付自己人和日本侵略者发挥了重大的影响。
--------------------------------------------------------
23、blacksmit049 （菲律宾）
Why would they? They had no real reasonsand also no real motivation. Modern Day China is also roughly the same as past China. China did sendthe expeditions of Zheng He but finally lost interest in such endeavours. Whywouldn't they? They had no need to open up to the world, they had everythingthey wanted right there in what they considered the centre of the world. Andthere was largescale migration of Chinese as well mind you, but that was inSE-Asia, mind you again, that's a big region all the same. Unlike in Europe, Asia lacked those incentives that drove men to venturefar and wide. They did travel far and wide in Asia,illegally but that could hardly be stopped. Private ventures to sail across theocean are also something that would require a lot of preparation and wouldhardly go unnoticed.
他们为什么要这样做？没有理由，也没有动机。现代的中国和古代大致相似。中国的确派遣了郑和进行探险，但最终在这方面失去了兴致。他们为什么不这样做？他们不需要开辟世界，他们拥有一切想要的东西，并认为这里就是世界的中心。值得留意的是，中国也进行了大规模的移民，只不过目的地是东南亚，现在依然如此。与欧洲不同，亚洲缺少驱动人们进行广泛冒险的动因。他们在亚洲范围内进行贸易，虽然是非法的，但很难被禁止。冒险家们在横穿大洋之前必须做好充足的准备，这样一来肯定会引起注意。（引用）
I wholeheartedly agree. Europeis a small place for many powers. Portugaland Spain being leaders ofthe first voyages across the Atlantic felt that the Iberian Peninsula is toosmall for them, but they didn't want to go to Africabecause of Muslim inhabitants and the region is not rich in gold or anything ofimportance. They explore the unknown regions, which takes courage because ofthe need of expansion and the growing competition. Asia is too big for China and India to explore more, they justhad enough. Situations affects the actions.
我完全同意。欧洲地域狭小且遍地诸侯。作为第一次横穿大西洋的领袖，伊比利亚半岛对于葡萄牙和西班牙人来说太小了，但由于伊斯兰教居民的缘故，他们并不想前往非洲，另外那一地区并不盛产黄金和其它重要的东西。出于扩张的需要及发展竞赛，他们鼓起勇气探索未知区域。亚洲对于中国和印度来说太大了，他们本身已经足够大了。形势决定了行动。
------------------------------------------------------------
24、scholar （美国）
There were five main colonizers. Spain, Portugal,England, France, and the Dutch. The Dutchjoined relatively late. Spainand Portugal's"colonialism" was born originally out of the intent to find a passageby way of water to China.Granted they had no idea where Chinawas, but they wanted to go and find it. The Ottomans and the Venetians beforethem had their monopoly over the influx of Asian goods, the Spanish andPortuguese wanted to break it. Their coming to the New World was mostly an accident, but once the Spanish knew of theriches there they were quick to conquer and colonize the place. Portugal later had claims on Brazil. Withthem conquering everything in sight, Englandand Francestarted their own endeavors. Englandbecame the most successful. Francecould math neither's success. The Dutch's scope was much more limited in the Americas, sothey focused on the East instead.
The whole colonial era, the Americas, everything was brought on by a questto make it to China.When they realized the Americashad wealth of their own, they wanted it for themselves. It also became aconvenient place to get rid of people you didn't like. Australia was apenal colony. New Zealandwas claimed simply because the English were scarred someone else would take it.South Africa was basically ahalfway station to India.
Now your remarks about Africaare pretty much wrong. It's a hotly debated subject on Spain's ambition towards Africa.Many in Spainwanted to conquer the Muslim world in a Crusade. Yes, the Crusades died off,but it was regaining popularity. The discovery of the New World gave Spainan outlet for it's religious zealotry, because they didn't conquer them. Theyconverted them. It was a crusade, motivated mostly for riches and gold, but acrusade against the heathen pagans.
Now the reason why Africawasn't conquered is two-fold. First, Northern Africa.Morocco, the Algiers, and later theOttomans were all firmly established and very strong nations that could notonly rival European countries, but did so in many respects. Ever hear of theBarbary Pirates? Anyways, the strength and centralization of Africa rivaledthat of Europe until... well, about the 17thcentury, there they struggled to keep up. By the time Africawas actually on the menu, they were far enough behind to be mostly irrelevant.The fact that they were Muslim made them more appetizing to conquer, not less.They were Catholics in a time when Catholicism was basically EuropeanGovernment. Even then, however, Moroccoremained a heavily independent nation that could only have been brought underFrench and Spanish control when the nation was having succession troubles. Imean, Morocco was the firstnation to actually recognize the United States as a nation.
The other reason is that Africais a pit of diseases, harsh climates, and to put it frankly, few great civilizations.Yes, there were the immediate Sub Saharan nations such as Songhai and Mali. There wasthe Kongo. The Shona. Ethiopia.For centuries most people who went deep into Africa who came from Europe never left alive. Malaria and other diseaseskilled them all. It was not because there was no wealth to be had, heck no.There was tremendous amounts of Gold, Silver, and Diamonds. They were just...slightly beyond reach. And even then colonization of African coasts continuedthroughout the entire colonial period. Once vaccines and the steam engine wereinvented Africa could be carved up by Europeans, otherwise Africawas a house of three. The Europeans who ruled by the immediate coast, themestizos who were intermediaries and had resistance to the plagues, diseases,and harsh climate, and the Africans themselves. Read up on the Portuguese takeover of Shona and the Kongo, and these were crusades themselves.
Asia was never too big for China,they just never left their tributary system, which kept them hemmed in, whilethe steppe peoples kept them from further expanding to the north or west exceptfor three occasions. Han, Tang, and Qing. And when you read up on theiradvances and discoveries in the world, it's something that inspires some awe.It's rather sad most of Han and Tang records are destroyed or incomplete. Thatjust leaves the Qing and educated speculation on the previous two.
India was never India.China a dozen Dynasties thatunified the country, however Indialacked this. There were a few kingdoms that did manage to conquer most of India but they never lasted even half as long asmost of China's.The only one that was one that conquered most of India was the Mughals in the lastthousand years. Others may have claimed half. India was a nation constantly atwar with it's neighbors. And Indiais not culturally and ethnically uniform like China, it's diverse with manydifferent ethnic and lingual groups meshed into the state. Persia, theCaliphate, and later the Mongols hemmed in the sub continent. That said, theIndian culture spread a great deal. While it was hemmed in on land, it traveledto the Swahili in Africa, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, Madagascar, Indonesia,China.They were great explorers that navigated where they could. You may even argue thatthey colonized Indonesiaand other regions because of their spreading of Hinduism there. So it's importantto take that into account.
What I mean to say is early colonizationwasn't what it appeared to be. It was adapting to circumstance. Africa was protected by disease and it's own environment.The Americashad very inviting spots for the Europeans to come in and take, especially sincethey just had to conquer it from plague ridden nations that were dying off justbecause you coughed with the superior weaponry at your disposal.
主要的殖民国家有五个，分别是：西班牙、葡萄牙、英国、法国和荷兰。荷兰的加入稍微迟一点。西班牙和葡萄牙的‘殖民主义’诞生之初是为了寻求通往中国的海上航线。他们根本就不知道中国在哪里，但是他们想去找找看。奥斯曼和威尼斯人垄断了进入（欧洲的）亚洲商品，西班牙和葡萄牙人想要打破这一切。他们阴差阳错地来到了‘新世界’，一旦西班牙人知道了这里的富饶，他们很快的占领并进行殖民。随后葡萄牙对巴西宣示主权。他们予取予求，占领着所能看到的一切，英国人和法国人这才开始了追赶的脚步。英国人取得了巨大的成功；法国人差强人意；荷兰人在美洲的势力范围极其有限，于是他们把注意力放在了东方。
纵观整个殖民时期，为了寻找中国而带动了美洲的发展。当他们发现了美洲自身的价值，他们就想据为己有。这里也成为了放逐那些不讨喜的人的地方。澳洲就是一个流放地。新西兰只是被简单地宣示了主权，因为英国已经筋疲力尽，其他国家可以随时取代之。南非主要是作为通往印度的中转站。
你所关于非洲的评论大错特错。西班牙对非洲的野心颇受争议。很多西班牙人都想在十字军东征中摧毁穆斯林世界。士兵们虽然相继死去，但是十字军的阴魂一直未散。新世界的发现成了西班牙宣泄宗教狂热的地方，因为他们没有征服原住民。他们改变了原住民的信仰。这是又一场十字军东征，主要是为了财富和黄金，而不是对异教徒的讨伐。
这就是非洲没有被征服的双重原因。首先，北非、摩洛哥、阿尔及尔以及后来的奥斯曼人都是已经建立的非常强大的国家，足以与欧洲国家相抗衡。听说过‘巴巴利海盗’吗？总之非洲的实力和集权与欧洲分庭抗礼，直到…好吧，17世纪两者之间的竞争仍然存在。当非洲成为案上鱼肉之时，他们已经落后的太多了。事实上穆斯林使他们热衷于攻城略地。当欧洲国家推崇天主教的时候，他们又变成了天主教徒。即便是那时，摩洛哥也是一个相当独立的主权国家，他们只是在继位上有麻烦时才被被法国和西班牙接管。我的意思是说，摩洛哥是第一个承认美国的国家。
另一个原因就是非洲疾病肆虐，气候恶劣，坦白地说，几乎没有文明存在。没错，撒哈拉沙漠以南也有像索马里和马里这些国家。这里有刚果、修纳、埃塞俄比亚。几个世纪以来，来自欧洲的大多数人都没能从非洲腹地活着走出来。疟疾和其它疾病夺取了他们的生命。这里并不贫瘠，黄金、白银和钻石的储量惊人。他们只是…稍微有些够不到。对非洲海岸的殖民贯穿了整个殖民时期。在疫苗和蒸汽机被欧洲人发明之前，非洲一直是三分天下（应该是欧洲人、北非人和原住民）。欧洲人在最近的海岸实行统治，梅斯蒂索人（指印第安人与欧洲人的混血儿）充当爪牙，抵抗瘟疫、疾病以及严酷的气候，还有非洲人。研究一下葡萄牙人对刚果和修纳的征伐，这些都是十字军东征。
对于中国来说，亚洲已经足够大了，他们的朝贡体系将自己限制了起来，而草原上的游牧部落进一步扩张到了北部和西部，除了三个特例，汉、唐、清…当你研究他们在世界上的领先和发现时，就会产生敬畏之情。令人惋惜的是汉朝和唐朝的很多资料被毁灭或者残缺不全，只留下了清朝以及对前二者的推断。
印度永远都不是印度。中国有十二个大一统的朝代，然而印度却没有。大半个印度被很多小国家攻占，他们甚至都没有大多数中国（王朝）的一半疆域。唯一攻占了大半个印度的是持续了千年之久的莫卧儿帝国。其它王朝只是声称拥有一半而已。印度是一个不断同邻国发生战争的国家，从文化和人种上来说，印度不比统一的中国，他们是由很多不同种族和语系组成的错综复杂的国家。波斯、哈里发和蒙古人都曾入主过南亚次大陆。换句话说，印度文化的传播非常广泛。美中不足的是仅限于陆地，它们被传到了非洲的斯瓦希里、波斯湾、红海、马达加斯加、印尼、中国。他们的伟大探索达到了力所能及的最大范围。你甚至会因为印度教的传播而去争论他们是否殖民了印尼以及其它地区。所以很有必要把这些计算在内。
我的意思是说，早期的殖民并不是我们想象的样子。具体情况具体分析。非洲被疾病和自身的环境所保护。欧洲人对美洲垂涎三尺，予取予求，特别是当他们征服了瘟疫横行的国家之后相继死亡，因为你可以带着由你支配的高级武器去见上帝了。
-------------------------------------------------
25、Naomasa298 （英国）
If the question is, why didn't Asiancountries found overseas colonies in the 17th and 19th centuries in the waythat European countries did, I'll speak for Japan.
Japanese isolationism was the main factorhere, an isolationism prompted by the fear of foreign influence destabilizingthe regime. The Tokugawa shogunate arose after over a century of civil war.During the last campaigns to unify the country, one of the factors in choosing sideswas religion - the Christian daimyo, by and large, opposed the Tokugawa. Oncethe country was unified, the fear of Christianity becoming a destabilizinginfluence grew, and it was gradually banned. The last great uprising, theShimabara Rebellion in 1637, was a Christian-led one.
Out of fear of western Christian influence,the government closed the country, prohibiting foreigners from entering andJapanese from leaving. There was strictly limited and controlled tradingcontact with the Dutch, Chinese and Koreans. Japanese adventurers still madetheir way across Asia, but these were largelyindividual efforts. Some disenfranchised samurai, especially Christian ones,found themselves in places like the Philippinesand Siam.
However, all this obviously led to a totallack of exploration and expansion. There were also strict rules on the size ofships that could be built, for fear of a challenge to the Shogunate's power.
如果问题是17世纪到19世纪，为什么亚洲国家没有像欧洲诸国那样在海外建立殖民地，那么我想为日本讲几句。
日本的孤立主义是最主要的原因，孤立主义引发了对外国势力动摇根基的担忧。经过了一个世纪的内战，德川幕府粉墨登场。在统一全国的最后战役中，其中选择的因素之一就是宗教——总体上说，基督教的大名反对德川幕府。一旦国家统一，对于基督教的恐惧就会影响到其发展，然后逐步被取缔。1637年的岛原之乱是由基督徒领导的最后一次大规模的起义。
除了对西方基督教影响的担忧，政府闭关锁国，禁止外国人进入或者离开日本。严格的限制和监控对荷兰人、中国人以及朝鲜人的贸易。日本的投机商们依旧来往于亚洲各地，但很大程度上是个人的行为。一些失去了地位的武士，特别是基督徒，在菲律宾和暹罗寻找容身之地。
不管怎么说，所有的一切导致了探索和扩张的停滞。另外，为了防止幕府的统治受到挑战，对于可建造船只的规格也是有严格限制的。
---------------------------------------------------
26、Thessalonian （希腊）
Asians tried to expand but they did notaccomplish a lot. The Mongols did not last for too long in Europe, althoughTurkish tribes from Asian steppes did conquer all their way to modern Turkey. America and Australia were overwhelmed andpopulated by Britons, Spaniards and Portuguese mostly. Africa was dominated byEuropeans but its population was never replaced by Europeans, like America and Australia which are mostlyEuropean, now.... The question is why, of course.
The answer could be lack of ambition orplan to dominate the world.
亚洲人试图扩张，但他们收效甚微。蒙古在欧洲没有站稳脚跟，尽管来自亚洲草原的土耳其人的部落攻占了现今土耳其全境。美洲和澳洲的绝大部分被被英国人、西班牙人和葡萄牙人瓜分并移民。非洲也被欧洲人所支配，但人口却没有被欧洲人所取代，现如今美洲和澳洲大部分都是欧洲人…原因显而易见，他们缺少支配世界的雄心壮志。
----------------------------------------------------
27、scholar （美国）
If we compare Mongol Colonialism with thelate 19th century colonization of Africa youwill find that Mongol Colonialism was more successful, longer lasting, andfarther reaching.
（回复25号评论）如果我们拿19世纪在非洲的殖民政策和蒙古相比，就会发现他们的政民政策更加成功，更持久，范围更大。
----------------------------------------------------
28、Thessalonian （希腊）
Mongols did retreat. They did not stay inEurope, unlike the Brits did in South  Africa....
（回复27号评论）蒙古的确撤退了。他们真的没有留在欧洲，而不像英国人在南非…
----------------------------------------------------
29、scholar （美国）
No. They withdrew from deep into Europe, but they existed in what we call European Russiafor centuries. The Crimean Khanate was one of the most powerful nations inEastern Europe and when it joined with the Ottomans in a similar relationshiplike the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth forcenturies. The Giray were very prominent and even more powerful than Russia which was immediately north of them untilMuscovy reformed itself and went on aneradication/conquering spree.
不是，他们撤出了欧洲腹地，但他们仍然在我们称之为‘俄罗斯的欧洲部分’生存了几个世纪。克里米亚汗国是东欧最强大的力量，后来他们并入了奥斯曼帝国，组成了‘波兰—立陶宛’相类似的联邦。Giray（克里米亚汗国的统治者）起到了至关重要的作用，在俄国改革并疯狂攻城略地之前，他们甚至比北边的俄罗斯还要强盛。
The Golden Horde, one of the Four MongolEmpires after the fragmentation. It survived for centuries.
金帐汗国（钦察汗国），蒙古帝国分裂后的四大汗国之一。存在了数世纪之久。
And the Crimean Khanate which lasted till1783, after the United  States was independent. Before though,before it was glorious, in many ways. The Giray were descendants of GenghisKhan.
1783年，克里米亚汗国覆灭，紧随其后的是美国的独立。尽管在此之前，它取得了辉煌的成就。Giray是成吉思汗的后代。
Africa was colonized for about 60-80 yearsas a whole ruled from Europe barring some minor outposts and some significantcolonies in suitable places like South Africa. But on a whole,colonialism for the entire continent lasted only so long. Mongolian colonialrule lasted far longer and had farther effects.
总的来说，非洲被欧洲人殖民了大约60-80年，除了一些较为次要的前哨战和一些像南非这样具有重大意义的地方。但大体上整个大陆殖民政策的持续时间还是相当长的。蒙古的殖民统治更久，而且产生了更为深远的影响。
-----------------------------------------------------
30、Thessalonian （希腊）
When I said Europe, I excluded Russia which is vast and politically it is notreally part of Europe.
我所说的欧洲是把俄罗斯剔除在外的，因为它幅员辽阔，政治上也不属于欧洲。
-----------------------------------------------------
31、scholar （美国）
Romania? Moldova? Definepolitically part of Europe. I'm interested inhearing this. For centuries all Germans were married to Russians in terms ofnobility and royalty if they weren't marrying each other. This was a majorfactor in Russiaturning away from modernization in the 19th century because they wanted to getrid of German influence. Scandinavia was isolated from Europemostly in terms of politics and pretty much everything. Russia was very much a part of Central andEastern Europe while Scandinavia was nothingimportant. Is Scandinavia? If you say yes,then what you just said is absurd. If you say no, then I can appreciate that.Europe is only France, Germany, Iberia,Italy, and England. Maybe Greece, but Idoubt it.I said Mongolian Colonialism. That meansfrom one little tribe among dozens to ruler of most of a continent andcontinued to hold it for centuries in comparison to less than a century oftotal rule in Africa. Pointing towards a withdraw from Europedue to the death of the Mongol Khagan isn't a failure in colonization, butpolitics. All the areas occupied were vassal states for centuries. Yourpointing to a strategic political withdrawal by an important general who neededto go to the Mongol Capital means nothing towards the impact of MongolianColonialism. I apologize if I come off as a bit confrontational, but it seemslike your not actually addressing the thing I said.
（回复30号评论）罗马尼亚？摩尔多瓦？政治上明确规定属于欧洲。我对这些很感兴趣。几个世纪以来，所有的日耳曼人都要嫁给俄罗斯的皇亲贵胄，如果双方彼此都没结婚的话。这也是俄罗斯对19世纪的现代化感到厌烦的主要原因，因为他们想要摆脱日耳曼人的影响。斯堪的纳维亚半岛在政治上和几乎所有方面与欧洲脱离。俄罗斯的相当一部分都在中欧和东欧，而斯堪的纳维亚半岛却无足轻重。斯堪的纳维亚半岛是（欧洲的一部分）吗？如果你说是，那么你的回答就是荒谬的；如果你说不是，那么我也认同。欧洲只有法国、德国、意大利和英格兰。或许还有希腊，但我有点怀疑。
我说的蒙古人的殖民政策，是说（蒙古）从诸多小部落中脱颖而出，统治着整个大陆的绝大部分地方，与在非洲不到一个世纪的统治相比，蒙古人持续了数个世纪之久。由于大汗的死去，蒙古人才从欧洲撤离，不是殖民失败了，而是政治因素。所有被攻占的地区作为附属国存在了几个世纪。你的观点是政治上的战略撤退，因为有一个很重要的将军必须回到蒙古的首都，而对蒙古的殖民政策没有影响。如有冒犯之处，希望多多包涵，不过看起来你并没有说到点子上。
-------------------------------------------------------
32、Thessalonian （希腊）
Romania and Moldova arenot part of Russia.Russia extends to Vladivostok, and it ismostly an Asian country, despite having European DNA in it! Europe extends fromPortugal to Greece and from Irelandto the borders of Finland,in purely political terms. Scandinavia has borders with Germany (via Denmark)and it has always been a part of Europe withtheir Viking expansions to the rest of Europe etc. The Mongol presence in Europe lasted for few decades only.
（回复30号评论）罗马尼亚和摩尔多瓦不是俄罗斯的一部分。俄罗斯东至海参崴，尽管拥有欧洲人的血统，但还是一个亚洲国家！从政治上而言，欧洲是从葡萄牙到希腊，从爱尔兰岛芬兰（的区域）。斯堪的纳维亚半岛同德国接壤（取道丹麦），维京海盗扩张到了欧洲的其它地方，他们一直都是欧洲的一部分。蒙古在欧洲只存在了几十年而已。
-------------------------------------------------------
（原帖网址http://www.historum.com/asian-history/19711-why-didnt-asians-expand-colonize.html译文来自龙腾网 翻译：病中乃知）

更多关于 国外网民讨论,中国,强盛时,扩张,殖民 的热帖

·美媒：俄不满中国复制其军品担心沦为附庸

·彻查湄公血案 中国有血性味不是孬种

·美专家：“黑鹰”出口中国必将其用于军事

·外媒：韩研八百公里射程导弹 威胁中国

·中国有没有地下核长城 美寝食难安