Why are books on Chinese history so scarce?

Why are there so few books on Chinese history, and why are almost all of them written by Westerners?

Is this just a case of the Chinese hating their own country and trying to remain willfully ignorant of its history, or what? It just seems inexplicable that a country with thousands of years of history should be limited to either encyclopedic series that span tens of volumes or single novels that cram even an event as complex as the Three Kingdoms era into twenty pages. And in most cases it's something the author treats as a curiosity rather than an area of expertise, with them not even having been to China and being unable to read the sources in the original Chinese.

Like, what gives? Where are all the biographies about Guan Yu and other famous Chinese figures? Where are all the works focusing on a narrow aspect of the history? And where the hell are all the Chinese scholars? And why do no historical works originating from China get any translations here? Are they just super biased, or what? Or is the Chinese government just super uncooperative?

And sorry for the lewd pic, but my HDD is fucked, and her being Chinese is the best I could do.

Other urls found in this thread:

jiuyangda.tumblr.com/
publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft1000031p&brand=ucpress.
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Iv always wondered the same thing.
I think it has to do with the language barrier, and us just not translating enough of it before the communists came in.

Yeah it's like the communists tried to eradicate chinese culture or something. Really makes you think.

Because Chinks have been writing their history since 1950s. New Temples, new parts of Great Wall, new "chronicles". Its so cheap and rude level of falsification, that not worth to see.

>Why are there so few books on Chinese history
what period are we talking? there's a ton of scholarship on 19th and 20th century china for example. There's even a lot on tang, song, yuan, ming. I think ancient history is harder because the lack of sources, but I can't be too sure.

>Where are all the works focusing on a narrow aspect of the history?
you can find those in the periods i mentioned above

>And where the hell are all the Chinese scholars?
commies didn't allow history to develop as a discipline and used it to convey ideological messages. plus, a ton of it hasn't been translated but that may change in the next few decades. it does confuse me though that such a project hasn't arisen yet. maybe there's a lack of will, funding, and people able to translate linguistic concepts from one language to the other. I also suspect that the government still plays a hand in making sure that no history puts china or the communists in a poor light. I had a professor who said he had to disguise the thesis of a book he was writing when talking to chinese officials or otherwise they would have blocked his access to archives n shit.

combination of these two

honestly chinks are so disassociated from culture and that is part of their culture

The Chinese destroyed their own history and culture. It's up to foreigners to save it.

Probably because it's mostly in Chinese and westerners in general don't care about Chinese history apart from meme people and happenings.

>Why are there so few books on Chinese history
There are plenty of official records even dating back to the Imperial era, but they're all in Chinese.

>Why can't I read Chinese? Why do I have my head up my ass? Why am I so goddamn stupid?

There OP I fixed your typos.

Do you want modern history books written by chinese and then translated into english or classic history books written in chinese and translated into english?
If it's the latter, a lot of them are translated into english like the classic of history or the records of the grand historian.

Too many people are too lazy in regards to this stuff.

It's one of those "if it isn't accessible as fuck it doesn't exist" pleb shitter thing. Other places have it more difficult then China since you only have to know Chinese as the barrier of entry to actually go below surface level shit extensively "or wait ages for a translation".

Using Cameroon for example you have to know German to be able to read the colonial records, papers and media at the time as well as having to go there to have access to it. Then you do have to do the same for English and French since they ruled over it as two separate entities when Germany lost them as well.

Then there's the issue of engaging with locals who may or may not be able to speak to you due to language barriers (if you speak English gg Cameroon is mostly francophone and you may need a translator in case some uses a local toungue).

There are plenty of books that are on Chinese history but most of them aren't available in English because they can't be fucked to translate them

Translation:
>I can't read Chinese, therefore all the history books in Chinese do not exist

>why are almost all of them written by Westerners?
Because Westerners write in English and Chinese historians don't?

You have so little access to Chinese histpry for the same reason you have so little knowledge of Chinese internet memes. The distance between our bubble and their bubble is quite vast.

This thread made it's way to tumblr somehow: jiuyangda.tumblr.com/

>Not self-promotion
Mods you are needed here

>Why are there so few books on Chinese history, and why are almost all of them written by Westerners?
>Is this just a case of the Chinese hating their own country and trying to remain willfully ignorant of its history, or what? I
This is a load of horse shit. Chinese people are ravenous consumers of their own history.

The reason you never see any books is because they're written in Mandarin for other Chinese, so what possible good could those books do on the shelves of the average western book store?

A better question to ask is why don't more Americans give a shit about Chinese history? If they did more western publishers would make more Chinese history books written in English for other westerners.

I... guess I'll do it. More Mei please.

>Mandachan, why are books on America so scarce? It seems like all of them are written by Chinese authors too. Do white piggu really not care about their history enough to make it accessible?

Nah, I just happened to see the post while looking for a SGZ translation.

Literally this.

I also imagined that the person saying it was the statue in the picture.

>The reason you never see any books is because they're written in Mandarin for other Chinese, so what possible good could those books do on the shelves of the average western book store?
Pretty much. You have no idea how disappointed I was when I discovered that Zhou Youguang's entire bibliography wasn't translated.

Most chinese history books are either bias or untrue so better stick to those that have been translated

Were you two dropped on your heads as children? So if I have a budding interest in Chinese history, that means I have go to learn Chinese?

I guess I would then have to go learn the language of every culture if I wanted any access to its history, from Church Slavonic to ancient Greek.

I seriously don't get how all of you in this thread can be so fucking DENSE.

The entire point of my OP was with reference to the Chinese living IN THE WEST. I am well aware that the Chinese have their own historians and probably plenty of books on this shit in China. That wasn't what I was saying.

However, if you look at something like Islam or the Middle-East in general, the Muslims have taken a way more active interest in peddling their own (albeit at times distorted) history. The same goes for Indians. As opposed to the Chinese.

>Most chinese history books are either bias or untrue
Evidence? Generally white people like Gavin Menzies do the wewuzzing for us. Give an example of an untranslated Chinese History book which contained false claims.
Maybe Middle Easterners and Indians in the west feel the need to peddle their ethnic history because your average westerner is unaware that they even had civilizations.

Because from the average chinese fellow's point of view the history of China is of nothing more than cruel subjugation, torture, oppression (not the modern sjw flavour mind you), toil and misery.

For example for westerners the Great Wall is a monumental feat of engineering, but for native chinese it was a cruel reminder of the thousand of peasants that were made to work to dead building it; of the totalitarian rule of the state.

It's only until very, very recently that your everyday streetwalker in Beijing has an interest in his country's glorious history, as a fountain of national pride.

For a great Mao-era history check out Tombstone by Yang Jisheng

Evidences of their version? They just constructing new buildings and claim it is ancient. And crying about documents which were lost during Cultural revolution. Its not serious.

This.

>The entire point of my OP was with reference to the Chinese living IN THE WEST. I am well aware that the Chinese have their own historians and probably plenty of books on this shit in China. That wasn't what I was saying.

Fucking liar. There's nothing in the OP about Chinese diaspora.

How is that pic SFW?


MODS!

>Why are there so few books on Chinese history,
Not really sure how one measures that.

>and why are almost all of them written by Westerners?
Okay now this is bait

>The entire point of my OP was with reference to the Chinese living IN THE WEST.

Care to ummmmm, point out where in OP you said that or even implied that?

>So if I have a budding interest in Chinese history, that means I have go to learn Chinese?
Why the literal fuck do you think most Chinese sources would not be written in fucking Chinese?

>Chinese living IN THE WEST
Because many Chinese who live in the West were more interested in getting AWAY from their culture until recently. In the 1960s Chinese people in America were almost ashamed of being Chinese, you can't really avoid it even considering the "century of humiliation" that more or less broke their cultural camel back. Lately, in the 2000s, Chinese have become proud that they are Chinese, owing to the resurgance of their nation and the newfound pride in themselves this creates. Thus you may find that university students in the west from China are more interested in their own national history.
Furthermore it's the case that Chinese people in the West have more interest in making it big than making their nation known, and this is historically true - China has not had spectacular interest in spreading their history and culture outside of their borders, for the most part, even if the Sinosphere nations tended to pick up many aspects on their own.

Stop saying chinks, that's a racial slut

>For example for westerners the Great Wall is a monumental feat of engineering, but for native chinese it was a cruel reminder of the thousand of peasants that were made to work to dead building it; of the totalitarian rule of the state.

>for native Chinese
Since when? Before the late Qing dynasty people as close as Beijing literally didn't even remember it existed, it was the westerners and Jesuits that brought attention to it.
The Great Wall was then taken as a nationalistic symbol starting with the original Republic of China, since they didn't have that many rallying points.

>Before the late Qing dynasty people as close as Beijing literally didn't even remember it existed,

Ummm... maybe the peasants who were too busy starving. But the Imperial palace and scholars clearly knew about it...

Most Americans don't even know the year when the USA was founded or that we were essentially something else 1781-1789.

>clearly knew about it
The peasants in Beijing were not really starving during the early-mid Qing dynasty. The scholars and Imperial Palace knew about it but their reaction when confronted by that one French dude who wrote a ton on China was "oh yeah...that old thing...like, okay what about it?"
No pride at all.

[Citation needed]

And okay. I don't see how that's meaningful or relevant. Every nation has a "national pride" no one gave a shit about a century prior.

Just a few examples of this
WE WUZ ROMANZ
WE WUZ GREEKZ
WE WUZ CONQUERORZ
TURKZ
QINGZ!
BRAHUMPUTRAZ!

Because of that.

>source?
I forgot exactly who it was so I'll admit I don't have direct evidence on hand. Superficially, almost all accounts we have of the Great Wall as anything impressive come from foreigners like Shahrukh until post-Imperial China. There's also quite a dearth of written works referencing it as oppression despite it having a grim nickname, and even when referenced it is generally simply used to show how Qin was barbaric as fuck and almost never mentions the later building projects. This implies it wasn't viewed as such.

>And okay. I don't see how that's meaningful or relevant.
My point is that the Great Wall was not viewed as a 'cruel reminder' of anything because it wasn't viewed period, almost everyone who wasn't thinking about it from a military point of view was not thinking about it at all.

>national pride
China came into the nationalism thing late. Even their term for nation is a reverse loanword from Japanese, they didn't have a notion of national pride, only cultural achievement.

>cruel subjugation, torture, toil, and misery
From what we can tell if they weren't at war at the time China tended to be pretty goddamn rich and that wealth was distributed among the people as well to an extent. If you read accounts like say Matteo / Niccolo / Marco, Al-Hakim, or Matteo Ricci, or Shahrukh's embassy. Now obviously if you listen to shit like then they were literally behind Abos until relatively recently, but that isn't quite accepted by most mainstream historical circles so let's just ignore that for now. If anything, the suffering and toil and misery was only in conciousness starting from the so-called Century of Humilation.

>oppression
There is a phrase in Chinese dating to either Ming or Yuan that goes "The Heavens are high and the Emperor is far away", or alternatively "The Mountains rise tall and the Court is distant". The notion is that for the most part there was hardly any oppression and enforcement of most rules was lax at best.

Although this is bait, both lines are clearly wrong

>Even their term for nation is a reverse loanword from Japanese, they didn't have a notion of national pride,
[CITATIONS NEEDED]

Spouting memes I see.

This lie triggers me

>[CITATIONS NEEDED]
Jesus fucking christ user how about you read a motherfucking book? The Chinese did not have a concept of a nation as tied to a state, merely a chinese cultural zone and therefore a state, this is entry level knowledge for anyone studying their history.
民族 Minzu is borrowed from Japanese 民族 Minzoku, as equivalent to nation (it technically means something like family of the people). Sun Yatsen even expressed the notion that nationalism was considered by many to have "served its purpose" after the fall of the Qing, which obviously implies it isn't a natively Imperial concept. The term of 中華民族 i.e. Chinese Nation (as seperate from the Imperial Chinese state, the ethnicities within China, or the Chinese culture) was coined by Liang Qichao, who was born in the fucking 1870s.
If you know literally fucking nothing then I can't discuss shit with you.

t. Lucian Pye

overseas Chinese outside America (e.g. in Southeast Asia) aren't shy about being Chinese.

This thread is the first time I truly felt Veeky Forums might have been a mistake.

Fucking decrepit anti-communist Cold War propaganda that shouldn't even stand up to a basic wikipedia run over of the Cultural Revolution

Morons that have nothing to say pretending to say something by attacking posters with barely coherent trolling

They also don't speak English and won't be writing books in English.
Also the surge in national pride has already happened - overseas Chinese just about everywhere aren't shy about being Chinese anymore

Yeah, but SEA Chinese have been fiercely Chinese for a long time, see Malaysia's long-standing racial politics and tensions and how Singapore was expelled for example

Also Singapore national language is literally English

Well that too but see , there's just no market for Chinese history outside of their cultural sphere for some damn reason, the best you'll get is either cursory summaries of their history as an 'introduction' (and good luck trying to find any material to move past that introduction) or shit like Meeting China Halfway / The China Threat / China's Expansionism under Xi Jinping / The Economic Miracle / Red Dragon Rising or whatever other """""modern history""""" books you can find
Oh and obviously a ton of books on the cultural revolution and communist atrocities.
I'm pretty sure there's a decent number of Vietnamese books on Chink history.

There doesn't need to be a market. This stuff exists in academia. People don't publish works based on large numbers of expected audience. Chemical Engineering doesn't have a popular market either, but that doesn't stop modern works from being translated into Chinese, English, Tagalog, whatever.

I can't be the only one that finds this "oh it's it's in Chinese and nothing can be done" excuse to be incredibly suspicious and unconvincing. There's over a billion Chinese. At least some of them are bilingual. No one has translated the major history works into English (the most popular language in the world)?

what are some good books on chinese history Veeky Forums?

>this stuff exists in academia
You'd be surprised at the number of Chinese versions of English historical.
They're quite rare indeed.
Academic histories are different from academic sciences. To begin with, many people learn their sciences in English and mathematics papers consist of 90 pages of equations and maybe a dozen of text annotations and conclusions.
Actual books on high-level sciences don't generally get translated. The papers MIGHT get translated but more often than not you're expected to just learn German if you want to read a paper from the University of Berlin.

>No one has translated the major history works into English (the most popular language in the world)?
Nobody cares to. People who are interested on the academic level often just up and learn the language to use primary sources anyway, this is why historians often know all sorts of languages from Greek to Sanskrit to Latin. They may or may not translate the works they used - they often don't, preferring to spend their time writing up new works.
Some of the works are translated, just not many. Some of the more famous court records are as well.

You just supported an unsubstantiated claim with another unsubstantiated claim.

>why are almost all of them written by Westerners?
because the chinese government likes to airbrush out the less favourable parts of chinese history like Tienanmen square.
A history book on china written by the chinese is called properganda

What are some good books in English about Chinese history?

The way history is taught in Asia is different to the West, their way of learning history is much more oriented towards simply learning dates and names instead of being taught to critically evaluate and balance sources against each other.

>he says when ancient Chinese historians like the Sima bunch were noted for using immense numbers of sources to the point they sometimes had entire chapters discussing why he chose to believe one source over another when they had mismatches
Come on mate

No it's because you can't read Chinese and mistakenly assume that English is the only language in the world.

Every communist government to come in power has tried to destroy the people's culture and history to make them more fluid and less likely to revolt.
When /pol/ comes here they are expected to not be autistic because of their ideology and that standard also applies to communists.

During the revolution there was a purge of scholars and cultural artifacts. Recent history has seen a reversal in this trend as the Communist party increasingly wishes to see themselves as the new Chinese imperium. To an extent past emperors are now revered when once their reign was reviled. Especially Qing.

>waifufag manchild needs to be spoonfed
What a surprise

Don't forget Confucianism

Oh, I don't know, maybe by saying

>And why do no historical works originating from China get any translations here?

The statement is fucking implicit. Why else would I pose the question? I don't live in an English-speaking country either, so I know how it works. And funnily enough, we have books from Japan translated here that the English-speaking world doesn't have at all. Nevertheless, even though we're a tiny country, the few historians we have abroad all study things related to the Balkans and publish papers on that.

Evidently they must have a multitude of studies in China, given they've always been obsessed with history. That's the whole POINT of the fucking thread. When there's SO MANY Chinese in the West, it's insane that most authors writing these books are white and all the other historians referenced in the works are all also white.

It makes way more sense to me that the person trying to convey all this stuff to a Western audience would be a Chinese person raised in the West, rather than a weit piggu that spent years just to get a basic grasp of the language.


I don't. My point was that it seems retarded to expect everyone to speak a certain language in order to read about that culture. I don't speak Russian, but I have access to plenty of books on Russian history, even in my own country.

OP here and not that guy, but I remember reading in Keay's China about how the government tried to show the waterworks and the Great Wall as single monumental constructions when they were just patchworks done throughout Chinese history.

And then mentions of how they tried to dismiss different finds that didn't fit the idea of a homogeneous Xia people back in the day, and how they've consistently tried to do away with evidence found in Xinjiang due to the political conflicts in that region, like the Caucasian mummies and so on.

Not saying he's right because I've never researched this stuff, but the reading was compelling.

>how the government
But user, the original people trying to show the great wall as single monumental constructions done entirely in Qin dynasty were Europeans who mistakenly thought the Beiping section went like that all the way to the west when it's more like little bits of wall using mountains and cliffs as natural bastions.
The actual education system in China makes it very clear that the Great Wall was only started in Qin and patched up repeatedly, and the canal systems likewise
Hell, the "Wild Great Wall" i.e. the parts of the wall in disrepair and mostly not continuous due to being broken by natural barriers are actually popular tourist sites so you can see this yourself.

Like I said, I'm just telling you what I read. I'm no expert on the topic.

Since the other guy asked as well, let me ask you too: Have any good recommendations? I would love to learn more.

I can read Chinese so I usually go for Chinese versions, but I believe the Records of the Grand Historian and some of the other Imperial records are translated for primary sources.
There is [China: A New Cultural History] by Cho-yun Hsu, Columbia University, and F. Mote's [Imperial China], Harvard University Press, which covers I believe Song through pre-Victorian Qing. Also [A Concise History of China] by J. Roberts, also from Harvard University Press.
These are the main well-written survey histories I've found for Chinese history, there's more on specific people or time periods like [Zhou Enlai] by Wenqian Gao (this is a Chinese person, translated from the original source. Well balanced treatment, isn't overly critical nor overly supportive) and publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft1000031p&brand=ucpress.

You're a good man. Bless.

Just put me in a wheelchair, get me to the show
Hurry hurry hurry, before I go loco
I can't control my fingers, I can't control my toes
Oh no oh oh oh oh

Ba-ba-baba, baba-ba-baba, I want to be sedated
Ba-ba-baba, baba-ba-baba, I want to be sedated
Ba-ba-baba, baba-ba-baba, I want to be sedated
Ba-ba-baba, baba-ba-baba, I want to be sedated

BECAUSE THEY'RE BEATING US AT TRADE!

Can anybody recommend between China: A New History by John King Fairbank and China: A History by John Keay? The latter is cheaper but is the former better?

I never read the first. The second is perfectly decent, but it lacks focus on the past few hundred years as it prefers to focus on ancient China before, say, 1600, and stops right after Red China in 1949. J. Spence's [The Search for Modern China] is a good follow up imo, these two together plus F. Mote's [Imperial China] is a good general introduction.
That being said, John Keay can be kind of...rude sounding? I remember him calling the buddha a vagrant and the 'alleged' great wall a bunch of times. He's definitely not unbiased in his tone if he uses sources generally pretty well.
It is extremely useful to know some of the language, even just a basic amount, when reading about Chinese history, if only because there's so much implication in some of the titles that is rarely covered. Emperor in Chinese has divine, august, primal, etc. etc. overtones, and not in the Roman sense either, and so on.

>China: A History by John Keay

I thought that one was very nice. By the time I was halfway in I actually knew where each province was without having to look at the map, because he made me remember them, and I could name the dynasties in order.

>not being able to do so already

Where is Gansu?

...am I meant to draw a map right now for you or something? Between Sha'anxi and Qinghai

If you want the gist of Chinese history, a few central themes sum up (for me personally) the thousands of years they have:

They believed in dynastic cycles of unity and unrest, acknowledging the periodic cycle of things (of course the Commie government is trying to usurp this tradition.)
天下大势、分久必合、合久必分
"When it comes to the world under heaven, things long united will be divided and things long divided will reunite once again."

Peasants throughout Chinese history see not the grand scale of dynastic cycles but rather their inevitable enslavement to the emperor and ultimate resignation.
兴、百姓苦、亡、百姓苦
"During prosperity, the hundred surnames (the people) will suffer and during decline, the hundred surnames will suffer also. "

Despite the divine rule of the mandate of heaven and the resignation of the peasantry, certain standards are expected to meet; if the pressing emperor fails to meet basic needs, the people will revolt. Chinese peasantry has a long history of revolting documented as far back as Chen Sheng and Wu Guang's Revolt at the turn of AD.
水能载舟,亦能覆舟
"Water can float a boat but water can also sink a boat."

It's more like the divine rule of the mandate of heaven literally means that if you fuck up the peasantry are allowed to remove you
The entire point is that the Emperor is just a heavenly bureacrat in charge of All Under Heaven. If he fucks up his territory, in other words if he fails at doing his job, then he should be removed.

Ok, it checks out.

Well, it's not necessarily legalizing the revolts but rather arguing that the presiding government is ineffective and the current emperor is at risk of losing the mandate of heaven. Sure, it basically implies the emperor gonna get his ads raided if he pulls such poor choices but on paper, it's not a direct affirmation that people can waltz into the throne room, pick up the emperor and throw him outside. Take case in Chen Sheng and Wu Guang; although their revolts captured the zeitgeist of angry peasants under the rule of Qin, they were ultimately offed by the draconian Qin troops. Incidentally, Chen Sheng has a great quote that reflects another aspect of Chinese history.
王侯将相宁有种乎
"Are kings and nobles given their high status by birth?"

>it's not a direct affirmation that people can waltz into the throne room, pick up the emperor and throw him outside
It's not a direct affirmation because that's pretty retarded to pull but the original explicit concept of the Mandate comes from Zhou, who had...just overthrown the Yin and were desperately looking for legitimacy to not be called peasant rabble.

>王侯将相宁有种乎
True, probably one of the most special aspects of chinese history is to think that people might not be special just from birth but that doesn't mean everyone is born equal.

Battle of Muye, right? My Pre-Qin Chinese history a shit. It's basically composed of Xia, which probably is made up, Shang, which probably is factual and Zhou, which was long winded.

Xia isn't really made up, the people seem to have existed in roughly the right areas and there are some archeological evidences, but speaking about dynasties before honestly even Qin is kind of missing the point. The real glue that held Chinese people together started with the Spring and Autumn and the Qin dynasty. There was certainly an identity of Shang and Zhou but nowhere near as powerful as post-Qin. The whole concept of Chinese dynasties is that despite the fact that the state repeatedly just fucking exploded, the conceptual, idealized state and the apsect of All Under Heaven was more or less the same, and this was not strongly the case before the Spring and Autumn / Warring States era.

You realize I went into it knowing absolutely nothing. I didn't even know if the Yellow river was above or below the Yangzi.

Because there is a lack of demand to translate these texts as a result of the Euro-centrist view of history academia has been put under until very recently. If you take the time to fucking use google you will find that there is a Chinese historian tradition stretching back past Sima Qian to the Zuo Zhuan.
I swear to god Veeky Forums is simultaneously the most pretentious and ignorant board on this website.

>Yangzi
Just a tip, the Yangzi river, in Chinese sources, does not mean literally the entire Yangtze - it only refers to the lower Yangtze river.

Talk to me more about the waters. And that isn't sarcastic. I wasn't even able to find a decent map of the rivers.

How exactly are they named and what are the main branches? And do they have any particular importance?

Also is there any Wiki that focuses on Chinese history to look this up? Wikipedia is pretty dogshit.

>I swear to god Veeky Forums is simultaneously the most pretentious and ignorant board on this website.
Veeky Forums beats us

>tell me about the waters
What do you mean? I mean all the rivers are important, they have cultural implications (Mountain and Water never refers to literally the ocean, it is always the river), there's a ton of poetic -> cultural identity surrounding them, places like Ningxia grew filthy fucking rich from the river bends making the soil relatively fertile, and of course the Yellow river in particular has special importance and features in so many poems and lamentations it's not even funny for its propensity to basically go overdrive and kill everything.

>a decent map of the rivers
Can't you just get a plain old geographical map of China?

>Ningxia grew filthy fucking rich from the river bends making the soil relatively fertile

See, I mean stuff like that. Or just ordinary trivia. I'm just requesting you waste time dumping info about the waters if you have the patience, I guess. Or a good source to read this stuff.

>Can't you just get a plain old geographical map of China?

I guess, but they're often detailed and hard to follow, and other ones only take in certain parts of the waters and omit others. I just Googled this instant and there were two that represented the same stuff, but one had way more stuff depicted than the other.

You'll probably want to look for a survey map of some sort, those focus entirely on geography.

>if you have the patience
I have the patience but not the time because I promised oneechan I'd go out with her today so yeah sorry, maybe if thread is still here when I get back

T H E Y ' R E

W R I T T E N

I N

C H I N E S E

R E T A R D

See , ,

You don't see the bananas translating chinese histories into english because
SURPRISE! they are actually banana and don't cared about being chinese

Also, unlike eternal EURO, chinese actually cared about their history. Any *chink* writer with decent chinese historical knowledge who tries to write a book on chinese histories will always do it in chinese and get decent audience rather than write an english book and see it get ignored by euro-centric whit pig

This sort of thing is increasingly a problem even concerning European sources.

The knowledge of Latin and Greek is remarkably poor these days and most people are content to discuss only translated works which are of varying quality and represent a paltry subset of sources. The rest is read only by specialists. Note that this includes not just primary sources but also earlier scholarship.

thanks
I'm a lazy fuck

OP posted a blatantly NSFW pic and Veeky Forums actually stays focused on the topic and provides in-depth discussion.

Truly the greatest board.

The answer to OP's question was pretty simple though. "It's all in Chinese".

[Citation needed]

Also, it was European Chinaboos that made this claim first and started convincing pop culture Chinese that it was true.

Just admit it's because you're mad about how rotk represented your ancestor.