《吸血鬼崛起》仆从系统怎么玩？v rising仆从系统玩法介绍，

国外论坛：在15世纪，中国、印度和欧洲哪个技术更先进？

在15-18世纪中国与西方技术发展比较分析科技作为科学技术的简称，大多数时候被视为不可分割的整体，但是科学与技术之间仍然有着明显的界限和隔阂，科学多偏近于纯理论探索，而技术则贴近于生活实际。在中国古代社会与欧洲产生了众多的科学技术成果，但是在15世纪的印度似乎并没有什么亮眼的表现。在美版知乎Quora上就有印度网友发出这样的提问：在15世纪，中国、印度和欧洲哪个技术更先进? 让我们来看看他们是怎么说的吧。

I’m going to say that, at least by the end of the 15th century, Europe had a slight edge. Not so much because of the specific technologies it had that China and India didn’t - the longbow, plate armor, stained glass. These were arguably surpassed by India’s comparatively more advanced textiles, suspension bridges, and its unique use of elephants as beasts of burden, and China’s porcelain, seismography, and canal engineering.

我想说，至少在15世纪末，欧洲稍微占上风。这倒不是因为它拥有中国和印度没有的特殊技术——长弓、板甲、彩色玻璃。可以说，这些都被印度相对更先进的纺织品、吊桥、独特的大象驮物，以及中国的瓷器、地震仪和运河工程所超越。

And the keys to the future did not lie in plate armor, the longbow, or stained glass anyway. But the European caravel and carrack, with their lateen sails, were the way forward to the modern ships that would make Europeans mappers and masters of the world’s oceans; Zheng He’s leviathans were simply too huge and expensive to be practical for exploring the world, even if China had not crippled itself with the Haijin edicts against long-distance voyages.

而且未来的关键并不在于板甲、长弓或彩绘玻璃。但是欧洲的小帆船和大帆船，带着它们的三角帆，是通向现代船只的道路，使欧洲人成为世界海洋的地图绘制者和主人;郑和的庞然大物实在是太大太贵了，不适合探索世界，即使中国没有因为禁止长途航行的海进令而陷入瘫痪。

Still the most remarkable advantage Europe had by the end of the 15th century was its receptiveness to new technology. Europe had achieved this state of parity to India and China largely by absorbing, or at best replicating, Indian and Chinese technology: gunpowder, rockets, the movable type printing press, the crossbow, the compass, the spinning wheel, Hindu-Arabic numerals, silk production, horse collars, the moldboard plow, stirrups. Without this willingness and ability to adopt newfangled outlandish tricks, Europe would have remained a backwater, as it had been for most of history. There was no similar move by China or India to adopt Gothic plate armor, the longbow, stained glass, or the caravel or carrack.

到15世纪末，欧洲最显著的优势还是它对新技术的接受能力。欧洲在很大程度上是通过吸收或最多复制印度和中国的技术来实现与印度和中国的平等地位的：火药、火箭、活字印刷机、弩、指南针、纺车、印度-阿拉伯数字、丝绸生产、马领、木板犁和马镫。如果没有这种采用新奇古怪的技巧的意愿和能力，欧洲就会像历史上大部分时间一样，一直处于落后状态。中国或印度也没有采取类似的行动来采用哥特式板甲、长弓、彩色玻璃、或者是木船或马车。

As late as 1792, the Qianlong Emperor contemptuously dismissed British offerings of spring clocks, telescopes, planetaria, and warship designs: “Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians.” That was the attitude that reduced China from being clearly the most powerful empire in the world in the 1400s to humiliation at the hands of an island kingdom with a tenth of its population in the 1800s.

直到1792年，乾隆皇帝还轻蔑地拒绝了英国人提供的时钟、望远镜、天文仪和军舰设计:“我们的天朝帝国拥有丰富的一切，在其境内不缺任何产品。因此，没有必要进口国外野蛮人的产品。”正是这种态度，使清朝从15世纪世界上最强大的帝国，沦落到19世纪被人口只有中国十分之一的岛国羞辱。

You picked just about the most difficult century to make an easy call on. China in the first century of the Ming dynasty was quite technologically advanced: anyone with a passing familiarity with Chinese history and culture at the time will think of the ocean-going vessels of Admiral Zheng He's fleet, of the massive imperial kilns at Jingdezhen and the unrivaled Chinese abilities in porcelain, the fact that moveable type printing was already commonplace.

你选了一个几乎最难的世纪来做一个简单的决定。明朝一世纪的中国在技术上相当先进:任何对当时的中国历史和文化略为熟悉的人都会想到郑和舰队的远洋船只，景德镇的大型官窑和中国在瓷器方面无与伦比的能力，事实上活字印刷已经很普遍了。

There was already current a kind of proto-empiricist or rationalist strain of thought (this is debatable) ascendant in early Ming—the legacy of the the eminent Song Dynasty Neo-Confucian thinker, Zhu Xi.

在明初，已经有一种原始经验主义或理性主义(这是有争议的)的思想流派在崛起——这是著名的宋代新儒家思想家朱熹的遗产。

But Europe during that time—especially Italy—the Renaissance was in full flower and the brilliance of Islamic civilization and of the Aristotelian and other classical philosophical traditions it had preserved were already transforming thinking and laying the groundwork for the Age of Reason.

但是那个时期的欧洲，尤其是意大利，文艺复兴正如火如荼地进行着，伊斯兰文明的光辉灿烂，以及它所保留的亚里士多德和其他古典哲学传统，已经在改变人们的思想，为理性时代的到来奠定了基础。

Clumsy Roman numerals had by this time already mostly given way to the Indo-Arabic numerals we now use, and with that, there were tremendous advances in mathematics. The Age of Exploration was already underway. And Europe was on the cusp of the Reformation: Erasmus already writing broadly, Abelard in France, and William of Occam in England, had already advanced logic considerably. Wycliffe and Hus had already challenged clerical authority and paved the way for a revolution in thought.

到那时，笨拙的罗马数字大多已经被我们现在使用的印度阿拉伯数字所取代，与此同时，数学也取得了巨大的进步。探索时代已经开始了。当时欧洲正处于宗教改革的风口:伊拉斯谟已经开始广泛写作，阿伯拉尔在法国，奥卡姆的威廉在英国，已经在很大程度上提高了逻辑。威克里夫和胡斯已经挑战了宗教权威，并为思想革命铺平了道路。

I think the 15th century was really the inflection point, and by the early 16th, it was pretty clear that Europe had a kind of internal dynamism that was going to produce more technological breakthrough—nothing like endemic warfare to do that—while China was in what some scholars have described as a "high-energy equilibrium trap," where the incentive for technological innovation wasn't really there.

我认为15世纪是真正的转折点，到16世纪初，很明显，欧洲有一种内在的动力，将产生更多的技术突破——这与地方性战争没有任何关系——而中国则处于一些学者所描述的“高能平衡陷阱”中，技术创新的动力并不真正存在。

At the time, both cultures were in flower, and the West had not yet discovered many practical uses for gunpowder, while the Chinese, if I recall, already had rockets and noisemakers, though they never got the barrel right for a while.

当时，两种文化都在蓬勃发展，西方还没有发现火药的许多实际用途，而中国人，如果我没记错的话，已经有了火箭和噪音制造者，尽管他们有一段时间没有把枪管弄好。

The Chinese were mapping the world, and one theoretician says that Portugal stole the Chinese maps that led them to the East.

中国人在绘制世界地图，一位理论家说，葡萄牙偷走了中国的地图，把他们带到了东方。

Both had flourishing science, armor, sophisticated war techniques, and things like pumps and clocks which Europe didn't get for a while. They had a culture of scholarship, and I don't believe that the West ever could hold a candle to the Confucian scholarship system for chosing public officials. In Europe, if you could read, it was a miracle.

这两个国家都有发达的科学技术、盔甲、复杂的战争技术，以及像水泵和钟表这样的东西，欧洲有一段时间没有得到。他们有一种学术文化，我不相信西方在选拔官员方面能与儒家的学术制度相媲美。在欧洲，如果你能阅读，那就是个奇迹。

The renaissance everyone talks about did come up with a lot of new inventions, technologies, and culture, true, but a lot of it was the re-discovery of the old Greek sciences. Contact with the Arabs had re-taught Greek to the classicissts, and a lot of the sciences were rekindled by the Greek spirit of written experiments that weren't informed by theories of Aristotle, or rather, restricted.

每个人都在谈论的文艺复兴确实带来了很多新的发明、技术和文化，这是真的，但其中大部分是对古希腊科学的重新发现。与阿拉伯人的接触让古典主义者重新学会了希腊语，很多科学都被希腊人的书面实验精神重新点燃，而这种精神并不受亚里士多德理论的影响，或者更确切地说，受到限制。

The church was losing it's vise-grip on the mind of people, and just as importantly, and often forgotten, the vicious rounds of the Plagues that wiped out up to 30% of Europe in some periods were winding down, allowing people to stop praying endlessly so it would hit their family, this time. City states were rising, etc...

教会逐渐失去了对人们思想的控制，同样重要的是，经常被遗忘的是，在某些时期夺去欧洲30%人口生命的恶性瘟疫也逐渐平息，这一次，人们不再无休止地祈祷，这样就能殃及家人。城邦正在崛起，等等……

So, I'd call it a draw in the 15th century, which is fine, since they never met.

在15世纪，我认为这是一场平局，这没什么，因为他们从未见过面。

In the 16th century, the technology award goes to the Turks, and most efficient use of gun-powder, and the advantage of not losing many of the old roman technologies that theWest had lost long ago.

在16世纪，技术奖颁给了土耳其人，他们最有效地使用了火药，他们的优势是不会失去很多西方很久以前就失去的古罗马技术。

Yep- waterproof cement. Invented by the Romans, used by the Turks, forgotten by the West until the 18th or 19th century!

是的——防水水泥。罗马人发明，土耳其人使用，直到18或19世纪才被西方遗忘!

Most of the civilised world was more advanced than Europe in 1500. Europe's big advantage was in sailing ships, and in being first to make substantial contact with the much weaker powers of the New World.

1500年的时候，大多数文明世界都比欧洲先进。欧洲最大的优势是在帆船上，并且是第一个与美洲的弱国进行实质性的接触。

Adam Smith in the late 18th century mentions that India and China were much richer than any part of Europe. He also notes that China did not seem hugely different from what Marco Polo had described, whereas Europe was changing fast.

亚当·斯密在18世纪晚期提到，印度和中国比欧洲任何地方都要富有得多。他还指出，中国似乎与马可波罗所描述的没有太大区别，而欧洲正在迅速变化。

The decisive difference between the state-sponsored overseas voyages by China and by Europe was that the Chinese discovered nothing new and nothing very profitable. Whereas the Spanish encountered an unexpected New World rich in gold and vulnerable to Old World military technology, while the Portuguese gained immediate vast profits by direct trade with the Spice Islands.

中国和欧洲国家资助的海外航行的决定性区别在于，中国人没有发现什么新的东西，也没有什么非常有利可图的东西。西班牙人遇到了一个意想不到的新大陆，那里盛产黄金，对旧世界的军事技术很脆弱，而葡萄牙人则通过与香料群岛的直接贸易获得了直接的巨额利润。

China meantime had become much more inward-looking under the later Ming and the northern-barbarian Manchus. Yet visitors from 18th century Europe remained impressed by it, especially tea and china-ware, which became important items of trade. And in the Wealth Of Nations, Adam Smith warmly endorsed the standard 18th-century view of China was an advanced rational Empire, while also noticing the poverty of its lower orders:

与此同时，中国在后来的明朝和北方蛮族满族统治下变得更加内向。然而，18世纪的欧洲游客仍然对它印象深刻，尤其是茶叶和瓷器，它们成为了重要的贸易物品。在《国富论》中，亚当·斯密热情地赞同18世纪的标准观点，认为中国是一个先进的理性帝国，同时也注意到下层社会的贫穷:
China is a much richer country than any part of Europe, and the difference between the price of subsistence in China and in Europe is very great. Rice in China is much cheaper than wheat is any where in Europe. (The Wealth Of Nations, I.xi.e.24, page 208)

中国是一个比欧洲任何一个国家都富裕的国家，中国和欧洲的生活价格差异很大。中国的大米比欧洲任何地方的小麦都便宜得多。(《国富论》24日,第208页)

In China, a country much richer than any part of Europe, the value of precious metals is much higher than in any part of Europe. As the wealth of Europe, indeed, has increased greatly since the discovery of the mines of America, so the value of gold and silver has gradually diminished. (Ibid., I.xi.n, page 255)

在中国，一个比欧洲任何地方都富有的国家，贵金属的价值也比欧洲任何地方都高。事实上，自从美洲的矿藏被发现以来，欧洲的财富大大增加了，因此金银的价值逐渐减少了。(出处同上,I.xi。n, 255页)

The retinue of a grandee in China or Indostan accordingly is, by all accounts, much more numerous and splendid than that of the richest subjects in Europe… in manufacturing art and industry, China and Indostan, though inferior, seem not to be much inferior to any part of Europe. The money price of the greater part of manufactures, therefore, will naturally be much lower in those great empires than it is any-where in Europe. (Ibid, I.XI.g, pages 223-4)

因此，在中国或印度斯坦(原文如此)，根据大家的说法，比欧洲最富有的臣民的随从要多得多，也要精彩得多……在制造艺术和工业方面，中国和印度斯坦虽然不如欧洲的任何地方，但似乎并不比欧洲的任何地方差多少。因此，在这些大帝国，大部分制造业产品的货币价格自然会比欧洲任何地方都低得多。g、223 - 4页)

China has been long one of the richest, that is, one of the most fertile, best cultivated, most industrious, and most populous countries in the world. It seems, however, to have been long stationary. Marco Polo, who visited it more than five hundred years ago, describes its cultivation, industry, and populousness, almost in the same terms in which they are described by travellers in the present times.

长期以来，中国一直是世界上最富有的国家之一，也就是世界上最肥沃、最优良、最勤劳、人口最多的国家之一。然而，它似乎已经长期停滞不前了。马可波罗五百多年前曾到过这里，他描述这里的耕作、工业和人口众多，所用的术语几乎和现在的旅行者描述的一样

It had perhaps, even long before his time, acquired that full complement of riches which the nature of its laws and institutions permits it to acquire. The accounts of all travellers, inconsistent in many other respects, agree in the low wages of labour, and in the difficulty which a labourer finds in bringing up a family in China. If by digging the ground a whole day he can get what will purchase a small quantity of rice in the evening, he is contented.

也许，早在他的时代之前，它就已经获得了法律和制度的性质所允许它获得的全部财富。所有旅行者的描述，在许多其他方面都是不一致的，但在劳动力的低工资和一个劳动者在中国抚养家庭的困难方面是一致的。如果他在地上挖了一整天，就能在晚上买到少量的大米，他就心满意足了。

The condition of artificers is, if possible, still worse. Instead of waiting indolently in their work-houses, for the calls of their customers, as in Europe, they are continually running about the streets with the tools of their respective trades, offering their service, and as it were begging employment. The poverty of the lower ranks of people in China far surpasses that of the most beggarly nations in Europe.
工匠的状况，如果可能的话，更糟。他们不像在欧洲那样在工场里懒洋洋地等待顾客的呼唤，而是不断地拿着各自行业的工具在大街上跑来跑去，提供服务，好像是在乞讨就业。中国底层人民的贫困程度远远超过欧洲最贫穷的国家。

Even Adam Smith was wrong to suppose China had been static since the days of Marco Polo. It actually had a much bigger population, and the poverty he reports may have been due to this. There had also been a slow but steady accumulation of new inventions. Still, he correctly puts China and India on a level with Europe in his day.

就连亚当•斯密(Adam Smith)认为中国自马可波罗(Marco Polo)时代以来就一直处于静止状态的想法也是错误的。它实际上有更多的人口，他报告的贫困可能是由于这个原因。新发明也在缓慢而稳定地积累。尽管如此，他还是正确地将中国和印度与他那个时代的欧洲相提并论。