We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon
Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
thousands of times, depending on definition, and is in effect no big deal, historically speaking, and because of such, and given the historical records meticulously kept in real time, likely China invented much of the ways to collapse. Of course, as in then again, China also innovated all the ways of rejuvenation, and as 'they' say, track record is good-good.
this episode was one Message 35024902 , reminds one of Masada but not quite. The fort held out against the full weight of several khans over a duration of 36 years, able to do so due to location location location and self-sufficiency and and and a slew of other factors (weaponry, tactics, etc). It, meaning the tenacity of the fort, absorbed quite a bit of the energy of the khans so that the rest of Eurasia escaped the worst of what the Mongols could have done. And no, the Fort's defenders did not fight to the last fellow, likely because the youngsters did not see as the oldsters saw.
It is an interesting bit of history, and I encourage you to give the VOLGs a watching.
As to why Rome did not do and could not have done a China, the video hereunder gives a few but not all clues, also interesting
