在中国军事史上，明朝后期，火器发展已经被欧洲所反超。虽然明王朝也在积极引进欧洲火器，如“嘉靖二十七年，都御史朱纨遣都指挥卢镗，破双屿，获番酋善铳者。命义士马宪制器，李槐制药，因得其传而造作，比西番犹为精绝云”，在双屿之战后马上学习葡萄牙火器，一度比起原版还更加精巧；但这种拿来主义往往被许多人看不上。很多人就觉得，只知道拿来，仍然是要比别人慢一步，为什么不像欧洲那样集中精力研发火器技术，推动其进步呢？

问题

挪威专家苏珊娜?维杰恩的回答

In fact, this is a very interesting question, which leads to a bigger question, that is, why China was so advanced in the early days, but European countries occupied a dominant position in technology and politics in the 19th century?

实际上这是个非常有趣的问题，它引出了一个更大的问题，即为什么中国早期如此的先进，反而欧洲国家在19世纪在技术和政治上占据了主导地位？

I found that the most persuasive theory (put forward in guns, bacteria, steel and the rise and fall of great powers) is that China has fairly standardized and solid control over its surrounding areas, such as the detention system, land conversion, etc., and no competitor can pose a serious challenge to it.

我发现最有说服力的理论（《枪炮、细菌和钢铁以及大国的兴衰》提出）是，中国对其周边地区拥有相当规范和牢固的控制，如羁縻制度，改土归流等，没有任何竞争对手能够对其形成严重挑战。

Lack of competition brings the danger of stagnation. Without threats, the weapons already possessed were sufficient to meet their needs, and the feudal dynasty had no incentive to continue to develop more advanced weapons. In that era, a conservative emperor could prevent technological innovation and exploration for decades.

缺乏竞争带来了停滞的危险。没有了威胁，已经拥有的武器足以满足他们的需要，封建王朝便没有动力继续开发更先进的武器，在那个时代，一个保守的皇帝可以在数十年内一直阻止技术创新和探索。

In contrast, Europe has been continuously fragmented for a thousand years, mainly because of its geographical form and location. Every country has its neighbors, and no country is invincible. Therefore, the kings and feudal lords of Europe must constantly consider how to conquer their neighbors or defend against such attacks.

相比之下，欧洲则在一千年里持续地支离破碎，主要是因为其地理形态和位置的原因。每个国家都有邻国，没有一个国家是坚不可摧的，因此欧洲的国王和封建领主必须不断考虑如何征服邻国，或者防御这样的袭击。

Of course, many European leaders are short-sighted, too conservative, or stupid, and indulge in pleasure. The difference is that these leaders often don't last long. A more ambitious and innovative neighbor will take all your land and open up the territory, which has led to a series of very bloody wars, but also brought impressive technological progress.

当然，欧洲也有很多领导人目光短浅，过于保守，或者愚蠢，耽于享乐。不同的是，这些领导人往往做不了多长时间，一个更具野心和创新精神的邻国会拿走你所有的土地，开疆裂土，这导致了一系列非常血腥的战争，但也带来了令人印象深刻的技术进步。

An example given by Jared Diamond is the development history of guns in Japan. In the 16th century, the Japanese first came into contact with muskets brought by Portuguese businessmen. In a short time, Japanese blacksmiths disassembled them, found out its working principle, and began to experiment to make better weapons.

Jared Diamond 给出的一个例子就是日本枪支的发展历史。16世纪，日本人第一次接触到葡萄牙商人带来的火枪。短时间内，日本的铁匠们就把它们拆解开来，找出了它的工作原理，并开始试验制造出更好的武器。

However, the shogunate general was worried that the spread of these new weapons would endanger his rule, so he took strict measures to deliberately stifle gun research. In Europe, this is undoubtedly self grave. But unlike European countries, Japan, as an independent island country, has no external threats and can suppress this development. However, if they continue to study, Admiral Perry's fleet is likely to rush into Tokyo Bay, only to find a group of soldiers with more advanced guns waiting.

然而，幕府将军担心这些新武器的传播会危及自身统治，所以采取了严厉措施故意扼杀了枪支研究。在欧洲，这样做无疑是自掘坟墓。可和欧洲各国不同，日本作为一个遗世独立的岛国，没有外来威胁，能够压制这种发展。然而，如果他们继续研究下去，佩里海军上将的舰队完全有可能冲进东京湾，却发现一批拥有更加先进枪支的军人正严阵以待。

The two major needs that prompted Europeans to develop cannons and guns are:

促使欧洲人开发大炮和枪支的两大需求是：

1. Castles and strong walls;

1、城堡和坚固的城墙；

2. Heavy armor knights and armed personnel, general cold weapons can not effectively fight.

2、重甲骑士和武装人员，一般的冷武器无法有效对抗。

But for China, these are not big problems, and they will not seek solutions for them.

但对中国来说，这些并不是大问题，他们也不会为此寻求解决方案。

In addition, people must realize that China's scale is unfavorable in innovation. Just like in Europe, people may rack their brains to build solid castles, and then the enemy will consider building better cannons to attack the city. For the Chinese army, they will choose to surround the city and wait for them to run out of ammunition and food and surrender. From the Republic of Rome to the Napoleonic era, the size of the population they could mobilize for war was unimaginable in the eyes of the West.

此外，人们必须认识到，中国的规模在创新方面比较不利，就像在欧洲，人们可能会绞尽脑汁建造坚固的城堡，然后敌人会考虑建造更好的大炮来攻城，对于中国军队来说，他们会选择包围城市，等待他们弹尽粮绝，出城投降。自罗马共和国以来，直到拿破仑时代，他们可以动员战争的人口规模在西方眼中是不可想象的。

Therefore, for Europe, technological progress is often the only option, while for the East, this is only one of many options.

因此，对于欧洲来说，技术进步往往是唯一的选择，而对于东方来说，这只是众多选择之一。

Second, the main enemies of ancient Chinese dynasties only dared to fight on a small scale, often in very remote areas, far away from the logistics line of the Central Plains Dynasty. Whether it is the grassland in Mongolia or the deep mountain canyon in the southwest, this is not an ideal environment for trying new technologies. In this case, reliability and adaptability are more important. The various problems it needs to deal with also make more advanced technology less useful.

第二个方面，中国古代王朝的主要敌人只敢进行小规模的战斗，往往在非常偏远的地区，远离中原王朝大军的后勤线。无论是蒙古的草原还是西南部的深山峡谷，这都不是尝试新技术的理想环境，在这种情况下，可靠性和适应性更为重要。它所需要处理的各种各样的问题也使得更先进的技术变得不那么有用。

We can compare the military technology from World War II to the cold war with today. We can reasonably say that the development in the past 20 years or so is far from the progress of the 1930s to 1980s. UAVs are really cool, and new infantry load-bearing robots are also very useful. But in the final analysis, if the United States wants to conduct a comprehensive conventional war against a relatively comparable enemy, these so-called advanced equipment will not reverse the war situation.

我们可以把二战到冷战时期的军事技术与今天作比较，我们可以合理地说，过去20年左右的发展在相对意义上远没有接近30年代到80年代的进步，无人机确实很酷，新的步兵负重机器人也很有用，可归根结底，如果美国要对一个相对可比的敌人进行全面的常规战争，这些所谓的先进装备并不会扭转战局。

Of course, the problem is that there is no opponent who can fight conventional war with it. Military technology has indeed developed to a certain extent. It has created some interesting things in its own way, but it does not really promote the boundaries of technology, and it is not very practical in large-scale long-term conventional war.

当然，问题是没有可以与之进行常规战争的对手，军事技术确实有一定的发展，它以自己的方式制造了一些有趣的东西，但并没有真正推动技术的边界，在大规模的长期常规战争中也不太实用。

Many of the most important advances in gunpowder weapons were first developed by private inventors for civilian purposes and later adopted by the military. China obviously does not have a civilian market to promote the development of guns.

火药武器的许多最重要的进步最初是由私人发明家为民用目的开发的，后来才被军方采用。中国显然不具备推动枪支发展的民用市场。

? the emergence of flint led to the development of metal cartridges and all modern guns, which was invented by a priest who was a fanatical bird Hunter;

? 燧石的出现导致了金属弹药筒和所有现代枪支的发展，它由一位牧师发明，这位牧师是一位狂热的猎鸟者；

? metal bullets were first developed by a private inventor and first sold to civilians;

?金属子弹头最早由一名私人发明家开发，并首次出售给平民；

? revolvers were first sold to civilians;

?左轮手枪首先出售给平民；

? the first repeater rifle was sold to civilians;

?第一支连发步枪卖给了平民；

? the first rifles were developed for hunting rather than war.

?第一批步枪是为狩猎而不是战争而开发的。

In Europe, hunting is a popular activity among wealthy people, who are eager to buy the latest inventions to meet their preferences. From ornate crossbows to rifles with wheel locks to assault rifles with hats, these people are rich and eager to buy the latest inventions. In most cases, the military only takes advantage of inventions and innovations in the civilian market.

在欧洲，狩猎是富裕人群中的一项流行活动，他们渴望购买最新发明来满足他们的喜好。从装饰华丽的弩到带轮锁的步枪，再到带帽的打击步枪，这些人都有钱并渴望购买最新发明，在大多数情况下，军方只是利用了在民用市场上的发明创新。

The army operates under the constraints of budget and military regulations, while individuals who are addicted to hobbies do not. Until a technology is perfected, it is usually useless to the army. The military is usually reluctant to use this weapon until this technology is proved to be reliable. Hunters who are keen to buy the latest firearms innovation are not subject to these restrictions, which is the historical reason why the civilian market promotes gunpowder technology.

军队在预算和军规的约束下运作，而沉迷于业余爱好的个人却没有。在一项技术完善之前，它通常对军队毫无用处。在这项技术被证明是可靠的之前，军方通常不愿意采用这种武器。热衷于购买最新火器创新的猎人不受这些限制，这就是为什么民用市场推动火药技术的历史原因。

It seems that there are no fanatical hunters in China who will spend money on the latest inventions to indulge their enthusiasm. People in China do not see the kind of ornate crossbows or guns you see in Europe. If rich Chinese like hunting, they seem to prefer to use traditional weapons rather than spend money on the latest inventions to pursue their interests. Therefore, in China, there are not as many citizens as in Europe to promote the innovation of gunpowder technology.

中国似乎没有狂热猎手会花钱购买最新的发明创造来放纵自己的热情，人们在中国没有看到你在欧洲看到的那种装饰华丽的弩或枪。如果中国有钱人喜欢打猎，他们似乎更喜欢使用传统武器，而不愿意花钱购买最新发明来追求自己的兴趣。因此，在中国，没有像欧洲那样有大量的公民推动火药技术的创新。

The development of guns not only proves that Britain defeated the Chinese in the Opium War, but also tells us how easily Britain defeated China. China's backwardness in a wide range of technologies is a major factor in its failure. From 1500 to the next 400 years, Europe almost made significant weapons progress, while China made little significant contribution to the progress of gunpowder technology after 1400 years.

枪械的发展不仅证明了我们英国在鸦片战争中打败了中国人，而且告诉我们英国是多么轻易地打败了中国。中国在广泛的技术方面的落后，是其失败的一个主要因素。从1500年到接下来的400年，欧洲几乎取得了重大武器进步，而中国在1400年后对火药技术的进步几乎没有做出重大贡献。

美国网友高弗里?维德逊的回答

Why did the Chinese discover gunpowder earlier than the Europeans?

为什么中国人比欧洲人更早发现火药？

One reason why China discovered gunpowder but Europe did not is that Europe has almost no natural source of the basic ingredients of saltpeter. It took China several centuries to produce something that instantly turned into an explosion.

中国发现了火药，而欧洲没有发现火药的一个原因是欧洲几乎没有硝石基本成分的天然来源，中国花了几个世纪的时间才制造出一种瞬间变成爆炸的东西。

When did European guns surpass China's? Why are guns in Europe better than those in China?

欧洲的枪支是什么时候优于中国的？为什么欧洲的枪械要优于中国？

Around the 16th century, Europeans worked harder to make better guns because they solved the problem they faced: dealing with armored knights and assembling infantry.

大概公元十六世纪左右，欧洲人更努力地制造质量更好的枪支，因为它们解决了他们面临的问题：对付装甲骑士和集结步兵。

For the artillery, they want to destroy all solid castles. In the hundred year war, the French destroyed the English castles with cannons and drove the British out of France.

对于炮兵来说，他们要摧毁所有坚固的城堡，在百年战争中，法国人用大炮摧毁了英国人的城堡，把英国人赶出了法国。

In contrast, the Chinese were threatened by grassland cavalry, which were flexible and did not face the threat of strong fortifications or dense infantry (during the period of 1200-1500).

相比之下，中国人则受到草原骑兵的威胁，这些骑兵行动灵活，他们没有面对（在1200-1500年期间）坚固的防御工事或密集的步兵的威胁。

The early small arms were too slow to launch, too short range to effectively fight cavalry, and the infantry had huge firepower. Similarly, the artillery was not mobile enough to threaten enemies such as the Mongols. Dr. chase believes that countries like Japan have not been able to develop such powerful weapons because they are not threatened by the Mongols (or similar nomads).

早期的小武器发射速度太慢，射程太短，无法有效对抗骑兵，并且步兵火力巨大，同样，火炮的机动性不足，无法威胁到诸如蒙古人之类的敌人。 蔡斯博士认为，像日本这样的国家也没能开发如此强大的武器，因为他们没有面临蒙古人（或类似的游牧民族）的威胁。

Have Europeans conquered more land than the Chinese?

欧洲人比中国人征服的土地更多吗？

This is doubtful. There is a view put forward by some people (mainly Chinese!) The author believes that China is not a country bent on conquering the Empire, although the Qing Dynasty controlled East Asia and administered a large number of affiliated countries. As Professor Jeremy Black said, "the two most powerful empires in the 18th century are Britain and China.这一点是存疑的。有一种观点是由一些人提出的（主要是中国人！）作者认为，中国不是一个一心想着征服帝国的国家，尽管清朝控制了东亚地区，管理者大量附属国。正如杰里米·布莱克（Jeremy Black）教授所说，“十八世纪最有实力的两个帝国是英国和中国。”

European powers held their ground in South America, where diseases killed the local population. They often spent a long time occupying trade posts and cooperating with local authorities. Compared with Asian empires such as the Qing Dynasty, the Ottoman Empire and the Mughal Empire, they can only be regarded as small states with a small population. Note that the Ottoman Empire, Mughal Empire and Persian Safavid Dynasty were all "gunpowder empires".

欧洲列强在南美坚守阵地，那里的疾病夺去了当地人口的生命，他们经常花很长时间占领贸易站等，并与当地当权者合作。与清朝、奥斯曼帝国和莫卧儿帝国等亚洲帝国相比，他们只能算是蕞尔小邦，人口较少。注意，这时的奥斯曼帝国、莫卧儿帝国和波斯萨非王朝都是“火药帝国”。

Why should Europeans develop global influence? What does guns have to do with this?

为什么欧洲人要发展全球影响力？枪支与此有什么关系？

Europeans have mastered a series of key technologies and capabilities:

欧洲人掌握了一系列关键技术和能力：

? strong ships capable of carrying powerful artillery;

?能够携带强大火炮的坚固舰船；

? powerful artillery on these vessels;

?这些船只上的强大火炮；

? the ability of cross ocean navigation;

?跨洋导航的能力；

? design strong fortifications so that they can seize small strongholds and confront more local regimes.

?设计强大的防御工事，使他们能够抓住小据点对抗更多的当地政权。

These capabilities enabled them to blast the opposition out of the water - as the Portuguese did in East Africa, the coast of West India, and the Spice Islands. Of course, relying on the huge fleet, the Spanish and Portuguese at this time were able to cross the Atlantic and rule the Americas, while the Nordic people only got some bits and pieces. At the beginning of the 15th century, after the treasure ship of the Ming Dynasty, the Chinese withdrew from the world navigation market.

这些能力使他们能够将反对派炸出水面——就像葡萄牙人在东非、西印度海岸和香料群岛所做的那样。当然，倚仗庞大的舰队，此时的西班牙人和葡萄牙人能够跨越大西洋，统治美洲，而北欧人则只得到了一些零碎的东西。15世纪初，明朝的宝船之后，中国人就退出了世界航海市场。

About 1700 years later, western scientific and technological progress began in an unprecedented way in history. Whether it was guns, geology, ships, bridges, medicine, evolutionary biology or anything else, they gradually gained an impeccable advantage (such as 1850), until other countries followed suit.

大约1700年后，西方的科技进步以历史上前所未有的方式开始，无论是枪支、地质学、船舶、桥梁、医学、进化生物学还是其他什么，它们逐渐获得了无懈可击的优势（比如1850年），直到其他国家纷纷效仿。