How Well Did Facts Travel to Support Protracted Debate on the History of the Great Divergence between Western Europe and Imperial China?
Kent Deng and
MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany
This paper tackles the issue of how reliable the currently circulated 'facts' really are regarding the 'Great Divergence' debate. Our findings indicate strongly that 'facts' of premodern China are often of low quality and fragmented. Consequently, the application of these 'facts' can be misleading and harmful.
Keywords: Great Divergence; evidence; GDP estimates (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: N01 P5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cna and nep-his
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/77276/2/MPRA_paper_77276.pdf original version (application/pdf)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pra:mprapa:77276
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany. Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by Joachim Winter ().