We all know that a lie goes halfway round the world while truth is putting on its boots. But what if the lie goes the whole way? What if it claims to circumnavigate the globe?
Purported evidence that the Chinese admiral Zheng He (
The map challenges the customary Euro-centric version of global discovery and can thus rely on a weight of political correctness in support. It appears to stake China's claim to have "discovered" America first.
This comes as a surprise to those of us who know for a fact that America was discovered by Prince Madoc ab Owain Gwynedd in 1170. He landed at Mobile, Alabama, on the orders of the family druid and asserted Wales' claim to King Arthur's North Atlantic empire. Making his way across country, he settled west of the Mississippi, where the Mandan tribe were encountered in the 18th century, fair skinned and speaking a dialect of Welsh.
Unfortunately, Madoc's arrival had been forestalled by St Brendan in the seventh century. He sailed to America in a leather-bound coracle, as Tim Severin proved in 1977. The survivors of this trip remain pickled in a downtown Boston saloon to this day.
Brendan and Madoc were followed by a Scottish knight templar, Henry Sinclair, seeking refuge from the suppression of his order in 1398. He and his freemasons escaped with assorted treasures and holy grails to settle in Nova Scotia with the Micmac Indians (clearly a tribe of Hiberno-Scots ancestry). Sinclair's masonic star, or "la merika," duly gave its name to the continent and merits a Da Vinci saga all of its own.
The only blot on this glory is that everyone knows America got its name from Glamorgan's Richard ap Meurig (Amerik), a wealthy sponsor of John Cabot's search for the north-west passage in the 1490s.
It is amazing that all these chaps never bumped into each other. Sailors tend to chat, and nothing obsesses them so much as maps.
Zheng's giant ships -- some 122m long, five times the size of Columbus' -- would surely have left a chopstick or two in Manhattan.
They would have left more than a kung fu parlor in downtown LA. As for Zheng He's dubious British cheerleader, the author Gavin Menzies, how can he explain a detailed Chinese map of America appearing three years before his hero discovered the place, as he claims, in 1421?
The Chinese map is plainly a hoax. It not only shows North and South America as massive continents, which no sailor could possibly have known. It accurately depicts Alaska, the curve of central America and the Yucatan peninsula, not to mention the Mississippi and St Lawrence rivers. It shows Australia and the land mass of Antarctica beneath it, and New Zealand as two islands.
Even normally chauvinistic Chinese scholars have rubbished the find. They pointed out last week that the cartographic portrayal of the Earth as two circles on a flat sheet is European. The most obvious "mistake," showing California as an island, is clearly borrowed from mistakes made in 17th-century European maps.
Nor are the Chinese characters properly medieval, that for the western God postdating the arrival of Jesuit missionaries. Zheng He's 15th-century travels in the Indian Ocean were indeed sensational, but they were well authenticated. Why diminish them by faking a circumnavigation? Besides, since the map is a copy, there is no way of verifying any original.
I blame the Internet. It is an open house for boosting the egos of crackpot historians, though it does at least facilitate their demolition. Map hoaxers usually fall down not on their inaccuracy but on their accuracy. It was the correctness of the 1440 Vinland map's outline of Greenland that for many years queried its status as the first map to show North America (or at least Baffin Island). Only after much scholarship in the 1960s was its authenticity put beyond doubt. As the Vinland scholar RA Skelton asserted at the time, it remains "the only known cartographic delineation of American lands before the discoveries of Columbus and Cabot."
The Vinland map's historical origin lay in the first known settlement of modern America by outsiders, by the Viking Leif Eriksson in the early 11th century. It is described in the sagas, and archaeological remains survive at L'Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland.
Since Columbus is thought to have sailed with Bristolians (people from the port city of Bristol in western England) to Iceland and cited "the lands the Bristol captains know" in support of his own expedition, Bristol's claim to the first "discovery" of America since the Vikings remains strong.
Yet so what? As theoreticians of geography point out, it all depends what you mean by discovery. America was "found" by Siberian migrants across the Bering Strait at various times between the 30th and the 10th millennium BC. As for later contacts, a minor industry surrounds the likelihood of Phoenicians, Portuguese and other sailors being blown across the Atlantic before Columbus and never coming back. African and Brazilian rafts may have drifted back and forth carrying seeds, spores and genes with them. That Chinese or other Oriental sailors may have travelled down the coast of Canada is possible. The trouble is, they never told us so.
Discovery requires more than a verifiable fact. It requires understanding what has been discovered, being able to place this mountain, island or coast in a framework of knowledge. That is why skeptics were right to question Columbus as the "discoverer" of America, since to his dying day he was convinced he had reached part of Asia. The real discoverer was Amerigo Vespucci, whose later voyages revealed the new continent for what it was, and from whom it took its name.
Hence Daniel Boorstin's masterpiece of modern geography, The Discoverers, presented the Portuguese Prince Henry the Navigator as a true explorer, merely sitting in his Sagres castle at Cape St Vincent, debriefing his captains and filling the blanks on his maps.
When Europeans heard tell of the New World, they were disappointed to be told by Columbus that "in these islands I have so far found no human monstrosities, as many expected." It was the disappointment of imagination corrected by facts.
Such discoverers were map makers not just of place, but of science, society, economics, the human body and the human mind. In the person of Einstein, Boorstin finally found geography married to physics, "when time and space came together in a single tantalizing riddle." All scientists were geographers at heart. That is why maps are the most sacred tools of science. That is why those who fabricate and abuse them are a menace to the cause of knowledge.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS