Announcement

**Wernazuma III** · August 7, 2002, 17:34

No one suggesting changes?
Did I really get them all in their "native" spelling? I doubt that, especially for the Egyptian list. Some of those cities are from an italian historical atlas...

**Ribannah** · August 7, 2002, 20:12

For a Chinese leader: the priest Hwui Shan (sp?), who explored the Americas in the 23rd century BC.

**Gangerolf** · August 8, 2002, 07:39

Hierakonpolis

Shouldn't it be Hieraconpolis? I don't know what the native egyptian spelling is like though.

**Gangerolf** · August 8, 2002, 07:41

For a Chinese leader: the priest Hwui Shan (sp?), who explored the Americas in the 23rd century BC.

23rd century BC?

Sounds controversial to say the least

**Ribannah** · August 8, 2002, 09:35

It is well documented in the Shan Hai King by minister and later
emperor Yu, who sent out explorers to 'the four corners of the earth'.

The voyage to Fu Sang, as they called the Americas, was measured to be about 7,000 miles east of China. The priest reported that 'the cities of this country need no walls as they wage no wars'. Stone arrowheads (Folsom Points?) were returned as tribute to Emperor Yu in 2205 B.C.

I have to add though that there is some confusion whether Hwui Shan was on the first Chinese expedition to the Americas or on a later one (around 500 AD). But there seems to be little doubt that he is a real historical figure.

**Wernazuma III** · August 8, 2002, 12:20

I agree with Gangerolf. This sounds like taking Atlantis for fact.

In reply to Gangerolf: The ancient Agyptians themselves didn't call the city Hierac/konpolis at all. It's a Greek name. As I've transcribed "kappa" as k in the Greek city list, I decided to do it here too.

**Ribannah** · August 8, 2002, 13:55

Some day you'll have to do that, too.

However, Plato did not describe the exact position of Atlantis, or its coast, or the landscape with rivers and mountains that match exactly what we now know about Atlantis, or the minerals that are found, or the adobe houses of the Atlantians and their way of life, and he didn't leave anchor stones and coins nor did he teach them agriculture, writing or the bow & arrow. Neither do we have legends told by the Atlantians of how they were visited by other peoples from beyond the ocean before the white people arrived.

**Lord Merciless** · August 8, 2002, 15:24

Fu Sang was an ancient Chinese name for Japan, who lies 700 miles out to the sea from China.

The Hwui Shan existed. However, he didn't discover America, but merely brought Japan into contact with China. Beginning from 620AD, Japanese sent scores of delegations study the Chinese culture. For example, their former capital Kyoto was modelled after Chang An.

**Wernazuma III** · August 8, 2002, 15:39

I won't reply to this after this post, as this really isn't the place. But all this sounds more like the work of someone who wants to "proove" something at all cost, disregarding the million arguments against it, founding it on 3 lines in an old account and 2 items. The teaching of writing and agriculture is the most ridiculous in all this, beside the early date...

Lord Merciless' reply does sound reasonable though.

**History Guy** · August 8, 2002, 17:01

Ribannah-- There is no evidence at all that he ever visited America. Indeed, it is highly improbable.

**Ribannah** · August 8, 2002, 18:19

Well, it seems funny to me that you think the idea of the Chinese reaching the Americas is so outrageous, while they had the equipment and the thrive to do it. The Buddhist priests made much further journeys than that to spread their belief.
Also, like I said, most of the original report has been saved.
It can be found in the Imperial Archives in Beijing, where it was studied by - who else - Jesuit priests.

But like Wernazuma III says, this should be discussed in another thread.

Lord Merciless, Hwui Shan's description of mountains and rivers does not match the geography of Japan.

Fu Sang is not an ancient name for Japan. It's the Chinese name for the Mulberry tree, which grows in China (and Japan) but also in Honduras and Guatemala. Japan was well known and already had a name, the newly discovered land still needed one.

**Ribannah** · August 8, 2002, 18:24

Oops double post.

**DarkCloud** · August 8, 2002, 19:15

The voyage to Fu Sang, as they called the Americas, was measured to be about 7,000 miles east of China. The priest reported that 'the cities of this country need no walls as they wage no wars'. Stone arrowheads (Folsom Points?) were returned as tribute to Emperor Yu in 2205 B.C.

60 minutes or whatever show that was on never proved that.

It is likely, supposedly, they possibly could have, but why would they have? We're talking about an amazingly advanced civilization that could have developed gunpowder, but did not have the necessity to...

Also, like I said, most of the original report has been saved.
It can be found in the Imperial Archives in Beijing, where it was studied by - who else - Jesuit priests.

The report I heard was that information was only found 20 years ago by some strange person who had a strange theory

(Now please note: I don't discount that the Chinese MAY HAVE reach N. America... The question is why they would have even tried... They had indonesia and Australia even closer (although the winds weren't exactly favorable there)

And just so you don't think I'm slamming the chinese, I know they visited Constantinople, etc. during the roman ages... As well as reaching the tip of africa...
But the main question is why they would travel 7000 miles the other way when they could easily go east? They had no need.

**Lord Merciless** · August 8, 2002, 19:21

Originally posted by Ribannah

Fu Sang is not an ancient name for Japan. It's the Chinese name for the Mulberry tree, which grows in China (and Japan) but also in Honduras and Guatemala. Japan was well known and already had a name, the newly discovered land still needed one.

I'm ethnically Chinese and know my NATIVE language better than you.

Announcement

Extra Pack, Existing Civs, part 4: Egypt, Babylonia, China

Extra Pack, Existing Civs, part 4: Egypt, Babylonia, China

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment