View Full Version : china may have beaten columbus

01-13-2003, 02:14 PM
nothing new, but it's not being more widely publicized -- the middle kingdom may have been the first to "discover" the americas:



01-13-2003, 02:21 PM
There have been at least 2 claims of Chinese explorers getting to the New World before Columbus or the Chinese fleet mentioned in the article.

1) Hsi and Ho @ 2640 BC
2) Hui Shun @458 AD

Check out this, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_medical/story.jsp?story=358001 perhaps when the Chinese got here they saw white faces?????????????????

01-13-2003, 03:07 PM
didnt they "discover"/ reach south africa before the dutch too?

Crimson Phoenix
01-13-2003, 03:45 PM
they also invented BJJ before the brazilians too :D

01-13-2003, 03:52 PM
lol @ Crimson Phoenix

Like the Rabid Sinophiles on this forum need any encouragement in their campaign to have Chinese culture recognized as the Uhr-culture of all humanity.

01-13-2003, 04:25 PM
The only thing I really disliked about that story was Menzie's assertion that "it's unarguable that China got to the Americas before the Europeans did.'" Since when are Vikings not European? Many people beat Columbus but most of those weren't interested in establishing longstanding colonies. Plus many of the previous groups weren't the nuts for maintaining a written record that he was and so... kids are still taught 1492 and Columbus as the discovery despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

David Jamieson
01-13-2003, 04:36 PM
The Norse made it to North America about 1000 years before Columbus.

The Chinese made it on the Pacific side at about the same time.

The problem is the European history record which is always favouring the Spanish, The British, The French and the Portugese.

Now in their own time they were certainly big on exploration, but when held up to the reality of times message they were just mere secondary players to the true ancient explorers.


01-13-2003, 04:56 PM
For those interested in doing a little internet research here is a partial list of expleditions that some historians claim predate Columbus':

1) Hsi and Ho (Chinese) 2640 BCE

2) Votan, Wixepecocha, Sume, and Bochia (Indian) 800-400 BCE

3) Hui Shun (Chinese) 458

4) St. Brendan (Irish) 550

5) Bjarni Herjulfson (Norse) 986

6) Leif Ericson (Norse) 1003

7) Thorvald Ericson (Norse) 1004

8) Thorfinn Karlsefni (Norse) 1010

9) Prince Madog Ab Owain Gwynedd (Welsh) 1170, 1190

10)King Abubakari II (Malian) 1311

11)Paul Knutson (Norwegian) 1356

12)Johannes Scolp and Joao Vaz Corte Real (Danish and Portuguese) 1476

Some seem to be more credible than others.

David Jamieson
01-13-2003, 05:52 PM
Well, the Welsh claim is bogus and was used in the 1600's in order to for the British to lay claim to the lands over the Spanish or the French by making the claim.

But, we all know how that turned out in the end :D


Chang Style Novice
01-13-2003, 06:12 PM
Whether Chinese explorers made it to the new world or not is pretty irrelevant as a matter of historical importance. Colonization and cultural fusion began in earnest with the Spaniards and Portuguese and later other Europeans. And in terms of what actually went down, that's what matters.

It's like saying that the Dogon people knew about that binary star in Sirius. Yeah, they did. But so what?

The Willow Sword
01-13-2003, 06:12 PM
The AMERICAS were discovered even long before that.

you Morons.

duhhh oh geee we never thought of that:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

01-13-2003, 06:20 PM
Kill the savages.

01-13-2003, 06:22 PM
you Morons

Actually I did make reference to aboriginal people living in America, so save your name calling and thumbs down for another thread.

The question, in light of that article, is whether the Asians crossing the landbridge between Asia and Alaska were the first. That article would have one believe that Caucasians from Europe somehow arrived long before the Asia to America migration. It would definitely put a spin on things if the "Native Americans" aka American Indians did the same thing to the original(?) Caucasian inhabitants that was later done to them.

The Willow Sword
01-13-2003, 06:26 PM
being part indian i can safely say that all this crap about who discovered america first and who was here way before him or her or whomthe fuk ever is MORONIC and totally Naive.

ill bet they have threads in europe about who discovered europe first,,the aliens or the atlantians.:rolleyes:


(CSN posted here and i dont think he is a moron,,just to make that clear:D )

01-13-2003, 06:30 PM

01-13-2003, 06:39 PM
Nobody is even using the word 'discovered' without quotation marks around it for the very fact that we know that people were here when the explorers arrived. You have to learn to calm down, read, and ask questions before assuming you know what people do or do not know.

being part indian i can safely say that all this crap about who discovered america first and who was here way before him or her or whomthe fuk ever is MORONIC and totally Naive.

The man with the 13000 year old skull of a Caucasian women found in the Americas would have something to say about that since the previous "oldest skull discovered in North America" had Mongoloid characteristics and was 2000 years younger.

I never said the research was spot on, and I expected casual conversation about the theory. What I didn't expect is that enormous chip on your shoulder.

Way to be pleasant. :rolleyes:

David Jamieson
01-13-2003, 07:05 PM

part "indian"? :D

I'd just like to say that the world is older than any culture and it will be here and we will all change again and again.


The Willow Sword
01-13-2003, 07:59 PM
The man with the 13000 year old skull of a Caucasian women found in the Americas would have something to say about that since the previous "oldest skull discovered in North America" had Mongoloid characteristics and was 2000 years younger.

There is a sucker born every minute;)

01-13-2003, 09:24 PM
Says the former Shaolin-Do guy :D

01-13-2003, 09:42 PM
Willow Sword,

I keep re-reading this thread, and I honestly can't figure out what set you off?

I'll say it again, nobody used the word <discover> without putting it in quotes, those weren't typos. That meant that the word <discover> was not to be taken literally (a silent way of acknowledging that they couldn't discover that which had already been discovered). It was a pleasant conversation throwing about intermingling odd historical legends and facts regarding exploration of the Americas. The mention of the 12000 year old skull was introduced as theory not fact, and I intentionally referred to the theory as the "author's beliefs".

You call me a moron for not knowing that the 'indians' (as you call them) were present in the Americas prior to the arrival of any of the explorers mentioned in the thread. Not true, I 've known it for quite some time and I even posted a link in this thread that mentioned that the 'indians' showed up 10000 years ago @8000BCE which is a lot earlier than anybody on the list (2640BCE being the oldest).

You call me naive, even though I warned that the credibility of some of the expeditions mentioned on the list is questionable.

You called me a sucker, when I posted that the 12000 year old skull was just one man's theory. In fact, I never once said that I believed that the skull proved anything, instead I referred to the "author's beliefs".

So I never disrespected you or your 'indian' heritage, but you went out of your way to disrespect me and then stuck with it, instead of being big enough to say, "I'm sorry, I read more into the posts than was there."

What's the problem?, because it isn't in this thread.

01-14-2003, 01:18 AM

no one's ever accused willow of being the brightest bulb in the chandelier. his panties are bunched up for some reason unrelated to this thread. he ignores the quotations point, even though that is how i started this thread -- with quotes around discover. oh well. :rolleyes:


that was one of the best comeback quips this forum has ever seen. i hereby give you tomorrow off. enjoy your day of rest.

The Willow Sword
01-14-2003, 12:00 PM
yeah that was a real good comeback:rolleyes:

thats a dead thread,,,dont try to ressurect it.

What sets me off about a thread like this is the notion that other nations claim some sort of birthright or take credit for "discovering" this continent when it was the more than 600 nations of natives peoples stretching down into southamerica that blanketed this land.

True that seafaring nations such as the norsemen and the Phonecians came over here,,,but these were not conquering war mongers set out to claim the "new" land,,they were merely passing through.

oh and FYI "coloumbus" did not land on the northamerican coast,
his little band of happy spaniards landed in what is now called the carribeans where he met the TAIYEENO people and rendered them extinct.
later on the other conquistadores such as cortez hit the mexican coastline,,and ponce de leon hit the florida coastline.

there are old "what seem to be" celtic ruins on the east coast and go in as far as Kentucky(where i am from)
and the "Serpent mound" of the ohio state,,in case you didnt know, is another older celtic ruin that the native peoples of that region do not claim as their own.

there is an ORAL tradition that has been handed down for a long time amongst these peoples and it is almost lost.
but we have these archeologists and so called scientists digging up these peoples grandmothers and coming to these far fetched conclusions about life over here.
If the chinese did come over here there is NO evidence or oral history amongst the people to chronicle it.
i apologize for calling some of you "morons" but you have to understand about the native mindset when it comes to matters like these and discussions like these.
yes KUNG LEK i am "PART" Native american,,,Cherokee and Iroquois to be exact(it is documented in my mothers family)
and being one who has grown up and being raised in the spiritual ways and teachings of these peoples it touches a nerve when i see and hear the term "discovery" of this land.


01-14-2003, 02:52 PM
Yes, it's probably a bad idea to bring up SD on this thread, but it does bother me that someone with your history would call people "suckers". Talk about hypocritical. But if it bothers you so much, I'll leave that part of your past alone ;)

If the chinese did come over here there is NO evidence or oral history amongst the people to chronicle it.

Really. How would you know there's no evidence? Did you read the book and research his claims? Did you contact(or try to contact) the individuals the author did? Have you contacted every Native American tribe in North America and learned about their handed down histories?

Also, you bash people about not stating the obvious which is common knowledge. Everyone knows the native Americans were here first. It's why we call them "Native" Americans. And why can't someone use the word "discover"? It's not like everyone knew what was over here. To them is was very much a "dicovery". You just need to not take things so personally. No one's implied anything even a bit insulting about the Native Americans.

01-14-2003, 02:59 PM
To everyone else, sorry about taking this a bit off topic. I guess I do have some overall "problems" with TWS outside of this thread(and it's not entirely 'cause of Shaolin-Do). I'll try to set those aside from now on. Heck if I actually met him in person I might actually like the guy :D I think this is an interesting topic and I'd hate to see it degrade into a flame war :P

The Willow Sword
01-14-2003, 03:19 PM
Really. How would you know there's no evidence? Did you read the book and research his claims? Did you contact(or try to contact) the individuals the author did? Have you contacted every Native American tribe in North America and learned about their handed down histories


or better yet,,,Does any native american tribe give this joker ANY credit for his "Theories"? i certainly didnt see any.

and as for me "contactacting every native american tribe in north america and learned about thier handed down histories."

:rolleyes: not even going to reply to that one.

Oh so Brad has some problems with me "outside od SD" hahah well take a number and get in line Brad,,,i will open the "lets take a shot at TWS" booth sometime around noon:rolleyes:

01-14-2003, 03:36 PM

honestly, no one here really cares who came first. this is a pure novelty that i posted to foster some light discussion. if you're ****ed off that other people like this book's author make claims as such, whoopdie ****. take it up with those who are making the claims.

the notion that columbus was the first here was disproved long ago -- the first time a first-grader asked his teacher, "but how could columbus have discubbered merica if the injuns were already here?" the fact that columbus didn't hit the main continent has been known for years. the fact that the norse beat him by a longshot is common knowledge. the idea that other cultures hit up the westside has long been in circulation, be it from polynesia, mainland asia or anywhere else.

you seem to take this a bit personally, assuming some kind of first people's status makes your opinion any more valid on this issue than anyone else's. fact is, no one knows when the specific ancestors of native peoples came over here anyway. there were several opportunities, so who's to say that those who founded the tribes you trace yourself back to came here with first batch?

there is no legitimate pride in being first, other than one can claim that his or her ancestors were the first folks to say, "****, it's cold here. let's go somewhere else."

the going argument is that every one of us hatched from the same batch, the eldest example of which i believe was found in ethiopia. i guess that means we're all tied.

except eulerfan. being a woman, she's from another planet entirely. :)

back to columbus -- his kindness toward those he labeled as "indians" was a bit lacking, and those tribes that encountered him suffered badly. columbus day has less to do with christopher columbus as it does with the beginning of an influx of europeans to this continent -- an influx that was the start of this whole country. if america was dominated by and based on the cultures of native peoples, we still might have a columbus day, but it'd be more to celebrate the day he was killed for being a thief, liar, possible murderer, etc. america, and the world, would be a wholly different place had that influx not happened, but it did, and columbus was set aside as an easy icon.

01-14-2003, 03:48 PM
hmmm, interesting, but I think the Norse have them both beat. ;)

Not to nitpick here Willow, but those "celtic" ruins are actually supposedly "nordic" ruins. There is common confusion since the Celts were almost as bad as the romans in pillaging another cultures beliefs and arts.

01-14-2003, 04:00 PM

No I haven't. I never said he was right or wrong.
I should've known you'd roll you eyes. God forbid the mighty TWS should have to explain his childish insults. Try acting like an adult for once in your life and backing up your arguements. Your entire argument boils down to this so far:

1.There maybe some old "celtic" ruins in Kentucky
2.Serpent mound in Ohio
3.Columbus landed in the Carribian
4.You're part "Indian"

What any of this has to do with Chinese posibly landing in North America is beyond me.

The Willow Sword
01-14-2003, 05:57 PM

01-14-2003, 08:20 PM
Anyway, back to the topic, have any of you read the book yet? If so, what were your thoughts? There's a big display for it at B&N here, so I thought about picking up a copy this weekend.

01-14-2003, 11:50 PM

if you do, please share your thoughts. i'm kinda tired of books like this being reviewed solely by those in the industry who have something to gain or lose with each different opinion and, thus, often ignore the important stuff and focus on the petty (i work for a uni, so i see it day in, day out from the faculty; silly faculty :p).

anyhoo, share your thoughts if/when. :)

01-15-2003, 04:18 AM
- it came as a Christmas present.

I love the blurb inside the cover. Roughly, it says that "in 1421 the Chinese Emporer built the largest fleet of ships the world has ever seen. 500 ocean-going junks, each of 500 feet length. Their mission was to sail to sail to the lands beyond the ****hest seas to collect royal tribute from whosoever they found there."

The audacity!

I only started reading the text last night so can't review it so much.
1. It certainly contains a lot of details, references and the like.
2. It seems to be written in a vaguely nauseating mood of excitement that, so far, I don't share. This seems mainly in order to hype the idea that the author/researcher is smashing a belief that we all hold - Columbus blah blah. Which we don't.
3. Despite the points in 2, the story of the fleet's journey should be interesting. I've skipped through and seen many maps, plates and such which show the route taken over the Earth in great detail. I can't wait to read about it all.

BTW, you guys are being cruel to TWS - you have no right to rationalise away his points as if he shouldn't have said anything. You are guilty as charged and only made it seem otherwise by some exceptional uses of guile and sophistry. Enough! I shan't read this thread again so better rant in pm's! :D

01-15-2003, 09:55 AM
Supposedly there is a map of the east coast of north america in a monestary in Ireland that predates Columbo and Vespucci. I've seen enough evidence to be convinced the Chinese and the Vikings got here before Columbo.

10-11-2021, 09:32 AM
Goodbye, Columbus? Here's what Indigenous Peoples' Day means to Native Americans

October 11, 20213:47 AM ET
Emma Bowman

Protesters marched in an Indigenous Peoples Day rally in Boston on Oct. 10, 2020, as part of a demonstration to change Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples' Day. Boston made that change last week.
Erin Clark/Boston Globe via Getty Images
This year marks the first time a U.S. president has officially recognized Indigenous Peoples' Day.

President Biden issued a proclamation on Friday to observe this Oct. 11 as a day to honor Native Americans, their resilience and their contributions to American society throughout history, even as they faced assimilation, discrimination and genocide spanning generations. The move shifts focus from Columbus Day, the federal holiday celebrating Christopher Columbus, which shares the same date as Indigenous Peoples' Day this year.

Dylan Baca, a 19-year-old Arizonan who was instrumental in helping broker the proclamation, is overwhelmed by the gravity of Biden's action.

"I still don't think I've fully absorbed what that has meant," he said. "This is a profound thing the president has done, and it's going to mean a lot to so many people."

Four years ago, the Native leader started an organization alongside Arizona state Sen. Jamescita Peshlakai, Indigenous Peoples' Initiative, with a similar mission: to tell a more positive and more accurate tale of Native Americans by replacing Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples' Day.

What is Indigenous Peoples' Day?
Indigenous Peoples' Day advocates say the recognition helps correct a "whitewashed" American history that has glorified Europeans like Italian explorer Christopher Columbus who have committed violence against Indigenous communities. Native Americans have long criticized the inaccuracies and harmful narratives of Columbus' legacy that credited him with his "discovery" of the Americas when Indigenous people were there first.

"It is difficult to grapple with the complete accomplishments of individuals and also the costs of what those accomplishments came at," said Mandy Van Heuvelen, the cultural interpreter coordinator at the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian.

There are no set rules on how one should appreciate the day, said Van Heuvelen, a member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe from South Dakota. It's all about reflection, recognition, celebration and an education.

"It can be a day of reflection of our history in the United States, the role Native people have played in it, the impacts that history has had on native people and communities, and also a day to gain some understanding of the diversity of Indigenous peoples," she said.

The idea was first proposed by Indigenous peoples at a United Nations conference in 1977 held to address discrimination against Natives, as NPR has reported. But South Dakota became the first state to replace Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples day in 1989, officially celebrating it the following year.

Biden's proclamation signifies a formal adoption of a day that a growing number of states and cities have come to acknowledge. Last week, Boston joined Arizona, Oregon, Texas, Louisiana, Washington, D.C., and several other states in dedicating a second Monday in October to Indigenous Peoples' Day. Native Americans have borne the brunt of the work to make that happen.

Many state and local governments have gone a step further. More than a dozen states and well over 100 cities celebrate the day, with many of them having altogether dropped the holiday honoring Columbus to replace it with Indigenous Peoples' Day.

What might seem to some like a simple name change can lead to real social progress for Indigenous Americans, said Van Heuvelen.

"What these changes accomplish, piece by piece, is visibility for Native people in the United States," she said. "Until Native people are or are fully seen in our society and in everyday life, we can't accomplish those bigger changes. As long as Native people remain invisible, it's much more easier for people to look past those real issues and those real concerns within those communities."

What about Columbus Day?
Columbus Day remains a federal holiday that gives federal government employees the day off from work.

The day was first founded as a way to appreciate the mistreatment of Italian Americans, and Congress eventually made it a federal holiday in 1934.

"Italian American culture is important, and I think there are other times and places to recognize that. But I think it's also important to also recognize the history of Columbus Day itself," said Baca. "Should we recognize a man whose labors killed children, killed women and decimated the Native American population here? I don't think that is something that we want to be honored."

Monday marks Oregon's first statewide recognition of Indigenous Peoples' Day, in place of Columbus Day, after its legislature passed a bill brought by its Indigenous lawmakers. Rep. Tawna Sanchez, one of those lawmakers, says the movement to recognize the day is an ideal time to capitalize on the momentum of political recognition.

"I don't know that we'll ever get to a place where people have their land back or have the recognition of who they are, to the degree that we that we need to or should. But the fact that people are paying attention at this very moment that's important, because we will have a greater opportunity to educate people and help them understand why we are where we are right now," she said.

"History is always written by the conqueror," said Sanchez. "How do we actually tell the truth about what happened and where we sit this very moment? How do we go forward from here?"

We don't have a Columbus Day Or Indigenous Peoples' Day thread so this will do.