When I looked up articles about Colombia in the Encyclopedia Britannica, I encountered some problems. I telephoned Professor Chen Qiaoyi, a historical geographer, and mentioned the viewpoint of the book China People Discovered America (hereinafter referred to as Discovery). Professor Chen is certainly familiar with this situation. He pointed out that to prove that China people discovered and entered the American continent, we should not only rely on circumstantial evidence, but also have direct proof and publish it in regular academic journals. He knows that there are many articles in this field. He pointed out that the information quoted from the famous American magazine NaionalGeographic like Discovery is not an academic magazine. Because Discovery is not an academic monograph in the strict sense, and I am a layman, I have no right to speak about it, so I can only stop here. What I want to say is that in the process of reading Discovery, I feel that some places related to agriculture in the book are problematic, which is not conducive to demonstrating that China people have arrived in the New World many times in a row. It is divided into the following three aspects:
2011-04-10 20: 22 reply
King Wuling of Zhao
82nd floor, hardcore member.
First, about Xiaomi.
"Discovery" quoted a Chinese article "Xuanyuan Huangdi Tusi" published in National Geographic 199 1 (Volume 180). It is said that this picture has been circulated among people in Ditongo village in Iroquois, North America for a long time. According to Discovery, the part related to animals and plants in the picture is: "The chief in Xuanyuan. Plants include Chinese fir, cypress, hibiscus, corn, especially millet. As we all know, Xiaomi originated in the Banpo clan period in China, and it was found in the "Xuanyuan Huangdi Toast" by Iroquois in North America, which was thought-provoking. " These seven kinds of plants are realistic, except for woody Chinese fir and juniper, the other five kinds are herbs, with corn as the most typical, with prominent corn cob at the waist, flowering tassels at the top and corn leaves. The other four plants are obviously dicotyledons. In any case, they are not monocotyledonous millet, but they have nothing to do with millet. How did the author identify them as Xiaomi? If there are only words without pictures, readers will fully believe that the author's introduction is very short.
In my opinion, this crop, which is mistaken for millet, may be edible amaranth. The amaranth we eat every day is vegetable amaranth, which is native to Asia. The amaranth in The Yellow Emperor's toast in Xuanyuan is edible amaranth (A. caudatus), also known as grain amaranth. Originated in South America, the Peruvian Andes is a food crop domesticated by local Indians in their early years. South American Indian language is "Quihuicha" and English is "Inca wheat". Incas are a branch of Indians, mainly distributed in Peru. However, edible amaranth is also distributed in southwest China, such as Yunnan and Yunnan ethnic minorities. It is called "Tianxiong Rice" or "Amaranth Rice", which was mistakenly recorded as "indica rice" by the Han people when they visited. There is also planting in the northwest, which is called "millet valley". I wonder if it's the same species.
The author of Discovery only introduced five of the seven plants: Chinese fir, juniper, hibiscus, corn and millet (probably edible amaranth), and the other two were not introduced. I think one of them is a bit like pumpkin, which is also the origin of South America, but I'm not sure. The other is like taro antiquorum, but taro was introduced to America only in the16th century, and it is unlikely to enter the prayer map. I found that there are actually more than seven kinds of plants in the picture, and there are some branches and leaves behind the corn plants, which are beyond recognition. A * * * should have eight kinds of plants.
After denying the so-called "millet" in Pray for the Year, a very important question arises: Since there is no millet in Pray for the Year, how can we explain that the Yin people who have been repeatedly textual researched in the book have crossed to South America? The book Discovery says that after the Shang and Zhou Dynasties were cut by Zhou Wuwang,
2011-04-10 20: 22 reply
King Wuling of Zhao
83rd Floor, Core Members
"The mysterious disappearance of 250,000 elite soldiers left behind in Dongyi area and their families has become a major unsolved case in the early history of the Chinese nation. ..... Just as Yin Jun disappeared in Dongyi, the Austrian-Murk civilization suddenly rose in Yucatan Peninsula in Central America ... In addition, there are many close ties in linguistics, philology and folklore, which just confirmed the same view that there should be a major cultural and ethnic exchange event between the two continents ... "
As we all know, the Yin people lived on millet. When they go out to sea on a large scale (whether hundreds of thousands of people are likely to sail at sea or not), it is the minimum common sense to carry enough food (millet) with them. After arriving in a new place and settling down, the first important thing is to cultivate farmland in order to produce the food you need. Even if there are other edible foods in the local area, it is difficult to change the millet you are used to. Moreover, millet is not only food, but also a gift from ancestors. How can you give up easily?
Later, when Wu Yue people and Xu Fudong visited Japan, they both brought rice seeds. Calling rice "ィネ" in Japanese is opposite to "Yi Slow" in Vietnamese, just like American corn was introduced to Europe and brought to India. The book Discovery also demonstrates that Xu Fu and his party finally arrived in America. If millet and rice are introduced into South America, there should be corresponding loanwords reflected in Indian languages. "Discovery" says that there are millet in the "Year Prayer Map", which proves that the Yin people crossed South America eastward. Unfortunately, there is no millet in the Year Prayer Map, and the narrative is empty.
2011-04-10 20: 23 reply
King Wuling of Zhao
84th Floor, Core Members
Second, the question of Fusang.
The five plants introduced in Discovery, Chinese fir, juniper, hibiscus, corn and millet, are not only amaranth but also hibiscus. Fusang is a common noun in ancient books, which is controversial. It is not only a place name, but also a plant. Of course, the place name is taken from this plant, but it is also possible that Fusang is only a Chinese transliteration of the place name, so it is considered that Fusang is a transliteration of "Fuji" in Japan. "Discovery" quoted "the mountain scenery of JD.COM" as saying: "It is 500 miles south and 300 miles quicksand. As for the mountain that has not been licked. Looking at the young sea in the south and the purlin in the east, [or hibiscus], there is no vegetation and windy. This is a mountain with a width of one hundred miles. " In fact, "Shan Hai Jing Overseas East longitude" simply said Fusang: "There are Fusang on the Tang Valley, bathing on the 10 th, in the north of Tooth." Those who live in the water have big trees, living in the lower branch for nine days and living in the upper branch for one day. "Guo Pu notes that Fusang is a supporting wood (the author presses it, so it is also a purlin), so supporting wood has nothing to do with mulberry. However, it was not until Dong Fangshuo's Ten Kingdoms in the Eastern Han Dynasty that Mu Fu was described as "leaves like mulberry trees, several thousands of feet long and twenty yards big". The two are born from the same root and more dependent, hence the name Fusang. " Xu Shen and Guo Pu came to a conclusion. The so-called roots in pairs are difficult to understand unless it is a scene in which vines (such as mulberry leaves) are wrapped around a big tree.
"Discovery" is based on the words quoted in Shan Hai Jing, and also on the fact that there is a huge carved rock in Paracas Mountain in South America, and the carved image looks like mulberry (? ), that is, putting Oracle Bone Inscriptions's mulberry characters under Mo Yan's pictures, and combining the 52nd picture in the book, it shows that there are mulberry trees in China and South America, which is obviously far-fetched.
In addition, because there are only two kinds of woody plants in Praying for the Year, it was explained that one is Chinese fir, the other is juniper, and the other five are herbs. Then where is this thousands of feet Fusang? If one of Chinese fir and juniper is hibiscus, which one is wrong? Judging from their plant shapes, they are not like mulberry, but like Chinese fir and juniper.
The title of the 5 1 picture in the book is "Ten-day Fusang Map of Mexico and the Eastern United States", but the source of this picture is not explained. The title was obviously added by the author. The hibiscus tree in the picture has three thick roots, like three pillars. The central trunk is divided into nine branches, four on the left and five on the right. The left half of the tree and branches are shaded and the right half is white. On the three branches on the left side of the tree, there is a bird, three * * *. Seems to represent the sun (the sun)? There are no birds on the branch on the right. Since it is 10 (Ukraine), why is it only the third place (Ukraine)? This tree is an abstract painting, which is different from the realistic painting of plants in the picture of praying for the New Year. Of course, this tree is not like mulberry or any other tree. How does this picture reflect the "Ten-Day Fusang" in China's ancient books?
There are more than 65,438+0,400 species of Moraceae. Mulberry in ancient China refers to one of Mulberry 16 species. Mulberry trees in Oracle Bone Inscriptions are sericulture. How can it be equivalent to a mulberry-like tree carved on Mo Yan in South America?
Third, the problem of peanuts, broad beans, sesame seeds and corn.
In the first chapter of Discovery, the "fact" of the ancient crop exchange between China and the United States was demonstrated in quite a few words, saying: "In the 1960s, six peanuts were found in the ruins of Jiangxi and Zhejiang four thousand years ago in China. As we all know, peanuts originated in America, so it can be inferred that there was contact between China and America in ancient times. In addition, many plant seeds were found with rice in the ruins of Qianshanyang and Shuitianfan in Liangzhu culture four or five thousand years ago. Among them, peanuts, sesame seeds and broad beans have been identified, among which peanuts have been carbonized and shaped like small seeds. (page 155 of Archaeological Discovery and Research in New China compiled by the Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences thinks that carbonized peanuts have been around for 5000 years. It is believed that peanuts originated in America, but why did peanuts exist in Liangzhu cultural site four or five thousand years ago? Without China people as the medium, they could not easily cross the ocean. In recent years, a Guiyan stone tomb in Mao Wen, Sichuan Province during the Han and Wei Dynasties was excavated. Among the relics found were corn cobs (1983 1 1.5). The article "Two Characteristics of China's Communication with the United States" in Beijing Evening News pointed out that "there are corn in the tombs of Han and Wei Dynasties, ... corn originated in the American continent. In fact, China's herbal medicine and local records were planted and spread in China during the Tang and Song Dynasties. This is an important material evidence that people who come back from the United States can only plant seeds in China by bringing them back to China, and then gradually spread them after adapting to the soil and climate conditions, otherwise they will never cross the Pacific Ocean. "
Archaeologists were not familiar with some plant seeds unearthed from Liangzhu cultural site in the 1950 s, so they sent them to the departments of agriculture and horticulture of Zhejiang Agricultural College for identification. The teachers in the department are all engaged in modern agricultural scientific research, have not been exposed to unearthed seeds and have no archaeological knowledge. They can only compare the appearance of seeds with today's seeds and identify them, but the tone of identification is not very sure. When it was published, it became a very positive conclusion, and when it was published in newspapers and periodicals, it became the basis for domestic and foreign peers to quote, and it still is. In fact, there were articles in the newspapers and periodicals at that time that experts and scholars doubted, but they did not conform to the ethos of "the sooner the better" and "patriotism", and few people paid attention to them. After 1980, the academic atmosphere developed normally, and some people wrote articles to refute and correct peanuts, broad beans and sesame seeds one by one, which was also recognized by the archaeological community. However, the book "Discovery" still only quotes the early literature, ignoring the later literature, and of course it will fall into a misunderstanding. As for the problem of corn, citing the unreliable news hype of Beijing Evening News will not only help to prove corn, sunflower, tomato, tobacco and so on. "It's people who come back from the United States. They bring the seeds back to China before they can be planted in China." On the contrary, it is a pity to add materials without scientific basis to the discovery out of thin air and dilute the very valuable research materials in the book.
This article is not a complete denial of discovery. Any excellent book will inevitably have some shortcomings or mistakes. This book summarizes a large number of powerful argumentation materials, which is very enlightening and valuable for further screening and research. However, due to the wide range of content, understanding and identification are beyond my knowledge. The author only talks about some views from the perspective of agriculture. The author feels that there is a kind of imprecise atmosphere in the current academic circles, that is, the more materials beneficial to his own views, the better, no matter whether it is reliable or not, even if it is unreasonable; Even if the material that is not conducive to your point of view is correct, you will turn a blind eye and discard it because it does not conform to your point of view. I think this may be one of the reasons why Professor Chen emphasized publishing in regular academic journals.
This is copied from other places.