🚀 go-pugleaf

Duncan Craig (dunkers@king.cts.com) wrote on Sat, 24 Oct 1998 10:13:24 -0700:
:      (snipped)

: > Considering the majority of the East Indian sites, are conducted by East
: > Indians and/or have Indian University involement nowdays , the mindset
: > would be leaning towards Pre-Colubian voyages, since that would raise the
: > prestige of the Indians. Sort of like English historians claims on Roger Bacon
: > coming up with gunpowder independent of the East....

: Good point.

I don't see it this way.

: That's why I find it curious that in 1984, Beijing Universitys
: leading historian vehemently denied Chinese excursions to the New World prior to
: Columbus (L.A. Times, April 18, 1984).
: Duncan

I cannot speak for the Chinese scholar. But what is yours or Oscar's point
exactly?

You both imply that Chinese and/or Indians may have some prior bias. This
is debatable. Perhaps they have a bias, but which way, and how strong?

Even if they do have a bias for precolumbian contacts, I certainly don't
think it's large enough to make a difference. The biggest factor here is
ignorance. Very few people _anywhere_ are aware of these theories.

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=- Toronto -=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku

The USA is so enormous, and so numerous are its schools, colleges and  
religious seminaries, many devoted to special religious beliefs ranging
from the unorthodox to the dotty, that we can hardly wonder at its     
yielding a more bounteous harvest of gobbledygook than the rest of the 
world put together.                                                    
         -- Sir Peter Medawar