Now that you have survived Y2K, it's time to take a Pop Quiz!<br><a
href=http://www.chinapage.org/quiz.html
target=new>http://www.chinapage.org/quiz.html</a><br><br>Happy New Year to All!

Dear Ming and all members of this
club,<br><br>Happy new year to you all. <br><br>Ming, I took the
test and I passed. Chinese people are lucky to have
two New Year Days. What about Germany, Japan ,
Indonesia and other countries ? May be some members can
tell us their new year customs.<br><br>Julian.

I found an interesting website on Chu
culture:<br><a href=http://chudu.hb.cninfo.net/
target=new>http://chudu.hb.cninfo.net/</a><br>It has an article about the
earliest Dao De Jing
from Guo Dian (as posted by Takaki san). It is well
worth reading.<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Thanks Sesame_a  <br>Your contributions will be welcome.<br><br>Ming

Thanks Sesame_a  <br>Your contributions will be welcome.<br><br>Ming

Thanks Sesame_a  <br>Your contributions will be welcome.<br><br>Ming

Thanks Sesame_a  <br>Your contributions will be welcome.<br><br>Ming

Last year there was a major exhibit at the
Metropolitan Museum, featuring a painting called the River
Bank. The painting stirred up quite a bit of
controversy. We had discussed it at the time See Msg# 366,370,
etc.<br>Because of the controversy, the Met Museum organized a
special Symposium on Dec 11,1999 just to debate this
painting.<br><br>I saw the painting, but did not attend the
symposium. There is now a rather long report about this
symposium by Mr. Horsley, who is very hostile to the
painting and the Museum.<br>You can read his article
at:<br><a href=http://www.thecityreview.com/symposium.html
target=new>http://www.thecityreview.com/symposium.html</a><br><br>Ming

Dear Ming,<br><br>I received an email from Mr.
Horsley earlier too on this matter. Zhang Daqian has his
own merit of being a superior artist. Unfortunately
Chinese art (or almost any other art except pop art)
always receive insufficient attention unless it is
antique. <br><br>SL Lee

Dear Ming & Siu-Leung<br><br>I was dismayed, nay,
shocked when I read an article about the debate at the
Met. Museum accusing Zhang Daqian of forgery some two
weeks ago while on an air-flight. Some years back at
the Taipeh Museum, I had acquired several books of
Zhang's paintings, which I felt to be reflective of
traditional Chinese landscape. <br><br>In Mr. Carter
Horsley's analysis of the debate, he went even to the
extent of suggesting the possibility of Prof. Wen Fong,
C.C. Wang and Zhang Daqian of conspiring to defraud
the museum.<br>To me, this sort of blatant suggestion
is a subtle form of character assassination. This is
the fundalmental weakness in the American democracy
where some-one can suggest all sorts of negative
possibilities about another person. Casting such aspersions in
a situation that cannot be verified either way is
bad taste.<br><br>I hope readers will accept facts
and delegate the negative parts of Mr. Horsley's
comments to the waste bin where they rightly deserve, till
more proof has been found.<br><br>Tin-Kay

Dear Tin-Kay,<br><br>Zhang Daqian was well known
for his fake paintings before he became famous. There
is book about his paintings and biography, written
with the consent of his family. Mainly he was studying
paintings by copying from Dunhuang murals and other anicent
masters. But his copying was so good that it could be
taken as genuine. Short of funds, he sold some of these
copies. Often, he copied those not too well known artists
and those with paintings outside China.
<br><br>Whether the River Bank picture is a fake is not possible
for me to comment. It would require a lot more
investigation. But I believe there are still a lot of fake
paintings around by Zhang or other artists. I think even
fake paintings have their merit. Many of Rambrandt's
paintings are fakes. But they are just as well
done.<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Dear Siu-Leung<br><br>I was shocked by the
article on the Riverbank symposium about the alleged
forgery by Zhang Daqian, not by his capability to fake
ancient paintings, but that, in his later years, with so
much honor and accolades and free from the demands of
financial considerations, could he possibly have attempted
to pass off a forgery of such a dimension. It has
been publicly acknowledged that in his younger years
he had done superb forgeries, but that was in a lean
and hungry period. <br><br>Following the end of World
War II, Zhang Daqian had numerous exhibitions all
over the world. His was a family name in Hong Kong and
Taiwan, and rich overseas Chinese everywhere were
clamoring to buy a piece of his work for investment in view
of his age. In Sichuan, they treated him as a native
son, as he was born there, and stayed during the
Japanese War years in Qingcheng Shan, the Daoist Mountian
off Chengdu. He finally settled in Argentina, then
Brazil, and was raised by admiring Chinese to a demigod
amongst contemporary Chinese painters. Even in Xiamen, I
was surprised to find a large picture of Zhang Daqian
at the Hulishan¡¯s Rongguang Treasure Museum, which
felt very honored to have been visited by Zhang Daqian
amongst other visitors like Lee Kuan Yew.<br><br>If Zhang
Daqian had indeed painted the Riverbank (about 7 ft by
3.5 ft) in the earlier forties as alleged by James
Cahill, it would be a grand master plan to lend credence
to the existence of the painting through a forged
letter from Xu Hongbei to his elder brother, Zhang
Shanzi, acknowledging Dong Yuan¡¯s painting with the
signature and seal of Dong Yuan and the seals of two
collectors. Strangely, Cahill admitted that, on first look,
Riverbank did not have the imprints of Zhang's earlier
forgeries, but then he went on to claim many similarities.
<br><br>To my simple mind, it would certainly be foolhardy
for Zhang Daqian to sell off a fake Riverbank in his
latter comfortable years, since there is a possibility
that the real painting (as quoted in a poem by Zhao
Mengfu) might later emerge. With all the principal
players like Zhang Daqian, Zhang Shanzi, Xu Hongbei, Dong
Yuan dead, experts will still continue to be experts,
voicing probabilities and possibilities. The real truth
may be as misty as the Qingcheng Shan in the early
morning.<br><br><br>I object to Carter Horsley comments on the possible
interpretations of the controversy because he implied that
possibly Prof. Weng Fong, C.C. Wang and Zhang Daqian had
conspired to defraud the museum and the public with the
alleged forgery. It is serious enough to be implicated by
association with a forgery, if proven true, let alone be
accused of conspiracy.<br><br>Despite this, I must give
credit to Horsley for elaborating fully on the debate.
In his suggestion for the next symposium, he should
have also added that more Chinese painting experts
from China, Taiwan and the Chinese Diaspora, be
invited. I really wonder why Prof. Shih Shou-chien from
Taiwan National University was the only notable
non-American Chinese participant.<br><br><br>Tin-Kay

Dear Tin-Kay,<br><br>Mr. Horseley was the
reporter/writer who brought me to the attention of this, but I
think the charge on forgery was from Professor Cahill
of U. of Berkeley. Mr. Horseley's complaint, as I
recall, is New York Times cut short of his report,
suspicious of covering up. I doubt really NYT did that on
purpose. They might be out of space on that day or
something. I would think they like to see more debates and
controversies than anybody else. I would say, Mr. Horseley's
position is rather neutral. the charge of forgery mainly
comes from Professor Cahill.<br><br>The "evidence"
brought up by Cahill is very subjective indeed on style
without scientific support. The problem is Cahill rejects
the dating of silk and seal etc, which are more
objective than all his remarks. His reasoning is Zhang had
access to old silk and seals. That unfortunately leads
to no proof or disproof of anything. <br><br>As awe
are scientists by training, I think there are many
ways to approach the problem from a scientific
viewpoint. I think if silk and seal can be forged, ink is
the least one can do as it is consumed and a dating
may be possible given the difference of several
hundred years. Analysis of the ink would provide a
definitive answer. Indeed, Zhang could get hold of old silk
and even carved seals of the author and curators. But
it would be difficult for him to reproduce the ink.
A scanning electron microscopy of the piece in
question compared to the authentic work by the same author
should settle it.<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Dear Siu-Leung and all,<br><br>When I read the
article, the first thing that came to my mind was why
couldn't they settle this by dating the material and ink
of the painting. Prof. Cahill defended it by saying
Zhang could have used the old material and seal. But I
agreed with SL that certainly he couldn't use the old
ink. Cahill said he could recognize one's style by the
brush strokes. May be, may be not. It is very
subjective. Can anybody be really that good ?<br><br>Julian.

Ink is a very specific identification tool. Short
of the DNA fingerprinting, authentication of any
painting should use ink as a major criterion and not the
"style".<br><br>The ingredient and production of ink are typical of a
location (by the plant charcoal they use) and the
technique of the manufacturer. Ink sticks can be preserved
for a long time. A little ink ball from the Nan Yue
King's tomb still can be used for writing and its color
is still brilliant and shiny. But unless the forger
can obtain the same kind of ink the original artist
used, his forgery cannot fool this
examination.<br><br>Style is the least accurate in authentication. Zhang
Daqian can imitate signatures and carve seals that are
not recognizable by museum curators. One's style also
changes over time, sometimes dramatically. If Zhang
really menat to forge, he would not have forged to
expose the difference in style. That is the first thing
he could do and was very good at.<br><br>There is
one interesting piece I read somewhere that paint
makers are thinking of incorporating artist's blood DNA
in the signature ink to ensure
authenticity.<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Ink is a very specific identification tool. Short
of the DNA fingerprinting, authentication of any
painting should use ink as a major criterion and not the
"style".<br><br>The ingredient and production of ink are typical of a
location (by the plant charcoal they use) and the
technique of the manufacturer. Ink sticks can be preserved
for a long time. A little ink ball from the Nan Yue
King's tomb still can be used for writing and its color
is still brilliant and shiny. But unless the forger
can obtain the same kind of ink the original artist
used, his forgery cannot fool this
examination.<br><br>Style is the least accurate in authentication. Zhang
Daqian can imitate signatures and carve seals that are
not recognizable by museum curators. One's style also
changes over time, sometimes dramatically. If Zhang
really menat to forge, he would not have forged to
expose the difference in style. That is the first thing
he could do and was very good at.<br><br>There is
one interesting piece I read somewhere that paint
makers are thinking of incorporating artist's blood DNA
in the signature ink to ensure
authenticity.<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Dear Tin-Kay: <br>See photo of Zhang Daqian. I
don't quite agree with your views.<br>First of all, it
is not conclusive that Zhang Daqian painted the fake
painting. The painting was sold to the Met Museum by C.C.
Wang who is<br>alive and living in New York. On the
other hand,<br>Zhang is dead for a number of years. If
anyone<br>can clarify, it ought to be Wang.<br><br>Even if we
assume that Zhang did the fake painting, it most
certainly was done years ago<br>before WWII. There are two
factors: (1) This is a very large painting with great
details. It certainly took many months of work to paint
it.<br>After Zhang became famous, it would not be profitable
for him to do this. He can do a painting in half a
day and sell it for good money.<br>(2) His eye sight
failed and he was nearly blind<br>in later years.
Physically he could not have done the fake. His later
paintings are in large strokes because of this.<br>So I
think it is unfair to condemn Zhang Daquin<br>as you
did.<br><br>Ming

Dear Ming<br><br>You have mis-understood me.
<br><br>Far from condemning Zhang Daqian, I was in fact
stating my disbelief that he would be involved in a
conspiracy for two reasons:<br><br>1. It would seem
improbable for a person, so highly respected in his old age
by the Chinese and art community worldwide, to have
involved himself in passing off a forgery, despite his
earlier forgeries in his lean and hungry
period.<br><br>2. It would be foolhardy for him to fraud a large
painting of such international interest and detailed
dimension because it would be extremely embarrassing if the
actual painting did turn up later.<br><br>If indeed
Zhang Daqian did fake the painting, he could only have
done it in his younger poorer days, and even then he
would not have got himself, later on, involved in such
a fraud complicated by a futher forging of a letter
from Xu Hongbei to his elder brother, Zhang Shanzi.
<br><br>My main concern is that the follow-up conspiracy
theory carries with it an insinuation involving not only
Zhang, but also Wen Fong and C.C. Wang. It seems to me
that Wen Fong would now have to be on the defensive,
and hence unlikely to be entrusted with large grants
to buy more oriental paintings, even if he is
innocent. <br><br>Tin-Kay

Dear Carl,<br><br>We are all here to share
something about Chinese culture. Nothing can be exhausted
and we can spend days on Dao De Jing.<br><br>On your
question about Shang scripts, I think the oracle script
(jiaguwen) and the bronze engraving (jinwen) are not quite
the same. The fact that calligrapher often "borrow"
jinwen to write jiaguwen got these two really confused.
There are similarities of course. Jiaguwen seems to be
a lot older. It is unfortunate that much was
destroyed as the Chinese medicine "dragon bone" or even
pulverized as fertilizer. China is now vigorously digging to
date Xia/Shang. I think Rudy might have more to
present on this. An interesting hypothesis was Xia people
got defeated by Shang and driven to America (another
says Shang people were the ancestors of native
Americans). There is a lot to be learn yet.<br><br>There is a
site that has something about the origin of
characters.<br><a href=http://www.zhongwen.com/
target=new>http://www.zhongwen.com/</a> <br>The author of the site and the book,
Rick
Harbaugh, is another Yali (now teaching at
Yale)<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Hi Siu-Leung Lee! You said: "An interesting
hypothesis was Xia people got defeated by Shang and driven
to America (another says Shang people were the
ancestors of native Americans). There is a lot to be learn
yet." <br><br>Do you have any other thing, say
historical accounts or ..., on this "native Americans" parts
that you can tell us about? I am curious to know more.
After all, honestly this is the only thing that I could
understand properly at the moment while we are talking about
this Shang culture and the rest.<br>But most of the
time, I am listening and learning and I shall keep
quite until I got a bit better equipped
there.<br><br>Thanks for answering!<br><br>Sesame

Sesame,<br><br>I have pointed out the following
similarities of American/Mayan culture and ancient Chinese
culture:<br>1. Artistic design - bronze pattern vs Mayan stone
carving. Sanxingdui vs Seattle/Vancouver native art.
Legend of bird as the ancestor of man. Serpent(dragon?)
in Ohio mound and Mayan pyramid.<br>2. Precision of
astronomical observation and use.<br>3. "Rabbit" in the moon
and possibly other legends.<br>4. Certain
pronunciation of words - Ho for river(Olympic Park in
Wahsingtong state), Hopi (southwest native American tribe)
for peace.<br>While many of thes can be called
incidental, we don't find them in the Greek/Roman relics.
<br><br>There was a news in the following
site<br><a href=http://www.east.cn.net/culture/china/index.htm
target=new>http://www.east.cn.net/culture/china/index.htm</a> (issue #29)
<br>about jiaguwen and central
American civilizations. But the content is no more
available.<br><br>Another thing you can do is look at the links at my
website:<br><a href=http://www.asiawind.com/hakka/china.htm
target=new>http://www.asiawind.com/hakka/china.htm</a><br>Go down to the bottom
table. There is a link to
Mayan cultures. See for yourself some interesting
comparisons. <br>People sometimes trivialize the folklores and
legends. In fact they might provide the best clues of
evolution of civilization. <br><br>Yahoo does not allow
long posts. So, our discussion is limited. I might
open up a webpage for more detailed discussion and
articles.<br><br>Siu-Leung Lee

Please have a look at Dr. David kelly's
page:<br><a href=http://hawk.hama-med.ac.jp/dbk/kelley.html
target=new>http://hawk.hama-med.ac.jp/dbk/kelley.html</a><br><br>It has many
interesting comparations.<br><br>I am
not able to restablishing the Sinorama web page. It
had a great article on the Olmec & the Shang
culture:<br>
<a href=http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/sinorama
target=new>http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/sinorama</a><br><br>SINORAMA Magazine,
Vol. 22 No. 5 May 1997<br><br>A Link
Between Chinese and American Cultures?<br>--The Olmec and
the Shang<br><br>Going into the jungle, we embark on
a journey of discovery of an ancient civilization.
The colossal stone heads of the Olmec are a puzzle
still waiting to be solved. <br><br>The continent of
Asia at the western edge of the Pacific Ocean and the
Americas at the ocean's eastern edge lie 15,000 kilometers
apart. Today, a US-resident Chinese scholar believes he
has found evidence in ancient writing that 3000 years
ago, a lost people of the Shang Dynasty went to
Columbus's "New" World. . . .<br><br>Flying east from Mexico
City over countless volcanic peaks, in slightly less
than an hour we reach Villahermosa ("The Beautiful
City") by the Gulf of Mexico. As we disembark we are met
by a rush of humid air which reminds us of the
steamy heat of Taiwan's high summer.<br><br>The
adventure of an ancient civilization<br><br>In the open-air
museum of Parque La Venta, gigantic trees tower into the
sky everywhere. As soon as we go in through the gate,
in a sandy enclosure we see several monkeys hanging
playfully from exercise bars, for this tropical park
doubles as a miniature zoo. It is also one of the places
where Mexico's earliest civilization, the Olmec, once
flourished.<br><br><br>Following the markers on the ground into the jungle, we
embark on the adventure of exploring an ancient
civilization. In the midst of the greenery, a stone monument
carved with human figures rises out of the ground. A
stone altar is decorated with the figure of a priest,
sitting cross-legged and wearing an ornate headdress; his
head stands out in sharp relief. But what is the most
astonishing of all is surely the several colossal human heads
carved out of granite, each of them around two meters
high and weighing up to twenty tons. The heads are
adorned with helmets and all have narrow eyes, broad
noses, thick lips and deep, solemn brows.<br><br><br>It
is a Sunday, so the park is full of people, with
whole families, young and old, out together. In the
park we see many Caucasian sightseers, but we
black-haired, yellow-skinned visitors from Taiwan seem to
attract more attention. Adults nod and smile to us
visitors from afar, while children steal inquisitive
glances with their bright, black eyes. When we ask to
take their pictures among the enormous stone heads,
they agree joyfully yet shyly.<br><br><br>Amid the
lush green vegetation, the millennia-old relics seem
to have become part of nature. But did the meeting
between the black-haired, yellow-skinned peoples of Asia
and the Americas only begin
today?<br><br><br>US-resident scholar Mike Xu (far left), whose ideas sparked
off a heated debate, discusses possible links between
Chinese and American cultures with a group of
researchers. <br><br>Explosive evidence<br><br>Last year, in a
book entitled Origin of the Olmec Civilization,
Professor Mike Xu, a Chinese who teaches in the foreign
languages department at the University of Central Oklahoma,
proposed a hypothesis which aroused a storm of controversy
in archeological circles. In Xu's view, the first
complex culture in Mesoamerica may have come into
existence with the help of a group of Chinese who fled
across the seas as refugees at the end of the Shang
dynasty. The Olmec civilization arose around 1200 BC,
which coincides with the time when King Wu of Zhou
attacked and defeated King Zhou, the last Shang ruler,
bringing his dynasty to a close.<br><br><br>(page 1)

continued...<br><br>Furthermore, Xu had
"explosive" evidence in the form of the written word. Over
the past three years he has found some 150 glyphs on
photographs of and real specimens of Olmec pottery, jade
artifacts and sculptures. As well as himself leafing
through dictionaries of ancient Chinese, he has also
taken his drawings of these markings to be examined by
mainland Chinese experts in ancient writing, and most have
agreed that they closely resemble the characters used in
Chinese oracle bone writings and bronze
inscriptions.<br><br><br>"At first these experts all tried to send me away,
saying they could not give an opinion on foreign
artifacts," Mike Xu recalls. But after his repeated
entreaties, they reluctantly took a look. The moment they saw
his drawings, each of them asked him: "Where in China
were these inscriptions found?" When they heard they
came from America they were all
dumbstruck.<br><br><br>"If these inscriptions had been found in excavations
in China," says Chen Hanping, a research associate
at the mainland's Historical Research Institute,
"they would certainly be regarded as writing or symbols
from the pre-Qin-dynasty period."<br><br><br>Six jade
"celts" which make up part of Offering No. 4, excavated
at La Venta, are incised with symbols which resemble
hieroglyphic writing. Could this be the earliest known writing
in the New World? And could it be related to the
Chinese oracle bone script which existed at about the
same time? <br><br>Ritual objects of Shang
refugees?<br><br>A subsequent event further boosted Mike Xu's
confidence. From June to October last year, the National
Gallery of Art in Washington DC staged a major exhibition
on the Olmec civilization, with items loaned from
Mexico. Mike Xu and Chen Hanping visited the exhibition
together. Inside, they both stopped in front a group of
jade statues. This exhibit, known as Offering No. 4,
was found at La Venta in 1955, and comprises 15 human
figures about six inches tall, carved from jade or
serpentine, and arranged in a half-circle facing a figure
carved from red sandstone. Behind the red figure are six
jade "celts" (polished, chisel-shaped implements), on
which incised symbols or writing are faintly
discernible.<br><br><br>"Oh, I can see what's written on that one," Chen
Hanping called out in surprise. "It says: 'The ruler and
his chieftains establish the foundation for a
kingdom.'" On another of the celts they could faintly make
out "12 generations." Could this refer to the 12
Shang kings who ruled from the time when Pan Geng moved
his capital from Shandong to Yin in He'nan, to when
the Shang was destroyed by the Zhou? Might these
really be ritual objects of a lost group of Shang people
who had fled to the New World?

(top) Tripod vessels are also widely seen in
Mesoamerica.<br> (left) This earthenware gui (a pitcher with three
hollow legs) <br> is a typical artifact of the Chinese
late neolithic period, from <br> the Dawenkou culture
to the Longshan culture. This one is 4800 <br> years
old. <br> <br> Out of nowhere?<br> In 1850, some sugar
plantation workers discovered an enormous sculpted stone
<br> head buried on the Mexican Gulf Coast. This was
the beginning of the <br> "reemergence" of the Olmec
civilization. But even today, our knowledge of it <br> is
limited.<br> As far as archeologists can piece together the
story, the Olmec civilization <br> emerged around 1200
BC, when its people took up a sedentary lifestyle.
<br> Social classes began to form, and the common
people came to be ruled by an <br> elite. From the
artifacts which survive today, we can see that the Olmec
<br> were outstanding stone carvers. The objects range
from colossal granite <br> heads, monuments carved
with lifelike images, and altars, to exquisitely <br>
carved small jade human figures, celts, pendants and so
on.<br> On these objects one often sees motifs which are
a blend between jaguar and <br> human faces; the
corners of their roaring open mouths are slightly <br>
downturned. Legend has it that these "were-jaguars" were the
descendants of <br> a human woman who mated with a jaguar,
and the cult of the jaguar became one <br> of the
shared motifs of other ancient Mesoamerican
civilizations.<br> Even the famous Maya culture was strongly
influenced by the Olmec <br> civilization, and further
developed its legacy in the areas of astronomy, <br>
architecture and sculpture. Thus the Olmec has been described
as a "mother <br> culture" which gave birth to the
other ancient Mesoamerican civilizations <br> including
the Maya and the Aztec. But by the 4th century BC,
the Olmec's <br> power was in decline, and the last
traces of the civilization date from <br> around 100
BC.<br> "In fact, 'Olmec' was a name given to the
inhabitants of the Gulf Coast by <br> the Aztecs in the 15th
century, and meant 'the rubber people,'" writes <br>
Professor Michael Coe of Yale University. "Today we don't
know who these <br> people were, or even what they
called themselves."<br> Although we cannot call these
ancient people by their right name, the <br> artifacts
and altars they left behind can be seen everywhere
from the Gulf <br> Coast region to the valleys of
Mexico's central highlands and the Pacific <br> Coast to
the west, and even as far south as Western Guatemala.
For people <br> today the Olmec are a mysterious and
intriguing people, who "came from <br> nowhere and left no
clue about their passing." Theories about their
origins <br> abound.

.......<br> One of their own<br> 35-year-old Mike
Xu, who was born in Shanghai and now teaches Chinese
<br> language and philosophy at an American
university, is neither an <br> archeologist nor a historian.
How did he get involved in this field?<br> There are
both direct and indirect reasons. Four years ago, when
Xu went to <br> visit a large Indian fair in
Oklahoma City, the Native American at the <br> entrance
took Xu for one of his own people and waved him in for
free. This <br> set Xu wondering whether he really did
look like a Native American, and <br> whether there
were any cultural links too.<br> When he was teaching
Pacific Rim Studies at the university, students would
<br> sometimes ask him about connections between the
Americas and China. He never <br> knew how to answer these
questions, but they gradually aroused his interest <br> in
researching such matters. Also, his father is a neurological
researcher <br> who is very interested in the links between
human DNA on the Asian and <br> American continents.
Thus when Xu began doing research outside his own <br>
field, perhaps there was an element of following in his
father's footsteps.<br> As well as looking for links
between writing systems of the Olmec and the <br> Shang,
Xu also looked for similarities in such areas as
religion, <br> agriculture, astronomy and calendar
systems.<br> In his view, both peoples venerated their
ancestors, practiced human <br> sacrifice and worshipped the
sun and rain spirits. Furthermore, the Olmec <br>
worshipped the cougar, the eagle and the snake, while the
Chinese regarded <br> the tiger as a symbol of strength,
the people of the Shang used birds as <br> clan
totems, and wasn't the dragon, which Chinese people
venerate, also <br> derived from the snake?<br> In terms of
astronomy, the settlements excavated at La Venta are
arranged <br> facing eight degrees west of north, while
Shang sites face five degrees east <br> of north. What
is remarkable about that? In one of his articles
Mike Xu <br> writes that the "eight degrees" and "five
degrees" are actually with <br> reference to the magnetic
north indicated by compasses, and not the true <br>
north pole. Thus both actually face true north. He
believes that for both <br> peoples to have known how to
determine true north as long ago as 1200 BC is <br> no
coincidence.

The time of the rise of the Olmec civilization
coincides with the fall of <br> the Shang dynasty, and
there are a number of similarities between the two <br>
cultures. On this basis, Xu boldly infers that some 5000
people of Shang <br> sailed across the Pacific on bamboo
rafts and landed in western Mexico; <br> later, they
gradually spread to the central highlands and the Gulf
Coast, <br> and built up a civilization of art,
religion, architecture, agriculture and <br> trade. Xu has
even written a historical drama, Fallen Grace, which
describes <br> how the lost people of Shang may have
crossed the sea.<br> Flights of fancy may carry one
anywhere one pleases, but scholarly research <br> requires
evidence, and where is the evidence to be found? If jade
artifacts <br> can show a relationship between the Shang
and the Olmec, then why were the <br> bronze
artifacts which are even more representative of the Shang
dynasty not <br> also brought along? And why is there no
sign at all of another "trademark" <br> of the Shang:
turtle shells and animal bones used for divination and
<br> inscribed with written characters? Mike Xu calmly
replies to this objection <br> that it is not hard to
imagine that in their rush to flee the Zhou <br>
onslaught, the Shang people would have been glad to escape
with their <br> lives-how could they have carried
heavy bronzes with them? Furthermore, to <br> continue
the tradition in America would depend on people with
sufficient <br> knowledge of bronze technology having made
the journey to the New World, and <br> on finding
suitable deposits of copper and tin ores. As for the
oracle <br> bones, the climate on Mexico's coast is wet
and humid, and the soil is acid. <br> Very few human
bones from that period have survived-how could we
expect <br> turtle shells and animal scapulae to be
preserved for so long?<br> The seafaring skills of the
people of the Shang are another point of doubt. <br>
Archeological discoveries have shown that there was trading
activity along <br> China's coasts during the Shang era.
But did the Shang have advanced ocean <br> navigation
skills? Did they have compasses? Ancient Chinese writings
give no <br> detailed account of these matters.<br>
However, some have pointed to the Kuroshio current, a
northern equatorial <br> current which flows west to east
along the east coasts of Taiwan and Japan. <br> If
boats followed this current, might they not indeed have
been able to <br> cross the ocean?

Chips off the same block<br> In contrast to these
seemingly farfetched ideas, some recent archeological <br>
finds have shown that the Olmec culture did not appear
"overnight." Many <br> permanent settlements had developed
previously.<br> "The advanced civilization of the Olmec was the
product of interaction <br> between different tribes,"
says Dr. Rebeca Gonzalez Lauck, director of <br>
Mexico's National Institute of Anthropology and History.
Most crucially, if <br> people from the Old World
really did come across the sea, why has no-one <br> ever
found a single artifact from the other shore as
evidence of this? On <br> the other hand, asks Paul
Pettennude of the Maya Underwater Research Center, <br> why
didn't the Olmec influence the Shang in return? Perhaps
at that time <br> some of the lost people of the
Shang could have sailed back across the <br> Pacific to
China and brought some cultural influences from the New
World. . <br> . .<br> But in any event, archeological
sites from the Olmec and Shang cultures only <br> began
to be discovered at the end of the last century, and
systematic <br> excavations were not made until the 1930s
and 40s. No-one can predict that <br> in future new
evidence will not come to light which will completely
overturn <br> today's views, or vindicate them.

In the eye of the beholder<br> As for the oracle
bone writing which is crucial to Mike Xu's
conjectures, <br> just how credible is the evidence? The
generally accepted view is that 3000 <br> years ago the
Olmec did not have a writing system, or at most had a
few <br> ideographic symbols. In fact a major reason
why the Olmec are still shrouded <br> in mystery is
the of lack any decipherable script, which means that
<br> researchers can only piece together Olmec history
from excavated pottery and <br> jade artifacts.<br> If
the marks incised on Olmec relics really were
writing, and if they did <br> closely resemble the writing
of ancient China, this would be something quite <br>
remarkable.<br> When scholars here in Taiwan, on this side of the
Pacific, overcame their <br> initial surprise, they were
as interested as the mainland scholars. After <br>
looking at over 100 characters hand-drawn by Mike Xu,
they really did <br> recognize many which were similar
to the characters of oracle bones and <br> bronzes.
"Some are similar to particular pre-Qin characters, but
it would <br> take further research to determine
their phonetic and semantic values," says <br> Chung
Po-sheng, head of the Chinese writing systems section at
the Academia <br> Sinica's Institute of History and
Philology.<br> For the sake of caution, all the researchers
hoped they could see <br> photographs or rubbings of
the original artifacts, because the hand-drawn <br>
characters could very possibly be inaccurate, or might even
be unconsciously <br> affected by the drawer's own
convictions. Furthermore, most of the glyphs <br> found so far
are single characters. French priest Jean Lefeuvre,
an expert <br> in oracle bone inscriptions, hopes
that Xu can find some characters joined <br> together
into phrases, for this would make research easier.<br>
This is a reasonable expectation, but in fact things
aren't so simple, <br> because the only groups of
characters found so far are those on the few jade <br> celts
from La Venta. Chang Kuang-yuan, head of the
department of antiquities <br> at the National Palace Museum
in Taipei, examining black-and-white close-up <br>
photographs of the celts with a magnifying glass and leafing
through <br> dictionaries making comparisons, is still
doubtful of the interpretation <br> "The ruler and his
chieftains establish the foundation for a kingdom."<br>
Naturally there are many unsolved questions in the research
of China's <br> ancient writing too, but Chang still
has the feeling that Xu's imagination <br> may have
been somewhat too fertile. "It's like when you look at
clouds. If <br> you see a cloud you think looks like a
dog, the longer you look at it, the <br> stronger the
resemblance," says Chang. If you rush into something with too
<br> much enthusiasm, there is a risk that your field
of vision will become ever <br> narrower.

Is this the last word on the matter? Mike Xu
evidently does not think so. He <br> says that finding
similar characters is only the first step, and that his
<br> research on the subject has only just begun. In
his view, most researchers <br> of Chinese writing
have very little knowledge of American civilizations,
<br> while very few scholars of Mesoamerican
archeology are versed in Chinese <br> culture. There has
never been any contact between the two fields of <br>
research, so it is hardly surprising if no-one ever made
comparisons in the <br> area of writing.<br> "I'm not saying
that the American peoples are Chinese, but that at
some <br> point in history the Shang culture and
writing was brought directly or <br> indirectly into the
New World," says Xu. Modern DNA studies have
confirmed <br> that the Native American and East Asian
peoples are all Mongoloid peoples, <br> and he hopes that
DNA experts can do more detailed research into the
<br> relationship between America and China.
Eventually he would like to see an <br> exhibition of both
cultures in which Olmec and Shang artifacts are <br>
exhibited, to let the public see for themselves.<br> In
terms of archeological theory, Mike Xu is a
"diffusionist." Diffusionist <br> theories have it that there are
direct or indirect links between various <br> cultures,
which may have been disseminated intentionally or
unintentionally <br> by way of trade, migration, missionary
activity or colonization, and have <br> generally been
transmitted from more highly developed cultures to less <br>
developed ones.<br> Looking no further than China for
examples, in the 17th century French <br> Jesuit priests
confidently affirmed that writing had come to China from <br>
Egypt via Greece, because both used pictographic
characters, and in the <br> early 20th century, theories that
Chinese culture had its origins in more <br> westerly
regions were popular for a time, with many people
suspecting that <br> Chinese civilization had come from the
Middle East. But later archeological <br> finds
disproved these ideas.

In fact cultures have always influenced each
other, and nobody develops in <br> an absolute vacuum.
But when similar developments appear in two places
very <br> far apart or at two different times, how
does one explain it? Is it really <br> due to contact,
or is it simply that "great minds think alike"-that
human <br> beings confronted with similar environments
produce similar responses?<br> Professor David Grove of
the University of Illinois has commented that there
<br> are indeed many points of similarity between the
Olmec and Shang cultures, <br> but that this does not
mean that the two were in contact. It is the same as
<br> the way "a whale looks like a fish, but in fact
is a mammal." And <br> pictographic writing systems
are the result of past people's observation of <br>
the natural world. The moon and the sun as seen by
different peoples are <br> probably pretty much the
same.<br> The internationally respected Chinese
archeologist Chang Kuang-chih, former <br> vice-president of
the Academia Sinica, acknowledges that there are
indeed <br> many similarities between the ancient
civilizations of Asia and the <br> Americas. "But the very fact
that the similarities are so numerous and so <br>
geographically widespread means that they do not look like the
result of a <br> chance contact. For me this makes
diffusionist theories even harder to <br> accept."
Nonetheless, he says, if there is credible new evidence he
will be <br> happy to examine it.