Chinese Knew North America More Than 4000 Years Ago!

Scientists prefer to deal with properly reported (reliable) primary data which is well-recorded (correct) and in enough quantity to seem to rule out the possibility of exception (sufficient). An astronomer, although unable to sit inside a star, can examine the very light that comes loaded with information. A historian cannot walk the plain of San Jacinto during the significant battle. Both must interpret data.

So, whatever data is verified, there still remains the task of significance, of interpretation. And this depends to some degree on the interpreter. Certainly, all the conclusions need to be consistent with verified fact and earlier, reliable interpretations. Or, even when the data seems good, maybe the historian feels for some reason that earlier interpretations were wrong.

For example: was the defense of the Alamo really all that important? Certainly so if one considers the pride and heroism that is evoked in some people when the story is intoned. Everyone needs things of pride, self, and group. On the one hand, the battle can be seen as absolutely significant, a heroic delaying tactic which allowed the Texan army to prepare for a decisive victory. The delay saved hundreds of settlers’ lives in the way of the Mexican Army.

On the other hand, it was collective and accidental stupidity. The main delay for the Mexican army was not the thirteen days, but the muddy rivers on the way into East Texas, and the inability to join forces with the southern army. Settlers to the east had short but ample time to learn which way to run from the fast-fleeing revolutionary government and the few groups of mounted rangers who acted as rear scouts. And, anyway, had San Jacinto proved a disaster for the Texans, United States forces were already ready to step in (as they did ten years later) and take Texas (and a lot more of North America) from Mexico. The military conclusion of the Alamo battle was not important at all.

Or maybe both. Some interpreters struggle hard to include every possibility in their conclusions.

In any case, many facts about the Alamo battle can be known, because military records and diaries confirm a lot (not all) of the events. The “outline” of what went on is known. What the events “mean”—their interpretation—is more open. Neither undisputed fact nor corroborating evidence exist for Hwui Shan’s story.