Rich Rostrom wrote:
> Stephen Graham <grahams@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>>I doubt that... Carthage had connections
>>>in the Med and into the Atlantic, but not
>>>into the Indian Ocean. Egypt was controlled
>>>by Greeks.
>>
>>Why do you think Egypt being controlled by Greeks (which is only true at
>>times) is a bar to an individual Carthaginian traveling into the Indian
>>ocean.
>
>
> What's he doing in the Indian Ocean?

Exploring, seeking new opportunities, perhaps sold into slavery. There
are several different reasons.

> One such might (before or after) have been
> roaming the Erythraean Sea as far as India
> Extra Gangem.

And might also have been the first to see the Pacific and the Atlantic.

The point is that it is unlikely that a Muslim traveller was the first;
there are too many opportunities before 600 CE for someone else.

> There was some very thin contact between Rome and China;
> I've never heard of Romans in Burma, or Thailand, or
> Indochina, or Malaya.

So? As I said, it's easy enough to verify in any competent history of
Southeast Aisa.

>>You might, for instance, look at Kenneth Hall's
>>Maritime Trade and State Development in Early Southeast Asia.
>
>
> If I had access to a university library...

Or interlibrary loan.

Stephen Graham <grahams@u.washington.edu> wrote:

>Rich Rostrom wrote:
>
>> It is probable that the first person
>> to see the western Pacific and eastern
>> Atlantic was a Moslem traveler.
>
>Much more likely some Carthaginian trader.

I doubt that... Carthage had connections
in the Med and into the Atlantic, but not
into the Indian Ocean. Egypt was controlled
by Greeks.

The Romans had Atlantic and Indian Ocean
links, but the latter went no further than
India AFAIK.

Moslems from Spain and the Maghreb of course
went to Mecca, and the Islamosphere reached
out to the Indies in the 1200s. There were
Moslems in China much earlier than that;
the question is whether any of them would
go west of Baghdad/Mecca, or anyone from
Maghreb/Andalus would go east. It's possible
that some venturesome type who had been to
Andalus and seen the Atlantic might travel
to Cathay, too. Whether he bothered to go
on past Chang'an to the seacoast...

That's why I think it was a mariner.
--
| He had a shorter, more scraggly, and even less |
| flattering beard than Yassir Arafat, and Escalante |
| never conceived that such a thing was possible. |
| -- William Goldman, _Heat_ |

Rich Rostrom wrote:
> Stephen Graham <grahams@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>> Rich Rostrom wrote:
>>
>>> It is probable that the first person
>>> to see the western Pacific and eastern
>>> Atlantic was a Moslem traveler.
>> Much more likely some Carthaginian trader.
>
> I doubt that... Carthage had connections
> in the Med and into the Atlantic, but not
> into the Indian Ocean. Egypt was controlled
> by Greeks.

Why do you think Egypt being controlled by Greeks (which is only true at
times) is a bar to an individual Carthaginian traveling into the Indian
ocean.

> The Romans had Atlantic and Indian Ocean
> links, but the latter went no further than
> India AFAIK.

As I mentioned earlier, there is ample evidence of Roman trade and
diplomatic missions in Southeast Asia and China. You might, for
instance, look at Kenneth Hall's Maritime Trade and State Development in
Early Southeast Asia.

But any reasonable history of Southeast Asia will mention it. Which is
why I know of it, with a MA in Burmese history.

> Moslems from Spain and the Maghreb of course
> went to Mecca, and the Islamosphere reached
> out to the Indies in the 1200s.

Given that you don't have Muslims until after 600 CE, I think it's
highly unlikely that any Muslim was the first to see both the Atlantic
and Pacific.

Stephen Graham <grahams@u.washington.edu> wrote:

>> I doubt that... Carthage had connections
>> in the Med and into the Atlantic, but not
>> into the Indian Ocean. Egypt was controlled
>> by Greeks.
>
>Why do you think Egypt being controlled by Greeks (which is only true at
>times) is a bar to an individual Carthaginian traveling into the Indian
>ocean.

What's he doing in the Indian Ocean?

Trade voyaging? Unlikely - he's a foreigner
in Egypt. That's the bar. It's difficult to
operate in a foreign country, but with direct
communication with the homeland, it's possible.
There's a base to draw on.

But going another step, to where communication
passes through an intermediate country; that
IMHO is far more difficult and unlikely.

OTOH, the Greeks went west as well as east;
to Massilia (Marseille) and Narbo (Narbonne);
some could easily venture to Gibraltar.

One such might (before or after) have been
roaming the Erythraean Sea as far as India
Extra Gangem.

>> The Romans had Atlantic and Indian Ocean
>> links, but the latter went no further than
>> India AFAIK.
>
>As I mentioned earlier, there is ample evidence of Roman trade and
>diplomatic missions in Southeast Asia and China.
>
>But any reasonable history of Southeast Asia will mention it. Which is
>why I know of it, with a MA in Burmese history.

There was some very thin contact between Rome and China;
I've never heard of Romans in Burma, or Thailand, or
Indochina, or Malaya.

However, the Romans were based in Egypt. The Carthaginians
were not.

>You might, for instance, look at Kenneth Hall's
>Maritime Trade and State Development in Early Southeast Asia.

If I had access to a university library...
--
| He had a shorter, more scraggly, and even less |
| flattering beard than Yassir Arafat, and Escalante |
| never conceived that such a thing was possible. |
| -- William Goldman, _Heat_ |