Page 214 - Ming_China_Courts_and_Contacts_1400_1450 Craig lunas

Plate 22.11 The Annals of Ryukyu (Liuqiu guo
zhi lüe 琉球國志略) by Zhou Huang 周煌,
published in 1759. Shurun tang edition,
National Library of China

mistake. It also proposes a formula for determining ship size (see Pl. 19.1) is exactly one Chinese foot long, and was
from rudderpost size that is based on a modern propeller- designed this way to standardise the size of a foot. The
driven steel ship, and a rudder of a completely different samples that survive can therefore be used to confirm the
shape – made for shallow-water rather than deep-water size of a Ministry of Works foot in the Ming period.
35
sailing. More recently, scholars have been saying that Zheng Although, as mentioned above, it is not absolutely certain
He’s ships must have been deep-bottomed fuchuan 福船 style that this is the length of the foot used as a standard for
ships (like the Ryukyu ship, Pl. 22.11) in order to survive on shipbuilding, it is not likely to be far off. It should be noted
the high seas. In the illustrations in Plate 22.12, showing that the prominent scholar and shipbuilding engineer Xi
34
the various sizes of treasure ship compared to the size of the Longfei 席龍飛 uses 28.3cm as the standard shipbuilding
rudderpost, an 11.07m long rudderpost appears like a foot measure, based on a ruler discovered in Fujian. 36
toothpick compared to a ship that is 137m long or even half One important piece of archaeological evidence is the
that size. The archaeological report of the Nanjing Treasure shipyard itself. Many of the original 13 basins, shown on a
Shipyard itemises thousands of objects that were excavated map of Nanjing from the Second World War (Pl. 22.13)
there (including nails and pieces of wood), but nothing have now been filled in and transformed into sites for
conclusive was found to indicate that the ships were of the apartment buildings. Only three of the original basins now
order of 450ft long. survive, basins 4, 5 and 6 (Pl. 22.14). Basin 6 is the only one
It was mentioned above that two foot-rulers were found in to have been excavated. Its 400m length leaves plenty of
the Treasure Shipyard, both about 31cm long, thus room for three 137m long treasure ships lengthwise, but it is
conforming to the size of the Ministry of Works foot. only 40m wide. Therefore, 56m wide treasure ships would
Another clue to the length of the foot is provided in a not fit in the basin. This seems to be conclusive evidence that
completely unexpected source. The Ming paper money note the ships built in this shipyard were not 44 by 18 zhang.
In 2010, a further archaeological exploration turned up
Plate 22.12 Three sizes of ship compared to the size of the an inscription in what is thought to be the tomb of Hong Bao
rudderpost
洪保, another eunuch, saying that he sailed on a ship that
37
was 5,000 liao in size.
Studies by Chinese scholars are becoming more and
more sophisticated and rigorous, as historians increasingly
collaborate with engineers and scientists. Of course there is
always hope that future archaeological finds will uncover
more ships and discoveries related to Zheng He’s voyages
and will answer the questions posed above. However, only
the discovery of a 44-zhang ship will settle the matter of
whether they were ever this big. Until further evidence is
found, it appears that the best we can say is that the ships
were probably about 250ft long, which is still a substantially
large ship.

204 | Ming China: Courts and Contacts 1400–1450