ABSTRACT
The question of Taiwan in the political sphere is a dicult one – Taiwan appears to be a political entity that is either ocially recognized or otherwise. Taiwan in itself is not proper political reference; Taiwan is politically the Republic of China (ROC), in distinction to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) of Mainland China. The reference to Taiwan is a cultural one that persists and is still the distinguishing reference. The political, military and economic clout of post-Nixon PRC has forced the hands of many governments to recognize one ‘China’ in deference to the other. Yet there is no dispute that the Island itself, despite whatever political positioning, has always been a distinct territory in its own right. In Martino Martini’s Novus Atlas Sinesis of 1655, Formosa is partially mapped; and in Arnoldus Montanus’ Atlas Chinensis of 1671, the trans-literated reference Tayowan is already in print, and is signicant enough to have its own entry in the list of contents,3 In the massive eighteenth century geographic study of the Jesuits collated by Fr. Du Halde, the island was mapped by Fr. J B Regis.4 It was also infamously the subject of the bizarre claims of George Psalmanazar, the so-called rst Formosan.5 Psalmanazar imagined that Formosa was ruled by Japan and cloaked himself in disguise and lived in adopted character as ‘the rst Formosan’. His book of supposed records detailed language, customs, practices and so forth; and is similar in structure to Du Halde’s collated studies. However whilst Du Halde’s geography was based on actual observation, Psalmanazar’s stories of Formosa were more akin to Gulliver’s Travels. Psalmanazar was an incredible fraudster who exploited the rise of the Chinoiserie. The imagined Formosa of Psalmanazar presented another world to the then known world.6 He
was later exposed but as incredible as his early exploits were, they portended a future in ways he probably never imagined.
