1421

[Lucas]

Anyone read this? I'm about half way through. It is a great read. If you like explorative history, you better read this or you will be missing out on some PRIME GOLD!

1421

[GeneChing]

I started it, but got distracted and put it down.

It was discussed somewhat on our A Case for the influence of the Ming Dynasty Navy on Shaolin Martial Arts thread.

[Lucas]

omg gene pick it back up! it gets good as soon as the great treasure fleet sets sail !!!!

its the Straight of Hong Bao now. F that other guy, M-something...

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Zheng He's fleet was real. It may have sailed much further than traditionally expected. However, I now strongly doubt that the fleet made it to the North-East coast of North America. Some of the evidence used to make the case for a Chinese presence (such as the Cape Breton settlement) has been debunked. Evidence points way more towards Medieval Pre-Columbian Scandinavians having left traces in the Great lakes/North Atlantic Seaboard region, including within the native oral traditions of the areas in question (especially the Mi'kmaq.)

There's better evidence pointing to Medieval Chinese presences along the West coast, Mexico, South America and Australia.

Menzies is a speculator. Granted, he's made some great observations regarding old navigational maps, but his interpretation of some of the non-maritime "evidence" is sometimes pure speculation which discounts actual, verifiable facts.

Other than that, it's a fun read, and it certainly brings up interesting questions regarding Chinese Naval hand-to-hand combat and its influence on Kung Fu, especially Shaolin.

[solo1]

finished it about 2 weeks ago. The first half of the book was riveting the second half, not so much. But overall a good read.

[Lucas]

im about halfway through, so far its been a fun read. interesting stuff

[ghostexorcist]

I haven't read the book for a reason. It's basically a big joke in the scholarly community. See here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1421:_T...ered_the_World

[Lucas]

Finished reading the book. There is really an astounding amount of research done. He does also have a lot of backing you know. For all the people that critisize, there is the other side as well. Of course a lof of whats in the book is speculation, but there is a ton of verifiable facts, and a plethora of evidence. You really should read the book first before coming to any conclusions.

I dont put too much weight on wiki opinions. lol...

So far from what i read of people disputing it boils down to "NUH UH, DIDNT HAPPEN"

i would like to see one person go point by point on his book with an actual debate for every peice of evidence and every claim. With stronger evidence to discount what he's found. He had help from HUNDREDS of scholars, professors, archeologists, so there are HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of professionals that do agree with him.

Also take into account the CHINESE scholars that were developing this very trail before him.

Seriously there are some forms of evidence you would have to be completely retarded to refute, or just bone headed and blind.

No i dont buy all the claims or speculations in the book, that would be silly, but there is quite a bit of proven evidence laid out in the book as well. To ignore some of these things would be just as silly.

So, show me a source debating point by point every piece of evidence, otherwise his argument is much more solid than any ive seen against his.

Id suggest to read the book for yourself and form your own opinion. For all the 'scholars' that joke, there are serious scholars taht back him up too. its a he said she said and your forming an opinion based on one side of the he said she said without doing your own research....I know some people that approach kungfu the same way....

He has all the hundreds, yes, hundreds, of names of people who back him and helped him with his years of research and compiltion of data, facts, evidence, and hypothosis. All his sources are listed, and you can verify a lot of the claims and evidence yourself.

im half and half on it basically.

[ghostexorcist]

Finished reading the book. There is really an astounding amount of research done. He does also have a lot of backing you know. For all the people that critisize, there is the other side as well. Of course a lof of whats in the book is speculation, but there is a ton of verifiable facts, and a plethora of evidence. You really should read the book first before coming to any conclusions.

I dont put too much weight on wiki opinions. lol...

So far from what i read of people disputing it boils down to "NUH UH, DIDNT HAPPEN"

i would like to see one person go point by point on his book with an actual debate for every peice of evidence and every claim. With stronger evidence to discount what he's found. He had help from HUNDREDS of scholars, professors, archeologists, so there are HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of professionals that do agree with him.

Also take into account the CHINESE scholars that were developing this very trail before him.

Seriously there are some forms of evidence you would have to be completely retarded to refute, or just bone headed and blind.

No i dont buy all the claims or speculations in the book, that would be silly, but there is quite a bit of proven evidence laid out in the book as well. To ignore some of these things would be just as silly.

So, show me a source debating point by point every piece of evidence, otherwise his argument is much more solid than any ive seen against his.

Id suggest to read the book for yourself and form your own opinion. For all the 'scholars' that joke, there are serious scholars taht back him up too. its a he said she said and your forming an opinion based on one side of the he said she said without doing your own research....I know some people that approach kungfu the same way....

He has all the hundreds, yes, hundreds, of names of people who back him and helped him with his years of research and compiltion of data, facts, evidence, and hypothosis. All his sources are listed, and you can verify a lot of the claims and evidence yourself.

im half and half on it basically.

The reason I pointed towards the wikipedia article is because the section is sourced with works that present counter arguments against the author's theories. One such work is "How Not to (Re)Write World History: Gavin Menzies and the Chinese Discovery of America". If you have access to JSTOR you should be able to give it look.

I'll pass on the book.

[Lucas]

Yep, ive read that. plus other review articles. i agree with a lot of what they say. however there are some things that are pretty difficult to refute, though..you wouldnt know that. just as much as menzies speculates, the critics gloss over the evidence that is verifiable and hard.

im sure being made an honorary professor at the university of (i believe)bejing and giving regular lectures is because they think hes full of it lol