Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Gavin Menzies' Zheng He Theory


  • Please log in to reply
194 replies to this topic

#31 astralis

astralis

    Grand Guardian (Taibao 太保)

  • CHF Beginner
  • 232 posts

Posted 07 July 2004 - 08:42 PM

sorry guys,

if you actually read his book and examine it, you will also see how the many critiques of menzies' book reveals his "evidence" to be a whole bunch of mumbo-jumbo.

#32 Sephodwyrm

Sephodwyrm

    Vanguard of Zhan Guo (战国先锋)

  • CHF Beginner
  • 2,711 posts
  • Location:Tucson, Arizona, US of A
  • Interests:Upsetting regional imbalances
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Warring States Military, Chinese Sketches and Artwork

Posted 08 July 2004 - 01:13 PM

Why don't you critique the book yourself by doing your own research? There's too much politics involved in this, and there's always a refusal to accept Chinese technological superiority throughout history. When most Europeans in their historical books call London the biggest city in the world, or Rome as the biggest city in the world, or the Roman Empire as the greatest Empire in classical history, I see no reason why I should believe in European scholars.

The thing is that we should, on the pretext of Menzies' work, start other projects and investigate more about the voyages of Ma San Bao. It is useless just sitting around and criticizing. Recent news from the Chinese archaeological department is that they are probably going to spend some serious money looking more deeply into the matter. I think this is the better way to go.
Maxim-Ivan Illustrations
Chief Editor and Founder
Our Deviantart Site

#33 DaMo

DaMo

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Super Moderator
  • 1,755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dubai
  • Interests:History, Philosophy, Law, Political Science, InfoTech
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Prehistory, Early Imperial, Samguk

Posted 08 July 2004 - 06:53 PM

Well, let's at least not run around quoting it as fact. We can say that the theories of the Ming reaching America are being investigated, but there is too little evidence at this point to claim outright that they did.
"If an archeologist calls something a finial, he usually he has no idea what it is"
"We Vandals get blamed for stuff that was actually done by some errant Lombard or Visigoth"
"Nationalism is much about forgetting as it is about remembering"

China historical vacation 2011 photos and videos: http://www.chinahist...na-trip-photos/

#34 astralis

astralis

    Grand Guardian (Taibao 太保)

  • CHF Beginner
  • 232 posts

Posted 08 July 2004 - 10:44 PM

certainly more historical research into zheng he's voyages would be nice. but menzies' "research" centers primarily around one old european map that with VERY creative "re-sizing" has "similarities" to a few chinese maps. also, he includes VERY sketchy DNA evidence, evident to people who have studied biology, and some of the archaeological evidence he has presented have been disproved.
i have problems with this sort of sensationalist literature. many, many critiques have been done of menzies work ranging from taida in taiwan to the full gamut of US and british universities, including UC berkeley, UCSD, stanford, harvard, princeton, oxford...etc etc. certainly not just "european bias." the taiwanese magazine "sinorama" (guang hua) just did an article about this.

#35 DaMo

DaMo

    Prime Minister (Situ/Chengxiang 司徒/丞相)

  • Super Moderator
  • 1,755 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dubai
  • Interests:History, Philosophy, Law, Political Science, InfoTech
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Prehistory, Early Imperial, Samguk

Posted 17 July 2004 - 05:19 PM

MODS: Perhaps this should be pinned until July 22nd. B)
"If an archeologist calls something a finial, he usually he has no idea what it is"
"We Vandals get blamed for stuff that was actually done by some errant Lombard or Visigoth"
"Nationalism is much about forgetting as it is about remembering"

China historical vacation 2011 photos and videos: http://www.chinahist...na-trip-photos/

#36 Yun

Yun

    Sage-King

  • CHF Han Lin Scholar
  • 9,057 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore/USA
  • Interests:Ancient Chinese history, with a focus on the Age of Fragmentation. Chinese ethnicities, religion, philosophy, music, and art and material culture. Military history in general.
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Three Kingdoms, Age of Fragmentation, Sui-Tang

Posted 18 July 2004 - 01:25 AM

Done :lol:
The dead have passed beyond our power to honour or dishonour them, but not beyond our ability to try and understand.

#37 zelbest

zelbest

    General of the Guard (Hujun Zhongwei/Jinjun Tongshuai 护军中尉/禁军统帅)

  • CHF Beginner
  • 103 posts

Posted 22 July 2004 - 08:02 AM

just saw it last night and menzie's theory got owned. He failed to provide any concrete evidence to support his theory.

#38 Ghost_of_Han

Ghost_of_Han

    Grand Mentor (Taishi 太师)

  • Entry Scholar (Xiucai)
  • 439 posts
  • Location:Michigan
  • Interests:Chinese History, and Chinese
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 22 July 2004 - 12:09 PM

No I refuse to believe you, your just trying to bring down Menzie. His had some details that were assumed, but I see no reason not to believe his major part of the theory that China was first.

So what about the DNA. Can you tell me its not sketchy, I mean from the map all the indian nations on the coast had Chinese linked DNA. The counter argument is that the theory of the Asian crossing over the ice bridge, but that wouldn't explain why only coastal DNA is like Chinese.

I don't believe the light house was Chinese, but that rock road was left by the Chinese. Its too perfect to be natural, and it makes perfect sense the reason for it. They need a kinda of ramp for the ships.

I think the Italian explorer didn't metion the Chinese that much is because, Europeans are tradionally nationalists, and have been know to lie about things. Who would want to come back home and admit that there is someone WAY WAY beyond you.

Think about it 28,000 some men, no matter how rich you are, you don't send that many men to just trade, they were going on a long journey.

Only problem is the records have been burned, and we will probaley never be for sure in what happened. But no one can denine that something in History is worng.

#39 Cao Cao

Cao Cao

    Provincial Governor (Cishi 刺史)

  • CHF Beginner
  • 36 posts

Posted 23 July 2004 - 01:26 PM

I saw the PBS documentary too and while Menzies' theories on the Da Conti map, the Bimini Roads, and the Newport lighthouse were heavily debated upon, what was the most disappointing for me was that there was no mention or debate on the supposed wreckages of Ming ships that Menzies mentioned on his website, www.1421.tv, specifically http://www.1421.tv/p...x.asp?PageID=79

of which I would think are the most important supporting contentions for Menzies' main thesis.

#40 wuTao

wuTao

    State Undersecretary (Shangshu Lang 尚书郎)

  • Novice Scholar (Tongsheng)
  • 571 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    General Chinese history, Asian history

Posted 23 July 2004 - 03:35 PM

I personally believe that Menzies is a fraud, and the show proves it. Menzies' inability to respond to the criticize presented to him shows how groundless his theory is. All he could say was "i accept that" when presented with experts saying that da Conti never mentions Chinese or travels to China, or how the map does not really say "volcano erupted here", or when Chinese experts said that Zhou Wen returned home early. He's basically agreeing that he never really did any indepth research, and his claims are fradulent!

#41 zelbest

zelbest

    General of the Guard (Hujun Zhongwei/Jinjun Tongshuai 护军中尉/禁军统帅)

  • CHF Beginner
  • 103 posts

Posted 23 July 2004 - 05:29 PM

i wouldnt call him a fraud, he just made too many assumptions and took many rumors or theories as truth without investigating them.

to Ghost of Han: im not trying to bring him down, i want to believe that china reached America first as much as he did. Its just i cannot believe in theories that have way too many holes in them.

#42 Yun

Yun

    Sage-King

  • CHF Han Lin Scholar
  • 9,057 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore/USA
  • Interests:Ancient Chinese history, with a focus on the Age of Fragmentation. Chinese ethnicities, religion, philosophy, music, and art and material culture. Military history in general.
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Three Kingdoms, Age of Fragmentation, Sui-Tang

Posted 23 July 2004 - 09:36 PM

Any comments on the isolated "leads" presented on this page in Menzies' site?

http://www.1421.tv/gallery.asp#

Or on Menzies' suggestion that the Chinese built an earlier version of the Panama Canal? http://www.1421.tv/p...?EvidenceID=194
(contrary to the title, he doesn't say anything about the Egyptians)
The dead have passed beyond our power to honour or dishonour them, but not beyond our ability to try and understand.

#43 Ghost_of_Han

Ghost_of_Han

    Grand Mentor (Taishi 太师)

  • Entry Scholar (Xiucai)
  • 439 posts
  • Location:Michigan
  • Interests:Chinese History, and Chinese
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 24 July 2004 - 02:19 AM

I personally believe that Menzies is a fraud, and the show proves it. Menzies' inability to respond to the criticize presented to him shows how groundless his theory is. All he could say was "i accept that" when presented with experts saying that da Conti never mentions Chinese or travels to China, or how the map does not really say "volcano erupted here", or when Chinese experts said that Zhou Wen returned home early. He's basically agreeing that he never really did any indepth research, and his claims are fradulent!


All he did was assume things, and they posed questions at him, that he had no way to give a good reponse. They just skewd him. All the facts are kinda blurry, but the fact remains, there was a map made long before Colmbus, the NAtive american DNA on the Coast is that of Chinese and Europeans were known for lying, so I bet they know there weren't the first and just lied about it.

#44 Guest_Thanol_*

Guest_Thanol_*
  • Guest

Posted 24 July 2004 - 10:34 AM

I personally believe that Menzies is a fraud, and the show proves it. Menzies' inability to respond to the criticize presented to him shows how groundless his theory is. All he could say was "i accept that" when presented with experts saying that da Conti never mentions Chinese or travels to China, or how the map does not really say "volcano erupted here", or when Chinese experts said that Zhou Wen returned home early. He's basically agreeing that he never really did any indepth research, and his claims are fradulent!


All he did was assume things, and they posed questions at him, that he had no way to give a good reponse. They just skewd him. All the facts are kinda blurry, but the fact remains, there was a map made long before Colmbus, the NAtive american DNA on the Coast is that of Chinese and Europeans were known for lying, so I bet they know there weren't the first and just lied about it.

Does he ever give out details on the DNA evidence, I mean really NA and Chinese are part of the same race so of course we're going to be related.

#45 Kulong

Kulong

    Grand Marshal (Da Sima/Taiwei 大司马/太尉)

  • CHF Grand Historian Award
  • 1,487 posts

Posted 29 July 2004 - 09:12 AM

I wanted to post this under the older thread about the PBS documentary but couldn't find it and the Search feature is disabled.

For those of you who missed it, here is a BitTorrent file for it.

http://66.90.75.92/s...America.torrent

Yeah, in your face DaMo. :P

[Mod: Kulong, I've merged this into the original thread for you]
生為中國人,死為中國魂。

"You can believe in any god, as long as it's our God."




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users