1421 completely debunked?
Angela sent on a mailing list posting from Geoff Wade, who claims that Gavin Menzies, author of 1421: the year China discovered the world, is complete and utter bunkum. This is very disappointing. However, when there is no evidence backing up a claim of ‘no evidence’, I tend to get curious.
In his first statement of ‘fact’, Wade makes the accusation:
In short, there is no archaeological, textual or archival material to support the Menzies thesis as set down in *1421*. In this book Menzies intentionally distorts known materials and deliberately alters known facts in order to support his thesis.
I’d like to see that backed up. Wade claims Menzies is making shite up and has no evidence, but doesn’t show us his evidence refuting Menzies. Perhaps he is assuming a certain deep level of background knowledge into the history of the world, or he’s hoping we believe him unquestioningly, too.
Wade also says that
The genetic evidence on which Menzies relies is provided by a company whose genetic tests have been labelled a “scam” by Stephen O’Brien, the US National Cancer Institute’s laboratory chief.
His dismissal can be found at the St Petersburg Times: Race gleaned from DNA causes debate. However, the 1421 website cites the DNA evidence they used, and I doubt all those scientists relied on the Ancestry by DNA test.
A reasonable argument against believing Menzies wholesale is Timothy Furnish’s essay, Is Gavin Menzies Right or Wrong?
There is a good forum thread discussing Menzies’ book, and another on Geoff Wade (who claimed that Admiral Cheng Ho’s voyages to Southeast Asia were not peaceful).
In addition, not only are the Bimini stones posited as proof of Chinese travels around the world, others believe they prove the existence of Atlantis (scholars argue that they are actually natural formations).
I think Menzies has put forward a very interesting theory. I think it is plausible that a fleet of Chinese ships explored the world. It is also plausible that they did not. At the moment, the 1421 book and website offer extensive appendices and notes supporting his claim (which is not to say they are proven facts), and Wade has written articles (with no appendices or footnotes) that claim to prove fabrication.
(I gain nothing from arguing in favour of Menzies — other than I love a good yarn.)
In
Comments
I,m also familiar with Wade’s bitter and fierce arguments against Gavin Menzies. I have no idea who this Wade is (or any evidence by myself whether Menzies has right or wrong) but I had exactly the same experience when I relatively late in my life came to the academic circles. People who have been scholars all their lives are unbelievable intolerant, even aggressive to hear something new that may not fit in their own beliefs.
The reason is that the scholars usually build up their whole career and academic existence on one single pillar, only building it higher and higher. This is why I understand very well hat they who seem to rock the foundation of this pillar are not welcomed.
I actually met up with a friend last night who knows Wade. He said he would ask Wade if he has written any (footnoted and referenced) articles rebutting Menzies, and to try to get me a copy. He also said that a lot of people did not like Menzies’ book, because the research was very poorly done, but as my friend had not read the book, he could not say one way or the other.
Dear all,
Referenced and footnote rebuttal of mMnzies by Bill Hartz available at:
http://thehallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=91
The DNA evidence all says that North Americans populations are related to Asian populations and that there has been “recent” (within last 10,000 years)inflow of genes across the bering Straits area. Nothing new and nothing to support menzies claims
See also book by Phil Rivers: “1421: fact and fantasy”
Wade is neither bitter nor intolerant. Like most historians, he finds new theories exciting. But when people fabricate evidence in order to deceive people in their quest for a buck, he like most historians gets pretty disgusted.
Best wishes,
geoff wade
If that really was Geoff Wade, even if it wasn’t, thanks for taking the time to post the link to the article.
[...] Pursuant to a comment made on my earlier post, 1421 completely debunked?, I encourage people to read the essay linked there. It is a referenced look at some of Gavin Menzies’ claims, and is very interesting. [...]
Wade, Rivers and a Professor Su from Taiwan are buddies trying to “debunk” certain theories they disagreed.
As college professors and researchers in a famous educational and research institution, they should not do any personal attacks or writing open or anonymous letters to the Singapore press, Singapore Tourism Board and even the U.S. Library of Congress to “debunk” Mr. Menzies for presenting his case.
With no respect of Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Faith, and disregard of other people using an open platform to voice what he finds, I think it’s a disgrace to the educational and research institutions which hired Wade and Su, these two institutions should remind the two folks what freedom of expression are all about.
I do agree that academics should refrain from making personal attacks on those with whom they disagree. I hear that the discussion is getting quite heated, with Wade attempting to sue the publishers for misrepresenting 1421 as a non-fiction title. I have also heard that there is a claim that the publishers edited 1421, against Menzies’ wishes, to increase its chances of becoming a bestseller. I would be more than happy to find out what Menzies thinks of all this.
Again, I’m not ruling anything out, since history is such that we won’t know for sure what happened because everyone who was there is long dead.
I was dumbfounded to read those who tried to debunk Gavin Menzies to an extreme by digging into the court case of him and posted on the net anonymously.
On September 5, an article of Zheng He Research and Activities Brief was written and posted by Au Cheng-liang, an amateur history researcher from Tainan (quote - interpretation corrected by a lawyer called Jiang Shin-Shian - unquote). The article was titled, “Another Side of Menzies -
Straddled by Court Cases and Debts”, it started off by putting in the details of Gavin’s court case, named his wife Marcella, and ended by saying his book was based on assumptions and not true.
I can’t believe these academics and scholars!!!
These people are hired by high education and research authorities, they must know they cannot go into a smear campaign and ruin other’s reputation simply because others have presented a different theory.
How am I going to trust putting my kids to these institutions that have low form of lives to teach our children!!! How can I trust the research presented by these institutions suspecting that the truth might have been shut out from a bunch of cronies who had no open mind!!!
I hope the National University of Singapore, Taiwan Oceanographic University will examine why these people are allowed to do these under the name of their distinguished organizations, and whether these people had any similar smear campaigns to anyone they disagreed.
Menzies’ is a charlatan. I worked on some of the archaeological sites in NZ he spins yarns about, and he made up a lot of details (all actually), included bizzare factual mistakes and from this built a fantasy version.
Since I know he is deluded it follows the rest is just as dubious.
The NZ material I posted here;
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=10888
I have posted rebuttal of the global fantasies on a website taken from numerous reviews;
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=10942&st=0
I also checked into his irresponsible methods with other ‘evidence’ and found those that check his ‘facts’ worldwide find the same things.
This website includes many issues of evidence, and manipulation. I include and abridged version of an excellent article on the above link. Full version at:http://www.dightonrock.com/gavinsfantalyland.htm
If you read one link that explodes Menzies’ today then make it this dighton rock one!
If you read this then any doubts about Menzies’ distortions will vanish. It is thoroughy referenced and is easy to check Gavins own sources. ;)
If you read through it then almost everything Menzies’ said is exploded as fiction and fabrication.
His ‘carved stones’ are typically bronze age, not Ming…his ship wrecks are often identified as historical & carbon dated after 1421…but he just leaves such things out despite knowing it from his own sources!. Pure manipulation.
I weep for history.
Menzies is not an underdog being picked on by academics. I dont think he is being treated unfairly.
His 1421 work is a disgrace. He is simply a sham historian. His book either demonstrates the authors very poor grasp of reality or else a brilliant insight into how to sell beyond 20 editions in 5 short years.
The phrase is ‘laughing all the way to the bank’.
Comments form
TrackBack URL