Bill Hartz on 1421

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.

While I believe strongly that history is a very subjective thing, i.e. kings and ancient scribes (and whoever else wrote stuff) left behind what they wanted us to believe happened during their reign, I am also aware that those who cite references and bibiliographies can very easily mislead readers by counting on the fact that most of us won’t bother to check. I still give the benefit of the doubt to authors when I read what is noted as non-fiction, I’m not so cynical nor an expert in any field (except for one type of sock doll), and this essay’s arguments make clear that Menzies did make rather… er… fascinating leaps of logic in order for the background material to support his claims (at least for those covered in the rebuttal essay, that is).

(There’s an additional comment on the forum where the original complaint was posted, this one about an ‘odd ball‘ from the early Ming dynasty. Very cool.)

My thanks to whoever it was who posted the comment, whether it was Geoff Wade himself, my friend who said he would ask Geoff Wade, or anyone who was interested enough to take the time.

• 7 Nov 2005