1421 hypothesis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. |
The 1421 hypothesis suggests that during the Ming Dynasty from 1421 to 1423, ships commanded by the Chinese captains Zhou Wen (周聞), Zhou Man (周滿), Yang Qing (楊慶) and Hong Bao (洪保), in the fleet of Emperor Zhu Di's (朱棣) Admiral Zheng He (鄭和), travelled to many parts of the world unknown to contemporary Europe. The suggestion was put forward by former British Royal Navy submarine commander Gavin Menzies in his book, 1421: The Year China Discovered The World, first published in 2002.
According to Menzies, the Chinese discoveries include Australia, New Zealand, the Americas, Antarctica, the northern coast of Greenland, and the Northeast Passage. The knowledge of these discoveries was subsequently lost, Menzies argues, because the Mandarins (bureaucrats) of the Imperial court feared the costs would ruin the Chinese economy. A year later Zhu Di died, the new Hongxi Emperor forbade further expeditions, and the Mandarins hid or destroyed the records of the voyages.
The 1421 hypothesis has proven popular with the general public, but has been dismissed by Sinologists and other professional historians.
Contents |
[edit] Method
Menzies bases his story on alleged Chinese shipwrecks, old Chinese and European maps, a disputed translation of a Chinese inscription set up by Zheng He, surviving Chinese literature from the time, and accounts written by navigators such as Christopher Columbus and Ferdinand Magellan. Menzies also claims that unexplained structures such as the Newport Tower and the Bimini Road were constructed by Zheng He's men.
[edit] Maps
Several maps were used by Menzies:
- The Kangnido map (混一疆理歷代國都之圖 or 疆理圖) (1402), which Menzies says indicates an extensive geographical knowledge of the Old World (and particularly of the contour of the African continent) by Eastern Asian countries, even before the time of Zheng He's expeditions.
- The Pizzigano map (1424)
- The Fra Mauro map (1459), which shows a general understanding of the masses of Africa and Asia, even before Europeans had sailed around Africa. According to him, the coasts had already been charted by Arab or Chinese sailors. The Fra Mauro map also relates an expedition by an "Indian" ship into the Atlantic around 1420. "India" meaning Asia in 15th century Europe, and the ship being called a "Junk (Zoncho in the original), Menzies suggests the ship was a Chinese ship:
- "About the year of Our Lord 1420 a ship, what is called an Indian junk (lit. "Zoncho de India", "India" meaning Asia in 15th century Europe), on a crossing of the Sea of India towards the Isle of Men and Women (close to Socotra), was diverted beyond the Cape of Diab (Cape of Good Hope), through the Green Isles, out into the Sea of Darkness (Atlantic Ocean) on a way west and southwest. Nothing but air and water was seen for 40 days and by their reckoning they ran 2,000 miles and fortune deserted them. When the stress of the weather had subsided they made the return to the said Cape of Diab in 70 days and drawing near to the shore to supply their wants the sailors saw the egg of a bird called roc." (Fra Mauro map, Inscription 10, A13).
- The Cantino map (1502)
- The Waldeseemüller map (1507)
- The Piri Reis map (1513)
Gavin Menzies suggests that the southern landmass is indeed the Antarctic coastline and was based on earlier Chinese maps. According to Menzies, Admiral Hong Bao charted the coast over 70 years before Columbus as part of a larger expedition under the famous Chinese explorer and admiral Zheng He to bring the world under China's tribute system.
- The Johannes Schöner globe (One was made in 1515 and another in 1520)
- The Jean Rotz map (1542)
- The Wu Pei Chi (Wu Bei Zhi; 武備志) map (redrawn after Zheng He's maps in 1628)
- The Vinland map, redrawn in 15th Century from a 13th century original.
Also, the De Virga world map (1411-1415) has been presented on Gavin Menzies's 1421 website as new evidence of the propagation of eastern cartographic know-how before the European Age of Discovery.
[edit] Other evidence
Additional supporting evidence given by Menzies includes:
- DNA studies purportedly showing "recent" DNA flow from China to indigenous people of North & South America, Australia, New Zealand, etc.
- A drawing of an animal in a book reportedly published in China in 1430 showing what Menzies claims is an armadillo, an animal found only in the New World.
- Bananas and rice plantations were reportedly seen along the banks of the Amazon by Francisco de Orellana, 1541.
- Reported indications of horses, flightless ducks and Asiatic pigs possibly in the New World prior to Columbus's arrival.
- Carved stones with what Menzies claims is Asian writing found in places such as the Cape Verde islands, South America and New Zealand.
- Artifacts such as Chinese porcelain and Chinese jade found in the Americas which Menzies claims date back before the arrival of Europeans.
- Cases of some diseases, such as smallpox, reportedly appearing before the arrival of Europeans.
- Seeming linguistic similarities with the Chinese language of place names in Peru and Chile.
- Menzies cites many accounts of European explorers such as Sir Francis Drake, Francisco Vázquez de Coronado, Pedro Menéndez de Avilés and João Rodrigues Cabrilho. Menzies claims these accounts indicate Chinese settlements and the wrecks of Chinese junks were already present in the New World.
- Also quoted are the accounts of Bartolomé de las Casas, according to which two dead bodies that looked like Indians were found on Flores (Azores). De las Casas said he found that fact in Columbus' notes, and it was one of the reasons that led Columbus to assume India was on the other side of the ocean.
[edit] Criticism
Menzies' hypotheses have found no support among mainstream historians. Robert Finlay: "Examination of the book's central claims reveals they are uniformly without substance." [1] John E. Wills: "These myriad flaws do not make Menzies' book completely useless to teachers of world history. Rather, it might be used to teach students about the use and misuse of historical evidence." [2]
The 1421 hypothesis is based on some documents of debatable provenance (e.g., the Vinland map) and on novel interpretation of already accepted documents (Fra Mauro map, de las Casas) as well as uncategorized archaeological findings.
Some critics focus their skepticism on the conspicuous absence of an explanation of why these Chinese fleets seemed to touch every coastline of world except that of Europe. The absence of any European records corroborating such an exploration is glaringly absent. Such a record, if it existed, would certainly have been handed down. On the other hand it is a given fact that Chinese-European contact existed for well over three centuries before the 15th century,
While it represents a minor part of Menzies' argument, some critics also maintain that the linguistic evidence cited by Menzies is itself questionable. It is perhaps inevitable that similarities between words taken from any pair of languages will exist-- even if only by pure chance. Thus, the short lists provided by Menzies are considered by some to represent unsatisfactory evidence. Furthermore, none of the alleged Chinese words listed by Menzies as similar to words of the same meaning in the Squamish language of British Columbia is a real Chinese word. Similarly, the presence of Chinese-speaking people in various locations in the Americas could be explained by immigration after Columbus, yet Menzies cites no evidence that these communities existed prior to Columbus.
Menzies' critics note that throughout the book he displays a lack of chronological control e.g. p138 with a story of a map dated to 120 years before 1528; Menzies dates the map to 1428 not 1408.[citation needed] They claim many true but irrelevant facts are included presumeably to confuse the reader.[citation needed] In other cases, they say supposed relevant facts are due to mistranscriptions.
Another criticism is that Menzies chose not to consult the most obvious source of information on the Zheng He voyages, namely the Chinese records from the period themselves. Menzies seems to be attempting to anticipate and deflect this criticism by asserting that most Chinese documents relating to the travels of Zheng He were destroyed by the same Mandarins responsible for the closing of China's borders in the years following 1421. While it can be supposed that some records have been destroyed, other records remain in extensive form, including the account by Ma Huan published in 1433 and other information in the Ming dynastic histories. These records have even served as the basis for previous historical accounts of the Zheng He voyages, such as that by Louise Levathes.
Some critics have also questioned whether Menzies has the nautical knowledge he claims. Some feel that his unsubstantiated claim to have actually sailed the same seas is suspect, particularly while commanding HMS Rorqual.
Menzies and/or his publisher have also been criticised for misrepresenting his background as an expert on China. The dust jacket of 1421, states that Menzies was raised in China. In fact he was born in London.[1]
Menzies makes another argument both in his book and also in a PBS program based on what he claims to be similarities between appearance of Native Americans and Chinese. Menzies claims that Columbus believed until he died that he had reached China because he saw Chinese people (who were actually Native Americans) in the New World. Menzies uses this statement to claim that Columbus saw the previously settled Chinese "colonizers" from Zheng He's voyage. Most people take this to be completely baseless and false. Columbus actually believed he had reached India and he thought the people he saw were Indians. That is the reason why even today Native Americans are still called Indians and not Chinese. This attack is not without its own flaws, though, for in Columbus' time China was referred to as "India" by Europeans.
[edit] Australia
Given by Menzies as evidence of Chinese contact in Australia is the reported existence of stone structures in and around Sydney and Newcastle, Australia. These structures in fact do not exist, or if they do Menzies has failed to tell people where he found them. On page 203 of his book, Menzies writes of the 'Chinese' ruins in Bittangabee Bay. According to the commemorative association AOTM, these are more likely to be a structure built for the Imlay family in the 1840's than ancient Chinese. On page 220 there is the claim that "A beautiful carved stone head of the goddess Ma Tsu...is now in the Kedumba Nature Museum in Katoomba." In fact no such museum actually exists. There once was a curio stand in Katoomba called "Kedumba Nature Display" but it closed down in the 1980s. Later on in the book, Menzies recruits "a local researcher", Rex Gilroy, for his valuable discovery of a Chinese pyramid in Queensland: the Gympie Pyramid. Menzies claims that the Gympie pyramid is "the most direct and persuasive evidence of the Chinese visits to Australia" (1421, p221). However, this is the same Rex Gilroy who at one time ran the "Kedumba Museum" and purportedly found the Chinese carved goddess Ma Tsu from the Chinese Fleets, a connection which Menzies fails to mention. Menzies also fails to mention that Gilroy himself used the Gympie Pyramid as evidence of the Egyptian discovery of Australia. (Rex Gilroy is also well known in Australia as the "father of Yowie (cryptid) research", Australia's Bigfoot, "discovering" foot prints etc.[2]) The Gympie Pyramid has been researched idependently and found to be part of a retaining wall built by an Italian farmer to stop erosion on a natural mesa on his property.)
[edit] Achievement
Whatever its historical merits, Menzies' book and the surrounding publicity has succeeded in raising awareness of Zheng He and the Ming Imperial Treasure Fleets, reaching a much broader audience than any previous work on the subject, in part through recent television documentaries on the History Channel.
[edit] References
- ^ Finlay, Robert (2004). "How Not to (Re)Write World History: Gavin Menzies and the Chinese Discovery of America". Journal of World History 15 (2).
- ^ Wills, John E. (2004). "book review". World History Connected 2 (1).
- Levathes, Louise, When China Ruled the Seas: The Treasure Fleet of the Dragon Throne, 1405-1433, Oxford University Press, 1997, trade paperback, ISBN 0-19-511207-5
- Ma Huan,Ying-yai Sheng-lan, The Overall Survey of the Ocean's Shores (1433), translated from the Chinese text edited by Feng Ch'eng Chun with introduction, notes and appendices by J.V.G.Mills. White Lotus Press, reprint. 1970, 1997.
- Menzies, Gavin (2003). 1421, The Year China Discovered America. New York: Morrow/Avon. ISBN 0-06-053763-9.
- Menzies, Gavin (2002). 1421, The Year China Discovered the World. London: Bantam Press. ISBN 0-593-05158-0.
[edit] See also
- 1421: The Year China Discovered America
- Gavin Menzies
- Kangnido map
- Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact
[edit] External links
[edit] News stories
- BBC News article: 'China map lays claim to Americas'
- China beat Columbus to it, perhaps by The Economist, January 12, 2006
- "Speculation That Chinese Explorer Discovered America", Windows Audio from Public Radio International The World program, January 17, 2006
- Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Four Corners Program Transcript of "Junk History"
- "The Independent article: Hero of the Ming Dynasty: The man who mapped the world"
[edit] Debunking sites
- "1421: A Chinoise history"· XPOFerenS
- 1421: The Year the Chinese DID NOT Discover America: A Tabulation of the Evidence Against Gavin Menzies
- Gavin's Fantasy Land
- 1421 exposed - academic website criticising Menzies' theories
- Critique of linguistic claims
- Update on critique of linguistic claims
- Junk History, Four Corners, ABC Television, Quentin McDermott, Broadcast: July 31, 2006.
- Zheng He in the Americas and Other Unlikely Tales of Exploration and Discovery, CSICOP: September 2004
