Saturday, June 21, 2008

1434 Book Review

1434 The Year A Magnificent Chinese Fleet sailed to Italy and ignited the Renaissance.
By Gavin Menzies Harper Collins June 2008
Website

The Renaissance was heralded through the recovery by Italian scholars of Greek and Roman classical literature. When the movement began, the civilization of Greece and Rome had long been exerting a partial influence, not only upon Italy, but on other parts of mediaeval Europe as well. Source


What if this Greek and Roman orgin was a lie? What if the Renaissance was totally fueld by something or someone else? what if Leonardo da Vinci was NOT the scientist and inventer everyone says he was?

How will you react? With Shock? With Horror?
Will you call me a Heretic? Will you call me a Liar?

What if Leonardo never actually dreamt up and created these inventions? Yes, he drew them, noone denies that, but they were not his original ideas. He was just redrawing them, and making better drawings of someone elses inventions. Whose inventions was he redrawing, you ask? Why, the Chinese of course.

About a month ago, I read and reviewed a book written by Paul Chiasson, in which he claimed that the Chinese had discovered America before Columbus. Island of the Seven Cities. Chiasson mentioned another book - 1421 - written by Gavin Menzies, which hypothesised that the Chinese sent out huge junks (boats) in the early 1400s to map the world. Along the way they discovered the Americas.

Gavin Menzies has now written another book called 1434 - due to be published this month (June 2008). In this book, Menzies states that in 1434, the Chinese travelled to Europe and gave their knowledge of astronomy, cartography, agriculture, machines, weapons, and many other areas of knowledge to the Vatican. This was done so that Europe could reciprocate and pay tribute back to China.

However, a few years later, China cut herself off from the world and chose to isolate herself, and her people from the West. Noone knows excactly why China made this decsion, but Menzies makes a hypothesis. That China lost so many junks and crew during the great exploration of the early 1420s, that as a country, she withdrew into herself to grieve. This caused China to become isolated.

In 1513 Piri Reis of Turkey drew a map of the world. Only the Atlantic part of this world map survives to the present day. This map shows the Caribbean islands and the east coast of South America. Brazil was discovered in 1500, but not settled or explored until the 1530s.

In one of the inscriptions on the map itself, Piri Reis lists these (other) sources, and tells us how he used them: No one now living has seen a map like this. I have composed and constructed it using about twenty maps and mappaemundi; these are the maps which were composed in the time of Alexander of the Two Horns, and which show the inhabited portion of the earth. The Arabs call these maps ja'fariya.

I have used eight ja'fariya maps, an Arab map of India and four recent Portuguese maps - these maps show the sea of Sind, India and China according to mathematical principles - and also a map of the western regions drawn by Colombo. The final form was arrived at by reducing all these maps to the same scale. Therefore the present map is as accurate for the Seven Seas as the maps of our own countries used by sailors.

Another note gives the date and authorship of the map: "This map was drawn by Piri ibn Hajji Muham­mad, known as the nephew of Kemal Reis, in the month of Muharram of the year 919 [1513]."

Charles Hapgood studied the Piri Reis map for a number of years, and wrote a book about it, called the Maps of the Ancient Sea Gods. He finally decided that the older maps that Reis claims to have copied from, must have been made by aliens and UFOs from outer space. Do you beleive that?

While historians accept and beleive that Piri Reis copied his map from other sources originating at the Library of Alexandria, there is no proof of this at all. If anything from the Library of Alexandria had been discovered this would be very exciting news and known world wide. I would surely know about it, as I am an avid student of the Library of Alexandria history.

I believe that those other sources came from the Chinese. It makes logical sense. Reis even mentions that he used a map from India. How do we know that the Indians did not get their knowledge from China? We don't.

1434 is a very exciting book to read, and most definitely an eye opener about an important part of the real history of this planet. I have read about a number of finds in various places that do not fit the "official" archaeological record, and as such they are either ignored or hidden away.

There are also those who are debunking Menzies's theories. Websites such as 1421 Exposed and threads such as this one all debunk Menzies ands say that he made mistakes therefore his evidence and theories are wrong.

Lets put it this way - those debunking Menzies did not themselves go out and correct Menzies errors. No. They just say this is wrong, that is wrong, and then do nothing. They also dont show any proof that Menzies is wrong. I am free to believe whatever I choose. I choose to beleive Menzies. What he says does make logical sense.

Admittedly some of what Menzies says is hard to beleive, precisely because it goes against everything we have been taught. He makes a shocking statement about the Maori's of New Zealand. In NZ (when I was at school) the official story was that the Maoris came from a place called Hawaiki, which has been identified as Hawaii. The Maori's showed extrordinary navigational abilities to traverse thousands of miles of open ocean from Havaiki to New Zealand with no landmarks to guide them. Menzies claims that the original Maoris were actually Chinese.

According to the NZ history website this Chinese origin seems to now be correct - but it is definitely NOT what I was taught in school. Mind you, I have been out of school for 25 years.

If you are willing to be open minded, and to think logically about this book, then you too will learn new things that your teachers did not teach you in school.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

I find Gavin Menzies amazing. He read books and records, finding something didn't add up, he went further to find answers or to raise more questions. He used Internet to his best advantage, and many people went to his website to give him clues to get his questions answered. Gavin Menzies, his books "1421" and "1434" are great stuffs for liberal study. bkwdkysh

Doug & Helen said...

Menzies says the Maori originate from Chinese miners in New Zealand in 286 BC - that is nothing at all to do with the suggestions that they are a Polynesian people and that the Polynesian people come from Taiwan, where they had been isolated from mainland China for at least ten thousand years.
Menzies book (probably, like his first, written by a number of people) plays fast and loose with the truth.

Bolkonsky said...

Could the author of this book review please learn how to spell "believe?" Although truthfully I am not surprised. Menzies' books are a search for historic sensationalism, not scholarship, and it pains me that people read them. Absurd theories sell books, although, in the end, they are still absurd.

Historia said...

WOW, every single coment says that Menzies is a liar - BUT noone even attempts to show or what the truth really is.

I would strongly suggest that you do not make these wild statements that Menzies is wrong - without providing proof that says he IS wrong. You have not done so.

Anonymous said...

You stated quite clearly that "if you have an open-mind, and read this book and its logic, you will learn new things that are not taught in school", there are a lot of people paraded as scholars and academics, they called foul but never able to produce any proof to refute Menzies' findings. These people will attack you just because you have a different view-points. Mantovani.

Anonymous said...

Menzies rarely provides proof. His new book is even worse, he frequently relies on contributions to his website for evidence. But the fact is that many people have provided proof to refute various of Menzies' findings - his fans are commenting on things they've never read it appears.

Historia said...

I note that Anonymous does not provide any proof that Menzies is wrong. He just keeps repeating that Menzies is wrong. Therefore his statements are just his opinion as far as I am concerned.

I also note that Anonymous refuses to supply a name and any qualifications that qualify him to refute Menzies work. If he was a real academic, he would be giving me proof that Menzies is wrong. So far, not one single statement or bibliographic note, that gives me verifiable proof (that I can research for myself) that Menzies is totally wrong.

Truth is flexible. One persons truth is another persons lies. (Now where have I heard this before? Oh yes - religion). I like Menzies theory and so far, his proof makes sense to me.

If other people choose to say he is wrong, well that is their choice, but they have NO right to say I am wrong without PROOF. This is because they are not willing to be flexible and not willing to ask questions (like Menzies did) and find out for themselves.

Since Anonymous has not provided any proof whatsoever. He probably only looked at Menzies website since the book has only recently been published. The website shows extra proof that cannot be fitted into the book. What is wrong with that?

I will no longer post any comments from anyone calling themselves Anonymous. If you use your name then I will post the comment.

Doug & Helen said...

There is no one poser named anonymous, and although I haven't logged on every time, I am the only poster who has used a real name p(what is the difference between 'Historia' and 'anonymous'.
I'm Doug Weller.
His new book has little in the way of proof, as I said, a lot of claims backed by -- claims on his website.
I'vce seen quite a few reviews offering some proof he is wrong, as does the Wikipedia article. As does
www.1421exposed.com/
Menzies 'proofs' evaporate when examined, eg his claims for junks in California. Menzies makes claims, sure. But he fails to prove them.

Historia said...

Doug
You did not have to use your own name. A non-de-plume would have sufficed. Anonymous will not be acceptable - I dont care who he is.

In this supposedly free world where free speech is supposedly still the law, we will have to agree to disagree.

You (and Anonymous) appear bent on wanting me to change my mind and start claiming that Menzies books are full of bull. Sorry. I happen to think his questions and theories are reasonable and logical.

Do you seriously believe that Wikipedia as a trustworthy source? That is a laugh. Wikipedia indeed.

You cannot claim to call Wikipedia an academic site. It is severely biased. A number of "articles" on Wikipedia have been known to edited stringently in favour of the subject - with all negativity removed.

Yes I use Wikipedia sometimes for links - but only when I cannot find any decent information elsewhere.

If you (or Anonymous) cannot give me any bibliographic details other than 1421 exposed, then I have to assume that you (and Anonymous) are amateurs. Just like I am an amateur. I never said I was an academic.

History is written by the winners. The losers have their history as well, and I have an unusual desire to know what the losers aaid about various events. They are MUCH more likely to tell the truth. History's winners are well known to often elaborate the truth in their version of history.

This topic is now CLOSED.

Thank you.

Doug & Helen said...

1421exposed is a site with a lot of academic participation and run by at least one academic.

Anonymous said...

I love this book! I am so happy there are people out there challenging the world's euro-centric views. I completley agree with Menzies. He is truley brilliant

COLOMBIAN GREEN said...

I HAVE READ A FEW BOOKS ON LEONARDO DA VINCE SEEN THE EXIBITS A COUPLE OF TIMES AND ALWAY MARVELED THAT ONE MAN ACHIEVED ALL THAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE DONE ON SO MANY SUBJECT IN ONE LIFE TIME. I STILL THINK HE WAS A GREAT MAN BUT BELIEVE THAT MANY THINGS HE WAS CREDITED AS BEING THE FIRST AT ARE NIT TRUE.