Who Discovered America?: The Untold History of the Peopling of the Americas
Contents:
Let me give a couple of examples. At the beginning to the book Menzies claims that he tried to make a crossing of the Bering Sea, to prove whether or not the ancestors of the Native American could have done the same. He fails, and therefore states no one else could. Imagine the hubris, first just to assume that he's personally the yardstick of human accomplishment, and secondly that he didn't bother The thing that strikes me most about this book is how far out of control Menzies' ego has gotten.
Imagine the hubris, first just to assume that he's personally the yardstick of human accomplishment, and secondly that he didn't bother to check to see if the conditions in the area today are the same as when they crossing happened. There's ample fossil evidence that Beringia supported vegetation and wildlife far north of where it lives now. I'm also not sure how he completely ignores the existence of the Inuit and similar tribes, who live in environments that were much harsher. But as we'll see, Menzies has a pretty poor opinion of all Native Americans.
Later in the book Menzies has been informed of a map that he constantly calls the "" map, even though the map itself only claims to be an 18th copy of an alleged map. In any case, the map is clearly a forgery someone made up just to fit Menzies' theories. Menzies translates some of the text, and even though the map is written in Chinese he translates it into bizarrely archaic english -- "equitation," "toxophily" and "anthropophagi" are words he uses, for no apparent reason. As this inscription is supposed to describe the people of the eastern coast of North America in , what he's trying to do is obscure how completely incorrect the description is.
Equitation is horse riding horses were extinct during the early human habitation of North America, despite Menzies' pathetic attempts to claim otherwise , toxophily is archery Native Americans used bows, though whether Chinese people would call it "archery" is debatable , and anthropophagi is cannibalism self-explanatory. The only reason Menzies wrote it that way is because his ego won't allow him to admit that the map is a forgery, and he thinks his readers are stupid.
The real point of Menzies' theories is to rob the Native Americans of their history -- everything noteworthy that happened in the Americas before Columbus was because of some outside influence, whether it was the the Chinese, the Japanese, the Minoans, or whoever. Like most alternate historians of the modern era he realizes that calling Native Americans stupid or uncivilized won't fly, but I note that at one point in the book Menzies slips up.
In discussing the Windover archeological site, which he thinks is the remains of a Minoan colony, Menzies writes that the people found there "were a kind and caring people -- not savages.
View all 8 comments. Feb 10, David R. I have read the complete set of Menzies' "Chinese navigators" books and this is by far the most ludicrous of the bunch. The book wobbles through varies "theories" of various peoplings, the most noteworthy being Peru and North Carolina! Menzies continues to display a penchant for devising a theory, seeking the data that fit it, making astonishing but unsupported claims, and disregarding perfectly good evidence that contradicts him, making him the 21st Century Erich von Daniken.
His North Caroli I have read the complete set of Menzies' "Chinese navigators" books and this is by far the most ludicrous of the bunch. His North Carolina "theory" is that the Shawnee, Mingo and other tribes are actually Chinese in ethnicity which would surprise them, I think. Ostensibly these Chinese shipwrecked, promptly marched to the mountains to mine minerals, and yet managed Menzies explains not to get a remarkably accurate map of the eastern seaboard back to China.
A purported wrecked junk in the Dismal Swamp is accepted from unreliable accounts one that has not been examined or photographed , and a critical map displaying the "Azores" and the eastern seaboard looks all the world like one of the Korean peninsula and surrounding islands. Or did the ancient Minoans settle the American interior?
Menzies took an idea that had plausibility for the eastern Pacific and has magnified it into new depths of absurdity.
He seems stuck on his idea and seeks evidence to support it without bothering with corroboration or considering alternative explanations. He draws on a variety of fields - biology, anthropology, linguistics, history, oceanography, etc. Retrieved 23 June Ostensibly these Chinese shipwrecked, promptly marched to the mountains to mine minerals, and yet managed Menzies explains not to get a remarkably accurate map of the eastern seaboard back to China. Thankfully there is a reasonable good index. He wasn't even close to being the first.
I strongly urge all to avoid this book. Dec 22, Virginia rated it did not like it. Menzies' first book "" offered an interesting premise which I think has promise. His style of writing was a bit unpleasant as he was so eager to make the point that China had visited the Americas pre-Columbian that he verged on missionary fervor. Since it was his first book, I overlooked it. Unfortunately, that fervor became worse: The fact is he is not an archaeologist, biologist, botanist, or other scientist that can Menzies' first book "" offered an interesting premise which I think has promise.
The fact is he is not an archaeologist, biologist, botanist, or other scientist that can credibly analyze and write cogently on this subject. He spent much time quoting at length from this person or that person's writing, but these tended to be more opinions rather than validation of the theory.
Gavin Menzies - Wikipedia
He also wasted space telling the reader of how he went hither and yon in his pursuit of proof, with very little to show for all those words. His comments about the Silk Road were unbelievably shallow and unedifying, for example. If you like travelogues, read Paul Theroux or Bill Bryson. If you prefer science writers like Simon Winchester or Mark Kurlansky, who really research their books and present them to the reader in logical, readable, informative format, you should avoid this book.
Oct 08, Jessica Torres rated it it was amazing. I found this book after a curiosity with DNA research led me to it. I remember never liking history as a kid. It was blata I found this book after a curiosity with DNA research led me to it. It was blatantly obvious even by a child that it was skewed by whomever wrote it regardless of truth.
All I can say This needs to be taught in class. May 19, Nivedita Sankar rated it did not like it. My favorite part of this book might have been the first two pages, when Gavin Menzies seemed to be leveraging his strengths and doing an incredible improbable amphibious trip across the Bering. The cancellation of his trip, based on the political climate of Russia and poor access to oil and other resources, seems to give Menzies weight enough to claim that a Bering crossing could never have been possible. There is no science, history, or apparent understanding of evidentiary support.
The rest o My favorite part of this book might have been the first two pages, when Gavin Menzies seemed to be leveraging his strengths and doing an incredible improbable amphibious trip across the Bering. The rest of the book is comparably ridiculous. I think this may have been a nice read if framed as a man with an interest in history pursuing global visits to important historical sites.
Instead, he uses his experiences as a tourist as hard evidence for his claims, which border, if not completely cross into offensive territory. Jan 22, Walt rated it it was ok Shelves: When Menzies published he received a lot of attention. His theories threatened to shake up academe. Unlike other revisionists, he packs in a lot of references to beef up his claims. He draws on a variety of fields - biology, anthropology, linguistics, history, oceanography, etc.
Consequently, it is nearly impossible to systematically evaluate his claims.
The Untold History of the Peopling of the Americas [Gavin Menzies, Ian Hudson] on rethinking of the accepted historical record in Who Discovered America?. Editorial Reviews. From the Back Cover. A groundbreaking new book that upends our Who Discovered America?: The Untold History of the Peopling of the Americas - Kindle edition by Gavin Menzies, Ian Hudson. Download it once and read.
This book is presented as an addendum to and his subsequent books on prehistoric explorers. I was eager to finally read one of Menzies When Menzies published he received a lot of attention. I was eager to finally read one of Menzies' books. I agree with a basic premise, that it is hard to fathom migrants from Siberia walking over Berengia and settling the Western Hemisphere all the way to Tierra del Fuego.
I want to believe him. However, his informal writing style, poor citations, and disorganized structure, and blatant misinterpretation of other authors leads me to disbelieve the rest of his data. The informal writing style quickly began bothering me when he introduced the book with what reads like a cross between disclaimer and a plea to take him seriously. That is not a good way to start a book. Then he begins with a chapter on the Minoans. He does not attempt to connect this to the Chinese or any other Asians. Sailing into chapters on biology, disease, linguistics, and astronomy, Menzies style is to present an enormous amount of data within a small number of pages, rat-a-tat-tat, effectively overloading the reader with information, and then pauses to describe his worldly travels, concluding with a snide conclusion that the evidence is overwhelming in support of his theory.
The citations present a more tricky problem. Many readers praise Menzies because of his citations. This book has many pages of endnotes and references. However, many studies are not properly cited. The text says Professor Smith proved Theory X. The endnotes refer readers to Menzies earlier books, Menzies' website, or maybe Professor Smith's publications. I wanted to read more about these studies; but found the poor citations did not allow me to easily retrieve Menzie's sources.
The disorganization comes heavily from his style of presenting information so quickly and moving onto the next bit of evidence. The Minoans are a great example. What is their purpose in this book? Near the end of the book, he has a couple of chapters about early hominids in North America, and he advances the possibility that they are European I am still uncertain.
2 134,79 RUB
The misinterpretation of other authors is what really bothers me. I have only read two of the books Menzies mentions. That happens to be mainstream science. However, Menzies twists Southernton's writings into his theory that Asians had been visiting North America more recently. Southernton never claimed that. Menzies also misinterprets Ibn Battuta's Medieval explorations. Battuta traveled throughout the Muslim world and into East Asia.
Who Discovered America? The Untold History of the Peopling of the Americas
Menzies claims that Battuta's memoirs prove that the Chinese traveled by ship from China to Morocco. Battuta may have sailed on a Chinese junk; but not to Morocco or from Morocco to China. Battuta was a great traveler and explorer, he was not the norm for the Medieval world.
I find Menzies' evidence fascinating. I want to learn more. I Googled many of the things he talks about. It is easy to find critics refuting him. There are myths and stories about Chinese junks in America; but none have been photographed There are plausible explanations for the Chinese anchors near Los Angeles. Even his concluding chapters on the Minoans are full of controversy with strong arguments against Menzies.
Some of his strongest evidence is in maps. Menzies even has an insert of it in his book. Don't read Chinese or Korean? Don't see the Azores on the map? He does not help you there. In fact, the map looks awful. Korea is portrayed beautifully. This was a Korean map. However, further away from Korea, the map is more abstract. China is out of proportion, Japan is Africa and Europe are blobs. Southeast Asia is one huge landmass. I do not believe the Azores are there. Menzies has some interesting evidence.
However, when I consider his evidence alongside evidence I have prior knowledge about, and more that I can evaluate for myself, I question more and more of the evidence. Anyone can look at the Kangnido Map and have trouble seeing the Azores.
Many readers may have some background in biology, DNA, parasitology, etc. Is there such a thing as Taiwanese DNA? Now, I am mistrustful of all of his writings.
Navigation menu
Read this book with care. Please look for additional information on your own. Many people have taken the time to carefully rebut his evidence; but it is piecemeal. Dec 14, Geoff rated it it was ok. Interesting topic but the text could have done with better editing. Thankfully there is a reasonable good index. I bought the book thinking I would send it to a friend in Brazil, who is interested in the populating of the Americas. But when I got to chapter five I realised I would be wasting my money doing that.
In chapter five is a paragraph that says: That material is beyond the scope of this book, but we have added links to this research on our website. May be a better title would be "Who I think Discovered America! I also wondered about Mr Menzies contention at the end of the book that you can become an expert on any one of a number of topics related to his theory in just a month by judicious reading. I suppose it may be true, if there is very little information of which you would need to become aware.
Dec 12, Mirrani rated it liked it. Here's the thing about books like this: I am not an expert on this subject, so I couldn't tell you whose research is right and whose is wrong and when I chose this book to listen to, I wasn't interested in anything other than hearing someone's theory on the subject. On that count this book hit the mark.
- Citation Styles for "Who discovered America? : the untold history of the peopling of the Americas".
- And When We All Fall Down; Will the Sun Still Rise?!
- .
It very clearly defined the author's position on the "discovery" of the Americas and what culture or person was the first to visit what ar Here's the thing about books like this: It very clearly defined the author's position on the "discovery" of the Americas and what culture or person was the first to visit what area. Though I was hoping for something on the history of the Native Americans, I wasn't bothered by this suggested history of interaction with the Native peoples after they were already established. Is any of the information in this book factual?
That's not for me to say. I'll leave that debate for the experts.
Gavin Menzies
Did it provide some interesting possible history ideas to wrap my mind around? Sure, which is all that I really wanted anyway. May 02, Clifford rated it did not like it. I can buy into the basic premise, but this author feels like he must discredit other theories of human migration into the Americas in order for his to have primacy. It would be OK if he did so with evidence and reason, but he resorts to anecdotal stories and his own out-of-context experiences to claim other theories are wrong and assert his conjecture as the only way people came to this continent.
I could live with his ego-trip if he worked his evidence and theory in support of present f Really? I could live with his ego-trip if he worked his evidence and theory in support of present fossil evidence of humans crossing a land bridge across the Bearing Strait and stuck with his claim of Chinese sailors reaching the Americas prior to Columbus or the Norse. That is until he starts using parallel development of scientific principles as evidence as if they were determined by random chance.
Menzies' numerous claims and the hundreds of pieces of "evidence" he has assembled have been thoroughly and entirely discredited by historians, maritime experts and oceanographers from China, the U. Menzies has created a website for his readers to send him any information they can find that might support his hypothesis. Fritze calls the "almost cult-like" manner in which Menzies continues to drum up support for his hypothesis.
In Menzies released a second book entitled In it Menzies claims that in Chinese delegations reached Italy and brought books and globes that, to a great extent, launched the Renaissance. He claims that a letter written in by Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli and found amongst the private papers of Columbus indicates that an earlier Chinese ambassador had direct correspondence with Pope Eugene IV in Rome. Menzies then claims that materials from the Chinese Book of Agriculture , the Nong Shu , published in by the Yuan-dynasty scholar-official Wang Zhen fl.
He says two things are almost identical when they are not. Rivers writes that Menzies contradicts himself by saying elsewhere in his book that Taccola had started his work on his technical sketches in , when Zheng He's fleet was still assembled in China, and that the Italian engineer finished his technical sketches in —one year before the purported arrival of the Chinese fleet. Albrecht Heeffer investigated Menzies' claim that Regiomontanus based his solution to the Chinese remainder theorem on the Chinese work Mathematical Treatise in Nine Sections from He arrived at the conclusion that the solution method does not depend on this text but on the earlier Sunzi Suanjing as does the treatment of a similar problem by Fibonacci which predates the Mathematical Treatise in Nine Sections.
Furthermore, Regiomontanus could rely on practices with remainder tables from the abacus tradition. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved 24 March Archived from the original on 27 January Retrieved 26 January Nationalism and the Internet". Retrieved 10 October Journal of Scholarly Publishing.
The Year China Discovered America ed. Retrieved 23 June Mad as a Snake or a Visionary? The New York Times. Retrieved 12 March January 26, - Page 2". Archived from the original on 10 June Archived from the original on 28 March Retrieved 2 October The Year China Discovered the World". The Asian Review of Books.
Archived from the original on Archived from the original on 17 December Retrieved from " https: Views Read Edit View history. This page was last edited on 20 October , at