Totally made up rubbish - shouldn't be called history

Sure 1421 has plenty of hearsay and conjecture, and some entertaining theories put forth by Menzies, most of which can't be backed up with factual evidence at this time. Obviously by reading the subtitle ...The Year China Discovered America you get the gist that Menzies asserts a China-first-to-the-Americas hypothesis.

China was on the forefront of invention once upon a time. Gunpowder is one example. But shifting firmly entrenched belief that old European explorers were first to the Americas takes some imaginative thinking. We know that the impressive China fleet of the 1400s sailed to the Middle East and Africa, but did they turn around and hit up the Americas at some point? Certainly the natives (Inuit all the way down to South America) have a certain Asian look to them, but the Bering Strait land-bridge theory already covers that. There's just not enough evidence to prove otherwise.

I don't care who gets credit in the history books for discovering this, that or the other thing. I would like to see us humans get it right though, and unfortunately Menzies can't prove his theories. Aside from that though, his book is an intriguing good read filled with fun ideas and adventure.

It's rare that I would waste space blasting a book. Life is short and time is a scarce resource. I'd rather just drop a book unworthy of finishing and move on to a new one. This time, though, I think 1421 merits further explanation because of the sensational success it has experienced worldwide.

Simply put, 1421 is junk history posing as "real history." Gavin Menzies has spun a fantastical and interesting tale out of the very real events surrounding the massive Chinese treasure fleets of 1421. His thesis--that the Chinese discovered the New World in the 1420s, mapped it, and that it was their maps that European explorers used when sailing for the New World (including, he argues, Columbus).

Built by a Ming emperor to gather in tribute from the ends of the Earth, the fleet was one of the last acts of imperial hubris. Shortly after it set sail, the emperor died. His son, in replacing his father's policies, had the fleets destroyed upon their return, along with records gathered during the voyage. Starting with that sparse introduction, Menzies proceeds to gather bits and pieces of evidence stretching from China itself to the Indian subcontinent, from the Congo to Patagonia and beyond, and levies the evidence to tell a tale of the massive Chinese fleet charting the New World the greater part of a century before Columbus set sail in 1492.

It is an extremely interesting and, if it were true, a ground breaking discovery and thesis. Perhaps it is true. But likely, it is not.

As I started reading it, the first question that came to mind for me was this: in the almost six centuries since these events happened, why has no one else suggested that the Chinese arrived first? Menzies explanation is that historians generally lack the skill set necessary to uncover the truth, a skill set that he has as a former captain in the British Navy. Unlike most historians, Menzies argues, he can read a chart, understand what he's looking at, and glean from these 15th century charts things that no historian would otherwise notice.

Yeah. It's a little bit of a stretch. I would be surprised to find that no historian has ever had the skill set to learn maritime charts and understand how to read them (heck, Theodore Roosevelt when only an undergraduate student at Harvard, researched and wrote a book of naval strategy -- "The Naval War of 1812"--that became a classic and a text book used by both the US and British navies for decades after it was published). That being said, I gave Menzies the benefit of the doubt. I've long been intrigued with China and its history, and I think I wanted to believe that history as we have been taught might not be true. How interesting would it be for America to have been discovered by the Chinese?

As I read, though, red flags continued to pop up. Out of only sparse details, Menzies would assert "conclusive proof" that his theories were finding relevance. Finally, over two hundred pages in, I decided to check into what critical review might have said about his methods and evidence. I reasoned that if Menzies is correct, or even has a good theory, then the academic community would support his findings with further research. I went to the internet.

Critical acclaim was anything but what I found. In addition to finding entire sites dedicated to debunking Menzies myths, I also found that historical lectures had been given explaining and demonstrating that what Menzies proposed was just that--a proposal. Be it even true, the evidence was not there, not was the reasoning clearly logical.

For example:

--Menzies claims that Chinese anchors have been found off of the coast of California, but fails to document them.
--1421 says that Chinese DNA is found in North America natives, but fails to account for the influx of Chinese immigrants in the 17th century.
--Menzies finds what he claims are chickens unique to Asia living in Peru, but fails to note that Peru exported millions of tons of silver to China and brought back silk and porcelain (and presumably other things, like, for example, chickens) throughout the heyday of the Spanish during the 16th through 17th centuries.

And that's just to start.

Historian Kirstin A. Seaver says, in disecting claims about the Chinese in Vinland:

"The study of history is likely to reward anyone willing to undertake it in a quest for better understanding of who they are, how they became what they are, and what they might hope to become. The manufacture of a history that never existed rewards only those who make money by deceiving the public."

If 1421 is true, Menzies has not found the evidence to support it. If it is false, it's junk and a waste of time to read. Further, it perpetuates a falsehood that makes the acquisition of real history--real, boring, dry and factual history--that much harder to grasp.

Muy interesante recuento de lo que pudo haber sido la historia de la flota china en el siglo XXIII, y los logros que pudieron y debieron alcanzar entonces, entre ellos, llegar a América antes que los europeos.

I enjoyed reading this book. A bit iconoclastic in nature, the book posits a sea-change (pun intended) for our historical perspective on the discovery and mapping of much of the world.

While it apparently created quite a stir among conventional historians I didn't find its information to be that shocking. On the contrary, the idea that a large fleet of large Chinese ships traveled around the world before Columbus and Magellan and Cook only makes sense, given the advancements in Chinese culture that only became known to the western world after Marco Polo and colonization.

That the Chinese and Muslim nations had a rich history and significant trading around the Indian Ocean that surprises some is only indication of our ethnocentricity. When the Silk Road was such an impactful transport route and its closure caused exploration by the Chinese into far reaches of the world doesn't surprise me.

The information shared on evidence of a significant exploration and mapping and development of means of charting location well in advance of western knowledge of the same is compelling and yet interesting for the casual reader as well. What could be much more scholarly and dry instead has a scope as great as the travels it seeks to recount.

There are times when the evidence gets a little scientific, but the author avoids making this uninteresting for the general reader. The book is listed as 650 pages, but that is because the last 160 pages are addenda and notes and the kind of references that historians would relish. Keeping it out of the main text made it more readable but also provides the backup to the author's contentions and suppositions that makes for good reading.

Again, I'm constrained by five stars in my rating. I'd give this an 8.25 on a scale of 10. A good read, with interesting content, but it suffers somewhat from insertion of reactions to detractors and a feeling by the author of a need to counter their assertions.

Don't read this. It may be a very enchanting read, and of course there is an absolutely interesting core of truth in it (the Chinese expeditions into South Asia, in the beginning over the 15th century), but it's full of speculation and exaggeration! See my review in my general account on GR: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....

A bit hard to figure where to place this book. Is it historical or is it historical interpretation or misinterpretation? Did Bao, Wang, Qing and Man split off from the Cape Verde Islands with Wen brining the Cherokee Rose plant to N. America, along with some male DNA? That China explored intentionally or unintentionally the West Coast of the continent has more physical eveidence of support. That the entire coastal areas of the continents, less Europe and Antarctica - but including Greenland - were mapped as result of a grand fleet is argued for in this well documented work. It's a half and half sort of result in my view - some of it true, some not but pushed to the fore with scanty evidence and much interpretation. Gets you thinking. China has been an odd place of brilliant invention and daring followed by Egyptian-like aridity of idea and a closed border. Still, what an amazing history.

Astounding! When I first read this, I thought it was a hoax.

It is hard to believe it has taken this long for some inquiry about Chinese navel exploration beyond the Indian ocean and nearby Pacific when even Menzies' detractors admit that China had the capability to circumnavigate the globe in the early 15th century. Also, most tellingly, it was done by a man who was only an amateur historian. So very typical of the smug academic establishment who currently call his work sloppy science and pseudo-history. And it seems Menzies has relied on lots of anecdotal and mythological evidence. It is worth noting that early inquiries about Viking discovery of America was also based on Norse myths and lots of anecdotal evidence but as more and more hard evidence accrued the case became stronger until finally a Viking settlement was found in Northern Canada. Just as historians derided evidence about Viking exploration until it overwhelmed their defence of the status quo, so too is it likely that Menzies has started a process of investigation that will show again that historians are sometimes more interested in reciprocal citations than real research.

Also, not to forget that a layman, Thor Heyerdahl demonstrated in 1947 that Polynesians and Native Americans could have sailed rafts across the pacific, as early as the Paleolithic era. A few years ago DNA analysis proved these two groups in fact intermixed early in the pre-Columbian era refuting extensive academic opposition to this hypothesis.

I loved this book and it shocked the shit out of me.

Once you get something in your head, it's hard to let go. For example Gavin Menzies believes that China discovered the world and is so convinced of it he wrote a book.

1421 is like listening to an old man give his long winded opinion. Every turn Gavin Menzies takes, every though he has, every theory he comes up with, a little searching and the evidence is right there. It's hard to know whether he's trying to convince you or the world (don't worry he's definitely convinced himself), but I'd guess both. With the huge amount of data lumped on you, the notes and cross references, it's hard to argue against him. That is until you start to hear things that just sound a little fictitious, a little far stretched, and every single anomaly throughout the world all leads back to Gavin's theory. After he repeats himself yet again, only a third of the way through the book, it all gets a bit tiresome and you can see how the remainder of the book is going to untenuously play out. Whilst the occasional interesting fact has you perking up, a quick Google search shows that Mr. Menzies has been a little creative with the truth.

At the end of the day some say 1421 is fact, some say it's fiction. Either way the facts don't add up and the fiction is monotenous and boring. Long before the book was to end something stuck in my head too, that I don't really care to carry on and see how it plays out, because at the end of the day does it really matter?

I stopped reading this book halfway through when I realized that, contrary to my assumption that it would largely be based on factual content about Zheng He's treasure fleet voyages with some speculation about the potential that it reached the New World, it turned out to be entirely lacking in any factually sourced non-fiction content whatsoever. Certainly nothing beyond what a person could find out after a quick google search or skimming the Wikipedia entry about Zheng He.

This book is a complete waste of time. It's embarrassing that an entirely unqualified person who, if my research into him is accurate, couldn't even be relied on to write the book himself but required the help of a team of ghostwriters, was apparently given a large advance in order to produce nonsense. This book takes away from the potential for a scholar with real expertise to publish a worthwhile popular history of Zheng He's voyages, which are fascinating in their own right.

The author starts off with his assumption that the famous European explorers used European maps that were copied from old Chinese maps because they showed yet uncharted land. In 1421, a large Chinese fleet set sail and discovered the world.

Based upon the assumption that the large Chinese armada sailed with a speed about 4.8 knots, combined with the ocean's currents, the author is able to reconstruct the entire course of the Chinese armada and to pinpoint each location of the different armada's on any given day.

In his opinion the Chinese fleets sailed around Cape of Good Hope, visited the coast of West Africa, the Cape Verde Islands where the fleet splitted into a southern direction and a northern direction. The southern fleet then explored South America, then went on to discovering Antartica, and then back via the Kerguelen to Western Australia upon returning to China. The northern fleet discovered the Caribean, went to Greenland and then sailed through the Arctic Ocean and North Pole back to China. Another fleet visited the Maya's and established Chinese colonies there.

This is all supported by little evidence, and except for some marginal examples the Chinese left any clues what so ever. Let me give you an example of how the author describes the discovery of Guadeloupe: the author assumes the fleet travels by the same route as Columbus did 70 years later. The author then assumes that they were traveling by night, because the island of Guadeloupe is charted, but other islands in the near surrounding have not. The only reason is that the Chinese were traveling by night and assuming it is new moon, the exact date is given: 25 November 1421. The anamolies with the island of Guadeloupe as chartered on the map with the real geographical situation is easily explained: the Chinese junks were low on the water and therefore it's obvious that they didn't see any bays. Also, the fact that Guadeloupe consists of two different parts is easily explained, because when the Chinese fleet was in the area, it was early in the morning and the sun must have distorted their vision. The fleet then goes northbound, where the map shows a lot of islands that aren't there, easily explained by the fact that the sealevel has risen with more than 6 feet since 1421, so a lot of islands must have overflooded with water since then, like this only occured in this region. The Chinese fleet then must have been low on water and therefore must have been visiting Bimini. The (in)famous Bimini road is explained by the fact that the Chinese fleet must have lost their ballast stones to recover some ships that obviously must have been damaged by the storms in the region.

And it is things like these why this is obvious drivel and I can go on and on. At this point in the book I started to think about Erich von Däniken and decided to place Gavin Menzies in the same category.

So why 3 stars? If you want to read this as a science and historic book I will give this 1 star - for it's obvious not. But as a historical novel, apart from all the pseudo-science drivel, it's an enjoyable read.

I suspect it doesn't matter to Gavin Menzies. This book is ofcourse highly controversial and the author has fared well; his next book claims that it were the Chinese who started the Renaissance in Europe. Both books have sold well and it will only spur Gavin Menzies on to write more of these books.

Point is, read this for fun, read for curiosity, but read with a skeptical eye, is all.

It's too bad that not much in this book is true. Mentzies is a good writer, capable of bringing you into his version of history. Unfortunately, his version is unsupported by facts.
Red flag number one: the references to other sources all come back to Menzies. If he is the only source, we have to wonder why nobody else found the same things. Red flag number two: the ships he suggests are several times larger than the known largest wooden ships ever built and being made of wood, would not be strong enough for an ocean voyage. So, a few interesting claims, but so far the evidence is lacking. Find your Chinese ship in CA, date it, establish the navigation for this specific ship, and then we'll talk again.

Now, as a work of fiction....