|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Wird oft zusammen gekauft
Produktinformation
|
Mehr über den Autor
› Besuchen Sie die Seite von Gavin Menzies auf Amazon
Produktbeschreibungen
Amazon.co.uk
Although Menzies has unearthed a few unknown primary sources, the bulk of his thesis depends on amalgamating several disparate areas of research into a grand unified theory. So he combines what we do know--principally that the Chinese built huge sailing ships with nine masts and that Asiatic chickens were discovered in South America--into what he considers compelling evidence. Menzies has also turned up some maps from the pre-Columbus era that appear to show the Americas, along with a few shipwrecks and Ming artefacts from along his supposed route.
It all makes for a gripping read, even if the sum doesn't quite add up to the whole. For all the detail, Menzies is some way off providing proof. None of the supposed 28,000 colonists has left any documentary evidence because all records, boats and shipyards associated with his voyage were burnt by imperial order in 1433. This surely begs the question--if we know so much of Zheng He's voyages around the Indian Ocean, how come we know nothing of his trips further east? Nor, conveniently for Menzies, did any of the colonists return home in triumph. They either died en route or skulked home to obscurity after they were disowned by the emperor.
So you either accept Menzies as an act of faith or brush him aside with scepticism. Either way, you'll have a lot of fun in the process as the book is never less than provocative. And even the sceptics will find themselves hoping Menzies has got it right, because there's something intrinsically uplifting about the notion of an amateur historian getting one over the professionals. --John Crace -- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine vergriffene oder nicht verfügbare Ausgabe dieses Titels.
Kurzbeschreibung
Welche anderen Artikel kaufen Kunden, nachdem sie diesen Artikel angesehen haben?
Buchdeckel | Copyright | Inhaltsverzeichnis | Auszug | Stichwortverzeichnis | Rückseite
Vorgeschlagene Tags zu ähnlichen Produkten(Was ist das?)Setzen Sie den ersten relevanten Tag hinzu (ein Schlüsselwort, das mit diesem Produkt in engem Zusammenhang steht).
|
Eine digitale Version dieses Buchs im Kindle-Shop verkaufen
Kundenrezensionen
However, I don't know what to think of such issues as Puerto Rico not only having been discovered by Chinese Fleets, but that based on this information, the Portuguese would have colonised areas in the Caribbean a generation prior to Columbus' journey - there seems no credible reason why Prince Henry the Navigator, being given such acclaim in history as he has been, would not also be credited with discovery of the New World if in fact he and his companions had found a passage across the Atlantic and discovered islands there.
Menzies is a good writer. I enjoyed reading the text very much. His description of the history of imperial China in the generation of the 1421 fleet is very engaging. The description of the politics and culture of China of the early Ming dynasty is good. The building of the Forbidden City, the repair of the Great Wall, and the dredging and expansion of the Great Canal are all projects from this period. It is also well known in historical circles that the period from 1400 to the 1430s was a time of exploration, with Zheng He, a Muslim eunuch in the court of the emperor, in charge of seven different fleets that reached Africa, Japan, and many islands of the South Pacific. These were documented and maintained as part of the ongoing record of Chinese history - why they would be selective to edit out the parts about the Americas, Greenland, and Antarctica becomes a bit speculative.
Likewise, his description of medieval Europe in the generations before and of the great voyages of discovery is also very interesting. He describes some of the political forces driving both exploration and colonisation - again, however, things fall a bit short. Why would the Portuguese, already settled in the Caribbean, agree to a division of the world by the Pope that would cut them out of that territory (particularly when the fact that they had a presence in Brazil was part of why they were permitted in the division to maintain their colonies there)?
Menzie's evidence comes from maps, from archaeological finds, and from literary and documentary pieces. However, one of the pitfalls here is that most every piece of evidence presented is subject to multiple interpretations. Menzie's claims as a navigator and expert in chart-reading do bear up under scrutiny, but this does mean that his interpretations are necessarily correct. There are those who brand his interpretations and conclusions as outlandish - I would opt more for the word 'hopeful' here, in that he does believe that what he has discovered is true on the whole, and this hopefulness leads in a particular hermeneutical direction.
Accoring to one commentator, 'Menzies' hypothesis and his theory accomplishes what many Zheng He scholars and academicians failed to do: that is to create a wide awareness on the subject matter; and forced a critical rethink, including some reevaluations on the extent, the success and the failures of the Ming Imperial Treasure Fleet.' The real benefit of a book such as this one is that it causes conversation and research into history among those who might not otherwise be so inclined. The worrisome part is that it might not be conducted in such as way as to be able to separate fact from fiction.
Menzies does maintain a website dedicated to further researches and refinements in his theory. Thus far, few major academics and historians have signed on as believers of this theory, but there are some - Sir John Elliott, in the Department of Modern History at Oxford is perhaps the most notable.
So, one is left at this - history is not an exact science much of the time, but it isn't a complete fiction or completely subjective dependent upon the whims of those who believe what they will believe, either. It is true that China was more advanced that Europe in many ways at this time, and that the Chinese did command larger fleets than the Europeans at this point in time. However, Menzies' conclusions here are based on interpretation that rests on the shifting sands of myth, legend, and documents with variable ideas of accuracy. Menzies is passionate in his writing, but so far has failed to be convincing. I will strive to maintain an open mind; I will continue to accept the more 'canonical' reading of history that has a stronger pedigree, but will follow the developments of Menzies' theory in the coming decades with interest.
I would give this three-and-one-half stars given the option.
However, I don't know what to think of such issues as Puerto Rico not only having been discovered by Chinese Fleets, but that based on this information, the Portuguese would have colonised areas in the Caribbean a generation prior to Columbus' journey - there seems no credible reason why Prince Henry the Navigator, being given such acclaim in history as he has been, would not also be credited with discovery of the New World if in fact he and his companions had found a passage across the Atlantic and discovered islands there.
Menzies is a good writer. I enjoyed reading the text very much. His description of the history of imperial China in the generation of the 1421 fleet is very engaging. The description of the politics and culture of China of the early Ming dynasty is good. The building of the Forbidden City, the repair of the Great Wall, and the dredging and expansion of the Great Canal are all projects from this period. It is also well known in historical circles that the period from 1400 to the 1430s was a time of exploration, with Zheng He, a Muslim eunuch in the court of the emperor, in charge of seven different fleets that reached Africa, Japan, and many islands of the South Pacific. These were documented and maintained as part of the ongoing record of Chinese history - why they would be selective to edit out the parts about the Americas, Greenland, and Antarctica becomes a bit speculative.
Likewise, his description of medieval Europe in the generations before and of the great voyages of discovery is also very interesting. He describes some of the political forces driving both exploration and colonisation - again, however, things fall a bit short. Why would the Portuguese, already settled in the Caribbean, agree to a division of the world by the Pope that would cut them out of that territory (particularly when the fact that they had a presence in Brazil was part of why they were permitted in the division to maintain their colonies there)?
Menzie's evidence comes from maps, from archaeological finds, and from literary and documentary pieces. However, one of the pitfalls here is that most every piece of evidence presented is subject to multiple interpretations. Menzie's claims as a navigator and expert in chart-reading do bear up under scrutiny, but this does mean that his interpretations are necessarily correct. There are those who brand his interpretations and conclusions as outlandish - I would opt more for the word 'hopeful' here, in that he does believe that what he has discovered is true on the whole, and this hopefulness leads in a particular hermeneutical direction.
Accoring to one commentator, 'Menzies' hypothesis and his theory accomplishes what many Zheng He scholars and academicians failed to do: that is to create a wide awareness on the subject matter; and forced a critical rethink, including some reevaluations on the extent, the success and the failures of the Ming Imperial Treasure Fleet.' The real benefit of a book such as this one is that it causes conversation and research into history among those who might not otherwise be so inclined. The worrisome part is that it might not be conducted in such as way as to be able to separate fact from fiction.
Menzies does maintain a website dedicated to further researches and refinements in his theory. Thus far, few major academics and historians have signed on as believers of this theory, but there are some - Sir John Elliott, in the Department of Modern History at Oxford is perhaps the most notable.
So, one is left at this - history is not an exact science much of the time, but it isn't a complete fiction or completely subjective dependent upon the whims of those who believe what they will believe, either. It is true that China was more advanced that Europe in many ways at this time, and that the Chinese did command larger fleets than the Europeans at this point in time. However, Menzies' conclusions here are based on interpretation that rests on the shifting sands of myth, legend, and documents with variable ideas of accuracy. Menzies is passionate in his writing, but so far has failed to be convincing. I will strive to maintain an open mind; I will continue to accept the more 'canonical' reading of history that has a stronger pedigree, but will follow the developments of Menzies' theory in the coming decades with interest.
I would give this three-and-one-half stars given the option.
How wrong was I! This book is full of exciting news. Being a former navy officer myself, I admire Menzies for his astuteness, endurance and his unprecedented attempt to integrate different research findings and professional practice into a new, a WHOLE picture. And that is the point where the established scientific grumblers will start criticizing and ridiculing him for being superficial, randomly integrating cross-science findings into a new approach to prove his 'theory' to rewrite human history.
Even ignoring his attempt for the time being, for the long run, nobody can turn a blind eye to his new view on human history, especially with the rise of China as a new powerful player in world affairs. The question Menzies asks himself: Why are oriental scientists aware of all the facts he presents, but why is the Western view on its own history so blind? Self-censorship, arrogance? Or - because of the divine plan that we in the West are - per definitionem - the good guys who present progress that saved and will save the world? The Chinese of the past have at least shown that a different approach to deal with other cultures than with suppression, eradication and exploitation is possible. Is it this, what we should learn from Menzies new approach? In the West and in the East?
Kunden diskutieren
|
Das Forum zu diesem Produkt
Fragen stellen, Meinungen austauschen, Einblicke gewinnen Aktive Diskussionen in ähnlichen Foren
Kundendiskussionen durchsuchen
|
Ähnliche Foren
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lieblingslisten
|
|
Ähnliche Artikel finden
Anhand des Sachgebietes nach ähnlichen Produkten suchen:
Ihr Kommentar
|
