先起個頭：
中文版 http://1421.phoenixtv.com/
英文版 http://www.1421.tv/
1421鄭和下西洋
版主: Hammer
最近臺灣國家地理頻道也有撥出相關影集探討，只可惜古中國只重儒學，明成祖死後，鄭和船隊這些相關資料都付之一炬，至今寶船多大都是推測出來的，寶船大小說法差距很大。
最氣人的是 "死印尼人" 在某紀念館內有 "鄭和跪拜印尼土王" 的蠟像，真是天大的笑話，以目前中西歷史學家所認可的鄭和船隊及附屬軍隊規模，應該是 "印尼土王向鄭和跪拜" 才合理，"死印尼人" 真是自大兼不要臉，印尼政府沒本事搞經濟，每次印尼暴亂就找華人出氣，實在氣人，印尼華人應該團結，用經濟實力修改法律，買通政客，在選舉時就出花招選出華人作大頭，讓印尼像新加坡一樣成為華人為主的國家！
ps:老喬不算太激動吧？
最氣人的是 "死印尼人" 在某紀念館內有 "鄭和跪拜印尼土王" 的蠟像，真是天大的笑話，以目前中西歷史學家所認可的鄭和船隊及附屬軍隊規模，應該是 "印尼土王向鄭和跪拜" 才合理，"死印尼人" 真是自大兼不要臉，印尼政府沒本事搞經濟，每次印尼暴亂就找華人出氣，實在氣人，印尼華人應該團結，用經濟實力修改法律，買通政客，在選舉時就出花招選出華人作大頭，讓印尼像新加坡一樣成為華人為主的國家！
ps:老喬不算太激動吧？
中華共和聯邦旗：
看似中華民國旗是給 "右岸" 面子，五星紅三面包圍"青天白日是 "左岸" 的裡子。
Joe Chang
部份吧節錄一位留美華人的文章，文筆相當好。
(原发：清谈天地www.talkskyalnd.com。欢迎光顾)
一
冯唐易老，李广难封，所以后人感叹：使李将军，遇高皇帝，万户侯何足道哉。吟诗填词靠的是天马行空，人有多大胆地有多大产。发这个时空感叹的刘克庄其实很本分，主要是因为家传的东西记得利落，这个创意是摘自本家前辈汉文帝刘恒。刘恒同志是历史上雷锋式的皇帝，非常艰苦朴素，连封侯的事也让李广找老爹刘邦去。这就好象现在国营企业掏空了当破烂卖了，工人被扫地出门很是气愤，主事的解释我们是淤困，有问题找前任厂领导去。
过去这叫意境深远现在叫意淫，原来这种时空错位的也就是打游戏脑子进水的黄易擅长，忽然间无数的架空出现了，不明真相的以为修高架桥的全改行写历史小说了。正经八百的讨论也不少，最著名的就是秦和马其顿的人马要是遇见了会怎么样？当然这还属于有可能没出现的历史，因为两者处于同一个时代。可是其他很多就是关公战秦琼了，比如虎子这个题目，当郑和遇见哥伦布。除非郑公公活到100岁，哥小官人穿开裆裤时远航。
写这种胡扯为什么呀？首先咱们得数数国际友人。所谓国际友人不能是那种外表忠厚内心里想狠赚中国人钞票的洋混混番痞子，起码要象伟人说的那样，把中国人们的解放事业当做自己的事业。想治病救人的榜样是白求恩，想干别的也不是没有榜样，这个现在还没有为中国人们捐躯的榜样名字叫加文孟席斯。
孟席斯同志是英国皇军海军退休军官，和白求恩同志不一样，他不是来中国发扬自己的专长，为中国海军改进潜艇或者造航空母舰的，他有更高的追求，几年前出版了一本“1421年，中国人发现世界” 。记得那年在图书馆的数据库里看到这个书名那样的激动，几个礼拜夜不能寐总算借到了，其感觉和刚到美国时在图书馆里面见到全本金瓶梅时一模一样。迫不及待翻开看了大半宿，才发觉他的书名和虎子这篇文章的名字一样气吞山河，其实说的是郑和船队先到北美。
老先生的这本书确实让中国人们扬眉吐气，我就纳闷，什么样的猪能够长出央视感动中国人物评选组织者的脑子？这老孟应该是第一号感动中国的人那，怎么能拉下？他还能活多少年呀？你看他感动出多少万册书，还有一位钱不少的最近又发现地图。连我这现在不在中国的都被感动了，我准备夏天回国到长陵撬块明砖，偷偷埋在好莱坞，然后大张旗鼓地发现。美国的专家就算了他们哪里懂呀？请中国的历史专家，找卖营养液壮阳药治不育阳萎的资助这些专家来美国开现场鉴定会。这么一整虎子我什么水平？你们说是争取人大委员那还是政协常委？可不能小看这个翻案，美国多少地方叫哥伦布呀，比如俗名华盛顿的哥伦比亚特区就是它首都，就得改成郑和特区。还有哥伦布日就得改叫郑和日。为了尊重历史、和两岸统一的需要，郑字就用繁体，就这一个字的笔划，智力水平和布什不相上下的，多写几次准保脑血栓。
(原发：清谈天地www.talkskyalnd.com。欢迎光顾)
一
冯唐易老，李广难封，所以后人感叹：使李将军，遇高皇帝，万户侯何足道哉。吟诗填词靠的是天马行空，人有多大胆地有多大产。发这个时空感叹的刘克庄其实很本分，主要是因为家传的东西记得利落，这个创意是摘自本家前辈汉文帝刘恒。刘恒同志是历史上雷锋式的皇帝，非常艰苦朴素，连封侯的事也让李广找老爹刘邦去。这就好象现在国营企业掏空了当破烂卖了，工人被扫地出门很是气愤，主事的解释我们是淤困，有问题找前任厂领导去。
过去这叫意境深远现在叫意淫，原来这种时空错位的也就是打游戏脑子进水的黄易擅长，忽然间无数的架空出现了，不明真相的以为修高架桥的全改行写历史小说了。正经八百的讨论也不少，最著名的就是秦和马其顿的人马要是遇见了会怎么样？当然这还属于有可能没出现的历史，因为两者处于同一个时代。可是其他很多就是关公战秦琼了，比如虎子这个题目，当郑和遇见哥伦布。除非郑公公活到100岁，哥小官人穿开裆裤时远航。
写这种胡扯为什么呀？首先咱们得数数国际友人。所谓国际友人不能是那种外表忠厚内心里想狠赚中国人钞票的洋混混番痞子，起码要象伟人说的那样，把中国人们的解放事业当做自己的事业。想治病救人的榜样是白求恩，想干别的也不是没有榜样，这个现在还没有为中国人们捐躯的榜样名字叫加文孟席斯。
孟席斯同志是英国皇军海军退休军官，和白求恩同志不一样，他不是来中国发扬自己的专长，为中国海军改进潜艇或者造航空母舰的，他有更高的追求，几年前出版了一本“1421年，中国人发现世界” 。记得那年在图书馆的数据库里看到这个书名那样的激动，几个礼拜夜不能寐总算借到了，其感觉和刚到美国时在图书馆里面见到全本金瓶梅时一模一样。迫不及待翻开看了大半宿，才发觉他的书名和虎子这篇文章的名字一样气吞山河，其实说的是郑和船队先到北美。
老先生的这本书确实让中国人们扬眉吐气，我就纳闷，什么样的猪能够长出央视感动中国人物评选组织者的脑子？这老孟应该是第一号感动中国的人那，怎么能拉下？他还能活多少年呀？你看他感动出多少万册书，还有一位钱不少的最近又发现地图。连我这现在不在中国的都被感动了，我准备夏天回国到长陵撬块明砖，偷偷埋在好莱坞，然后大张旗鼓地发现。美国的专家就算了他们哪里懂呀？请中国的历史专家，找卖营养液壮阳药治不育阳萎的资助这些专家来美国开现场鉴定会。这么一整虎子我什么水平？你们说是争取人大委员那还是政协常委？可不能小看这个翻案，美国多少地方叫哥伦布呀，比如俗名华盛顿的哥伦比亚特区就是它首都，就得改成郑和特区。还有哥伦布日就得改叫郑和日。为了尊重历史、和两岸统一的需要，郑字就用繁体，就这一个字的笔划，智力水平和布什不相上下的，多写几次准保脑血栓。
跌倒了不必急著站起來，要仔細四周看看有什麼可以撿的，不然就白摔了。
Re: 1421鄭和下西洋
http://www.chinareviewnews.com/doc/1007 ... 0730141736
英史學家：達芬奇、伽里略許多發明均抄襲中國
2008-07-30 14:17:36
中評社香港7月30日電／備受爭議的英國業餘史學家孟席斯再度推出新書，聲稱15世紀意大利文藝複興時期達．芬奇的許多機器設計圖與中國古代的機器“驚人地”相似。他說，一支中國船隊在1434年曾帶了一批中國科技典籍到意大利，爲西方的工程和科技發展乃至整個文藝複興運動奠下了基礎。
中國船隊赴意啓導文藝複興
孟席斯是業餘史學家，他在2002年出版的《1421：中國人發現美洲》一書中曾指出中國人比哥倫布早70年發現美洲新大陸。他今次出版新書 《1434：一支龐大的中國艦隊抵達意大利並燃起文藝複興》（1434: The Year A Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed To Italy and Ignited The Renaissance），認爲當年一名中國特使從威尼斯前往佛羅倫薩，把一些科技典籍交給當時的教宗歐日納四世，結果導致了文藝複興。“我認爲這些書正好燃起了文藝複興，達．芬奇和伽里略建立的東西，正好是基於中國人的知識……達芬奇基本上只是將所有（中國人的）東西用立體方法呈現，同時並加以改良。”
孟席斯說，當年一支4艘船的中國遠征船隊抵達威尼斯，把比當時歐洲一切都要先進的百科全書、天文圖及地圖獻給了歐洲人。“中國特使曾前往佛羅倫薩”的說法是建基於他在哥倫布的書信中，發現了一封意大利數學家托斯卡內利的信件，他聲稱信上寫著“教宗歐日納四世在位時，一名中國大使曾會見他”。
對比中國古籍《農書》設計圖
孟席斯又稱，達．芬奇的設計概念其實是源自中國的科技。齒輪、水車以及其它儀器的設計早就爲中國典籍所載，被意大利人塔可拉及法蘭席斯科複制及修改， 最後傳到了達．芬奇手上。爲證明其說法，孟席斯在書中印了幾幅中國《農書》等古籍的設計圖，將它們跟達．芬奇、塔可拉及法蘭席斯科的設計圖並列。
他聲稱，若此見解獲得接納，歷史學家一直相信的“歐洲中心論”將會受到重大沖擊。研究達．芬奇的牛津大學美術史教授肯普指出孟席斯的說法“很有意思 ”，但他强調必須進一步研究。他指出，“孟席斯說一些東西看上去相似，所以它是抄襲來的……這種論證方法並不够有力。”一些西方學者則更强烈地質疑孟席斯 的觀點，說他的書應被納入“虛構小說”。
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticN ... 4420080729
Columbus debunker sets sights on Leonardo da Vinci
Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:20am BST
By Tim Castle
LONDON (Reuters) - Leonardo da Vinci's drawings of machines are uncannily similar to Chinese originals and were undoubtedly derived from them, a British amateur historian says in a newly-published book.
Gavin Menzies sparked headlines across the globe in 2002 with the claim that Chinese sailors reached America 70 years before Christopher Columbus.
Now he says a Chinese fleet brought encyclopaedias of technology undiscovered by the West to Italy in 1434, laying the foundation for the engineering marvels such as flying machines later drawn by Italian polymath Leonardo.
"Everything known to the Chinese by the year 1430 was brought to Venice," said Menzies, a retired Royal Navy submarine commander, in an interview at his north London home.
From Venice, a Chinese ambassador went to Florence and presented the material to Pope Eugenius IV, Menzies says.
"I argue in the book that this was the spark that really ignited the renaissance and that Leonardo and (Italian astronomer) Galileo built on what was brought to them by the Chinese.
"Leonardo basically redrew everything in three dimensions, which made a vast improvement."
If accepted, the claim would force an "agonising reappraisal of the Eurocentric view of history", Menzies says in his book "1434: The Year A Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed To Italy and Ignited The Renaissance".
NONSENSE
The urbane 70-year-old sold more than a million copies of his first book, "1421", which argued Chinese sailors mapped the world in the early 1400s shortly before abandoning global seafaring.
His theories are dismissed as nonsense by many academics -- Menzies says Chinese fleets reached Australia and New Zealand as well as America before European explorers -- but have gained an international following among readers.
"This whole fantasy about Europe discovering the world is just nonsense," said Menzies.
In his latest book -- published in the United States in June and this month in Britain -- Menzies says four ships from the same Chinese expeditions reached Venice, bringing with them world maps, astronomical charts and encyclopaedias far in advance of anything available in Europe at the time.
Menzies says Leonardo's designs for machines can be traced back to this transfer of Chinese knowledge.
Leonardo, born in 1452, is perhaps best known for his enigmatic "Mona Lisa" portrait of a woman in Paris's Louvre Museum, but he also left journals filled with intricate engineering and anatomical illustrations.
Menzies says designs for gears, waterwheels and other devices contained in Chinese encyclopaedias reached Leonardo after being copied and modified by his Italian antecedents Taccola and Francesco di Giorgio.
To support his argument, Menzies publishes drawings of siege weapons, mills and pumps from a 1313 Chinese agricultural treatise, the Nung Shu, and from other pre-1430 Chinese books, next to apparently similar illustrations by Leonardo, Di Giorgio and Taccola.
"By comparing Leonardo's drawings with the Nung Shu we have verified that each element of a machine superbly illustrated by Leonardo had previously been illustrated by the Chinese in a much simpler manual," Menzies writes.
"It's very suggestive, very interesting, but the hard work remains to be done," said Martin Kemp, Professor of the History of Art at Oxford University and author of books on Leonardo.
"He (Menzies) says something is a copy just because they look similar. He says two things are almost identical when they are not," Kemp said.
"It's not strong on historical method," he added. But Kemp said he would look out for any signs that Leonardo had access to Chinese material, directly or indirectly, when studying his manuscripts in future.
COMPLICATED
"I will keep my eye open, without thinking it is going to turn Leonardo studies or any studies of 15th century technology upside down."
Kemp said the source of the claimed Chinese influence was a separate issue.
"There is a whole series of questions a historian would ask about mediaeval technology, about Islamic technology, about transmission across trade routes, the Silk Route in particular.
"It's a terrifically complicated area and having a Chinese person in Florence in 1434 ends up giving that person a hell of a lot of work to do."
Menzies bases his claim that a Chinese ambassador went to Florence on a copy of a letter dated 1474 by Italian mathematician Toscanelli found among Columbus's papers.
Menzies publishes a translation from the letter reading: "In the days of Pope Eugenius there came a Chinese ambassador to him," although this is not explicit in the original Latin text.
"It's drivel", said Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, a British expert on maritime exploration who is a professor of history at Tufts University in the United States and at Queen Mary College, University of London.
"No reputable scholar would think that there is any reason to suppose that the person referred to by Toscanelli was Chinese," he told Reuters.
Geoff Wade, a senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore's Asia Research Institute, said Menzies' book and theories should be reclassified as historical fiction.
"Certainly Chinese ideas came to Europe and European ideas went to Iran and onwards," Wade said in a telephone interview.
"But the premise of the book that there was a Chinese fleet in 1434 which went to Italy is completely without any substance.
"There is absolutely no Chinese evidence for it."
Menzies brushes off the criticism, pointing to shelves of files in the rooms of his basement study filled with material he says supports his theories, much contributed by readers of his books and associated Web sites.
"I say the claim that critics make that there is no evidence is absolute rubbish. There is stacks and stacks of evidence.
"It's not me that's the fantasist, it's the historians who persist in this complete rubbish which is currently taught as history."
(Editing by Janet Lawrence)
英史學家：達芬奇、伽里略許多發明均抄襲中國
2008-07-30 14:17:36
中評社香港7月30日電／備受爭議的英國業餘史學家孟席斯再度推出新書，聲稱15世紀意大利文藝複興時期達．芬奇的許多機器設計圖與中國古代的機器“驚人地”相似。他說，一支中國船隊在1434年曾帶了一批中國科技典籍到意大利，爲西方的工程和科技發展乃至整個文藝複興運動奠下了基礎。
中國船隊赴意啓導文藝複興
孟席斯是業餘史學家，他在2002年出版的《1421：中國人發現美洲》一書中曾指出中國人比哥倫布早70年發現美洲新大陸。他今次出版新書 《1434：一支龐大的中國艦隊抵達意大利並燃起文藝複興》（1434: The Year A Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed To Italy and Ignited The Renaissance），認爲當年一名中國特使從威尼斯前往佛羅倫薩，把一些科技典籍交給當時的教宗歐日納四世，結果導致了文藝複興。“我認爲這些書正好燃起了文藝複興，達．芬奇和伽里略建立的東西，正好是基於中國人的知識……達芬奇基本上只是將所有（中國人的）東西用立體方法呈現，同時並加以改良。”
孟席斯說，當年一支4艘船的中國遠征船隊抵達威尼斯，把比當時歐洲一切都要先進的百科全書、天文圖及地圖獻給了歐洲人。“中國特使曾前往佛羅倫薩”的說法是建基於他在哥倫布的書信中，發現了一封意大利數學家托斯卡內利的信件，他聲稱信上寫著“教宗歐日納四世在位時，一名中國大使曾會見他”。
對比中國古籍《農書》設計圖
孟席斯又稱，達．芬奇的設計概念其實是源自中國的科技。齒輪、水車以及其它儀器的設計早就爲中國典籍所載，被意大利人塔可拉及法蘭席斯科複制及修改， 最後傳到了達．芬奇手上。爲證明其說法，孟席斯在書中印了幾幅中國《農書》等古籍的設計圖，將它們跟達．芬奇、塔可拉及法蘭席斯科的設計圖並列。
他聲稱，若此見解獲得接納，歷史學家一直相信的“歐洲中心論”將會受到重大沖擊。研究達．芬奇的牛津大學美術史教授肯普指出孟席斯的說法“很有意思 ”，但他强調必須進一步研究。他指出，“孟席斯說一些東西看上去相似，所以它是抄襲來的……這種論證方法並不够有力。”一些西方學者則更强烈地質疑孟席斯 的觀點，說他的書應被納入“虛構小說”。
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticN ... 4420080729
Columbus debunker sets sights on Leonardo da Vinci
Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:20am BST
By Tim Castle
LONDON (Reuters) - Leonardo da Vinci's drawings of machines are uncannily similar to Chinese originals and were undoubtedly derived from them, a British amateur historian says in a newly-published book.
Gavin Menzies sparked headlines across the globe in 2002 with the claim that Chinese sailors reached America 70 years before Christopher Columbus.
Now he says a Chinese fleet brought encyclopaedias of technology undiscovered by the West to Italy in 1434, laying the foundation for the engineering marvels such as flying machines later drawn by Italian polymath Leonardo.
"Everything known to the Chinese by the year 1430 was brought to Venice," said Menzies, a retired Royal Navy submarine commander, in an interview at his north London home.
From Venice, a Chinese ambassador went to Florence and presented the material to Pope Eugenius IV, Menzies says.
"I argue in the book that this was the spark that really ignited the renaissance and that Leonardo and (Italian astronomer) Galileo built on what was brought to them by the Chinese.
"Leonardo basically redrew everything in three dimensions, which made a vast improvement."
If accepted, the claim would force an "agonising reappraisal of the Eurocentric view of history", Menzies says in his book "1434: The Year A Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed To Italy and Ignited The Renaissance".
NONSENSE
The urbane 70-year-old sold more than a million copies of his first book, "1421", which argued Chinese sailors mapped the world in the early 1400s shortly before abandoning global seafaring.
His theories are dismissed as nonsense by many academics -- Menzies says Chinese fleets reached Australia and New Zealand as well as America before European explorers -- but have gained an international following among readers.
"This whole fantasy about Europe discovering the world is just nonsense," said Menzies.
In his latest book -- published in the United States in June and this month in Britain -- Menzies says four ships from the same Chinese expeditions reached Venice, bringing with them world maps, astronomical charts and encyclopaedias far in advance of anything available in Europe at the time.
Menzies says Leonardo's designs for machines can be traced back to this transfer of Chinese knowledge.
Leonardo, born in 1452, is perhaps best known for his enigmatic "Mona Lisa" portrait of a woman in Paris's Louvre Museum, but he also left journals filled with intricate engineering and anatomical illustrations.
Menzies says designs for gears, waterwheels and other devices contained in Chinese encyclopaedias reached Leonardo after being copied and modified by his Italian antecedents Taccola and Francesco di Giorgio.
To support his argument, Menzies publishes drawings of siege weapons, mills and pumps from a 1313 Chinese agricultural treatise, the Nung Shu, and from other pre-1430 Chinese books, next to apparently similar illustrations by Leonardo, Di Giorgio and Taccola.
"By comparing Leonardo's drawings with the Nung Shu we have verified that each element of a machine superbly illustrated by Leonardo had previously been illustrated by the Chinese in a much simpler manual," Menzies writes.
"It's very suggestive, very interesting, but the hard work remains to be done," said Martin Kemp, Professor of the History of Art at Oxford University and author of books on Leonardo.
"He (Menzies) says something is a copy just because they look similar. He says two things are almost identical when they are not," Kemp said.
"It's not strong on historical method," he added. But Kemp said he would look out for any signs that Leonardo had access to Chinese material, directly or indirectly, when studying his manuscripts in future.
COMPLICATED
"I will keep my eye open, without thinking it is going to turn Leonardo studies or any studies of 15th century technology upside down."
Kemp said the source of the claimed Chinese influence was a separate issue.
"There is a whole series of questions a historian would ask about mediaeval technology, about Islamic technology, about transmission across trade routes, the Silk Route in particular.
"It's a terrifically complicated area and having a Chinese person in Florence in 1434 ends up giving that person a hell of a lot of work to do."
Menzies bases his claim that a Chinese ambassador went to Florence on a copy of a letter dated 1474 by Italian mathematician Toscanelli found among Columbus's papers.
Menzies publishes a translation from the letter reading: "In the days of Pope Eugenius there came a Chinese ambassador to him," although this is not explicit in the original Latin text.
"It's drivel", said Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, a British expert on maritime exploration who is a professor of history at Tufts University in the United States and at Queen Mary College, University of London.
"No reputable scholar would think that there is any reason to suppose that the person referred to by Toscanelli was Chinese," he told Reuters.
Geoff Wade, a senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore's Asia Research Institute, said Menzies' book and theories should be reclassified as historical fiction.
"Certainly Chinese ideas came to Europe and European ideas went to Iran and onwards," Wade said in a telephone interview.
"But the premise of the book that there was a Chinese fleet in 1434 which went to Italy is completely without any substance.
"There is absolutely no Chinese evidence for it."
Menzies brushes off the criticism, pointing to shelves of files in the rooms of his basement study filled with material he says supports his theories, much contributed by readers of his books and associated Web sites.
"I say the claim that critics make that there is no evidence is absolute rubbish. There is stacks and stacks of evidence.
"It's not me that's the fantasist, it's the historians who persist in this complete rubbish which is currently taught as history."
(Editing by Janet Lawrence)
Re: 1421鄭和下西洋
http://www.tampabay.com/features/books/ ... 739828.ece
Review: In '1434,' Menzies has a tale for you
By Carlo Wolff, Special to the Times
In print: Monday, July 28, 2008
Too bad Cecil B. DeMille isn't around to film Gavin Menzies' 1434, a swashbuckling, overly detailed account — including copious speculation — of Chinese influence on the Renaissance. Check out the subtitle: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance. Menzies writes sentences but thinks in marquees.
Not only does Menzies, an obsessive raconteur and indefatigable traveler of controversial provenance, claim the Chinese discovered America before Columbus, he also debunks da Vinci and downplays Copernicus. 1434 is full of astonishing characters and claims that Menzies gives prominence by way of forensic cartography, exploration of obscure Chinese and European documents and Wiki-based collaboration.
This roguish work is sure to spur discussion, much as its predecessor, 1421: The Year China Discovered America, did upon publication six years ago. Whether it stands up as history is a matter for experts to settle. In the meantime, it makes for largely fascinating reading.
Despite Menzies' excessive detail — the chapter linking da Vinci and contemporaries Francesco di Giorgio Martini and Mariano di Jacopo ditto Taccola (I hadn't heard of them either) is the last word in exhaustive — his thesis is certainly provocative.
Menzies argues that a massive fleet, sent on behalf of Emperor Zhu Zhanji under the command of Grand Eunuch Zheng He, left Nanjing, China, in January 1431. The seafarers ultimately wound up in Venice in 1434, where courtiers and businessmen learned from them about astronomy, mathematics (including calculus and trigonometry), cartography, physics, architecture and weaponry.
It's as if, he suggests, China poured all its knowledge into Italy, triggering the Renaissance. Is Menzies the agent of a Chinese revisionist lobby? Or are his books merely yet more proof that, culturally, China is on the ascent, Europe on the way down? (America, forget about it.)
Menzies also suggests that a tsunami destroyed the fleet, but only after the Chinese had voyaged to America. In addition, a map in the doge's palace in Venice convinced him that "both the Venetians and the Portuguese knew the contours of the whole word before the Portuguese voyages of exploration even started."
His book sets out to prove that thesis, underlining the author's numerous connections, a new Web site designed to buttress it(http://www.1434.tv) and voluminous footnotes attesting to Menzies' voracious reading and eager collaborators.
There were times I thought I was eavesdropping on a dotty academic, as when Menzies assumes the reader will drop everything to dip into 1421 to round out a story about cartographic discrepancies.
And there are times when the speculation winds on and on for naught. Menzies calls Leonardo da Vinci more illustrator than inventor and spends quite some time trying to prove that da Vinci had access to Chinese documents presaging his own accomplishments. Research proves, however, that that didn't happen, Menzies says. So why make the effort?
Still, Menzies' ruminations can ensnare you, and his descriptions of places he visits as he weaves this rich, unorthodox tapestry make you want to go there.
One thing for sure: He has struck a lucrative historical vein. As long as he restricts his books to the years before 1492, Menzies will do just fine.
Carlo Wolff is a freelance writer from Cleveland.
Book review
1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance
By Gavin Menzies
William Morrow, 384 pages, $26.95
Extract from the book
One thing that greatly puzzled me when writing 1421 was the lack of curiosity among many professional historians.
After all, Christopher Columbus supposedly discovered America in 1492. Yet 18 years before he set sail, Columbus had a map of the Americas, which he later acknowledged in his logs. Indeed, even before his first voyage, Columbus signed a contract with the King and Queen of Spain that appointed him Viceroy of the Americas. His fellow ship’s captain, Pinzon, who sailed with him in 1492 had too seen a map of the Americas -- in the Pope’s library.
How do you discover a place for which you already have a map?
The same question could be asked of Magellan. The straits that connect the Atlantic to the Pacific bear the great Portuguese explorer’s name. When Magellan reached those straits, he had run out of food and his sailors were reduced to eating rats. Worse, they were convinced they were lost.
Esteban Gomez led a mutiny, seizing the San Antonio with the intent to lead part of the expedition back to Spain. Magellan quashed the mutiny by claiming he was not at all lost. A member of the crew wrote , “We all believed that [the Strait] was a cul-de-sac; but the Captain knew that he had to navigate through a very well concealed strait, having seen it in a chart preserved in the treasury of the King of Portugal, and made by Martin of Bohemia, a man of great parts.”
Why were the straits named after Magellan when Magellan had seen them on a chart before he set sail? Once again, it doesn’t make sense.
The paradox might be explained had there been no maps of the straits or of the Pacific – if, as some believe, Magellan was bluffing about having seen a chart. But there were maps. Waldseemueller published his map of the Americas and the Pacific in 1507, thirteen years before Magellan set sail. In 1515, four years before Magellan sailed, Schoener published a map showing the straits Magellan is said to have “discovered.”
The great European explorers were brave and determined men. But they discovered nothing. Magellan was not the first to circumnavigate the globe nor was Columbus the first to discover the Americas So why, we may ask, do historians persist in propagating this fantasy? Why is the “Times History of Exploration,” which details the discoveries of European explorers, still taught in schools? Why are the young so insistently misled?
After 1421 was published, we set up our website, http://www.1421.tv, which has since received millions of visitors. Additionally we have received hundreds of thousands of emails from readers of 1421, many bringing new evidence to our attention. Of the criticism we’ve also received, the most frequent complaint has concerned my failure to describe the Chinese fleets’ visits to Europe when the Renaissance was just getting underway.
Two years ago, a Chinese Canadian scholar, Tai Peng Wang, discovered Chinese and Italian records showing beyond a doubt that Chinese delegations had reached Italy during the reigns of Zhu Di (1403 – 1425) and the Xuande Emperor (1426 – 1435). Naturally, this was of the greatest interest to me and the 1421 team.
Shortly after Tai Peng Wang’s 2005 discovery, Marcella and I set off with friends for Spain. For a decade, we’ve enjoyed holidays with this same group of friends, travelling to seemingly inaccessible places – crossing the Andes, Himalayas and Hindu Kush, voyaging down the Amazon, journeying to the glaciers of Patagonia and to the High Altiplano of Bolivia. In 2005 we walked the Via de la Plata from Seville, from which the Conquistadores sailed to the New World, north to their homeland of Extremadura. Along the way, we visited the towns in which the Conquistadores were born and grew up. One of these was Toledo, painted with such bravura by El Greco. Of particular interest to me were the mediaeval pumps by which this fortified mountain town drew its water from the river far below.
On a lovely autumn day, we walked uphill to the great cathedral that dominates Toledo and the surrounding countryside. We dumped our bags in a small hotel built into the cathedral walls and set off to explore. In a neighbouring Moorish palace there was an exhibition dedicated to Leonardo da Vinci and his Madrid codices, focusing on Leonardo’s pumps, aqueducts, locks and canals -- all highly relevant to Toledo.
The exhibit contained this note: “Leonardo embarked upon a thorough analysis of waterways. The encounter with Francesco di Giorgio in Pavia in 1490 was a decisive moment in Leonardo’s training, a turning point. Leonardo planned to write a treatise on water.”
This note puzzled me. I had been taught that Leonardo had designed the first European canals and locks, that he was the first to illustrate pumps and fountains. So what relevant training had he received from di Giorgio, a name completely unknown to me?
My research revealed that Leonardo had owned a copy of di Giorgio’s treatise on civil and military machines. In the treatise, di Giorgio had illustrated and described a range of astonishing machines, many of which Leonardo subsequently reproduced in three-dimensional drawings. The illustrations were not limited to canals, locks and pumps; they included parachutes, submersibles tanks and machine guns as well as hundreds of other machines with civil and military applications.
This was quite a shock. It seemed Leonardo was more illustrator than inventor and that the greater genius may have resided in di Giorgio. Was di Giorgio the original inventor of these fantastic machines? Or did he, in turn, copy them from another?
I learned that di Giorgio had inherited notebooks and treatises from another Italian, Mario di Jacopo ditto Taccola (called Taccola “the jackdaw”). Taccola was a clerk of public works living in Siena. Having never seen the sea or fought a battle, he nevertheless managed to draw a wide variety of nautical machines – paddle wheeled boats, frogmen and machines for lifting wrecks together with a range of gunpowder weapons, even an advanced method of making gunpowder. It seems Taccola was responsible for nearly every technical illustration that di Giorgio and Leonardo had later improved upon.
So, once again, we confront our familiar puzzle: How did a clerk in a remote Italian hill town, a man who had never travelled abroad nor obtained a university education, come to produce technical illustrations of such amazing machines?
This book attempts to answer that and a few related riddles. In doing so, we stumble upon the map of the Americas that Taccola’s contemporary, Paolo Toscanelli, sent to both Christopher Columbus and the King of Portugal, in whose library Magellan encountered it.
Like ‘1421’, this book is a collective endeavour that never would have been written without the help of thousands of people across the world. I do not claim definitive answers to every riddle. This is a work in progress. Indeed, I hope the reader will join us in the search for answers and share them with us – as so many did in response to ‘1421.’
However, before we meet the Chinese squadron upon its arrival in Venice and then Florence, a bit of background is necessary on the aims of the Xuande Emperor for whom Grand Eunuch Zheng He served as ambassador to Europe. A Xuande imperial order dated 29th June 1430 stated:
“The New Reign of Xuan De has commenced and everything shall begin anew. But distant lands beyond the seas have not yet been informed. I send Eunuchs Zheng He and Wang Zing Hong with this imperial order to instruct these countries to follow the way of heaven with reverence and to watch over their people so that all might enjoy the good fortune of lasting peace.”
The first three chapters of this book describe the two years of preparations in China and Indonesia to fulfil that order, which required launching and provisioning the greatest fleet the world had ever seen for a voyage across the world. Chapter 4 explains how the Chinese calculated longitude without clocks and latitude without sextants –prerequisites for drawing accurate maps of new lands. Chapters 5 and 6 describe how the fleet left the Malabar Coast of India, sailed to the canal linking the Nile to the Red Sea, then down the Nile into the Mediterranean. Some have argued that no Chinese records exist to suggest Zheng He’s fleets ever left the Indian Ocean. Chapters 5 and 6 document the many records in China, Egypt, Dalmatia, Venice, Florence and the Papacy describing the fleets’ voyage.
In Chapter 21, I discuss the immense transfer of knowledge that took place in 1434 between China and Europe. This knowledge originated with a people who, over a thousand years, had created an advanced civilisation in Asia; it was given to Europe just as she was emerging from a millennium of stagnation following the fall of the Roman Empire.
The Renaissance has traditionally been portrayed as a rebirth of the classical civilisations of Greece and Rome. It seems to me the time has come to reappraise this Eurocentric view of history. While the ideals of Greece and Rome played an important role in the Renaissance, I submit that the transfer of Chinese intellectual capital to Europe was the spark that set the Renaissance ablaze.
When you have read the book, please tell us whether you agree.
Gavin Menzies
New York
17th July 2007
Review: In '1434,' Menzies has a tale for you
By Carlo Wolff, Special to the Times
In print: Monday, July 28, 2008
Too bad Cecil B. DeMille isn't around to film Gavin Menzies' 1434, a swashbuckling, overly detailed account — including copious speculation — of Chinese influence on the Renaissance. Check out the subtitle: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance. Menzies writes sentences but thinks in marquees.
Not only does Menzies, an obsessive raconteur and indefatigable traveler of controversial provenance, claim the Chinese discovered America before Columbus, he also debunks da Vinci and downplays Copernicus. 1434 is full of astonishing characters and claims that Menzies gives prominence by way of forensic cartography, exploration of obscure Chinese and European documents and Wiki-based collaboration.
This roguish work is sure to spur discussion, much as its predecessor, 1421: The Year China Discovered America, did upon publication six years ago. Whether it stands up as history is a matter for experts to settle. In the meantime, it makes for largely fascinating reading.
Despite Menzies' excessive detail — the chapter linking da Vinci and contemporaries Francesco di Giorgio Martini and Mariano di Jacopo ditto Taccola (I hadn't heard of them either) is the last word in exhaustive — his thesis is certainly provocative.
Menzies argues that a massive fleet, sent on behalf of Emperor Zhu Zhanji under the command of Grand Eunuch Zheng He, left Nanjing, China, in January 1431. The seafarers ultimately wound up in Venice in 1434, where courtiers and businessmen learned from them about astronomy, mathematics (including calculus and trigonometry), cartography, physics, architecture and weaponry.
It's as if, he suggests, China poured all its knowledge into Italy, triggering the Renaissance. Is Menzies the agent of a Chinese revisionist lobby? Or are his books merely yet more proof that, culturally, China is on the ascent, Europe on the way down? (America, forget about it.)
Menzies also suggests that a tsunami destroyed the fleet, but only after the Chinese had voyaged to America. In addition, a map in the doge's palace in Venice convinced him that "both the Venetians and the Portuguese knew the contours of the whole word before the Portuguese voyages of exploration even started."
His book sets out to prove that thesis, underlining the author's numerous connections, a new Web site designed to buttress it(http://www.1434.tv) and voluminous footnotes attesting to Menzies' voracious reading and eager collaborators.
There were times I thought I was eavesdropping on a dotty academic, as when Menzies assumes the reader will drop everything to dip into 1421 to round out a story about cartographic discrepancies.
And there are times when the speculation winds on and on for naught. Menzies calls Leonardo da Vinci more illustrator than inventor and spends quite some time trying to prove that da Vinci had access to Chinese documents presaging his own accomplishments. Research proves, however, that that didn't happen, Menzies says. So why make the effort?
Still, Menzies' ruminations can ensnare you, and his descriptions of places he visits as he weaves this rich, unorthodox tapestry make you want to go there.
One thing for sure: He has struck a lucrative historical vein. As long as he restricts his books to the years before 1492, Menzies will do just fine.
Carlo Wolff is a freelance writer from Cleveland.
Book review
1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance
By Gavin Menzies
William Morrow, 384 pages, $26.95
Extract from the book
One thing that greatly puzzled me when writing 1421 was the lack of curiosity among many professional historians.
After all, Christopher Columbus supposedly discovered America in 1492. Yet 18 years before he set sail, Columbus had a map of the Americas, which he later acknowledged in his logs. Indeed, even before his first voyage, Columbus signed a contract with the King and Queen of Spain that appointed him Viceroy of the Americas. His fellow ship’s captain, Pinzon, who sailed with him in 1492 had too seen a map of the Americas -- in the Pope’s library.
How do you discover a place for which you already have a map?
The same question could be asked of Magellan. The straits that connect the Atlantic to the Pacific bear the great Portuguese explorer’s name. When Magellan reached those straits, he had run out of food and his sailors were reduced to eating rats. Worse, they were convinced they were lost.
Esteban Gomez led a mutiny, seizing the San Antonio with the intent to lead part of the expedition back to Spain. Magellan quashed the mutiny by claiming he was not at all lost. A member of the crew wrote , “We all believed that [the Strait] was a cul-de-sac; but the Captain knew that he had to navigate through a very well concealed strait, having seen it in a chart preserved in the treasury of the King of Portugal, and made by Martin of Bohemia, a man of great parts.”
Why were the straits named after Magellan when Magellan had seen them on a chart before he set sail? Once again, it doesn’t make sense.
The paradox might be explained had there been no maps of the straits or of the Pacific – if, as some believe, Magellan was bluffing about having seen a chart. But there were maps. Waldseemueller published his map of the Americas and the Pacific in 1507, thirteen years before Magellan set sail. In 1515, four years before Magellan sailed, Schoener published a map showing the straits Magellan is said to have “discovered.”
The great European explorers were brave and determined men. But they discovered nothing. Magellan was not the first to circumnavigate the globe nor was Columbus the first to discover the Americas So why, we may ask, do historians persist in propagating this fantasy? Why is the “Times History of Exploration,” which details the discoveries of European explorers, still taught in schools? Why are the young so insistently misled?
After 1421 was published, we set up our website, http://www.1421.tv, which has since received millions of visitors. Additionally we have received hundreds of thousands of emails from readers of 1421, many bringing new evidence to our attention. Of the criticism we’ve also received, the most frequent complaint has concerned my failure to describe the Chinese fleets’ visits to Europe when the Renaissance was just getting underway.
Two years ago, a Chinese Canadian scholar, Tai Peng Wang, discovered Chinese and Italian records showing beyond a doubt that Chinese delegations had reached Italy during the reigns of Zhu Di (1403 – 1425) and the Xuande Emperor (1426 – 1435). Naturally, this was of the greatest interest to me and the 1421 team.
Shortly after Tai Peng Wang’s 2005 discovery, Marcella and I set off with friends for Spain. For a decade, we’ve enjoyed holidays with this same group of friends, travelling to seemingly inaccessible places – crossing the Andes, Himalayas and Hindu Kush, voyaging down the Amazon, journeying to the glaciers of Patagonia and to the High Altiplano of Bolivia. In 2005 we walked the Via de la Plata from Seville, from which the Conquistadores sailed to the New World, north to their homeland of Extremadura. Along the way, we visited the towns in which the Conquistadores were born and grew up. One of these was Toledo, painted with such bravura by El Greco. Of particular interest to me were the mediaeval pumps by which this fortified mountain town drew its water from the river far below.
On a lovely autumn day, we walked uphill to the great cathedral that dominates Toledo and the surrounding countryside. We dumped our bags in a small hotel built into the cathedral walls and set off to explore. In a neighbouring Moorish palace there was an exhibition dedicated to Leonardo da Vinci and his Madrid codices, focusing on Leonardo’s pumps, aqueducts, locks and canals -- all highly relevant to Toledo.
The exhibit contained this note: “Leonardo embarked upon a thorough analysis of waterways. The encounter with Francesco di Giorgio in Pavia in 1490 was a decisive moment in Leonardo’s training, a turning point. Leonardo planned to write a treatise on water.”
This note puzzled me. I had been taught that Leonardo had designed the first European canals and locks, that he was the first to illustrate pumps and fountains. So what relevant training had he received from di Giorgio, a name completely unknown to me?
My research revealed that Leonardo had owned a copy of di Giorgio’s treatise on civil and military machines. In the treatise, di Giorgio had illustrated and described a range of astonishing machines, many of which Leonardo subsequently reproduced in three-dimensional drawings. The illustrations were not limited to canals, locks and pumps; they included parachutes, submersibles tanks and machine guns as well as hundreds of other machines with civil and military applications.
This was quite a shock. It seemed Leonardo was more illustrator than inventor and that the greater genius may have resided in di Giorgio. Was di Giorgio the original inventor of these fantastic machines? Or did he, in turn, copy them from another?
I learned that di Giorgio had inherited notebooks and treatises from another Italian, Mario di Jacopo ditto Taccola (called Taccola “the jackdaw”). Taccola was a clerk of public works living in Siena. Having never seen the sea or fought a battle, he nevertheless managed to draw a wide variety of nautical machines – paddle wheeled boats, frogmen and machines for lifting wrecks together with a range of gunpowder weapons, even an advanced method of making gunpowder. It seems Taccola was responsible for nearly every technical illustration that di Giorgio and Leonardo had later improved upon.
So, once again, we confront our familiar puzzle: How did a clerk in a remote Italian hill town, a man who had never travelled abroad nor obtained a university education, come to produce technical illustrations of such amazing machines?
This book attempts to answer that and a few related riddles. In doing so, we stumble upon the map of the Americas that Taccola’s contemporary, Paolo Toscanelli, sent to both Christopher Columbus and the King of Portugal, in whose library Magellan encountered it.
Like ‘1421’, this book is a collective endeavour that never would have been written without the help of thousands of people across the world. I do not claim definitive answers to every riddle. This is a work in progress. Indeed, I hope the reader will join us in the search for answers and share them with us – as so many did in response to ‘1421.’
However, before we meet the Chinese squadron upon its arrival in Venice and then Florence, a bit of background is necessary on the aims of the Xuande Emperor for whom Grand Eunuch Zheng He served as ambassador to Europe. A Xuande imperial order dated 29th June 1430 stated:
“The New Reign of Xuan De has commenced and everything shall begin anew. But distant lands beyond the seas have not yet been informed. I send Eunuchs Zheng He and Wang Zing Hong with this imperial order to instruct these countries to follow the way of heaven with reverence and to watch over their people so that all might enjoy the good fortune of lasting peace.”
The first three chapters of this book describe the two years of preparations in China and Indonesia to fulfil that order, which required launching and provisioning the greatest fleet the world had ever seen for a voyage across the world. Chapter 4 explains how the Chinese calculated longitude without clocks and latitude without sextants –prerequisites for drawing accurate maps of new lands. Chapters 5 and 6 describe how the fleet left the Malabar Coast of India, sailed to the canal linking the Nile to the Red Sea, then down the Nile into the Mediterranean. Some have argued that no Chinese records exist to suggest Zheng He’s fleets ever left the Indian Ocean. Chapters 5 and 6 document the many records in China, Egypt, Dalmatia, Venice, Florence and the Papacy describing the fleets’ voyage.
In Chapter 21, I discuss the immense transfer of knowledge that took place in 1434 between China and Europe. This knowledge originated with a people who, over a thousand years, had created an advanced civilisation in Asia; it was given to Europe just as she was emerging from a millennium of stagnation following the fall of the Roman Empire.
The Renaissance has traditionally been portrayed as a rebirth of the classical civilisations of Greece and Rome. It seems to me the time has come to reappraise this Eurocentric view of history. While the ideals of Greece and Rome played an important role in the Renaissance, I submit that the transfer of Chinese intellectual capital to Europe was the spark that set the Renaissance ablaze.
When you have read the book, please tell us whether you agree.
Gavin Menzies
New York
17th July 2007
Re: 1421鄭和下西洋
這位孟席斯先生,有"朝鮮精神"嫌疑.
沒記錯的話,他似乎出生於中國.
有些人認為,他不過就是一位出書騙錢的傢伙,
這種書在近年的中國可以狠削一大筆! (時機錢)
最近一本不夠,又想再來一次?
沒記錯的話,他似乎出生於中國.
有些人認為,他不過就是一位出書騙錢的傢伙,
這種書在近年的中國可以狠削一大筆! (時機錢)
最近一本不夠,又想再來一次?
Re: 1421鄭和下西洋
There is no question Mr. Menzies' mind is revving on a much higher gear than the ordinary historians... more like that of a theoretical physicist!
However, he does raise many interesting questions historians should have asked long ago -- take a look at the book extract posted above and tell me whether he got a point.
Btw, there are Chinese books published long ago detailing discoveries of ancient Chinese artifacts (potteries, Chinese character engraved stones, ...) and even language and race, in the Americanas so we already know Menzies is not a total lunatics, if at all.
However, he does raise many interesting questions historians should have asked long ago -- take a look at the book extract posted above and tell me whether he got a point.
Btw, there are Chinese books published long ago detailing discoveries of ancient Chinese artifacts (potteries, Chinese character engraved stones, ...) and even language and race, in the Americanas so we already know Menzies is not a total lunatics, if at all.
Re:
會把這些相關資料燒掉不是什麼儒學的關係，而是因為明成祖派鄭和出航幾次後Joe Chang 寫:最近臺灣國家地理頻道也有撥出相關影集探討，只可惜古中國只重儒學，明成祖死後，鄭和船隊這些相關資料都付之一炬，至今寶船多大都是推測出來的，寶船大小說法差距很大。
最氣人的是 "死印尼人" 在某紀念館內有 "鄭和跪拜印尼土王" 的蠟像，真是天大的笑話，以目前中西歷史學家所認可的鄭和船隊及附屬軍隊規模，應該是 "印尼土王向鄭和跪拜" 才合理，"死印尼人" 真是自大兼不要臉，印尼政府沒本事搞經濟，每次印尼暴亂就找華人出氣，實在氣人，印尼華人應該團結，用經濟實力修改法律，買通政客，在選舉時就出花招選出華人作大頭，讓印尼像新加坡一樣成為華人為主的國家！
ps:老喬不算太激動吧？
國庫金錢被消耗大半(那種船隊規模和人數花費可想而知)，搞的國庫空虛
後來明成祖死後，當朝重臣急忙把資料全燒了，就怕那天那個皇帝看了覺的有趣又要再搞同樣的事
不過明朝皇帝個個是白癡.....應該沒有興趣看這些東西....等於是白燒了.....
Re: 1421鄭和下西洋
http://dailynews.sina.com/bg/news/usa/u ... 92649.html
華裔學者質疑坤輿萬國全圖作者 華人繪製非利瑪竇
2010年07月28日 19:51 中國新聞網
中新網7月29日電 據美國《僑報》報道，今年是著名傳教士利瑪竇(Matteo Ricci)逝世400周年，他在1602年明朝萬曆年間繪製的“坤輿萬國全圖”被譽為是“不可能的黑鬱金香”，至今舉世聞名，不久前美國國會圖書館還曾專門展出一份原件。但旅居美國的華裔學者李兆良博士日前公佈他本人的一項研究論證認為，“坤輿萬國全圖”其實並非利瑪竇的作品，而是由鄭和時代的中國人繪製，比利瑪竇早160年。
李兆良表示，這其中的證據有幾百項，但都需要自己研究其中的細節。利瑪竇的確把一份世界地圖帶來中國，但是他在地圖上說得很清楚，他曾參考了中國的通志和方志，把錯誤的“度數”和“譯名”更正，又增加了幾百個地名。利氏地圖上的美洲有一半的地名沒有在當時歐洲繪的地圖上出現，其中一些從來沒有相對的歐譯名字。利瑪竇沒有到過美洲，他地圖上的中文地名，不是來自西方地圖，只能來自中國。
李兆良認為，坤輿萬國全圖上的命名是有系統的，有全盤觀念，以中國為中心。而西方世界地圖在東西南北的觀念卻是不能統一，錯誤百出，而且延續到 200年以後。中國的大西洋與大東洋無法正確表示在歐繪地圖上，因為歐洲的方位與中國不同。這種錯誤出現在一具1542年教廷官方特別用銅鑄造的地球儀上，也出現在利瑪竇的後人艾儒略(1582-1649)繪製的萬國全圖(1620)。艾氏比利氏晚三十年來華，他的世界地圖資料不及坤輿萬國全圖十分之一，而且仍然出錯，表示利瑪竇在中國繪製的坤輿萬國全圖是源自中國的資料。
李兆良表示，從歐洲的角度來說，利瑪竇的坤輿萬國全圖沒有教皇的領地，也沒有佛羅倫薩這個文藝復興時期最重要的城市。這與利氏的時代和作為教皇派遣來華傳教的耶穌會會員的身份完全不相稱。相當於今天的中國人畫的中國地圖沒有北京、上海；或者美國人畫的美國地圖沒有華盛頓、紐約。
李兆良認為，坤輿萬國全圖其實是鄭和航海時代中國人探索的結晶。鄭和七次下西洋，歷時28年，並非最遠止於東非洲，而是包括美洲。坤輿萬國全圖將現在的佛羅裡達稱為“花國”，那上面標注的許多美洲的地名至今仍在使用，只是漢字本身稍有變化。
李兆良於1943年在香港出生，1969年香港中文大學生物學系學士，1974年美國普度大學生物化學博士，1974-77年在耶魯大學化學系做研究員，隨後在德州大學當副教授，1989-93年在香港任生物科技研究院副院長，發表科學論文40余篇。他在科技專業以外，興趣廣泛，近年來熱衷於研究鄭和航海的歷史。他將於8月7日在華盛頓附近的馬裡蘭羅克維爾(Rockville)發表演講。(管黎明)
==============
圖中找不到台灣
http://zh-classical.wikipedia.org/wiki/ ... %96%29.jpg
華裔學者質疑坤輿萬國全圖作者 華人繪製非利瑪竇
2010年07月28日 19:51 中國新聞網
中新網7月29日電 據美國《僑報》報道，今年是著名傳教士利瑪竇(Matteo Ricci)逝世400周年，他在1602年明朝萬曆年間繪製的“坤輿萬國全圖”被譽為是“不可能的黑鬱金香”，至今舉世聞名，不久前美國國會圖書館還曾專門展出一份原件。但旅居美國的華裔學者李兆良博士日前公佈他本人的一項研究論證認為，“坤輿萬國全圖”其實並非利瑪竇的作品，而是由鄭和時代的中國人繪製，比利瑪竇早160年。
李兆良表示，這其中的證據有幾百項，但都需要自己研究其中的細節。利瑪竇的確把一份世界地圖帶來中國，但是他在地圖上說得很清楚，他曾參考了中國的通志和方志，把錯誤的“度數”和“譯名”更正，又增加了幾百個地名。利氏地圖上的美洲有一半的地名沒有在當時歐洲繪的地圖上出現，其中一些從來沒有相對的歐譯名字。利瑪竇沒有到過美洲，他地圖上的中文地名，不是來自西方地圖，只能來自中國。
李兆良認為，坤輿萬國全圖上的命名是有系統的，有全盤觀念，以中國為中心。而西方世界地圖在東西南北的觀念卻是不能統一，錯誤百出，而且延續到 200年以後。中國的大西洋與大東洋無法正確表示在歐繪地圖上，因為歐洲的方位與中國不同。這種錯誤出現在一具1542年教廷官方特別用銅鑄造的地球儀上，也出現在利瑪竇的後人艾儒略(1582-1649)繪製的萬國全圖(1620)。艾氏比利氏晚三十年來華，他的世界地圖資料不及坤輿萬國全圖十分之一，而且仍然出錯，表示利瑪竇在中國繪製的坤輿萬國全圖是源自中國的資料。
李兆良表示，從歐洲的角度來說，利瑪竇的坤輿萬國全圖沒有教皇的領地，也沒有佛羅倫薩這個文藝復興時期最重要的城市。這與利氏的時代和作為教皇派遣來華傳教的耶穌會會員的身份完全不相稱。相當於今天的中國人畫的中國地圖沒有北京、上海；或者美國人畫的美國地圖沒有華盛頓、紐約。
李兆良認為，坤輿萬國全圖其實是鄭和航海時代中國人探索的結晶。鄭和七次下西洋，歷時28年，並非最遠止於東非洲，而是包括美洲。坤輿萬國全圖將現在的佛羅裡達稱為“花國”，那上面標注的許多美洲的地名至今仍在使用，只是漢字本身稍有變化。
李兆良於1943年在香港出生，1969年香港中文大學生物學系學士，1974年美國普度大學生物化學博士，1974-77年在耶魯大學化學系做研究員，隨後在德州大學當副教授，1989-93年在香港任生物科技研究院副院長，發表科學論文40余篇。他在科技專業以外，興趣廣泛，近年來熱衷於研究鄭和航海的歷史。他將於8月7日在華盛頓附近的馬裡蘭羅克維爾(Rockville)發表演講。(管黎明)
==============
圖中找不到台灣
http://zh-classical.wikipedia.org/wiki/ ... %96%29.jpg
Re: 1421鄭和下西洋
古代中國人到達美洲
根據1965年祕魯出土的銅人像，手上的石牌刻有「武當山」字樣，除了祕魯，在波利維亞、墨西哥也有中國文物出土；美洲目前在考古學與歷史學上還有很多謎團，而且難以解釋也相當古怪，像是美洲出土中國文物中還曾經有：「大齊田人之墓」、「木武本」、「太歲」、「明月松間照」等等漢字字樣。在厄瓜多還有挖到王莽時代的古錢幣。此外美國東岸也發掘出一面明朝「宣德金牌」，其上鑄有「大明宣德委錫」六字，以此證明中國似乎與美洲有些微往來，但是這些仍然無法說明中國與美洲直接往來交通。還有即使出土一面宣德金牌也不能夠證明鄭和曾經到達美洲大陸，只能採取保留態度以中國文物曾經流傳到美洲來看待。
http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E4%B8%96 ... A%E5%8F%B2
http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hant/%E8%A1% ... A%E8%B3%A2
衛聚賢的(中國人發現美洲)這書
我小時候讀過
確實有拿著武當山字樣小人像照片
不過字是像印章一樣的鏡像反寫
很奇妙
古代世界真是不可思議的謎
根據1965年祕魯出土的銅人像，手上的石牌刻有「武當山」字樣，除了祕魯，在波利維亞、墨西哥也有中國文物出土；美洲目前在考古學與歷史學上還有很多謎團，而且難以解釋也相當古怪，像是美洲出土中國文物中還曾經有：「大齊田人之墓」、「木武本」、「太歲」、「明月松間照」等等漢字字樣。在厄瓜多還有挖到王莽時代的古錢幣。此外美國東岸也發掘出一面明朝「宣德金牌」，其上鑄有「大明宣德委錫」六字，以此證明中國似乎與美洲有些微往來，但是這些仍然無法說明中國與美洲直接往來交通。還有即使出土一面宣德金牌也不能夠證明鄭和曾經到達美洲大陸，只能採取保留態度以中國文物曾經流傳到美洲來看待。
http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E4%B8%96 ... A%E5%8F%B2
http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hant/%E8%A1% ... A%E8%B3%A2
衛聚賢的(中國人發現美洲)這書
我小時候讀過
確實有拿著武當山字樣小人像照片
不過字是像印章一樣的鏡像反寫
很奇妙
古代世界真是不可思議的謎
一個人穿上百年髒鞋六十年染上香港腳
你可以說他腳臭但你不能說他是香港人
你可以說他腳臭但你不能說他是香港人
誰在線上
正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者：沒有註冊會員 和 33 位訪客