Sinking the myth of 1492
Gavin Menzies "thought himself original" when he began researching for his book '1421'. He then discovered that lots of professional historians had been there before him, and with "lucky timing" he was able to collate and produce an argument that has convinced many already. Because you're an Oxford student and 'Oxford students don't have time to read the national press', you've perhaps never heard of Gavin Menzies. Or maybe you heard something off someone some time about some guy that had some theory that Columbus didn't actually discover America after all. Another crazy fantasist. Well this is certainly the view of the professional historian Professor Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, who has written numerous books about Christopher Columbus. In a review article that will shortly be published in the Literary Review, he does not hold back. Forgive my use of such a large extract, but you'll see what I mean: "No doubt it will lead to big sales among readers of the Daily Star and Sunday Sport. It is the historical equivalent of stories about Elvis Presley in Tesco and close encounters with alien hamsters. It will mislead many and disillusion many more, setting back efforts to get western readers to acknowledge the real achievements of Chinese science and navigation of the middle ages. The publishers and PR types who have clustered round Mr Menzies with contracts for TV and syndication-rights are callous exploiters of vulgar sensationalism." And believe me, the publicity machine has not been idle.
We should not of course take Prof. Fernandez-Armesto at completely face-value; no true historian would take evidence from such a small sample without investigating its provenance. The very fact that Fernandez-Armesto has written so widely on the subject in a professional capacity, gives him a massive stake in preserving the status quo, in protecting the nursery rhymes. 'In 1492, Columbus sailed...'
He may well have sailed 'the ocean blue', but according to Gavin Menzies he was using Chinese maps, and far from it all happening in 1492, the year was 1421. '1421: The Year China Discovered The World' is a 500 page doorstop, complete with Appendices stuffed full of facts, figures and logical arguments to back up his hypotheses. Mr. Menzies has spent nearly 15 years researching this book following his retirement as a submarine commander in the Royal Navy. One thing you cannot accuse him of is lack of determination. Having become interested in the year 1421 on holiday in China, he decided to research the period more thoroughly and came across "overwhelming evidence" in support of Chinese expeditions that led to the discovery of not just America, but Australia, Antarctica and even the South Shetland Islands.
Whatever you may think about the strength of his evidence, and I leave you to judge that upon reading the book, his methods are undoubtedly interesting. He agreed that an "original practical methodology" was one of the notable strengths of the book, and is perhaps an area where professional historians "wouldn't dare stick their neck out." His use of Microsoft's Starry Night software has been widely covered in the national press, but what I found more interesting was his explanation of the value of seeing the world "from periscope level." Rather like career politicians, you sometimes get the feeling that professional historians miss practical perspectives, but having spent most of his working life underwater, Menzies has a unique angle on seafaring. The unusual shapes that we see on ancient maps is, obvious when explained to you, due to the fact that everything was seen from sea level. A group of islands viewed from a distance, one behind the other, would appear as one land mass. Hence the 'inaccuracy' of maps when compared with modern cartography.
When I challenged Menzies with some of Fernandez-Armesto's accusations (some of them far from complimentary) there was, understandably, a distinct cooling on his part, and "no comment", "Prof Fernandez-Armesto is entitled to his views", were some of the responses. This is not necessarily to say that Menzies could not defend his theories or his evidence, and the way he has collated existing evidence into a coherent whole, which has not been done before in this area, is persuasive. However, the Oxford historian Alan Knight is also sceptical: "There have been no end of fairly crackpot theories about Old World contacts with the New (predating Columbus) - ancient Egyptians, Polynesians, the Lost tribes of Israel etc. Usually the supposed date is a long time ago, and the connection is based on some vague stylistic similarities (more recently, some supposed DNA evidence has been cited). None of this is at all convincing. As for contact by the Chinese circa 1421 it is very strange that the record has remained silent thus far!"
Menzies' literary agent, Luigi Bonomi, has been quoted as saying that "a lot of academics have ossified views. They want to protect their own. To them, Gavin is an outsider and they may round on him like a pack of wolves." According to Menzies himself, this is far from the case so far - he claims support from all over the world for the theories espoused in his book, published only on Monday. And anyway he's "home and dry" on most of his contentions because the evidence is so "overwhelming". In fact there's so much of it that "the paperback will be a rewrite."
I will leave you to make up your own mind, but just make sure you don't do it in a way "shorn of critical intelligence," or you'll have Professor Fernandez-Armesto on your back.
Gavin Menzies will be appearing to speak about his book at the Oxford Union on Monday 11th November, at 8.30 pm
7th Nov 2002