This is not my theory. Read the book and satisfy yourself about the many kinds of evidence found. Not all records were destroyed by the government, The admiral in charge of the entire expedition of some 800 ships which were then divided into 5 fleets with different areas to explore. Admiral He retired in honor with his own mansion and artfacts. All parts of the world were explored, except Europe which was avoided. The goal was to find new lands to trade with. They went completely around Africa, along the Atlantic and Pacific coast of North and South America, including the Caribbean and Alaska areas. Even Australia. The Portuguese had made progress along Africa’s coast, and there were Portuguese fishing the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, so there may have been maps of those areas, but a map, I think called Piri Reyes, even included Antarctica. I don’t think the Portugues had any maps of Central and South America or the Pacific Ocean sides of those lands. Magellan did not have to discover the Straits of Magellan as the Chinese had mapped then 150 years before his trip and he knew about them.
The evidence is also found in Chinese DNA in various areas where sailers and the concubines brought on the voyage were forced to remain when ships were destroyed in storms. Asain chickens were found in the Americas when the first Europeans arrived. Some of the plants native and exclusive to the Americas were found in China after those dates mentioned. A hole lot of other evidence is supplied. Quite amazing actually. Those shipwrecked waited forever for the rescue that never came as the Chinese turned inward and never followed up on the amazing discoveries made by these 5 fleets
It’s not just me who sees throw his Pelion-on-Ossa claims.
[ https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/is-gavin-menzies-right-or-wrong ]
Authors that aim to rewrite 500 years of accepted history should rely less on subjective claims and more on hard evidence. And this is where Menzies ultimately fails to persuade. First, he does not read Chinese and thus cites no primary sources—a problem even if one accepts that the records were all destroyed. Even more fatal to his argument, Menzies often fails to provide corroborating data for many of his claims. To cite just four examples, he:
never provides the DNA evidence supposedly linking the American Indians and Chinese;
fails to document the discovery of Chinese anchors off the coast of California;
appeals to unspecified “local experts,” as when arguing that remains of 15th century Chinese shipwrecks have been found in New Zealand;
and says that a Taiwanese museum’s copy of a Chinese map allegedly showing Australia and Tasmania “unfortunately...has been lost.”
Questionable speculative leaps are also Menzies’s stock-in-trade, as when claiming that the inscription on a stone column in the Cape Verde Islands (off Africa’s western coast) is in Maylayam, a language of South India, and that this proves the Chinese were there. Yet why would a Chinese fleet admiral order a message inscribed in a language other than Chinese?
And sometimes Menzies just plain contradicts himself, as when he asserts that “sea levels in 1421 were lower than today” (p. 257) because of modern global warming, but then later claims “Greenland was circumnavigable in 1421-2, for...the climate...was far warmer than it is today” (p. 306).
I think called Piri Reyes, even included Antarctica
—
That particular map shows Antarctica’s coasts without ice. It was made when there was no ice along the coast, some 100,000 or 14 million years ago. It was also made as an areal view, not a flat map.
The Chinese are well-known braggarts, claiming stuff they never did to please kings and emperors.
The Asian DNA was Japanese, who arrived there on the Black Current, sometime during the height of the Jomon civilization, 14,000 years ago.
There are too many holes, disconnects, and errors in the 1493 book to be believable - reads like a wiki entry. You will notice that the author makes various claims, but presents no actual documents to support the ‘evidence’; he makes reference, but does not print the evidence.
When a book claiming stuff gets its material in or from ‘The Atlantic’ it is very highly suspect. Never mind that the book amounts to a revisionist screed against Western civilization. The author is not a historian, but a run of the mill writer.
Credibility rating = 0