SinoDefence Forum

mindreader

What exactly are you trying to argue with then?

1. Zheng He's fleet never made money, hence it was cancelled. I find you actually in agreement with this part so surely this is not it.

2. I think I already defined direct trade. Furthermore, like I said, the fact that there already are existing, though shorter distance sea trade routes negates the necessity of having Zheng He's fleet for trade.

Not to mention I think that you forget context is important. In my last three posts I've mentioned that IT IS possible for a merchant to get from China in the Middle East, in fact, they don't even need to own their own ships to do so. But what I clearly stated is that having a ship of the calibre of Zheng He's WAS impossible if one has profit in mind. So once again, let me know if you have disagreements with this.

3. This is the part where I find something interesting in your argument, but it's still irrelevant. First of all, spices didn't come from SE Asia to China during Ming times. It came much earlier. Secondly, alright, suppose you have this huge demand for spices, do you necessarily need to use Zheng He's fleet import it?

I think both of us have acknowledged that there is already a set of well established trade routes to the region, so why do you need to build a fleet. Especially since spices is a perishable item (not as much as certain other food items, but still one), which means you are constructing a fleet (which costs a lot) to carry spices to China (which increases the risks of a loss in the form of spoilage) when you could have simply paid an Indian merchant or Chinese merchant travelling to the area to do the same.

Why the hell would anyone in their right minds do that? Remember, the context of which is, should we build a fleet of Zheng He's calibre to import spices. Now I personally think that's silly, but apparently we have some disagreements.

4. The non-functional tributary system is precisely why Zheng He's missions are failures from the economical sense. What he should have done (and which I've indeed already clarified) is go to the next local king/warlord/shah/what have you and said, see my fleet, pay tribute or I'll blow all your coastal cities to rubbles. But instead of earning money, the Ming dynasty bankrolled huge expenses so Zhu Di can prove his legitimacy.

Given all the above, and the context in which I made my claims, I see no problem with them. I suggest that you re-read my posts again. Otherwise you would just be arguing with something you for the most part, have no argument with.

Spike

If you need me to spell it out for you, I am not arguing with your main point since it is correct in my mind. I am disputing some of the supporting points which you used to advance your main argument in previous posts. I thought this was fairly obvious since I never once refuted or even mentioned your main claim in my first post (ie. Zheng He never made any money).

barrett555

Hello,

Many things are not true, although the author Gavin Menzies made a lot of money out of his book without any fact on the discovery of America around then. There are many issues involve here and one would have to stay true to the science of things to realised all. For example, Asian in America could have happened before the gold rush in California, could have been centuries ago, but not necessary 1418 or within that 100 years +/- time frame. so DNA testing doesn't prove anything really except the fact that there are people with the Asian blood, the rest is just stories rand tales really. The recent discovered map is a "claimed" copy of the original 1418 map, where is the 1418 map? Someone's claim something doesn't mean that it is necessary true. I have seen fakes going way back to many centuries ago as there were already people who would buy something with a big fake artist name on it, Japanese included, such as Masamune made Japanese sword. I have seen an early map by about a dozen years and it looks way off from this 1418 version. THE KEY TO PROVE ANYTHING IS TO HAVE A REAL 1418 MAP, and without it everything is just pure fraction. Remember, anything after the Columbus discovery of America doesn't count, as that is the very date that the knowledge of Asia, Europe and America had been established, words and map could be passed on from that point on. Gavin Menzies needs to find evidence(s) that the very same fleet that he spoke of was doing what he said they were to prove his own point, and all the existing material doesn't suggest so even for another 100 plus years after 1418. Also, any evidence could have been planted at a later date, such as plant, animal, even artifact of the Ming Dynasty, he would need a real boat that there is in no other way could have got there otherwise, with natural deposit on it from the nature aging of material nearby in the very same location. Chinese could have been all over the place even way before 1418, who knows? But those doesn't make it a America discovery, those could have been done pre-historically. It make more sense if he name his book as who landed on America first and yet went back home to report such finding, but as for discovery and documentation, once again, need evidence.

Also, there were a whole lot more going on at that period of time if Chinese history is being looked at by many more folds, not just the money, but also the politics at the time. The issue in here stays the same, did he or did he not accomplished so much as claimed and if so, where is the evidence? Also, I do not have any problem with the idea of the size of the treasure junk after seeing the Great Wall of China, or the Yamato from Japan during WWII, or the size of the pier, and I am so sick and tired of Chinese burning all the books every so many hundred years, but proves settle all things and where is it?

Here is a link to the 1402 so called world map from China:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He

Can you see the huge difference? Does it even occur to anybody that the so called claimed to be a copy of the 1418 map looks just like the centuries later European world map, with many updates on the description (I happen to read classical Chinese perfectly) with the name North America and South America (after Chinese translation) seems to be a little TOO ORIGINAL for any professional view point?

In order to go from the 1402 map to the "claimed" 1418 map, plus to receive acceptance of earth as being round, plus figuring out drawing the whole world map as 2 connected circles on a flat surface without stating that it is in fact a representation of 2 half hemispheres joined together, and yet it wasn't represented as a whole square shape map similar to the 1402 map without the circular cut out, it only suggest that the 1418 map is highly unlikely for real, more of a hoax at the time, but not entirely impossible and yet there is not one solid proof.

I could only wish I watched the PBS show early enough to end this hypothesis (NOT a theory or a fact without any proof) so that no one would even have to waste any money to make some nut case rich.

Kind regards,

Tony Ng (San Francisco)

SampanViking

Arguements about who landed on North America first are in fact pointless. It is neither of them, the true holder of this title is my distant relative Eric, who discovered it in 1000 AD.

This of course means that North America is the property of Iceland and that all you guys that live there are all late with the rent

__________________
For uncensored Chinese Politics and Current Affairs join us all at New Century China Forum -http://www.newcenturychina.org/forums

barrett555

Just what I would expect from you. Well done indeed.

SampanViking

Barrett555, Please be aware that there are very strong rules in this forum which prohibit multiple postings and one liners. You do have an edit function which will allow you to add more text to an already submitted post.

Please also, be clear about whom you are directing any comments towards. The forum rules are available at the head of each forum, so I would respectfully suggest you read them prior to further postings

Thank you

__________________
For uncensored Chinese Politics and Current Affairs join us all at New Century China Forum -http://www.newcenturychina.org/forums

Gaginang

have you forgotten the native indian mate, they are the true title owner of north america, anyone else came after them, still HAVN't pay rent.

regarding the story of zheng he going to africa. it's one of human great epic which has not been fully credited for human expansion of knowlegdes and communcations.

crews = 27,000 men
concubine = 1000

Treasure ship 135 m

Ship 120 meters plus = 60
Support ships = 300

wow.

columbus

ship = 1
how long = 28 meter
crew = 56
concubine = hand

sad

FuManChu

I think the main problem with Zheng He is that it is very questionable as to whether he actually "achieved" as much as the other great explorers. The others encouraged others to follow on, whereas the Chinese government stopped the fleets after a while. What ZH found wasn't used by following generations of sailors.

It was impressive, but perhaps also somewhat futile.

__________________
"Japan is as much of a threat to China, as China is to Japan."

--FuManChu

ger_mark

There's no chinese text where we can find something about this giant ships

Niccolo di Conti traveled to china in 1450 and when he came back he was lying to push europe to invest more in sea discoverys

__________________
[ Admin Edit: No Pics in signatures ]

Gaginang

Try chinese maritime musuem for the evident of the giant ships. Alot of stuff in the book 1421 are bulleck, but some the theories have grounds.

first the chinese invented the compass and they knew how to used it well, second the chinese mastered the art of sailing into the wind,
third the chinese knew how to read the stars
forth the chinese was the most advanced nation on earth,
fifth the chinese had the resources


i don't see, why the chinese didn't travelled and maped the world. after all they also the first to draw the equator. if they haven't traveled the world, how would they can divide the globe into spheres.

FuManChu

If that's the case, why is the only person pushing that proposal a retired British sailor (note "sailor", not historian)? There were voyages, but even Chinese academics are refuting the idea that he went all around the world.

__________________
"Japan is as much of a threat to China, as China is to Japan."

--FuManChu

SampanViking

Hi Gaginang

No I have not, but as they lacked the foresight to develop a land registry prior to Eric's landing, I have discounted them.

FuManChu

Verging slightly offtopic, briefly: in many respects Japan is the Asian Equivalent of Britain, Similar climate, similair size and obviously an Island. I am surprised we do not have any accounts of Japanese Maritime Adventureres and Exploreres and wondered if you could provide an explaination?

__________________
For uncensored Chinese Politics and Current Affairs join us all at New Century China Forum -http://www.newcenturychina.org/forums

FuManChu

Err, have I got a rep for being the Japanese history expert here? Happy to fill you in.

Japan is one of those curiosities. In many respects it was a lot like the UK, but certain factors led things to develop differently there. If you look at the map of Europe (as it was), you'll find lots of countries and principalities bunched together. Whereas in Asia you didn't have that, at least in relation to where Japan was positioned (just Korea and China). Despite a few forays into Korea, Japan didn't get involved with the mainland like we did in Europe.

Japan was never a maritime nation like we were and never took a proper interest in naval technology (before the 19th century) - the ships used in Hideyoshi's invasion of Korea were slow and really platforms for their troops. The ships in the Far East as a whole didn't change much either - the junks the Chinese used against the Royal Navy weren't much different from those Zheng He might have used.

There was no rush for colonies in Asia that required ships to be built and technology to be advanced. Then you can factor in the many internal wars that meant Japanese leaders' attention was focused inwards quite frequently.

And then of course there was the Tokugawa isolationist policy that shut outside contact down in the 17th century. I wonder what would have happened to the history of the world if Japan had opened up in the 17th century to European technology, especially English ship-building methods!

__________________
"Japan is as much of a threat to China, as China is to Japan."

--FuManChu

Gaginang

the notion dat zheng he or his troops went around the world is questionable, i don't think they did, but other asian have, particular the chinese. these were chinese traders, these traders were made up some of the many navigators of zheng he expeditions. because they knew the way and the season best for travelling by sails. and the hiden danger of the ocean and peoples.



other traders dat constribute to this knowledge of the world were indian, persian, africa, arab, south east asian. while the west was the medieval by taking religioun religiously.

as for the japanese were they poor back then, and were enjoying life in their own way. i heard of japanese travelling with chinese trader down to south east asia.

Lack forsight?? to develop the land. what for. if you enjoying the land as it. would like to breath fresh air or rather would you like to breath fog of toxic fume.

SampanViking

Hi Gaginang

Please no double posts (I have merged them for you)

I did not say develop the land, I said a land registry: An offical account of whom owns what peice of land.

Hi Fumanchu

Well you seem to have an interest in Japan and that ususally is linked with knowledge.

Thanks for the info, it is genuinely surprising, I would have thought they would have been far more active maritimely.

__________________
For uncensored Chinese Politics and Current Affairs join us all at New Century China Forum -http://www.newcenturychina.org/forums