Talk:Marco Polo
From Academic Kids
| Contents |
introductor of lots of things in Italy
Marco Polo is reputedly the introductor of lots of things in Italy. From memory, ice cream, spaghetti,... Probably, some of these are just trials to give a prestigious history to anonymous events, but could someboy include a more complete list (bracketed between "reputedly", "tradition", "legend"). -- Error 01:47 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Croatian
What does it matter how Marco Polo is spelled in Croatian?Renke
- Supposedly he is Croatian... Adam Bishop 18:44, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Actually it was Dalmatia. And Dalmatia then was Venetian. So much for public education in Croatia! it's as bad as ours in the U.S.! Wetman 21:44, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Actually you're just reading some overzealous blather from a user who isn't even from Croatia, the IP was from an American ISP. :) Once we remove silly misinterpretations, there is reason to believe that the family came from Curzola, and that they weren't Italic but Slavic. --Shallot 21:56, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- This tradition is dubious, there are documents signed by Polo family in Venice since 971). By the way Curzola inhabitants were not at all Slavs, in XI century they requested help from Venice against Slav incursion. --80.180.172.153
- That's definitely not a reason to censor it all. --Joy [shallot] 10:49, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- It's not censorship, just a correction.
- Uh-huh. And the tidbit above is supposed to be the rationale? Is there actually proof that those were all the same Polos? It can really go either way and we'll probably never know, AFAIR, so it is blatant censorship to remove all references to the issue. --Joy [shallot]
- Why did you re-add "Mate" and "Nikola"? Do you want to add "Mathieu" and "Nicolas", or "Matthew" and "Nicholas" too?
- I just reverted the whole bad-faith edit. Those names can go if there are no historical records mentioning those versions. --Joy [shallot]
- Reverted "from Croatia" because it is historically incorrect. AFAIK, at the time Korcula was part of the independent Republic of Venice, and Marco was a Venetian citizen. Saying that he was "from Croatia" is as incorrect as saying that he was "from Italy" or "from Yugoslavia". The fact that he was born in Korcula which is now part of Croatia is dutifully noted in the article.Jorge Stolfi 13:38, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
skeptic side
The skeptic side is somewhat overplayed in this article, IMHO. The simplest explanation for Marco's omissions is that, as he is said to have said, "he just didn't tell even half of what he saw". Also: chopsticks may be a notable feature of Chinese culture for modern restaurant-goers, but for someone like Marco (who, like europeans of the time, ate with his hands) it probably seemed an insignificant detail, especially compared to things like armies and money, and the much stranger things that he did report. Ditto for writing -- to Marco, who apparently was illiterate, Chinese writing would not have seem any different than Greek, Hebrew, or Arabic, which were no news to his Venetian audience. As for Chinese foot-binding, it may not have been a pervasive custom, or (being a strictly private familiar thing) it may have been outside of his sight. Finally, one should note that Marco visited the court of a Mongol ruler 800 years ago, so one shoudl not assume that the customs he met there were the same as those of the Han dinasties 300 years later. (Think how much Europe changed in 300 years). And as for the "careful record keeping": even if we assume that he was as important to the Khan as he claimed, he still was probably one among thousands of courtiers and foreign merchants in Kublai's court. Anyway, c'mon, there are more important things about this subject than "Croatian vs. Venetian" or the skeptics viewpoint...Jorge Stolfi 19:59, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Marco Polo doubting Thomas'
In the article for Marco Polo, I would like to add a topic in response to the section questioning the validity of Marco Polo's story.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Polo#Did_the_trip_really_take_place.3F)
(quoting from the article)
"While most historians believe that Marco Polo did indeed reach China, in recent times some have proposed that he did not get that far, and only retold information he had heard from others. Those skeptics point out that, among other omissions, his account fails to mention Chinese writing, chopsticks, tea, foot binding, or the Great Wall. Also, Chinese records of the time do not mention him, despite the fact that he claimed to have served as a special emissary for Kublai Khan—which is puzzling, given the careful record-keeping in China at that time."
In response to these arguments I would like to add a topic to link off of this:
[Keep in mind, that Marco Polo arrived to China when it was under Mongol rule (specifically Kublai Khan). What would later become Beijing had just been sacked and destroyed (and was rebuilt as the new Mongol capital of Khanbaliq. This would have been akin to discoverying Japan for the first time right after it was hit with a nuclear bomb in 1945. Must've given off some strange impressions. Then too, Mongol invasion of Europe was imminent, and expeditions of this type would have been valued as much for its intelligence as it was for its material interest. Still, given these circumstances, Marco painted an intriguing picture of medieval China to what was then Dark Age Europe.]
Great Wall of China- although the original Great Wall was started in the Qin dynasty, the bulk of the Great Wall as seen today was created during the Ming Dynasty; long after Marco Polo's journeys there. At the time, the walls may not have been impressive enough to warrant "Great Wonder" status, and may not have been that different from other great barriers constructed throughout the Classical and Ancient world (like Hadrian's wall). Plus, the Great Wall was meant to keep the Mongols out; not something the occupiers (Mongols) would entertain outsiders with [It would be like the Allies turning the Atlantic Sea Wall of WWII into a historical monument. It should be noted that all of the Great Wonders of the Classical World were destroyed except for the Pyramids of Giza whose mere size was its defense. A military fortification at that time, even a major one like the Great Wall, may not have been reason enough to present as a national treasure.]
Tea - because no records state exactly when tea became popular and mainstream throughout China, it is quite possible Marco did not have any in his time there [amazing to think of a time in China when tea was not in every household, but there must have existed a time- why not later]. Also, tea may not have been part of the Mongol's custom, and thus never offered it to Marco Polo. Finally, tea may have still been in its infancy- perhaps just leaves in water; and not have developed its distinct taste that fueled future wars over.
Foot binding- as strange and exotic as this idea may be to westerners now, this may not been a topic that either the Mongols or Marco Polo cared to talk about. It was a practice done to young Chinese girls, and may just have never entered the conversation when Marco met with the Khan leaders. It also may have been seen by Marco and just not noteworthy enough for him to mention.
Chinese writing- it is almost definite that Marco saw Chinese writing in his travels there; although in medieval China, the writing was most probably only for scribes, and business and government documents. Similar to Europe, only the educated needed to read at this time, and most people probably got around fine without it. [There were not signs over every store and restaurant like the modern world, and few newspapers if any]. There is also the complexity of Chinese characters which is surely why Marco did not learn the language.
Chopsticks- of all the items noted that Marco Polo neglected to write on, this is actually the most notable since it definitely existed and was used at the time, and it is noteworthy enough to describe considering how different it is to western utensils. However, it could be that the Mongols did not adopt this practice and used common or similar utensils as westerners; unlike the Chinese.
(quoting from the article)
"On his deathbed, a priest begged Marco to confess that he had lied in his stories. Marco refused, insisting, 'I have not told half of what I saw!'
Although his deathbed remarks may not be true, it is entirely possible Marco did not talk about much of what he saw in his travels. As two different cultures as they could be, maybe he just did not remember to write everything in his book Il Milione. The original, itself, did not survive and may also include lost writings not included in the translations.
Acefox
---
Another defense to Marco Polo's journey is that the only arguments that discredit it are what he missed describing: chopsticks, foot binding, writing, etc. There are no arguments whether anything he said was factually wrong. Meaning, that if he did lie and make up the story he was highly accurate in describing it. Given an entire book on it, it seems impossible he could have been accurate about making it all up by coincidence. Perhaps the original source of the criticisms at the time did not entirely trust him because he may have been known to exaggerate stories. His critics may have also been jealous or competitors. In his defense, even if he did exaggerate, the subject was more interesting than his story. --Acefox 20:37, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Il Milione
Benjamin Colbert states in his introduction to the Wordsworth edition of "The travels.." (ISBN 1-85326-473-3) that "To some, Polo earned the nickname of Il Millione, Marco 'Million', and a reputation for exaggeration, or worse, as a teller of tall tales." This text also mentions nothing about the book having the name Il Milione or that the name derives from Marco's family name. Can someone provide a source for the statement here that "His travels are written down in Il Milione ("The Milione", from Polo's family nickname Emilione, or The Travels of Marco Polo)." Seabhcán 20:08, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
This hypothesis is now accepted by many Italin scholars and was first proposed by L.F. Benedetto.
Bibliography: Benedetto, L.F., "Perché fu chiamato Milione il libro di Marco Polo", in «Il Marzocco», Firenze, 14 Settembre 1930 and "Ancora del nome Milione", in «Il Marzocco», Firenze, 16 novembre 1930, cited in Zorzi, Alvise, "Vita di Marco Polo veneziano", Rusconi Editore, Milano, dicembre 1982. GhePeU 13:50, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
