Talk:Marco Polo/Archive 1

message: Attention: Please note that the above discussion (under both titles, The "Polo" Surname and To Euganeo) was between myself Euganeo and the anonymous vandal Evergreen (Evergreen Montenegro1). He appears to have a history of vandalising the Marco Polo page and other pages. He has recently completely deleted all the comments that I have made and all the work I have put into carefully discussing this matter in a reasonable academic fashion. Other users have made attempts to reinstate the material that Evergreen has been deleting.
It was an extremely difficult and time consuming effort done by various wiki Admin and users to reinstate the original comments. Evergreen then proceeded to delete only his own messages.
After this (Evergreen Montenegro1)has insisted on baiting me into another argument with his pseudohistorical comments and his insults. Evergreen makes a habit of refusing to sign on with a proper account with Wikipedia and continually hides behind the veil of his IP address (Evergreen Montenegro1). I had attempted to come to some sort of a truce with Evergreen whereby he would leave my comments alone and stop deleting them and he would be free to delete only his own comments.
   
If anyone wants to see the original comments that were made and the strange manner in which Evergreen has been behaving, please look at the History tab above to see a log of all the edits he has made. This is vandalism. You are not meant to delete another User's comments. He had deleted all of my comments in discussion with him. This is unethical and makes it look as though he has something to hide. Why is he trying to cover his tracks and silence me?
   
Please take note of the following links and warnings against him to cease otherwise he will be blocked. Take note also of the history on his IP discussion page (as he has not registered with Wikipedia) at this (Evergreen Montenegro1). He has deleted all the other User's comments on his talk page to hide that he has been warned before. New warnings have been posted by other Users since Evergreen has continued to expound his nationalistic Croatian ideologies on the Wikipedia.
   
Vandals will not be tolerated on Wikipedia. Please inform yourselves by checking out the Wikipedia Blocking Policy.
Furthmore, pseudohistorical and jingoisitic agenda-driven POV postings and arguments are to be kept in the discussion area. But to be devoid of insults and petty bickering. In the past I have attempted to discuss this in a civil manner with Evergreen but this has been to no avail. Please be warned of the activities and subversive agenda behind any interaction you may have with Evergreen. He is essentially a vandal but also a proponent of pseudohistorical theories which he wishes to enforce on others via intimidation.
Euganeo 00:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'll start cleaning up this page as soon as I get a chance. Take care Euganeo 05:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh this is just excellent. And the word pilich in Croatian has Turkish origins. Does this make Marco Polo Turkish? Way to go. 213.172.234.88 10:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention: [[User_talk:|Evergreen]] known for previously vandalising the Marco Polo discussion page 

message: http://www.ikorcula.net/marcopolo/Pilic_Polo_Marko.htm
----------------------------------------
plese read, the view is backed by non Croat sources Evergreen Montenegro1 03:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh this is just excellent. And the word pilich in Croatian has Turkish origins. Does this make Marco Polo Turkish? Way to go. 213.172.234.88 10:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pseudohistory, just for the amusement sake

message: 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)
thread_title: skeptic side

message: 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)
thread_title:  Marco Polo doubting Thomas' 

message: Benjamin Colbert states in his introduction to the Wordsworth edition of "The travels.." () 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)
thread_title:  ''Il Milione'' 

message: Spice trade has been nominated to be improved by Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Come and support the article with your vote!--Fenice 06:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: Does a translated version of his book "Descriptions of the world" exist online?
no
There's one at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10636 Piamero 15:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marco Polo's book 

message: A 14th century document linking Marco Polo with Dalmatia 
A copy of the 14th century British Museum Additional MS 12475 linking Marco Polo with Dalmatia. Line against shield with 4 birds "(P)olo, questi veneron orrigamente de dalmatia". Polo, this man originally came from Dalmatia. 
Document is presented to the Marco Polo Centre Korcula - Croatia on Sept. 7th 1998 by James A. Gilman on behalf of Europa-Youth Evergreen Montenegro1 03:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll merge this post into two (or three) separate discussion topics just for Evergreen Montenegro1 and I as per our private discussions on User_talk:Euganeo. Thanks Evergreen. Euganeo 05:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The proof of Dalmatian origin 

message: Marco Polo(c. 1254-1324), Italian traveller and author, whose writings gave Europeans the first authoritative view of life in the Far East. Polo was probably born in Venice, although he may have been born in Venetian Dalmatia on the island of Curzola (now Korčula), off the Croatian coast, where his family originated. His father Nicolò and uncle Maffeo were Venetian merchants and business partners who had commercial interests in Constantinople (now İstanbul) and the Crimea. .Read More
 www.greatitalians.com  
Please note above is cut and paste from the net, unbias view.
Evergreen Evergreen Montenegro 03:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italian view 

message: When Marco Polo was 35 his dad returned. --Leo 07:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: is gunpowder really that great an invention? Papadilos 17:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Offcourse it is. Gunpowder greatly changed warfare and made alot of new inventions possible. 80.57.174.103 (talk) 22:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Scapegoat for chinese claimers=

message: I have been asked by supporter of Curzola theory to see article and give comments.
Because nationality is very important about this article I will only say that I live in Croatia and read Italian language.
Reason for writing POV tag in article is that wikipedia must be neutral ! This article is not neutral in birth controversy because there are written arguments for Curzola and Venice theory and criticism of Curzola theory. When in article it will be written criticism of Venice theory then POV tag will not be needed anymore.
About other stuff there is all in all 2 questions. Where is Marco Polo born and if he is born in Curzola what has been his nationality. I want only to say that this are 2 separated questions !!
My last comment is about Marco Polo picture. Under picture is written that he is born in Venice but this is disputed. In my thinking it will be more honest, neutral that it is written that Marco Polo is born in Republic of Venice until Curzola-Venice problem is not solved.  --Rjecina 16:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is only answer on comment from my discussion page of deleting POV tag. Wikipedia need to be neutral because of what is not possible to write 2 thinking and then attack only one. POV tag is staying because of article structure. I do not know about Marco Polo enough to edit article so I will not edit. You users which are making edit wars need to find compromise solution which is not POV. If you have agreement you can delete Curzola theory from article but you need to have agreement. On other side few argument written in part Criticism of the Curzola theory are for me if nothing else stupid but if I delete I will enter edit war and I do not want that ! --Rjecina 05:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you critic the theory claiming that pyramids were built by E.T., you do not need to critic the "Pharaon theory". Do you get the concept? Let's say that Venice is a "well sourced" theory. Anybody is free to add the proper critics in any moment, but this is not a "must". Regards.--Giovanni Giove 08:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Marco Polo was an Italian merchant not a Venetian trader.
----------------------------------------------------------
no he wasnt
tyler snyder is the filthiest wrestler ever!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.204.208.123 (talk) 20:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  you made a mistake! 

message: Here are two links about Polo's Book  and  (in Italian).  From the 
Prologue, it's possible to read:
* "Incomincia il libro di Messer Marco Polo cittadino di Venegia...."
* "Furono due nobili cittadini di Vinegia, ch'ebbe nome l'uno messer Matteo e l'altro messere Nicolao...."
* "E questo libro vi conterà per ordine si come misier Marco polo, nobile e savio zitadin de Veniesia....."
So, the father, the uncle and Marco are definied "citizens of Venice".
More:
* "Li due frategli, udendo ciò, pensaro d'andare in questo mezzo a Vinegia per vedere loro famiglie; alora si partiro d'Acri e vennero a Negroponte e poscia a Vinegia. E qui vi trovò messer Niccolao che la sua moglie era morta, e erane rimaso uno figliulo di 15 anni, ch'avea nome Marco; e questi è quello messer Marco di cui questo libro parla."
So after a trip of years (they were in China), the Polos are back in Venice. They want to go in Venice to see their families: so, their home was in Venice.
Nicolo' discover thate the wife is dead, and he meets a son of 15.
Can anybody tell me how is possible for Marco to be born in Curzola?
--Giovanni Giove 18:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Croat, just read Marco's book 

message: Nicolo is back from China after 20 years. He find a boy of 15, son of the dead wife! In Venice!!! That what it's wrotten in the book!
Can you tell me how is possible for Marco, to be born in Curzola?!
Well, that's the evidence and I begin to be tired.
Ivan
--Giovanni Giove 15:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh my God!:-(((

message: Nicolò Polo, after 20 years, decide to go in Venice to see the family. He discover that the wife is dead and that she left a boy of 15, called Marco.
(from "Il Milione")
What does it means? It means that Marco was Born in Venice (the town, not the Republic).
Stop.
Your Ivan
--Giovanni Giove 14:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The only evidence: born in Venice 

message: :Re: it has been discussed.
:The birth place of Polo is Venice (the town). You talk about Polo, but, it is evident, you had never read his book.
:This book says that Nicolò and Matteo were in Acri (a town), then in Negroponte (or Euboea) that was a Venitian island. Then they decided to go to Venice. It's evident that the book speaks about "places" (towns and islands), and NOT "states". So, if it's wrotten "Venice", it's the TOWN of Venice, not the "Republic of Venice". So the Polo family was in Venice (the town) and Marco MUST be born in Venice, because he was 15 when Nicolò was bach after 21 years. Marco was the son of Nicolo's wife (that what is wrotten).
:I've quoted everthing!
:Furhermore, Curzola is NEVER mentioned in the book.
:Conclusions.
:Marco was born in Venice.
:About supposed "nationalties", well....this is another speech.
:--Giovanni Giove 12:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: I didn't realize until today that Croatians were so desperate to have some heroes to call their own.  Are you all that desperate??  If this doesn't work out, maybe you can try to claim someone else?  I know that the Slavs down in the FYROM like to believe Alexander the Great was a Slav too.. *snicker*. :))
----------------------------------------------------
Nobody is desperate. Just want the evidence to be heard, that's all. I think that's fair.
As for Alexander the Great, interesting topic. 
Some say Ancient Greeks and the Greeks of today are two different people.
So him being Macedonian Slav or non Greek is a possibilty.
In my opinion he was Greek Macedonian as indicated by most accounts but hearing the Macedonian Slav theory does make you question it just a little.
He was also said to be half Epirote..those people are said to be related to modern Albanians.
Evergreen Montenegro1 22:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croations 

message: I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information.  I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list.  Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article.  Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here.  Regards, Durova 18:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cultural depictions of Marco Polo]] 

message: I have deleted some of my debate with other Italian users. We're fighting over what is already known - accepted and has been printed many times over - Marco Polo was said to be of Dalmatian origin and this has come from Italians themselves. Many other backgrounds have said the same, including English..so i don't see how this view is Croatian propaganda. Like it or not, evidence is there and the evidence doesn't lie. 
 
Some of these Italian users here probably will tell you that Columbus was Italian without doubt too and will shoot down any other user if they tell them he was Spanish or Portuguse. 
The Marco Polo article is Italian POV and any reference to Marco being born on Korcula and his possible Croatian origin gets deleted. Why?
I thought Wiki was free to edit aslong as sources can be listed.
I have listed sources again and again, most are non Croat as I keep stating...
I think this is so unfair
PS - Nobody is claiming anything...Marco Polo was Venetian 100% ...Venetians were both  Italian and Croatian people not just Italian.
Evergreen Montenegro1 00:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. You insisted that he was born on Curzola. And he was not. Even if the family had origins in Dalmatia, this does not mean he had Croatian origins. You perfectly know that 1) Dalmatia was for the first time incorporated to Croatia only in 1939. 2) Slaves in Dalmatia were only one of the etnich groups, and coastal Dalmatia were mainly romance/Italian. Your Ivan from Venice.--Giovanni Giove 08:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dalmatia was part of Croatia first time in 1939?!? Why don't you read History of Croatia. And second you probably meant Slavs not slaves.--Factanista 02:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose you should read an history book. Dalamtia was Venitian (whilste Croatia and Slavonia were Hungarian), then Dalmatian were Austrian. When Dalmatia joined Jugoslavia, it was not immediatly annexed to Croatia.--Giovanni Giove 09:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dalmatia was not Venetian until 1420s when Hungarian-Croatian pretender to the throne sold his rights to it to Venice. As for Croatia(Croatia-Slavonia) it was in personal union with Hungarian crown, it was not "hungarian". It is you who needs to read some history books or at least refer yourself at History of Croatia. --Factanista 17:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perfect:).... between 1420 and 1939 it was not part of  Croatia..... finnaly you adimit it. --Giovanni Giove 21:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I finally admit it? LOL! You are totally insane...where did I not admit it...no where did we actually discussed this before anyway? Have we ever? Please control yourself. Besides this is relevant how? Only you know... --Factanista 22:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I said you several time that in his book Marco said the his town was in the TOWN of Venice and he was born in the TOWN of Venice. --Giovanni Giove 20:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Basically, he was Venitian from Venice...--Giovanni Giove 15:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POLO ORIGIN DEBATE a waste of time and effort 

message: It seems that supporter of the 'Croaticty' of Polo, finnaly accepted that Polo is born in Venice. It seems that now they have turned to claim for supposed Croatian origins. The user Factantista has recenently started an edit war on this subject. 
Everything is possible, but before to claim that the Polo's family, was originary from Sebenico or Curzola, he should post the sources. I've heard about Sebenico, but nothing from Curzola. Or better, there is that unsipported 'theory' about the Polos still living in Curzola and the coats of arm with the kitchens. I wonder if Fatcantista support this theory in his claiming about the Curzolan origins.--Giovanni Giove 23:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All the  4 origins are wrong. A recent  meeting of  HDZ historians has established that Columbus is born in the Croatian Island of Braz, and his real name was Kristofer Golubic. Very important is the Golubic's coat of arm, showing a pigeon flying over a bullshit. Colombo is the Italian word for pigeon, in Croatian golub is pigeon. An accident? A lot of pigeons are still present in the beautiful island, and they can be tasted in all the local resturants. Golubic shall be considered Croat until somebody shows the opposite... see ya!--Giovanni Giove 23:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins 

message: Is this true?
Is his grave still there?
Not sure where the original author got this information from.
Evergreen Montenegro1 21:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  QUESTION - Was he buried in San Lorenzo? 

message: I've moved this ection as unsourced from the main article to here; until sources aren't provided, it can't stay there.
===Did the trip really take place?===
According to a famous story, a priest begged Marco on his deathbed to confess that he had lied in his stories. Marco refused, insisting, "I have not told half of what I saw!" This anecdote is an example of the skepticism that welcomed Marco's tales during his life.
In recent times, while most historians believe Marco Polo did reach China, some have proposed 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 (although in the last case this should not be surprising given that the wall was not built at its present dimensions until the Ming Dynasty). 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.
On the other hand, Marco describes other aspects of Far Eastern life in much detail: paper money, the Grand Canal, the structure of a Mongol army, tigers, the Imperial postal system, the sea route from China to the Middle East (including references to Sumatra, Java -- as Java major and Java minor respectively -- and the Philippines) and the existence of rhinoceros in Sumatra. He also refers to Japan by its Chinese name "Zipang" or Cipangu. This is usually considered the first mention of Japan in Western literature. However, it is possible that Marco heard of these things from Arab silk road traders. Trade between the Middle East and Far East was flourishing and travellers are often happy to retell stories of their ventures in great detail.
In his defense, much of what he did not mention is circumstantial and there are no known arguments today to refute any of the descriptions he wrote about. Additionally, Marco gives a detailed account of accompanying an embassy from China to the Khan of Persia and of the delivery of Princess Kökechin for marriage to the Khan. Both Chinese and Persian annals mention this mission and include the names of the envoys; but the additional information about the journey which Marco provides is such that, one can reasonably assume, he could only have known if he had been a member of that embassy.  
Marco Polo is also believed to have described a bridge that later was the site of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, a battle that marked the beginning of the Second Sino-Japanese War.--Aldux 12:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced, original research section

message: According to a famous story, a priest begged Marco on his deathbed to confess that he had lied in his stories. Marco refused, insisting, "I have not told half of what I saw!" This anecdote is an example of the skepticism that welcomed Marco's tales during his life.
In recent times, while most historians believe Marco Polo did reach China, some have proposed 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 (although in the last case this should not be surprising given that the wall was not built at its present dimensions until the Ming Dynasty). 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.
On the other hand, Marco describes other aspects of Far Eastern life in much detail: paper money, the Grand Canal, the structure of a Mongol army, tigers, the Imperial postal system, the sea route from China to the Middle East (including references to Sumatra, Java -- as Java major and Java minor respectively -- and the Philippines) and the existence of rhinoceros in Sumatra. He also refers to Japan by its Chinese name "Zipang" or Cipangu. This is usually considered the first mention of Japan in Western literature. However, it is possible that Marco heard of these things from Arab silk road traders. Trade between the Middle East and Far East was flourishing and travellers are often happy to retell stories of their ventures in great detail.
In his defense, much of what he did not mention is circumstantial and there are no known arguments today to refute any of the descriptions he wrote about. Additionally, Marco gives a detailed account of accompanying an embassy from China to the Khan of Persia and of the delivery of Princess Kökechin for marriage to the Khan. Both Chinese and Persian annals mention this mission and include the names of the envoys; but the additional information about the journey which Marco provides is such that, one can reasonably assume, he could only have known if he had been a member of that embassy.  
Marco Polo is also believed to have described a bridge that later was the site of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, a battle that marked the beginning of the Second Sino-Japanese War.--Aldux 12:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Did the trip really take place?

message: The ancient chinese invented paper? I wouldn't contest the fact that they had their own paper, but paper as we know it draws its name from "papyrus". The ancient egyptians invented paper.
As for Spaghetti, not only, as said in the article, is there evidence in ancient artworks that pasta existed in italy long before Marco Polo did, but also near Mt. Vesuvius mills for the grinding of wheat have been found, dating from several centuries bc. 82.51.57.163 22:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Papyrus isn't the same as the paper we use today. The paper we use today, ie. that made from pressed wood filings, was invented in China. mike4ty4 02:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  China & Spaghetti 

message: Citations for origin of noodles or spaghetti : 4000 yrs old noodles found in China.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4335160.stm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1012_051012_chinese_noodles.html
81.255.155.129 09:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations for spaghetti 

message: Well, one of them, in any case. I was going through a local magazine, when I found an article (it's in Serbian, cyrilic) which said that Marco Polo was married to one of Kublai Khan's daughters, princess Hao-Dong (that was the name given in the article). The article goes on saying how the oriental princess wasn't well accepted in Venice, and how she took her own life after Marco had been captured in 1298, by the Genovese (and the princess lied to by Polo's sister, Lucia, that Marco had been killed). However, the wiki article on Kublai Khan has no mention of her (nor, if I'm not mistaken, any of the Khan's children), and the same goes for wiki's Marco Polo article. Now, I'm willing to dismiss this as a romantic fib, but the article went further, saying that a female skeleton in oriental garbs was found when renovating the Malibran (sp?) theater. Not only that, but she had the crest/coat of arms of Kublai Khan. Do any of the Italian (from Venice would be perfect ;) ) users know anything about this? And, did Kublai Khan (and Khans in general) use crests or any other form of heraldry? 77.46.252.189 09:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The wives of Marco Polo 

message: The Croatian spelling for Polo's name should be deleted from the open section as there are no reasonable evidence for polo being a Croatian. More, the map of the journey is written with the Croatian alphabet
-it should be changed also. --Gilisa 18:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croatian, again+ the Map of the journey

message: The "Ethnicity controversy" section needs to be substantiated. Currently it just states by fiat that there is a controversy and that each of two sides has an approximately equal number of supporters. I personally find this very difficult to believe, and after reading this talk page, I can see that it's a systematic vandalism of the page by apparent Croatian nationals. I find this to be akin to the "controversy" over whether the moon landing in 1969 was real or not, the "controversy" over whether Jesus was from Africa or not, and the "controversy" over whether George Washington and Adam Weishaupt were the same person. --76.224.92.141 19:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You know, its pretty funny. Up until a week ago I thought such wild history revisionism only existed in the pages of Afrocentric books; you know the whole "Greeks were black, Romans were black, Egyptians were black, Jesus was black, Shakespeare was black, Einstein was black, everybody who ever did anything of note was black, etc, etc." I was totally unware that we now have generation of Eastern Blocentrics too trying to "take" historical figures from the west or whatever this is supposed to be. I mean we actually now have the need for Wikipedia article on the Birthplace of Marco Polo, it seems so cultish to me, but whatever its funny... only on here could we have something as ridiculous as that. - Gennarous (talk) 03:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  mo like ethnicity controwhatevery amirite 

message: This is out of sequence, but I'll paste it here. There was a "comments" subpage of this page, but all it said was "needs inline citations plange 02:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments page