Marco Polo

Topic 2: In the Prologue to The Travel of Marco Polo the author claims that his book is "an accurate record"�, free from any sort of fabrication"�. Is this Statement true? How reliable and useful is this book as a source of historical information (Support your answer with evidence from the primary sources)? Marco Polo has discovered much of central Asia. Over the years many manuscripts, evolve around the controversial issue, on whether Marco Polo did go to China. How accurate his account and reliability can this be as a source of historical information? In this essay I will distinguish the accuracy, the extent of the reliability of this source, and the principle arguments of Marco's credibility.

Firstly, with regards to the reliability of this source "The Travels of Marco Polo"�, one must first understand how it was written. Generally, it was not written like a real travelogue, but rather like a typical courtly romance. Having being dictated it to Rusticello of Pisa while the two were in prison together in Genoa during the year 1298 (Latham 1958:33), who is no other than a narrator of Arthurian romances, who followed the convention ways of courtly romances with the opening of "Emperors and kings, dukes and marquises, counts, knights, and townspeople"�(Marco Polo The Travel of Marco Polo extract: 1) is identical to the beginning to his own heroic tales (Wood 1995:41) than the words of a season traveler like Marco himself (Spence 1998:5). It is possible that more of Rusticello's style found its way into the book, in the form of exaggerations and stories to make the book seem more exciting, for example "their book is full of strange and wondrous tales and huge quantities"� (Wood 1995:42). It would not be a surprise if Rusticello was behind many of the exaggerations, mistakes, and stories that are present in The Travel of Marco Polo. Complicating matters even further is the absence of the original copy of Marco's book and the presence of 143-150 different manuscripts. Small errors made by copyists could have grown into some of the larger inconsistencies that we see today (Wood 1995:43) Therefore, much of the real text spoken by Marco might have been altered, and this fails to prove the authenticity.

Secondly, Marco's itinerary is untrustworthy because of the lack of coherence. It is impersonal and in several instances stated incorrect dates & events, such as the siege in Siang yang in 1273, in which he mention that he, his father Nicolo and uncle Maffeo were present at the siege. They claim that they assisted Khubilai Khan in the fight against the stubborn "Siang-yang-fu"�, by introducing the technology of catapults and instrumentally bringing about its surrender (Latham 1958:207-208). This is patently false since the siege of Siang yang ended in January 1273 (Spence 1998:4), and the three Polos could not have reached china before 1274 (Rossabi 1988:147). Furthermore, Marco's seventeen years of career with the Great Khan only started between 1274-1291, this further strengthened the fact that he wasn't present at the siege in 1273 (Spence 1998:8). This was no small achievement, as this city "Siang-yang-fu"� which held the protracted siege by the armies of Khubilai Khan from 1268-1273, marked the first stage of the collapse southern Song dynasty (Spence 1998:7). Apparently, this city which Marco brought victory to the Mongol has contributed huge revenue to Khubilai's treasury (Latham 1958:177-178). This point fails to prove its accuracy from Marco's itinerary.

Thirdly, knowing that Marco has served the Great Khan for seventeen years (Marco Polo The travel of Marco Polo extract: 3) from 1274-1291, has never fail to go for special mission assigned by the Great Khan, one will definitely realize that he has seen much of China. Although this is possible, it is also unlikely because it has been mentioned that Marco Polo did not make notes of the custom of Chinese tea drinking (Spence 1998:10), whereas he did mention about other drinks and wines (Latham 1958:61,176). There are a few excuses for this, Marco Polo spent most his time with the Mongols, who were not big tea drinkers (Wood 1995:71). As a result he may not have seen the importance of tea drinking to the general populace and as a result, not mentioning it. We must also take into consideration that Marco's audience were the Europeans, mostly merchants. He may not have mention tea because the people back home might not have seen or understand it. This would certainly not be strange for Marco, when describing the province of Caindu,in which he mentions the wheat and rice wine, clover, ginger, and cinnamon. He then says that there are "other spices which never reach our countries, so we need say nothing about them"� (Yule 1929:56).

Marco Polo has also been criticized for not mentioning the Chinese writing system. Chinese characters are a work of art, usually written with a paint brush. Their calligraphy was everywhere, on buildings, doorways, bank notes and even mountain sides. It was used to add a "depth of meaning"� to many scenes. Besides its decorative use, it was heavily used in government documents. The Mongols even adopted its use when they were faced with the challenge of administrating their enormous empire (Wood 1995:69-70). So why didn't Marco Polo mention about the Chinese written language? Probably, it did not concern him. It could be that Rusticello just decided to leave it out, feeling that it just wasn't interesting enough to be placed in the book.

Another point left unnoted is that of wood block printing. "The markets of the town that Marco Polo describes would have been full of small book stalls selling cheaply printed popular handbooks and works of fiction (Wood 1995:70-1)"�. However, this point is debatable, when Marco describes paper money as being stamped with the Great Khan's seal (Latham 1958:147). By stamping he may mean that it is made using the wood block printing process, or merely the stamped seal that was placed on the currency. It should be noted that while Marco did not mention about wood block printing, he did mention "the use of paper effigies of people, caparisoned horses and camels, and paper money burnt at funerals (Wood 1995:70). It seems silly to critique polo for the omission of the printing process, when he describes so many other things in great details (Wood 1995:68-71).

Apart from the omissions, The Travel of Marco Polo is full of inaccuracies, exaggerations, and, possibly, lies. Marco Polo said that he was the governor of Yangzhou (Latham 1958:206). This is at best an exaggeration, as Chinese sources did not mention any westerners or member of the Polo family at all, let alone as a governor (Spence 1998:10). This may have added by Rusticello or Marco Polo to make the story more interesting and increase Marco's credibility. Some have said, in Marco Polo's defense, that he might have actually been the salt administrator of yangzhou. Marco Polo may have just made himself governor since the population of Europe would not understand the power that a salt administrator had in this area. It would also explain why Marco Polo placed such a heavy emphasis on manufacturing and taxation of salt. This claim was supported by "The complete History of the Yuan"�, or Yuan Shi, since someone named Polo, or Buolo was recorded as having been a salt administrator. Unfortunately, for polo supporters it was shown that this name actually referred to a Mongol, "named Poulad by Rashid and Bolod aqa in the Mongol. The Boluo, Poluo or Polo name is simply a transliteration of the sound of the Mongol (Wood 1995:135)"�.

By far the strangest thing about Polo's journey is that no source confirms his presence in China. Bishop John of Monte corvino who arrived in Peking in 1291, built a catholic church there and wrote letters describing his work including "the coming and going of Italians"�, but unfortunately there is no mention of Marco Polo. In The travel of Marco Polo, Marco portrays himself as being a very important person. He claimed to be a governor of a city for three years. He was also sent on missions by the Khan to gather interesting description of other places. The Khan supposedly loved the Polo's so much that he kept them there for 17 years and they had to beg to be allowed to return home (Wood 1995:7). On their return Polo claims to have been on boat with a princess destined to marry someone in Persia (Wood 1995:137). Yet despite all their missions, adventures, and supposed importance there is not one reference to their presence in China. Certainly if they had the status that they claimed there would have been some records of their presence. Even the Novgorodian delegation from 1261 that was mentioned previously was recorded (Wood 1995:132). What could the absence be? It could be that he never went to china at all, obviously preventing him from being placed in the record books.

In conclusion, the book would give a much better credibility in the eyes of the readers. However, absence of evidence should not be taken as evidence. This calls for a closer look at our evidence and remind us not to merely accept the "˜standard' explanation of things, but to evaluate the evidence ourselves. Therefore, the accuracy and the extent of the reliability of this source are doubtful. They seem to forget that Marco Polo did not write the book, and that the original copy has never been found, and there are over 140 different version of The travel of Marco Polo and any mistakes and exaggeration can easily be credited to the copyist and Rusticello. The different versions do have much in common, a, for the most part, accurate description of China and its people. This fact alone gives some useful historical information, however it will require much evidence to prove that Marco Polo's itinerary is of accurate record.