THE TRAVELS OF MARCO POLO; FACT OR FICTION
...ina, eventually spreading to all classes” (McKay, p.349). If foot binding was so common among the wealthy, which Polo claims to have been in contact with, why was this tradition not described in his book? Marco Polo also claims to have met and served at the court of the great Kubilai Khan, a ruler who was thought to be half human and half God. Khan lived in isolation where few were allowed to see him because he was considered the “son of heaven,” meaning a God among men. Visitors were taken through several massive red doors made out of gold, which Marco Polo fails to mention in his journals. “In the southern front of this wall there are five gates. There is one great gate in the middle, which is never opened except when the Great Khan is leaving or entering. Next to this, one on either side, are two small gates, by which everyone else enters. There are also two more large gates, one near each corner, which are like-wise used by other people” (Marco Polo, p. 125). Judging by the original records of the Chinese and Mongols, there is certainly no evidence whatsoever that Marco Polo actually traveled to China and reached the court of the great Mongol ruler, Kubilai Khan. There is even less evidence of him ever being asked to serve at the court of Kubilai Khan, or ever being appointed to the post of governor of Yangzhou. It is an honor, which Marco Polo claims to have been bestowed upon him by the Khan for three years. Despite Marco Polo's claims, one of the most puzzling aspects of his story, given his self-stated position of importance and closeness with the Mongol court, is the lack of reference to the Polo’s in Chinese sources, or Mongol sources for that matter. Facts as important as those stated above, allow historians to question Marco Polo as a credible source. Many people took his accounts with a grain of salt and some skeptics question the authenticity of his account. Another interesting fact is that Marco Polo made no references to the Great Wall, which is visible for any foreigner to take notice. How can an accomplishment, which was 3,000 miles long from the ocean towards the west, be passed by unnoticed (Wang, August 11, 2004)? The Great Wall was “man-made in which one million people died attempting to create it for Chinese protection against barbarians (non-Chinese)” (Wang, August 11, 2004). There are several other factors to considerate, which lead to questioning Marco Polo and his travels. For example, a bridge in China named the Marco Polo Bridge (after the “great traveler”) was stated to have twenty-four arches by Polo’s journals when in fact, it only obtained eleven arches. Marco Polo also refers to the emperor by his Persian title instead of his Mongol title. For one who was supposed to have lived in China for 17 years, Marco Polo never picked up even a few Chinese and Mongol words or names of places; he seems to have relied almost exclusively on Arab and Persian sources for place-names. The widespread use of Persian, Arabic or Turkish proper names is one of the major puzzles of Marco Polo's book. Polo also never mentioned Daoism, one of China’s strongest beliefs. Gunpowder for the fireworks that would light up the night sky was also missing from his recordings of Chinese cultures. Marco Polo also failed to mention pork (the most popular food in China), or the many religious cults, which still exist in China today. There are numerous facts that initiate questioning towards the credibility of The Travels of Marco Polo, however, how could he have written his book with such detail about other features of China and its civilization? Historians believe that Polo received his stories and information from his family (also merchants who traveled) and from Persian and other merchants traveling on the Silk Road. “There was a market both for skeins of silk thread and for silk cloth woven in Chinese or Syrian workshops. Caravans returning to China carri...