• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Serious Oh dear! Looks like Marco Polo "never actually went to China", according to some "AMDKs"! So should we believe them or @ginfreely? hahaha

Do you believe the "AMDKs" or @ginfreely? hahaha

  • Of course, I believe the "AMDKs"!

    Votes: 6 75.0%

  • I will always believe my beloved @ginfreely! :inlove:

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • I don't know what to say....

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • Total voters
    8
Hypocrite-The

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
musashi said:
Click to expand...
For a long time. The prevalent theory was Marco Polo just stayed somewhere on the border an recorded the tales told by travellers. When his book was written etc. He went back to Europe n told the story to the Europeans. Tat was how he spread his story
 
Hypocrite-The

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Did_Marco_Polo_Go_to_China?

Open main menu
Wikipedia Search
EditWatch this page
Read in another language
Did Marco Polo Go to China?
Did Marco Polo Go to China? is a 1995 book, by Frances Wood, arguing that Italian explorer Marco Polo never visited China but travelled no further than Persia and that he based his description of China on accounts from Persian travelers.

Did Marco Polo Go to China?
Did marco polo go to china book.jpg
First UK hardcover edition, 1995
Author
Frances Wood
Country
United States
Language
English
Subject
History
Published
1995
Media type
Print
ISBN
978-0-8133-8999-8
The book notes that Polo failed to mention the Great Wall, the use of chopsticks as eating utensils, tea, foot-binding, Chinese calligraphy or other significant features and that there are no Chinese records of Polo's presence. Thus it is a typical example of an argument from silence.

Some archeologists have pointed to inconsistencies and inaccuracies in his description of Kublai Khan's attempted invasions of Japan in 1274 and 1281 and that Polo's account mixed up details from the two invasions.[1]

Criticisms Edit
A number of scholars have argued in favor of the established view that Polo was in China in response to Wood's book.[2] The book has been criticized by figures including Igor de Rachewiltz (translator and annotator of The Secret History of the Mongols) and Morris Rossabi (author of Kublai Khan: his life and times).[3]

Errors in Wood's book have been pointed out by various scholars. For example, Stephen G. Haw notes how Wood claims that the History of Yuan mentions Giovanni de Marignolli by name even though it mentions only the tributary gift that he brought to the Yuan court, a large impressive war horse given by the "Franks" (Fulang) of Europe.[4]

The historian David Morgan also points out basic errors made such as confusing the Liao dynasty with the Jin dynasty, and he found no compelling evidence in the book that would convince him that Marco Polo did not go to China.[5] Haw also argues in his book Marco Polo's China that Marco's account is much more correct and accurate than has often been supposed and that it is extremely unlikely that he could have obtained all the information in his book from second-hand sources.[6] Haw also criticizes Wood's approach to finding mention of Marco Polo in Chinese texts by contending that contemporaneous Europeans had little regard for using surnames and that a direct Chinese transliteration of the name "Marco" ignores the possibility of him taking on a Chinese or even Mongol name with no bearing or similarity with his Latin name.[7]

Reviewing Haw's book, Peter Jackson (author of The Mongols and the West) has said that Haw "must surely now have settled the controversy surrounding the historicity of Polo's visit to China".[8]

Igor de Rachewiltz's review, which refutes Wood's points, concludes with a strongly-worded condemnation: "I regret to say that F. W.'s book falls short of the standard of scholarship that one would expect in a work of this kind. Her book can only be described as deceptive, both in relation to the author and to the public at large. Questions are posted that, in the majority of cases, have already been answered satisfactorily ... her attempt is unprofessional; she is poorly equipped in the basic tools of the trade, i.e., adequate linguistic competence and research methodology ... and her major arguments cannot withstand close scrutiny. Her conclusion fails to consider all the evidence supporting Marco Polo's credibility."[9]

References
Last edited 2 months ago by an anonymous user
Wikipedia
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted.
Terms of UsePrivacyDesktop
 
musashi

musashi

Alfrescian
Loyal
LaoTze said:
I voted and believed in Ginfreely.
You all know I love her so much and been on record giving her lots and lots of sincere advice for her happiness.
So whatever she say must be true and will be true in my eyes and ears and heart and my mind.
Click to expand...
Dear @LaoTze, many thanks for your reply and for voting in the poll, even though you do not agree with me! :tongue:
But I'm very surprised that you "love" @ginfreely "so much" and "will always believe" her! :tongue:
 
LaoTze

LaoTze

Alfrescian
Loyal
musashi said:
Dear @LaoTze, many thanks for your reply and for voting in the poll, even though you do not agree with me! :tongue:
But I'm very surprised that you "love" @ginfreely "so much" and "will always believe" her! :tongue:
Click to expand...

It is ok if we do not agree with everything.
Love for Ginfreely slowly but surely developed as I tried to coach her on the way to happiness.
I feel so much for her that the que to my giving of rainbows filled up until end of next year with other gals.
It will be unjust for me to let her potong jalan and unfair to the current que holders.


Poor Gin just got to make do with
1549297569000.png
 
ginfreely

ginfreely

Alfrescian
Loyal
eatshitndie said:
the arabic reference was zaiton, a far cry from portuguese and spanish phonetic translation of chincheo, based on the local fuking dialect. in hokkien (fuking) , it was chinchew. if marco was there, he would have picked up and spoken the local fuking dialect and called the hooker haven cinceo, spelled according to italian rendition. instead he followed the persian and arab translation of zayton and zaiton respectively, which was commonly referred to in the persian gulf and not in chinchew itself.
Click to expand...
You are assuming too much and based on your assumptions you are calling him a liar, which is not right. A chinese can be born in mudland and stay in mudland for years and still hardly know Malay due to the circle of people that they liaise with, what makes you think that Marco Polo should pick up this and pick up that in Hokkien?
 
ginfreely

ginfreely

Alfrescian
Loyal
glockman said:
Wah, that must be a really big and deep harbour siol :biggrin:
Click to expand...
You are caught using your old dirty trick of your filthy clone @Cottonmouth upping thread and you replied in minutes - 3 minutes to be exact. Just like you and Sinkie then. Except then was insinuating insults now is full blown ccb insults from your ccb Malaysian pussy mouth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top