小编物语：马可波罗，13世纪来自意大利的世界知名的旅行家和商人。17岁时追随父亲和叔叔，途经中东，历时四年多抵达蒙古帝国。

他在中国游历了17年，曾采访当时中国的许多古城，到过西南部的云南和东南地区。返回威尼斯之后，写知名的《马可波罗游记》记载了他在东方最富裕的国家中国的见闻，引发了欧洲人对东方的冷淡憧憬，对以后新航路的修筑产生了极大的影响。One of historys greatest explorers, may in fact have been a conman, it was claimed yesterday.昨日有消息称之为，历史上最最出色的探险家之一有可能事实上是个大骗子。Far from being a trader who spent years in China and the Far East, he probably never went further east than the Black Sea, according to a team of archaeologists.据一个考古队称之为，马可波罗有可能显然不是在中国和远东行驶多年的商人，很有可能都到时过比黑海很远的地方。

They suspect the Venetian adventurer picked up stories about the mysterious lands of the Orient from fellow traders around the Black Sea who related tales of China, Japan and the Mongol Empire in the 13th century.他们猜测这位威尼斯探险家从一些黑海地区的商人伙伴那里真是了很多关于那片谜样的东方大地的故事。他们向他描写了很多13世纪中国、日本和蒙古帝国的传说。He then put the stories together in a book commonly called The Travels of Marco Polo, hailed as one of the first travel books; it purports to be his account of his journeys through Persia, Asia and the Far East between 1271 and 1291.后来他将这些故事构建一本书，也就是为世人所熟悉的《马可波罗游记》，这本书堪称是最先的旅游书籍之一，并包括他1271年到1291年间游历波斯、亚洲和远东的记录。

It details his relations with Kublai Khan, the Mongol ruler who became Emperor of China.书中详尽描写了他和蒙古统治者忽必烈的交情，忽必烈后来沦为了中国的一代帝王。But now an Italian team of archaeologists studying in Japan have cast doubts about one of Italys great national heroes although there have been competing claims to him from Croatia, which argues he was born there.但如今一个在日本积极开展研究的意大利考古队对这位意大利民族大英雄产生了批评。不过关于马克波罗的国籍，克罗地亚否认他是克罗地亚人，说道他出生于在那里。The doubters told Italian history magazine Focus Storia that there were numerous inconsistencies and inaccuracies in Marco Polos description of Kublai Khans attempted invasions of Japan in 1274 and 1281.怀疑者们告诉他意大利历史杂志《探讨历史》说道，马可波罗关于忽必烈1274年和1281年两次企图侵略日本的叙述中，不存在诸多不完全一致和不精确的地方。

He confuses the two, mixing up details about the first expedition with those of the second.他将忽必烈第一次和第二次远征的细节弄混了。In his account of the first invasion, he describes the fleet leaving Korea and being hit by a typhoon before it reached the Japanese coast, said Professor Daniele Petrella of the University of Naples, the leader of the archaeology team.在叙述第一次侵略日本时，他说道舰队刚刚离开了高丽（今天的朝鲜、韩国）就遭遇了台风，没有能到达日本海岸。

这支考古队的领队、那不勒斯大学教授丹尼尔彼得雷拉说。But that happened in 1281 is it really possible that a supposed eye witness could confuse events which were seven years apart?但那只不过是1281年时候的事如果是亲眼所见，怎么有可能将相距七年之久的两个事件混淆？He said that Polos description of the Mongol fleet did not square with the remains of ships that the team had excavated in Japan, as he had written of ships with five masts, while those which had been found had only three.他还说道，马可波罗关于蒙古舰队的叙述也与考古队在日本挖出出来的船舶遗骸不吻合，他所记录的舰船有5支桅杆，而所发掘出的舰船只有3支桅杆。When he describes Kublai Khans fleet he talks about the pitch that was used to make ships hulls watertight. He used the word chunam, which in Chinese and Mongol means nothing.当他写道忽必烈的舰队时，他提及用沥青做到船体透气，他用的词是chunam，而在中文和蒙文中并没这个词。

In fact, it is the Persian word for pitch. Its also odd that instead of using, as he does in most instances, local names to describe places, he used Persian terms for Mongol and Chinese place names.实质上，这是个用来回应沥青的波斯文词语。而且，大多数时候他都会用于当地的地名，但是这次他却用波斯文词语来指蒙古和中国的地方，这也很怪异。The explorer claimed to have worked as an emissary to the court of Kublai Khan, but his name does not crop up in any of the surviving Mongol or Chinese records.这位探险家自称为曾作为使节去朝见忽必烈，但现存的蒙古或中国史料记述中都去找将近他的名字。

本文来源：亚星游戏官网-www.et-navi.com