Which detail in the excerpt from "Did Marco Polo Really Go to China?" supports the claim that stories about Marco Polo's travels and encounters were perhaps false or exaggerated?

A. "Polo's Description was copied and recopied in a dozen languages, and it was still popular 200 years later—Christopher Columbus took a copy to the Americas in 1492. But scribes and translators left some things out and added others; at least 143 versions appeared between the fourteenth and nineteenth centuries. It's hard to know exactly what was in Polo's original version."

B. "Polo seems to have said nothing about the Great Wall of China, or the practice of foot-binding, or the popularity of tea, and Chinese records say nothing about Polo. Was he really there? Omissions don't prove that he wasn't. The Great Wall of China as we know it was built in the sixteenth century, under the Ming Dynasty; earlier walls were less prominent and might not have impressed Polo. He probably associated more with foreigners (including the Mongol conquerors) than with the Chinese themselves, so he might not have seen much of foot-binding and tea-drinking. Or, if he did mention these things, copyists may have dropped them from later manuscripts."



Answer :

Final answer:

The absence of mentions of key Chinese customs in Marco Polo's accounts raises doubts about the accuracy of his descriptions.


Explanation:

The detail in the excerpt from 'Did Marco Polo Really Go to China?' that supports the claim of potential falsehood or exaggeration in stories about his travels is the absence of mentions of certain Chinese customs in his accounts. Specifically, the lack of references to practices like foot-binding, tea-drinking, or the Great Wall of China raises questions about the accuracy of his descriptions. Omissions don't prove that he wasn't there, but these missing details contribute to the debate around the authenticity of Marco Polo's accounts.


Learn more about Marco Polo's travels here:

https://brainly.com/question/12585396