Category: John Mandeville (Page 6 of 7)

Sir John Mandeville describes a traveller’s journey from the countries of Western Europe to Constantinople by listing the locations passed through along the way. According to him, one can begin by going through Germany and then Hungary. From there, one travels along the River Danube, through Belgrade, and crosses the River Maritsa. Then one travels, presumably by land, through Pechenegs to Greece and through several cities thereafter until arriving at Constantinople. Mandeville does not include the practical aspects of this journey, and would be hard-pressed to do so considering his narrative is entirely fictional.

Once the narrative settles for a moment in Constantinople, Mandeville takes care to describe the city as beautiful, noting its important monuments, the religious relics located there, and some of the surrounding physical geography. Regarding the physical aspects of the city, he says it has strong walls and three corners. He describes it as a city surrounded by water, noting the strait running through it. He also notes that there are a number of islands nearby in addition to three large mountains — Olympus, Athos, and a third one that he does not name.

In the city, he describes the church dedicated to St. Sophie, praising its beauty. Here he focuses in particularly on the statue of the Emperor Justinian in front of the church, reporting that there used to be an apple in the statue’s hand, and its disappearance symbolizes the loss of a once expansive empire. The statue’s other hand is raised pointing west in a purported gesture of threat towards sinners. This detail seems also to be symbolic on Mandeville’s part of the conflict between the Orthodox Christianity of the East and the Roman Catholic Church dominating the West. This conflict is elaborated elsewhere in Mandeville’s section on Constantinople, when he states on page 12 that “All people in the land of Greece are Christian, but it’s a very different faith from ours.” After this sweeping statement of distinction, Mandeville proceeds to tell the story of a conflict between the Roman Pope and the Orthodox patriarch, then enumerate the theological and practical differences between these two branches of Christianity.

Mandeville also notes several religious relics located in Constantinople, including a nail from the Cross of Christ among other items associated with his Crucifixion, a piece of Christ’s crown of thorns, and the bodies of several saints. He uses his mentions of the nail and the crown as opportunities to go on long, meticulously-detailed tangents about aspects of Christ’s life and death. Mandeville is writing throughout his descriptions of Constantinople with the clear purpose of communicating certain theological perspectives.

This theological discussion emphasizes primarily the differences between Orthodox and Roman Catholicism. When he lists the specific ways they vary in their views and practices, it comes across as a reaffirmation of the perceived ‘correctness’ of the Western Christian tradition in contrast to the strangeness of the Greek tradition. However, in context with the rest of Mandeville’s narrative, the intention for this comparison seems to go beyond an expression of xenophobia. There is a factually incorrect but symbolically significant arrangement within the text, wherein Western Europe and the land of Prester John are placed equidistant from Jerusalem. It is debatable what this positioning means for Mandeville’s perception of his own homeland’s spirituality. Is Western Europe closer to or farther from what Mandeville thinks Christianity is supposed to be? Does its symbolic location on the globe represent a spiritual distance? Judging from his descriptions of the Christianity practiced in Constantinople, Mandeville seems simultaneously to be highlighting Western Europe’s purity of belief and their spiritual isolation, symbolized by their physical distance from a Holy Land not in the possession of Christians.

Mandeville goes to great lengths in his writing on India to describe unusual sights and peoples there. He begins his section on India by describing an awe-striking physical feature of the land: diamond growth. It is explained that these precious stones can be found in icy rocks, sea rocks, and in mountainous areas, implying that the land of India as Mandeville perceives it varies in climate and topography. Also described in this passage are the mystical properties of the diamonds — bringing courage and good health to those who carry them. It is interesting that this passage on diamonds serves as an introduction of sorts to the land India, as it is representative of Mandeville’s focus throughout the following chapter on the marvelous and incredible things to be found there.

He mentions the Indus River as a geographical feature of India, taking particular note of the 30-foot long eels he claims reside in it. Elsewhere he mentions an Indian island infested with dragons and snakes and other dangerous wild beasts. These details contribute to a theme of exoticizing India within the text. Mandeville puts particular effort into describing the people he claims reside in India and its “islands,” highlighting physical appearances as well as cultural practices that stand in contrast to the familiar world of medieval Western Europe.

The peoples Mandeville lists are generally portrayed as peculiar or revolting through the traits he emphasizes. He describes more than one cannibalistic culture, and more than one culture in which wives are killed if their husbands die before them. He describes the people of an island he called Lamuri, who wear no clothing and do not practice marriage — however, even here women are a good to be “shared” among men. He notes people from an island he calls Sumatra, who brand their faces with hot irons. With the partial exception of cannibalism, Mandeville does not appear to be noting these things for the purpose of denouncing them from any moral position. Rather, he presents them as if the reader will naturally perceive them as absurd or amazing, and marvel at his portrait of a mystical Asian land.

Mandeville does describe some people as explicitly evil, including one group who train dogs to kill their enemies, and another group who drink human blood and refer to it as “god.” Conversely, he describes one group as highly moral and faithful. This appears in a particular section in the chapter on India in which he simply lists the peoples he purports to have encountered for their physical peculiarities. He describes a group of people who have dogs’ heads and wear nothing but loincloths, but are highly intelligent and do not cause harm to others. They are good fighters and devout in their religious faith. In this list of physically abnormal people, he also includes people with one eye in the middle of their foreheads who only consume raw meat, headless people with eyes and mouths on their chests, people with both male and female sex organs, faceless people, very small people, and people with lips big enough to hide their whole faces from the sun.

Through these details, Mandeville’s imagined version of India becomes a place remarked chiefly for its strangeness. As he never actually travelled there, this account offers nothing in terms of anthropological value. But it does reflect the conception of far-off Eastern/Asian lands in the educated Western European mind of the Middle Ages. This is especially significant considering Mandeville interpreted other sources to come up with his image of India, and was likely writing to appeal to an audience that he knew wanted to read about oddities from what they perceived as a mystical, exotic, and inconceivably far-off place.

John Mandeville refers to Constantinople largely as a landmark in the routes to and from Jerusalem. He uses it almost like a gas station, often referencing things as being “ such-and-such many miles from Constantinople”, or referencing it as a place you must pass through in order to get somewhere else. For John Mandeville, Constantinople is not a destination worth visiting in and of itself, but rather a rest stop on the way to more worthy places. He is brief in his descriptions of the city, although what little physical description he does give is positive. This is in stark contrast to his descriptions of Jerusalem, which were incredibly specific and detail-oriented. Jerusalem had paragraphs dedicated to descriptions of things like counting numbers of steps and illustrating architecture and religious monuments for his readers. This is likely because The Book of John Mandeville expected a large majority Christian audience, and Jerusalem is a very important city in the Christian faith. For a monk who had never really travelled to either city ,Jerusalem was most definitely considered more important and worthwhile in his own mind. It is also entirely possible that the author of The Book of John Mandeville just did not have enough information about Constantinople to write about it in the same amount of detail. As a monk writing from his monastery, most of the information he received was likely material of religious importance, and so he may have been deliberately vague about Constantinople with the goal of hiding his lack of knowledge about the city. However, what little description he does include is full of praise. He describes Constantinople as being “a very beautiful and great city with strong walls and it is three-cornered”. He also praises the Emperor of Constantinople’s architecture, saying “the Emperor’s palace is really lovely and beautifully adorned”. He specifically praises the “pretty court for jousting”, the “tiered seats in which one can sit and watch and not impede other people’s views”, and the pillars, which are “made of marble”. While these are praise-worthy objects, it is strange that John Mandeville singled them out specifically, especially when he seems highly concentrated on only those things which have religious significance in other sections. While it is possible that John Mandeville just had an appreciation for the cleverness of the Emperor’s architecture, it also seems like the kind of thing a knight or other kind of warrior would take note of. It seems likely that the monk writing as John Mandeville received some of his information about Constantinople from a knight’s report.

Where John Mandeville does not go into detail of the physical descriptions of Constantinople, he spends a lot of time criticizing the Greeks, specifically the Greek Christians. He spends paragraphs explaining exactly how different their faith is from the Christianity of Western Europe. While he does not outright condemn the Greek Christians, it is clear he does not approve of their practices, even going so far as to say “that is an immense scandal” when describing some of their methods. He finishes that description with a sanctimonious “ God can correct it when He wills it”. He ends by acknowledging that his description of the Greeks may not be relevant to the journey, but he defends himself, saying “they are nevertheless relevant in so far as I have undertaken to show some of the customs and manners and differences of these countries”. He is clear on the point that Greek Christianity varies from and conflicts with the Christianity he wishes to teach, and goes on to say “I have written it hear so that you can see the differences between our faith and theirs…”. It seems like he feels the need to end his account this way almost to make sure he keeps his audience; he does not want anyone reading to mistake the Greek faith as his, or as the correct or proper one. John Mandeville is very clear that the only true faith is his version of Christianity, and while he does not personally work to combat any variants, he is certain they will be taken down in their own time.

The author’s description of Constantinople continues the pattern mentioned in my previous post where he tends to write more as a form of entertainment than an actual travel narrative. The city of Constantinople is described in chapter two, “One Way to Jerusalem” because, according to the author, it is a major city europeans must pass through to travel to Jerusalem. The author spends most of the chapter supposedly on the subject of Constantinople, however I say supposedly because a lot of the time he is on a religious tangent that distantly relates to the city. Nevertheless he does provide concrete information. The author tells us that the emperor of Greece usually lives in Constantinople, and briefly describes the emperor’s palace. He gives some history of the Greek empire, mixing this history in with descriptions of local attractions. He also touches on some of the cultural importance and local superstitions of these places, and lists a few other relics and famous bodies buried at Constantinople. He explains what the city physically looks like as well as the geography around it in describing the mountains, listing the islands nearby and including local stories about certain geographical points.

However, the bulk of the chapter is spent on religious information. In the middle of describing the city, the author goes into a tangent about the story of Jesus on the cross. He describes the different forms of wood used to make the cross and why they were used, includes a short story about Adam, and ends with explaining what happened to Jesus on the night he was arrested. While the story distantly relates to Constantinople, it is a weak connection and modern readers would consider it a unrelated inclusion. However, it is apparent that religion is an important subject to the author because he spends another considerable part of the chapter explaining how the religion practiced by citizens of Constantinople, while technically considered Christianity, is different from the normal practices.

The vast amount of time the author spends on the subject of religion, be it the random religious stories or the detailed explanation of why Constantinople christianity is different, reveals the deep importance of religion, and christianity in particular, to the author and the culture he is writing for. Roughly four out of the eight pages spent on Constantinople are actually about religious aspects. On one hand, it is true that the information the author provides about the difference in the practice of Christianity would be helpful for travelers during that time because it would give them an idea of what to expect from a community of people that they identify with. However, the religious stories of Adam and Jesus on the cross really give no necessary information about travel to Constantinople, and these take up most of the religious portion.  The lack of legitimate helpful information in this chapter lends to the argument that this book was written more as an piece of entertainment than an actual guidebook or an travel record. The author structured his book to be a form of amusement for a culture in which Christianity and religion was a vital part of daily life.

The section of “The Book of John Mandeville” about Babylon focuses on a variety of different aspects of the travel narrative. The author describes the important aspects of doing the physical act of traveling to the area. He describes how travelers need permission from the Sultan to actually travel to Babylon. He also describes where others need to travel to get to Babylon. He lists routes from various places and includes information about the people who live there. The author also describes some of the interesting physical aspects of the locations. He describes buildings many of which are included because of their religious history, most of which he includes as well.  The author spends a great deal of time describing the Sultan, who lives in Babylon. How this Sultan lives, the areas over which he rules, how he commands his military force, his marriages and his sexual habits are all described in detail. The history of the Sultans is also included, which seems to be made up of each new Sultan killing off the old one, or occasionally being elected by the people, along with royal etiquette and how visitors are expected to act towards the Sultan. The author also includes some information about the surrounding area’s geography and weather, as well as the history of the old Babylon.

The section of the book describing Babylon is interesting when thinking about questions of purpose. While the author does refer to himself and his experiences in the narration, it is relatively low-key. This section is written as more a form of guide than a account depicting the author’s travel experiences. He speaks directly to the reader, giving suggestions and directions, as well as general information. While all of this information is supposedly coming from the author’s own travels to the place, he does not include much directly about his own experiences. From this, I see the purpose of the book itself meant as either a direct guidebook for other travelers, or simply as a form of entertainment for those not planning to travel at all. The book has pieces that are important for a guidebook. The author includes different routes to travel to Babylon and things that travelers should know before attempting to journey there, like the fact that they need permission from the Sultan first. He also includes information about the landscape and people, and even more information about the Sultan himself and how visitors are supposed to act in his presence. However, I’m inclined to believe that this book is meant more as home entertainment than an actual guidebook. Much of the history and cultural information included about Babylon is very general. The author includes short anecdotes of the historical context of things or religious stories, and describes some of the places in more of a entertainingly visual way than a practical, useful way. This book was meant to entertain people reading in their home, who did not plan to actually go anywhere, but could use the narrative as their own escape.