|
17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The curious history of John Mandeville, June 2, 2000
Sir John Mandeville was an Early-Renaissance writer of travel tales similar in content and style to his famous near-contemporary, Marco Polo. But history has judged these two men quite differently: whereas Marco Polo has become a household word, synonymous with bold explorations, Mandeville has been largely forgotten. But it was not always so. During his lifetime, and for a couple of centuries afterwards, Mandeville was by far the more famous of the two. A copy of Mandeville - but not Polo - was in the possession of Leonardo da Vinci. More telling, about 300 manuscripts (hand-written copies) of Mandeville survive, compared to only about 70 of Polo. What accounts for Mandeville's reversals of fortune? Mandeville (or someone calling himself that) wrote his book about 1356, or shortly thereafter. Its original tile was "The Voyages and Travels of Sir John Mandeville, Knight," but is now generally known as "Travels of Sir John Mandeville." Polo's book, originally titled, "Descriptions of the World," came out about 1300. Whereas Mandeville wrote his book himself, Polo used the services of a professional writer, Rusticello, who in turn based the book on Polo's notebooks. (Mandeville is the better written.) Standards of what constitutes a historical/geographic work have greatly changed. Both books -- but especially Mandeville -- contain a fascinating pastiche of facts (often distorted), impressions, opinions, and utterly fantastic claims. Reading Mandeville today, one is left with a bewildering farrago of National Geographic and supermarket tabloids. As the Age of Exploration progressed, reliable geographic, historic, and economic data came to be more highly valued than fantastic tales. Since Polo's book was found to be the more reliable its reputation increased. Mandeville, on the other hand, came to be seen as a "teller of tall tales," a kind of Baron Munchhausen. Indeed, today many historians question whether the man "Mandeville" really existed. Most believe that the person who wrote "Mandeville" never actually traveled to the placed he describes, and obtained his material from other sources. He took the identity of "Sir John Mandeville" to bolster his credibility. (Recently there have been attempts to "rehabilitate" Mandeville.) What is their relevance today? Except in a narrow historical context, I would say that Mandeville is definitely the more interesting. What Mandeville lacks in historic and geographic accuracy, he more than makes up by his insight into what continually fascinates mankind - both then and now. A considerable portion of Mandeville can be fairly equated to today's Elvis sightings, or to the woman from Ohio who has the spaceman's baby. We are too immersed in our contemporary world to clearly see what is behind such phenomena; but looking back at Mandeville's world our vision greatly improves. Consider: Mandeville tells of a society in which women often have snakes in their ...uhm...private parts. In order to protect themselves their men hire the services of professional "testers." As absurd as this all sounds, could Mandeville actually be describing some venereal disease? Another example: could the various human monstrosities described by Mandeville (people with dog's heads, etc.) have modern counterparts in television's Star Trek? The Penguin book would be improved by additional maps and illustrations -- unfortunately this would increase the cost.
|