Chapter 10

The chief depositaries of these Mandaean mysteries are the priests, who enjoy a high degree of power and social regard. The priesthood has three grades: (1) theSh’kandāor deacon is generally chosen from episcopal or priestly families, and must be without bodily blemish. The candidate for orders must be at least nineteen years old and have undergone twelve years’ preparation; he is then qualified to assist the priesthood in the ceremonies of religion. (2) TheTarmīdā(i.e.“Talmīdā,” “initiated”) or priest is ordained by a bishop and two priests or by four priests after a long and extremely painful period of preparation. (3) TheGanzivrā(“treasurer”) or bishop, the highest dignitary, is chosen from the whole body of the Tarmīdās after a variety of tests, andpossesses unlimited authority over the clergy. A supreme priestly rank, that ofRīsh ‘ammā, or “head of the people,” is recognized, but only in theory; since the time of Pharaoh this sovereign pontificate has only once been filled. Women are admitted to priestly offices as well as men. The priestly dress, which is all white, consists of drawers, an upper garment, and a girdle with the so-calledtāgā(“crown”); in all ceremonies the celebrants must be barefoot. By far the most frequent and important of the religious ceremonies is that of baptism (maṣbūthā), which is called for in a great variety of cases, not only for children but for adults, where consecration or purification is required, as for example on all Sundays and feast days, after contact with a dead body, after return from abroad, after neglect of any formality on the part of a priest in the discharge of his functions. In all these cases baptism is performed by total immersion in running water, but during the five days’ baptismal festival the rite is observed wholesale by mere sprinkling of large masses of the faithful at once. The Mandaeans observe also with the elements of bread (pehtā) and wine (mambūhā, lit. “fountain”) a sort of eucharist, which has a special sanctifying efficacy, and is usually dispensed at festivals, but only to baptized persons of good repute who have never willingly denied the Mandaean faith. In receiving it the communicant must not touch the host with his finger; otherwise it loses its virtue. The hosts are made by the priests from unleavened fine flour. The Mandaean places of worship, being designed only for the priests and their assistants (the worshippers remaining in the forecourt), are excessively small, and very simply furnished; two windows, a door that opens towards the south so that those who enter have their faces turned towards the pole star, a few boards in the corner, and a gabled roof complete the whole structure; there is neither altar nor decoration of any kind. The neighbourhood of running water (for baptisms) is essential. At the consecration of a church the sacrifice of a dove (the bird of Ishtar) has place among the ceremonies. Besides Sundays there are six great feasts: (1) that of the New Year (Naurūz rabbā), on the first day of the first month of winter; (2)Dehwā h’ nīnā, the anniversary of the happy return ofHibil Zīvāfrom the kingdom of darkness into that of light, lasting five days, beginning with the 18th of the first month of spring; (3) theMarwānā, in commemoration of the drowned Egyptians, on the first day of the second month of spring; (4) the great five days’ baptismal festival (pantshā), the chief feast, kept on the five intercalary days at the end of the second month of summer—during its continuance every Mandaean, male and female, must dress in white and bathe thrice daily; (5)Dehwā d’daimānā, in honour of one of the three hundred and sixty ‘Uthras, on the first day of the second month of autumn; (6)Kanshe Zahlā, the preparation feast, held on the last day of the year. There are also fast days called m’battal (Arab.), on which it is forbidden to kill any living thing or eat flesh. These, however, are really “rest-days,” as fasting is forbidden in Mandaeism. The year is solar, and has twelve months of thirty days each, with five intercalary days between the eighth and the ninth month. Of the seven days of the week, next to Sunday (habshaba) Thursday has a special sacredness as the day ofHibil Zīvā. As regards secular occupation, the present Mandaeans are goldsmiths, ironworkers, and house and ship carpenters. TheSidrā Rabbālays great stress upon the duty of procreation, and marriage is a duty. In the 17th century, according to the old travellers, they numbered about 20,000 families, but at the present day they hardly number more than 1200 souls. In external appearance the Mandaean is distinguished from the Moslem only by a brown coat and a parti-coloured headcloth with a cord twisted round it. They have some peculiar deathbed rites: a deacon with some attendants waits upon the dying, and as death approaches administers a bath first of warm and afterwards of cold water; a holy dress, consisting of seven pieces (rastā), is then put on; the feet are directed towards the north and the head turned to the south, so that the body faces the pole star. After the burial a funeral feast is held in the house of mourning.The Mandaeans are strictly reticent about their theological dogmas in the presence of strangers; and the knowledge they actually possess of these is extremely small. The foundation of the system is obviously to be sought in Gnosticism, and more particularly in the older type of that doctrine (known from the serpent symbol as Ophite or Naassene) which obtained in Mesopotamia and Further Asia generally. But it is equally plain that the Ophite nucleus has from time to time received very numerous and often curiously perverted accretions from Babylonian Judaism, Oriental Christianity and Parsism, exhibiting a striking example of religious syncretism. In the Gnostic basis itself it is not difficult to recognize the general features of the religion of ancient Babylonia, and thus we are brought nearer a solution of the problem as to the origin of Gnosticism in general. It is certain that Babylonia, the seat of the present Mandaeans, must be regarded also as the cradle in which their system was reared; it is impossible to think of them as coming from Palestine, or to attribute to their doctrines a Jewish or Christian origin. They do not spring historically from the disciples of John the Baptist (Acts xviii. 25; xix. 3 seq.;Recog. Clem.i. 54); the tradition in which he and the Jordan figure so largely is not original, and is therefore worthless; at the same time it is true that their baptismal praxis and its interpretation place them in the same religious group with the Hemerobaptists of Eusebius (H. E.iv. 22) and Epiphanius (Haer., xvii.), or with the sect of disciples of John who remained apart from Christianity. Their reverence for John is of a piece with their whole syncretizing attitude towards the New Testament. Indeed, as has been seen, they appropriate the entire personale of the Bible from Adam, Seth, Abel, Enos and Pharaoh to Jesus and John, a phenomenon which bears witness to the close relations of the Mandaean doctrine both with Judaism and Christianity—not the less close because they were relations of hostility. The history of religion presents other examples of the degradation of holy to demonic figures on occasion of religious schism. The use of the word “Jordan,” even in the plural, for “sacred water,” is precisely similar to that by the Naassenes described in thePhilosophumena(v. 7); thereὁ μέγας Ἰορδάνηςdenotes the spiritualizing sanctifying fluid which pervades the world of light. The notions of the Egyptians and the Red Sea, according to the same work (v. 16), are used by the Peratae much as by the Mandaeans. And the position assigned by the Sethians (Σηθιανοί) to Seth is precisely similar to that given by the Mandaeans to Abel. Both alike are merely old Babylonian divinities in a new Biblical garb. The genesis of Mandaeism and the older gnosis from the old and elaborate Babylonio-Chaldaean religion is clearly seen also in the fact that the names of the old pantheon (as for example those of the planetary divinities) are retained, but their holders degraded to the position of demons—a conclusion confirmed by the fact that the Mandaeans, like the allied Ophites, Peratae and Manichaeans, certainly have their original seat in Mesopotamia and Babylonia. It seems clear that the trinity of Anu, Bel, and Ea in the old Babylonian religion has its counterpart in the Mandaean Pīrā, Ayar, and Mānā rabbā. The D’mūthā of Mānā is the Damkina, the wife of Ea, mentioned by Damascius asΔαύκη, wife ofἉός. Mandā d’hayyē and his image Hibil Zīvā with his incarnations clearly correspond to the old Babylonian Marduk, Merodach, the “first-born” son of Ea, with his incarnations, the chief divinity of the city of Babylon, the mediator and redeemer in the old religion. Hibil’s contest with darkness has its prototype in Marduk’s battle with chaos, the dragon Tiamat, which (another striking parallel) partially swallows Marduk, just as is related of Hibil and the Manichaean primal man. Other features are borrowed by the Mandaean mythology under this head from the well-known epos of Istar’sdescensus ad inferos. The sanctity with which water is invested by the Mandaeans is to be explained by the fact that Ea has his seat “in the depths of the world sea.”Cf. K. Kessler’s article, “Mandäer,” in Herzog-Hauck’sRealencyklopädie, and the same author’s paper, “Ueber Gnosis u. altbabylonische Religion,” in theAbhandh. d. fūnften internationalen Orientalisten-congresses zu Berlin(Berlin, 1882); also W. Brandt’sMandäische Religion(Leipzig, 1889), and M. N. Siouffi’sÉtudes sur la religion des Soubbas(Paris, 1880).

The Mandaeans are strictly reticent about their theological dogmas in the presence of strangers; and the knowledge they actually possess of these is extremely small. The foundation of the system is obviously to be sought in Gnosticism, and more particularly in the older type of that doctrine (known from the serpent symbol as Ophite or Naassene) which obtained in Mesopotamia and Further Asia generally. But it is equally plain that the Ophite nucleus has from time to time received very numerous and often curiously perverted accretions from Babylonian Judaism, Oriental Christianity and Parsism, exhibiting a striking example of religious syncretism. In the Gnostic basis itself it is not difficult to recognize the general features of the religion of ancient Babylonia, and thus we are brought nearer a solution of the problem as to the origin of Gnosticism in general. It is certain that Babylonia, the seat of the present Mandaeans, must be regarded also as the cradle in which their system was reared; it is impossible to think of them as coming from Palestine, or to attribute to their doctrines a Jewish or Christian origin. They do not spring historically from the disciples of John the Baptist (Acts xviii. 25; xix. 3 seq.;Recog. Clem.i. 54); the tradition in which he and the Jordan figure so largely is not original, and is therefore worthless; at the same time it is true that their baptismal praxis and its interpretation place them in the same religious group with the Hemerobaptists of Eusebius (H. E.iv. 22) and Epiphanius (Haer., xvii.), or with the sect of disciples of John who remained apart from Christianity. Their reverence for John is of a piece with their whole syncretizing attitude towards the New Testament. Indeed, as has been seen, they appropriate the entire personale of the Bible from Adam, Seth, Abel, Enos and Pharaoh to Jesus and John, a phenomenon which bears witness to the close relations of the Mandaean doctrine both with Judaism and Christianity—not the less close because they were relations of hostility. The history of religion presents other examples of the degradation of holy to demonic figures on occasion of religious schism. The use of the word “Jordan,” even in the plural, for “sacred water,” is precisely similar to that by the Naassenes described in thePhilosophumena(v. 7); thereὁ μέγας Ἰορδάνηςdenotes the spiritualizing sanctifying fluid which pervades the world of light. The notions of the Egyptians and the Red Sea, according to the same work (v. 16), are used by the Peratae much as by the Mandaeans. And the position assigned by the Sethians (Σηθιανοί) to Seth is precisely similar to that given by the Mandaeans to Abel. Both alike are merely old Babylonian divinities in a new Biblical garb. The genesis of Mandaeism and the older gnosis from the old and elaborate Babylonio-Chaldaean religion is clearly seen also in the fact that the names of the old pantheon (as for example those of the planetary divinities) are retained, but their holders degraded to the position of demons—a conclusion confirmed by the fact that the Mandaeans, like the allied Ophites, Peratae and Manichaeans, certainly have their original seat in Mesopotamia and Babylonia. It seems clear that the trinity of Anu, Bel, and Ea in the old Babylonian religion has its counterpart in the Mandaean Pīrā, Ayar, and Mānā rabbā. The D’mūthā of Mānā is the Damkina, the wife of Ea, mentioned by Damascius asΔαύκη, wife ofἉός. Mandā d’hayyē and his image Hibil Zīvā with his incarnations clearly correspond to the old Babylonian Marduk, Merodach, the “first-born” son of Ea, with his incarnations, the chief divinity of the city of Babylon, the mediator and redeemer in the old religion. Hibil’s contest with darkness has its prototype in Marduk’s battle with chaos, the dragon Tiamat, which (another striking parallel) partially swallows Marduk, just as is related of Hibil and the Manichaean primal man. Other features are borrowed by the Mandaean mythology under this head from the well-known epos of Istar’sdescensus ad inferos. The sanctity with which water is invested by the Mandaeans is to be explained by the fact that Ea has his seat “in the depths of the world sea.”

Cf. K. Kessler’s article, “Mandäer,” in Herzog-Hauck’sRealencyklopädie, and the same author’s paper, “Ueber Gnosis u. altbabylonische Religion,” in theAbhandh. d. fūnften internationalen Orientalisten-congresses zu Berlin(Berlin, 1882); also W. Brandt’sMandäische Religion(Leipzig, 1889), and M. N. Siouffi’sÉtudes sur la religion des Soubbas(Paris, 1880).

(K. K.; G. W. T.)

1The first of these names (not Mendaeans or Mandaites) is that given by themselves, and meansγνωστικοί, followers of Gnosis (מאנדאייא, fromמאנדא, Hebr.מדע). The Gnosis of which they profess themselves adherents is apersonification, the æon and mediator “knowledge of life” (see below). The title Nasoraeans (Nāṣōrāyē), according to Petermann, they give only to those among themselves who are most distinguished for knowledge and character. Like the Arabic Naṣāra, it is originally identical with the name of the half heathen half Jewish-ChristianΝαζωραῖοι, and indicates an early connexion with that sect. The inappropriate designation of St John’s Christians arises from the early and imperfect acquaintance of Christian missionaries, who had regard merely to the reverence in which the name of the Baptist is held among them, and their frequent baptisms. In their dealings with members of other communions the designation they take is Sabians, in Arabic Ṣābi’ūna, fromצבא=צבע, to baptize, thus claiming the toleration extended by the Koran (Sur, 5,.73; 22, 17; 2, 59) to those of that name.2In 1882 they were said to have shrunk to 200 families, and to be seeking a new settlement on the Tigris, to escape the persecutions to which they are exposed.3See T. Nöldeke’s admirableMandäische Grammatik(Halle, 1875).4Narratio originis, rituum, et errorum Christianorum S. Joannis(Rome, 1652).5Reisebeschreibung, part iv. (Geneva, 1674).6Voyage au Levant(Paris, 1664).7Reisen im Orient, ii. 447 seq.8M. M. Siouffi,Études sur la religion ... des Soubbas(Paris, 1880).9Mandaean MSS. occur in the British Museum, the Bodleian Library, the Bibliothèque Nationale of France, and also in Rome, Weimar and Berlin. A number of Mandaean inscriptions relating to popular beliefs and superstitions have been published by H. Pognon,Inscriptions mandaites(2 vols., Paris, 1898-1899), also by M. Lidzbarski in hisEphemeris(Giessen, 1900 seq.).10The first printed edition and translation of theSidra rabba, by Matth. Norberg (Codex Nazaraeus, liber Adami appellatus, 3 vols., Copenhagen, 1815-1816, followed by a lexicon in 1816, and an onomasticon in 1817), is so defective as to be quite useless; even the name Book of Adam is unknown to the Mandaeans. Petermann’sThesaurus s. Liber magnus, vulgo “Liber Adami” appellatus, opus Mandaeorum summi panderis(2 vols., Berlin and Leipzig, 1867), is an excellent metallographic reproduction of the Paris MS. A German translation of about a quarter of this work has been published in W. Brandt’sMandäische Schriften, with notes (Göttingen, 1893). A critical edition still remains a desideratum. Next in importance to theSidrā rābbāis theSidrā d’Yahyā, or “Book of John,” otherwise known as theD’rāschē d’Malkē, “Discourses of the Kings,” which has not as yet been printed as a whole, although portions nave been published by Lorsbach and Tychsen (seeMuseum f. bibl. u. orient. Lit.(1807), and Stäudlin’sBeitr. z. Phil. u. Gesch. d. Relig. u. Sittenlehre1796 seq.). TheKolāstā(Ar.Khulāṣa, “Quintessence”), or according to its fuller title’Enyānē uderāshē d’maṣbūthā umasseḳthā(“Songs and Discourses of Baptism and the Ascent,” viz. of the soul after death), has been admirably lithographed by Euting (Stuttgart, 1867). It is also known asSidrā d’neshmātha, “Book of Souls,” and besides hymns and doctrinal discourses contains prayers to be offered by the priests at sacrifice and at meals, as well as other liturgical matter. The Mandaean marriage service occurs both in Paris and in Oxford as an independent MS. TheDīwān, hitherto unpublished, contains the ritual for atonement. TheAsfar malwāshē, or “Book of the Zodiac,” is astrological. Of smaller pieces many are magical and used as amulets.11The use of the word “life” in a personal sense is usual in Gnosticism; compare theΖωὴof Valentin andel-ḥayāt el-muallama, “the dark life,” of Mani in theFihirst.

2In 1882 they were said to have shrunk to 200 families, and to be seeking a new settlement on the Tigris, to escape the persecutions to which they are exposed.

3See T. Nöldeke’s admirableMandäische Grammatik(Halle, 1875).

4Narratio originis, rituum, et errorum Christianorum S. Joannis(Rome, 1652).

5Reisebeschreibung, part iv. (Geneva, 1674).

6Voyage au Levant(Paris, 1664).

7Reisen im Orient, ii. 447 seq.

8M. M. Siouffi,Études sur la religion ... des Soubbas(Paris, 1880).

9Mandaean MSS. occur in the British Museum, the Bodleian Library, the Bibliothèque Nationale of France, and also in Rome, Weimar and Berlin. A number of Mandaean inscriptions relating to popular beliefs and superstitions have been published by H. Pognon,Inscriptions mandaites(2 vols., Paris, 1898-1899), also by M. Lidzbarski in hisEphemeris(Giessen, 1900 seq.).

10The first printed edition and translation of theSidra rabba, by Matth. Norberg (Codex Nazaraeus, liber Adami appellatus, 3 vols., Copenhagen, 1815-1816, followed by a lexicon in 1816, and an onomasticon in 1817), is so defective as to be quite useless; even the name Book of Adam is unknown to the Mandaeans. Petermann’sThesaurus s. Liber magnus, vulgo “Liber Adami” appellatus, opus Mandaeorum summi panderis(2 vols., Berlin and Leipzig, 1867), is an excellent metallographic reproduction of the Paris MS. A German translation of about a quarter of this work has been published in W. Brandt’sMandäische Schriften, with notes (Göttingen, 1893). A critical edition still remains a desideratum. Next in importance to theSidrā rābbāis theSidrā d’Yahyā, or “Book of John,” otherwise known as theD’rāschē d’Malkē, “Discourses of the Kings,” which has not as yet been printed as a whole, although portions nave been published by Lorsbach and Tychsen (seeMuseum f. bibl. u. orient. Lit.(1807), and Stäudlin’sBeitr. z. Phil. u. Gesch. d. Relig. u. Sittenlehre1796 seq.). TheKolāstā(Ar.Khulāṣa, “Quintessence”), or according to its fuller title’Enyānē uderāshē d’maṣbūthā umasseḳthā(“Songs and Discourses of Baptism and the Ascent,” viz. of the soul after death), has been admirably lithographed by Euting (Stuttgart, 1867). It is also known asSidrā d’neshmātha, “Book of Souls,” and besides hymns and doctrinal discourses contains prayers to be offered by the priests at sacrifice and at meals, as well as other liturgical matter. The Mandaean marriage service occurs both in Paris and in Oxford as an independent MS. TheDīwān, hitherto unpublished, contains the ritual for atonement. TheAsfar malwāshē, or “Book of the Zodiac,” is astrological. Of smaller pieces many are magical and used as amulets.

11The use of the word “life” in a personal sense is usual in Gnosticism; compare theΖωὴof Valentin andel-ḥayāt el-muallama, “the dark life,” of Mani in theFihirst.

MANDALAY,formerly the capital of independent Burma, now the headquarters of the Mandalay division and district, as well as the chief town in Upper Burma, stands on the left bank of the Irrawaddy, in 21° 59′ N. and 96° 8′ E. Its height above mean sea-level is 315 ft. Mandalay was built in 1856-1857 by King Mindōn. It is now divided into the municipal area and the cantonment. The town covers an area of 6 m. from north to south and 3 from east to west, and has well-metalled roads lined with avenues of trees and regularly lighted and watered. The cantonment consists of the area inside the old city walls, and is now called Fort Dufferin. In the centre stands the palace, a group of wooden buildings, many of them highly carved and gilt, resting on a brick platform 900 ft. by 500 ft., and 6 ft. high. The greater part of it is now utilized for military and other offices. The garrison consists of a brigade belonging to the Burma command of the Indian army. There are many fine pagodas and monastic buildings in the town. The population in 1901 was 183,816, showing a decrease of 3% in the decade. The population is very mixed. Besides Burmese there are Zerbadis (the offspring of a Mahommedan with a Burman wife), Mahommedans, Hindus, Jews, Chinese, Shans and Manipuris (called Kathe), Kachins and Palaungs. Trains run from Mandalay to Rangoon, Myit-kyina, and up the Mandalay-Kunlong railway. The steamers of the Irrawaddy Flotilla Company also ply in all directions. There are twenty bazaars, the chief of which, the Zegyo, was burnt in 1897, and again in 1906, but rebuilt.

TheMandalay Districthas an area of 2117 sq. m. and a population (1901) of 366,507, giving a density of 177 inhabitants to the square mile. About 600 sq. m. along the Irrawaddy river are flat land, nearly all cultivated. In the north and east there are some 1500 sq. m. of high hills and table-lands, forming geographically a portion of the Shan table-land. Here the fall to the plains averages 3000 to 4000 ft. in a distance of 10 m. This part of the district is well wooded and watered. The Maymyosubdivision has very fine plateaus of 3000 to 3600 ft. in height. The highest peaks are between 4000 and 5000 ft. above sea-level. The Irrawaddy, the Myit-ngè and the Madaya are the chief rivers. The last two come from the Shan States, and are navigable for between 20 and 30 m. There are many canals, most of which have fallen greatly into disrepair, and the Aungbinle, Nanda and Shwepyi lakes also supply water for cultivation. A systematic irrigation scheme has been undertaken by the government. The Sagyin hills near Madaya are noted for their alabaster; rubies are also found in small quantities. There are 335 sq. m. of forest reserves in the district, but there is little teak. The climate is dry and healthy. During May and June and till August strong winds prevail. The thermometer rises to about 107° in the shade in the hot weather, and the minimum in the month of December is about 55°. The rainfall is light, the average being under 30 in.

TheDivisionincludes the districts of Mandalay, Bhamo, Myit-kyina, Katha and Ruby Mines, with a total area of 29,373 sq. m., and a population (1901) of 777,338, giving an average density of 30 inhabitants to the square mile.

(J. G. Sc.)

MANDAMUS, WRIT OF,in English law, a high prerogative writ issuing from the High Court of Justice (named from the first word in the Latin form of the writ) containing a command in the name of the king, directed to inferior courts, corporations, or individuals, ordering them to do a specific act within the duty of their office, or which they are bound by statute to do, and performance whereof the applicant for the writ has a specific legal right to enforce. Direct orders from the sovereign to subjects commanding the performance of particular acts were common in early times, and to this class of ordersmandamusoriginally belonged. It became customary for the court of king’s bench, in cases where a legal duty was established but no sufficient means existed for enforcing it, to order performance by this writ. Under the Judicature Acts and theCrown Office Rules, 1906 (r. 49), the powers of the court of king’s bench as to the grant of the prerogative writ of mandamus are exercisable only in the king’s bench division of the High Court.

The writ though of right is not of course:i.e.the applicant cannot have it merely for the asking, but must satisfy the High Court that circumstances exist calling for its issue. The procedure regulating the grant and enforcement of the writ is determined by theCrown Office Rules, 1906 (rr. 49-68, 125).

Mandamushas always been regarded as an exceptional remedy to supplement the deficiencies of the common law, or defects of justice. Where another legal or equitable remedy exists, equally appropriate, convenient, speedy, beneficial and effectual, the writ will as a rule be refused. It is occasionally granted even when a remedy by indictment is available: but is not issued unless the existence of the duty and refusal to perform it are clearly established, nor where performance in fact has become impossible. The writ is used to compel inferior courts to hear and determine according to law cases within their jurisdiction,e.g.where a county court or justices in petty or quarter sessions refuse to assume a jurisdiction which they possess to deal with a matter brought before them. It has in recent years been employed to compel municipal bodies to discharge their duties as to providing proper sewerage for their districts and to compel anti-vaccinationist guardians of the poor to appoint officers for the execution of the Vaccination Acts; and it is also employed to compel the promoters of railway and similar undertakings to discharge duties imposed upon them towards the public by their special acts,e.g.with reference to highways, &c., affected by their railways or other undertakings. The courts do not prescribe the specific manner in which the duty is to be discharged, but do not stay their hands until substantial compliance is established.Besides the prerogative common-law writ there are a number of orders, made by the High Court under statutory authority, and described as or as being in the nature of mandamus,e.g.mandamus to proceed to the election of a corporate officer of a municipal corporation (Municipal Corporations Act 1882, s. 225); orders in the nature of mandamus to justices to hear and determine a matter within their jurisdiction, or to state and sign a case under the enactments relating to special cases.At common law mandamus lies only for the performance of acts of a public or official character. The enforcement of merely private obligations, such as those arising from contracts, is not within its scope. By s. 68 of the Common Law Procedure Act 1854, the plaintiff in any action other than replevin and ejectment was empowered to claim a writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to fulfil any duty in the fulfilment of which the plaintiff was personally interested. By s. 25 (8) of the Judicature Act 1873 a mandamus may be granted by an interlocutory order of the High Court in all cases in which it shall appear to the court just or convenient that such an order should be made. This enactment does not deal with the prerogative mandamus but empowers the king’s bench and the chancery divisions to grant an interlocutory mandamus in any pending cause or matter by an order other than the final judgment and even by an order made after the judgment. S. 68 of the act of 1854 has been repealed and replaced by Order LIII. of theRules of the Supreme Court. The remedy thus created is an attempt to engraft upon the old common law remedy by damages a right in the nature of specific performance of the duty in question. It is not limited to cases in which the prerogative writ would be granted; but mandamus is not granted when the result desired can be obtained by some remedy equally convenient, beneficial and effective, or a particular and different remedy is provided by statute. An action for mandamus does not lie against judicial officers such as justices. The mandamus issued in the action is no longer a writ of mandamus, but a judgment or order having effect equivalent to the writ formerly used.Mandatory Injunction.—The High Court has a jurisdiction derived from the court of chancery to grant injunctions at the suit of the attorney-general or of private persons. Ordinarily these injunctions are in the form of prohibition or restraint and not of command. But occasionally mandatory injunctions are granted in the form of a direct command by the court.Specific Performance.—The jurisdiction of the High Court, derived from the court of chancery, to decree specific performance of contracts has some resemblance to mandamus in the domains of public or quasi-public law.Ireland.—The law of Ireland as to mandamus is derived from that of England, and differs therefrom only in minor details.British Possessions.—In a British possession the power to issue the prerogative writ is usually vested in the Supreme Court by its charter or by local legislation.United States.—The writ has passed into the law of the United States. “There is in the federal judiciary an employment of the writ substantially as the old prerogative writ in the king’s bench practice, also as a mode of exercising appellate jurisdiction, also as a proceeding ancillary to a judgment previously rendered, in exercise of original jurisdiction, as when a circuit court having rendered a judgment against a county issues a mandamus requiring its officers to levy a tax to provide for the payment of the judgment.” And in the various states mandamus is used under varying regulations, mandate being in some cases substituted as the name of the proceeding.

Besides the prerogative common-law writ there are a number of orders, made by the High Court under statutory authority, and described as or as being in the nature of mandamus,e.g.mandamus to proceed to the election of a corporate officer of a municipal corporation (Municipal Corporations Act 1882, s. 225); orders in the nature of mandamus to justices to hear and determine a matter within their jurisdiction, or to state and sign a case under the enactments relating to special cases.

At common law mandamus lies only for the performance of acts of a public or official character. The enforcement of merely private obligations, such as those arising from contracts, is not within its scope. By s. 68 of the Common Law Procedure Act 1854, the plaintiff in any action other than replevin and ejectment was empowered to claim a writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to fulfil any duty in the fulfilment of which the plaintiff was personally interested. By s. 25 (8) of the Judicature Act 1873 a mandamus may be granted by an interlocutory order of the High Court in all cases in which it shall appear to the court just or convenient that such an order should be made. This enactment does not deal with the prerogative mandamus but empowers the king’s bench and the chancery divisions to grant an interlocutory mandamus in any pending cause or matter by an order other than the final judgment and even by an order made after the judgment. S. 68 of the act of 1854 has been repealed and replaced by Order LIII. of theRules of the Supreme Court. The remedy thus created is an attempt to engraft upon the old common law remedy by damages a right in the nature of specific performance of the duty in question. It is not limited to cases in which the prerogative writ would be granted; but mandamus is not granted when the result desired can be obtained by some remedy equally convenient, beneficial and effective, or a particular and different remedy is provided by statute. An action for mandamus does not lie against judicial officers such as justices. The mandamus issued in the action is no longer a writ of mandamus, but a judgment or order having effect equivalent to the writ formerly used.

Mandatory Injunction.—The High Court has a jurisdiction derived from the court of chancery to grant injunctions at the suit of the attorney-general or of private persons. Ordinarily these injunctions are in the form of prohibition or restraint and not of command. But occasionally mandatory injunctions are granted in the form of a direct command by the court.

Specific Performance.—The jurisdiction of the High Court, derived from the court of chancery, to decree specific performance of contracts has some resemblance to mandamus in the domains of public or quasi-public law.

Ireland.—The law of Ireland as to mandamus is derived from that of England, and differs therefrom only in minor details.

British Possessions.—In a British possession the power to issue the prerogative writ is usually vested in the Supreme Court by its charter or by local legislation.

United States.—The writ has passed into the law of the United States. “There is in the federal judiciary an employment of the writ substantially as the old prerogative writ in the king’s bench practice, also as a mode of exercising appellate jurisdiction, also as a proceeding ancillary to a judgment previously rendered, in exercise of original jurisdiction, as when a circuit court having rendered a judgment against a county issues a mandamus requiring its officers to levy a tax to provide for the payment of the judgment.” And in the various states mandamus is used under varying regulations, mandate being in some cases substituted as the name of the proceeding.

MANDAN,a tribe of North American Indians of Siouan stock. When first met they were living on the Missouri at the mouth of the Heart river. At the beginning of the 19th century they were driven up the Missouri by the Sioux. In 1845 they joined the Gros Ventres and later the Arikaras, and settled in their present position at Fort Berthold reservation, North Dakota. The Mandans have always been agricultural; they are noted for their ceremonies, and from the tattooing on face and breast were described in the sign language as “the tattooed people.”

MANDARIN,the common name for all public officials in China, the Chinese name for whom iskwanorkwūn. The word comes through the Portuguese from Malaymantri, a counsellor or minister of state. The ultimate origin of this word is the Sanskrit rootman-, meaning to “think,” seen in “man,” “mind,” &c. The term “mandarin” is not, in its western usage, applied indiscriminately to all civil and military officials, but only to those who are entitled to wear a “button,” which is a spherical knob, about an inch in diameter, affixed to the top of the official cap or hat. These officials, civil and military alike, are divided into nine grades or classes, each grade being distinguished by a button of a particular colour. The grade to which an official belongs is not necessarily related to the office he holds. The button which distinguishes the first grade is a transparent red stone; the second grade, a red coral button; the third, a sapphire; the fourth, a blue opaque stone; the fifth, a crystal button; the sixth, an opaque white shell button; the seventh, a plain gold button; the eighth, a worked gold button; and the ninth, a worked silver button. The mandarins also wear certain insignia embroidered on their official robes, and have girdle clasps of different material. The first grade have, for civilians an embroidered Manchurian crane on the breast and back, for the military an embroidered unicorn with a girdle clasp of jade set in rubies. The second grade, for civilians an embroidered golden pheasant, for the military a lion with a girdleclasp of gold set in rubies. The third grade, for civilians a peacock, for the military a leopard with a clasp of worked gold. The fourth grade, for civilians a wild goose, for the military a tiger, and a clasp of worked gold with a silver button. The fifth grade, for civilians a silver pheasant, for the military a bear and a clasp of plain gold with a silver button. The sixth grade, for civilians an egret, for the military a tiger-cat with a mother-of-pearl clasp. The seventh grade, for civilians a mandarin duck, for the military a mottled bear with a silver clasp. The eighth grade, for civilians a quail, for the military a seal with a clear horn clasp. The ninth grade, for civilians a long-tailed jay, for the military a rhinoceros with a buffalo-horn clasp.

The “mandarin language” is the Chinese, which is spoken in official and legal circles; it is also spoken over a considerable portion of the country, particularly the northern and central parts, though not perhaps with the same purity. Mandarin duck (anas galericulata) and Mandarin orange (citrus nobilis) possibly derive their names, by analogy, from the sense of superiority implied in the title “mandarin.”

SeeSociety in China, by Sir R. K. Douglas;L’Empire du milieu, by E. and O. Reclus.

MANDASOR,orMandsaur, a town of Central India, in the native state of Gwalior, on the Rajputana railway, 31 m. S. of Neemuch. Pop. (1901), 20,936. It gave its name to the treaty with Holkar, which concluded the Mahratta-Pindari War in 1818. It is a centre of the Malwa opium trade.

Mandasor and its neighbourhood are full of archaeological interest. An inscription discovered near the town indicated the erection of a temple of the sun in 437, and at Sondani are two great monolith pillars recording a victory of Yasodharma, king of Malwa, in 528. The fort dates from the 14th and 15th centuries. Hindu and Jain remains are numerous, though the town is now entirely Mahommedan.

MANDATE(Mandatum), a contract in Roman law constituted by one person (themandatarius) promising to do something gratuitously at the request of another (themandator), who undertakes to indemnify him against loss. The jurist distinguished the different cases of mandatum according as the object of the contract was the benefit of the mandator or a third person singly, or the mandator and a third person, the mandator and the mandatarius, or the mandatarius and a third person together. When the benefit was that of the mandatarius alone, the obligations of the contract were held not to arise, although the form of the contract might exist, the commission being held to be merely advice tendered to the mandatarius, and acted on by him at his own risk. Mandatum was classified as one of the contracts established by consent of the parties alone; but, as there was really no obligation of any kind until the mandatarius had acted on the mandate, it has with more propriety been referred to the contracts created by the supply of some fact (re). The obligations of the mandatarius under the contract were, briefly, to do what he had promised according to his instructions, observing ordinary diligence in taking care of any property entrusted to him, and handing over to his principal the results of his action, including the right to sue in his name. On the other hand, the principal was bound to recoup him his expenses and indemnify him against loss through obligations he might have incurred.

The essentials and the terminology of the contract are preserved in most modern systems of law. But in English law mandate, under that name, can hardly be said to exist as a separate form of contract. To some extent the law of mandatum corresponds partly to the law of principal and agent, partly to that of principal and surety. “Mandate” is retained to signify the contract more generally known as gratuitous bailment. It is restricted to personal property, and it implies the delivery of something to the bailee, both of which conditions are unknown in the mandatum of the civil law (seeBailment).

MANDAUE,a town of the province of Cebú, island of Cebú, Philippine Islands, on the E. coast and E. coast road, about 4 m. N.E. of the town of Cebú, the capital. Pop. (1903), 11,078; in the same year the town of Consolación (pop. 5511) was merged with Mandaue. Its climate is very hot, but healthy. The principal industries are the raising of Indian corn and sugar-cane and the manufacture of salt from sea-water. Cebú-Visayan is the language.

MANDELIC ACID(Phenylglycollic Acid), C8H8O3or C6H5·CH(OH)·COOH, an isomer of the cresotinic and the oxymethylbenzoic acids. Since the molecule contains an asymmetric carbon atom, the acid exists in three forms, one being an inactive “racemic” mixture, and the other two being optically active forms. The inactive variety is known asparamandelic acid. It may be prepared by the action of hydrochloric acid on the addition compound of benzaldehyde and hydrocyanic acid:—

C6H5CHO + HCN + HCl + 2H2O = C6H5·CHOH·COOH + NH4Cl,

(F. L. Winckler,Ann., 1836, 18, 310), by boiling phenylchlor-acetic acid with alkalis (A. Spiegel,Ber., 1881, 14, 239), by heating benzoylformaldehyde with alkalis (H. v. Pechmann,Ber., 1887, 20, 2905), and by the action of dilute alkalies on ω-dibromacetophenone (C. Engler,Ber., 1887, 20, 2202):—

C6H5COCHBr2+ 3KHO = 2KBr + H2O + C6H5·CHOH·CO2K.

It crystallizes from water in large rhombic crystals, which melt at 118° C. Oxidizing agents convert it into benzaldehyde. When heated with hydriodic acid and phosphorus it forms phenylacetic acid; whilst concentrated hydrobromic acid and hydrochloric acid at moderate temperatures convert it into phenylbrom- and phenylchlor-acetic acids. The inactive mixture may be resolved into its active components by fractional crystallization of the cinchonine salt, when the salt of thedextromodification separates first; or the ammonium salt may be fermented byPenicillium glaucum, when thelaevoform is destroyed and thedextroform remains untouched; on the other hand,Saccharomyces ellipsoïdeusdestroys thedextroform, but does not touch thelaevoform. A mixture of the two forms in equivalent quantities produces the inactive variety, which is also obtained when either form is heated for some hours to 160° C.

MANDER, CAREL VAN(1548-1606), Dutch painter, poet and biographer, was born of a noble family at Meulebeke. He studied under Lucas de Heere at Ghent, and in 1568-1569 under Pieter Vlerick at Kortryck. The next five years he devoted to the writing of religious plays for which he also painted the scenery. Then followed three years in Rome (1574-1577), where he is said to have been the first to discover the catacombs. On his return journey he passed through Vienna, where, together with the sculptor Hans Mont, he made the triumphal arch for the entry of the emperor Rudolph. After many vicissitudes caused by war, loss of fortune and plague, he settled at Haarlem where, in conjunction with Goltzius and Cornelisz, he founded a successful academy of painting. His fame is, however, principally based upon a voluminous biographical work on the paintings of various epochs—a book that has become for the northern countries what Vasari’sLives of the Paintersbecame for Italy. It was completed in 1603 and published in 1604, in which year Van Mander removed to Amsterdam, where he died in 1606.

MANDEVILLE, BERNARD DE(1670-1733), English philosopher and satirist, was born at Dordrecht, where his father practised as a physician. On leaving the Erasmus school at Rotterdam he gave proof of his ability by anOratio scholastica de medicina(1685), and at Leiden University in 1689 he maintained a thesisDe brutorum operationibus, in which he advocated the Cartesian theory of automatism among animals. In 1691 he took his medical degree, pronouncing an “inaugural disputation,”De chylosi vitiata. Afterwards he came to England “to learn the language,” and succeeded so remarkably that many refused to believe he was a foreigner. As a physician he seems to have done little, and lived poorly on a pension given him by some Dutch merchants and money which he earned from distillers for advocating the use of spirits. His conversational abilities won him the friendship of Lord Macclesfield (chief justice 1710-1718) who introduced him to Addison, described by Mandeville as “a parson in a tye-wig.” He died in January (19th or 21st) 1733/4 at Hackney.

The work by which he is known is theFable of the Bees, published first in 1705 under the title ofThe Grumbling Hive, or Knaves Turn’d Honest(two hundred doggerel couplets). In 1714 it was republished anonymously withRemarksandAn Enquiry into the Origin of Moral Virtue. In 1723 a later edition appeared, includingAn Essay on Charity and Charity Schools, andA Search into the Nature of Society. The book was primarily written as a political satire on the state of England in 1705, when the Tories were accusing Marlborough and the ministry of advocating the French War for personal reasons. The edition of 1723 was presented as a nuisance by the Grand Jury of Middlesex, was denounced in theLondon Journalby “Theophilus Philo-Britannus,” and attacked by many writers, notably by Archibald Campbell (1691-1756) in hisAretelogia(published as his own by Alexander Innes in 1728; afterwards by Campbell, under his own name, in 1733, asEnquiry into the Original of Moral Virtue). TheFablewas reprinted in 1729, a ninth edition appeared in 1755, and it has often been reprinted in more recent times. Berkeley attacked it in the second dialogue of theAlciphron(1732) and John Brown criticized him in hisEssay upon Shaftesbury’s Characteristics(1751).

Mandeville’s philosophy gave great offence at the time, and has always been stigmatized as false, cynical and degrading. His main thesis is that the actions of men cannot be divided into lower and higher. The higher life of man is merely a fiction introduced by philosophers and rulers to simplify government and the relations of society. In fact, virtue (which he defined as “every performance by which man, contrary to the impulse of nature, should endeavour the benefit of others, or the conquest of his own passions, out of a rational ambition of being good”) is actually detrimental to the state in its commercial and intellectual progress, for it is the vices (i.e.the self-regarding actions of men) which alone, by means of inventions and the circulation of capital in connexion with luxurious living, stimulate society into action and progress. In theFablehe shows a society possessed of all the virtues “blest with content and honesty,” falling into apathy and utterly paralyzed. The absence of self-love (cf. Hobbes) is the death of progress. The so-called higher virtues are mere hypocrisy, and arise from the selfish desire to be superior to the brutes. “The moral virtues are the political offspring which flattery begot upon pride.” Similarly he arrives at the great paradox that “private vices are public benefits.” But his best work and that in which he approximates most nearly to modern views is his account of the origin of society. Hisa prioritheories should be compared with Maine’s historical inquiries (Ancient Law, c. V.). He endeavours to show that all social laws are the crystallized results of selfish aggrandizement and protective alliances among the weak. Denying any form of moral sense or conscience, he regards all the social virtues as evolved from the instinct for self-preservation, the give-and-take arrangements between the partners in a defensive and offensive alliance, and the feelings of pride and vanity artificially fed by politicians, as an antidote to dissension and chaos. Mandeville’s ironical paradoxes are interesting mainly as a criticism of the “amiable” idealism of Shaftesbury, and in comparison with the serious egoistic systems of Hobbes and Helvetius. It is mere prejudice to deny that Mandeville had considerable philosophic insight; at the same time he was mainly negative or critical, and, as he himself said, he was writing for “the entertainment of people of knowledge and education.” He may be said to have cleared the ground for the coming utilitarianism.

Works.—Typhon: a Burlesque Poem(1704);Aesop Dress’d, or a Collection of Fables writ in Familiar Verse(1704);The Planter’s Charity(1704);The Virgin Unmasked(1709, 1724, 1731, 1742), a work in which the coarser side of his nature is prominent;Treatise of the Hypochondriack and Hysterick Passions(1711, 1715, 1730) admired by Johnson (Mandeville here protests against merely speculative therapeutics, and advances fanciful theories of his own about animal spirits in connexion with “stomachic ferment”: he shows a knowledge of Locke’s methods, and an admiration for Sydenham);Free Thoughts on Religion(1720);A Conference about Whoring(1725);An Enquiry into the Causes of the Frequent Executions at Tyburn(1725);The Origin of Honour and the Usefulness of Christianity in War(1732). Other works attributed, wrongly, to him areA Modest Defence of Public Stews(1724);The World Unmasked(1736) andZoologia medicinalis hibernica(1744).See Hill’sBoswell, iii. 291-293; L. Stephen’sEnglish Thought in the Eighteenth Century, A. Bain’sMoral Science(593-598); Windelband’sHistory of Ethics(Eng. trans. Tufts); J. M. Robertson,Pioneer Humanists(1907); P. Sakmann,Bernard de Mandeville und die Bienenfabel-Controverse(Freiburg i/Br., 1897), and compare articlesEthics,Shaftesbury,Hobbes.

See Hill’sBoswell, iii. 291-293; L. Stephen’sEnglish Thought in the Eighteenth Century, A. Bain’sMoral Science(593-598); Windelband’sHistory of Ethics(Eng. trans. Tufts); J. M. Robertson,Pioneer Humanists(1907); P. Sakmann,Bernard de Mandeville und die Bienenfabel-Controverse(Freiburg i/Br., 1897), and compare articlesEthics,Shaftesbury,Hobbes.

(J. M. M.)

MANDEVILLE, GEOFFREY DE(d. 1144), earl of Essex, succeeded his father, William, as constable of the Tower of London in or shortly before 1130. Though a great Essex landowner, he played no conspicuous part in history till 1140, when Stephen created him earl of Essex in reward for his services against the empress Matilda. After the defeat and capture of Stephen at Lincoln (1141) the earl deserted to Matilda, but before the end of the year, learning that Stephen’s release was imminent, returned to his original allegiance. In 1142 he was again intriguing with the empress; but before he could openly join her cause he was detected and deprived of his castles by the king. In 1143-1144 Geoffrey maintained himself as a rebel and a bandit in the fen-country, using the Isle of Ely and Ramsey Abbey as his headquarters. He was besieged by Stephen in the fens, and met his death in September 1144 in consequence of a wound received in a skirmish. His career is interesting for two reasons. The charters which he extorted from Stephen and Matilda illustrate the peculiar form taken by the ambitions of English feudatories. The most important concessions are grants of offices and jurisdictions which had the effect of making Mandeville a viceroy with full powers in Essex, Middlesex and London, and Hertfordshire. His career as an outlaw exemplifies the worst excesses of the anarchy which prevailed in some parts of England during the civil wars of 1140-1147, and it is probable that the deeds of Mandeville inspired the rhetorical description, in the Peterborough Chronicle of this period, when “men said openly that Christ and his saints were asleep.”

See J. H. Round,Geoffrey de Mandeville, a Study of the Anarchy(London, 1892).

(H. W. C. D.)

MANDEVILLE, JEHAN DE(“Sir John Mandeville”), the name claimed by the compiler of a singular book of travels, written in French, and published between 1357 and 1371. By aid of translations into many other languages it acquired extraordinary popularity, while a few interpolated words in a particular edition of an English version gained for Mandeville in modern times the spurious credit of being “the father of English prose.”

In his preface the compiler calls himself a knight, and states that he was born and bred in England, of the town of St Albans; had crossed the sea on Michaelmas Day 1322; had travelled by way of Turkey (Asia Minor), Armenia the little (Cilicia) and the great, Tartary, Persia, Syria, Arabia, Egypt upper and lower, Libya, great part of Ethiopia, Chaldaea, Amazonia, India the less, the greater and the middle, and many countries about India; had often been to Jerusalem, and had written in Romance as more generally understood than Latin. In the body of the work we hear that he had been at Paris and Constantinople; had served the sultan of Egypt a long time in his wars against the Bedawin, had been vainly offered by him a princely marriage and a great estate on condition of renouncing Christianity, and had left Egypt under sultan Melech Madabron,i.e.Muzaffar or Mudhaffar1(who reigned in 1346-1347); had been at Mount Sinai, and had visited the Holy Land with letters under the great seal of the sultan, which gave him extraordinary facilities; had been in Russia, Livonia, Cracow, Lithuania, “en roialme daresten” (? de Daresten or Silistria), and many other parts near Tartary, but not in Tartary itself; had drunk of the well of youth at Polombe (Quilon on the Malabar coast), and still seemed to feel the better; had taken astronomical observations on the way to Lamory (Sumatra), as well as in Brabant, Germany, Bohemia and still farther north; had been at an isle called Pathen in the Indian Ocean; had been at Cansay (Hangchow-fu) in China, and had served the emperor of China fifteen monthsagainst the king of Manzi; had been among rocks of adamant in the Indian Ocean; had been through a haunted valley, which he places near “Milstorak” (i.e.Malasgird in Armenia); had been driven home against his will in 1357 by arthritic gout; and had written his book as a consolation for his “wretched rest.” The paragraph which states that he had had his book confirmed at Rome by the pope is an interpolation of the English version.

Part at least of the personal history of Mandeville is mere invention. Nor is any contemporary corroboration of the existence of such a Jehan de Mandeville known. Some French MSS., not contemporary, give a Latin letter of presentation from him to Edward III., but so vague that it might have been penned by any writer on any subject. It is in fact beyond reasonable doubt that the travels were in large part compiled by a Liége physician, known as Johains à le Barbe or Jehan à la Barbe, otherwise Jehan de Bourgogne.

The evidence of this is in a modernized extract quoted by the Liége herald, Louis Abry2(1643-1720), from the lost fourth book of theMyreur des Hystorsof Johans des Preis, styled d’Oultremouse. In this “Jean de Bourgogne, dit à la Barbe,” is said to have revealed himself on his deathbed to d’Oultremouse, whom he made his executor, and to have described himself in his will as “messire Jean de Mandeville, chevalier, comte de Montfort en Angleterre et seigneur de l’isle de Campdi et du château Pérouse.” It is added that, having had the misfortune to kill an unnamed count in his own country, he engaged himself to travel through the three parts of the world, arrived at Liége in 1343, was a great naturalist, profound philosopher and astrologer, and had a remarkable knowledge of physic. And the identification is confirmed by the fact that in the now destroyed church of the Guillelmins was a tombstone of Mandeville, with a Latin inscription stating that he was otherwise named “ad Barbam,” was a professor of medicine, and died at Liége on the 17th of November 1372: this inscription is quoted as far back as 1462.

Even before his death the Liége physician seems to have confessed to a share in the composition of the work. In the common Latin abridged version of it, at the end of c. vii., the author says that when stopping in the sultan’s court at Cairo he met a venerable and expert physician of “our” parts, that they rarely came into conversation because their duties were of a different kind, but that long afterwards at Liége he composed this treatise at the exhortation and with the help (hortatu et adiutorio) of the same venerable man, as he will narrate at the end of it. And in the last chapter he says that in 1355, in returning home, he came to Liége, and being laid up with old age and arthritic gout in the street called Bassesauenyr,i.e.Basse Savenir, consulted the physicians. That one came in who was more venerable than the others by reason of his age and white hairs, was evidently expert in his art, and was commonly called Magister Iohannes ad Barbam. That a chance remark of the latter caused the renewal of their old Cairo acquaintance, and that Ad Barbam, after showing his medical skill on Mandeville, urgently begged him to write his travels; “and so at length, by his advice and help,monitu et adiutorio, was composed this treatise, of which I had certainly proposed to write nothing until at least I had reached my own parts in England.” He goes on to speak of himself as being now lodged in Liége, “which is only two days distant from the sea of England”; and it is stated in the colophon (and in the MSS.) that the book was first published in French by Mandeville, its author, in 1355, at Liége, and soon after in the same city translated into “the said” Latin form. Moreover, a MS. of the French text extant at Liége about 18603contained a similar statement, and added that the author lodged at a hostel called “al hoste Henkin Levo”: this MS. gave the physician’s name as “Johains de Bourgogne dit ale barbe,” which doubtless conveys its local form.

There is no contemporary English mention of any English knight named Jehan de Mandeville, nor are the arms said to have been on the Liége tomb like any known Mandeville arms. But Dr G. F. Warner has ingeniously suggested that de Bourgogne may be a certain Johan de Bourgoyne, who was pardoned by parliament on the 20th of August 1321 for having taken part in the attack on the Despensers, but whose pardon was revoked in May 1322, the year in which “Mandeville” professes to have left England. And it should now be added that among the persons similarly pardonedon the recommendation of the same noblemanwas a Johan Mangevilayn, whose name appears closely related to that of “de Mandeville”4—which is merely a later form of “de Magneville.”

Mangeuilain occurs in Yorkshire as early as 16 Hen. I. (Pipe Roll Soc., xv. 40), but is very rare, and (failing evidence of any place named Mangeville) seems to be merely a variant spelling of Magnevillain. The meaning may be simply “of Magneville,”deMagneville; but the family of a 14th century bishop of Nevers were called both “Mandevilain” and “de Mandevilain”—where Mandevilain seems a derivative place-name, meaning the Magneville or Mandeville district. In any case it is clear that the name “de Mandeville” might be suggested to de Bourgogne by that of his fellow-culprit Mangevilayn, and it is even possible that the two fled to England together, were in Egypt together, met again at Liége, and shared in the compilation of theTravels.

Whether after the appearance of theTravelseither de Bourgogne or “Mangevilayn” visited England is very doubtful. St Albans Abbey had a sapphire ring, and Canterbury a crystal orb, said to have been given by Mandeville; but these might have been sent from Liége, and it will appear later that the Liége physician possessed and wrote about precious stones. St Albans also had a legend that a ruined marble tomb of Mandeville (represented cross-legged and in armour, with sword and shield) once stood in the abbey; this may be true of “Mangevilayn” or it may be a mere myth.

It is a little curious that the name preceding Mangevilayn in the list of persons pardoned is “Johan le Barber.” Did this suggest to de Bourgogne thealias“à le Barbe,” or was that only a Liége nickname? Note also that the arms on Mandeville’s tomb were borne by the Tyrrells of Hertfordshire (the county in which St Albans lies); for of course the crescent on the lion’s breast is only the “difference” indicating a second son.

Leaving this question, there remains the equally complex one whether the book contains any facts and knowledge acquired by actual travels and residence in the East. Possibly it may, but only as a small portion of the section which treats of the Holy Land and the ways of getting thither, of Egypt, and in general of the Levant. The prologue, indeed, points almost exclusively to the Holy Land as the subject of the work. The mention of more distant regions comes in only towards the end of this prologue, and (in a manner) as an afterthought.

By far the greater part of these more distant travels, extending in fact from Trebizond to Hormuz, India, the Malay Archipelago, and China, and back again to western Asia, has been appropriated from the narrative of Friar Odoric (written in 1330). These passages, as served up by Mandeville, are almost always, indeed, swollen with interpolated particulars, usually of an extravagant kind, whilst in no few cases the writer has failed to understand the passages which he adopts from Odoric and professes to give as his own experiences. Thus (p. 209),5where Odoric has given a mostcurious and veracious account of the Chinese custom of employing tame cormorants to catch fish, the cormorants are converted by Mandeville into “little beasts calledloyres(layre, B), which are taught to go into the water” (the wordloyrebeing apparently used here for “otter,”lutra, for which the Provençal isluriaorloiria).

At a very early date the coincidence of Mandeville’s stories with those of Odoric was recognized, insomuch that a MS. of Odoric which is or was in the chapter library at Mainz begins with the words:Incipit Itinerarius fidelis fratris Odorici socii Militis Mendavil per Indian; licet hic[readille]prius el alter posterius peregrinationem suam descripsit.At a later day Sir T. Herbert calls Odoric “travelling companion of our Sir John”; and Purchas, with most perverse injustice, whilst calling Mandeville, next to Polo, “if next ... the greatest Asian traveller that ever the world had,” insinuates that Odoric’s story was stolen from Mandeville’s. Mandeville himself is crafty enough, at least in one passage, to anticipate criticism by suggesting the probability of his having travelled with Odoric (see p. 282 and below).

Much, again, of Mandeville’s matter, particularly in Asiatic geography and history, is taken bodily from theHistoriae Orientisof Hetoum, an Armenian of princely family, who became a monk of the Praemonstrant order, and in 1307 dictated this work on the East, in the French tongue at Poitiers, out of his own extraordinary acquaintance with Asia and its history in his own time.

It is curious that no passage in Mandeville can be plausibly traced to Marco Polo, with one exception. This is (p. 163) where he states that at Hormuz the people during the great heat lie in water—a circumstance mentioned by Polo, though not by Odoric. We should suppose it most likely that this fact had been interpolated in the copy of Odoric used by Mandeville, for if he had borrowed it direct from Polo he would have borrowed more.

A good deal about the manners and customs of the Tatars is demonstrably derived from the famous work of the Franciscan Ioannes de Plano Carpini, who went as the pope’s ambassador to the Tatars in 1245-1247; but Dr Warner considers that the immediate source for Mandeville was theSpeculum historialeof Vincent de Beauvais. Though the passages in question are all to be found in Plano Carpini more or less exactly, the expression is condensed and the order changed. For examples compare Mandeville, p. 250, on the tasks done by Tatar women, with Plano Carpini, p. 643;6Mandeville, p. 250, on Tatar habits of eating, with Plano Carpini, pp. 639-640; Mandeville, p. 231, on the titles borne on the seals of the Great Khan, with Plano Carpini, p. 715, &c.

The account of Prester John is taken from the famousEpistleof that imaginary potentate, which was so widely diffused in the 13th century, and created that renown which made it incumbent on every traveller in Asia to find some new tale to tell of him. Many fabulous stories, again, of monsters, such as cyclopes, sciapodes, hippopodes, monoscelides, anthropophagi, and men whose heads did grow beneath their shoulders, of the phoenix and the weeping crocodile, such as Pliny has collected, are introduced here and there, derived no doubt from him, Solinus, the bestiaries, or theSpeculum naturaleof Vincent de Beauvais. And interspersed, especially in the chapters about the Levant, are the stories and legends that were retailed to every pilgrim, such as the legend of Seth and the grains of paradise from which grew the wood of the cross, that of the shooting of old Cain by Lamech, that of the castle of the sparrow-hawk (which appears in the tale of Melusina), those of the origin of the balsam plants at Maṭarīya, of the dragon of Cos, of the river Sabbation, &c.

Even in that part of the book which might be supposed to represent some genuine experience there are the plainest traces that another work has been made use of, more or less—we might almost say as a framework to fill up. This is the itinerary of the German knight Wilhelm von Boldensele, written in 1336 at the desire of Cardinal Talleyrand de Perigord.7A cursory comparison of this with Mandeville leaves no doubt that the latter has followed its thread, though digressing on every side, and too often eliminating the singular good sense of the German traveller. We may indicate as examples Boldensele’s account of Cyprus (Mandeville, p. 28 and p. 10), of Tyre and the coast of Palestine (Mandeville, 29, 30, 33, 34), of the journey from Gaza to Egypt (34), passages about Babylon of Egypt (40), about Mecca (42), the general account of Egypt (45), the pyramids (52), some of the wonders of Cairo, such as the slave-market, the chicken-hatching stoves, and the apples of paradise,i.e.plantains (49), the Red Sea (57), the convent on Sinai (58, 60), the account of the church of the Holy Sepulchre (74-76), &c. There is, indeed, only a small residuum of the book to which genuine character, as containing the experiences of the author, can possibly be attributed. Yet, as has been intimated, the borrowed stories are frequently claimed as such experiences. In addition to those already mentioned, he alleges that he had witnessed the curious exhibition of the garden of transmigrated souls (described by Odoric) at Cansay,i.e.Hangchow-fu (211). He and his fellows with their valets had remained fifteen months in service with the emperor of Cathay in his wars against the king of Manzi—Manzi, or Southern China, having ceased to be a separate kingdom some seventy years before the time referred to. But the most notable of these false statements occurs in his adoption from Odoric of the story of the Valley Perilous (282). This is, in its original form, apparently founded on real experiences of Odoric viewed through a haze of excitement and superstition. Mandeville, whilst swelling the wonders of the tale with a variety of extravagant touches, appears to safeguard himself from the reader’s possible discovery that it was stolen by the interpolation: “And some of our fellows accorded to enter, and some not. So there were with us two worthy men, Friars Minor, that were of Lombardy, who said that if any man would enter they would go in with us. And when they had said so, upon the gracious trust of God and of them, we caused mass to be sung, and made every man to be shriven and houselled; and then we entered, fourteen persons; but at our going out we were but nine,” &c.

In referring to this passage it is only fair to recognize that the description (though the suggestion of the greatest part exists in Odoric) displays a good deal of imaginative power; and there is much in the account of Christian’s passage through the Valley of the Shadow of Death, in Bunyan’s famous allegory, which indicates a possibility that John Bunyan may have read and remembered this episode either in Mandeville or in Hakluyt’s Odoric.

Nor does it follow that the whole work is borrowed or fictitious. Even the great Moorish traveller Ibn Batuta, accurate and veracious in the main, seems—in one part at least of his narrative—to invent experiences; and in such works as those of Jan van Hees and Arnold von Harff we have examples of pilgrims to the Holy Land whose narratives begin apparently in sober truth, and gradually pass into flourishes of fiction and extravagance. So in Mandeville also we find particulars not yet traced to other writers, and which may therefore be provisionally assigned either to the writer’s own experience or to knowledge acquired by colloquial intercourse in the East.

It is difficult to decide on the character of his statements as to recent Egyptian history. In his account of that country (pp. 37, 38) though the series of the Comanian (i.e.of the Bahri Mameluke) sultans is borrowed from Hetoum down to the accession ofMelechnasser,i.e.Malik al-Nāṣir (Nāṣir ud-din Mahommed), who came first to the throne in 1293, Mandeville appears to speak from his own knowledge when he adds that this “Melechnasserreigned long and governed wisely.” In fact, though twicedisplaced in the early part of his life, Malik Nāṣir reigned till 1341, a duration unparalleled in Mahommedan Egypt, whilst we are told that during the last thirty years of his reign Egypt rose to a high pitch of wealth and prosperity. Mandeville, however, then goes on to say that his eldest son,Melechemader, was chosen to succeed; but this prince was caused privily to be slain by his brother, who took the kingdom under the name ofMelechmadabron. “And he was Soldan when I departed from those countries.” Now Malik Nāṣir Mahommed was followed in succession by no less than eight of his sons in thirteen years, the first three of whom reigned in aggregate only a few months. The names mentioned by Mandeville appear to represent those of the fourth and sixth of the eight, viz. Ṣaliḥ ‘Imād ud-din Ismā’īl, and Moẓaffar (Saif ud-din Ḥajjī); and these the statements of Mandeville do not fit.

On several occasions Arabic words are given, but are not always recognizable, owing perhaps to the carelessness of copyists in such matters. Thus, we find (p. 50) the names (not satisfactorily identified) of the wood, fruit and sap of the balsam plant; (p. 99) of bitumen, “alkatran” (al-Kāṭrān); (p. 168) of the three different kinds of pepper (long pepper, black pepper and white pepper) assorbotin,fulfulandbanoorbauo(fulfulis the common Arabic word for pepper; the others have not been satisfactorily explained). But these, and the particulars of his narrative for which no literary sources have yet been found, are too few to constitute a proof of personal experience.

Mandeville, again, in some passages shows a correct idea of the form of the earth, and of position in latitude ascertained by observation of the pole star; he knows that there are antipodes, and that if ships were sent on voyages of discovery they might sail round the world. And he tells a curious story, which he had heard in his youth, how a worthy man did travel ever eastward until he came to his own country again (p. 183). But he repeatedly asserts the old belief that Jerusalem was in the centre of the world (79, 183), and maintains in proof of this that at the equinox a spear planted erect in Jerusalem casts no shadow at noon, which, if true, would equally consist with the sphericity of the earth, provided that the city were on the equator.

The sources of the book, which include various authors besides those whom we have specified, have been laboriously investigated by Dr Albert Bovenschen8and Dr G. F. Warner,9and to them the reader must be referred for more detailed information on the subject.

Back to Index Next