Presents to Princes (article)

Presents to Princes: A Bestiary of Strange and Wondrous Beasts, Once Known, for a Time Forgotten, and Rediscovered
By Helmut Nickel, for Metropolitan Museum Journal (1991)

For starters, how cool would it be to have a name like “Helmut Nickel”? I wonder if the department/my thesis committee would let me adopt a really amazing nom de plume for my thesis (if I ever finish the f-cking thing).

Okay, so this article is a discussion of some iconic creatures that persisted in the Middle Ages, appearing as heraldic beasts, features in bestiaries, pets of (and gifts to) people of rank, and through various other cultural conduits. The article is full of absolutely gorgeous illustrations, and I only wish I could see them in colour. I wish someone would make a picture book of medieval beasts. Maybe someone already has. Time to tackle AbeBooks…

I will keep my tongue between my clenched teeth and ignore the disparaging remarks that Nickel makes about Mandeville. Nickel discusses Mandeville briefly in terms of his “colourful account of the Great Khan’s court” (135), and the red skins that hang on the walls, from animals that Mandeville calls the “panters” (variously translated as “panthers” and “pandas”). Nickel notes a level of detail in Mandeville’s description of the skins that surpasses “the sources happily exploited by Sir John to flesh out his own stories” (135). As Nickel comments, this may be taken as an indication that “Sir John was not just a bald-faced liar but had some traveling experience of his own” (135). An unnecessary and unscholarly dig, and a pointless inclusion given that the extra details could just as easily be attributed to pure invention and imagination.

Okay, I didn’t keep quiet, so I might as well just say it: Nickel, I liked your article, but I think you should leave Mandeville alone. Human storytelling around the world is built on a rich foundation of loving plagiarism. Mandeville’s popularity attests to his incredible power as a storyteller. Don’t be jealous!

Chaucer and Mandeville's Travels (article)

Chaucer and Mandeville’s Travels
By Josephine Waters Bennett, for Modern Language Notes (1953)

This article attempts to make links between Chaucer and Mandeville, and speaks in tentative tones that are later assured by Moseley’s article, I suppose (discussed in the previous post).

Essentially, Bennett argues for a borrowing from the Travels in Chaucer’s Squire’s Tale. This is on the basis that (1) Chaucer’s “as tellen knyghtes olde” could be construed as a reference to Sir John Mandeville, the only popular author writing of the east who happened to be a knight, (2) the likely date for the writing of the Travels would have made the author a contemporary of Chaucer’s grandfather, therefore fitting the descriptor “olde” in the above-quoted line, (3) the wittiness of Mandeville in certain points of the Travels is akin to Chaucer’s, likely making the latter more disposed to think well enough of the former to borrow his work, and (4) the immense popularity of the Travels makes it a worthy cultural reference to make for Chaucer’s audience’s benefit.

However, as Moseley made clear in his article, at the time Chaucer was writing, the Travels was not yet popular in England. Would the merit of popularity on the continent make it a worthy cultural reference? Perhaps.

In any event, nothing to do with plants.

Chaucer, Sir John Mandeville, and the Alliterative Revival (article)

Chaucer, Sir John Mandeville, and the Alliterative Revival: A Hypothesis concerning Relationships
By C. W. R. D. Moseley, for Modern Philology (1974)

This article makes some links between Mandeville and Chaucer and the poets of the Alliterative revival respectively. It attempts to explain why the early career of the Travels was limited in England to such an odd group of people, and how those writers may have used the Travels in their own writing.

In particular, Moseley names Chaucer, the Pearl poet and the poet of the alliterative Morte as borrowing from the Travels, though he comments that even in sections of their work that would make overlap and borrowing logical and easy, Mandeville is soundly ignored by Gower, Hoccleve, Langland, Usk and others. (Usk was a chump anyway.)

Useful points: a picture of the early importance of the Travels in English literary culture, including the suggestion that Mandeville’s images of the False Garden and the road to Earthly Paradise may have informed some elements of the visionary landscape of Pearl (184).

(Intermission)

Consider this a brief intermission to say:

This is what I feel like right now.




I feel like I am made of books. I feel like my skeleton is made of brittle book spines. I feel like a blur of faded gilt edges, smudged ink, a smattering of languages, illegible titles. My lungs are a catalogue of old-book smells inhaled during furtive night-time reading. I see words when I close my eyes.

More to follow. Promise.