[1] Purcell's assertion that the year of his birth was 1807 rests on
no trustworthy evidence.
MANNY, SIR WALTER DE MANNY, BARON DE (d. 1372), soldier of fortune and
founder of the Charterhouse, younger son of Jean de Mauny, known as Le
Borgne de Mauny, by his wife Jeanne de Jenlain, was a native of Hainaut,
from whose counts he claimed descent. Manny--the name is thus spelt by
most English writers--was a patron and friend of Froissart, in whose
chronicles his exploits have a conspicuous and probably an exaggerated
place. He appears to have first come to England as an esquire of Queen
Philippa in 1327, and he took a distinguished part in the Scottish wars
of Edward III. In 1337 he was placed in command of an English fleet, and
in the following year accompanied Edward to the continent, where in the
campaigns of the next few years he proved himself one of the boldest and
ablest of the English king's military commanders. He was summoned to
parliament as a baron by writ from the 12th of November 1347 to the 8th
of January 1371. In 1359 he was made a knight of the Garter; and at
various times he received extensive grants of land both in England and
in France. He was frequently employed by King Edward in the conduct of
diplomatic negotiations as well as in military commands. He was one of
those charged with the safe custody of the French king John when a
prisoner at Calais in 1360; in 1369 he was second in command under John
of Gaunt in his invasion of France.
But Manny is chiefly remembered for his share in the foundation of the
Charterhouse in London. In 1349 he bought some acres of land near
Smithfield, which were consecrated as a burying-place where large
numbers of the victims of the Black Death were interred; and here he
built a chapel, from which the place obtained the name of
"Newchurchhaw." The chapel and ground were bought from Manny by the
bishop of London, Michael de Northburgh, who died in 1361 and by his
will bequeathed a large sum of money to found there a Carthusian
convent. It is not clear whether this direction was ever carried out;
for in 1371 Manny obtained letters patent from King Edward III.
permitting him to found, apparently on the same site, a Carthusian
monastery called "La Salutation Mère Dieu," where the monks were to pray
for the soul of Northburgh as well as for the soul of Manny himself. The
bishop's bequest may have contributed to the building and endowment of
the house; or possibly, as seems to be implied by a bull granted by
Urban VI. in 1378, there were originally two kindred establishments
owing their foundation to Northburgh and Manny respectively. At all
events Manny, who died early in 1372, left instructions that he was to
be buried in the church of the Carthusian monastery founded by himself.
About 1335 he married Margaret, daughter and heiress of Thomas
Plantagenet, earl of Norfolk, son of King Edward I., whose first husband
had been John, Lord Segrave. This lady, who outlived Manny by many
years, was countess of Norfolk in her own right, and she was created
duchess of Norfolk in 1397. Manny left no surviving son. His daughter
Anne, Baroness de Manny in her own right, married John Hastings, 2nd
earl of Pembroke; and on the death of her only son unmarried in 1389,
the barony of Manny became extinct.
See _Oeuvres de Froissart, I. Chroniques_, edited by Baron Kervyn de
Lettenhove (Brussels, 1867-1877), and the Globe edition of
_Froissart's Chronicles_ (Eng. trans., London, 1895); G. F. Beltz,
_Memorials of the Most Noble Order of the Garter_ (London, 1841);
_Chronicon Angliae 1323-1388_, edited by E. Maunde Thompson (Rolls
series 64, London, 1874); Philip Bearcroft, _An Historical Account of
Thomas Sutton and of his Foundation in Charterhouse_ (London, 1737).
MANNYNG, ROBERT (ROBERT OF BRUNNE) (c. 1264-1340?), English poet, was a
native of Brunne, now Bourne, in Lincolnshire. About 6 m. from Bourne
was the Gilbertine monastery of Sempringham, founded by Sir Gilbert de
Sempringham in 1139. The foundation provided for seven to thirteen
canons, with a number of lay brothers and a community of nuns. No books
were allowed to the lay brothers and nothing could be written in the
monastery without the prior's consent. Mannyng entered this house in
1288, when, according to the rules, he must have been at least 24 years
of age, if, as is supposed, he was a lay brother. He says he was at
Cambridge with Robert de Bruce and his two brothers, Thomas and
Alexander, but this does not necessarily imply that he was a
fellow-student. There was a Gilbertine monastery at Cambridge, and
Mannyng may have been there on business connected with his order. When
he wrote _Handlyng Synne_ he had been (11. 63-76) fifteen years in the
priory, beginning to write in "englysch rime in 1303." Thirty-five years
later he began his _Story of Inglande_, and had removed (11. 139, &c.)
to the monastery of Sixille (now Sixhills), near Market Rasen, in north
Lincolnshire.
_Handlyng Synne_, a poem of nearly 13,000 lines, is a free translation,
with many additions and amplifications, from William of Waddington's
_Manuel des Pechiez_. It is a series of metrical homilies on the Ten
Commandments, the Seven Deadly Sins and the Seven Sacraments,
illustrated by a number of amusing stories from various sources. The
_Cursor Mundi_ had turned religious history into something not very
different from a romance of chivalry, and in the stories of _Handlyng
Synne_ the influence of the _fabliaux_ is not far to seek. Mannyng wrote
in the English tongue not for learned but for "lewd" men, "that talys
and ryme wyl blethly here," to occupy the leisure hours during which
they might otherwise fall into "vylanye, dedly synne or other folye."
Each of his twenty-four topics has its complement of stories. He tells
of the English observance of Saturday afternoon as holy to the Virgin,
and has much to say of popular amusements, which become sins when they
keep people away from church. Tournaments in particular are fertile
occasions of all the deadly sins; and mystery plays, except those of the
birth and resurrection of Christ performed in the churches, also lead
men into transgression. He inveighs against the oppression of the poor
by the rich, reproves those who, weary of matins or mass, spend their
time in church "jangling," telling tales, and wondering where they will
get the best ale, and revives the legend of the dancers at the church
door during mass who were cursed by the priest and went on dancing for a
twelvemonth without cessation. He loved music himself, and justified
this profane pleasure by the example of Bishop Grosseteste, who lodged
his harper in the chamber next his own; but he holds up as a warning to
gleemen the fate of the minstrel who sang loud while the bishop said
grace, and was miserably killed by a falling stone in consequence. The
old monk's keen observation makes the book a far more valuable
contribution to history than his professed chronicle. It is a storehouse
of quaint stories and out-of-the-way information on manners and customs.
His chronicle, _The Story of Inglande_, was also written for the solace
and amusement of the unlearned when they sit together in fellowship (11.
6-10). The earlier half is written in octosyllabic verse, and begins
with the story of the Deluge. The genealogy of Locrine, king of Britain,
is traced back to Noah, through Aeneas, and the chronicler relates the
incidents of the Trojan war as told by Dares the Phrygian. From this
point he follows closely the _Brut_ of Wace. He loved stories for their
own sake, and found fault with Wace for questioning the miraculous
elements in the legend of Arthur. In the second half of his chronicle,
which is less simple in style, he translates from the French of Pierre
de Langtoft. He writes in rhyming alexandrines, and in the latter part
of the work uses middle rhymes. Mannyng's _Chronicle_ marks a change in
national sentiment. Though he regards the Norman domination as a
"bondage," he is loud in his praises of Edward I., "Edward of Inglond."
The linguistic importance of Mannyng's work is very great. He used very
few of those Teutonic words which, though still in use, were eventually
to drop out of the language, and he introduced a great number of French
words destined to be permanently adopted in English. Moreover, he
employed comparatively few obsolete inflexions, and his work no doubt
furthered the adoption of the Midland dialect as the acknowledged
literary instrument. T. L. Kington-Oliphant (_Old and Middle English_,
1878) regards his work as the definite starting point of the New English
which with slight changes was to form the language of the Book of Common
Prayer.
A third work, usually ascribed to Mannyng, chiefly on the ground of its
existing side by side with the _Handlyng Synne_ in the Harleian and
Bodleian MSS., is the _Medytacyuns of the Soper of oure lorde Jhesu, And
also of hys passyun And eke of the peynes of hys swete modyr, Mayden
marye_, a free translation of St Bonaventura's _De coena et passione
Domini..._.
Robert of Brunne's _Chronicle_ exists in two MSS.: Petyt MS. 511,
written in the Northern dialect, in the Inner Temple library; and
Lambeth MS. 131 in a Midland dialect. The first part was edited _The
Story of England ..._ (1887) for the Rolls Series, with an
introductory essay by F. J. Furnivall; the second part was published
by Thomas Hearne as _Peter Langtoft's Chronicle ..._ (1725). Peter
Langtoft's French version was edited by Thomas Wright for the "Rolls
Series" in 1866. Of _Handlyng Synne_ there are complete MSS. in the
Bodleian library (MS. 415) and in the British Museum (Harleian MS.
1701), and a fragment in the library of Dulwich College (MS. 24). It
was edited, with Waddington's text in parallel columns, by F. J.
Furnivall for the Roxburghe Club (1862), and for the Early English
Text Society (1901-1903). The _Meditacyun_ was edited from the
Bodleian and Harleian MSS. by J. Meadow Cooper for the same society
(1875). See also Gerhard Hellmers, _Ueber die Sprache Robert Mannyngs
of Brunne und über die Autorschaft der ihm zugeschriebenen Meditations
..._ (Göttingen, 1885), which contains an analysis of the dialectic
peculiarities of Mannyng's work; O. Boerner, "Die Sprache Robert
Mannyngs" ... in _Studien zur engl. Philologie_ (vol. xii., Halle,
1904) and Oskar Preussner, _Robert Mannyng of Brunne's Übersetzung von
Pierre de Langtofts Chronicle_ (Breslau, 1891). All accounts of his
life are based on his own work. For the Sempringham priory see
Dugdale, _Monasticon_ vi. 947 seq., and Miss Rose Graham's _S. Gilbert
of Sempringham and the Gilbertines_ (1901).
MANOEUVRES, MILITARY. Manoeuvres may be defined as the higher training
for war of troops of all arms in large bodies, and have been carried out
in most countries ever since the first formation of standing armies. In
England no manoeuvres or camps of exercise appear to have been held till
the beginning of the 19th century, when Sir John Moore trained the
famous Light Brigade at Shorncliffe camp. In France, however, under
Louis XIV., large camps of instruction were frequently held, the
earliest recorded being that of 18,000 troops at Compiègne in 1666; and
these were continued at intervals under his successor. At these French
camps much time was devoted to ceremonial, and the manoeuvres performed
were of an elementary description. Still their effect upon the training
of the army for war was far-reaching, and bore fruit in the numerous
wars in the first half of the 18th century. Moreover, experiments were
made with proposed tactical systems and technical improvements, as in
the case of the contest between _l'ordre mince_ and _l'ordre profonde_
(see INFANTRY) between 1785 and 1790. Other countries followed suit, but
it was reserved for Frederick the Great to inaugurate a system of real
manoeuvres and to develop on the training-ground the system of tactics
which bore such good fruit in his various campaigns. The numbers of
troops assembled were large; for example, at Spandau in 1753, when
36,000 men carried out manoeuvres for twelve days. The king laid the
greatest stress on these exercises, and took immense pains to turn to
account the experience gained in his campaigns. Great secrecy was
observed, and before the Seven Years' War no stranger was allowed to be
present. The result of all this careful training was shown in the Seven
Years' War, and after it the Prussian manoeuvres gained a reputation
which they have maintained to this day. But with the passing away of the
great king they became more and more pedantic, and the fatal results
were shown in 1806. After the Napoleonic wars yearly manoeuvres became
the custom in every large Continental army. Great Britain alone thought
she could dispense with them, perhaps because of the constant practical
training her troops and officers received in the various Indian and
colonial wars; and it was not till 1853 that, by the advice of the
Prince Consort, a body of troops were gathered together for a camp of
exercise on Chobham Common, and that eventually a standing camp of
exercise was evolved out of the temporary camp formed during the Crimean
War at Aldershot.
Most continental armies have, since the great successes of the Germans
in 1870, copied more or less their system of military training; hence
it is appropriate to consider their methods first. The whole training
of the army is based on a yearly programme of gradual progression,
from the joining of the recruits in October to the training by squads,
companies, battalions and regiments, the latter finishing their field
training about the middle of August, when the manoeuvre period begins.
First of all, the brigades go through five working days of drills on
flat ground, to get them under the hand of their commanders and
prepare them for manoeuvres. Then follow ten working days of
manoeuvres in new and varied ground, of which four are "brigade," four
"divisional" and two "corps" manoeuvres, in each case the unit named
being divided into two portions of all arms, which manoeuvre against
one another. Each year two or more army corps carry out manoeuvres
before the emperor, working against one another. The chief feature of
the German manoeuvres is the free hand allowed to leaders of sides. Of
course, for reasons of supply and transport, it is necessary to keep
the troops within a certain area, but the general and special ideas[1]
are so framed that, while retaining their own initiative, the leaders
of sides have to give such orders as will suit the arrangements made
by the director of manoeuvres for supply. The faculty of quartering
troops on private individuals to any extent, and the fact of the
troops being provided with portable tent equipment, give great
latitude to the German leaders in their choice of quarters for troops,
and so increase the similitude of manoeuvres to war. The Austrian and
Italian manoeuvres are a close copy of the German, but those of the
French present the peculiarity of a certain amount of prearrangement,
especially at grand manoeuvres, when it is frequently laid down
beforehand which side is to be victorious. Thus a series of pictures
of war is presented, but the manoeuvres are hardly a test of the skill
of the rival leaders. But, just as in recent years in France this
practice has been modified, so also the entire liberty given to
commanders in the German manoeuvres in 1906-7 had to be curtailed in
the following years owing to the strain of forced marches which it
entailed on the troops.
In Russia the climatic and social conditions, and the distribution of
the army, necessitate a quite peculiar system. The troops leave their
barracks and move into standing camps, generally in May, and in these
for about three months their training up to that in battalions is
carried out on the drill ground. Camps of mixed units are then formed
for a month, and from them, but always over the same ground, the
manoeuvres of regiments, brigades and divisions are performed. Then
follow the so-called mobile manoeuvres, which last for ten days or a
fortnight. Of all European manoeuvres these are perhaps the nearest
approach to war, for the sides start a great distance apart, and ample
time is allowed for cavalry reconnaissance. Besides, the Russian
soldier does not require elaborate arrangements for supply; hence the
director is not so tied down by consideration of this matter as in
other armies. A political colour is sometimes given to such large
assemblages of troops, especially when the manoeuvres take place in
frontier districts.
In England the military authorities have long been hampered in the
organization of manoeuvres by the necessity of carrying them out on
very limited portions of government land or on areas lent as a favour
by, or hired from, private individuals. There has been no want of
recognition by the military authorities of the necessity for, and
value of, manoeuvres, and the training at the camps of instruction has
been supplemented as far as possible by small manoeuvres on such
portions of country as could be made available. But, with the
exception of spasmodic efforts in 1871 and 1872, it was not until 1897
that the government allowed itself to be convinced by its military
advisers, and passed a Military Manoeuvres Act, by which certain
districts could be "proclaimed" for purposes of manoeuvres, and troops
in consequence could traverse all ground. In 1898 the first manoeuvres
under this Act were held in Wilts and Dorset, and were intended to be
repeated at fixed intervals in future years. In addition, every effort
was made to add to the existing permanent training grounds for troops,
and ground was acquired on Salisbury Plain with the intention of
developing it into a second Aldershot. But the training on those
well-known grounds, excellent as it is in itself as a preparation, is
not "manoeuvres," and never can do away with the necessity for them,
with a more or less free hand given to the leaders over fresh country.
Much misconception prevails as to the nature and limitation of the
military instruction to be imparted at manoeuvres. Manoeuvres are a
school for the leaders, in a less degree for the led, and
consequently the minor details of instruction must be completed, and
the troops fully trained as units, before they can take part in them
with advantage. The time during which large bodies of troops can be
kept together for manoeuvres is too short, and the expense too great,
to justify time being spent on exercises which might as well be
carried out in the ordinary stations or at the great training camps.
Therefore it may be laid down as a principle that manoeuvres, properly
so-called, should be begun with units not smaller than a brigade of
infantry on each side, with a due proportion of the other arms
attached. It is useful if these can precede the manoeuvres of larger
bodies, as the training is then progressive and the result more
satisfactory.[2]
The choice of ground is of great importance. Its extent should be
proportionate to the force to be employed and the nature of the
instruction to be imparted. It should not be too hilly nor yet too
flat, but both descriptions should be judiciously combined; and regard
must be had to the water supply and the road and railway net for the
convenience of the supply service. Once the ground has been selected,
the general and special ideas must be so framed that the troops are
thereby confined to the chosen ground without seeming to tie the hands
of the leaders of sides. It is of great advantage if the same idea can
be maintained throughout each series of operations, as thereby the
interest of all concerned and the likeness to actual warfare are
increased; and, if possible, the "state of war" should be continuous
also. Within the limits of the special idea, the utmost latitude
should be left to leaders; but if the orders of one or both sides seem
to render a collision unlikely, the director should so modify the
special idea as to compel one or other to re-cast his orders in such a
way that contact is brought about. Such interference will scarcely be
necessary after the first issues of orders in each series. In war the
number of marching days vastly outnumbers those of fighting, but in
manoeuvres this must not be allowed; tactical instruction is what is
desired, and a manoeuvre day in which none is imparted is not fully
utilized. It is not necessary that all the troops should be engaged,
but at least the advanced bodies must come into contact, and the rest
must carry out marches as on active service. Each action should be
fought to its end, "Cease firing" being sounded when the crisis has
been reached; and on a decision being given by the director, one side
should retire and the fight be broken off in a proper military manner.
The troops should place outposts each day, and act in all respects as
if on active service.
The quartering and supply of troops are the chief difficulties in the
arrangement of manoeuvres, and afford ample opportunity for the
practising of the officers and departments responsible for these
matters. In England, where in peace it is not possible to billet
troops on private individuals, quartering must be replaced by
encampments or bivouacs, and the selection of ground for them affords
invaluable practice. If possible, their position should be selected to
conform to the military situation; but if it is found necessary, for
reasons of water or food supply, to withdraw troops to positions other
than such as they would occupy in real warfare, time should be allowed
them on the following day to regain the positions they would otherwise
have occupied. It is next to impossible, for various reasons,
financial and other, to organize the food supply in manoeuvres as it
would be in war. Sufficient transport cadres cannot be kept up in
peace, and consequently recourse must be had to hired transport, which
cannot be treated as a military body. Again, food cannot be
requisitioned, and local purchase at the time cannot be trusted to; so
dépôts of supplies must be formed beforehand in the manoeuvres area,
which more or less tie the hands of the supply service. Still, with a
judicious choice of the points at which these are formed, much may be
done to approximate to service conditions, and the more nearly these
are realized the more instructive for the supply will the manoeuvres
become.
Finally, a word must be said as to the umpire staff, which represents
the bullets. The most careful selection of officers for this important
duty is necessary, and they must have sufficient authority and be in
sufficient number to make their influence everywhere felt. Their
principal object should be to come to a decision quickly, so as to
prevent the occurrence of unreal situations; and by constant
intercommunication they must ensure uniformity in their decisions, and
so maintain continuity of the action all over the manoeuvres
battlefield. (J. M. Gr.)