Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
So many things about the Middle Ages seem strange to the modern reader that it is easy to over-emphasize the differences between the points of view and the methods of medieval and of modern writers. Especially is this true of the writers of fiction. We seldom get more than a brief glimpse of the medieval fiction-writer, specifically the author of medieval romances, actually at work; for example, when we find Chrétien de Troyes using the old book from the cathedral library at Beauvais in the composition of Cligès. Generally we have only the finished product on the one hand, and on the other hand, “sources” of various kinds, folk-tale or saga or classical story. Where the relation between the finished product and the source is close and obvious, as in such romances as Sir Amadas and Sir Isumbras, the mere identification of the source reveals the method of the writer: he found an attractive old story and retold it, adding such embellishments as his audience would probably like. Nothing could be simpler. But the writers of the more courtly and sophisticated romances were not mere redactors; they were authors, in very much the same sense as the modern novelist is an author. And like most modern novelists, they showed their inventive powers, not often in finding new material, but usually in making recombinations of old material. They sometimes had the advantage over the present would-be producer of “best sellers” in writing for specific courtly groups presided over by single leaders of taste. It was therefore relatively easy to discover what their public wanted. Thus Chrétien wrote his Chevalier de la Charrette to satisfy Marie de Champagne, though it seems not to have been exactly in accordance with his own ethical standards.
1 Ed. by H. Michelant, Soc. des anciens Textes français, 1876; MS. in the Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal. Cf. John Edwin Wells, Manual of the Writings in Middle English, 1916, p. 19; also Introd. by Sir Frederick Madden in work cited below; Laura A. Hibbard, Medieval Romance in England, 1924, p. 214.
2 Wells, op. cit., p. 19. The poem is in King's Coll. Camb. MS. 13. defective at the beginning, and has been edited by Sir Frederick Madden for the Roxburghe Club (1832) and by W. W. Skeat for the EETS (Ext. Ser., I, 1867). I have not seen the Roxburghe Club edition, but Professor Skeat reprints Sir Frederick Madden's valuable introduction. There is also extant a fragment of an English prose version, Herrig's Archiv, CXVII, 318 ff.
3 Michelant, op. cit., pp. xviii-xxi. Madden, unfortunately, did not have first-hand acquaintance with the French verse romance; cf. EETS, ed., p. xvii.
4 Professor Wells' remark that “the English romance shows in details extraordinary independence of the extant French poetical version,” though literally true—with the possible exception of the word “extraordinary”—might be misleading; for in all essential particulars, the stories are identical.
5 Gaston Paris, “La Sicile dans la litterature française du moyen age,” Romania, V, 109.
6 Bernhard Ten Brink, Geschichte der englischen Literatur, Strassburg, 1899, I, 389-91.
7 Gustav Körting, Grundriss der Geschichte der englischen Literatur, 1893, ¶91. See summary of discussion of origin by Miss Hibbard, op. cit., pp. 217 ff.
8 Sir Frederick Madden's identification of the Countess Yolande, mentioned in the French text, as the daughter of Baldwin IV, Count of Hainault, is generally accepted and in this paper is taken as proved.
9 Professor Wells prints “William's,” but this is an obvious error.
10 Arthur and Gorlagon, [Harvard] Stud. and Notes, VIII, 149-275.
11 Zsf. für Rom. Phil., VI (1882), 94 ff., ed. by W. Horak. Miss Hibbard, op. cit., p. 220, writes: “Although only the more obvious parallels of incident and character have been touched on here, it seems sufficiently clear that the author of Guillaume de Palerne was familiar with the particular story of which Bisclavret and Melion were independent derivations.” Evidence will be given later to show the probable dependence of Guillaume on Melion or on a version closely resembling the extant text of the latter.
12 Michelant, op. cit., p. xx; G. Paris, La Litterature française au moyen age, Paris, 1914, ¶¶ 51, 52; Wells, loc. cit.; Körting, op. cit., ¶91. This would also account for the accurate references in the romance to Sicilian localities, Hibbard, op. cit., p. 220, though the author's knowledge might have been derived directly or indirectly from the Countess Yolande's husband; cf. D infra.
13 In the English William of Palerne, which in this respect does not differ essentially from the French, one eighth of the entire poem is taken up with actual accounts of battles.
14 Hue de Rotelande's Ipomedon is located principally in Apulia and Calabria. It is obviously a “courtly composite,” as Professor Wells calls it (p. 148). Curiously enough, it has one prominent incident in common with both Guillaume de Palerne and Floriant et Florete: the attempt to force a princess into marriage by besieging her in her castle and her rescue by a knight, who is a “fair unknown.” This is, however, a very frequently recurring incident.
15 Op. cit., Romania, V, 111.
16 Alois Brandi in Paul's Grundriss der germanischen Philologie, II, Pt. 1, 660-61; Gustav Gröber, Grundriss der romanischen Philologie, II, Pt. 1, 529-30. Brandl's statement that William and Melior are bound together by means of a “Zaubertrank” is inaccurate; Gröber's comparison of the part played by the wolf to the part played by the dog in Tristan is decidedly misleading.
17 XXVIII, 139-79.
18 M. Lot-Borodine, La femme et l'amour au XIIe siècle d'après les poèmes de Chrétien de Troyes, Paris, 1909, p. 247.
19 Schofield, English Literature from the Norman Conquest to Chaucer, London, 1914, p. 312. Miss Hibbard makes a similar statement, op. cit., p. 217.
20 Standish H. O'Grady, Sylva Gadelica, A Collection of Tales in Irish, 2 vols., London and Edin., 1892, II, 286 ff.
21 Herodotus, Book I, ¶'s 107 ff.; Plutarch's Lives, ed. by Bernadotte Perrin, Loeb Library, 1919-21, I, 97 ff.; Carolus Plummer, Vitae Sanctorum Hiberniae, 2 vols., Oxford, 1910, I, 65 ff., and I, 46 ff.; Der grosse Wolfdieterich, hrsg. von Adolf Holtzmann, Heidelberg, 1875. To avoid awkwardness, the story of Romulus and Remus is referred to as that of Romulus.
22 William of Palerne, ll. 4010 ff.; Melion, ll. 407 ff.; Die Lais der Marie de France, hrsg. von Karl Warnke, 2 vols., Halle, 1885, Bisclavret, pp. 75 ff., vv. 135 ff.; Arthur and Gorlagon, ed. by Kittredge, Harv. Studies and Notes, VIII, 149 ff., p. 159.
23 Arthur and Gorlagon, p. 184, note 2.
24 See notes 11 and 22 for citations of these works. Professor Kittredge discusses all of these except G and shows their common provenience. There are two extant MSS. of the Lai de Melion, both in the Picard dialect, one of the late 13th, the other of the late 14th, century. Concerning them Professor Kittredge writes (p. 198): “Neither presents a perfect text, and the Picard version may therefore be put back some time. Probably it is not much later than Marie herself. . . . . Though Marie wrote her Lais about 1180, there is no MS. earlier than the second half of the 13th century.” I have assumed, on Mr. Kittredge's authority, as well as on other grounds, that Melion antedates Guillaume.
25 This duplication of incidents is so characteristic of the French author that it affords a real argument for the theory that the boat episode was in the original version. Another notable duplication—or “triplication”—is found in his use of animal disguises. Having discovered apparently that the transformation of a man into a wolf is intensely interesting, he proceeds to disguise his lovers, first as white bears, and later as a hart and a hind. There seems to be some uncertainty even in the author's mind as to whether William and Melior are temporarily changed into animals or merely put on the skins of animals. On the whole, their behavior seems to indicate that the transformation is complete. The change is entirely under their own control, and is accomplished merely by putting on the animal-skins; whereas Alphons is under enchantment, from which he is powerless to escape. Both conditions are abundantly paralleled in folk-lore from all parts of the world. Cf. Wilhelm Hertz, Die Werwolf, Stuttgart, 1862 (this is the most valuable book on the subject); also Caroline Taylor Stewart, “The Origin of the Werwolf Superstition,” Univ. of Missouri Studies, Soc. Science Series, II, no. 3, 1909; Kirby F. Smith, “An Historical Study of the Werwolf in Literature,” PMLA, LX (1894), 1-42 (largely indebted to Hertz), etc.; for a bibliography on the subject, see George F. Black, “A List of Books relating to Lycanthropy,” N. Y. Pub. Lib. Bulletin 23, 1919, pp. 811-15.
26 See above, note 8.
27 Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I, 2 vols., ed. by Wm. Stubbs, Rolls Series, 1864, Vol. I, Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, auctore, ut videtur, Ricardo, Canonico Sanctae Trinitatis Londiniensis. Dated by the editor, p. lxx, as probably between 1200 and 1220. References to the Count of St. Paul are on pp. 213, 257, 258, 292, 293, 298.
28 Of course, he may have held lands from Richard; I have not been able to discover his feudal relations, but his original appearance with Philip implies that he was the vassal of the French, rather than of the English, king.
29 The account is drawn from the Itinerarium Ricardi, pp. 146 ff. and from the article on Richard I in the Dict. of Nat. Biog.
30 Accounts differ as to the details. The author of the Itinerarium states that the attack on Messina took place as a result of a quarrel between Richard and the citizens, and that the demand on Tancred was not made until the spoils of the city were in Richard's hands to offer in exchange for Joanna's dowry; cf. pp. 154 ff.
31 Poradiso, XX, 62.
32 Cf. article on Richard I in Dict. of Nat. Biog. by T. A. Archer. The detailed information about Alfonso II of Aragon is taken from Rousseau St. Hilaire, Histoire d'Espagne, Paris, 1844, Vol. IV, Book X, Chap. II; that about Alfonso VIII of Castile from the same work and volume, Book X, Chap. I.
33 Op. cit., p. 214.
