The Medieval Alexander legend and romance epic: essays in honour of David J.A. Ross 0527626007, 9780527626006
169 97 14MB
English Pages [338] Year 1982
Polecaj historie
![Epic and Romance: Essays on Medieval Literature [Reprint ed.]
0486203557, 9780486203553](https://dokumen.pub/img/200x200/epic-and-romance-essays-on-medieval-literature-reprintnbsped-0486203557-9780486203553.jpg)
Citation preview
Essays in Honour of David J.A. Ross Edited by PETER NOBLE, LUCIE POLAR and CLAIRE ISOZ
NUNC COCNOSCO EX PARTE
THOMAS J. BATA LI BRARY TRENT UNIVERSITY
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation
https://archive.org/details/medievalalexandeOOOOunse
THE MEDIEVAL ALEXANDER LEGEND AND ROMANCE EPIC
The Medieval Alexander Legend and Romance Epic Essays in Honour of David J.A. Ross Edited by PETER NOBLE, LUCIE POLAK and CLAIRE ISOZ
KRAUS INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATIONS Millwood, New York . London, England . Nendeln, Liechtenstein
© Individual Contributors 1982 All rights reserved No part of this work covered by the copyrights hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means - graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or taping, information storage and retrieval systems - without written permission of the publisher
First published 1982 by Kraus International Publications A Division of Kraus-Thomson Organization Limited Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: The Medieval Alexander Legend and Romance Epic. Bibliography: p. 1. Romances — History and criticism — Addresses, essays, lectures. 2. Ross, D.J.A. (David John Athole) I. Ross, D.J.A. (David John Athole) II. Noble, Peter. III. Polak, Lucie. IV. Isoz, Claire. PN689.M4 1982 809'.02 82-14022 ISBN 0-527-62600-7
Contents List of Illustrations
vii
Foreword
ix
David J. A. Ross: A Bibliography of his work (1948-1982) Claire Isoz
xi
Alexander and the Universal Chronicle: Scholars and Translators G.H.V. Bunt
1
The Close of the Cantar de Mio Cid: Tradition and Individual Variation Alan Deyermond
11
Tenses in the Past Narrative in Li Restor du Paorx Enid Donkin
19
The Manuscript Corpus of the Medieval Romance Epic Joseph J. Duggan
29
The 'Cocktail-Shaker Technique' in Two Chansons de Geste Wolfgang van Emden
43
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa: zu zwei Konigsbiographien der Stauferzeit Xen]a von Ertzdorff
57
Some Feudal and Military Terms in Girart de Roussillon - quintane, mostreison and soudader Mary Hackett
71
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander' A.T. Hatto
85
The Poema de Mio Cid and the Old French Epic: Some Reflections David Hook
107
La Coupe de la legende de Tristan dans L'Escoufle de 3ean Renart Rita Lejeune
119
Aspects of the Knighting Ceremony Faith Lyons
125
v
Typological Problems in Medieval Alexander Literature: The Enclosure of Gog and Magog Ian Michael
131
Anti-clericalism in the Feudal Epic Peter Noble
149
Charlemagne and the Marvels of Constantinople Lucie Polak
159
An Early French Epic Manuscript: Oxford, Bodleian Library, French e. 32 Ian Short
173
Notes on Three Illuminated Alexander Manuscripts Alison Stones
193
The Iconography of the Medieval Beast Epic: From Manuscript to Printed Page Kenneth Varty
243
Assonance and Vocabulary in the Moniage Guillaume Brian Woledge
259
The Problem of the Two Ganelons Zara P. Zaddy
269
vi
Illustrations Frontispiece David 3.A. Ross.
Between pages 241 and 243
.
1
.
Berlin, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz Kupferstichkabinett 78.C.1 Le Roman d'Alexandre (hereafter Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett 78.C.1) f.56v. Alexander orders a giant to be burnt to death.
2
Brussels, Bibliotheque Royale, 11040 Le Roman d'Alexandre (hereafter Brussels, Bib. Roy. 11040) f.59v Alexander orders a giant to be burnt to death.
3.
London, British Library, Harley 4979 Le Roman d'Alexandre (hereafter London, BL Harley 4979) f.60. Alexander and his men fight giants wearing skins; Alexander orders a giant to be burnt to death.
4.
Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett 78.C.1, men fight giants wearing skins.
f .56.
5.
Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett 78.C.1, Darius hung above his tomb.
f.37v.
6.
Brussels, Bib. Roy. 11040, executed above his tomb.
7.
London, BL Harley 4979, f.46. The headless bodies of Darius' murderers hung.
8.
Brussels, Bib. Roy. 11040, f.36v. approach Darius' capital Persepolis.
9.
Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, f.fr. 749 Estoire, f.6v. Vespasian cured of leprosy by Veronica's cloth with the image of Christ.
10.
Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Smith-Lesouef 20 Psalter, f.llv. Herod ordering the Massacre of the Innocents.
11.
Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett enthroned.
f.39v.
vn
The
78.C.1,
Alexander
The
f.4.
his
murderers
murderers
Alexander
and
and
King
of
of
Darius
his
men
Alexander
12.
London, British Library, Yates-Thompson 19 Brunetto Latini, Tresor, f.3. The author reading his work to his students.
Between pages 258 and 259 13.
Noble the Lion with members of his Court: Isengrin the Wolf, Grimbert the Badger, Tibert the Cat and Courtois the Dog. In the background, Reynard the Fox attacks Couard the Hare. From the c.1499 Wynkyn de Worde edition. Frontispiece.
ik.
Noble the Lion with members of his Court: Isengrin the Wolf, Grimbert the Badger, Tibert the Cat and Courtois the Dog. From the 1498 Lubeck edition, p.ll.
13.
Noble the Lion with members of his Court: Brichemer the Stag, Bernard the Ass, Isengrin the Wolf, Couard the Hare and Reynard the Fox. From MS G., Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, f.fr. 1580, f.ll8v.
16.
Noble the Lion, with members of his Court: Belin the Ram, Tibert the Cat, Courtois the Dog(?), Isengrin the Wolf(7), Reynard the Fox, and a dog(?). From MS I, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, f.fr. 12584 f.18.
The above illustrations have been reproduced by kind permission of the following: Kupf erstichkabinett, besitz, Berlin. Departement Brussels.
de
Staatliche
Manuscrits,
Museen
Bibliotheque
Preussischer Royale
Kultur-
Albert
Department of Manuscripts, British Library, London. Departement de Manuscrits, Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris.
vm
ler
Foreword
This collection of essays is offered to Professor Ross by his friends, colleagues and former pupils to honour his great contribution to medieval scholarship and his distinguished teaching career. All the contributors have chosen topics in the fields with which he is particularly associated - the Alexander legend, the Romance epic and iconography. These essays are a mark of esteem and gratitude felt by a few of the many whom he has helped and inspired. The editors would like to thank all those who have helped in the production of the book, the staff of Kraus-Thomson's London office and those colleagues who have not con¬ tributed but have helped in other ways: the late Professor F.P. Pickering, Dr. Rosemary Combridge, Miss Sylvia Harris, Dr. P. McGurk and Mr. Peter Thurlow. It was with great sadness that the editors received news of the death of Lucie Polak, who played a major part in the production of this book. Her own contribution to it shows the loss which scholarship has suffered in the early death of one of Professor Ross's out¬ standing pupils. Her friends and colleagues will greatly miss her wit, her gaiety and her incisive mind.
IX
David J.A. Ross A Bibliography of his Work (1948-1982) Claire Isoz Abbreviated titles: BHR CCMe CM FS JWCI
Bibliotheque d'Humanisme et Renaissance Cahiers de Civilisation Medievale Classica et Mediaevalia French Studies Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes Medium Aevum Modem Language Review Scriptorium Zeitschrift fur deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur
MAe MLR Sc ZDA
1948 1.
'Allegory and Romance on a Medieval French Marriage Casket', JWCI, 11 (1948), 112-42 and plates 25-31. 1951
2.
'Pleine sa hanste', MAe, 20 (1951), 1-10 and plates I and II. 1952
3.
'Letters of Alexander: A new partial Julius Valerius', CM, 13 (1952), 38-58.
4.
'Some Notes on the Old French Alexander Romance in Prose', FS, 6 (1952), 135-47.
5.
'The Old French Alexander Romance in Prose: A Postscript', FS, 6 (1952), 353.
6.
'Nectanebus in his Palace: A problem of Alexander iconography', JWCI, 15 (1952), 67-87 and plates 16-18.
7.
'The Printed Editions of the French Prose Alexander Romance', Library, 5th Series, 7 (1952), 54-57.
8.
'Medieval 558-59.
9.
'Methods of Book-production in Miscellany (London, B.M., ms Royal and plates 10-12.
Relicta
MS of the
unabbreviated
in the Seventeenth Century', MLR, 47 (1952), a XIVth Century French 19.D.I.)', Sc, 6 (1952), 63-75
xii
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic 1953
10.
'A Lost Painting in Henry Ill's Palace at Westminster', JWCI, 16 (1953), 160.
11.
'La Houce Partie: A Postscript', MLR, 48 (1953), 184.
12.
'A Medieval Poltergeist that paid Rent', MLR, 48 (1953), 327-28. 1954
13.
'An Unrecorded Follower of Piero (1954), 174-81 and plates 21-24.
della
14.
Review of Gerbert de Mez, edited 1952), in MLR, 49 (1954), 79-80.
by
Francesca', Pauline
JWCI,
Taylor
17
(Namur,
1955 15.
'Discussions: Thomas of Kent', FS, 9 (1955), 349-51.
16.
'Illustrated Manuscripts of Orosius', Sc, 9 (1955), 35-56 and plates 11-15.
17.
'Some Unrecorded MSS of the Historia de Preliis', Sc, 9 (1955), 149-50. 1956
18.
G. Cary, The Medieval Alexander, edited by D.3.A. (Cambridge, 1956, reprinted 1967), xvi, 415 pp., 9 plates.
Ross
19.
'A Check-list of MSS of three Alexander Texts: The Oulius Valerius Epitome, the Epistola ad Aristotelem and the Collatio cum Dindimo', Sc, 10 (1956), 127-32.
20.
'An Illustrated Humanistic Manuscript of Oustin's Epitome of the Historiae Philippicae of Trogus Pompeius', Sc, 10 (1956), 261-67 and plate 32. 1957
21.
'A Corvinus Manuscript Recovered', Sc, 11 (1957), 104-8.
22.
Review of The Medieval French 'Roman d'Alexandre', vol. VII, edited by Bateman Edwards and Alfred Foulet (Princeton, 1955), in FS, 11 (1957), 267-68.
23.
Review of P. Hess, Li roumanz 1956), in FS, 11 (1957), 270-71.
24.
Review of F. Pfister, Alexander der Grosse in den Offenbarungen der Griechen, Juden, Mohammedaner und Christen (Berlin, 1956), in Gnomon, Bd 29 (1957), 317-19.
de
Julius
Cesar
(Winterthur,
1958 25.
'A Fifteenth-century Revision of Alexander', MAe, 27 (1958), 86-94.
the
Old
French
Prose
xiii
D.J.A. Ross - A Bibliography 26.
Review of La Chrortique Metrique attribute a Geffroy de Paris, edited by A. Diverres (Paris, 1956), in MAe, 27 (1958), 192-94. 1959
27.
'A
New
Manuscript
of
Archpriest
Leo
of
Naples:
Nativitas et
victoria Alexandri Magni', CM, 20 (1959), 98-158. 28.
'A New Manuscript of the Latin Fuerre de Gadres and the Text of Roman d'Alexandre Branch IP, JWCI, 22 (1959), 211-53 and plate 22.
29.
'New Mediaeval Latin Versions of French Alexander Poems', MAe, 28 (1959), 48-49.
30.
Review of Calendre, Les empereors de Rome, edited Millard (Ann Arbor, 1957), in FS, 13 (1959), 56-57.
by
Galia
1960 31.
'A
Ghost
Edition
of
the
Historia
Alexandri
Magni',
Book-
Collector, 9 (1960), 67-68. 1961 32.
'The I3 Historia (1961), 205-21.
33.
(In collaboration with J.M. Bately) 'A Check-list of Manuscripts of Orosius' Historiarum adversum paganos libri septem', Sc, 15 (1961), 329-34.
34.
Review of Hiram Peri (Pflaum), Der Religionsdisput der BarlaamLegende, ein Motiv abendlandischer Dichtung (Salamanca, 1959), in FS,
35.
de
Preliis and the Fuerre de Gadres', CM, 22
15 (1961), 255-56.
Review
of
V.
Slessarev, 1959
Legend (Minneapolis,
'Prester and
John':
London,
The
1960),
Letter in
FS,
and 15
the
(1961),
361-62. 1962 36.
'A Late Twelfth-Century Artist's Pattern-Sheet', JWCI, 25 (1962), 119-28 and plates 19-23.
37.
'Alexander in the Liber Floridus of Lambert of St. Omer', MAe, 31 (1962), 125-28.
38.
'An Illuminator's Labour-Saving plates 15-16.
Device', Sc,
16 (1962), 94-95 and
1963 39. Alexander Historiatus: A Guide to Medieval Illustrated Alexander Literature, Warburg Institute Surveys, I (London, 1963), vii, 128 pp. 40.
'Je luy livre chanse...', BHR, 25 (1963), 172-73.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
iv 41.
'L'originalite de Turoldus: le maniement (1963), 127-38 and plates I-IV.
42.
'The History of Macedon in the Histoire ancienne jusqu'a Cesar: Sources and Compositional Method', CM, 24 (1963), 181-231.
43.
'Olympias and the Serpent: The Interpretation of a Baalbeck Mosaic and the Date of the Illustrated Pseudo-Callisthenes',
de
la
lance',
CCMe,
6
JWCI, 26 (1963), 1-21 and plates 1-6. 44.
Review of K.V. Sinclair, The Melbourne Livy (Melbourne, 1961), in FS, 17 (1963), 400-1.
45.
Review of R. Heppenstall, The Fourfold Tradition (London, in MLR, 58 (1963), 121.
1961),
1964 46.
'An Exemplum of Alexander the Great', MLR, 59 (1964), 559-60. 1965
47. 48.
'In Memoriam Gladys Dickinson', BHR, 27 (1965), 332-33. 'Alexander (1965),
and
the
Wonderstone
in Le
Chevalier Errant', FS,
19
159-63.
49.
Review of Gesta Francorum et Aliorum Hierosolimitanorum, edited by Rosalind Hill (London, 1962), in MLR, 60 (1965), 108-9.
50.
Review of Guillaume de la Perriere, Le theatre des bons engins, 1539, facsimile with introduction by G. Dexter (Gainesville, 1964), in MLR, 60 (1965), 281. 1966
51.
52.
'Les Trois Grands: A Humanist Historical Tract of the Fifteenth Century', CM, 27 (1966), 375-96. 'Gautier
del
Hum:
An
Historical
Element
in
the
Chanson
de
Roland?', MLR, 61 (1966), 409-15. 53.
Review of 'The Rule of St. Benedict’, a Norman prose version, edited by R.3. Dean and M. Dominica Legge (Oxford, 1964), in FS, 20 (1966), 172-73.
54.
Review of Jean d'Outremeuse, 'Ly Myreur des Histors1: Fragment du second livre, edited by A. Goosse (Brussels, 1965), in FS, 20 (1966), 392-93.
55.
Review of L. Bergson, Der griechische Alexanderroman: Rezension B (Stockholm, Goteborg and Uppsala, 1965) in Gnomon, Bd 1 (1966), 447-50.
56.
Review
57.
Review of Huit miracles de Gautier de Coinci, edited by Erik v. Kraemer (Helsinki, 1960), and Les Miracles de Nostre Dame par
of Loren MacKinney, Medical Illustrations in Manuscripts (London, 1964), in MAe, 35 (1966), 162-64.
Medieval
D.J.A. Ross
-
A Bibliography
Gautier
de Coirxci, edited by V.F. 1961), in MLR, 61 (1966), 129-30.
58.
xv
Koenig
(Geneva
and
Paris,
Review of 3. Flinn, 'Le Roman de Renart' dans les litteratures etrangeres au moyen age (Toronto and London, 1964), in MLR, 61 (1966), 704-6. 1967
59.
'Alexander Historiatus: A Supplement', JWCI, 30 (1967), 383-88.
60.
'The Iconography of the Alexander in Renard le ContrefaW, Sc, 21 (1967), 74-83 and plates 7 and 8.
61.
'Alexander Iconography in Spain: El (1967), 83-86 and plates 9 and 10.
62.
libro de Alexandre’, Sc, 21
'Two New Manuscripts of the Alexander of Ulrich von Etzenbach',
ZD A, 96 (1967), 239-46. 63.
Review
the
of
D.M.
Christian
Lang, 'The Balavariani': A Buddhist Tale from (London, 1966), in Asia Major, New Series
East
(1967), 254-56. 1968 64.
Alexander
and the Faithless Lady: A Inaugural Lecture delivered at Birkbeck 1967 (London, Birkbeck College, [ 1968]).
Submarine
Adventure,
College,
November,
7
65.
'The Iconography of Roland', MAe, 37 (1968), 46-65.
66.
Review of Jean le Court dit Brisebarre: 'Le Restor du Paon', edited by R.J. Carey (Geneva, 1966), in MAe, 37 (1968), 80-84.
67.
Review of K. Varty, Reynard the Fox (Leicester, 37 (1968), 337-41.
68.
Review
69.
Review of F.D. Kelly, Sens et Conjointure in the 'Chevalier de la Charrette' (The Hague, 1966), in MLR, 63 (1968), 962-63.
1967), in MAe,
of Alice M. Colby, The Portrait in Twelfth-century French Literature (Geneva, 1965), in MLR, 63 (1968), 240-41.
1969 70.
'A thirteenth-century Anglo-Norman workshop illustrating secular literary manuscripts?', in Melanges offerts a Rita Lejeune, 2 vols (Gembloux, 1969), I, 689-94, 2 plates.
71.
'Les
Merveilles
de
Rome:
Two
Medieval
French
Versions
of the
Mirabilia Urbis Romae’, CM, 30 (1969), 617-65. 72.
73.
'Some Geographical mentary Tresor des 51-53.
and
Topographical Miniatures in a 23 (1969), 177-86 and
Histoires', Sc,
Frag¬ plates
'Alexander and Antiiois the Dwarf King: A longer Version and a Hebrew Analogue', ZD A, 98 (1969), 292-307.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic Review of Roy Wisbey, Das Alexanderbild Rudolfs von Ems (Berlin, 1966), in German Life and Letters, 22 (1969), 187-90. Review
of
W.
Calin,
The
Epic
Quest,
(Baltimore
and
London,
1966), in MLR, 64 (1969), 162-63. of Howard S. Robinson, 'La Chanson de Willame': Critical Study (Chapel Hill, 1967), in MLR, 64 (1969), 418-19. Review
Review of Le Livre du Roy Rambaux de Frise, edited Sargent (Chapel Hill, 1967), in MLR, 64 (1969), 419-20.
by
A
B.N.
1970 Foreword in C.W. Aspland, A Syntactical Study of Epic Formulas and Formulaic Expressions containing the -ant Forms in Twelfthcentury French Verse (St Lucia, 1970), vii-viii. Review of E. Kohler, 'Conseil des barons' und 'Jugement des barons': Epische Fatalitat und Feudalrecht im altfranzosischen Rolandslied (Heidelberg, 1968), in MLR, 65 (1970), 418-19. Review of Jourdain de Blaye, edited by P.F. Dembowski (Chicago and London, 1969), in MLR, 65 (1970), 623. Review of Richard Baum, Recherches sur les oeuvres attributes a Marie de France (Heidelberg, 1968), in MLR, 65 (1970), 896-98. of G.D. West, French Arthurian Verse Romances 11501300: An Index of Proper Names (Toronto, 1970), in Notes and Queries, New Series, 17 (1970), 317. Review
1971
Illustrated Medieval Alexander-Books Netherlands: A Study in comparative
in Germany and the iconography (Cambridge,
1971), xviii, 202 pp., 428 illustrations. N.
Edition critique Ciboule, edited by
Marzac,
Robert
du
sermon
'Qui
manducat
me'
de
D.3.A. Ross, MHRA, Texts and Dissertations Series, 4 (Cambridge, 1971), viii, 98 pp., 2 plates.
'Le Chevalier Melior', MAe, 40 (1971), 104-8. 'Blood
in the
Sea:
An Episode in Jourdain de Blaivies', MLR, 66
(1971), 532-41. Review of 'Simon de Pouille': Chanson de Geste, edited by Oeanne Baroin (Geneva and Paris, 1968), in MLR, 66 (1971), 182. Review
of
(i)
R.A.
Wisbey, Concordance to the Vorau and Compendia, 1 (Leeds, 1968), (ii) R.A. .the 'Speculum Ecclesiae', Compendia, 2 R.A. Wisbey and C. Hall, A Complete
Strafi burg 'Alexander', Wisbey, Word-Index to (Leeds,
1968),
(iii)
Concordance to the 'Rolandslied' (Heidelberg Manuscript) with Word-Indexes to the Fragmentary Manuscripts, Compendia, 3 (Leeds, 1969), in MLR, 66 (1971), 209-210.
D.J.A. Ross - A Bibliography 89.
XVII
of C.W. Aspland, A Syntactical Study of Epic Formulas and Formulaic Expressions containing the -ant Forms in Twelfthcentury French Verse (St Lucia, 1970), in MLR, 66 (1971), 891-92. Review
1972 90.
R.M. Jones, The Theme of Love in the 'Romans d'Antiquite', edited by D.J.A. Ross, MHRA, Texts and Dissertations Series, 5 (London, 1972), viii, 130 pp.
91.
Review
the
of Ian Michael, The Treatment of Classical Material in 'Libro de Alexandre' (Manchester, 1970), in CCMe, 15 (1972),
87. 1973 92.
Review of Hugo Buchthal, Historia Troiana: Studies in the History of Mediaeval Secular Illustration (London and Leyden, 1971), in CCMe, 16 (1973), 67-69. 1974
93.
Review of Eberhard Leube, Fortuna in Karthago: Die AeneasDido-Mythe Virgils in den romanischen Literaturen vom 14. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert (Heidelberg, 1969), in FS, 28 (1974), 55-56.
94.
of G.J. Brault, Early Blazon: Heraldic terminology in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries with special reference to Arthurian literature (Oxford and London, 1972), in FS, 28 (1974), Review
436-37. 95.
Review of Paul Aebischer, Prehistoire et protohistoire du 'Roland' d'Oxford (Bern, 1972), and Textes Norrois et Litterature franqaise du Moyen Age (Geneva, 1972), in MAe, 43 (1974), 159-63. 1975
96.
Obituary notice April 1975.
97.
'Alan Carey (1975), 399.
for
Taylor
Professor
(1905-75):
A.
In
Carey
Taylor,
The
Memoriam', Studi
Times,
Francesi,
3
19
1976 98.
'Alexander
Mittelalters,
Anteloye', in Die deutsche Literatur des Verfasserlexikon, Bd I, Lieferung I (Berlin and New
und
York, 1976), cols 210-12. 99.
'Alexander
Enzyklopadie
der
des
Grosser
Das
Marchens,
Alexanderbild im Mittelalter', in Bd I, Lieferung I (Berlin and New
York, 1976), cols 281-87.
Vasque de Lucene et la Cyropedie a (1470) (Geneva, 1974), in MAe, 45 (1976),
100. Review of D. Gallet-Guerno,
la cour de Bourgogne 231-34.
xviii 101.
7’he
Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
Review of Derek Pearsall and Elisabeth Salter, Landscapes and Seasons of the Medieval World (London, 1973), in MLR, 71 (1976), 365-67.
102.
C. Settis-Frugoni, Historia Alexandri elevati per aerem: Origine, iconografia e fortuna di un tema (Rome, 1973), in Rivista Storica Italiana, 88 (1976), 165-74. Review
of
griphos
ad
103.
'A Funny Name for a Horse: Bucephalus in Antiquity and the Middle Ages in Literature and Visual Art', in Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages, Symposium Interfacultaire Werkgroep Mediaevistick, Groningen, 12-15 October 1977 (Nijmegen, 1978), 302-3.
104.
'Before Roland: What Happened 1200 Years ago Next August 15?', Olifant, 5 (March 1978), 171-90.
105.
'Not Worth a Penny', Reading Medieval Studies, 4 (1978), 69-85. 1979
106.
Enid Donkin, Jean Brisebarre: 'Li Restor du Paon', edited by D.3.A. Ross, MHRA, Texts and Dissertations Series, 15 (London, 1979), vi, 275 pp.
107.
Review of E.C. Armstrong, The Medieval French 'Roman d'Alexandre': Introduction and Notes to Branch III, prepared by Alfred Foulet (Princeton, 1976), in FS, 33 (1979), 61-63. 1980
108.
'Old French', in Traditions of Heroic and Epic Poetry, edited by A.T. Hatto, MHRA (London, 1980), pp. 79-133.
109.
Review of P. Demats, Fabula: Trois etudes de mythographie antique et medievale (Geneva, 1973), in FS, 34 (1980), 61-62. 1982
110.
'Parva Recapitulatio: An English Collection of Texts Alexander the Great', CM, 33 (1981/2), 191-203.
111.
'Ces Deniers qui sont rouges: Le besant dans la litterature et dans la vie de la France et de 1'Europe occidentale au moyen age', in La Chanson de geste et le mythe carolingien: Melanges Rene Louis, 2 vols. (Saint-Pere-sous-Vezelay, 1982), II, 1063-72.
relating
to
Alexander and the Universal Chronicle: Scholars and Translators G.H.V. Bunt All those working in the field of Alexander studies owe a debt of gratitude to David Ross for providing them with two basic tools of research, Cary's The Medieval Alexander,1 which he edited for publication, and his own Alexander Historiatus,2 as well as for numerous other contributions on more specialised subjects. The Groningen research group on Alexander in the Middle Ages, however, possibly has even more reason to be grateful to Professor Ross for his generous support ever since our first contacts early in 1975.' It was he who did much to make the 1977 Groningen Alexander symposium a success, and who helped us avoid several errors in the collection of papers on medieval treatments of Alexander's last days3 which was the tangible result of this gathering. After the publication of this book, the Groningen group decided to take up the study of the treatment of Alexander's career in medieval universal chronicles, and to take as a focal point one of the most voluminous representatives of this genre, the Speculum Historiale of Vincent of Beauvais. In doing so, the group is pursuing a line of research which was also represented in the 1978 collection of papers, where Mrs A.B. Mulder-Bakker contributed a paper on Frutolf of Michelsberg, and Dr W.L. Jonxis-Henkemans discussed the General Estoria of King Alfonso the Wise of Castile. It is a pleasure to offer here to Professor Ross a modest sheaf of first-fruits of our labours on Alexander in the universal chronicles. *
*
*
Vincent's Speculum Historiale not only contains one of the most elaborate chronicle accounts of Alexander that we possess, it was also among the most influential historical compilations. Together with its two companion specula, the Speculum Naturale and the Speculum Doctrinale (in early versions of Vincent's work a single undivided compilation), it forms the Speculum Maius;1* in later manuscripts and in incunable editions we often find a fourth, spurious, speculum, the Speculum Morale. However, the individual specula are often found separately, and Vincent himself designed his work so as to make such separate publication possible. Judging from the number of extant manuscripts and later excerpts and adaptations, the Speculum Historiale must have enjoyed a far greater popularity than its companion soecula. Currently members of the Groningen group are working, in collaboration with the Atelier Vincent de Beauvais at Nancy, on an analysis of Vincent's treatment of Alexander, of its place in the conception of the Speculum Historiale, on its genesis and sources, and on the scattered Alexander references which occur in the work besides its account of Alexander's career. This account is found, after some introductory remarks at the conclusion of the preceding Book, in Book V,5 where it is interspersed with some other
2
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
historical material, and with brief treatments of the lives and the flores of a number of philosophers. It purports to consist of extracts, usually more or less condensed, from a large variety of authors, with some passages signed Actor, which Vincent says he gives on his own responsibility, or has heard from an unnamed teacher. The Alexander story is largely taken from the Julius Valerius Epitome (cited as Historia Alexandri), the Epistola Alexandri ad Aristotelem, the Collatio cum Dindimo, and from Justinus' epitome of the Historiae Philippicae of Pompeius Trogus. However, the Atelier Vincent de Beauvais has recently discovered that Vincent found most of the material for his Books III, IV and V (as in the Groningen incunable; Douai numbering II, III and IV) compiled for him in the Chronicon of his little known predecessor, Helinand of Froidmont.6 This universal chronicle is designed on similar lines to that of Vincent, although it identifies its ultimate sources in the margins, not, as Vincent did purposefully, in the body of the text; its Alexander story, in Books XVII and XVIII, is even longer than Vincent's. Only the first eighteen and the last five of its 49 Books are preserved, Books XVII and XVIII in only one manuscript, Vat. Reg. Lat. 535. The Atelier Vincent de Beauvais has kindly made available to us a photostat of the relevant part of this manuscript, in which the material taken over by Vincent is marked by underlining. A cursory examination of the two Alexander stories confirms Mme Paulmier's statement that many chapters in Vincent's story copy Helinand's account almost word for word, retaining the order and the content of Helinand's citations. Even the passages signed Actor are nearly always taken over literally from Helinand. Yet Vincent also omits much of Helinand's material; he makes his own ordinatio into books and chapters, provides his own rubrics, and occasionally rearranges the material. There are also a fair number of additions, some of them very brief; longer passages independent of Helinand's work as we have it are the accounts of the philosophers in chapters 7 to 10, the citations from Comestor in chapters 15 (the dispute over the succession in Jerusalem and Nagosus' plundering of the temple), 17 (Saraballa builds a temple on mount Garisim), 31 (Saraballa's intrigues) and 32 (Alexander's visit to Jerusalem), and the epilogus and Alexander's correspondence with Dindimus in chapters 66 to 71. Helinand does cite Comestor in his chapter XVIII. 30 (on the inclusion of the ten tribes), which Vincent faithfully copies in his chapter 43; both chroniclers here cite the title of the book, Historia Scolastica, rather than the name of its author. Unlike Helinand's Chronicon, Vincent's Speculum Historiale had a considerable influence on West European literature, Latin as well as vernacular. For example, in Vincent's own country, France, it was translated about 1322 by Jean de Vignay, whose Mireur Estorial survives in a considerable number of manuscripts (Ross in his Alexander Historiatus, p.22, lists nine MSS with illustrations). There is no modern edition of Jean's translation, which is in prose. The Groningen group is planning to undertake a study of Book V, which contains Jean's translation of Vincent's Alexander story. Late in the thirteenth century, the prolific Dutch (or Flemish) poet and translator, Jacob van Maerlant, made an incomplete translation, in four-stress rhymed verse, under the title Spiegel Historiael.7 The Alexander material is in Book IV of the first 'Partie'. Maerlant does not include Vincent's long prologue in his translation, but prefixes his own brief prologue, in which he dedicates the work to Count Floris V of Holland (who was murdered in 1296)
Alexander and the Universal Chronicle
3
and promises his audience to translate all the histories in the Speculum Historiale from the Latin 'in sconen worden ende in lichten' (in beautiful and simple words), with an important reservation: Maer die clergie alleene, Diere vele in es gesayt, Willie dat dat paepscap mayt, Want den leeken eist te swaer; Ende oec mede hebbic vaer, Dat des dat paepscap belgen soude, Of ic mi dies onderwinden woude. (1st Partie, Book I, lines 76-82) (But only the learned material, of which much is sown in it, 1 want the clergy to reap, since it is too heavy for the laity; and also I have fears lest it might anger the clergy if I were to undertake that.) Maerlant has indeed omitted much learned matter, but also, contrary to his promise, parts of the Alexander narrative, and has generally simplified his source material so as to make it suitable for a lay audience. Earlier in his career, Maerlant had adapted Gautier de Chatillon's Alexandreis (Alexanders Geesten) and Peter Comestor's Historia Scolastica (Rijmbifbel); in his Spiegel Historiael he makes some interesting, if puzzling, observations on his earlier work on Alexander as compared with Vincent and his own translation. Maerlant's translation had much success, and itself became the source of later adaptations. Members of the Groningen Alexander group are working on a detailed comparison of Vincent's treatment of Alexander and Maerlant's Dutch translation as a pilot project for further investigation of vernacular adaptations of Latin Alexander material. It is hoped that results will become available for publication in the near future. In England, Vincent's compilation was well-known, and Pauline Aiken has traced, in a series of articles and her doctoral dissertation, its influence on Chaucer. There is, however, no Middle English translation of the Speculum Historiale, although it was used as a source text by the Chester monk Ranulph Higden for his universal chronicle Polychronicon, of which the final version can be dated c.1362. Higden's chronicle was translated into English by 3ohn of Trevisa in 1385-1387, and again in the fifteenth century by an anonymous writer Higden's original Latin and the two translations have been edited by C. Babington and J.R. Lumley for the Rolls Series.11 The remainder of this paper will be concerned with the relation between the two chronicle^ accounts of Alexander by Vincent of Beauvais and Ranulph Higden of Chester.
Like the Alexander section in Vincent's work, that in Higden's Polychronicon largely consists of citations from named authors, the sources being identified at the head of each citation. Of course, Higden need not necessarily have had
4
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
direct access to the sources that he claims, and he may well have used one or more florilegia; but so far no text has come to light which Higden could have used in the same way as Vincent uses Helinand. Vincent, that is, in most cases, in reality Helinand, usually quotes his sources in abbreviated form, but with sufficient literalness to make comparison with the original fairly simple. Errors in source ascription are infrequent; the most problematic are the citations said to be from Quintus Curtius and Justinus, or from Quintus Curtius alone, of which only three (in chapters 38, 61 and 63) can be found in that writer's Historia Alexandri Magni;13 four (in chapters 5, 36 and 64) are in fact from Justinus, or rather from a text of Quintus Curtius with interpolations from Justinus,14 and one (in chapter 30) from the Julius Valerius Epitome. Higden treats his sources with much greater freedom; he frequently condenses drastically, and, even when he does not condense, rewrites his source material considerably, sometimes adding information which the named source does not supply. Erroneous source ascriptions are more frequent, which strengthens our suspicion that Higden does not always quote his authorities at first hand; there is some variation between the manuscripts in the matter of source attribution; and it is not always clearly indicated where a new citation begins. Thus on p.406 Higden quotes Tullius (Cicero, De Officiis, 11.53) for Philip's letter to Alexander reproving him for his attempt to buy men's friendship with money, but then continues with the statement that Darius succeeded to the Persian throne. This is not from Cicero, nor from Justinus, who has supplied the citation immediately following, nor from Vincent, whose mention of Darius' accession in chapter 22 differs in various particulars. Later, on p.424, Higden cites 'Justinus, libro sexto' for a letter from Darius to Alexander telling him to go back to his mother's lap, and sending him a whip, a ball, and a purse with gold coins, followed by Alexander's reply. These letters cannot be found in Justinus15 but are given in similar wording by Vincent, chapter 26, taken, via Helinand, from the Historia Alexandri, that is, the Julius Valerius Epitome. This is, incidentally, the only case in his Alexander story where Higden names Justinus; his epitome of the Historiae Philippicae is usually referred to as 'Trogus'. On p.444 a letter to Alexander from the inhabitants of the Maeotidan marshes is given as derived from Trogus Book XII, where I cannot find it; its content is similar to that of a long speech by a Scythian envoy which Quintus Curtius gives in Vll.viii. 12-30, and which is also found separately in some manuscripts of the Florilegium Angelicum.16 It is also found, in abbreviated form, but markedly different from Higden's version, in Vincent, chapter 61 (from Helinand XVIII. 61), but is there attributed to one of Alexander's nobles. What Higden's immediate source may have been, has not become clear to me. The most interesting of these false ascriptions is perhaps the scene of the philosophers at Alexander's grave, who pronounce their platitudinous comments on the futility of the king's achievement in the face of death. This scene is ultimately derived from Petrus Alfonsi's Disciplina Clericalis, whence it found its way into The Diets and Sayings of the Philosophers and into manuscripts of all three versions of the Historia de Preliis.17 Higden has only five philosophers instead of the usual eight or more, and he assures us he takes the scene from Trogus Book XII. It is not clear what his actual source was. The authors cited most frequently in Higden's account of Alexander (which is in Book III, chapters 27 to 30) are Trogus, Peter Comestor and Vincent. The
Alexander and the Universal Chronicle
5
Trogus and Vincent citations will be discussed below. Of the Comestor citations, four are also in Vincent (Higden vol.III pp.412, 418, 450 and vol.IV P-16; Vincent chapters 31, 32, 43, Book VI chapter 1); two of Vincent's Comestor passages are not in Higden (those in chapters 15 and 17); and Higden has five Comestor pieces not in Vincent (vol.III p.410 and vol.IV pp.2, 4, 8 and 10). With one exception, they can all be found in Migne's edition (PL 198, cols 1463-4, 1496-8); but the citation on p.8, which relates how Alexander enters Babylon to receive the 'messangers of the west londes' (Trevisa's translation) is not in Migne's text. Since, however, Comestor's book is often interpolated, it is just conceivable that Higden used such an interpolated text. Occasional citations occur from Josephus, Augustine's De Civitate Dei (the famous anecdote of the pirate Dionides), John of Salisbury's Policraticus, Eutropius, Quintus Curtius (an interpolated text), Jerome, Seneca, Giraldus Cambrensis' Topographia and 'Tullius'. Some of these are also found in Vincent, sometimes ascribed to other sources; but the citations from Josephus, Eutropius and Giraldus are found only in Higden. To a number of comments and anecdotes Higden prefixes his own name Ranuiphus. In his authoritative book, The Universal Chronicle of Ranulf Higden (Oxford 1966), John Taylor tells us that Higden's immediate source for his account of Alexander was the fourth book (Taylor here refers, of course, to the Douai edition of 1624) of Vincent's Speculum Historiale, although he also used additional sources. George Cary, The Medieval Alexander, goes even further, asserting that Higden's narrative, 'besides various unimportant borrowings . . . was largely founded on Vincent' (p.74). We are thus given the impression that Higden did little more than rehash what he found in Vincent, with the addition of some further material. A careful examination of the two chronicle accounts of Alexander, however, shows that such a view is untenable, and that Higden's dependence on Vincent has been overstated. It cannot be denied that Vincent was an important source for Higden's Alexander story. He is cited at length for the story of the begetting of Alexander by Nectanabus, and for the main events of his early years; for Alexander's visit to Darius' court, disguised as a messenger; and finally for his visit to the trees of the sun and the moon, which prophesy his impending death by poison (vol.III pp.392, 398, 430, 478, and vol.IV p.4). There are also some unacknowledged, or falsely ascribed, passages which may go back to Vincent, the most important of which is the first pair of letters between Darius and Alexander referred to above. There is, however, also information given under Vincent's name which cannot be found in any text of the Speculum Historiale, and which must come from another source which I cannot at present identify. Thus on p.4 Higden relates that the trees of the sun and the moon advise Alexander not to go to Babylon, because in that city he will be killed the next year, not through iron, but by poison. This warning, which Higden gives in a passage cited from Vincent, cannot be found in the Speculum Historiale; Vincent does refer to a later warning of similar content in chapter 63, where a magus warns Alexander when he is approaching Babylon. Higden alludes to the warning of the trees in a later citation, on p.8, which he attributes to Comestor, but which, as we said above, cannot be found in Migne's text. As was pointed out above, the authorities cited most frequently and lengthily in Higden are Trogus/Justinus, Comestor and Vincent - in that order. But we must envisage the possibility that Higden derived material cited under
6
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
other names from Vincent as well. When, however, we compare the Trogus citations in Higden with the corresponding parts of Vincent's narrative, we find that Higden more than once gives information which is present in Justinus, but not in Vincent. For instance, in chapter 30 Vincent refers to the different accounts in Justinus (Xl.viii) and the Historia Alexandri (II.8) of Alexander's rash bathe in the ice-cold river Cignus and his recovery thanks to the ministrations of his physician Philip. Here Higden (p.410), who gives only the story as found in Justinus, adds, from Xl.viii.6-9, that Philip had been bribed by Darius, but that Alexander, in spite of warnings against possible poisoning by Philip, trusted him and accepted the medicine administered by him. Again, in chapter 33 Vincent, citing dustinus Book XI (xi.6-9), briefly refers to Alexander's visit to the temple of Ammon, where he bribed the priests to proclaim him as the god's son. Higden here, contrary to his usual practice, represents dustinus' narrative much more fully (p.420). Finally, in chapter 42 Vincent, paraphrasing dustinus Book XII (iii.8-12), relates how Alexander adopted Persian dress and Persian manners, and changed his way of living for the worse. He then continues with some instances of Alexander's wanton cruelty towards his followers, taken from dustinus XII.v. Higden, however, includes also the intervening chapter from dustinus, where Alexander encourages his soldiers to marry captive women (pp.436-440). We may, it seems, conclude that Higden cannot have derived his dustinus material, which constitutes a considerable proportion of his Alexander story, from Vincent, but must have had independent access to dustinus, or at least to copious extracts from his work as might be found in a florilegium.18 Higden's Alexander story is considerably shorter than that of Vincent. He achieves this greater brevity by mostly giving condensed paraphrases of his source materials, and by omitting much of the story as Vincent has it. Thus he omits all information about the philosophers, which in Vincent occupies ten chapters out of seventy-one, and about Alexander's travels in India and its mirabilia, to which eight chapters are devoted in Vincent; not that Higden despises the mirabilia, for he devotes some attention to them in his geographical introduction in Book I. Much material more central to the Alexander story is also absent from Higden's account. On the other hand, Vincent treats the contacts between Alexander and the Brahman king Dindimus relatively briefly in an appendix which is not derived from Helinand as we have his work. This appendix consists of an Epilogus de pace Bragmanorum cum Alexandro (chapter 66) and a series of five letters which goes back, in abbreviated form, to the Collatio cum Dindimo (chapters 67-71). In the epilogus we are told that Alexander plans to conquer the island of the Brahmans, but receives a letter from them which leads him to abandon the plan. This letter is not from the Collatio, although it is largely made up of material which is also found in the Collatio. A passage closely similar to Vincent's epilogus is found in John of Salisbury's Policraticus IV.xi.534a-b,19 but an immediate source for Vincent's epilogus has not been found. Nor does he claim a source; both the epilogus and the five letters are given under the heading Actor. Higden has a much longer account of the contacts between Alexander and the Brahmans; he gives to this episode a whole chapter out of a total of four for the entire Alexander story, and places it between the battle with Porus and the visit to the trees of the sun and the moon. Higden, too, does not claim a source. His version opens with a passage which closely
Alexander and the Universal Chronicle
7
resembles Vincent's epilogus, but what in Vincent is a letter from the Brahmans is in Higden the first half of a letter from Dindimus to Alexander. It is followed by excerpts from the Collatio, but different ones from those in Vincent; in Higden Dindimus writes three letters and Alexander two, and Dindimus has the last word. The letters are followed by a visit of Onesicritus to Dindimus with an imperious message from Alexander, which fails to impress the Brahman king. In the end Alexander, omni remota pompa (Trevisa translates, 'Alisaundre lefte of al pompe and pride'), goes to Dindimus in person and asks to be taught wisdom, offering costly presents in return. Dindimus accepts only the oil, which he pours into the fire, hymnumque Deo cecinit (in Trevisa's translation, 'and song an ympne to God alle-my 3ty'). This part of Higden's story is ultimately derived from the Palladius tradition, but what its immediate source was, is still unknown. What has become clear, however, is that, apart perhaps from the opening passage, Higden's Brahman episode cannot have been taken from Vincent, and that it furnishes further evidence of Higden's relative independence from the Speculum Historiale. There is also a striking difference in the accounts that our two chroniclers give of the chronology of Alexander's campaigns and conquests. In Vincent, after subduing the Greek cities, he first goes to Thracia, Lycaonia, Sicily and Italy, from there to Egypt and then to Syria (chapters 23-25). In Higden he fights the battle of the Granicus and conquers Lydia, Iconium, Pamphilia and Sardis, before turning to Syria (pp.410-418), which accords better with what is now believed to be the historical order of events. The battle of the Granicus and most of the conquests in Asia Minor are derived from Comestor (PL 198, col. 1496); we can only speculate on the reasons which moved Higden to prefer the very brief reference in the Historia Scolastica to 3ustinus' account, which does not mention the Granicus, but localises the battle on the Adrasteian plain (XI.vi.10).20 What we can again safely infer is that the broad outline of Higden's narrative was not derived from Vincent. Two further points need to be made. First, Higden refers for his first Vincent citation to the fifth Book. This implies that he must have used, directly or indirectly, a copy of the Speculum Historiale in which the prologue is counted, together with the table of contents, as the first Book, the Speculum proper beginning with Book II. More importantly, Higden appears to cite Vincent only in the four chapters of his Alexander story and in his list of sources which follows the prefatory matter. I must perforce rely here on the Index Nominum at the end of the Rolls Series edition, which I have not checked against the voluminous text itself. There may be various reasons why Higden should have used Vincent only for his Alexander story. For instance, he may have had access only to this one book of the Speculum Historiale. But it also shows that Vincent's work was not of central importance to Higden's conception of the
Polychronicon. *
*
*.
In the above I have attempted to show that Cary's view, which seems to have become the usual one, that Higden's account of Alexander is fundamentally the same as that of Vincent, with some unimportant additions, cannot be maintained. I cannot claim to have solved any problems regarding Higden's sources or the use that he made of them; indeed, I have raised problems
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
8
rather than solved any. There would seem to be ample opportunities for future research here. If Vincent cannot have supplied the backbone of Higden's Alexander story, who can? We might perhaps consider an alternative hypothesis. Possibly Higden based his account of Alexander primarily, but not necessarily at first hand, on Justinus, whom he cites most frequently and most copiously, and had resource to Vincent chiefly for such 'legendary' matter - the story of Alexander's begetting and birth, his murder of Nectanabus, his visit in disguise to Darius' court, his consultation of the trees of the sun and the moon - as he wished, for some reason or other, to include, but also, probably, for the first exchange of letters with Darius. He may have relied on Comestor, whom he cites frequently but never at great length, as a subsidiary source, and on his 'minor' authorities for anecdotes, incidental information, moral asides, etc. This hypothesis would need to be tested against the background of Higden's procedures elsewhere in his chronicle. So far, Higden's Polychronicon has not received much attention from Alexander scholars. Our two basic tools of research, for which we all thank Professor Ross, mention it only in passing. Yet Taylor's book on the Polychronicon as well as David Fowler's more recent discussion in the final chapter of his The Bible in Early English Literature (London, 1977) recognise the importance of Higden's treatment of Alexander as typical of his outlook. One of the things that I hope this paper has made clear is that Higden's great chronicle would repay more scholarly activity than has been bestowed upon it so far.
NOTES In this paper I have made considerable use, without further acknowledgement, of the findings of my fellow members of the interdisciplinary research group on Alexander in the Middle Ages in the University of Groningen. The paper has profited greatly from their friendly help and criticism. For the views that it expresses, and for the imperfections that it still contains, I am, however, alone responsible. 1.
George Cary, The Medieval Alexander, edited by D.3.A. Ross (Cambridge, 1956, reprinted 1967).
2.
D.3.A.
3.
Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages: Ten Studies on the Last Days of Alexander in Literary and Historical Writing, edited by W.3. Aerts, 3os.
Ross, Alexander Historiatus: A Guide to Medieval Illustrated Alexander Literature, Warburg Institute Surveys, 1 (London, 1963). D.3.A. Ross, 'Alexander Historiatus: A Supplement', Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 30 (1967), 383-388.
M.M. Hermans, Elizabeth Visser, 1978). 4.
Mediaevalia Groningana,
1
(Nijmegen,
The most recent, and not very satisfactory, edition of the Speculum Maius was published by the Benedictines of Douai in 1624; this edition was
Alexander and the Universal Chronicle
9
reprinted in 1968. The need for a modern critical edition was eloquently argued by B.L. Ullmann in his article 'A Project for a New Edition of Vincent of Beauvais', Speculum, 8 (1933), 312-326. The prologue has recently been the subject of two studies, both of which also give an edition: Anna-Dorothee von den Brincken, 'Geschichtsbetrachtung bei Vincenz von Beauvais: Die Apologia Actoris zum Speculum Maius, Deutsches Archiv fiirErforschung des Mittelalters, 34 (1978), 410-499; and Serge Lusignan, Preface au Speculum Maius de Vincent de Beauvais: Refraction et diffraction, Cahiers d'Etudes Medievales, 5 (Montreal and Paris, 1979). 5.
In the Douai edition, which is the text most commonly cited, the Alexander material is contained in Book IV. In many other printed versions and MSS, however, and in a two-volume incunable in the library of the University of Groningen, which is thought to have been printed by Adolf Rusch of Strasbourg c. 1473, the Alexander story is in Book V. This is also the case in many medieval texts which adapt Vincent's work or use it as a source. The Groningen group has chiefly used this incunable. It counts the Prologue and the table of contents as Book I. In the Douai edition this Prologue, which belongs to the Speculum Maius as a whole rather than to the Speculum Historiale alone, is not included in the volume which contains that Speculum. This explains why there the Alexander story is in Book IV.
6. See
Monique Paulmier-Foucart, 'L'Atelier Vincent de Beauvais: Recherches sur l'etat des connaissances au Moyen Age d'apres une encyclopedie du XHIe siecle', Le Moyen Age, 85 (1979), 87-99.
7.
Jacob van Maerlant, Spiegel Historiael, edited by M. de Vries and E. Verwijs, 3 vols. (Leiden, 1857-62).
8.
See K.R. de Graaf, 'The Last Days of Alexander in Maerlant's Alexanders Geesten' in Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages (see note 3), 234-237.
9.
Pauline Aiken, 'Arcite's Illness and Vincent of Beauvais', PMLA, 51 (1936), 361-369; 'The Summoner's Malady', Studies in Philology, 33 (1936), 40-44; 'Vincent of Beauvais and Chaucer's Knowledge of Alchemy', Studies in Philology, 41 (1944), 371-389; 'Vincent of Beauvais and Dame Pertelote's Knowledge of Medicine', Speculum, 10 (1935), 281-287; 'Vincent of Beauvais and the Green Yeoman's Lecture on Demonology', Studies in Philology, 25 (1938), 1-9; 'Vincent of Beauvais and the "houres" of Chaucer's Physician', Studies in Philology, 53 (1956), 22-24. I owe this list to an article by Joseph M. McCarthy in Newsletter: Vincent of Beauvais, 1978. This Newsletter is issued by Professor Gregory G. Guzman of Bradley University, Peoria, Illinois 61625, USA. To McCarthy's list we should add, 'Chaucer's Legend of Cleopatra and the Speculum Historiale’, Speculum, 13 (1938), 232-236; 'Vincent of Beauvais and Chaucer's Monk's Tale', Speculum, 17 (1942), 56-68.
10. Pauline Aiken, 'The Influence of the Speculum Maius of Vincent of Beauvais on the Works of Chaucer' (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1934). 11. Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden Monachi Cestrensis; together with the English translations of John Trevisa and of an unknown writer of the
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
10
fifteenth century, edited by Churchill Babington (vols. 1 and 2) and Rev. Joseph Rawson Lumley (vols. 3-9). Rolls Series 4-1 (London, 1865-1886, reprinted 1964). 12. References to Vincent are to chapters of Book V in the Groningen incunable (see note 5). References to Higden are to pages of vols. Ill (for pp.392-478) and IV (for pp.2-16) of the Rolls Series edition (see note 11). 13.1 have used the edition of E. Hedicke (Leipzig, 1908). 14. One of the members of the Gromngen group, E.R. Smits, is at present working on the Quintus Curtius interpolations. 15. I have used the edition of Otto Seel (Leipzig, 1935). 16. See R.H. Rouse and M.A. Rouse, 'The Florilegium Angelicum: its Origin, Content and Influence', in Medieval Learning and Literature. Essays presented to Richard William Hunt, edited by 3.J.G. Alexander and M.T. Gibson (Oxford, 1976), pp.66-114. 'Die Historia de Preliis Rezeptionsgeschichtliche Probleme', in Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages (see note 3).
17. On
manuscripts
Alexandn Magni,
of HdeP I2 see E.R. Smits, Rezension I2 im Mittelalter:
18. As appears from R.M. Wilson's chapter 'The Contents of the Medieval Library' in The English Library before 1700: Studies in its History, edited by Francis Wormald and C.E. Wright (London, 1958), many English monastic libraries possessed a copy of Justinus. That there was at least one Justinus florilegium becomes clear from Franz Ruhl, Die Verbreitung des Justinus im Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1871), esp. p.18. 19. John of Salisbury, reprinted 1965).
Policraticus, edited by C.C.I.
Webb
(London,
1909,
20. Helinand (XVIII. 10) and Vincent (chapter 27) also refer to Justinus' account of the battle in campis Adrestis, but mostly follow the confused story of the Julius Valerius Epitome (1.36-41).
The Close of the Cantar de Mio Cid: Epic Tradition and Individual Variation Alan Deyermond The last major section of the Cantar de Mio Cid - the court hearing at Toledo which vindicates the hero, and the duels which ratify that decision - may be viewed in three ways. First, this is a dramatic personal confrontation in which heroes defeat villains (the poet's criterion for distinguishing between good and bad is simple: is a character loyal or hostile to the Cid?). Secondly, the court scene and the duels present in personal terms a political and social conflict, ending in a decisive shift of power from an old, increasingly corrupt and ineffectual, higher nobility to the new class of infanzones, represented by the Cid, and a similar shift of power from the old kingdom of Leon to the new, previously subordinate, kingdom of Castile.1 The higher nobility of Castile is represented by the Cid's enemy Garcia Ordonez; that of Leon by the Cid's sons-in-law, the Infantes de Carrion. These open or covert enemies, the 'malos mestureros' who caused the hero's banishment, are shown to be ineffectual militarily (the Cid, lines 3281-90, taunts Garcia Ordonez with the defeat after which his beard was pulled out), politically (their conduct and the Cid's courage and loyalty have transformed King Alfonso's attitude so that he is now a steadfast supporter of the hero), intellectually (they are outwitted in the court scene), economically (the Infantes have spent the dowries, and to make reparation to the Cid are compelled to pay in kind and then to borrow money, 3236-49), and perhaps even sexually (there are some indications in the text that the Infantes' marriages to the Cid's daughters are consummated belatedly and only in the excitement of an impending act of sadism).2 Their defeat by the Cid's champions in the duels, and the betrothal of the hero's daughters to the future kings of Navarre and Aragon, confirm and emphasize the Cid's rise to a position of supreme honour. We must, of course, remember that this is a poetic fiction. The Cid of the Cantar has much in common with the historical Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar, but they are not identical. The political and social changes in the Cantar are probably more spectacular, and certainly more rapid, than in the historical reality of medieval Castile. Within the poetic fiction, however, changes of the kind I have described are brought to vivid and memorable life by the poet's use of structural and stylistic techniques. Both of these aspects - the personal confrontation of good and evil, the presentation of social and political changes - may be observed when one comes to the Cantar without experience of any other epic poetry. The third way in which the closing section of the Cantar may be viewed depends on a knowledge of epic tradition: unless we are aware of the poet's modifications of that tradition, we shall miss an important aspect of his art. The poet of Mio Cid makes a subtle and highly individual use of the resources offered to him by Spanish and French epic tradition - so subtle and so individual that his dependence on tradition has often been underestimated. It is, for example,
12
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
easy to miss his use of folk-motifs, but they are there none the less. His formulaic style owes a substantial debt to the oral past of the Spanish epic, though not so substantial as to support a belief that the Cantar itself was composed orally.1* Composition by motif is used, though again in a way that indicates a literate poet working in a formerly oral medium. Features of epic plot which occur in widely separated cultures are found, usually with a marked difference, in the Cantar. My chief concern in this article is the treatment of such plot elements in the closing section of the Cantar, but one earlier instance may serve as a reminder that they occur throughout the poem. Epic heroes are often faced with a momentous choice in circumstances which make it impossible to take a wholly right decision. Whether they realize it or not, they have a choice of evils. This tragic dilemma, or disastrous choice, is discussed by Bowra, with examples from Old Norse, Middle High German, and Yugoslav works.6 It faces the Cid, though in a muted form, when King Alfonso lends his support to the suggestion of the Infantes de Carrion that they should marry Elvira and Sol, the hero's daughters. The Cid has misgivings about the Infantes: 'Elios son mucho urgullosos e an part en la cort'.7 For that reason, 'd'este casamiento non avria sabor' (1939). However, as the Cid explains to his daughters: pedidas vos ha e rrogadas el mio senor Alfonso atan firmemientre e de todo coragon que yo nulla cosa nol' sope dezir de no. (2200-02) This is not as feeble as one might think. Alfonso's sponsorship of the marriage plan is a gesture of reconciliation, a symbol of the acceptance of the exiled hero and his family into Castilian society once more. If it is rejected, that reintegration is blemished, and that will harm Elvira and Sol as much as their father. This is not, therefore, a choice between family affection and political interest, but rather between two actions, both of which carry some risk to the girls' interests (there is, of course, no way in which the Cid could foresee how the Infantes would turn out: the worst he knows of them is their pride). Either decision would be a wrong one. The wrong decision that is made, the acceptance of the Infantes as sons-in-law, leads to the outrage in the oakwood of Corpes, but that in turn binds Alfonso more closely to the Cid, and opens the way to far better marriages. The Cantar is that rarity, an epic with a happy ending, and the disastrous choice proves disastrous only in the medium term. The Cid says to his daughters: 'Buen casamiento perdiestes, mejor podredes ganar' (2867), and so it turns out when the girls marry the princes of Navarre and Aragon. The barbarous and potentially lethal attack by the Infantes de Carrion on their young wives, the afrenta de Corpes, is seen by the villains as revenge for an insult: 'La desondra del leon assis ira vengando' (2762). To the Cid and his followers - and to the poet - it is an unprovoked outrage which cries aloud for vengeance. The events of the poem from the incident of the escaped lion onwards thus follow the familiar epic pattern of insult or supposed insult which leads to an act of treacherous violence, which is in turn avenged by the hero or his surviving representatives.8 Ganelon, furious at what he takes to be a slight offered by Roland, plots with the Moorish king to destroy Roland and the French rearguard; the plot succeeds, but Ganelon is brought to justice and
The Close of the 'Cantor de Mio Cid'
13
suffers an agonizing form of execution. In the Nibelungenlied, Brunhild is convinced that Siegfried has betrayed the humiliating secret of her wedding night, and she incites his treacherous murder by Hagen; his widow Kriemhild bides her time, and the killers perish in a general slaughter which engulfs even Kriemhild herself. In the lost Spanish epic of Siete infantes de Lara (the plot is preserved in great detail by chronicles of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries), Doha Lambra twice takes offence at the behaviour of her nephew Gonzalo Gonzalez, and when the men she chooses to deliver a counter-insult are killed, she persuades her husband Ruy Velazquez to arrange the killing of Gonzalo Gonzalez and his six brothers. The plan succeeds, but an attempt to have their father, Gonzalo Gustioz, killed not only fails but leads to the begetting of an avenger, Mudarra, and hence to the death by torture of Ruy Velazquez and, in one version, to the execution of Lambra. It would be easy to extend the list, but it is unnecessary. In all of these cases, the recipient of the real or imagined insult is related, usually by marriage, to the offender; the offender is treacherously killed to wipe out the shame of the insult; and the traitor is put to death in circumstances of memorable atrocity. The Cantar de Mio Cid clearly makes use of this pattern to provide the basic plot of its second half, just as its first half is based on the equally familiar epic pattern of exile and return. Yet the divergence from the pattern is obvious. The Infantes de Carrion are related by marriage to the supposed author of the insult: they hold their father-in-law responsible for their disgrace in the episode of the lion, and for the ridicule which follows ('non viestes tal juego commo iva por la cort', 2307). On this belief depends everything that follows: the afrenta de Corpes, the court at Toledo, the duels. The belief, however, is not merely erroneous but irrational. In the other epics I have mentioned - Chanson de Roland, Nibelungenlied, Siete infantes de Lara - the furious reaction to insult is exaggerated, but it has some rational basis. In the Cantar de Mio Cid, that basis is wholly lacking. The Infantes de Carrion are the sole authors of their disgrace in the lion episode: they are cowardly when the Cid's followers are brave, and they are found in humiliating and ludicrous hiding-places. When the Cid's followers laugh at them, the Cid intervenes to protect his sons-in-law ('mando lo vedar Mio £id el Campeador', 2308).9 He, therefore, has not the slightest degree of responsibility for their discomfiture, yet they convince themselves that the fault is his. This forms part of their progressive dissociation from reality, of the irrationality which increasingly controls their actions.10 Nor is this the only symptom. The Infantes persuade themselves that they have been dishonoured by their marriage to the daughters of a lesser noble, and that this dishonour too must be washed away by blood: Por los montes do ivan ellos Ivanse alabando: 'De nuestros casamientos agora somos vengados;^ non las deviemos tomar por varraganas si non fuessemos rrogados, pues nuestras parejas non eran pora en bragos.' (2757-61) Yet these marriages, which the Infantes now see as an intolerable insult, were their own idea; they prevailed on King Alfonso to support the idea, and to convince the Cid of its advantages. Resentment over the marriages is, however, a secondary motive for the
14
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
afrenta de Corpes, and it is the lion episode which dominates their planning of the afi'enta, becoming the subject of obsessive repetition: Sacar las hemos de Valencia de poder del Campeador, despues en la carrera feremos nuestro sabor, ante que nos rretrayan lo que cuntio del leon . . . (2546-48) AssI las escarniremos a las fijas del Campeador, antes que nos rretrayan lo que fue del leon.
(2555-56)
and which is the only explanation offered to the victims: Bien lo creades, don Elvira e dona Sol, aqul seredes escarnidas en estos fieros montes. Oy nos partiremos e dexadas seredes de nos, non abredes part en tierras de Carrion. Iran aquestos mandados al £id Campeador, nos vengaremos por aquesta la desondra del leon.
(2714-19)
This, of course, is a second important departure from the traditional pattern: not merely do the Infantes create their own disgrace and blame the Cid for it, but they take revenge by a treacherous attack on substitute victims. Roland, Siegfried, and Gonzalo Gonzalez are the targets of the ^traitors' attacks, and all of them are killed. In Siete infantes Gonzalo Gonzalez's six brothers are also killed, and in Roland many French knights fall with the central hero, but this is incidental to the achieved aim of the traitor in each case. In Mio Cid, there is no attempt to kill or wound the supposed author of the insult (except emotionally, through the attack on his daughters). A third divergence from the pattern is implied in what has just been said: the victims of the afrenta de Corpes are wounded and abandoned, but they are not killed. Indeed, it is unlikely that the Infantes intended to kill them. Even these cowardly and ineffectual young men are, when fully armed, able to kill two defenceless girls, and the fact that they do not do so (although, of course, the girls might have died of their injuries) indicates lack of intention. It suits their purpose much better that Elvira and Sol should live with their dishonour.11 This departure from the pattern is, I think, essential for the way in which the poet handles the last section of his work, the hero's revenge. We have already seen that the treacherous killers Ganelon, Hagen, and Ruy Velazquez are put to death (in the first two cases, many of their supporters are also killed). The killing of Ganelon follows a trial for treason, whereas that of Hagen and of Ruy Velazquez is an act of individual retribution. In the Cantar de Mio Cid, epic vengeance takes the form - as far as I know, unprecedented - of a civil action for damages. The court that hears the Cid's complaints against the Infantes is of a very different kind from the one that tries Ganelon. The dramatic power of this potentially bathetic legal action is a striking testimony to the poet's skill: we never stop to question whether this is a suitable way for an epic hero to take his revenge.12 The court hearing is followed by judicial duels in which the Cid's loyal followers defeat the Infantes and their brother, thereby confirming the court's vindication of the Cid. It is noteworthy that of the four ways in which a judicial duel could be decided,
The Close of the 'Cantar de Mio Cid'
15
only one is omitted by the poet: the death of one of the contestants. In the first duel, the wounded Fernan Gonzalez yields to Pero Bermudez. In the second, the other Infante, Diego, is wounded by Martin Antollnez and flees from the duelling field. In the third, their brother Asur Gonzalez is so seriously wounded by Muno Gustioz that his family yields on his behalf. But none of them is killed.13 This merciful treatment of the villains is extraordinary in the context of world epic. It is, of course, made possible by the absence of killing in the afrenta de Corpes: had either Elvira or Sol died, the Cid would inevitably have insisted on the death of the murderers. But even in cases where there is no murder, it seems normal for the hero's vengeance on his enemies to take the form of killing. Odysseus is, as has been pointed out by Hart, similar to the Cid in his combination of fortitudo and sapientia.lk These are among the very few epic heroes who prefer to think their way out of a crisis whenever possible; they avoid unnecessary bloodshed. Yet when Odysseus returns to Ithaca, and finds that the suitors are besieging Penelope and wasting his resources, he kills them and then hangs the maidservants who abetted them. The Cid, under much grosser provocation, is content to ask for the return of his swords, then to demand the repayment of the dowries, and finally to lodge a formal accusation of dishonour (menos vaZer). Does this imply weakness or lack of resolution? There is no sign of it in the Cantar. On the contrary, the Cid pursues with skill and single-minded determination an outcome which is wholly satisfactory to him and to his daughters. Perfect justice is seen to be done.15 The Infantes de Carrion had viciously beaten the Cid's daughters because of the supposed insult of the lion episode, and now they are punished by the revelation of that episode to the King and the great nobles who are present at the Toledo court: Pero Bermudez taunts Fernan Gonzalez, and Martin Antollnez taunts Diego, with ail the details of their cowardice (3329-42, 3363-66). Moreover, the details of Fernando's cowardice in battle against the Moors, hitherto concealed even from the Cid by Pero Bermudez's generosity, are published to the court (3315-28). The secondary motive for the afrenta is the Infantes' wish to rid themselves of wives whom they regard as unworthy, and to wipe out what they claim to be the insult of being forced to marry girls who were not fit even to be their mistresses. The result of the afrenta is, however, by dissolving the marriages, to rid Elvira and Sol of unworthy husbands. The Cid can now receive in open court the request that his daughters should marry princes of Navarre and Aragon. The Infantes claim in court that they should marry royalty: De natura somos de condes de Carrion, deviemos casar con fijas de rreyes o de enperadores, ca non perteneqien fijas de ifanqones. (3296-98) Only a hundred lines later, the Navarrese and Aragonese envoys arrive. Elvira and Sol are about to become royalty by marriage, and the Cid's chief lieutenant Alvar Fanez at once points the moral: Esto gradesco yo al Criador quando piden mis primas don Elvira e dona Sol
16
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic los ifantes de Navarra e de Aragon. Antes las aviedes parejas pora en bravos las tener, agora besaredes sus manos e llamar las hedessenoras aver las hedes a servir, mal que vos pese a vos.
treacherous violence, and vengeance as the starting-point for the second half of his work. He does not abandon the pattern, but rather adapts it, replacing the traditional killing-avenged-by-killing with a subtler, more delicately balanced sequence of offence and punishment. Both the use of the tradition and its modification seem to me to be conscious artistic choices. Epic poets often follow traditional patterns without apparently being aware that they are doing so. Albert Lord has, for example, shown that the incorporation of the Baligant episode in the Chanson de Roland is probably the result of what he terms mythic necessity, which gives Roland a plot structure similar to that of the first half of Beowulf.16 Necessity of this kind operates at times, I believe, in Mio Cid: the appearance of the Infantes' brother Asur Gonzalez in the court scene is not required by the necessities of the plot or of character development. He seems to be introduced merely in order to provide a third duel, because three is a favourite number for narrative units in a traditional tale.17 I think it unlikely that the poet realized this. It seems much more likely that he was unconsciously following a traditional path. The^same^ may be true of one line in the description of the third duel: when Muno Gustioz wounds Asur Gonzalez, 'Todos se cuedan que ferido es de muert' (3688) - it seems as if the traditional scene of killing which the poet consciously avoids has unconsciously affected his choice of words. This, however, can hardly be the case with the modifications of the vengeance pattern discussed above; too much careful adjustment is involved. The poet's individual variation of his inherited pattern gives emphasis to two of the poem's themes: the hero's mesura, and the transformation of sorrow into joy. The Cid's restraint in his vengeance shows prudence and mercy as well as power. The absence of killing at the end liberates the emotions of the audience from a preoccupation with the fate of the villains, and concentrates attention on the happy outcome, in which the Cid's honour continues to increase steadily even after his death: iVed qual ondra crege al
This technique is obviously of particular usefulness in epics of revolt,10 of which Girart de Vienne is a paradigmatic example (although this fact has been largely missed in the literature on this sub-genre). Girart de Roussillon is, if the arguments rehearsed above are accepted, the earliest of the group and it is perhaps to be considered as transitional between the ethos of the Cycle de Guillaume and that of the Cycle de Boon de Maience. It uses the structure of a typical epic of revolt - the vassal who falls from high favour and is forced into revolt by the monarch, is besieged in his castle as part of a long period of hostilities and finally makes peace - but it uses the pattern only in order to show, by the study of an extreme case, that the vassal is never justified in taking up arms against his lord. The king-figure is painted as black as is imaginable, and becomes vindictive to a degree which exceeds even Charles in Renaut de Montauban and La Chevalerie Ogier, in order to make this moral lesson as stark and austere as possible. There is a personal element in the hostility of Charles Martel towards Girart de Roussillon which is very necessary to the poet, who needs to keep his hero under constant royal pressure both before and after his conversion in the forest. It is this personal hatred which makes the King ready to override his wisest counsellors and attack Girart almost as soon as the agreement over the latter's status as an alleutier is made (laisse L),11 which makes him react negatively and even violently to repeated attempts to establish a peace (e.g. laisses CXXVI, CCCLXXIII, CCCCLXIII ff.), which makes him automatically suspect the worst when Thierry and his sons are murdered (laisse CCXII), in spite of the apparently solid friendship established in the period between the two wars (cf. laisse CCI). It explains the way in which Charles resorts to treason (laisses LXIV ff., CCCCXXI ff.) and to encouraging ambushes against Girart (laisses CCXVII, DLIV ff.). It expresses itself in physical symptoms (which later poets imitate): he becomes black with rage (e.g. 864, 7969), changes colour (8256), burns with anger (8824), cannot speak (4743-46), rages 'com Alamanz' (3707) and, in a symbolic but psychologically true gesture, closes his eyes in frustration (1777, 1785). His expressions of hatred are vivid, e.g. 'laire futers' (2099), 'Fils a putein, perjures, filz de jasau' (3664), 'glot pusnais' (7977). The hypocrisy and ill-controlled anger which alternate in laisses DXLVII-DL are very typical and, coming late in the poem, show the enduring and unchanging loathing which Charles bears towards Girart. It is in motivating this particularly personal hatred that the poet uses the 'cocktail-shaker technique'. The exchange of fiancees forced by Charles upon
50
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
Girart gives the author the opportunity of injecting some sexual jealousy into what is otherwise a feudal, if unusual, situation. Girart's pride - already in evidence in this episode, as we realise perhaps with hindsight when the burning of the banners at Vaubeton is expounded1 - demands not only that he be relieved of all homage, but that he assure himself that his original betrothed, Elissent, does not think the worse of him for agreeing to the King's wishes. This is stressed both before and after the marriage. 'Cui volet melz, donzele, mei o cest rei? - Se Deus m'ajut, charz saigne, eu am plus tei. - Se m'agu(i)ssaz orguel dit ne desrei, 3a mais ne vos tangest dojoste sei. Er le prendez, donzele, eu t'ou autrei; Eu prendrai ta seror per amor tei.'
(463-68)
'Que m'en direz, muillier d'amperador, D'achest cange qu'ai fait de vos a lor? Bien sai que m'en tenez por sordeor. - Seiner, mais de grant preiz e de valor. Vos m'avez fait relne, e ma seror Avez pres a muillier per meie amor. Bertolais e Gervais, qu'es riu contor, Vos m'en siaz ostage e lui autor, E vos, ma char(e) seur, ma tan fesor, E en apres 3esu lo redemptor, Que do in per ist anel au due m'amor; E doins li de mon oscle l'aurieflor, Que plus l'aim ke mon paire ne mon seinor.' Au soupartir non pout mudar non plor.
(574-87)
So we realise that Girart has indeed retained the love of Elissent while receiving that of Berthe also. At once, the poet tells us that the love between Girart and the Queen was to survive pure and chaste, but that the King became so jealous that he used another pretext in order to attack him:13 Aisi duret tos tens l'amor des dous, Sanz nule malvaistat qui ainc i fous, Fors bone voluntat e sang rescous. E per hoc s'en fu Carles tan enviious, Tot per autre auchaison ce li met jous An(z) fu au due tan fers e tan irous, Per quan ferent batailles per plans erbou(u)s, Qu'en i at tant des mors, fei ke dei vos, Que li vif sunt restat tan tenebrous, Qu'ainc pois non fu parlaz moz amorous.
(588-97)
This strange, chaste yet ambiguous relationship is revived at the end of the poem, when Girart returns from exile to find Elissent (in a splendid and evocative moment of chiaroscuro) praying on Good Friday in church:
The 'Cocktail-Shaker Technique' in Two Chansons de Geste E Girarz se levet, lau es venguz. A un autar desoz uns arvoluz La la trobet orent a pau de luz.
51
(7819-21)
Once his identity is ascertained: Onques lai(s) lo devenrens n'i fu gardaz; En is loc fu Girarz set veiz baisaz.
(7843-44)
The Queen assures him that she can do what she likes with Charles (7869) and repeatedly gets round the latter by using her attractiveness (undiminished, of course, like Penelope's, by the effluxion of epic time); the King is conscious of being manipulated, but can only comply and then accuse her of bewitching him (laisses DXLVII-DXLIX, DLI, DCVI-DCVII, DCXI-DCXIII). The disadvantage at which Charles finds himself is well illustrated by one line: Per contrailes qu'en dist li fait poor.
(8889)
The poet thus remains clearly conscious of the datum which he has created when he re-introduces the Queen for the last part of the epic, but his earlier use of the Girart-Elissent relationship and the King's jealousy is equally conscious and corresponds to the technique under discussion. As in Girart de Vienne, there is the older motif, characteristic of the Girart poems, of the great magnate claiming to rule as allodia vast areas of the Empire, who is equal to the King but for the crown, who refuses to come to court.111 This is made quite clear as one strand in the King's thinking: E qui aleu m'o quert, lai m'arazone. Lo reiame desfait e despersone; Eu non(c) ai plus de lui fors la corone.
(564-66)
But laisse XLVI also illustrates the 'cocktail-shaker technique' in the way in which it juxtaposes these territorial second-thoughts with the Queen's warning Girart about her husband's moves: Carles a cor valent e cuer felon; E dist non soufre par en sa reion. Furent o lui si conte e si baron, E son ob es lor muetes e lor bracon. E trespassent Ardane e bois d'Argon, E per hoc sci ant pres prou venacon. La relne ou apres e mandet Ion Girart, qu'ere se gart de traition.
(647-54)
The whole series from laisse XXXI to laisse XLV1I ff. intercalates the motifs of sexual and territorial jealousy, as can be shown schematically thus (sexual jealousy motif in italics): XXXI, XXXIII, XXXIV, XXXV, XXXVI, XXXV///XXXVII, XXXIX, XL, XLII, XLIII, XLIV, XLV, XLVI/XLVI, XLVII. The King is not slow to realise the irresponsibility, in feudal as well as marital terms, with which he has acted and almost immediately begins to threaten to
52
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
,ou»rcA thP situation.
He speaks in territorial and feudal language, but the
territorial comment from Charles: 'Seiner', co dist li cons, 'ojaz mon deit: Pois Carles est tan lieus c'on le mescret, Se midonne fai tort ne enneleit, Qu'eu li poisse ajudar de tot son dreit.' Co dist tote la cors qu'el faire ou deit. 'Eu l'autrei', co dist Carles, 'sobre ma feit.' E pois dist a conseil, a son recheit: 'Trop m'a Girarz is cons d'ifs) plait destreit; Mais eu li cuit car vendre, quore que seit.'
(526-34)
Equally indicative of the poet's method is the way in which he speaks of 'vengeance': Ajudez me venjar dunt plus me duel, Qu'eu vos am plus assaz qu(e] eu ne suel.
(638-39)
Vengeance is an inappropriate word in the political context, but a revealing one on the psychological level. The poet of Girart de Roussillon is a much subtler writer than many of his contemporaries, and his accuracy in psychological matters is remarkable. He uses the cocktail shaker not, like his more obvious colleague Bertrand, to prejudice the audience against the King's territorial claims, but rather to motivate the peculiarly tenacious and vindictive hatred which he needs for his king-figure. He proposes to show at Vaubeton that the territorial advantages demanded by Girart at the exchange of fiancees are in fact extortionate and destructive of feudal order, so that the King's comments at lines 565-66 are shown to be true enough; but he also shows us that the King, too, is at fault, saying the right thing for the wrong reason and rationalising his jealousy with territorial second-thoughts which happen to be correct but which were far from his mind when he leapt at a bargain neither man should have struck. With deft and able strokes of the brush or, to keep to our metaphor, some judicious mixing and a brief shake, the poet motivates a searing hatred based ultimately on sexual jealousy, for nothing less personal will serve his lofty moral purpose: to push Girart to the brink of damnation and then to make his sanctification a long and laborious process, commensurate with the enormity of the destruction wrought in France by two intransigent men, proud and full of hatred. If Girart's redemption is to be complete and meaningful, it must contrast with, and be constantly menaced by, an undying hatred. The technique I have sought to analyse in this paper credibly starts the process which then gathers its own momentum and the reintroduction of the cajoling Queen with Girart's return to chivalric life is a 'refresher' adequate for the purpose of keeping the King's hatred alive even after all the years which have elapsed. Only with the sacrificial slaying of Girart's son by Gui de Risnel and the consequent turning of Girart and Berthe towards the way of sanctity is the
The 'Cocktail-Shaker Technique' in Two Chansons de Geste
53
role of Charles and his jealousy finally made redundant, and he disappears from the story for the hagiographic ending. Even the most cunning of cocktails no doubt appealed less to this very remarkable author than the odour of sanctity.
NOTES 1.
For the dating of Girart de Vienne, the detailed discussion of earlier views and arguments for 1180-83 in my University of London thesis (1963, Chapter III) are resumed in my edition of the poem (S.A.T.F., Paris, 1977), pp.xxx-xxxiv and my article ’Girart de Vienne: problemes de composition et de datation', CCM, 13 (1970), 281-90. For a discussion of historical considerations which converge on the same dates, see also my contribution to Actes du IVe Congres International de la Society Rencesvals (Heidelberg, 1969), pp.63-70. For Girart de Roussillon, see F. Lot, 'Encore la legende de Girart de Roussillon: A propos d'un livre recent', Romania, 70 (1949), 192-233, " 355-96, reprinted in Etudes sur les legendes epiques frangaises (Paris, 1958), pp.105-78. Lot rightly, in my view, rejects (Etudes, pp.106-19) the early date of ca. 1150 proposed by R. Louis, De I'histoire a la legende, II. Girart comte de Vienne dans les chansons de geste, 2 vols (Auxerre, 1947), I, 311-416, esp. 355 ff., on the grounds of connections with the Second Crusade and the entourage of Alienor d'Aquitaine. Lot proposes 1155-80 as outside dates. On the other hand, he is indefensibly cavalier (Etudes, pp.168-69) in rejecting Louis's list op. cit. (p.133) of motifs from Girart de Roussillon borrowed and adapted by Bertrand de Bar, a list which may be thought to be very persuasive.
2.
See R. Louis, op. cit. pp.45-70; van Emden, thesis and article in CCM quoted in note 1 above. The analysis conducted by M. Louis and myself has received striking confirmation by a computer-generated analysis carried out on the text of my edition by Dr Alison Elliott of Brown University, whose findings are still awaiting publication. They show that the whole poem is heavily formulaic but that there are significant differences between the formulae used in the central part of Girart de Vienne, dealing with the siege, as compared with the first and (to a lesser extent) the third section identified by M. Louis and myself.
3.
See R. Louis, op. cit., van Emden, art. cit. and ed. cit. (from which all quotations from Girart de Vienne are taken). Pending a future publication, the only detailed discussion of my own approach to these problems is in my thesis, quoted above, chapter II.
4.
R. Louis, op. cit., p.49; there is a final allusion to her at 2890-96.
5.
Das Werden der Wilhelm - und der Aimerigeste (Leipzig, 1939), p. 133. cf. E.R. Curtius, Gesammelte Aufsatze zur romanischen Philologie, (Bern and Munich, 1960), p.285.
54 6.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic See R. Louis, op. cit., pp.47-48, 50 ff.; van Emden, CCM article quoted above and 'Rolandiana et Oliveriana: Faits et hypotheses', Romania, 92 (1971), 507-31, esp. 516 ff., and 'Encore une fois Oliveriana et Rolandiana, ou 1'inverse', Revue beige de philologie et d'histoire, 54 (1976), 837-58 esp. 846-50. Notes at p.508 n.l and 838 n.4 respectively of these two articles give bibliographical information on the many studies in which the late Paul Aebischer dealt with these matters; the relevant part of the Karlamagnus saga (Branch I, chapters 34-35 and 38-43), which is obviously crucial, has been translated both by Aebischer, Textes norrois et litterature frangaise du moyen age, II (Geneva, 1972) and by Constance B. Hieatt, Karlamagnus Saga, I (Parts I-III), (Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, Toronto, 1975).
7. cf. Girart de Roussillon, edited by W.M. Hackett, S.A.T.F., 3 vols (Paris 1953-55), lines 765-67, 834-36, 845-47, 860-62: E dijaz me lo rei per qu'en debat; Car eu tien en aleu tot mon ducat. Ne irai a sa cort de tot estat.
(765-67)
'Roissellons fu tos tens alues mon paire, E sil m'a otroiat nostre enperaire, E tote m'autre onor tro a Sen Faire . . .'
(834-36)
E dijaz me le rei que molt mal fai, Qu'eu tien tot en aleu des Leire en cai. Nen irai a son droit tant con viu(e)rai.
(845-47)
'- Aleus est Rossilluns, au veir afit Ainc ome li siens paire reis ne servit; Car non fera il vos, si com el dit.'
(860-62)
The same theme is expounded in Aspremont, where the ferocious independence of Girart de Fraite is a constant theme, but see especially the edition by L. Brandin, C.F.M.A. (Paris, 1919-21), lines 1173-77, 1181-4, 1433-37, 11337-46; it remains in 'fossil' passages in Girart de Vienne too: lines 4041 ff., 5381 ff., 6156 ff. It is therefore not surprising to see it also in the Karlamagnus Saga, chapter 38, (translated by C. Hieatt, p.122). It is generally associated with the idea that Girart holds independently vast areas of the southern half of the Empire of Charlemagne's time: e.g. Girart de Roussillon, lines 559-62, 604-5; Aspremont, lines 1027-28, 1167-72, 1407-12; Girart de Vienne (in another 'fossil' passage, contradicting the data of the rest of the poem), lines 6215-16. 8.
It is perfectly clear, as is shown below, that the Saga sees Girart as a serious rebel, who puts himself in the wrong and who is forced to seek peace, not from a position of strength as in the extant poems, but from one of weakness.
9. The petit vers (line 2163) echoes that (line 1014) which ends laisse XXVII, where Renier successfully defies Charles in the earlier quarrel which leads to the King's being forced to grant him the fief of Genvres. The contrast
The 'Cocktail-Shaker Technique' in Two Chansons de Geste
55
between the attitude shown by the clan's acceptance of Charlemagne's summons and that of Girart in the Saga is significant (translated by C. Hieatt, p. 122): and when this message came to Geirard, he answered, 'My father held Viana, and inherited it from his brother Gundeblif, who won it from the heathens; it never came into the king's possession, and I shall not let him have it. My kinsmen have ruled it for a good thirty years.' (The clause translated ' and I shall not let him have it' may alternatively mean 'and I will not come', which, though considered less appropriate in context by many Old Norse specialists, is very close to such epic assertions as Girart de Roussillon, lines 837, 847, Aspremont, lines 1176-77, 1184, 1424.) dean Misrahi, 'Girard de Vienne et la Geste de Guillaume', Medium Aevum, 4 (1935), 1-15, rightly underlined the importance of Bertrand's use of Garin and Girart's connection with the clan of Aymeri, and so of Guillaume himself (p. 11): Dans la premiere version Girard est fils de Bueves et il peut avoir tous les vices et commettre tous les crimes possibles. Chez Bertrand, au contraire, il est de la geste de Monglane et ne peut plus etre 'fel' et deloyal . . . Le Girard 'fel' de la premiere tradition avait a se reformer radicalement avant d'etre admis a la geste des Narbonnais. Il s'est reforme sous la plume de Bertrand. Il est a la fois curieux et significatif que, dans le poeme de Bertrand, c'est le vieux Garin de Monglane qui decide Girard a obeir a la citation du roi. 10. It might be argued that the author of the Jeu d'Adam does something very similar at the start of his play. The lesson of the liturgy which forms the outline of his play is Genesis I, which follows what is now known as the 'Priestly' tradition describing the creation of man and woman together in God's image (1.27). No doubt because of this and because of the practical difficulties of staging, the author shows us Adam and Eve standing before God at the outset; he therefore has to cut the fifth and sixth Responsories, which follow the older 'Jahwist' tradition of Genesis II. 4b ff. in describing the creation of Eve from Adam's rib. But the author needs this idea to motivate Adam's resentment against Eve after the Fall: in Adam's lament (Jeu d'Adam, edited by W. Noomen, C.F.M.A. (Paris, 1971), lines 353 ff.), the author moves to a powerful climax on this theme (lines 358-66), enhanced by interpretatio, exclamatio and anaphora, to show Adam's contrition being blocked by self-pity and frustration increased by the knowledge that Eve is born of him. Thus the poet motivates thematically and even psychologically the final refusal to accept responsibility at lines 417-22 (based of course on Genesis III. 12), which ultimately attracts Figura's anger. But these crucial moments are already prepared very early in the play: following the 'Priestly' Lesson, the first Responsory already mixes 'Jahwist' material (from Genesis II. 7) in the Respond with a return to 'Priestly' tradition in the Verse. This, of course, is 'given' by the liturgy, but the poet now begins in the 'Priestly' tradition (lines 1-5) and then moves swiftly to insert the 'Jahwist' version of Eve's creation as something
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
56
which has happened before the play began (lines 9-20). This is stressed by heavy rhetorical treatment - interpretatio arranged in a complex chiasmic pattern - at lines 17-20. The passage on marriage (lines 21-48) continues to reflect and elaborate on Genesis II, but lines 61-4 appear to go back to Genesis I again (cf. I. 28-9), before we return definitively to the Gahwist' account, from Genesis II. 15 onwards, at line 81 of the play. The aims of the dramatist are different, but his methods are not dissimilar to those of our epic poets. 11. All references are to the edition by W.M. Hackett (see note 7). 12. See the magisterial exposition of the moral and legal aspects by P. Gentil, Romania, 78 (1957), 328-89, 463-510. 13. cf. W.M. Hackett, ed. cit., Ill, 519, note to lines 591-92. 14. cf. note 7 above.
Le
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa: zu zwei Konigsbiographien der Stauferzeit1 Xenja von Ertzdorff Alexander der Grosse lebte auf vielfaltige Weise in der Erinnerung des Mittelalters fort. Kaiser Friedrich II wurde, wie Rudolf M. Kloos gezeigt hat,2 mit dem Makedonenkonig verglichen, der zum 'sakularisierten Idealtyp des gliickhaften Eroberers' wurde, dessen Taten 'ausschliesslich aus dem Streben des Helden nach eigenem Ruhm und aus dem Glauben an seine eigene Kraft motiviert' wurden. Diese Deutung ist aus einer bestimmten politischen Konstellation der spaten Stauferzeit in Italien herzuleiten, dennoch zeigt sie bemerkenswerte Entsprechungen zur literarischen Darstellung Alexanders in Rudolfs von Ems Alexanderroman, der in den staufischen Kreisen in Oberdeutschland entstanden ist.1* Der Alexanderroman Rudolfs von Ems wurde zwischen 1235 und 1245 geschrieben, der erste Teil mbglicherweise fur den jungen Konig Heinrich (VII), der zweite moglicherweise fur den jungen Konig Konrad.5 Das Werk ist als Konigsbiographie konzipiert, aber Fragment geblieben. Jene von Kloos erwahnten Alexandervergleiche sind als Ausdruck fur das Alexanderverstandnis der spaten Stauferzeit sehr aufschlussreich, sie sind aber fur einen Vergleich mit einem Erzahltext, wie dem Roman des Rudolf von Ems methodisch nicht vergleichbar. Ich wahle statt dessen eine andere Konigsbiographie, die Gesta Friderici, des Bischofs Otto von Freising;6 die beiden ersten Bucher stammen noch von Otto selbst, 1157/8 geschrieben - fur Kaiser Friedrich I. Eine literarische Beziehung zwischen dem Alexander und den Gesta besteht nicht. Es geht mir um den phanomenologischen Vergleich: Otto von Freising stellt den Aufstieg der Staufer und Leben und Taten Friedrichs I. aus seiner zeitgenossischen - staufisch Partei nehmenden - Sicht dar. Er berichtet, was er fur wert hielt, dass es zum Lobpreis der Staufer und des Kaisers Friedrich der Nachwelt iiberliefert werde. Auch hier kann der moderne Leser nicht erwarten, die voile Wirklichkeit der Berichtszeit zu erfahren. Auch hier ist literarisch geformt, stilisiert, idealisiert. Aber der Bereich historischer und zeitgenossicher Wirklichkeit ist erheblich grosser und differenzierter als in der Darstellung des Alexanderlebens durch Rudolf von Ems. Doch auch dieses Werk soil nach dem Willen seines Verfassers verlassliche Uberlieferung darstellen. Aber aus unserer modernen Sicht iiberwiegt hier die freie Erfindung, die idealisierende Umdeutung. Ich mochte zwei wesentlich erscheinende Themenbereiche in beiden Werken miteinander vergleichen. Es sind dies: I. die Aussagen der Erzahler fiber die Absichten, die sie mit ihrem Werk verbinden, und fiber seine Empfanger. II. die Vorgeschichte, das Leben und die Taten Friedrichs I. und Alexanders.
58
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic I
Die Absicht Rudolfs von Ems ist es: und wil iu bescheiden hie an dirr aventiure wie ein der tugentrichste man der ritters namen ie gewan, dirre welte pris erwarp, wie er warp, wier verdarp, wier zer welte wart geborn, wie im besunder wart erkorn der welte hoehstiu werdekeit, wier die werdekeit erstreit daz sin lop, sin name, sin leben an lobe ze maze ist gegeben den tumben und den wisen. swer werdekeit wil prisen, der muoz den stolzen degen wis prisen und sinen pris.
(41-56)7
(ich will euch in dieser Geschichte berichten, wie der vollkommenste Mann, der jemals den Namen eines Ritters erhielt, den Lobpreis dieser Welt erwarb, was er leistete, wie er scheiterte, wie er zur Welt kam, wie ihm besonders das hochste Ansehen dieser Welt zuteil wurde, wie er dieses Ansehen erkampfte, sodass sein Lob, sein Name, sein Leben der Massstab ist fur die Unerfahrenen und die Erfahrenen. Jeder, der Ansehen (in der Gesellschaft) lobend beurteilen will, muss den stolzen und erfahrenen Helden und sein Ansehen preisen.) Alexander Leben, Taten und sein Ruhm sind Vorbild fur alle, d.h. die Unerfahrenen - moglicherweise noch jugendlichen Mitglieder - und die Erfahrenen, die Erwachsenen, in der hofischen Adelsgesellschaf t der spaten Stauferzeit in Oberdeutschland - moglicherweise im Umkreis der beiden jungen Stauferkonige Heinrich und Konrad, den Sohnen Kaiser Friedrichs II. Alexander wird 'Ritter' genannt, er ist der 'tugentrichste man', ihm werden die hochste 'werdekeit' und das hochste 'lop' zuerkannt: er ist damit hineingenommen in die von den Literaten in der Volkssprache literarischgeformten Wertvorstellungen fur die Adelsgesellschaft um 1200. Rudolfs von Ems Thema ist der Lobpreis Alexanders, so wie Lob und Tadel Gegenstand der Geschichtsschreibung sind. Zweck seines Schreibens ist es, ein Vorbild darzustellen, die Empfanger - und allgemein sein Publikum - daruber zu belehren, wie nach Alexanders Vorbild ein ritterliches Leben zu fuhren sei. Die literarische Darstellung selbst hat hohen asthetischen Anforderungen zu genugen, ausserdem bemuht sie sich um genaue Wiedergabe der Quellen. Alle wichtigen Informationen fiber Personen, Orte, Handlungsablaufe, werden punktlich berichtet; der Autor versteht sich als Geschichtsschreiber, er berichtet die Wahrheit. Unsere moderne Einschatzung als Romanschriftsteller, der einen historischen Roman geschrieben habe, trifft seine eigene Selbsteinschatzung nicht. Seine Geschichtsschreibung, auf 'historischen
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa
59
Quellen' beruhend, erhebt den Anspruch der Richtigkeit, der asthetischen Qualitat und der Vermittlung vorbildlichen sittlichen Verhaltens fur die zeitgenossiche Adelsgesellschaft. Otto von Freising schreibt eine anspruchsvolle lateinische Prosa. Ottos Absicht ist, wie er im Prolog der Gesta Friderici schreibt, der Lobpreis der virtutes Kaiser Friedrichs I., welche die Vorzfige der Fruheren noch bei weitem fibertreffen. Er nennt sie: 'temperans in prosperis, fortis in adversis, iustus in iudiciis, prudens et acutus in causis', (S. 118,21 f), massvoll im Gluck, tapfer in Widrigkeiten, gerecht im Gericht, klug und scharfsinnig in Streitfragen' (S.119,25 ff). Es sind dies die traditionellen Fursten- und Konigstugenden des Herrscherlobes, die dem Kaiser 'durch gottliche Ffigung eingegeben und von Gott zum gemeinen Nutzen des gesamten Erdkreises verliehen worden sind.' (S.l 19,29 ff). Zum Teil sind sie mit den ritterlichen Ffirstentugenden der volkssprachigen Adelsliteratur identisch, ihre inhaltliche Ausffillung aber ist verschieden, wie noch zu zeigen sein wird. Bemerkenswert ist im Vergleich mit Rudolf von Ems besonders, dass Otto sein Werk zum Lobpreis des noch lebenden Kaisers schreibt, daraus aber keinerlei moralische Vorbildgebung fur gegenwartige oder zukunftige Leser ableitet. Der Rahmen des zu Erzahlenden ist ebenfalls weit gespannt: Aber bevor ich die Reihe deiner Taten (tuorum gestorum seriem) schildere, gedenke ich, fiber deinen Grossvater, deinen Vater und deinen Oheim einiges im Dberblick vorauszuschicken, und so wie an einem Faden die Erzahlung herabzuffihren, damit das, was fiber deine Person zu sagen sein wird, durch den Glanz ihrer Taten noch glanzender erscheine. (S.l 19,34 ff.) Dies ist jenes genealogische Erzahlprinzip, das wir auch aus hofischen Romanen kennen: der Geschichte Tristans oder Parzifals wird die Geschichte ihrer Eltern vorangestellt. Rudolf von Ems berichtet ahnlich fiber die Zeugung Alexanders durch den Betrug des geheimnisvollen und weisen Agypterkonigs Nectanabos, damit den Ursprung des Helden in das Zwielicht einer geheimnisvollen, und nur scheinbar rational durchschaubaren Herkunft verlegend.8 Die Geschichtsschreibung eines Otto von Freising kann sich eine derartige Mythisierung der Herkunft des Helden aus mehreren Grfinden nicht erlauben. Den Glanz der Taten ihrer Konige beschreiben beide - aber die Taten sind weitgehend verschieden. Uber den Gehalt seiner Darstellung und die Erfiillung der Lesererwartungen schreibt Otto: Denn auch Lucan, Vergil und die fibrigen romischen Schriftsteller haben zwar nicht nur geschichtliche, sondern auch sagenhafte Ereignisse, .... die Taten der Fursten und Herren der Welt aber in hoherer Sprache erzahlt, und sie haben auch oft Erorterungen eingeschoben, in denen sie an tiefste Geheimnisse der Philosophic riihrten. Dadurch werden nicht nur die, denen es Freude macht, den Gang der geschichtlichen Ereignisse zu horen (quibus rerum gestarum audiendi seriem inest voluptas), sondern auch diejenigen, denen die Erhabenheit scharfsinniger Gedankengange (quos rationum amplius delectat subtilitatis sublimitas) hoheres Entzficken bereitet, angelockt, derartiges zu lesen und kennenzulernen. (S. 121,8 ff.)
60
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
Das Publikum soli nicht uber zu preisende 'werdekeit' belehrt werden, sondern es gibt zwei Gruppen: die einen, die sich an der Information, dem vermittelten Wissen iiber den Gang der Ereignisse, erfreuen; die anderen denen geschichtsphilosophische Erorterungen Freude machen. Bemerkenswert ist, dass hier nicht von dem prodesse fur den Leser oder Horer gesprochen wird, sondern von delectare und von voluptas audiendi. Die geschichtstheologische Ausweitung der Darstellung Ottos von Freising ist in lhrer Zeit einmalig und hat kaum Vergleichbares in der Geschichtsschreibung angeregt. Es ware daher auch ungerecht, an ihr die im Vergleich hochst bescheidenen Interventionen Rudolfs von Ems zu messen. Es ist hier der grundsatzlic e Unterschied im angesprochenen Publikum zu sehen: Otto von Freising, auf der Hohe der lateinischen theologischen und philosophischen Bildung seiner Zeit stehend, selbst ein hervorragender Historiker und Stilist, schreibt fur den Kaiser und einen kleinen Kreis lateinisch geschulter Leser, die selbst auf der Hohe der Bildung und Wissenschaft der Zeit stehen. Ihnen braucht man keine Vorbilder vorzustellen, sondern sie konnen Vergnugen und Genuss aus der Lekture der geschichtlichen Ereignisse oder scharfsichtiger Argumentationen gewinnen. Ihnen ist daher auch eine sehr viel grdssere Fulle von 'Realitat' der historischen Ereignisse und philosophischen Gedankengange zuganglich, als Rudolf von Ems in der Volkssprache einem ebenfalls schon begrenzten Publikum adlig-hofischer Provenienz bot.
n Im ersten Buch der Gesta Friderici berichtet Otto von Freising uber den Aufstieg des staufischen Hauses. Es ist eine genealogische Abfolge bis zum Tod Konig Konrads. Das Buch beginnt mit der Verhangung des Bannes uber Kaiser Heinrich IV. durch Papst Gregor VII. Es folgen die daraus erwachsenen kirchenpolitischen Konflikte. Reichsgeschichte und res gestae der verschiedenen Herrscher einerseits und staufische Geschichte andererseits sind einmal gewissermassen gegenlaufig: hier Zerfall, Auflosung, mutatio rerum, dort standige Aufwartsbewegung, immer grosserer Wirkungskreis, stets Steigerung der Bedeutung ohne wirklichen Ruckschlag. Und das wird solange durchgefiihrt, bis die zweite, die staufische Komponente zur Dominante des Geschehens wird .... In denselben Vorgangen, die sich ihm vor einem Jahrzehnt noch ausschliesslich als Ungluck darboten, vermag Otto nun aufgrund neuer Erfahrungen auch die heilenden Krafte zu entdecken, die auch dem ubrigen Geschehen die letzte Schwere nehmen.9 Kurz vor seinem Tod iibergibt Konig Konrad dem Herzog und spateren Konig Friedrich die Reichsinsignien (regalia) und seinen eigenen jungen Sohn. Zur Begriindung heisst es: Er war namlich ein kluger Mann (vir prudens) und machte sich keine Hoffnung darauf, dass sein Sohn, der ja noch ein kleiner Knabe war, zum Konig erhoben wiirde; deshalb glaubte er, fur seine personlichen Interessen wie fur das Reich werde es besser sein,
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa
61
wenn lieber seines Bruders Sohn wegen der vielen Beweise seiner hervorragenden Eigenschaften (ob muita virtutum suarum clara facinora) sein Nachfolger wiirde. (S.281,2 ff.) Das zweite Buch beginnt mit der Wahl Friedrichs zum deutschen Konig. Sicher, Ottos Darstellung des Aufstiegs der Staufer ist in dem Sinn tendenzios, dass Negatives verschwiegen und Negatives bei den Gegnern betont wird (Schmale, S.ll). Dennoch ist die historische 'Wirklichkeit' mit den politischen und militarischen Auseinandersetzungen, den Rechtsstreitigkeiten und theologischen Auseinandersetzungen des 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts im Reich durch Namen und Fakten in hohem Masse gegenwartig. Halt man daneben die Vorgeschichte Alexanders von Rudolf von Ems mit dem Bericht iiber den zauberkundigen Agypterkonig Nectanabos, so wird der Abstand von der historischen Realitat des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts zu einer unbestimmten Vorzeitigkeit deutlich. Der Erzahler berichtet - under Berufung auf von ihm nicht naher bezeichnete schriftliche Quellen Daz hie vor in Egipto was ein edel kiinec rich, dem do nieman was gelich an listen und an manheit. swaz man von zouberlisten seit dar an was sin kunst so groz daz niender lebte sin genoz bi der zit iiber alles lant, der was Nektanabus genant. gewaltec und here nach kiineclicher lere was sin geburt geheret, vil kunst was er geleret.
(108-20)
(friiher war in Agypten ein edler machtiger Konig, dem keiner an Gelehrsamkeit und Tapferkeit glich. Was man von Zauberkunsten auch sagt, das verstand er, sodass ihm damals in alien Landern niemand gleich kam. Der hiess Nektanabus. Machtig und erhaben, wie es sich fur einen Konig gebiihrt, war seine hochgeborene Herkunft. In vielen Wissenschaften war er unterrichtet.) Der machtige, hochvornehme Konig ist gelehrt und tapfer - auch ein Topos des Herrscherlobes - aber diese Gelehrsamkeit reicht in mythische Bereiche, die hier, scheinbar rational etwas einsichtig gemacht, die Herkunft des 'wunderlichen Alexander', des Alexander mirabilis, in mythische Fernen geheimnisvoll iiberhohen. Rudolf von Ems bewundert stets aufs Hochste die Erhabenheit einer koniglichen Herkunft; die alte Verehrung fur die Geblutsheiligkeit wird auch hier deutlich. Das Wissen des Konigs Nectanabos wird ausfuhrlich umschrieben, benannt, aber nicht eigentlich inhaltlich dargestellt: ein Stilzug, der sehr charakteristisch ist. Rudolf von Ems arbeitet mit lobend qualifizierenden Begriffen ohne eigentliche konkrete Anschaulichkeit. Aus der durch Zauberei zustande gekommenen Verbindung zwischen Nektanabos und der Konigin Olimpias geht Alexander hervor. Bei der
62
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
Geburt des Helden entsteht ein furchtbares Unwetter und die Gestalt des Knaben 1st 'Wunderlich’: sein Haar war rot und dicht wie eine Lowenrnahne, ein Auge schwarz, eines gelb, sein Wuchs untadelhaft. Der Erzahler fasst noc einmal die 'mirabilia', die zur Geburt des Helden fuhrten, zusammen: wie wunderlich sin forme was, und wie ez gar von wunder kam da von er den urhap nam, des han ich iu ein teil geseit mit endehafter warheit. sit ez mit wunder wart getan swaz wir von im gelesen han, so mac ouch des niht wundern mich, was er selbe wunderlich, und ob er sinen gerinc kerte an wunderlichiu dine und ob er sich an wunder lie, ob ez im wunderliche ergie, daz muoz ich ane wunder lan: ez muoste im wunderliche ergan.
(1330-44)
(wie merkwiirdig/erstaunlich seine Gestalt war, und wie es so merkwurdig zuging, wovon er abstammte, davon habe ich euch mit unbedingter Wahrheit erzahlt. Da es merkwurdig/erstaunlich zuging, alles, was wir von ihm gelesen haben, so kann auch das mich nicht erstaunen, wenn er selbst erstaunlich war und er Erstaunliches tat und es ihm erstaunlich erging. Es erstaunt mich nicht, dass es ihm erstaunlich ergehen musste.) Einerseits die unbedingte Wahrheitsversicherung des Historikers, andrerseits die scheinbar rational einsichtig gemachte mythische Ursprungssage und die mythischen Attribute des Helden, das ist die ebenfalls erstaunliche Paradoxie dieser Konigsbiographie, die, abgesehen von einigen, durch Allgemeinbildung der zeitgenossischen Horer in etwa fixierbare Personen-, Orts-, Lander-und Volkernamen, unverbindlich in einem ahistorischen Raum der Vornehmheit und zu bestaunender Merkwurdigkeiten schwebt. Was diese Konigsbiographie fur das Publikum verbindlich macht, ist die als vorbildlich dargestellte ritterlich-hofische Sittlichkeit. EJber die Objektivitat Ottos als Geschichtsschreiber Kaiser Friedrichs I. urteilt die moderne Geschichtsschreibung recht negativ. In unserer Fragestellung wird aus diesem Urteil deutlich, dass auch Otto von Freising seine Darstellung geformt hat - in einer bestimmten Absicht. Die 'reine Realitat und Wahrheit' erfahren wir auch von ihm nicht, auch er hat das zu Berichtende stilisiert. Ihm geht es um die Verherrlichung der Staufer, vor allem Friedrichs I. Ottos zwei Bucher der Gesta Friderici sind durch und durch in diesem Sinne hofische Geschichtsschreibung. Sie verklaren die staufische Vergangenheit fast um jeden Preis und lassen Friedrich I. als den Herrscher erscheinen, auf den die Geschichte
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa
63
von annahernd einem Jahrhundert hinzielte. Geschichtsphilosophie und hofische Tendenz sind die Quelle des Glanzes, in dem die Staufer und ihr vorlaufiger Hohepunkt Friedrich bei Otto zu stehen scheinen. (Schmale, S.13) Und weiter heisst es: In Wirklichkeit schreibt Otto mit vollem Bewusstsein, wie Friedrich sich als Herrscher selbst sehen und wie er alien sonstigen etwaigen Lesern seines Werkes erscheinen soli. (ibid. S.13) Den Grad von Anschaulichkeit und Konkretheit des Erzahlten mochte ich nun an einigen ausgewahlten Episoden aus den Gesta Friderici deutlich machen und entsprechende Episoden aus Rudolfs von Ems Alexander daneben stellen. Der Vergleich kann das Mass an Realitatsferne und Idealisierung Alexanders zeigen. Ich wahle die letzten Abschnitte iiber den Italienzug Friedrichs aus: Nachdem der Kaiser den Engpass durchschritten und nun alle Gefahren uberstanden hatte, schlug er in jener Nacht sein Lager frohlich gestimmt (letus) in dem Gebiet von Trient auf. Dann zog er fiber Trient und durch das Tridentiner Tal und gelangte bis Bozen. Diese Stadt, an der Grenze Italiens und Bayerns gelegen, schickt den Bayern einen sfissen, zum Versand ins Ausland geeigneten Wein. Wahrend viele sich von hier aus in ihre Heimat zerstreuten, schlug er den Weg fiber Brixen ein und kehrte .... nach einem Jahr in die bayrische Ebene zurtick. (11,43 = S.371) Die Namen bieten eine fur den Leser fassbare geographische Realitat. Eine Information wird noch fiber den Wein der Stadt Bozen gegeben, fiber die Stimmung des Kaisers nach der Uberwindung aller Fahrnisse wird berichtet, dass sie heiter gewesen sei; es ist die freudige Gelassenheit des Konigs, die er zu zeigen hat. Ein kurzer Bericht fiber die Auflosung des Heeres und die Heimkehr des Kaisers schliesst an. Rudolf von Ems erzahlt, wie sich Alexanders Heer nach der Eroberung von Tyrus nach Rhodos begab: Gen Rode huop sich do mit kraft Alexanders ritterschaft, diu gap sich im sa zehant. wie er besazte siniu lant? Socrates, ein wiser degen, solde do Zilizje pflegen und die naehsten inseln gar twingen do mit siner schar, swaz lande Tire gelegen was, der pflac auch Philotas und twanc diu naehsten bilant .... swaz heres mit den komen was, die santer werliche anthalp in die riche ....
(9165 ff.)
64
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic (Nach Rhodos begab sich Alexanders Ritterschaft mit grosser Macht. Rhodos ergab sich ihm sogleich. Wie er seine Lander besetzte? Socrates, ein erfahrener Held, sollte Zilizje schiitzen und die nachsten Inseln vollstandig erobern mit seinem Heer. Was zu Tyrus gehorte, das schutzte Philotas und eroberte die anliegenden Lander. Die Heere, die mit ihm gekommen waren, sandte er bewaffnet iiberall hin in die Reiche . . . .)
Auch hier sollen die Namen einen, wenn auch unbestimmteren, Realitatsbezug herstellen. Rudolf von Ems gibt hier einen knappen Bericht ohne Detailinformationen. Die Anreihung als Ausdruck fur die Fiille der Eroberungen ist wichtig. Auf diese recht trockene Weise bewaltigt Rudolf von Ems eine grosse Stoff-Fulle, wo Otto von Freising detailierter berichtet. Mir ist dieser Textauszug auch aus einem anderen Grund wichtig: er ist ein Beispiel fur Alexanders 'Regierungskunst'. Kaiser Friedrich fuhrt Kriege und Belagerungen durch, ebenso wie dies von Alexander berichtet wird, aber seine Regierungskunst erschopft sich nicht darin, Statthalter einzusetzen, sondern er regiert sein Reich selbst durch Massnahmen, die ausfiihrlich von Otto von Freising - wenn auch mit preisender Stilisierung - erzahlt werden. Wahrend von Friedrichs Verhandlungen mit dem Papst, mit den Fursten und anderen Grossen berichtet wird, von Reichstagen, Gerichtsverhandlungen und Rechtsgeschaften und diplomatischen Verhandlungen, die in die Realitat des 12. Jahrhunderts - wenn auch aus spezieller Sicht - hineinblicken lassen, ist Alexander ein durch die Lande ziehender Erobererkonig, der sich selbst mit seinen eroberten Landern und Stadten nicht beschaftigt, sondern zu weiteren Eroberungen weiterzieht. Wenn wir aber an die spate Stauferzeit denken, die auf die Abfassung des Alexander folgt, dann wird eine merkwiirdige Aktualitat sichtbar, auf die Rudolf Kloos hingewiesen hat: So sehr man nun den sakularisierten Idealtyp des gluckhaften Eroberers, wie er in den Alexander-Romanen seit der zweiten Halfte des 12. Jahrhunderts entwickelt ist, mit mancher Gestalt des politischen Lebens im Italien des fruhen 13. Jahrhunderts vergleichen mochte, so musste dieser Typus in seiner letzten politischen Konsequenz doch im mehr oder weniger unverbindlichen Bereich der Literatur verbleiben, solange die Ordnung des Staates wenigstens ausserlich intakt war. Mit dem Tode des Kaisers aber .... schien das iiberlieferte Weltbild endgiiltig zu zerbrechen. So kann es uns kaum zufallig erscheinen, wenn in diesem Augenblick das neue in den Alexander-Romanen entwickelte Herrscherbild des auf sich allein gestellten Eroberers politisch akut wird . . . .10 Der in eigentlichen Reichsgeschaften inaktive, umherziehende ErobererKonig Alexander entspricht dem in den Artus-Romanen auf aventiure ziehenden Ritter, nur sind die Raume, Grossen und Mengen ins Ungeheure, in die Dimension der mirabilia, entriickt. Fur die Abfassungszeit des Alexander diirfte noch mehr die literarische vor einer moglichen politischen Bedeutung iiberwiegen, obwohl ich sie nicht ganz ausschiiessen mochte. Die Personlichkeit der jungen Konige Heinrich und Konrad und ihr Verhaltnis zu Kaiser Friedrich mochten durchaus Ansatzpunkte fur eine mehr als nur
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa
65
ethische Identifikation mit dem literarischen Wunschbild Alexander bieten: vielleicht auch den Wunsch, durch auf sich gestellte Alleingange den Beifall ihrer Umgebung zu finden. Wahrend die virtutes des Kaisers 'temperans in prosperis, fortis in adversis, iustus in iudiciis, prudens et acutus in causis' durch die Erzahlung sich in der Praxis zeigen, werden die Tugenden Alexanders aufgezahlt und durch seine Handlungsweise unter Beweis gestellt, auch dann noch, wenn der Erzahler eigentlich gegen die Uberlieferung schreibend, den Jahzorn Alexanders beschonigt. Sonst aber ist Alexander vollkommen: ein personlich tapferer und grosszugiger Konig, dessen milte, Freigebigkeit, besonders geruhmt wird. Das sind die virtutes der hofischen Konige und Fursten nach den Normen der hofischen Literaten. In diesem Sinn ist Alexander von Rudolf von Ems zum hofisch-ritterlichen Konig nach dem Vorbild der Artus-Romane einstilisiert worden. Was allerdings fehlt, ist die hofische Liebe. Sie spielt fur Alexander keine Rolle als Handlungsmotivation, und Rudolf von Ems hat in dem fiberlieferten Fragment auch keinen Versuch gemacht, diese fur den hofischen Fursten in den Romanen der Zeit massgebende Handlungsmotivation zu erganzen. Dafiir wird Alexanders Frommigkeit und Gottverbundenheit, die auch aus der antiken Uberlieferung bekannt ist, hervorgehoben.11 Die Fremdheit des vorchristlichen Gottesglaubens wird von dem Erzahler respektiert, sehr im Unterschied zur alteren Fassung des Alexanderliedes, das den Konig als 'Heiden' sehr distanziert betrachtet. Das vorbildliche Leben Alexanders in seinem 'orden', dem ihm zuganglichen Gottesglauben, legitimiert seine Vorbildlichkeit auch fur die Leser der Adelsgesellschaft des 13. Jahrhunderts (v. 12941 ff.). Mir scheint damit eine Offenheit fur die so adaptierte Vorbildlichkeit Alexanders in diesem Roman erreicht, welche die historische Personlichkeit in ihrem fremden Bezugsbereich akzeptiert und fur den eigenen Normenkodex adoptiert. Historische Andersartigkeit kann akzeptiert werden, auf der anderen Seite wird sie voll integriert und damit aus dem eigenen Bezugssystem herausgelost und in das eigene - zeitgenossische - eingepasst: diese Paradoxie der Alexanderrezeption durch Rudolf von Ems ist beim Nachdenken fiber den Umgang mit Geschichte im Mittelalter sehr ernst zu nehmen.12 Noch ein anderes scheint mir fur die zum reinen Vorbild erhobene Darstellung Alexanders wichtig: die Motivation fur seinen Untergang und die Beurteilung seiner lang anhaltenden Erfolge in seinen kriegerischen Unternehmungen. Beide hangen eng miteinander zusammen. Alexanders Gluck ist staunenswert - aber auch die Laufbahn Kaiser Friedrichs ist von Erfolgen begleitet, die den stetigen Aufstieg der Staufer zur Konigs- und Kaiserwiirde beglaubigen und kronen. Otto von Freising schreibt in der Widmung an den Kaiser: Denn unter alien romischen Kaisern ist beinahe dir allein das Vorrecht gewahrt worden, dass sich dir, obwohl du dich ja bekanntlich von friihester Jugend an mit kriegerischen Pflichten abgemiiht hast, die Miene des Glucks noch nicht verfinstert hat (obscenum tibi nondum vultum fortuna verterit).' (S.l 19,21 ff.) Die Vorstellung von Fortuna, dem Gluck, die dem Kaiser noch nicht ihr
66
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
ekelhaftes Gesicht gezeigt habe, welches Ungluck in seinen kriegerischen Unternehmungen bedeutet hatte, ist im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert ein Teil jener Vorstellungen, welche das rasch wechselnde Geschehen, die instabilitas mundi bildhaft zu verstehen und zu deuten versuchen.13 Fiir Kaiser Friedrich I. - wie fur den Aufstieg seiner Familie - ist die Bestandigkeit des Glucks, seine stabilitas, kennzeichnend; und Otto von Freising betet zu Gott, 'dass deinem guten Anfang ein noch besseres Ende angeffigt werden moge (ut tuo bono principio melior finis apponatur)' (S. 119,33). Diese Bestandigkeit gegenuber der instabilitas und mutabilitas rerum, die Dauer der glucklichen und friedlichen Verhaltnisse unter Friedrich I. sind fur Otto von Freising ein Zeichen dafiir, dass nach dem Zerfall der vorhergehenden Epoche, den er in seiner Cronica1h dargestellt und beklagt hatte, nun eine gute und Gutes fur die Zukunft verheissende Zeit angebrochen sei, die dem bisher von ihm beobachteten Zerfall Einhalt gebieten wiirde. In eben dieser Cronica wird der Aufstieg Alexanders zur Herrschaft fiber das Abendland und den Orient in einer Regierungszeit von nur zwolf Jahren und sein von den Indischen simulacra solis et lunae auf Tag und Stunde vorausgesagter Tod durch Vergiftung zum Anlass einer grossen Klage fiber die Hinfalligkeit und
instabilitas der Welt. Und doch wird ein so grosser, so bedeutender Mann durch einen Trunk aus einem Becher, durch die Heimtficke eines Dieners ausgeloscht, wird durch eines Mannes Tod die ganze Welt erschiittert! .... Wir aber achten nicht darauf, die wir die Welt lieben, die wir unser Herz an sie hangen wollen wie an etwas Ewiges und Dauerndes! Wir fallen mit den Fallenden .... und schliesslich gehen wir unter mit dem Untergehenden. Civitas autem Christi, gegrfindet auf festem Fels, wird durch die Note und Stiirme der Welt nicht erschiittert, sie bleibt unwandelbar (immobilis) und unerschiitterlich (inconcussa) und ist wiirdig, ewig zu herrschen, ewig die Krone zu tragen. (Cronica, S. 153,34 ff.) Halten wir daneben, was Rudolf von Ems fiber Alexanders saelde und sein gelucke schreibt, so wird der grosse Stimmungsumschwung, der bereits fur Otto von Freising in der Abfassung der Gesta Friderici erkennbar wurde, besonders deutlich. Es ist Gott, der geliicke gewahrt ('daz im got gelfickes gan' (v.12 und v.20576 ff.)) und Alexander wurde die saelde in einem ganz besonders hohen Mass zuteil bis zu dem Tag, da er starb. Wir lesen: Sus vuocte sich manch saelden ie swaz Alexander ane gie daz er da von mit saelden schiet. sin witze also zu saelden riet daz er nie nihtes began, im gelunge wol daran: sin hoher pris, sin saelde was staete als ein herter adamas. diu glesin saelde in ie vloch, diu staete saelde in nach ir zoch eht uf und uf hin uf daz rat
Alexander der Grosse und Friedrich Barbarossa unz er so hohe wart gesat und also verre uz genomen daz niemen zuo zim mohte komen. diz werte gar unz an den tac daz sines libes zil gelac, daz in niht arges nie gewar, er uberwunde ez ie vil gar mit saelden saelecliche. des was er saelden riche und ist uns noch sin getat diu im vil lobes erworben hat, an lobe siieze und lobelich.
67
(20545-67)
(So fugte es sich stets mit Gluck, dass alles, was Alexander begann, er auch mit Gluck beendete. Seine Klugheit beriet ihn so glucklich, dass ihm alles gut gelang, was er anting. Sein hohes Ansehen, sein Gluck waren so bestandig wie ein harter Diamant. Das glaserne Gluck mied ihn. Das bestandige Gluck zog ihn nach sich immer hoher auf dem Rad, bis er so hoch sass und so weit emporragte, dass niemand zu ihm kommen konnte. Das dauerte bis zu dem Tag, an dem er sterben musste, dass ihm nichts Boses widerfuhr, dass er nicht glucklich und mit Gluck uberwunden hatte. Deshalb war er so glucklich und erfolgreich und sind fur uns seine Taten, die ihm viel Ansehen erworben haben, aufs hochste zu preisen.) Nicht das traurige Ende Alexander steht als warnendes Beispiel im Mittelpunkt, sondern sein erfolgreiches Leben. Alexander wurde bestandiges, nicht glasernes Gluck, zuteil - zunachst jedenfalls - Fortuna zog ihn an ihrem Rad bestandig und immer hoher empor - und dieser Aufstieg zu schwindelnder Hohe- ohne dass an einen Absturz gedacht wird - ist das Bewundernswerte und Beschreibenswerte an Alexander, wie ihn Rudolf von Ems sieht. Seine militarische Tapferkeit, seine Umsicht, seine Freigebigkeit und Grosszugigkeit und seine ungeheure MachtfCille, die er sich auf seinen Kriegszugen erwarb, sind das grosse Vorbild. Ausserdem auch seine Frommigkeit. Und alles, was er anting, gelang ihm, nichts Boses konnte ihm widerfahren. Ich bin versucht, hier an die Marchenfigur des 'Hans im Gluck' zu denken, die hinter diesem Wunschbild des 'wunderlichen' Alexander deutlich wird. Wie ist dann aber der plotzliche Abbruch dieses Lebens zu deuten? Als Mahnung, sich nicht an die in stetem Wandel begriffene Welt zu verlieren und mit ihr verloren zu gehen, verstand ihn Otto von Freising in der Cronica. Ahnlich kommentiert er im ersten Buch der Gesta Friderici einen plotzlichen Wechsel aus friedlichem Zustand zum Aufruhr, verursacht durch den Mutwillen des jungen Konigs Heinrichs IV.: Denn von den Arzten, die die Hinfaliigkeit (fallacia) der Leiblichkeit beobachten, kennt man das Wort: Besser ist zur Hohe als auf die Hohe. Denn der Mensch .... kann niemals in dem gleichen Zustand bleiben, und wenn er auf dem Gipfel ist, muss er bald wieder herabsteigen.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
gg
Otto von Freising leitet daraus die Mahnung ab, die 'auf dem hochsten Gipfel stehenden Fursten der Welt (principes orbis in summo positi)' sollen lernen, 'sich den Allerhochsten, ihren Schopfer, vor Augen haltend, Mass zu bewahren (moderantiam servare), damit sie sich nach Cicero desto bescheidener benehmen, je hoher sie stehen' (S.127,34 ff). Rudolf von Ems spricht im Prolog zum 6. Buch, in dem der Roman abbricht, davon, class saelde und ere wilde (fremd, unberechenbar) sind' (vers 20607 ff) und zitiert die Autoritat eines 'wisen meister Gotfrid' fiber die Zerbrechlichkeit des glasernen Gliickes: ez breche in kleiniu stucke swenn ez schin allerbeste. gelucke ge bald an und abe und si vil selten veste. vil lihter danne manz behabe, laze ez sich uns vinden und si sin gunst vil selten lane, ez kan vil gahes swinden .... doch darumbe sol ein man nach saelden werben swa er kan, wan daz harte vil geschiht, swar nach man den man werben siht, daz im daz liht aller meist wirt nach rehter voleist.
(20024 ff.)
(-Meister Gottfried sang . . . . es bricht in kleine Stucke, wenn es am besten erscheint. Gluck geht auf und ab und ist nie bestandig. Man kann es leichter finden als halten, und seine Gunst sei kurz, es kann sehr schnell wieder fort sein .... Doch deshalb soil ein Mann sich urn Gluck und Erfolg bemuhen, wo immer er Gelegenheit hat. Denn es geschieht sehr haufig, dass das, worum man einen Mann sich bemuhen sieht, ihm meistens auch in Ffille zuteil wird.) Es ist eine sehr optimistische und eigentlich auch recht banale Kommentierung, die Rudolf von Ems gibt: vom bestandigen Gluck geht er fiber zum glasernen Gluck. Warum und weshalb, erfahrt man nicht. Gegen die Unbestandigkeit des Glucks gibt er die Empfehlung, nicht abzulassen im Bemuhen, Gluck und Erfolg zu haben, denn die Erfahrung spricht dafiir, dass sie dem, der sich um sie bemiiht, auch zuteil werden. Das strebende Bemuhen ist eine vorbildliche Haltung der Stauferzeit,15 aber der Leser gewinnt doch den Eindruck, dass die Problematik um Alexanders plotzlichen Untergang hier an die Seite gedrangt wird, um das 'schone' Vorbild des strahlenden Heldenkonigs Alexander nicht zu truben. Das idealisierte Wunschbild von dem von Erfolg zu Erfolg eilenden, durch die Lande auf Eroberungen ziehenden, auf seine eigenen virtutes gestellten und sich bewahrenden Konigs weicht in der Darstellung Rudolfs von Ems der historischen Uberlieferung aus und den zeitgenossischen Reflexionen, die sich an diesen plotzlichen Wechsel vom Aufstieg zum Untergang knfipften.16 Rudolf von Ems zeichnet in Konig Alexander, dem 'edelsten Mann, der jemals Ritter genannt wurde', am konsequentesten des Idealbild eines stets
Alexander der Grosse and Friedrich Barbarossa
69
glucklichen und erfolgreichen, immer hoher emporsteigenden Konigslebens und versucht, den dunklen Hintergrund des jahen Todes Alexanders im Bewusstsein seines Publikums Weg zu retouchieren. Eine vergleichbare Idealisierungstendenz zeigt sich in dem Alexandervergleich in der spaten Stauferpublizistik, auf den Kloos hingewiesen hat, und in der Kaiserbiographie Ottos von Freising, der ebenfalls das Positive, Erfolgreiche, Aufsteigende Kaiser Friedrichs I. betont. Diese so sehr ungleichen Autoren verbindet das Bemiihen, in ihrer Darstellung einem glucklichen erfolgreichen Konig und seinen Taten Dauer im Fluss des Geschehens und der dauernden Verwandlung zu schaffen. Die Erinnerung an Konig Alexander und die Uberlieferung fiber ihn bot gerade soviel und sowenig an konkretem Wissen, dass aus ihr ein Wunschbild eines ritterlichen Konigs, strahlend in seinem Gluck und seinen Erfolgen, fur die Adelsgesellschaft um die Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts entstehen konnte. Dieses Wunschbild war schon in den Augen jener Zeitgenossen, aber blass und unwirklich vor den Anforderungen der zeitgenossichen Realitat, wie sie uns ebenfalls stilisiert im Leben und den Taten Kaiser Friedrichs I. entgegentritt.
ANMERKUNGEN 1.
Uberarbeitete Fassung eines Vortrags, den ich unter dem Titel 'Ideal und Wirklichkeit in der mittelalterlichen Literatur, verdeutlicht an der Gestalt Alexanders des Grossen' bei dem Symposion 'Alexander de Grote in de Middeleeuwen' der 'Interfacultaire Werkgroep Medievistiek' der Universitat Groningen vom 12.bis 15. Oktober 1977 gehalten habe. Eine kurze Zusammenfassung einiger Thesen erschien in den Mediaevalia Groningana, edited by L.3. Engels u.a., Vol.l: Alexander the Great in the Middle Ages:
Ten Studies on the Last Days of Alexander in Literary and Historical Writing. Alfa Nijmegen, 1978, S.295. Es war mir eine Freude, bei dieser Tagung Herrn Prof. Ross personlich kennenzulernen, daher dediziere ich ihm den vollstandigen und erganzten Text. 2.
Rudolf M. Kloos, 'Alexander der Grosse und Kaiser Friedrich II'. Kulturgeschichte, 50 (1968), S. 181-99.
3.
Kloos, a.a.O., S. 196.
4.
Xenja von Ertzdorff,
5.
X. v. Ertzdorff, a.a.O., S.98-101.
Archiv fur
Rudolf von Ems. Untersuchungen zum hofischen Roman im 13. Jahrhundert. Munchen, 1967, S.67 ff.
6. Bischof Otto von Freising und Rahewin, Die Taten Friedrichs Oder richtiger Cronica. Ubersetzt von A. Schmidt, hrsg. von Franz-Josef Schmale. Darmstadt, 1965 (=Freiherr vom Stein-Gedachtnisausgabe Bd.17). Vgl. auch: Walther Lammers, 'Weltgeschichte und Zeitgeschichte bei Otto von Freising' in Die Zeit der Staufer. Katalog der Ausstellung Stuttgart 1977, Bd. 5 Supplement : Vortrdge und Forschungen. Stuttgart, 1979, S.77 ff. -Leider konnte ich diesen Aufsatz fur meinen Beitrag nicht mehr auswerten.
70 7.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic Rudolf von Ems, Alexander. Ein hofischer Versroman des 13. Jahrhunderts. Leipzig, 1928 und 1929
Ich zitiere nach der Ausgabe von Victor Junk:
(=Bibl. des lit. Ver. in Stuttgart Nr.272 und 274).
8.
Vgl. hierzu Kloos, a.a.O., S.191 f. zur negativen Deutung dieser mythischen Herkunft und den Bezugen zu zeitgenossischen abwertenden. Geruchten uber die Herkunft Friedrichs II. Vgl. auch: Gunhild und Uwe Porksen, Die Geburt des Helden in mittelhochdeutschen Epen und epischen Stoffen des Mittelalters'. Euphorion, 74 (1980), S.257 ff. -Leider Konnte ich diesen Aufsatz fur meinen Beitrag nicht mehr auswerten.
9.
Franz-Josef Schmale in der Einleitung zu den Gesta, S.8 (Anm.5).
10. Kloos, a.a.O., S.196 f. 11. Hier sehe ich einen wichtigen Unterschied zu den Feststellungen von Kloos, a.a.O., S.196, nach denen 'das Heidentum des Helden dazu beigetragen zu haben (scheint), dass das Bild des Eroberers entsprechend seiner Tendenz friih rein weltliche Ziige annahm. Seine Eroberungen wurden jetzt nicht mehr als Erfullung des gottlichen Heilsplans angesehen, sondern wurden ausschliesslich aus dem Streben des Helden nach eigenem Ruhm und aus dem Glauben an seine eigene Kraft motiviert'. -Hier waren noch genauere Vergleiche notig. 12. Vgl. hierzu allgemein Fr. Graus, Lebendige Vergangenheit. Uberlieferung im Mittelalter und in den Vorstellungen vom Mittelalter. Koln, Wien, 1975. 13. A. Doren, Fortuna im Mittelalter und in der Renaissance. Vortrage der Bibliothek Warburg 1922/23 l.Teil.Leipzig-Berlin, 1924. Erganzungen bei K. Hampe, 'Zur Auffassung der Fortuna im Mittelalter'. Archiv filr Kulturgeschichte, 17(1927), S.20 ff. Th. Scharmann, Studien uber die saelde in der ritterlichen Dichtung des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts. Diss. Frankfurt, Wurzburg, 1935. W. Sanders, Gluck. Zur Herkunft und Bedeutungsentwicklung eines mittelalterlichen Schicksalsbegriffs. Koln, Graz, 1965 (=Niederdeutsche Studien Bd.13). 14. Otto Bischof von Freising, Chronik oder die Geschichte zweier Staaten. Ubersetzt von Adolf Schmidt. Hrsg. von Walther Lammers. Darmstadt, 1972 (=Freiherr vom Stein-Gedachtnisausgabe Bd. 16). 15. Friedrich Maurer, 'Die Welt des hofischen Epos 'und' Das Grundanliegen Wolframs von Eschenbach', in: F.M., Dichtung und Sprache des Mittelalters. Gesammelte Aufsdtze. Bern, Munchen, 1963, S.ll ff. und S.38 ff. 16. Unter dem Eindruck des zerbrechenden politischen Ordnungsgefiiges der Staufer wird auch Fortuna wieder zu der willkiirlichen Macht, die nicht begunstigt, sondern sinnlos zerstort. Vgl. hierzu Kloos, a.a.O., S.197.
Some Feudal and Military Terms in Girart de Roussillon — quintane, mostreison and soudader Mary Hackett The chanson de geste of Girart de Roussillon is noteworthy not only for the richness of its feudal and military vocabulary but also for the precision with which such terms are used. The reasons for my choice in this article are that the first two refer to obligations on the part of vassal or lord which are not mentioned in other texts, literary or historical, until a later date, while consideration of the second leads us naturally to examine the status and rble of soudaders in the broadest sense. An exhaustive treatment, particularly of the last question, would be outside the scope of this article, but 1 have compared the evidence of Girart with that of other twelfth-century texts and with the latest historical research on the subject.
devoir quintane As a form of military training and at the same time of popular entertainment, the quintane is frequent in chansons de geste and in romances, usually featuring at a wedding, or at the dubbing of new knights, to enable them to show their skill. In Girart, they are set up, though without the king's consent, at the Whitsuntide court which opens the poem1 and at the Easter court, where the king's misgivings about this dangerous exercise are justified by the murder of Thierry d'Ascane.2 A later incident, however, is more interesting and unusual. After twenty-two years of life in exile, Girart and Berte spend their Shrove Tuesday holiday watching the quintane: Vassaus qui doit qui (n) tane lo jor la rent. Fait la lo cons Gontelmes el aus d'Ag (ij ent. Girar la vait veeir o l'autre gent.
(7734-36)
It is here that Berte, remembering old times, persuades Girart to return to France in disguise, so that this occasion marks the turning point in their fortunes. The most interesting thing about this passage is, however, the use of the expression devoir quintane. To my knowledge, this expression, indeed this idea of the quintane as a feudal obligation, is not found in any other chanson de geste, although it may be implicit, as on the occasion of the dubbing of new knights. Godefroy gives several examples from legal texts of the duty of a vassal, or rather a vavasseur, to take part in this exercise on the occasion of his marriage. The earliest is from the Denombrement du baillage de
Constentin (1393): Et sont tenus mes hommes vavasseurs, c'est assavoir ceulx qui se marient de jouster sur bestes chevaliins et ferir au post chascun
72
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic d'une lance d'aune de plain poing par la poigniee tant qu'il aient chacun une lance rompue ou qu'ilz soient cheuz a terre, et chascun qui cherra en doit pour ce XVIII. res d'avoine, et sont ces choses appelles quictaines. (Arch. P.304, lOr.)
The only example of the expression devoir quintane given by Godefroy dates from the fifteenth century: Le droit dudit fieu est, qui se marie .... le mary doit quitane, c'est assavoir que .... doit venir a cheval, prest de hurter a un poteau. (Acte du XVe ap. L. Delisle, Agricult. Norm, p.71) In these examples, as in the others quoted by Godefroy and ToblerLommatsch, the obligation is on those of lower rank to do some military training, albeit only occasional; indeed, the latest examples may refer to the survival of a custom, rather than to a practical exercise. In our text, however, the two noblemen mentioned are obviously tenants in chief. It is not clear from the text whether devoir quintane refers to the duty of setting it up, in order to keep one's men in training, or, on the part of the lesser vassals, of participating. Whichever interpretation we accept, the quintane is here presented as quasi-legal obligation, at a much earlier period than in any other text known.
mostreison, mostrement Towards the end of the poem, after the final reconciliation between Girart and Charles, Fouque proposes to them both that every tenant in chief should maintain at his own expense an unspecified number of landless knights and hold regular reviews or musters of them; anyone too mean to do this would lose his fief: Ere prennent conseil cum cascun don, E li conte el demaine el ric baron, A pabres chevalers lor garison. E ques amenaz toz a mostreison, Si cum fu establit en la reion, Por defendre l'onor, s'on la semon. E si ac ric avar a cor felon, Ki ne vuelle soffrir conduit ne don, Un li toille l'onor e dunst l'a bon.
(9481-89)
Line 9485 suggests that this was already a legal obligation, if not always carried out. The king endorses his words, adding that the number of knights maintained should depend on the size of the fief, and suggesting that this would provide a standing army for the defence of the realm; he also offers to contribute to the expenses if necessary: 'A toz lo die, barun qui es manent, Amaz melz chevalers qu'aur ne argent, E tenez an segunt son chasement
Some feudal and military terms in 'Girart de Roussillon' Que cascun ac de mei, qui vi(n)t, qui cent, Qui tant, qui plus, qui mains, sun co que tent. Ki soffrir ne porat, eu li ement E donrai volenters del men sovent. E a(d)uizag les tos a mostrement; Que cascuns ait cheval e garniment. Ne vos truis desgarnis paiane gent; Que reames que vaut qui ne defent?'
73
(9492-9302)
This was accepted and solemnly sworn: E li conte l'otreient tot ensement; Issi unt affermat aicest covent, Que fait en unt fiances e sei (i) grement.
(9506-8)
Paul Meyer in his note on this passage calls it 'une tentative remarquable a l'effet de constituer une armee a peu pres permanente'.3 In his introduction4 he remarks that the aim of this plan was to assure a livelihood for the landless knights whose chief means of existence had been ended by the peace - a matter to which I shall return later - but says that it was doubtless also intended to furnish a speedier and more reliable means of mobilisation than the feudal levy. In the examples quoted by Godefroy and Tobler-Lommatsch the terms mo(n)straison, mo(n)strement are used only in an abstract sense, 'demon¬ stration', but we find a word mostre or monstre with a meaning akin to that of the terms used in our text. E quant il fet la moustre de ses gens armes (Livre du Roy Modus _ca. 1365). E apres ce relivrerent leurs chevaus a monstre (Froissart, Chron. II, 184). The obligation of a tenant in chief to furnish a contingent of mounted men either from his vavasseurs or from his household knights is, of course, implicit in the whole feudal military system. What is striking in our text is the condition that they should be poor knights, and that the number should be proportionate to the size of the fief. It is difficult to find out from historical sources if and when this requirement was in force in France. Sidney Painter says in his French Chivalry3 that 'in some advanced feudal states such as the duchy of Normandy a vassal's obligation to his lord was proportionate with the size of his fief', but he gives no historical source for this statement. According to Lemarignier,6 a hierarchy of fiefs developed in the twelfth century in France, with military aid due accordingly. He seems to be referring to the second half of the century. Certainly the system set out in our text would have required a stronger monarchy and a more centralised government than existed in France before 1150, or even later; it reflects a state of things characteristic rather of the Norman and Angevin kings of England. It is even less likely to have any relevance to the south of France, where the great lords were more or less independent of the king.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
74
soudaders The mention of poor knights makes it clear that these troops, though their provision was a feudal obligation, were not to consist of vavasseurs, but of landless knights, to be maintained as household knights. They would thus belong to the rather loose category of soudaders, or soudoiers, who fought for gain, in the form of maintenance, wages in money or in kind, or both. Since soudaders figure largely in our poem, or at least in a part of it, an examination of their status and r61e may help to supplement the historical evidence on this subject. The only mention of soudaders fighting in the king's army is line 1285, where Charles, rushing out to repel a surprise attack, 'A pres d'un soudader elme e aubert'. This passing mention shows that the poet takes for granted the presence in the king's household of soudaders, probably on a regular footing, since this incident occurs during a period of comparative peace. All the other examples concern the use of soudaders by Girart, or, occasionally, his vassals. They can be roughly divided into two categories, those attached on a permanent, or at least regular, footing to a lord, and those recruited temporarily for a particular campaign. The only explicit mention of the former occurs during the embassy of Fouque to Orleans to negotiate a settlement of the quarrel between Girart and Charles, an embassy whose failure was followed by the battle of Vaubeton. As Fouque prepares to leave the court, the abbe de Sainte Lei asks him what will happen, in the event of war, to those of his men whose lands lie in the region of Orleans (it is not made clear how Fouque came to have these vassals, but that is another question). 'Que feraz de tox ome(s)? Consel en prent. Irant o si serunt cai remanent? - Consel n'ai pres,' dis Folche, 'mon estient. Ne vuel perdent onor ne chasement; Mais cil qui nen ont terre ne tenement S'en ennent a Foucher, is mien parent, Qu'il fera del plus paubre ric e manent.' Es leuc Ten assegurent taus catre cent, Non falii uns per aur ne per argent.
(2155-63)
When they leave the court, the poet tells us that A Folcon sunt cregut mil chevaler, Od Folcher quatre cent, dungel legers, Qu'el prest toz a la cort a soudaders.
(2132-34)
One cannot help recalling here the famous appeal of Guillaume in the
Charroi de Nimes, although the cases are not quite parallel, because the appeal here is for a specific expedition: Ice di ge as povres bachelers As menus cops et as dras descirez, Quant ont servi por neant conquester, S'o moi se vueillent de bataille esprover,
Some feudal and military terms in 'Girart de Roussillon' Ge lor dorrai deniers et heritez, Chasteaus et marches, donjons et fermetez, Si le pals m'aident a conquester.
75
(6tf 1 -47)7
And a little later, the poet also mentions povres chevaliers, characteristically, the numbers are far less realistic than in Girart. Qui dont velst les povres escuiers, Ensemble o els les povres chevalers! Vont a Guillelme, le marchis au vis cler. En petit d'eure en ot trente milliers.
and,
(661-64)8
The practice of young knights or bacheliers attaching themselves for a limited period to a king or great lord is well known. The earliest literary examples are in the Lais of Marie de France. Of Eliduc we are told: Mut l'ama li re is e cheri; Un an entier l'ad retenu La fiance de lui en prist.
(266-69)9
The king's daughter speaks of him as both soudeer and chevalier: Jeo aim le novel soudeer, Eliduc, li bon chevaler.
(339-40)
and Mut ai aime un chevaler, Eliduc, le bon soudeer.
(1073-74)10
Chretien also speaks of soudoiers of noble birth: Qu'avuec aus uns soudoiers vint, Li nies le roi de Brandigan. Chies mon pere fu pres d'un an.
(6270-72)11
Yvain, though fighting for his lady and not for gain, is called vaillant sodoiier,12 and the variants of this line show that souduier and chevalier were interchangeable terms. In Le Roman de Thebes, which was probably composed at about the same time as Girart, there is one mention of soudoiers at the court in company with bacheliers:13 the young princes Thedeiis and Polinices are also called soudoier,11* which here may simply mean, as the editor suggests, 'chevaliers etrangers'. We should naturally expect the lais and romans to be concerned with individuals rather than with numbers. The historical narratives however speak of soudoiers in large numbers, serving on a semi-permanent basis. In the Roman de Brut, Vortigern advises the king:
76
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic Sire, dist il, si te piaiseit, Mis los e mis cunseil sereit Que tu enveiz pur chevaliers Des Pis d'Escoce soldeiers, Ki od tei seient en ta curt, Quel part que nostre guerre turt. Les Pis purras bien enveier La u tu en avras mestier.
(6583-90)
Benoit, in his Chronique des Dues de Normandie, tells us that when William the Conqueror returned to Normandy after his coronation: A ses chevaliers soudeiers Donna aveirs riches e chers. De sei les parti hautement.
(40259-61)16
This suggests that the soudoiers had served at least for the whole campaign, and either were no longer wanted or did not wish to leave Normandy permanently. The term soudader is also used by Marcabru and Bertran de Born, but it will be more convenient to consider these examples later, since it is not clear to which of our two categories they belong. Turning to historical sources, which are scanty, we are hampered by vocabulary difficulties. The exact equivalent of the term miles is not easy to determine. P. van Luyn speaks of milites, whom he defines as mercenaries, forming part of the familia of Foulque Nerra, in the eleventh century, who used to accompany him on journeys; twelve of them were sent by Foulque to assassinate Hugues de Beauvais.1 3. Boussard maintains that the successes of Henry II, from 1159 onward, were due to his use of mercenaries, but that these were not used by the king of France before 1180; this seems also to refer to the familia, or household knights.18 Marjorie Chibnall in a recent article takes this practice further back. Speaking of Henry I's activities in Normandy, she states that: 'it was in the king's mounted household troops, the familia regis, that mercenaries were most effectively employed'.19 She finds in Orderic Vital details about the circumstances and careers of these men, and concludes: 'Many of the knights of the familia were young men of good, even noble birth. It has been said of the knights who served for wages at this time that essentially they were of the same social class as those who served as vassals, and that any differences of rank .... certainly did not arise from the fact that they were paid.'20 We now come to the second category of soudaders - those who were hired in large numbers for a particular battle or short campaign. Apart from the Orleans incident quoted earlier, all the mentions of soudaders in our text occur after the second seizure of Roussillon by Charles, and belong to this category. At this stage, Girart has lost so much of his land to the king, with consequent loss of military strength, that he is reduced to hiring mercenaries. Gilbert de Senesgart advises him to withdraw to Dijon: E mandez Borgeinons e les Bovers, E prenez grant maisnade de soudeers;
Some feudal and military terms in 'Girart de Roussillon' Noi remaine a donar aurs ne deners, Ni henas ne graaus ne candelers.
77
(6367-70)
In the subsequent preparations for an attack on the convoy going to supply the royal garrison in Roussillon, we hear that Girart sends for his kinsmen and omes, and: O(e) qu'i sat bon ami per lui trames; E ag ent catre mile anz que moges.
(6487-88)
Unless this last line refers to them, we hear nothing of soudaders until after the battle, when Girart returns to Dijon and Fez espanre tant aur e tant diner, Tant mul, tant palefreit e tant dest(e)rer, Aiqui furent paiat gent soudader.
(6793-95)
Charles, however, almost immediately summons his men for another battle, and Girart once more resorts to hiring mercenaries. This time we are given more details: E mandat soudaders ab acest bruit: Prou lor dera argent e bon aur cuit. Girarz fait faire breus cent, e seele, E mandet chevalers per tote terre; Cil qui vout bon aver, Girarz li dere. Desci c'a catre mile funt metre sele, Qui vunt tuit a Dijon, qui qu'en pesere.
(6805-6)
(6808-12)
The third of these laisses similaires brings together vassals and soudaders', in fact, the distinction between them is not quite clear, especially in the case of the Bavarians: Lo cons Giratz mandet toz ses baruns, E tramet tros c'as monz per Bergeinuns, Boviers e Alemans tros c'a Saisuns. O ke sat bon vassal, aquel semuns, E pramet lor assaz e fait grant duns.
(6815-19)
The traitor who goes to warn the king of Girart's preparations distinguishes between feudal levies and mercenary troops: Que li cons a mandat tote sa gent, E a molt soudaders cui done argent.
(6914-15)
When Charles asks if he can give any idea of the numbers involved, the traitor answers that he can tell him the number of soudaders, for he has watched Girart paying them in advance:
78
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic Nes poi gins toz veeir ne aesmar, Mais de purs soudaders per achatar En i a catre mile, ques vi nombrar. Des lo matin del jor, ke 1'aube par, No fine a chevaliers d'aver donar.
(6924-28)
All these measures were in vain, for in this his last pitched battle Girart was heavily defeated and had to flee into exile. There is, however, one last occasion on which troops were hired in exactly the same way, and paid in advance. After the return of Girart and Berte from exile, Queen Elissent, who has brought about the reconciliation with the king, then wants to release Fouque from captivity. For this she needs help, not against his fair jailer, Aupais, but against the latter's cousin, Oudin, who is opposed to her plan to marry Fouque. U que relne sat vassal donzel, Tramet son don - argent e aur vermeil. De donar sunt ses tors e sui denteil.
(8195-97)
We notice that while Girart had promised payment, and indeed did pay the troops before the battle, Elissent sent the money before the recipients actually came! However, we must not rely on this evidence, for there is about this last part of the poem a less realistic atmosphere than in the rest of the poem. One detail is worth noting: the term maisnade is twice applied to these temporary soudaders, once, as has been seen in line 6368: E prenez grant maisnade de soudeers and later we are told: E Girarz a maisnade bone e grant, Li soudader bover e alemant.
(6858-59)
and in the last incident mentioned, when Fouque sees troops approaching, Aupais reassures him that they are: La maisnade Girard qui por te vent, Que tramet la relne . . .
(8362-63)
It is possible that elsewhere in the poem the term maisnade or even nuirit may include some soudaders of the first type, as did the familia of the Angevin kings, but we cannot either prove or disprove this. It is curious, though, that on two out of three occasions on which temporary soudaders were used, they should be called maisnade. The earliest mention of soldeiers in Old French chansons de geste, that in the Chanson de Roland, is rather baffling. Blancandrin, advising Marsile to offer great gifts to Charlemagne, adds: 'Ben en purrat luer ses soldeiers.' (34).21 This seems to take for granted the practice of hiring mercenaries, although the words are put into the mouth of the Saracen king. There is however no mention in the poem of soldeiers serving in the army of
Some feudal and military terms in 'Girart de Roussillon'
79
Charlemagne. Bedier in his glossary remarks 'll est douteux si on les employait comme combattants'.22 The Roman de Rou speaks of hiring them temporarily: De par tot manda soldeiers Ki al gaaig vont volentiers.
(6179-80)23
and in later texts such as Les Lorrains the practice is obviously frequent. Marjorie Chibnall mentions that Henry I 'occasionally used mercenaries of another type, hired in large numbers for a limited period, during the major campaigns of the first half of his reign'.24 This we have seen Girart do, but there the resemblance ends, for in Henry's case these casual men were apparently of a lower type, coarse and brutal, and he only used them when he must. There is no suggestion of this in Girart, and any acts of brutality killing of fugitives clinging to a cross and burning of churches with fugitives inside - are committed by Girart and his own men. The hired men are called bon vassal, vassal dongel and chevaliers; no pejorative terms are applied to them. Although some of the troops hired by Girart were Bavarians and Germans, the evidence we have found in Girart suggests the existence in France of a large number of young men whose services could be called upon, in an emergency, for payment. These are probably the same as the povres chevaliers recruited by Fouchier, and for whom Charles wished to make provision in his scheme for a standing army, killing, as it were, two birds with one stone. The two categories into which I divided the soudaders at the beginning of this article probably refer to the same people, the only difference being in the conditions of their employment. The existence of such a class of landless men is the subject of G. Duby in his article on Les Jeunes. He speaks of a class of landless young men who lived by hiring themselves out for military service, 'll semble a chacun normal que le fils de chevalier non etabli, non marie, prenne du champ et s'en aille au loin'. According to him 'les compagnies de jeunes formaient .... l'element de pointe de 1'agressivite feodale'.25 It may well be objected that, although Girart by its language belongs partly to the south of France, all our literary and historical parallels have been taken from the north. This is inevitable, because of the absence of evidence for the south, but it is also justified on other grounds. Girart's lands indeed included Provence, and if we count those of his father Drogon, extended into Catalonia. However, the spirit of the poem, particularly in the second half, from which all our evidence comes, is Burgundian. After the battle of Mont Amele, and the king's refusal to make peace, we hear that Charles by bribery has won the Gascons over to his side. The unpopularity of the Gascons and Provenqaux is reflected in Fouque's words to his men: Vos non es gienz Gascoin ne Provencal, Mais baron borgenon, sui natural.
(5775-76)
Non em gins Provencal, seu traitor; No li coven aver de nos pavor.
(5783-84)
and in their reply:
gO
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
In the absence of any Provencal epic of the same period, comparisons are not possible, but my impression is that our poem reflects conditions prevail g h0'hloweve^vve "do find that the reference in Girart to the duty of great lords to maintain povres chevaliers recall to some extent one of Marcabru s favourite themes. In Doas cuidas ai, compaignier, Marcabru addresses his audience equally as compaignier and as soudader, and as far as the obscurity of the style permits, one can interpret stanza III as describing the feelings of the soudader as their expectations of reward, or perhaps even of emp oymen , are disappointed: la vostra cuja, soudader, fai elusciar los baus Gaifier qu'en vis si balan, sem en gau, la cuja e' prometres failliz: nostre cujar fai desviar lo mons don issic la soriz qu'aissi vei los rics sordeziz c'om pro, contra donar, no.n au.
(19-27)
Marcabru's condemnation of the miserly rich lords finds an echo in words of Fouque: E si ac ric avar a cor felon Ki ne vuelle soffrir conduit ne don, Un li toille l'onor e dunst l'a bon.
(9487-89)
This moral obligation to keep open house explains, I think, the terms joi e deport in stanza VII of Pax in nomine Domini: e.l critz per aquest lavador versa sobre.ls plus rics captaus fraitz, faillitz, de proeza las, que non amon joi ne deport.
^ (60-63)
It is not only that the great lords refuse to take part in a crusade, but their meanness prevents them from maintaining a number of young men who might have formed a force for them to lead. In fact, they neglect to do what Fouque and Charles recommend in our text. Although Bertran de Born came too late to be contemporary with our poet, his evidence is, I think, worth looking at, since in his nostalgia for the good old days he may well have in mind an earlier period than his own. Though he does not seem to have taken part himself in the fighting, his attitude in welcoming war reflects that of those soudaders to whom the poet refers at the end of Girart (see later). In one of his planh on the young king, he speaks of the loss suffered by those who had depended on his bounty: Dolen e trist e pie de marrimen Son remasut li cortes soudadier Elh trobador e.lh joglar avinen,
(9-11)2 8
Some feudal and military terms in 'Girart de Roussillon1
81
In the other planh he enlarges on the theme of joi et deport, describing the generous hospitality from which the soudaders no doubt benefited: Gen acolhir e donar ses cor vaire E bel respos e be - siatz - vengut E gran hostal pagat e gen tengut, Dos e guarnirs et estar ses tort faire, Manjar ab mazan De viula e de chan Ab pro companho ....
(29-35)29
In fact, the young king was the pattern of what Marcabru wanted the southern lords to be. The joy which Bertran expresses at the prospect of war, and his scorn for a peaceful life, brings us back to the final scene of our poem, where similar sentiments are attributed to some of those listening to the Pope's appeal for peace: Vil tienent tals i a preecador, Qu'anc nen amerent paz ne joc d'ostor U ant tant ostagat a lor detor Que ja mais n'en serunt cuite fessor.
(9407-10)
In his final speech, Fouque acknowledges the problem of these young men donzels legiers, povres chevaliers - who now would not even be able to earn their living as soudaders; he suggests an outlet for their restless energies which would doubtless also be a means of enrichment: Or intrent chevaler en Ion sejor, E serent de sazun chien e ostor, Falcon e falconer e veneor, E qual le feran ore achatador E donzel galauber, chevaujador? Qui vol provar son cors ne sa valor, Si annent gerreiar gent paienor .... *
*
(9973-79) *
I hope to pursue further this examination of feudal and military terms in Girart. The three we have considered seem to take us in time and space some way from the mid-twelfth century and from the Poitou region. One cannot draw conclusions from so little evidence, though we may some time have to re-open the question of the date of the poem and perhaps of its unity, since ail the passages in question are found in the second half. In the meantime we can only add yet another puzzle to those set us by Girart de Roussillon.
g2
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
NOTES 1.
Girart de Roussillon, chanson de geste, edited by W. S.A.T.F., 3 vols (Paris, 1953-55), lines 36-39.
Mary Hackett,
2.
ibid., lines 3400-8.
3.
Girart de Roussillon, chanson de geste, translated by Paul Meyer (Paris, 1884), p.301, n. 5.
4.
ibid., p.lxxvii.
5. Sidney Painter, French Chivalry (Baltimore, 1940), p.6. 6. 3.F. Lemarignier, La France Medievale: 1970), p. 134.
Institutions et Societe (Paris,
7. Le Charroi de Nimes, edited by 3.-L. Perrier, C.F.M.A. (Paris, 1931). 8. ibid. 9.
Marie de France, Lais, edited by A. Ewert (Oxford, 1947): Eliduc.
10. ibid. 11. Chretien de Troyes, Erec et Enide, edited by M. Roques, C.F.M.A. 1952).
(Paris,
12. ibid., Le Chevalier au Lion, edited by M. Roques, C.F.M.A. (Paris, 1960), line 3194. 13. Le Roman de Thebes, edited by G. Raynaud de Lage, C.F.M.A. (Paris, 1966-68), lines 4377-80. 14. ibid., line 1015. 15. Le Roman de Brut, de Wace, edited by I. Arnold, S.A.T.F. (Paris, 1938). 16. Chronique des Dues de (Uppsala, 1951).
Normandie, par
Benoit, edited by
C.
Fahlin
17. P. van Luyn, 'Les milites du Xle siecle', Le Moyen Age, 26 (1971), 31. 18.3. Boussard, 'Les mercenaires au Xlle siecle: Flenri II Plantagenet et les origines de l'armee de metier', Bib. Ec. Chartes, 106 (1945), 189-224. 19. M. Chibnall, 'Mercenaries and the Familia Regis under Henry I', History, 62 (1977), 15. 20. ibid., p.22. 21. La Chanson de Roland, edited by F. Whitehead (Oxford, 1962); 133. 22. La Chanson de soldeiers.
Roland, commentee par J. Bedier (Paris,
cf.
line
1927), gloss.
23. Le Roman de Rou, de Wace, edited by A.3. Holden, S.A.T.F. (Paris, 1970-73). 24. M. Chibnall, op. cit. p.l 1.
Some feudal and military terms in 'Girart de Roussillon'
83
25. G. Duby, 'Au Xlle siecle: les "jeunes" dans la societe aristocratique', Armales: Economies, etc. 19 (1964), 841-46. 26. P. Ricketts, 'Doas cuidas ai, compaigner de Marcabru, edition critique, traduction et commentaire', Melanges Camproux, I, 183. 27. Marcabru, Pax in nomine Domini, in Martin de Riquer, Los Trovadores, I, 209. 28. Die Lieder von Bertrans von Bom, edited by C. Apel (Halle, 1932), no. 43. 29. ibid., No. 17.
The Elephants in the Strassburg Alexander A T. Hatto The continuation of Lamprecht's Alexander has a passage with some curious information about elephants.1 Alexander meets these animals in the hostile army of the Indian King Porus and the problem he is set by their fabulous nature is no less worthy of his cunning in the romance, than were the real elephants of his generalship in the battle on the Hydaspes. Hitherto the philologist has not faced them. Kinzel was not aware that the bulk of the story was to be found in a single book of the Vulgate Bible, which, having been retained by Luther, is more in the public eye in Germany than in England, where it was rejected - the Book of the Maccabees. It will appear later that another passage in the Bible, the satirical eulogy of the strength of Behemoth, was also of great importance in determining just which features of the elephant as portrayed by classical authors, should gain credence in the Middle Ages. It is the aim of the present enquiry, however, not only to name the literary sources of the account in the Alexander but also to survey the criteria which its medieval readers may have been able to command had they been inclined to examine the quaintly logical story. This will involve discussion of manuscript illuminations, textiles and chessmen as well as the growth of tradition since ancient times. The Elephant of the Book of the Maccabees: Its Vulnerable Spot, Its Mahout, Castle and Bellicosity Before more recondite questions are dealt with, the claim that the chief source of the account in Alexander is to be found in the Book of the Maccabees must be upheld. This will best be done by printing the Vulgate text as well as Kinzel's, which runs thus: man ne mac si niwit wunden, wen in den nabel under, daz ist ein michil wunder. ist abir ieman so tumb, er si alt oder junc, der iz in den nabel wil irslahen, der mac niemer so gegahen, er ne gwinnis groze not und den bitteren tot; wande swenne so erz stichit, schire iz sih selben richet und vellet uf in dernider und ne lebet niwit langer sider.
(4341-53)
86
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic iz treget wol ane zwibel in strite und in sturme berhfriden unde turme und riter dar inne. iz wiset mit grozeme sinne sin meister, der da mite kan. iz ne mac nieren gegan, daz lant ne si dar ebene. beginnit man ime ze gebene roten win oder blut, des gewinnet iz freislichen mut.
'^7
Vulgate, 1 Macc. VI. 30 Et erat numerus exercitus eius centum millia peditum, et viginti millia equitum, et elephanti trigintaduo, docti ad proelium .... 34 et elephantis ostenderunt sanguinem uvae et mori, ad acuendos eos in proelium. 35 et astiterunt singulis elephantis mille viri .... et quingenti equites ordinati unicuique bestiae electi erant .... 37 Sed in turres ligneae super eos firmae protegentes super singulas bestias: et super eas machinae: et super singulas viri virtutis triginta duo, qui pugnabant desuper, et Indus magister bestiae .... 43 Et vidit Eleazar filius Saura unam de bestiis loricatam loricis regis; et erat eminens super ceteras bestias. et visum est ei quod in ea esset rex. et dedit se ut liberaret populum suum, et acquireret sibi nomen aeternum. Et cucurrit ad earn audacter in medio legionis interficiens a dextris, et a sinistris, et cadebant ab eo hue atque illuc. Et init sub pedes, et occidit eum: et cecedit in terram super ipsum, et mortuus est illic. The use of elephants in warfare, their turrets and warriors are common to the Book of the Maccabees and the Latin source of the Alexander legend (vide infra). In the former there are also the mahout, sanguinem uvae, which seems to have been translated twice - once idiomatically and once literally, as if from a gloss -, and the way to kill an elephant. The Vulgate text does not say why Eleazar had to take the beast from below. The rationalist Nicolas de Lyra (1265-1349) says: 'percutiens in ventre, ubi non erat armatus', which may actually have been the case, though it does not help much, beyond suggesting that an earlier commentator may have had the same idea. Pliny states: 'durissimum dorso tergus, ventri molle', which accords well with Eleazar's chosen approach.3 Ambrose is more explicit and brings in weapons, maybe under the direct inspiration of the passage in the Book of the Maccabees: 'dum ventre caeterisque juxta mollioribus ad vulnus patet. Nam dorsum eius caetera exteriora non ulla facile solent tela penetrare'.4 And again: 'bestia quoque nec nuda facile penetrabilis ferro sit, et munita loricis, obvias sine sui periculo acies secet et conterat turmas' (col. 254). The beast Behemoth in Job, XL-XLI was often identified with the elephant (vide infra 97). In verse XL, 11 it is said: 'Fortitudo eius in lumbis eius, et virtus illius in umbilico ventris eius'. Good tactics demand that a forlorn hope be directed at the very seat of power, and so it is possible that the identification of Behemoth with the elephant may have given rise to the more explicit version of the Alexander and other texts.
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
87
So much for authority. It is nevertheless feasible that the story may have some foundation in logic and general knowledge. It will be seen that one of the fathers of the account in the Alexander made a generalization from the ivory commonly known, to the effect that every bone of the animal was made of the same solid material. People did not even need to see the hide to know that it was tough, and in the knowledge that some parts of the hide unspecified were tough, they could make a similar deduction that all was so, which would leave just a few obviously vunerable spots, among them the navel. Orosius' history of the world, which was popular enough in tone to be translated into Old English, relates that elephant-hide was used to cover shields in the Numidian wars.5 Elephant-hide was used to make the bellows of the giant organ in Jerusalem, a copy of which was sent to Pippin.6 It is possible that the hide was used more frequently a few centuries later when the pneumatic organ was in general use, and it would be idle to dwell on the impression of toughness made by lungs which, it is said, could be heard for miles around and needed gangs of strong men to work them. Nor is it altogether improbable that elephant-hide was to be had on the market for medical use. In bestiaries it is frequently said to be a good antidote against poison, together with elephant ivory.7 (This is clearly a transference from another ivory, from the narwhale's tusk, which was sold throughout the Middle Ages and well into the Age of Reason as unicorn's horn. Such a transference would have been helped by the ancient story that the elephant's traditional enemy was the venomous dragon). Sixteenth-century superstition gives the hide as an antidote against knee-cramp,9 which will readily be understood as a fresh case of sympathetic magic inspired by another feature of the elephant that will have to be discussed - its lack of knees! (Alexander 4365: 'wandiz ne hat niht knieschiben'). Prescription meant supply then no less than to-day and it may be taken for certain that something called elephant-hide was to be had on the market, though whether it was elephanthide in fact can no longer by ascertained, since the survival of inscribed alicorns (or 'unicorn's horns) affords almost the only material evidence in support of the various literary charges against quacks and huxters. But granted that the hide is tough, the navel would logically be one of the weak spots. Logic and authority are in accord. However this detail was come by, it is also found in AElfric's Homily on the Maccabees: pa haepenan pa ferdon to pam gefeohte swype. and mid mor-berium gebyldon pa ylpas. forpan pe mor-berian him is metta leofost. paer waes swype egeslic here paera haepenra manna. ac swa-peah iudas heom eode to mid wige. and ofsloh paer sona six hund wera. and his geferena eleazarus hatte. arn to anum ylpe pe paer (aenlicost) waes. wende paet se cyning waere on pam wig-huse pe he baer. he arn mid atogenum swurde betwux pam eorode middan. and sloh aefre on twa healfa paet hi sweltende feollon op paet he to pam ylpe com. and eode him on under. stang pa hine aet pam nauelan paet hi lagon paer begen. heora egper opres slaga.1 0 (574-87)
88
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
Konrad von Megenberg agrees: 'der helfant wirt niht verwunt wan datz (sic) dem nabel'.11 Konrad's source, in the main, is held to be the Liber de Natura Rerum. The long rimed Buch der Maccabtier composed by a member of the Teutonic Order before 1322 does not mention this detail: Under den elfant er do quam, der da den tot von imme nam.12
(3349-50)
The Liber de Natura Rerum in at least one of its branches shows a misunderstanding of 'sanguinem uvae et mori, ad acuendos eos in proelium' (I Macc. VI, 34). Konrad von Megenberg writes that according to some 'so der elephant erziirnet werd, also daz er ainen muot gevah ze streiten mit andern tiern oder mit dem menschen, der im dan zaigt ain rot wazzer oder rote^n wein und stellt ein greindez swein fur in, so verleust er alle sein manhait'. The same opposite rendering of acuendos is found in Jacob van Maerlant's Der Naturen Bloeme, which is also largely based on the De Natura Rerum: 'Toghemen haer roet wijn of bloet, So verwast dem die moet.14
(1377-78)
Quoting a 's-Gravenhage manuscript of the De Natura Rerum in the Royal Library (signature?) Verwijs gives: 'audaces nimium, maxime cum eis in proelio vivere vel mori sanguis ostenditur', and suggests 'vinum vel mortui' for 'vivere vel mori' (op. cit. 72). 'Mortui sanguis' shows a fine appreciation of the Middle Ages, but there can be little doubt that the biblical 'sanguinem uvae et mori' is the ultimate source.15 After these doubts and errors it would be well to conclude this part of the enquiry with the masterly translation of the authentic source in the rimed Buch der Maccabaer: Elefanden gremzten sie den mut und zeigten en roten wein gut und daz saf von mulberen, daz sie deste kuner weren.
(3291-94)
The Elephant's Solid Bones si ne hant in ir gebeine, nu merket waz ih meine, nieren nehein marc.
(Alexander 4330-32)
No wide search is needed to explain this. Where the only data are ivory carvings and one's mother tongue, scarcely any other conclusion is possible than that elfen bein is unqualified elephant's bone. Our version makes no mention of tusks, and we are abandoned to the unconscious myth-making play of etymology. Kluge-Gotze, Etymologisches Worterbuch der deutschen Sprache (1934) states, under 'Elfenbein', that ivory, as the only part of the elephant known to the Germanic tribes in early times, was called by a germanicized form of the Latin name for the entire creature - OHG (h)elfan(t), OE yip; and that a new term was evolved for ivory (presumably when more was known of the animal itself) - (h)elfenbein etc. It is interesting
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
89
to note that Homeric eXc^ots stood for ivory alone, while Arabic 'aj 'ivory' is derived from Sanskrit gadja 'elephant'.16 The etymological suggestion that elephant's bone was made of ivory was not entirely absent from medieval French, since olifans = 'ivory', 'oliphant' or 'elephant'. The naive idea that all of the elephant's bones were solid may well have found support in learned works in such turns of phrase as: 'et habent inflexibiles pedes, tibias et crura propter pondus corporis sustinendum: et habent ossa solida sine juncturas', where it is not clear whether the bones are called 'solid' because they are are jointless, or because their cross-section would reveal them to be without a cavity (vide infra 94 for whole quotation). It is certain that the author of the Alexander did not respect Pliny, nor perhaps even know him. hoc (dentes) solum ebur est; cetero et in his quoque, qua corpus intexit, vilitas ossea. quamquam nuper ossa etiam in laminas secari coepere paenuria: etenim rara amplitudo iam dentium praeterquam ex India reperitur (op. cit. VIII, 4) The latter half of this statement may have occasioned the idea of William le Clerc that ivory was made from elephants' bones: Des os fet horn yvoire chere, Dont l'em oeuvre en meinte manere.17
(3287-88)
It is to be observed that William also ignores the tusks, which makes a more logical story. There will be more of such logic. Konrad von Megenberg, usually so clear, offers a garbled version of another passage in Pliny, who says: 'and then tired (from being hunted) they break them (their tusks) by smiting them against a tree and redeem themselves with this ransom' (op. cit. VIII, 3). But Konrad says: wenne man die helfande jagt, so valient si auf herte erd oder auf stain und zerbrechent iriu pain dar umb, daz man si iht toet durch des pains willen, wan helfen pain ist gar edel und haizt ze latein ebur (op. cit. 134). If the first case of 'pain' means legs or bones - as it seems to, else why should they need to fall? - it is a strange way of avoiding the hunter and smacks more of self-immolation than self-defence. Konrad was not sure where the ivory came from.
The Elephant and its Castle man mach uf si buwen, willit irs getruwen, turme unde berchfride.
(Alexander 4334-36)
We might just as well believe it, for otherwise we should be out of sympathy with several more elaborate passages in Middle High German literature to follow. The direct source of the Provencal Alexander on which the Middle High German one was originally based, Leo of Naples' De Preliis, supports
90
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
neither buwen, nor berchfride, but these variations may be allowed the poet: 'elephantes, in quorum dorsis turres ligneae elevatae et per unamquamque turrim triginta homines existebant'.18 This tallies with the quotation from the Book of the Maccabees, with the exception that the latter prefers the number thirty-two, both for the number of elephants engaged and for the men they each carry. In the ancient campaigns they can only have carried some three to five men. Aelian, ever persuasive, restricts himself to three: XIII, 9 'ceterum militaris elephantus thoracio, ut vocant, aut etiam nudo dorso suo, tres bellatores fert'.19 But when the numbers begin to rise the howdah must grow into a castle and lifting to building, as the following quotations will show: uf sehs helfande zwei hundert sarjande. sehs helfande vuort er; die truogen nach des heldes ger wichus unde bercfrit. da riten tausent riter mit und vunf tusent sarjant. Die helfande volgeten mit dem her nach ir gelertem sit20 gegen den vinden uf den graben. diu wichus waren daruf erhaben gelich hoch der mure.
(Wigalois 10828-29)
(ibid. 10498-502)
(ibid. 10982-86)
Hugo von Trimberg's Renner: Und uf im treit wol vierzig man Mit wapen, als ich gelesen han.21
(21745-46)
Another manuscript of this worthy composition has fifty men in agreement with a source quoted by no less a person than Vincent of Beauvais, De Natura Rerum.22 It only remained for the Strieker to tidy up the story: ein tier daz heizet helfant, daz enist dir niht wol erkant, des kraft ist so staete, swer kunde mit geraete eine burc daruf geladen, daz enmohte im niht geschaden. nu sint meister in dem lande, die heizent der helfande zwen zesamen fiieren, daz sie sich niht mugen beriieren, sie heizent den wait vellen und machen vil staeten swellen und fuegent die daruf zwischen den buoc und die huf .... und setzent daruf feste
(Daniel 585-90)
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
91
beide von marmelsteine i inrl \ri~\rt ho I -f i und von helfenbeine.
(ibid. 605 ff)
When Solomon speaks of towers of ivory, need the Strieker hold back? And were there not elephants with pillars of stone on their backs, in Italian Romanesque churches? The turres common to the Latin sources have been variously conceived as wichus (/AElfric: wig-hus), turme or berchfride (cf. Ulrich von Eschenbach's Alexander, 19890 ff. 'ich han vernomen .... wie daz vil helfande tragen vil berevride').24 It is probable that illuminators and poets have influenced one another here. There is no set design for the structure on an elephant's back in the illustrated manuscripts, though most are towers or castles. The Harley Manuscript 4751 (British Museum) and the closely related MS Cambridge Univ. Libr. I.i.4.26,25 both Latin bestiaries, show a trellis-like structure on the animal's back of scaling-tower type (fols. 8r and 7r respectively). This interpretation of turres may have been inspired by the use of elephants in ancient warfare for storming fortifications, in the manner of the elephants in Wigalois 10982 ff. (ut supra). MS 673A of the University of Copenhagen, an Icelandic Latin bestiary, has an elephant of wolfish type with an open wooden frame on its back containing seven warriors.26 An inscription states that the elephant can be used for fighting as in the Book of the Maccabees. Wigalois and the Strieker's Daniel contain references to a more peaceful use for the elephant's broad back. er hiez bereiten durch ir gemach ein harte schoene kastel, ze maze hoch und sinwel, geriht uf einen helfant, daz man vil wol bedecket vant mit pfelle von Alexandrie. drinne min frouwe Larie mit zwelf junevrouwen reit, die waren rich und gemeit. vil groze gezierde truoc man drin; mit richen tepten sidin bestreuwet man daz kastel .... enmitten dar inne hienc ein muckennetze sidin. mit golde was gehangen drin ein kristalle, luterr danne ein glas, daz vil wol gefullet was mit balsam der gap guoten smac.
(Wigalois 10345 ff.)
niuwe bluomen, gruenez gras was ie touwigez drin gestreut. The
ladies
entertain
themselves
with
music
(ibid. 10613-14) and
games,
among
them
kurrier, a kind of chess, for which they use not men of wood, it is expressly said, but of ivory.
Ivory was very expensive in the eleventh and twelfth
92
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
centuries and later. The Cologne School frequently used walrus tusk for its carvings and the implication in Wigalois is that the queen's men were of the material appropriate to her high rank (10581 ff.). Later, we read: Erec und sin geselleschaft swenne die wolden groze kraft herzenlicher vreude spehen und minnicliche schoene sehen, so giengen si zer kunigin .... die lie man uf daz kastel They also fly falcons as they ride nearby (10660 ff.).
(ibid. 10954 ff.) The Daniel (575 ff.)
supplies some further information: Min her ist maneges geret, swa er so hin keret, swie groze tageweide er rite, sin hus gat im allez mit .... ez geschicht ane groze list, und sage dir rechte wie ez ist: ein tier daz heizet helfant (etc. ut supra). These are only distorted accounts of how oriental potentates were wont to travel. Wigalois well renders the luxury of the apartment, and but for his exaggeration the Strieker has some idea of how it was built on a frame slung between two elephants (605 ff. supra). Compare the later, but authentic account of Marco Polo: Et le grant Sire vait sus quatre olifans, sus quoi a fait moult belle chambre de fust, qui est, dedens, toute couverte de draps a or batuz; et dehors est couverte de cuir de lyons. Et il tient toute fois o lui laiens douze jerfaus de meilleurs que il ait. E sont o lui aussi pluseurs barons qui li tiennent compaignie. Et aucune fois alant, le seigneur, en sa chambre, et parlant a ses barons, qui vont aussi entour moult pres a cheval, li diront: 'sire, grues passent'. E il, de maintenant, fait descouvrir sa chambre, et les voit, etc.27
Wigalois has a further reference to the elephant: sin banier was alsus gevar: geteilet wiz unde rot. enmitten dar inne bot ein tier von golde liehten schin; daz muose wol gezieret sin, geschicket als ein helfant: da bi sin wafen was bekant.
(10479-85)
This is a pleasant thought of Wirnt, the author, but really the elephant (and castle) was not displayed until towards the end of the Middle Ages. It may possibly have been used somewhere in the East, but finds no place in Saracenic
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
93
heraldry.28 The taboo on graven images of men, which led to the creation of abstract chess-men in place of the pictorial ones from India, seems to have limited the animal designs in Islamic heradlry to three or four, by a mysterious contagion. In a later section it will be seen how this taboo was instrumental in turning the elephant-piece into a bishop.
The Elephant's Unbending Legs alsiz vellet ouh dernider, uf ne komet iz niwit sider; iz muz da ligende bliben, wandiz ne hat niht knieschiben; wellent irs gelouben, des ne mach iz niht gebogen an den schenkelen sin gebeine.
(Alexander 4362-68)
The story of the elephant's inflexible legs is very old. It was told by Ctesias, the physician of Artaxerxes II, and he is said to have made the observation from an autopsy.29 If he made his incision in the precise middle of the leg he certainly could not have discovered a joint, as any child could tell him to-day. He can have seen the elephant alive no more than can the people who repeated his story in one form or another for the better part of two thousand years after Aristotle confuted it.30 For the elephant gracefully flexes its legs in motion and bends them into flowing curves when kneeling to receive a burden. Some statements of Pliny convey the motion to the life. Having mentioned that they adore the king and kneel before him and offer him garlands he goes on to say that they are wont to 'make good sport in a kind of Moriske daunce' and afterwards 'to goe on ropes and cords', while 'at a pastime exhibited by Germanic Caesar .... some were so nimble and well-practised that they would enter into a hall .... where the tables were set full of guests, and passe among them so gently and daintily, weighing as it were their feet in going, so as they would not hurt or touch any of the companie’as they were drinking'.31 Those who handed down the story of the jointless legs, among them the continuator of Lamprecht's Alexander, can have read their Pliny, if they read him at all, neither attentively nor intelligently. A lack of harmony elsewhere with circumstantial accounts in Pliny favours the view that he was not easily accessible, nor much sought after as an authority, though he is often quoted by such intellectuals as Vincent of Beauvais. Apart from its literary charm the uncharitable legend owes its long life despite Aristotle and Pliny to its apt characterization of Adam's spiritual inflexibility after his Fall. Christian men were invited to contemplate a drama enacted in a timeless present, where an elephant falls down and cannot rise owing to its known deficiency, and twelve others come to its aid but fail to raise it. Whereupon a little one, which never omits to appear, succeeds. This signifies that where twelve prophets failed to help Adam to his feet again, Christ in His humility triumphed.32 Ctesias had given the story a good start in the world by using the elephant's infirmity to motivate its capture. According to him it would go to sleep leaning against a tree, which the hunter would mark and then saw half through in his absence. The next time it received the elephant's weight the tree would naturally give way, and the great beast would be caught. This story was felt to be so good that Caesar
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
94
risked it in his description of the alces in De Bello Gallico, Book VI, 26-7: 'crura sine nodis articulisque habent'; Pliny tells it of the achlin (op. cit. VIII, 16); and Aelian of the monoceros or unicorn (op. cit. XVI, 20). Pliny had first¬ hand information of the elephant, and his and Aristotle's dissension on the subject of knee-joints was never stifled, whatever the symbolical interest of the other story. The tradition of these conflicting accounts provides apt material for the study of blind motives. Vincent of Beauvais had read both accounts and made no attempt to reconcile them, but referred to his authorities by name (op. cit. XIX, 39-40). Bartholomew of Glanville is not content to compile. He makes a disastrous hash of the story, for though his elephant is taught to know the king and adore him and bend its knees in worship of him, yet, for the sake of the hunter s stratagem as told by Ctesias, it is unable to rise from a fall. All will agree with Bartholomew that the reconciliation of Pliny with the Physiologus was cheap at the price of omitting to say why the elephant could not get up. The following quotations betray some effort of thought. Philippe de Thaon says: Es jambes par nature nen ad que une jointure.34
(754)
William le Clerc with all the legal resources of a Norman states: E si a genoiilons esteit, Ja par sei ne relevereit
(op. cit. 3295-96)
Konrad von Megenberg is no more willing to commit himself: etleich sprechent auch, daz der elephant in der jugent seiniu knie gepiegen mug, aber in dem alter nicht, wan si erstorrent (op. cit. 136). For the benefit of his pupils he adds that the same applies to clerical knees. Saint Thomas' opinion is affected by his desire to find as many analogies as possible between the elephant and Behemoth: Tertio describit motum elephantis, de quibus dicitur, quod habent inflexibiles pedes, tibias et crura propter pondus corporis sustinendum: et habent ossa solida sine juncturis, et ad hoc designandum dicit: (Ossa eius velut fistulae aeris (Job, XL, 13)) quia flecti non possunt, sicut nec fistulae aeris, et hoc refertur ad exteriora organa motus, quae sunt tibiae et crura, interiora autem organa motus, sunt cartilagines quaedem, et nervi, quae etiam in elephantibus, non facile flectuntur. et quantum ad hoc subdit: (cartilago illius quasi laminae ferreae (Job XL, 18)).35 If Albertus Magnus had no other merits he would have earned his epithet by the test of elephant's knee-bones:
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
95
Crura autem eorum sunt magna et superius et inferius fere aequalis magnitudinis sicut columnae: et licet in multa divident pedem, tamen natura conjunxit pedum digitos ut ex hoc per fortificetur, et hac de causa etiam flexuras post genua in cruribus dicuntur non habere, et forte habent flexuras non laxas sed strictas: et ideo putantur non habere ab imperitis: quia si nullas haberent flexuras in cruribus, non haberent gressum ordinatum.36 Knee-joints are granted, but the discussion has been transferred one remove lower. The humble Strieker thinks that elephants only do not need to bend their legs, they are so strong: swer kunde mit geraete eine burc daruf geladen, daz enmohte im niht geschaden, ez enwurde niemer miiede. swie vil man daruf geluede, ez gebueget niemer siniu bein.
(Daniel 588-93)
This strenuous ratiocination had as little effect on literature until well into the seventeenth century as any authentic traveller's account in or out of Hakluyt. Henry of Navarre, the friend of Montaigne, had presented Elizabeth with an elephant that had captured the imagination of London, men had circumnavigated the world and had held converse with Rajahs, but dramatists could still express opposite views of this anatomical conundrum! In this matter Chapman thinks fit to support Ctesias: 'S'light, courtier down! I hope you are no elephant, you have joints'. (All Fools V.i). Shakespeare and Massinger are for Aristotle, and perhaps for their own eyes. In Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare's imagery often returns to one or another aspect of the theme. In I.ii Ajax is 'as slow as the elephant'. In Il.iii Ajax is again called an elephant and later on in the same scene Ulysses says of skulking Achilles: 'The elephant hath joints, but none for courtesy: his legs are legs for necessity, not for flexure'. In I.iii 'the splitting wind makes flexible the knees of knotted oaks' and throughout the play there are references to 'stiff joints' and 'supple knees' besides, nor is the context always one of pride. Massinger affords ocular demonstration of what Shakespeare states dogmatically: 'The elephants have found their joints, too'. (Stage direction - they kneel) (The Old Law V).37 It is a case of a stage joke, and Chapman's dissension from what any groundling might have known as an eye-witness cannot be taken too seriously. But the Elizabethans must have entertained strange feelings to see the elephant dispose of the assertions of their Encyclopedists with a graceful obeisance before the Queen, and the thoughtful will re-live their wonder not only in face of the exotic but at the precarious nature of science. The illuminator was as free to shelve the issue of knee-joints as Bartholomew of Glanville, though his wiles were more gracious than those of that shifty cleric. He could conceal the elephant's legs by interposing another and equally fascinating subject, a dragon in BM MS Reg. 12.C.XIX (62a), a lion in BM MS Reg. 20.B.XX (41b), horses and men in battle in BM MS Reg. 15.D.V (50a); or, more blatantly, rising ground in BM MS Reg. 16.G.VI1 (133b). Some
96
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
animals have legs which make a very rigid impression. Perhaps it was this rigidity which inspired Caesar's informants in their description of the elks vet. supra). Thus there are many elephants in the manuscripts furnished with the legs of animals which have either a solid or cloven hoof. Those who identified Behemoth with the elephant would have noticed that 'he eateth grass like an ox' (dob, XL, 15) and would have been inclined to include him among those that divide the hoof. In the illuminations the elephant may also have equine legs, for example in BM MSS Reg. 20.A.V (53a, 75b); 15.E.VI (16b); Harl. 1526 (4a), 4979 (51a, 74a). But where horses and elephants of this kind meet in the same picture, as regularly in the battle of Alexander against Porus, the horses prance and the elephants stand with all four legs planted firmly on the ground, looking very staid and non-committal for all their theoretical joints (for example in BM MSS Harl. 4979 (51a) and Add. 15268 (24a)). Perhaps the view expressed by St Thomas is evident here, that the movable parts are inside! In deference to a literary tradition they have lost all semblance of destructive cavalry and instead have come to look as much like objects of siege warfare as the castles on their backs. In BM MS Harl. 4979 (74a) not one of a gruesome herd of nine wild elephants is stirring a leg. A further way of compromise in the pictorial art was to give the reader a choice. This way is taken by the illuminator of MS Cambridge Univ. Libr. I.i. 4.26, a Latin bestiary, which under 'elephant' shows a reasonable animal with legs having no pronounced knee-joints, though somewhat equine in appearance and clovenhoofed (fo. 7a). On another page there is a picture of the Dragon engaged in its traditional fight with the elephant, which here is a beast with a mere tapir¬ like proboscis and prancing equine legs (fo. 46b). From this it may be seen that the continuator of the Strassburg Alexander was wise to give an unambiguous account of the elephant. His creature was to run its race under a severe handicap and he rightly saw to it that it should be fitted to bear it. He accordingly selected features which make for rigidity of construction, among them legs without knee-joints. But he was not the first German poet to allude to this peculiarity, for Otfrid writes (4,1,13 ff.): Sar Kriachi ioh Romani iz machont so gizami, iz machont sie al girustit, so thih es uuola lustit: Sie machont iz so rehtaz ioh so filu slehtaz, iz ist gifuagit al in ein selp so helphantes bein. His reference is to narrative that is well-composed. Whether Otfrid is to rank with those who inspired him must be left undecided, for they are not named, but one's impression on reading his verse, undeniably, is of being carried through the story on legs which have no joints.
Saint Thomas' identification of Behemoth with the Elephant These last three sections on the solidarity, strength and inflexibility of the elephant's bones are best summarized by a verse in praise of Behemoth: 'His bones are as strong as pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.' (Job, XL, 18). And while we are with Behemoth, St Thomas' parallels between this passage in Job and Aristotle's Historia Animalium can well be enumerated. In his introduction to his argument St Thomas says that devils, by a superior nature they share with angels, could aptly be described in the guise of certain
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
97
outstanding and somewhat monstrous beasts. Of terrestrial animals the elephant is pre-eminent in size and strength and therefore the Lord describes the Devil in his image (St Thomas identifies the marine monster, The Leviathan, with the whale).38 The first parallel is between the phrase 'Behemoth which I made with thee' (Job, XL, 15) and Aristotle's statement that the elephant is the most easily tamed, the gentlest and most intelligent of animals (St Thomas, op. cit. 249b, Aristotle, op. cit. IX, 46 = 630b). A later commentator, Nicholas de Lyra, is aware that the 'expositores catholici' identify Behemoth with the elephant, but basing his argument on Genesis, asserts that if it was made contemporaneously with Man it cannot be an elephant. Concerning Job, XL, 16 'Lo, now, his strength is in his loins and his force is in the navel of his belly' the Saint claims that the male's great weight and the manner of his approach to the female when mating, as described by Aristotle, would permit one to believe he was very strong in those parts (250a, cf. Aristotle V, 2 = 540a). The second half of the next verse, 'the sinews of his stones are wrapped together', has something of a parallel in Aristotle, who says: 'the testicles are not visible, but are concealed inside in the vicinity of the kidneys' (II,i = 500b). St Thomas' remarks on the elephant's inflexible legs and the corresponding passage in Job have each been quoted (supra 94,96). The quibble that they are nevertheless mobile within the body - 'interiora autem organa motus sunt cartilagines quaedam' - to some extent meets Aristotle's confutation of Ctesias' story that they are inflexible, and this allows him to continue: 'cartilagines quaedam et nervi, quae etiam in elephantibus, non facile flectuntur. et quantum ad hoc subdit: (Job, XL, 18 Cartilago illius quasi laminae ferreae)' (250a). (The Authorised Version lamely renders 'bones' for cartilago as well as for ossa). Job, XL, 22 The shady trees cover him with their shadows; the willows of the brook compass him about' is matched by Aristotle V, 2 (= 540a): 'Elephants also copulate in lonely places, especially by river-sides in their usual haunts'. Riversides, says St Thomas, 'quia circa fluvios solent esse arundineta et salices, loca umbrosa'. The next verse says: 'Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth'. For this St Thomas found in Aristotle: 'an elephant has been known to drink right off fourteen Macedonian metretae of water, and another eight metretae later in the day' (VIII, 9 = 596a). Ambrose would again seem to be colouring his account with biblical reminiscences when he says of the trunk: 'ideoque concava est, quo ad restinguendam tantae belluae sitim plenos lacus hauriat, aut collecto flumine possit inundare pontantem' (op. cit. col.253). This is surely one of the more closely reasoned arguments so far dealt with. The identification has never entirely gone out of fashion. The Authorized Version prints in the margin against Behemoth: 'or the elephant, as some think'. Cruden refers to it under 'Elephant' in his Concordance, and it was still remembered in the great commentaries and biblical dictionaries of the nineteenth century, though for no really cogent reasons the hippopotamus came to be preferred.
98
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic The Elephant's Trunk swen ez mit siner zungen in dem sturme mac irlangen des leben ist irgangen.
(Alexander 4359-61)
In his edition Kinzel points out that the trunk must have been confused with the tongue (p.491, note on line 4359). The confusion must have been shared by some others, illuminators and scholars alike. William le Clerc (3290 ff.) says: Quant il vent en un pre herbu, Hors de sa boche ist un boel, Od quei il se pest el prael. Altrement n'avendreit il pas, Sanz sei agenoiller si bas (etc. ut supra). BM MS Cott. Tib. B.V. significantly enough a pre-conquest manuscript, shows the trunk as a tongue, though it is curled up like a trunk (fo. 81a). MS Bodley 264 gives the trunk issuing from the mouth as stated by William le Clerc (2b). The elephants of carved wooden misericords belonging to the fifteenth century and later nevertheless still show the trunk as a pipe with a beli-shaped end issuing from the mouth.39 The elephant's trunk was altogether difficult to visualize from more or less distorted verbal descriptions. The information in Aristotle that 'if the elephant employ the trunk as well (as his mouth), the sound produced is like that of a hoarse trumpet' was apparently enough to give the slight swelling at the end of the trunk the size and look of a trumpet indeed.1*0 It is the commonest form in the illuminations. Some such statement as Aelian's 'at proboscide tanquam manu, vel etiam commodius utitur' (op. cit. VI, 31) will account for the cases where the trunk is given a pincer-like end (BM MS Reg. 20. B. XX. fo. 41v and 82v), which in fact is only an exaggeration, while one illustration reveals overmuch reflexion. 'If the trunk is like a hand', somebody must have thought, 'and elephants in any case have no hands but feet, then the trunk is terminated by a foot'. As the result of some such tortuous argument the illumination on fo. 50a of BM MS Harl. 4986, containing a Liber Apuleii Platonici de medicaminibus possibly of the tenth century, depicts an animal with a trunk which has a knee-joint, a pastern and a parted hoof in the style of its four legs, in fiat contradiction of Aristotle, who states that 'this organ is capable of being crooked or coiled at the tip, but not of flexing like a joint, for it is composed of gristle' (op. cit. II, 1 = 497b). Other signs that this specimen is largely of fantastic origin are its spotted hide, small ears and equine tail. In further elucidation of the passage quoted from the Strassburg Alexander evidence can be brought that the trunk was sometimes conceived as a lethal weapon in learned sources. Ambrose says that whatever an elephant rolls up in its trunk it breaks (op. cit. col. 255). Versions of the Physiologus in Latin frequently repeat this statement. Vincent of Beauvais quotes the De Natura Rerum: 'Elephanti ergo in bello quoque promuscide utuntur, et in ea capiunt homines'. But this item may not be derived from learned accounts, since Vincent's source goes on to describe Alexander's stratagem against the elephants of Porus as in the romance (Vincent, op. cit. XIX, 43) - he caused them to attack some effigies he had filled with Greek fire, on which they
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
99
burned their trunks (Alexander 4386 ff.). Jacob van Maerlant calls the trunk a snavel and his account tallies with Vincent's quotation from the De Natnra
Rerum (op. cit.): Jacob van Vetri maect ons cont, Dat siere mede in wighe slaen Hare viande ende vaen.
(1372-74)
Non-literary Evidence of the Elephant In all but three of the illuminations that have been examined, the elephants are more or less apocryphal, although they include some charming creatures. These three exceptions are found in BM MSS Cott. Nero D. I (fo. 169b), Cott. Julius D. VII (fo. 114a) and Parker 16 at Corpus Christi, Cambridge (Druce, op. cit. Plate I).41 They derive from the same source, a live elephant which was sent to England in 1253. MS Cott. Julius D. VII reads (I.c.): 'Anno gratie m cc 1 v Dominus rex anglorum fecit venire in Angliam elephantem quern dominus rex francorum Ludowicus dederat eidem'. It is highly probable that this was the same elephant we read of in the Hundredth Chapter of Joinville's Life of St Louis. In 1252, three years before the arrival of St Louis' gift in England, the Sultan of Egypt made him some presents with an eye to an alliance 'And with these things they sent to the King an elephant that the King sent to France'. However, such infusions of blood from the old stock had little appreciable effect on the breed whose main sustenance was not foliage but folios, not herbs but herbais. Thirteenth-century France, it seems, had elephants to spare, but the elephants of thirteenth-, fourteenth- and fifteenth-century romances and bestiaries produced there, retain their ancient insignia of bell¬ mouthed trunks, pink or violet skins, tusks rising fiercely from the lower jaw, and often the legs of the animals which fear them most in life, namely horses. It was claimed above that acquaintance with ivory and possibly with elephant-hide could only confirm such a story as is found in the continuation of Lamprecht's Alexander. The manuscript illuminations have proved to be largely dependent on literary tradition. But there were at least two other sources of information accessible to an intelligent and enterprising priest, which are not devoid of authentic lineaments: altar-cloths and chessmen.4 2 The elephant was frequently a subject of design in the Persian, Byzantine and later Italian and even Southern German damasks, one nation copying another in that order.43 Pope Leo III (795-816) says he had made several presents of altar-cloths with elephant patterns. One very famous silk of Byzantine origin is located in the reliquary of Charlemagne in Aix-la-Chapelle. It was presumably lowered into the grave when Otto III opened it at the end of the first millenium. The original Persian design showed an elephant with feline paws, tufted tail and knee and ankle joints stylized in a series of concentric outlines rather in the manner of isotherms. The Byzantine pattern retains the first two features, but rejects the last. It would not be rash to see the influence of the Physiologus here, which denies the existence of knee-joints. It was the Persian and Byzantine fashion to place a saddle¬ cloth on the elephant's back, but the European textiles replace them with towers (cf. Lucca damask of the fourteenth century, Falke II, No. 395). Falke says the Italian designs have thus laid aside the characteristics of their Greek and Persian models and present a more heraldic appearance. When we note
100
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
the trumpet-like proboscis of the Lucca elephants, however, we are reminded that the heraldic elephant and castle is relatively late and in any case derived from literature, which is once again seen defacing the last traces of authentic portrayal from the East; defacing them in the Italian copy of the Byzantine, in the Byzantine of the Persian, and very possibly also in the Persian s stylization of what was to them, after all, an exotic creature. Pliny tells us that his lovable elephant was well aware that its ivory tusks were the cause of all the woe it suffered at the hands of the creature to whom he places it second in intelligence. It is a poetical kind of justice, with no more consolation in it than poetry has to offer in such cases, that the most perfect images of the elephant to reach Western Europe were in ivory plastic. Here was a symbol which might have appealed to the mind, if not the soul, o The Physiologus, for it generally came to Europe with one or two diminutive men seated above its giant skull. Its form was that of what is now called the bishop among chessmen, Old French aufin, French fou by folk etymology from a variant, Middle Latin alfilus, alfinus, Arabic al-fiyl 'elephant'. The Arabic name for elephant still lingers on in Icelandic fill (Old Icelandic fill, Old Norse fill) 'elephant' and archaic Danish filsben (Norwegian filsbein, Old Norse fil(s)bein) 'ivory'. The most obvious carrier of this loan-word to suggest itself is the elephant chessman, though it cannot be the only possible solution where such cosmopolitan gentlemen are concerned. The elephant-piece together with the whole game of chess properly comes from India, the home alike of elephant-warfare and the desire to eliminate bloodshed from war, as lacking in relevance no less than in morality. When chess reached the Arabs through the Persians it became a mania, but the graven images of riders and footmen met with the disapproval of the religious. The game was the thing, and the distinguishing features of the pieces were speedily reduced to abstract geometrical shapes. Al-fiyl became something like a Viking's helmet, a truncated oval with two horn- or knob-like projections, from which it was sometimes called comutus in Latin. These projections were early identified with the double points of the bishop's mitre, hence the term in English and the new pictorial form, which also obtained in France and Germany, despite the discrepant names of fou and Laufer. But just as wine and music and unorthodox sciences were plied by the culture-loving Moslems of the Middle Ages in despite of the commandments, so the ancient Indian forms of the chessmen persisted beside the abstract innovations. The illustrations of Alfonso Sabio's chess-problems'*6 and the chessmen in the manuscript of the Carmina Burana**7 show abstract forms, but Arabic pictorial forms circulated widely in Southern Europe, while in Northern adaptations horses were more usually substituted for elephants. The Cabinet des Medailles in Paris has at least four of these Italo-Arabian elephant-pieces (Nos. 5554-7) in the collection known as 'Charlemagne's Chessmen'. They show elephants with massive, jointless legs, a head of Indian shape with pendant trunk and the tusks stylized round it until the tips almost meet, in accordance with the exigencies of one-piece carving. To the uninitiated the trunk might seem to issue from a mouth whose edges would be the tusks, an interpretation which would, of course, make the animal seem tuskless. Had the author or readers of the account in the Strassburg Alexander encountered such a piece they would have found no discrepancy but for the men's seat on the elephant's head and not in a tower; but again there was the King's piece which showed him riding
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
101
in an elaborate howdah and his mount whisking a horseman from his seat with its trunk. This piece has an Arabic inscription and it is unnecessary to stress how corroborative of the Alexander romance it must have appeared to people who made no great distinctions between Orientals, whether Indians, Persians or Arabs. In a set of draughtsmen made of walrus tusk, which was frequently used as a substitute for ivory, there is an elephant with four men in a tower, equine legs and splayed feet. The set is attributed to Cologne, the centre of the art of ivory carving in Germany, and comprises opposing sides of wild and tame animals. Goldschmidt thinks it not unlikely that romances like Alexander and Herzog Ernst influenced the design of such carvings. The date of this British Museum exhibit is very early thirteenth century (O.M. Dalton, Catalogue of the Ivory Carvings of the Christian Era (London, 1909), No. 179). Conclusion The author of the account which prompted this enquiry cannot fairly be accused of having created an animal either too monstrous to survive in the easy conditions of romance or flagrantly at variance with the learning of his time. Whatever he may have seen of the authentic animal, either in the form of material for the applied arts or of finished importations from Andalusia and the East, can only have strengthened his belief that it was so as he had said, while in word and picture as they came down to him there was enough disagreement to justify eclecticism. It is sad to think that Pliny and Aelian and even Aristotle were not accessible to this priest. But he undoubtedly did what he could with his sources; his choice of physical features is distinguished by its harmoniousness, and he found no cause to disagree with the Bible. He designed his creature above all to bear great burdens. Far be it from us to increase them by the onus of doubt. APPENDIX The Corruption of 1 Macc, VI, 34 'et elephantis ostenderunt sanguinem uvae et mori, ad acuendos eos in proelium' in the De Natura Rerum. Above on page 88 it was pointed out that the corrupt passage from the De Natura Rerum quoted by Verwijs in his edition of Jacob van Maerlant's Der Naturen Bloeme must go back to 1 Macc, VI, 34. But this does not explain why acuendos should have changed its meaning into its opposite. Quotation from three British Museum manuscripts containing the De Natura Rerum will reveal how corruptly this passage has been handed down: Reg. 12. E. XVII (47v): Bellicosi st & audaces nimium maxime cm eis in prelio uue 1' mori in signum sanguinis oduuntur (for ostenduntur, whose st, no doubt as the result of an earlier correction,_has been transferred to the line above before audaces, and whose u may stand for e) = R. Egerton 1984 (58v): Elephanti ad prelium animato per ostensionem sanguinis uuesi veniat porcus coram eo gruniens totam animositatem amittit = E. Arundel 323 (37r): Elephanti ad prelium animato per ostensionem
102
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic sanguinis une & mori si veniat procus (or: portus) (The continuation 'coram eo gruniens etc.' is lacking, the Elephant here makes way for the Horse) = A.
There is no critical edition of the De Natura Rerum, and the cleavage between the s'Gravenhage manuscript and R on the one hand, and E and A on the other, suggests why. There are at least two fundamentally different recensions. Konrad's 'erziirnet .... also daz er ainen muot gevah ze streiten' links his source with R through Bellicosi & audaces. The s'Gravenhage manuscript reading 'audaces nimium, maxime cum eis in proelio vivere vel mori sanguis ostenditur' and the corresponding passage in R will give 'Bellicosi et audaces nimium maxime cum eis in prelio uve, .... mori sanguis ostenditur', where cum can be corrected to coram with the help of E and A. This will account for Konrad's 'erzurnet-also daz er ainen muot gevah ze streiten’. The second part of this phrase 'und stellt ein greindez swein fur in, so verleust er alle sein manhait' is found in the other branch AE; cf. si veniat porcus coram eo gruniens totam animositatem amittit'. It is impossible to say what relationship holds between the two branches AE and GR without a special study, while another confusing fact is that the passage in question comes at the end of the section in E and A (the latter being incomplete), while in R and presumably in the s'Gravenhage manuscript it comes before the middle of a much longer section. Here the problem must be left open, but Oacob van Maerlant's even more drastically telescoped statement: Toghemen haer roet wijn of bloet, So verwast dem die moet.
(1377-78)
only shows how difficult it was to preserve a scientific formulation against accidental change in those days, for it omits all mention of the swine which were first responsible for damping the elephant's ardour, and attributes it entirely to the grape and mulberry juice, which, as the Book of the Maccabees says, had an opposite effect. It is difficult not to believe that a wiseacre formulated some such proposition as: 'if elephants which have been fired with red grape and mulberry juice are shown grunting swine, they will lose their ardour'! How preposterous to suppose that elephants roused by wine like those in the Book of Maccabees should ever fall in with swine like those in the Romance of Alexander! Such a statement would only too well deserve the poor line of scribes which fell to its lot right into our own era.
NOTES 1. Lamprechts Alexander, edited by K. Kinzel (Halle, 1884). 2.
Biblia Sacra cum glossa ordinaria a Strabo Fuldensi monacho. Nicolai Lirani (Antwerp, 1617), 2309 'loricatis'.
Postilla
3.
C. Plini Secundi Naturalis Historiae Libri XXXVII, edited by C. Mayhoff (Leipzig, 1909), VIII, 12. This phrase was often repeated.
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
103
4.
Migne, Patrologia Latina 14, Hexameron, VI, 15 = cols 253-4.
5.
Migne, Patrologia Latina 31, Pauli Orosii Opera Omnia: V. Cap. XV (para. 324).
6.
In the Gesta Caroli II, Chapter VII, the Monk of St Gall refers to follibus taurinis of another organ. This poetic license is also found in Virgil (Georg, IV, 171) - cow and ox hides were used for bellows, not bull's hide. See A. Gastoue, L'orgue en France (Paris, 1921), p.30, for Pippin's organ. For follibus taurinis, see H. Degering, Die Orgel (Munster, 1905), p.60121 and Johann Beckmann, A History of Inventions (London, 1846), I, 64.
Historiarum Lib.
7. cf. F. Wilhelm, Denkmaler deutscher Prosa des 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts, 2. Halfte, Kommentar, 27 (critical edition of Latin Physiologus). 8. O. Shepherd, The Lore of the Unicorn (London, 1930), IX 'Certainties'. 9.
E. Hoffman-Krayer und H. Bachtold-Staubli, Handworterbuch deutschen Aberglaubens, II, 764 'Elefant' and 781 'Elfenbein'.
des
10. AElfric's Lives of Saints, edited by W. Skeat (Early English Text Society), 2 vols (London, 1881-1890), II, 25, p.104. 11. jDas Buch der Natur von Konrad von Megenberg, edited by F. Pfeiffer (Stuttgart, 1861), p. 134. 12. Das Buch der Maccabaer, edited by K. Helm (Tubingen, 1904). 13. loc. cit. The grunting swine were one of Alexander's traditional stratagems. In this way he routed a herd of wild elephants issuing from a forest, an incident which is frequently illustrated in French manuscripts. 14. Der Naturen Bloeme, edited by E. Verwijs (Groningen/Leiden, 1868). 15. See Appendix for a discussion as to why acuendos should have changed its meaning into its opposite. 16. A. Pictet, 'Sur les origines de quelques noms d'elephants', Journal Asiatique (September/October 1843), 133 ff. 17. Le Bestiaire: Das Tierbuch des normannischen Dichters Guillaume le Clerc, edited by R. Reinsch (1892), p.366. 18.0. Zingerle, Die Quellen zum Alexander des Rudolf von Ems (Germanistische Abhandlungen 4) (1885), p.203. This treatise contains a critical edition of Leo. 19. AEliani de Natura Animalium, edited by R. Hercher (Paris, 1858). 20. cf. 1 Macc. VI, 30 'docti ad proelium' and 35 'et astiterunt singulis elephantis mille viri .... et quingenti equites ordinati unicuique bestiae electi erant'. Wigalois is quoted from the edition by J. Kapteyn (Bonn, 1926). 21. Edited by G. Ehrismann (Tubingen, 1908/9). 22. Vincenti Burgundi Speculum Quadruplex, Ex officina Belleri (1624), col. 1406 = lib. XIX, 43.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
104
23. G. Rosenhagen, Der Strieker.
Daniel von dem Bliihenden Tal (Breslau,
1894). 24. Alexander von Ulrich von Eschenbach, edited by W. Toischer (Tubingen, 1888). 25. M.R. dames, The Bestiary (London, 1928), a facsimile of the Cambridge manuscript. 26. Reproduced by G. Druce, 'The Elephant in Mediaeval Legend and Art', Archaeological Journal, LXXVI, 2nd Series, XXVI (1919), 23, from V. Dahlerup, Physiologus (Copenhagen, 1889). Druce's article deals with the history of the Physiologus in outline and of the general features of the elephant in illuminations, capitals and misericords, but omits damasks and chess-men, which still retain an aura of Eastern authenticity. The present article is indebted to Druce's for the reference to Ambrose, to the French capitals and the misericords and for the information derived from the reproductions of several illuminations not available in London. In his general survey there is not much which has an immediate bearing on the specific textual problem in hand. There are some 40 well-selected reproductions of elephants. 27. Le Livre de Marco Polo, edited by M. Pauthier (Paris, 1865), p.308. 28. L. Mayer, Saracenic Heraldry (Oxford, 1933), p.8 ff. 29. Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyklopadie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, p.2249 'Elephant'. 30. Historia Animalium, II, 1, 'The elephant does not sleep standing, as some are wont to assert, but it bends its legs and settles down'. 31. Pliny, op. cit., lib. VIII, 2.
The above rendering is by Philemon Holland, The Historie of the World, commonly called The Naturall Historie of C. Plinius Secundus (London, 1601). The original of 'Moriske daunce' is lascivienti pyrriche conludere.
32. This story is frequently found in the vernacular, though it has no place in the Latin Physiologus, edited by Wilhelm (vide supra). Yet it is found in the Greek Physiologus, quoted by F. Lauchert, Geschichte des Physiologus (Darmstadt, 1889), pp.260-1. 33. Mediaeval Lore .... Gleanings from .... Bartholomew Anglicus, edited by R. Steel (London, 1893), pp.126-7. 34. Popular Treatises on Science, edited by T. Wright (London, 1841), p.101. cf. Saint Thomas Aquinas' similar view below.
35. Sancti Thomae Aquinatis Doctoris Angelici Expositio Aurea in Sacram Scripturam (Paris, 1640). In 3ob, XL (250a). Borgnet, B. Alberti Magni Opera Animalibus, lib. XXII, Tract ii, 36.
36. A.
Omnia (Paris,
1891),
p.390:
De
37. The three quotations from Shakespeare, Chapman and Massinger are given by P.A. Robin, Animal Lore in English Literature (London, 1932), p.99.
The Elephants in the Strassburg 'Alexander'
105
38. op. cit. 249a. In the following, Aristotle will be quoted from D.W. Thompson's translation (1910) in The Works of Aristotle, translated under the editorship of 3.A. Smith and W. Ross, IV (Oxford, 1910). 39. M.R. James, The Romance of Alexander (Oxford, 1933), containing a facsimile of Bodley 264 (fo. 62b) and Druce, op. cit. Plate XIII(2), opp. p.65, misericord. 40. op. cit., IV, 9 = 536b. MSS with bell-mouthed trunks are BM Reg.20.B.XX (57a) (41b has a snout with pincers); 15.E.IV (16b, 21b); 10.E.IV (43b); 19.D.I (29a); 16.G.VII (133b); Harl. 273 (80a); 1526 (4a); 3240 (28a); 4751 (8a, 58b); 4979 (51a, 74a). 41. See M.R. James, The Drawings of Matthew Paris (Walpole Society, 14) (1925-6), p.l ff. The chronicle quoted in Julius D. VII is that of Matthew Paris. Other live elephants which came to Europe were Haroun Al-Rashid's gift to Charlemagne in 802 and Frederick II's war-elephant at Cremona in 1237. 42.1 am indebted to the late Professor F. Saxl of the Warburg Institute for iconographical references. 43. cf. O. von Falke, Die Kunstgeschichte der Seidenweberei (1913) passim. 44. For chessmen and draughtsmen, cf. H.J. Murray, A History of Chess (Oxford, 1913), 3 vols, Chapter X, and A. Goldschmidt, Die Elfenbeinskulpturen (Berlin, 1914-26), III, Introd. (for the Cologne School) and Fig. 292 (for the draughtsmen); IV, Introd. and pp.46-7 (for the discussion of the Indo-Arabico-European development of chessmen), Figs 170 and 171 (= Bibliotheque Nationale, Cabinet des Medailles Nos. 5557 and 5554; see also the Enciclopedia Italiana, XXX, opp. p.987, No. 5 and Murray, op. cit. opp. p.754), Fig. 10 of the Introd. (which reproduces a piece of similar type to the preceding) and Fig. 6 of the Introd. (which shows the King formerly allotted to a set known as 'Charlemagne's Chessmen'). 45. G. Zoega, A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic (Oxford, 1910) (fill does not appear in the various editions of Vigfusson's, Old Icelandic Dictionary); A. Torp, Etymologisk Ordbok (Kristiana, 1919); L. Heggstad, Gamalnorsk Ordbog (1930). 46. Goldschmidt, op. cit. 47. Edited by J. Schmeller (1894), p.246.
The Poema de Mio Cid and the Old French Epic: Some Reflections David Hook Recent investigation of the Old French epic by scholars primarily concerned with its Spanish counterpart has given rise to a number of studies devoted to documenting and evaluating parallels which have been noticed between the two at the level of formula, hemistich structure, and even episode.1 Conclusions have been varied, ranging from claims for specific verbal sources for individual phrases and passages to claims that the entire formulaic system of Spanish epic was based on French epic technique.2 The purpose of the present paper is to review some of the cases of apparent contact between the Poema de Mio Cid and French epics which have been discussed, and to examine some further parallels not hitherto studied.3 In so doing, much that is both basic and familiar will be repeated; but some recent developments in this field have made such a restatement of fundamental principles necessary. In particular, the supposed dependence of the PMC on certain specific French epics has been used as the basis for further work on the poem without sufficient consideration having been given to the degree of certainty with which these presumed sources have been established. The conceptual framework for evaluating similarities between works of literature is, of course, long established; in particular, the theoretical distinction between an analogue and a source is well known.1* In the context of the medieval Romance epic, the issue is complicated by the formulaic nature of the tradition, but the general principles still hold good. A parallel between a formula in a Spanish and a French text may come about, as Herslund reminds us, in four ways:5 1. a common ancestor for both versions (e.g. Germanic epic?); 2. imitation of Spanish by the French; 3. pure chance (polygenesis?); 4. imitation of French by the Spanish. Although Herslund is speaking of formulaic systems in general, and views the epic from the stance of an oralist, the possibilities he lists clearly apply, with slight modification, to any similarity, be it of formula or of episode.6 It is, however, necessary to add that imitation may take two forms: either the acquisition (whether conscious or unconscious) of formulaic patterns from attendance at oral performance, or the imitation of an individual written source. Although Herslund excludes the latter, it must surely be admitted in the case of the PMC in view of growing evidence of learned elements in the poem. An added problem with the PMC is that of deciding whether the poet was using an established formulaic system in Spanish which had been borrowed from French by earlier poets, or whether he was creating new Spanish formulae on French models; but this question is beyond the scope of this paper.
108
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic
The PMC makes abundant use of the formulaic structure pensar de + infinitive. For this, a specific French source was recently suggested in Raoul de Cambrai (lines 312, 6406).7 However, a much fuller study by Adams shows that the equivalent French structure is quite widespread, and that there is no justification for claiming Raoul as the model followed by the Spanish poet, since the occurrences of the formulaic pattern in that work are not marked by any peculiarity which would distinguish them from any other French works in which it is found.8 The point may be emphasized by another example of a formulaic structure common to the PMC and French epic: Al + infinitive + de + article + noun. In the PMC the following examples occur: Al salir de la missa (2070) Al salir de la ecclegia (2241) Al partir de la lid (3370) Al tirar de la lanqa (3686) There is in addition a variant without the article where a place name is involved ('Al exir de Salon', 859). For these, the following French parallels may be cited: A l'entrer de la ville (Doon, 3936) A l'esmovoir de l'ost (Doon, 2971) A l'issir d'une lande (Doon, 3184) A l'issir de la barre (Doon, 3854) A l'esmovoir des oz (Prise, Appendix I, 464) In all cases cited, both Spanish and French, the formulaic pattern fills the first hemistich. Although a French origin may be suspected, it is clearly futile to attempt to indicate a specific work as the source from which the Spanish poet (or conceivably his predecessors in some oral tradition of which we can know nothing)9 derived his formulaic structure. Unless we are dealing with a formula found in only one French text from the entire French epic tradition in existence at the time of the composition of the PMC, or unless one particular French version is marked by some peculiarity common only to it and the PMC, there can be no question of identifying specific sources for formulae in the Spanish poem.10 This is not, of course, to suggest that it is impossible for a formula to have a direct textual source: it is obvious that specific texts or specific oral performances of specific works must ultimately underlie all parallels of this nature between French and Spanish epics, unless we are dealing with polygenesis. There is, however, no way of determining what these were in the case of a common formula. Even where a single French text contains a large number of formulaic parallels for the PMC, this does not constitute proof that the Spanish poet knew that text. The need to make this observation is a measure of the extent to which specific sources have been claimed for formulaic material. Again, some examples illustrate the problems. It has recently been claimed that a version of the Chanson de Roland furnished the
The 'Poema de Mio Cid' and the Old French Epic
109
Spanish poet with details such as 'adtores mudados' (5), from 'hosturs muers', and 'la mar salada' (1090), from 'la mer salse'.11 In the latter case, the author however admits that the phrase is also found in other French epics; but it is nonetheless listed as a borrowing from Roland. It is hard to see why. There is nothing peculiar about the form of the phrase in Roland which would distinguish that work as the Spanish poet's source rather than (let us say) Doon de la Roche (3688, 4114) or Couronnement (978) in which a similar phrase ('mer saiee') can be found. Much the same applies to those 'hosturs muers'.12 Similar phrases can be cited from other French poems (e.g. Doon, 2185: '.j. ostor de .v. mues'); and in any case, in the PMC the 'adtores mudados' form part of an inclusive pair, 'sin falcones & sin adtores mudados'.13 This is not, to my knowledge, found in Roland, but is clearly related to a pair found in other French texts: Faucons sor perches, ostors et vair et gris (Garin, 10165) E portent lur falcuns e lur osturs asquanz (Voyage, 271) Dones gierfaus, dones ostoirs (Guillaume d'Angleterre, 154) It seems ill-advised to claim a specific source for only one element of an inclusive pair when parallels can be cited for the complete pair.11* It is also perhaps worth taking into account the fact that this pair in the PMC forms part of a longer description of possessions in which it is associated with the pair 'pielles & mantos' (4). Again, French parallels abound for this pair: Prist son mantel et son peligon gris (Garin, 6545) Si lor donnoit mantiaus et bliaus bels et genz Et peliqons ermins et autres garnemenz (Doon, 25-26) Quar lor donons pels et mantels et chapes (Couronnement, 1341) Mantiax vairs et pelices grises (Guillaume d'Angleterre, 3163) Que des mantiax et des pelices (Guillaume d'Angleterre, 3218) However, none of these parallels should be seen as a source, for again we are dealing with only one aspect of a more complex passage. In the PMC the two pairs which have been discussed are associated with other elements such as perches, and a passage in Garin containing all these elements has recently been suggested as a possible source, though even here alternative explanations cannot be entirely ruled out.15 Two further examples must suffice. It has recently been suggested that Raoul 385 (in fact 358: 'l'aigue demandent li chevalier vaillant') is the source of a detail in the PMC (1049, 'alegre es el conde & pidio agua a las manos').16 Again, however, we are faced with a general cliche of dinner scenes in the Old French epic, as the following examples make plain: L'eve demandent, s'assieent al mangier (Couronnement, 1293) L'aigue demandent, al mengier sunt asis (Garin, 2636, 3501) L'aigue demandent, s'asisent al mengier (Garin, 9434)
110
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic Demandent l'eve, s'asient cil bairon (Enfances Guillaume, 2388) Puis demanderent l'eve, s'asirent au soper (Doon, 1897) Tantost demande l'aigue, s'assirent au soper (Doon, 2102) Quant li soir s'aprocha, si demanderent l'aigue (Doon, 3565) Et cil demandent l'eve, au mangier sont assis (Doon, 3900) 11 demanderent l'eve sus ou palais a tant (Doon, 3987)
There is, of course, nothing about Raoul 358 which makes it any closer to the PMC version than any of the other French examples cited, and there is no reason for it to be suggested as the source of the Spanish poet's inspiration. Similarly, Parise la Duchesse has been claimed as the source for some of the details of the final duels in the PMC, including the line 'batien los cauallos con los espolones' (3618). This has been related to Parise, 521: 'il hurte le cheval des esperons dorez'.17 However, this is, of course, simply one variant of an extremely common formulaic expression; confining our attention to those versions which most closely parallel the wording of the PMC and Parise, the following can be cited: Le cheval brochet des oriez esperuns (Roland, 1225) Sun cheval brochet des esperuns d'or fin (Roland, 1245) Sun cheval brochet des esperuns d'or mier (Roland, 1549; cf. Raoul, 7772, Prise, 195, 1288) Les chevaus broichent des esperons des pies (Raoul, 4023; cf. 4226) Le destrier broiche des esperons burnis (Raoul, 4736) Le destrier broche des esperons aguz (Couronnement, 1229) Les chevals brochent des esperons forbiz (Couronnement, 2541) Le cheval broche des esperons massis (Garin, 4811) II broche le cheval des esperons qui trenchent (Doon, 2502) II broiche le cheval des esperons trenchanz (Doon, 1099, 1176) II broche le cheval des esperonz dorez (Doon, 1843) II broche le cheval des esperons d'or fin (Doon, 2293) II broche le cheval des esperons d'or mier (Doon, 2483) Les destriers hurtent des esperons tranchans (Ami et Amile, apud Herslund, p.92) There does not seem to be much justification for claiming the line in Parise as the source of that in the PMC. Whilst it might be argued that in both poems it forms part of a duel scene as opposed to a battle, and that it should not be viewed in isolation but taken in the context of other similarities claimed from the same passage in Parise, the fact remains that we are here dealing with one of the commonest formulaic expressions, of which some version can be found
The 'Poema de Mio Cid' and the Old French Epic
111
in the majority of French epics. As a result, its value as a verbal correspondence between Parise and the PMC is correspondingly reduced; in any case, the Parise example is not marked by any peculiar features which would make it a closer parallel for the PMC than other French versions. It is also worth recalling that a variant of this formulaic expression from Ogier le Danois (8886, 'le ceval broce des esperons dores') was cited by the same author in a different study as evidence to link that poem with the first lines of the PMC.18 Here there was no precise verbal correspondence, for the PMC line in question reads 'Alii pienssan de aguiiar' (10): a quite different formulaic pattern which in the case of PMC 227 was, as we have seen, related to Raoul 6406.19 A situation has thus developed in which separate occurrences of a formulaic expression in the PMC are given separate textual sources in French poems. The concept of free formulaic variation by the Spanish poet on general models derived from French may well be thought preferable to this. Examples of French patterns which have left their mark on the PMC could be multiplied without difficulty, but to conclude this brief survey of French parallels for formulae and formulaic patterns a further half-dozen examples will suffice. As equivalents for the pair 'maravilloso/a 367. Since there is no mention of our MS in Andrew Watson s The Manuscripts of Henry Savile of Banke (London, 1969), it presumably formed part of the collection of Sir John Savile. 18. This feature is studied, in relation to English MSS, by N.R. Ker, 'From "Above Top Line" to "Below Top Line"; a Change in Scribal Practice in
Celtica, 5 (1960), 13-16. 19. art. cit., p. 362. 20. The first four letters of 'hermins' of line 5 of f. 74 are in the hand of Scribe C, while the '-ins' betrays the distinctive letter forms of Scribe B. 21. Except for lines 7-8 which are in an unidentified (fourth?) hand. 22. The last four lines of f. 138v have been erased and rewritten in what is almost certainly the hand of Scribe A. 23. cf. the apparently later forms cretiens 7, areter 23, lors obers 25. 24. It should be stressed that what follows is a rapid investigation not of the language of the original poet(s) as reflected in their assonances, but merely of the graphies employed by the copyists of this particular MS. 25. Li Dialoge Gregoire lo Pape, edited by W. Foerster (Halle and Paris, 1876), (henceforth DG); cf. M. Wilmotte, 'Le dialecte du ms. f. fr. 24764' in Etudes de philologie wallonne (Paris, 1932), pp. 167-211 (henceforth Wilmotte); B. Woledge and H.P. Clive, Repertoire des plus anciens textes en prose frangaise (Geneva, 1964), no. 19; Li Sermon saint Bemart, edited by W. Foerster (Erlangen, 1885) (henceforth SB); cf. Woledge & Clive, op. cit., no. 64; Dialogus anime conquerentis et rationis consolantis, edited by F. Bonnardot in Romania, 5 (1876), 267-332 (henceforth DA); cf. Woledge ft Clive, op. cit., no. 18; Le Poeme Moral, edited by A. Bayot (Paris, 1929) (henceforth PM); cf. Wilmotte, 'Le dialecte du Poeme Moral' in Etudes de philologie wallonne, pp. 213-38; E. Philipon, 'Les parlers du duche de Bourgogne aux Xllle et XlVe siecles' in Romania, 39 (1910), 467-531, 41 (1912), 541-600, and 'Les parlers de la comte de Bourgogne aux Xllle et XlVe siecles' in Romania, 43 (1914), 495-559 (henceforth Philipon I, II, III respectively); R.N. Walpole, 'The Burgundian translation of the PseudoTurpin Chronicle...' in Romance Philology, 3 (1949-50), 83-116 (henceforth Walpole); E.B. Ham, Girart de Roussillon: poeme bourguignon du XlVe siecle (Yale Univ. Press, 1939), (henceforth Ham). Other studies cited are: M.K. Pope, From Latin to Modern French. . ., second edition (Manchester U.P., 1952); P. Fouche, Phonetique historique du frangais, II, second edition (Paris, 1969), III (Paris, 1961); C.T. Gossen, Grammaire de Vancien picard (Paris, 1970); 3. Chaurand, Introduction a la dialectologie frangaise (Paris, 1972).
An Early French Epic Manuscript
189
26. Ceu in SB 1.12, 1.13 etc., DA X 6, XII 6, Philipon II 583, II 590 (cf. also Pope § E xxv, Gossen § 64); lo in DG 6.12, SB 2.16, 2.17, DA V 13, PM v. 49, Philipon II 589, Ham pp. 34, 63 (cf. Pope § E xxv, Chaurand pp. 102-3); do in DA XI 20, Philipon II 589, Walpole 102 (cf. Pope § 843, Chaurand p. 103); fasiens in Philipon III 557 (cf. PM p. lxxiii, Walpole 100, Ham 36, 45, Pope § E xxvi, Gossen § 79); faurai cf. Philipon I 530-31, SB 5.25, PM p. xc, Wilmotte 177, Pope § E viii, Gossen § 61, Walpole 97, Ham 34, 65. 27. Pope §§ 896, E xxvi. 28. Pope § E vi; cf. montet in SB 8.8, mostret in SB 6.35, desiret, obliet etc. in DG 6.4, 6.15, also PM pp. xcviii-xcix, Gossen § 46. 29. cf. SB pp. vi-vii, Philipon III 546, Walpole 93, 99, Ham 26, 39, Gossen § 3. 30. cf. DA 328, PM p. xcix, Philipon I 529, Walpole 99, Ham 33, 43, Chaurand 89-90. 31. PM p. xcvii; cf. Wilmotte 171, Fouche III 861, Gossen § 50, Pope §§ 377-78. In A's paumoisons the a appears to have velarised; cf. Pope §§ 502, E xvi.
32. DG 5.14, 5.15, 6.25, PM pp. lxviii, Ixxxii-iii, Philipon III 548; cf. Wilmotte 174-75, Walpole 97, Gossen p. 52 note 6, Pope § E xx. 33. PM p. xc, Philipon III 555, Gossen § 61. 34. PM pp. Ixxxii-iii, Pope §§ 501, 540, E ix, Gossen § 12. 35. Philipon III 542. 36. PM p. Ixiv, Philipon 1512, Walpole 95, Gossen § 8, Pope § E iii, Chaurand 84. 37. DA II 5, III 12, DG 5.5, 5.7, SB 9.37, Wilmotte 174, Pope § E xviii, Gossen § 26. 38. Philipon III 542, Ham 30; cf. Gossen § 26, Fouche II 355. 39. Gossen § 40, Pope §§ pp. Ixxxix, xcvii.
195, N xxi, Walpole 97.
It is attested also in PM
40. DA 326; DG 7.5-6. 41. Ham 33; Walpole 99 § 26; cf. Ham 66. 42. PM p. xci, Philipon I 508, Walpole 98. 43. Wilmotte 170, Fouche II 263, Pope § NE iv. 44. Fouche II 415, Chaurand 83. 45. DA 325; Philipon I 514, II 578, III 537; Walpole 95 (cf. in the same text
veignes, teigne). 46. Philipon I 511-12; Fouche II 415. The digraph appears sporadically also in Norman; cf. Etienne de Fougeres, Le Livre des Manieres, edited by Lodge, TLF (Geneva, 1979), p. 46, and H. Goebl, Die normandische Urkundensprache, Osterreichische Akad. der Wissensch.; Phil.-Hist. Kl.: Sitzungsberichte 269 (Vienna, 1970), p. 149, § 15. Also characteristically Western is the verbal termination -on without final -s, found in Scribes A and C, but it occurs also in Francien and Orleanais; cf. Pope §§ 894, SC xvi.
190 47.
The Medieval Alexander and Romance Epic Gossen § 19. Characteristically, but not exclusively, Picard is veir(i*Tiomc i
jurturnttola
akttnrlagjcr
LcH&b?
tnoiaifUtcc-iit*io& iitna ffotenc Te$$tmmc3 tag at bzc$ ht ODiUmctTP m ccl tnaCtnc liett*wot «cnr& h I ft7 fjS
W( i*
ftnuH flame rfctbrtcmnr
la fluefc. ? Jit ctvmt vs
Plate 3. London, British Library, Harley 4979 (hereafter London, BL Harley 4979), f.60. Alexander and his men fight giants wearing skins; Alexander orders a giant to be burnt to death.
mfnHjirrftir fl romljflnt
H VJ^)cn>uf