2 results
5 - The Land without the Grail: A Note on Occitania, Rigaut de Barbezieux and Literary History
-
- By Richard Trachsler, University of Göttingen
- Edited by Norris J. Lacy
-
- Book:
- The Grail, the Quest, and the World of Arthur
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 05 February 2013
- Print publication:
- 20 November 2008, pp 62-75
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Little is left today of the once flourishing literary activity in the South of France, and much debate has arisen as to what exactly has been lost. Given the scarceness of surviving testimonies regarding the matière de Bretagne in the South, especially compared with the mass of Arthurian texts preserved in the langue d'oïl, critics, particularly those who argue for the priority of Occitan literature over its northern rival, have attempted to make up for quantity with quality. They console themselves with the thought that the Arthurian tradition in the South may not be very visible today but might in fact be older than the one inaugurated by Chrétien de Troyes in the North.
The extant material does not offer much support for claims in one direction or the other. Most of the evidence is indirect: as early as 1170, Guiraut de Cabrera, in his famous Ensenhamen in which he tells a jongleur what he should improve, mentions stories of Arthur, Erec, Tristan and Gauvain, and numerous troubadours allude to Arthur and Guenièvre, Tristan and Isolt, Gauvain, Yvain and Perceval. Unfortunately, these instances consist only of titles, names or, at most, the ‘emblematic’ use of isolated features of the legends involved. The exact story to which they allude can no longer be deduced. On the basis of what can be gathered, though, nothing indicates that the Arthurian tradition circulating in the South prior to Chrétien de Troyes was essentially different from what was known in the North, and it is indeed most likely that the early allusions refer very much to the same kind of material Chrétien himself would use to elaborate his romances.
3 - A Question of Time: Romance and History
- Edited by Carol Dover, Georgetown University, Washington DC
-
- Book:
- A Companion to the <i>Lancelot-Grail Cycle</i>
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 17 March 2023
- Print publication:
- 01 January 2002, pp 23-32
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Stories and Histories
L’Estoire de Lancelot, as the epilogue of the Mort Artu seems to call the entire Lancelot-Grail Cycle, is indeed a long story. From its beginnings that merge with the origins of Christianity in the Holy Land under the Roman emperor Vespasian, to its end de vers Occident with the passing of Arthur in the year 542 at Avalon, what we tend to see as a ‘romance’ shares much of its action with what medieval readers probably would have not hesitated to call ‘history.’ In particular the stories of Utherpendragon, the account of Arthur's youth, the Saxon and Roman wars, and the treason of Mordred have all been told by ‘historians’ such as Geoffrey of Monmouth and Wace. There is no doubt that the Lancelot-Grail draws on this historiographic model, at least in part, but it does so in order to create something entirely new.
Ostensibly historical, yet overtly merveilleux, the Lancelot-Grail Cycle shifts from story to history and combines the two modes of narration as well as the two kinds of source material. This is not unusual. In British, and especially Anglo-Norman historiography the dividing line between romance and chronicle has always been ill-defined, and the issue has not been neglected by scholars, but the fact is that it involves most of the early literary narratives in the vernacular that deal with historical matters. A prime example is Benoît de Sainte-Maure's Roman de Troie, which draws on sources that are unimpeachably ‘historical’: the reports of two ‘eye-witnesses’ recording the Trojan war in the most trustworthy manner imaginable – in Latin (originally Greek) prose.
In this particular context, it is worth remembering that the matter of Britain was not necessarily perceived as pure fiction, despite Jehan Bodel's early thirteenth-century claim that ‘Li conte de Bretaigne si sont vain et plaisant/ Et cil de Ronme sage et de sens aprendant.’ There is no need to search for the ‘historical’ Arthur, when manuscript compilation offers ample evidence that the Arthurian material was considered non-fiction. For example, the Brut is either preceded or directly followed by texts that are indisputably ‘historical,’ such as Geoffrey Gaimar's Estoire des Engleis, the chronicles of Pierre de Langtoft or Jordan Fantosme, genealogies, annals, etc. The Arthurian chronicles might therefore claim the same status as any historical text.