From Ritual to Romance/Chapter II
Chapter II: The Task of the HeroEdit
As a first step towards the successful prosecution of an investigation into the true nature and character of the mysterious object we know as the Grail it will be well to ask ourselves whether any light may be thrown upon the subject by examining more closely the details of the Quest in its varying forms; i.e., what was the precise character of the task undertaken by, or imposed upon, the Grail hero, whether that hero were Gawain, Perceval, or Galahad, and what the results to be expected from a successful achievement of the task. We shall find at once a uniformity which assures us of the essential identity of the tradition underlying the varying forms, and a diversity indicating that the tradition has undergone a gradual, but radical, modification in the process of literary evolution. Taken in their relative order the versions give the following result.
GAWAIN (Bleheris). Here the hero sets out on his journey with no clear idea of the task before him. He is taking the place of a knight mysteriously slain in his company, but whither he rides, and why, he does not know, only that the business is important and pressing. From the records of his partial success we gather that he ought to have enquired concerning the nature of the Grail, and that this enquiry would have resulted in the restoration to fruitfulness of a Waste Land, the desolation of which is, in some manner, not clearly explained, connected with the death of a knight whose name and identity are never disclosed. "Great is the loss that ye lie thus, 'tis even the destruction of kingdoms, God grant that ye be avenged, so that the folk be once more joyful and the land repeopled which by ye and this sword are wasted and made void." The fact that Gawain does ask concerning the Lance assures the partial restoration of the land; I would draw attention to the special terms in which this is described: "for so soon as Sir Gawain asked of the Lance...the waters flowed again thro' their channel, and all the woods were turned to verdure."
Diu Crone. Here the question is more general in character; it affects the marvels beheld, not the Grail alone; but now the Quester is prepared, and knows what is expected of him. The result is to break the spell which retains the Grail King in a semblance of life, and we learn, by implication, that the land is restored to fruitfulness: "yet had the land been waste, but by his coming had folk and land alike been delivered." Thus in the earliest preserved, the GAWAIN form, the effect upon the land appears to be the primary result of the Quest.
PERCEVAL. The Perceval versions, which form the bulk of the existing Grail texts, differ considerably the one from the other, alike in the task to be achieved, and the effects resulting from the hero's success, or failure. The distinctive feature of the Perceval version is the insistence upon the sickness, and disability of the ruler of the land, the Fisher King. Regarded first as the direct cause of the wasting of the land, it gradually assumes overwhelming importance, the task of the Quester becomes that of healing the King, the restoration of the land not only falls into the background but the operating cause of its desolation is changed, and finally it disappears from the story altogether. One version, alone, the source of which is, at present, undetermined, links the PERCEVAL with the GAWAIN form; this is the version preserved in the Gerbert continuation of the Perceval of Chretien de Troyes. Here the hero having, like Gawain, partially achieved the task, but again like Gawain, having failed satisfactorily to resolder the broken sword, wakes, like the earlier hero, to find that the Grail Castle has disappeared, and he is alone in a flowery meadow. He pursues his way through a land fertile, and well-peopled and marvels much, for the day before it had been a waste desert. Coming to a castle he is received by a solemn procession, with great rejoicing; through him the folk have regained the land and goods which they had lost. The mistress of the castle is more explicit. Perceval had asked concerning the Grail:
"par coi amende
Somes, en si faite maniere
Qu'en ceste regne n'avoit riviere
Qui ne fust gaste, ne fontaine.
E la terre gaste et soutaine."
Like Gawain he has 'freed the waters' and thus restored the land.
In the prose Perceval the motif of the Waste Land has disappeared, the task of the hero consists in asking concerning the Grail, and by so doing, to restore the Fisher King, who is suffering from extreme old age, to health, and youth.
"Se tu eusses demande quel'en on faisoit, que li rois ton aiol fust gariz de l'enfermetez qu'il a, et fust revenu en sa juvente."
When the question has been asked: "Le rois pescheor estoit gariz et tot muez de sa nature." "Li rois peschiere estoit mues de se nature et estoit garis de se maladie, et estoit sains comme pissons." Here we have the introduction of a new element, the restoration to youth of the sick King.
In the Perceval of Chretien de Troyes we find ourselves in presence of certain definite changes, neither slight, nor unimportant, upon which it seems to me insufficient stress has hitherto been laid. The question is changed; the hero no longer asks what the Grail is, but (as in the prose Perceval) whom it serves? a departure from an essential and primitive simplicity--the motive for which is apparent in Chretien, but not in the prose form, where there is no enigmatic personality to be served apart. A far more important change is that, while the malady of the Fisher King is antecedent to the hero's visit, and capable of cure if the question be asked, the failure to fulfil the prescribed conditions of itself entails disaster upon the land. Thus the sickness of the King, and the desolation of the land, are not necessarily connected as cause and effect, but, a point which seems hitherto unaccountably to have been overlooked, the latter is directly attributable to the Quester himself.
"Car se tu demande l'eusses
Li rice roi qui moult s'esmaie
Fust or tost garis de sa plaie
Et si tenist sa tiere en pais
Dont il n'en tenra point jamais,"
but by Perceval's failure to ask the question he has entailed dire misfortune upon the land:
"Dames en perdront lor maris,
Tieres en seront essilies,
Et pucielles desconsellies
Orfenes, veves, en remanront
Et maint chevalier en morront."
This idea, that the misfortunes of the land are not antecedent to, but dependent upon, the hero's abortive visit to the Grail Castle, is carried still further by the compiler of the Perlesvaus, where the failure of the predestined hero to ask concerning the office of the Grail is alone responsible for the illness of the King and the misfortunes of the country. "Une grans dolors est avenue an terre novelement par un jeune chevalier qui fu herbergiez an l'ostel au riche roi Pescheor, si aparut a lui li saintimes Graaus, et la lance de quoi li fiers seigne par la poignte; ne demanda de quoi ce servoit, ou dont ce venoit, et por ce qu'il ne demanda sont toutes les terres commeues an guerre, ne chevalier n'ancontre autre au forest qu'il ne li core sus, et ocie s'il peut."
"Li Roi Pecheors de qui est grant dolors, quar il est cheuz en une douleureuse langour--ceste langour li est venue par celui qui se heberga an son ostel, a qui li seintimes Graaus s'aparut, por ce que cil ne vost demander de qu'il an servoit, toutes les terres an furent commeues en gerre."
"Je suis cheuz an langour des cele oure que li chevaliers se herberga coianz dont vous avez oi parler; par un soule parole que il deloia a dire me vint ceste langour."
From this cause the Fisher King dies before the hero has achieved the task, and can take his place. "Li bons Rois Peschieres est morz." There is here no cure of the King or restoration of the land, the specific task of the Grail hero is never accomplished, he comes into his kingdom as the result of a number of knightly adventures, neither more nor less significant than those found in non-Grail romances.
The Perlesvaus, in its present form, appears to be a later, and more fully developed, treatment of the motif noted in Chretien, i.e., that the misfortunes of King and country are directly due to the Quester himself, and had no antecedent existence; this, I would submit, alters the whole character of the story, and we are at a loss to know what, had the hero put the question on the occasion of his first visit, could possibly have been the result achieved. It would not have been the cure of the King: he was, apparently, in perfect health; it would not have been the restoration to verdure of the Land: the Land was not Waste; where, as in the case of Gawain, there is a Dead Knight, whose death is to be avenged, something might have been achieved, in the case of the overwhelming majority of the Perceval versions, which do not contain this feature, the dependence of the Curse upon the Quester reduces the story to incoherence. In one Perceval version alone do we find a motif analogous to the earlier Gawain Bleheris form. In Manessier the hero's task is not restricted to the simple asking of a question, but he must also slay the enemy whose treachery has caused the death of the Fisher King's brother; thereby healing the wound of the King himself, and removing the woes of the land. What these may be we are not told, but, apparently, the country is not 'Waste.'
In Peredur we have a version closely agreeing with that of Chretien; the hero fails to enquire the meaning of what he sees in the Castle of Wonders, and is told in consequence: "Hadst thou done so the King would have been restored to health, and his dominions to peace, whereas from henceforth he will have to endure battles and conflicts, and his knights will perish, and wives will be widowed, and maidens will be left portionless, and all this because of thee." This certainly seems to imply that, while the illness of the Fisher King may be antecedent to, and independent of, the visit and failure of the hero, the misfortunes which fall on the land have been directly caused thereby.
The conclusion which states that the Bleeding Head seen by the hero "was thy cousin's, and he was killed by the Sorceresses of Gloucester, who also lamed thine uncle--and there is a prediction that thou art to avenge these things--" would seem to indicate the presence in the original of a 'Vengeance' theme, such as that referred to above.
In Parzival the stress is laid entirely on the sufferings of the King; the question has been modified in the interests of this theme, and here assumes the form "What aileth thee, mine uncle?" The blame bestowed upon the hero is solely on account of the prolonged sorrow his silence has inflicted on King and people; of a Land laid Waste, either through drought, or war, there is no mention.
"Iuch solt' iur wirt erbarmet han,
An dem Got wunder hat getan,
Und het gevraget siner not,
Ir lebet, und sit an saelden tot."
"Do der trurege vischaere
Saz ane froude und ane trost
War umb' iren niht siufzens hat erlost."
The punishment falls on the hero who has failed to put the question, rather than on the land, which, indeed, appears to be in no way affected, either by the wound of the King, or the silence of the hero. The divergence from Chretien's version is here very marked, and, so far, seems to have been neglected by critics. The point is also of importance in view of the curious parallels which are otherwise to be found between this version and Perlesvaus; here the two are in marked contradiction with one another.
The question finally asked, the result is, as indicated in the prose version, the restoration of the King not merely to health, but also to youth--
"Swaz der Franzoys heizet flo'ri'
Der glast kom sinem velle bi,
Parzival's schoen' was nu ein wint;
Und Absalon Davides kint,
Von Askalun Vergulaht
Und al den schoene was geslaht,
Und des man Gahmurete jach
Do man'n in zogen sach
Ze Kanvoleis so wunneclich,
Ir decheines schoen' was der gelich,
Die Anfortas uz siecheit truoc.
Got noch kunste kan genuoc."
GALAHAD. In the final form assumed by the story, that preserved in the Queste, the achievement of the task is not preceded by any failure on the part of the hero, and the advantages derived therefrom are personal and spiritual, though we are incidentally told that he heals the Fisher King's father, and also the old King, Mordrains, whose life has been preternaturally prolonged. In the case of this latter it is to be noted that the mere fact of Galahad's being the predestined winner suffices, and the healing takes place before the Quest is definitely achieved.
There is no Waste Land, and the wounding of the two Kings is entirely unconnected with Galahad. We find hints, in the story of Lambar, of a knowledge of the earlier form, but for all practical purposes it has disappeared from the story.
Analysing the above statements we find that the results may be grouped under certain definite headings:
(a) There is a general consensus of evidence to the effect that the main object of the Quest is the restoration to health and vigour of a King suffering from infirmity caused by wounds, sickness, or old age;
(b) and whose infirmity, for some mysterious and unexplained reason, reacts disastrously upon his kingdom, either depriving it of vegetation, or exposing it to the ravages of war.
(c) In two cases it is definitely stated that the King will be restored to youthful vigour and beauty.
(d) In both cases where we find Gawain as the hero of the story, and in one connected with Perceval, the misfortune which has fallen upon the country is that of a prolonged drought, which has destroyed vegetation, and left the land Waste; the effect of the hero's question is to restore the waters to their channel, and render the land once more fertile.
(e) In three cases the misfortunes and wasting of the land are the result of war, and directly caused by the hero's failure to ask the question; we are not dealing with an antecedent condition. This, in my opinion, constitutes a marked difference between the two groups, which has not hitherto received the attention it deserves. One aim of our present investigation will be to determine which of these two forms should be considered the elder.
But this much seems certain, the aim of the Grail Quest is two-fold; it is to benefit (a) the King, (b) the land. The first of these two is the more important, as it is the infirmity of the King which entails misfortune on his land, the condition of the one reacts, for good or ill, upon the other; how, or why, we are left to discover for ourselves.
Before proceeding further in our investigation it may be well to determine the precise nature of the King's illness, and see whether any light upon the problem can be thus obtained.
In both the Gawain forms the person upon whom the fertility of the land depends is dead, though, in the version of Diu Crone he is, to all appearance, still in life. It should be noted that in the Bleheris form the king of the castle, who is not referred to as the Fisher King, is himself hale and sound; the wasting of the land was brought about by the blow which slew the knight whose body Gawain sees on the bier.
In both the Perlesvaus, and the prose Perceval the King has simply 'fallen into languishment,' in the first instance, as noted above, on account of the failure of the Quester, in the second as the result of extreme old age.
In Chretien, Manessier, Peredur, and the Parzival, the King is suffering from a wound the nature of which, euphemistically disguised in the French texts, is quite clearly explained in the German.
But the whole position is made absolutely clear by a passage preserved in Sone de Nansai and obviously taken over from an earlier poem. This romance contains a lengthy section dealing with the history of Joseph 'd'Abarimathie,' who is represented as the patron Saint of the kingdom of Norway; his bones, with the sacred relics of which he had the charge, the Grail and the Lance, are preserved in a monastery on an island in the interior of that country. In this version Joseph himself is the Fisher King; ensnared by the beauty of the daughter of the Pagan King of Norway, whom he has slain, he baptizes her, though she is still an unbeliever at heart, and makes her his wife, thus drawing the wrath of Heaven upon himself. God punishes him for his sin:
"Es rains et desous l'afola
De coi grant dolor endura."
Then, in a remarkable passage, we are told of the direful result entailed by this punishment upon his land:
"Sa tierre ert a ce jour nommee
Lorgres, ch'est verites prouvee,
Lorgres est uns nons de dolour
Nommes en larmes et en plours,
Bien doit iestre en dolour nommes
Car on n'i seme pois ne bles
Ne enfes d'omme n'i nasqui
Ne puchielle n'i ot mari,
Ne arbres fueille n'i porta
Ne nus pres n'i raverdia,
Ne nus oysiaus n'i ot naon
Ne se n'i ot beste faon,
Tant que li rois fu mehaignies
Et qu'il fu fors de ses pechies,
Car Jesu-Crist fourment pesa
Qu'a la mescreant habita."
Now there can be no possible doubt here, the condition of the King is sympathetically reflected on the land, the loss of virility in the one brings about a suspension of the reproductive processes of Nature on the other. The same effect would naturally be the result of the death
of the sovereign upon whose vitality these processes depended.
To sum up the result of the analysis, I hold that we have solid grounds for the belief that the story postulates a close connection between the vitality of a certain King, and the prosperity of his kingdom; the forces of the ruler being weakened or destroyed, by wound, sickness, old age, or death, the land becomes Waste, and the task of the hero is that of restoration.
It seems to me, then, that, if we desire to elucidate the perplexing mystery of the Grail romances, and to place the criticism of this important and singularly fascinating body of literature upon an assured basis, we shall do so most effectually by pursuing a line of investigation which will concentrate upon the persistent elements of the story, the character and significance of the achievement proposed, rather than upon the varying details, such as Grail and Lance, however important may be their role. If we can ascertain, accurately, and unmistakably, the meaning of the whole, we shall, I think, find less difficulty in determining the character and office of the parts, in fact, the question solvitur ambulando, the 'complex' of the problem being solved, the constituent elements will reveal their significance.
As a first step I propose to ask whether this 'Quest of the Grail' represents an isolated, and unique achievement, or whether the task allotted to the hero, Gawain, Perceval, or Galahad, is one that has been undertaken, and carried out by heroes of other ages, and other lands. In the process of our investigation we must retrace our steps and turn back to the early traditions of our Aryan forefathers, and see whether we cannot, even in that remote antiquity, lay our hand upon a clue, which, like the fabled thread of Ariadne, shall serve as guide through the mazes of a varying, yet curiously persistent, tradition.
- ^ MS. Bibl. Nat., f. Franc. 12576 fo. 90.
- ^ Ibid. fo. 90vo, 91.
- ^ Diu Crone (ed. Stoll, Stuttgart, 1852). Cf. Sir Gawain of the Grail Castle for both versions.
- ^ Cf. MS. B.N. 12576, fo. 154.
- ^ Perceval, ed. Hucher, p. 466; Modena, p. 61.
- ^ Cf. Hucher, p. 482; Modena, p. 82.
- ^ Percevel li Gallois, ed. Potvin, ll. 6048-52.
- ^ Ib. ll. 6056-60.
- ^ Potvin, Vol. I. p. 15.
- ^ Ib. p. 26.
- ^ Ib. p. 86.
- ^ Ib. pp. 176, 178.
- ^ MS. B.N. 12576, ff. 221-222vo.
- ^ Mabinogion, ed. Nutt, p. 282.
- ^ Cf. Peredur (ed. Nutt), pp. 282, 291-92.
- ^ Parzival, Book v. ll. 947-50.
- ^ Ib. Book VI. ll. 1078-80.
- ^ Parzival, Book XVI, ll 275-86.
- ^ Cf. Morte Arthure, Malory, Book XVII. Chap. 18. Note the remark of Mordrains that his flesh which has waxen old shall become young again.
- ^ Parzival, Bk. IX. ll. 1388-92.
- ^ Sone de Nansai (ed. Goldschmidt, Stuttgart, 1899), ll 4775-76.
- ^ Sone de Nansai, ll. 4841-56.
- ^ It is evidently such a version as that of Sone de Nansai, and Parzival, which underlies the curious statement of the Merlin MS. B.N. f. Fr. 337, where the wife of the Fisher King is known as 'la Veve Dame,' while her husband is yet in life, though sorely wounded.