Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 9.djvu/675

EARLY ROMANCES.] facts of nearly all are, it is hardly necessary to say, mainly arbitrary. Arthurian Romances, The second class of early French epics consists of the Arthurian cycle, the earliest composi tions of which are at least a century junior to the earliest chanson de geste, but which soon succeeded the chansons in popular favour, and obtained a vogue both wider and far more enduring. It is not easy to conceive a greater contrast in form, style, subject, and sentiment than is presented by ners the two classes. In both the religious sentiment is promi- nent, but the religion of the chansons is of the simplest, not to say of the most savage character. To pray to God and to kill his enemies constitutes the whole duty of man. In the romances the mystical element becomes on the contrary prominent, and furnishes in the Holy Grail one of the most important features. In the Caiiovingian knight the courtesy and clemency which we have learnt to associate with chi valry are almost entirely absent. The gentix ber contra dicts, jeers at, and execrates his sovereign and his fellows with the utmost freedom. He thinks nothing of striking his cortoise moullier so that the blood runs down her cler vis. If a servant or even an equal offends him, he will throw the offender into the fire, knock his brains out, or set his whiskers ablaze. The Arthurian knight is far more of the modern model in these respects. But his chief dif ference from his predecessor is undoubtedly in his amorous devotion to his beloved, who, if not morally superior to Bellicent, Floripas, Esclairmonde, and the other Carlo- vingian heroines, is somewhat less forward. Even in minute details the difference is strongly marked. The romances are in octosyllabic couplets or in prose, and their language is different from that of the chansons, and contains much fewer of the usual epic repetitions and stock phrases. A voluminous controversy has been held respecting the origin of these differences, and of the story or stories which were destined to receive such remarkable attention. It is suffi cient to say here that the attempted production of early Breton originals is open to the gravest suspicion, and that Geoffrey of Monmouth s account of his Armorican text- book meets with little credence. M. Paulin Paris seems to have clearly proved that nothing older than Nennius can be pro duced, and that this and nothing else was Geoffrey s autho rity, so far as he had any. What we are at present con cerned with, however, is a body of verse and prose composed in the latter part of the 12th century and later. The earliest romances bear the names of Walter Map and Kobert de Borron, which are undoubtedly authentic. Later, we have the names of Helie de Borron, Luce de Gast, &c., which are probably fictitious. Walter Map is responsible for the Saint Graal and the Quete du Saint Graal, Robert de Borron for Joseph d Arimathie and Merlin. Artus and part at least of Lancelot du Lac (the whole of which has been attributed to Walter Map) appear to be due to un known authors. Tristan came later, and has a stronger mixture of Celtic tradition. Latest of all came the great Arthurian miscellany of Giron le Courtois. Most of these works, though not all, are in prose. At the same time as Walter Map, or a little later, Chretien de Troyes threw the legends of the Round Table into octosyllabic verse of a singularly spirited and picturesque character. The chief poems attributed to him are the Chevalier an Lijon (Sir Ewain of Wales), the Chevalier ct la Charette (one of the epi sodes of Lancelot], Eric et Enide, Tristan, and Percivale. These poems, independently of their merit, which is great, had an extensive literary influence. They were translated by the German minnesingers, Wolfram von Eschenbach, Gottfried of Strasburg, and others. With the romances already referred to, which were mostly written in England and at the English court, Chretien s poems complete the early forms of the Arthurian story, and supply the matter 639 of it as it is best known to English readers in Malory s book. Nor does that book, though far later than the original forms, convey a very false impression of the char acteristics of the older romances. Indeed, the Arthurian knight, his character and adventures, are so much better known than the heroes of the Carlovingian chanson that there is less need to dwell upon them. They had, however, as has been already pointed oat, great influence upon their rivals, and their comparative fertility of invention, the much larger number of their dramatis persona;, and the greater variety of interests to which they appealed, sufficiently explain their increased popularity. The ordin ary attractions of poetry are also more largely present in them than in the chansons ; there is more description, more life, and less of the mere chronicle. They have been accused of relaxing morality, and there is perhaps some truth in the charge. But the change is after all one rather of manners than of morals, and what is lost in simplicity is gained in refinement. Doon de Mayence is a late chanson, and Lancelot du Lac is an early romance. But the two beauti ful scenes in the former between Doon and Nicolette, in the latter between Lancelot, Galahault, Guinevere, and the Lady of Malehaut, may be compared as instances of the attitude of the two classes of poets towards the same subject. Romances of Antiquity. There is yet a third class of early narrative poems, differing from the two former in subject, but agreeing sometimes with one sometimes with the other in form. These are the classical romances which are not much later than those of Charlemagne and Arthur. The chief subjects with which their authors busied them selves were the conquests of Alexander and the siege of Troy, though other classical stories come in. The most remarkable of all is the romance of Alixandre by Lambert the Short and Alexander of Bernay. It has been said that the excellence of the twelve-syllabled verse used in this romance was the origin of the term alexandrine. The Trojan romances, on the other hand, are chiefly in octo syllabic verse, and the principal poem which treats of them is the Roman de Troie of Benoit de Ste More. Both this poem and Alixandre are attributed to the last quarter of the 12th century. The authorities consulted for these poems were, as may be supposed, none of the best. Dares Phrygius, Dictys Cretensis, the pseudo-Callisthenes sup plied most of them. But the inexhaustible invention of the trouveres themselves was the chief authority consulted. The adventures of Medea, the wanderings of Alexander and the Trojan horse, were quite sufficient to spur on to exertion the minds which had been accustomed to spin a chanson of some 10,000 lines out of a casual allusion in some preceding poem. It is needless to say that anachronisms did not dis turb them. From first to last the writers of the chansons had not in the least troubled themselves with attention to any such matters. Charlemagne himself had his life and exploits accommodated to the need of every poet who treats of him, and the same is the case with the heroes of anti quity. Indeed, Alexander is made in many respects a pro totype of Charlemagne. He is regularly knighted, he has twelve peers, he holds tournaments, he has relations with Arthur, and comes in contact with fairies, he takes flights in the air, and so forth. There is perhaps more avowed imagin ation in these classical stories than in either of the other divisions of French epic poetry. Some of their authors even confess to the practice of fiction, while the trouveres of the chansona invariably assert the historical character of their facts and personages, and the authors of the Arthurian romances at least start from facts vouched for partly by national tradition partly by the authority of religion and the church. The classical romances, however, are import ant in two different ways. In the first place, they connect the early literature of France, however loosely, and with