Romance and Epic Elements in the Different French Versions of Fierabras

MARIANE J. AILES

THE EARLIEST EXTANT VERSION OF FIERABRAS dates from a period crucial to the development of the chanson de geste, namely the end of the twelfth century. Already in this version, which I shall refer to as the Vulgate, there is a fusion of Epic with Romance, of the epic Christian- Saracen conflict with an added romance love-interest.1

In this Vulgate, the two attitudes, epic and romance, are found closely juxtaposed, often to humorous effect. There are two heroes, Oliver the epic hero and Gui the lover. The epic heroism of both French and pagan warri- ors is contrasted w i t h the less heroic atmosphere of the pagan court. One

1The poem, set in Spain, begins with the Saracen Fierabras challenging the Christian peers. Oliver, although suffering from a wound, replies to the challenge. Their fol- lows a long single combat, epitomizing the cross versus crescent theme, but with chivalric elements. The defeat and conversion of Fierabras is followed by the capture of Oliver and four other peers, who are taken to the Emir Balan, Fierabras's father. They are imprisoned but res- cued by Balan's daughter, Floripas, who is in love with Gui de Bourgogne. Charlemagne sends the remaining peers to rescue their companions, but they too are captured and again taken by FIoripas to her room. The peers expel the Saracens from the castle, Aigremore, only to find themselves besieged. Richard de Normandie escapes with a message to Charlemagne, who comes to the rescue of the peers. Balan refuses to be converted and is killed. The Destruction de Rome and the first part of the above outline of Fierabras (Oliver's duel with and ultimate defeat of Fierabras, along with the latter's conversion) may have orig- inally formed an independent chanson de geste, separate from the second part. H.R. Jauss chose Fierabras as his example of a romance-influenced chanson de geste in his paper "Chanson de geste et Roman courtois," in Chanson de geste und höfischer Roman : Heidelberger Kolloquium, 30 Januar 1961, Studia romanica, 4 (Heidelberg: Winter, 1963), pp. 61-77, in which he emphasized the essential differences which continue to exist between the two genres.

41 42 / Olifant / Vol. 10, Nos. 1 & 2 / Autumn 1982 - Summer 1983

particular contrast comes when Balan asks the peer Tierri about Charle- magne:

Quels hom est Karlemaines de quel chevalerie D'acointement de dames pour avoir druerie (vv. 2641-42)2

Tierri's rather off-course reply is that Charlemagne "Moult est preudons" (v. 2644) and that "Ne prise tous tes diex une pume pourie" (v. 2647). A fur- ther contrast occurs within the body of the peers themselves. When they are imprisoned and Floripas comes to them, Berart addreesses her courteously. Oliver, as is perhaps to be expected of the epic hero, demands arms, only to be told by Floripas to keep his mouth shut. Even within a single character, the lover-hero Gui de Bourgoigne, tension occurs between the ethos of the chanson de geste and that of the romance. Gui initially disdains the rôle of lover and refuses to accept anyone not given to him by Charlemagne, yet his scruples over such feudal duty are soon overcome.

In addition to the Vulgate there are three later adaptations of the poem, all of them Anglo-Norman. They are H (Hanover), fourteenth century; L (London, British Library, Royal 15.E.VI), mid-fifteenth century; and Eg (British Library, Egerton 3028), fourteenth century. L is not particularly closely related to the others, and although H and Eg are related, Eg is very individual. The Vulgate itself survives in four complete manuscripts and a number of fragments. All the complete manuscripts date f r o m the fourteenth or fifteenth centuries.3 The four versions, the Vulgate and the three adaptations vary in their treatment of the epic and romance elements.

2 All citations are from the Auguste Kroeber and G. Servois edition of B.N: f. fr. 12603, published in Fierabras: chanson de geste publiée pour la première fois d'après les manuscrits de Paris, de Rome et de Londres, Anciens poëtes de la France, 4 (Paris: Vieweg, 1860). 3The complete manuscripts are: A, Bibliothèque nationale, fonds français 12603, early fourteenth century, basis of the edition by Kroeber and Servois cited earlier; B, Bi- bliothèque nationale, fonds français 1499, fifteenth century; E, San Lorenzo de el Escorial, Bibliothèque du monastère, M.III.21, date disputed, probably fourteenth century; V, Rome, Vatican Library Regina 1616, dated 1317. Eg was edited by L. Brandin in Romania, 64 (1938), pp. 18-100. Ailes / Romance and Epic Elements in Fierabras / 43

The combat which opens the poem contains much of the heroic ideal. A wounded Oliver fights Fierabras in a single combat which results in the latter's conversion. In the Vulgate, this combat and the buildup to it is about a quarter of the whole poem, whereas in H it is between a fourth and a f i f t h of the poem, and in both Eg and L about a fifth. The most signifi- cant fact, however, is not that the combat has been considerably abbreviated, bu t what the adaptor has chosen to omit. In the Vulgate, both Fiera- bras the Saracen and Oliver the Christian are capable of chivalry. Fierabras offers to feign defeat if his opponent, who is in fact Oliver disguised as the newly-dubbed son of a vavassor, will send another more worthy opponent, equal in rank to Fierabras. Fierabras also offers him some of the balm of Christ to cure his wound, offers to let him pick up his sword, and, after having killed Oliver's horse, offers him his own. Oliver, of course, disdains all these. Fierabras's offer to pretend to be defeated is lacking in all three adaptations; the offer of the balm is lacking in Eg, but kept in H and L; the offer to let Oliver pick up his sword is kept in H and L, but the whole incident is altered in Eg, the sword being broken; f in ally , the offer of the horse is also kept in H and L, although the incident is abbreviated in H. In Eg Fierabras does dismount, not in order to be on an equal footing with Oli- ver bu t in order to protect his horse. The more chivalrous elements w i t h i n the combat are thus reduced in our three adaptations, which is, perhaps, unexpected. Professor Pearsall has suggested that the English were unable to accept the concept of the chivalrous Saracen or were impatient w i t h chivalry.1

The other major combat in the poem is between Charlemagne and Balan. It is given a buildup in epic style, as the two leaders meet in the midst of battle. This can be seen as a parallel to the Charlemagne-Baligant combat in the Roland, only whereas in the Roland divine intervention in the form of the angel Gabriel spurs Charlemagne on to victory, in Fiera- bras the Emperor would have been killed b u t for the timely, and less heroic, assistance of Richard de Normandie, Roland, and Oliver. Taken with the other parallels with the Roland, this illustrates the ability of our poet to parody chansons de geste.

In the late adaptations this parody seems to have been lost, though the reasons for this are unclear. In H and Eg, Charlemagne defeats Balan to-

1Derek Pearsall, Old English and Middle English Poetry (London, 1977), p. 117. 44 / Olifant / Vol. 10, Nos. 1 & 2 / Autumn 1982 - Summer 1983

tally unaided. In L the matter is less clear, since the crucial line is lacking: 'Ja occira karlon se Dix ne li aïe" (A, v. 5838). Either the adaptors simply could not bear to see Charlemagne on the point of defeat and therefore de- liberately exclude any outside intervention on his behalf, or, in the case of Eg and H, they are ignorant of the declension system and have mistakenly read "Karlon" as the subject. Whatever the case, the epic element, or rather the parody of the epic element, is lacking in these later versions.

There are several chanson de geste topoi used in Fierabras. Some remain intact in the various adaptations. Descriptions of arming and the praise of horses tend to be cut in L and Eg, and the description of the swords is rather curtailed in L. As all three Anglo-Norman versions tend to reduce description, this probably accounts for the abbreviation, rather than particular impatience with arming.

The Fierabras poet was by no means unskilled in the use of epic tech- nique. He uses laisses parallèles and reprise to good effect, although not always in a straightforward way. His most interesting use of laisses pa- rallèles is when he is sending the remaining peers to the rescue of the f i v e imprisoned by Balan. In a humorous parody of the council scene in the Roland, where Charlemagne's nobles eagerly volunteer to be ambassadors, the peers in Fierabras first t r y to dissuade Charlemagne from sending them, only to be told "Avek irés."

H keeps t h i s overall pattern. L, however, characteristically impatient with repetition, omits three complete laisses. The pattern is developed in Eg: in that version only two peers are imprisoned, so ten are sent, and we have nine laisses with parallel structure and strict repetition of formulae. The Eg adaptor still seems to have misunderstood the Fierabras poet, as these laisses are preceded by Charlemagne asking Gui de Bourgogne to go. Gui does not answer "afoler me volés" as he does in the Vulgate, but says, instead, "Jeo m'en irai volentiers." So in Eg we have the parallel with the Roland but the element of parody is absent.

Reprise, elaboratio, and repetitio in any form are often cut in L. They are almost totally absent from Eg but this is only to be expected in such an abbreviated tradition.

Since the romance characteristic of omitting the verba dicendi is Ailes / Romance and Epic Elements in Fierabras / 45

found in L and is also found in a late Vulgate manuscript not closely related to L, the cause seems to be because of fashion.

Fierabras depends heavily on chanson de geste tradition, particularly on the Roland. There are certain elements of parody, some of which we have noted, but the Roland material is also referred to in a serious way. In Eg there are some interesting departures from the use of the Roland tradition in Fierabras. At the end of the latter, Ganelon's death after Roncevaux is foretold. In Eg, Ganelon is executed as a result of his misdeeds in Fiera- bras. This was probably caused by eye-skip in Eg's source, but such an er- ror could easily have been rectified by anyone with the slightest knowledge of French literature. This implies ignorance of, or indifference to, French literary tradition. Also in Eg we find Ganelon, of all people, joining the ranks of the peers. Among the parallels with the Roland tradition made by the Fierabras poet is the rôle given to Ganelon as messenger to Balan, tak- ing no companion with him. In Eg the messenger is unnamed and the Ro- land parallel is lost, again suggesting that the adaptor was ignorant of or indifferent to the French tradition.

The character of Ganelon as depicted in the different versions is most revealing. The Vulgate exploits the Roland. We know Ganelon is a traitor and are constantly reminded of this fact, yet the potentially noble side of Ganelon, implicit in the Roland, is also developed. He plays his tradi- tional (sordid) rôle at the beginning when he and Hardré appoint Oliver to fight Fierabras, and also later, when all the peers are besieged in Aigre- more, Ganelon is indifferent to their fate and advocates returning to France. However, when Charlemagne, on his way to rescue the peers, is trapped in the City of Mautrible, Ganelon openly defies his clan, who, led by Alori, have suggested abandoning the Emperor and returning to France. Instead, Ganelon urges a rescue of Charlemagne, in which he fights bravely. Moreover, as messenger to Balan, he executes his task faith- fully and at the risk of his life.

All of this stands unchanged in both H and L. It is in Eg again that we have a departure from the Vulgate. The scene where Ganelon and Har- dré nominate Oliver is omitted. When Charlemagne is trapped in Mautri- ble, Ganelon takes Alori's rôle and suggests that they leave Charlemagne and return to France. It is possible that the adaptor misunderstood the French text here, as one line begins "Guenelon escria, " ('He shouted to 46 / Olifant / Vol. 10, Nos. 1 & 2 / Autumn 1982 - Summer 1983

Ganelon'), and this could have been interpreted by our Anglo-Norman adaptor as "Ganelon shouted." Whether it was the French that was misunderstood, or whether it was the intention of the Fierabras poet, there is here a gulf between the Anglo-Norman adaptor and his continental Vulgate model.

The characterization of Floripas is also of interest. The indifference of early epic to women is well-known, and no doubt the type of the "belle Sarrasine" was a sop to romance-lovers. Yet the "belle Sarrasine" belongs in the chanson de geste world. It is true that she does risk all for love in the manner of a courtly heroine, but the need for her conversion links her love to the Christian versus Saracen conflict, a conflict central to so many epics. We have, then, a certain tension between epic and romance elements. The "belle Sarrasine" is no courtly mistress, nor is she a reluctant maiden. Flo- ripas, the "belle Sarrasine" par excellence, is a strong-willed, self-assertive individual, less than modest and extremely violent, killing the jailer of the peers and her governess, and finally urging Charlemagne to kill her own father as he hesitates on the point of baptism.

Her character is the same in H as it is in the Vulgate. The only change is when she advises her father about the treatment of the peers. In the V u l - gate she suggests burning them alive, whereas H omits this.

In L the killing and the suggestion to burn the peers alive are retained and she still urges her father's death: the violence of her character thus re- mains undiluted. However, in her bearing she is less immodest and more dignified. A demand that Gui m u s t remain at Aigremore to kiss her is omitted, and she does not kiss Roland's feet in gratitude (as she does in the Vulgate).5

Again it is Eg which alters her character most. Her killings, as neces- sary elements of the story, are retained, indeed that of the jailer is described in even more violent terms. But when she advises Balan about the treatment of the prisoners, she recommends that some be kept for ransom, and she simply takes charge of the others; there is no suggestion of burning alive or chopping off of limbs. Most dramatic of all, instead of urging her

5In H the word "decement" is added at this point. Ailes / Romance and Epic Elements in Fierabras / 47

father's death, she urges his conversion, but here we must be cautious in our interpretation of that act, for it is Fierabras who urges this in the other versions, and the abbreviation "F" for Fierabras could have been wrongly expanded as Floripas. She is still forward with Gui, but as the whole episode of choosing a messenger is omitted, there is no question of her refus- ing to let Gui go. The incident of kissing Roland's feet is omitted. Overall she is quieter and more dignified than in the Vulgate, although still far from being an ideal romance heroine. Is it the passing of time which has made the epic conception unpopular, or is the chanson de geste type, the "belle Sarrasine," unacceptable in England?

The image of woman in general is not an idealized one in the Vul- gate. Two tales against women are told, one by the jailer, the other by Ba- lan's advisor. The first is omitted from all three Anglo-Norman versions, the second is retained only by H. These omissions could be due to chang- ing trends rather than to any insular as distinct from continental tradition.

In both epic and romance the supernatural is always important, but in the chanson de geste the emphasis is on religious phenomena, while in romance it is on magic. In the Vulgate Fierabras, magic is subservient to religion. The relics, stolen by Fierabras before our poem begins, constitute an important force in the poem. Fierabras has some of the ointment w i t h which Christ was embalmed and which cures any wound. In its powers and in the indiscriminate way it works, healing pagan and Christian alike, it resembles magical balms in other tales, such as Yvain. The other relics, when held aloft by Naimon before the pagans attacking Aigremore, i n - stantly stun the advancing enemy. The poem begins with a reference to the Lendit fair when the relics were carried in procession and closes with their distribution. In short, they may be the raison d'être of the poem.

Yet there are non-religious magical elements. Floripas has a belt which will keep them all from starving; Balan sends a necromancer to re- cover it; using magic, he gains the belt, but Gui kills him and tips him out of the window, belt and all. The whole episode has no effect on the rest of the narrative. The poet sees no place for the belt, as staying alive by magic would have been unheroic in a chanson de geste although acceptable in romance. The other main magical element is drawn under the religious banner. Richard de Normendie, on his way to Charlemagne for help, is guided over a river by a white hart, a common romance motif, normally 48 / Olifant / Vol. 10, Nos. 1 & 2 / Autumn 1982 - Summer 1983 magical but here simply an answer to prayer.6

Prayer itself is prominent in Fierabras. One of the most striking alter- ations in the Anglo-Norman versions is in the treatment of prayer. A number of "telegram" prayers — short appeals to God — are omitted and long prayers are often abbreviated. In L a long prayer made by Richard when he first reaches the river is totally omitted. The abbreviation is less noticeable in Eg than it is in L and H.

The relics named are different in H and Eg. The specific relics of the Lendit fair were important whenever the poem was sung in France, but in the Anglo-Norman realm other prestigious relics could be introduced, the lance (Eg) and the cross (H).7 The irrelevance of the Lendit fair has also al- lowed a remodelling of the opening laisse in Eg, and to a lesser degree in H. The incident of Naimon holding up the relics is abbreviated in L and omitted in Eg.

The magical elements are retained in all three adaptations.

From this we see a general decrease in interest in the religious element — such as the relics — not necessarily because of the later date of the adaptations, but because they were not French. The changes are not made in the late Vulgate manuscripts.

There are certain romance mo tifs present in the Vulgate Fierabras. We have already noted the white hart, drawn into epic religiosity. Also Charlemagne grants a romance-type rash boon to Oliver, who in reply re- quests the combat against Fierabras. This is slightly diluted in H, L, and

6While the motif of a white hart guiding someone over a river is a widespread folkloric element found in all literary genres, it is seen more often in romance than in epic works. Other examples of the m o t i f are found in the Chronique saintongeaise, and Runsivals strid, the Faeroese ballad based on the Roland (see Hans-Erich Keller, "Une Ballade de la ba- t a i l l e de Roncevaux en Thulé," in Jean-Marie d'Heur et Nicoletta Cherubini, éds., Études de philologie romane et d'histoire littéraire offerts à Jules Horrent à l'occasion de son soixan- tième anniversaire [(Tournai) : Gedit., 1980].) pp. 697-706). Another example in epic literature is seen in the Chanson de Saisnes. 7The relics in the Vulgate are the crown of thorns, the nails, and the shroud, and are divided between Saint Denis (the Lendit relics) and Compiègne. Ailes / Romance and Epic Elements in Fierabras / 49

the Vulgate, where Ganelon and Hardré also nominate Oliver, but it is highlighted in Eg which dispenses with these traitors.

In conclusion, it can be seen that whilst the treatment of romance elements varies little in the different versions of Fierabras, the chanson de geste material is treated very differently in the later adaptations. No doubt some of this is due to the decreasing popularity of the genre, but it would be going too far to say that the poem became more of a romance, even if it did become less of a chanson de geste. Even in the Vulgate the chanson de geste material is not used in a straightforward manner, but, as we have seen, was sometimes parodied and throughout mixed with romance elements. This may help to explain the continued popularity of the Vulgate into the later middle ages. This, then, begs the question: Why the adaptations? Moreover, why do these adaptations fail to exploit the romance elements, yet at the same time display misunderstanding, indeed ignorance of epic tradition? Could it be that in these adaptations we have evidence of an Anglo-Norman literary tradition, divorced from its continental parent?

MARIANNE J. AILES Reading