Mediaevistik 32 . 2019 435 rinnen von Zimmern kam, was faktisch hand, Benoît does gush enthusiastically einfach falsch ist. Anerkennung verdient over Henry II’s mother, the “Empress” aber Schmitz dafür, eine gut struktu- Matilda (N.B., there are six Matildas in rierte, weitgehend sehr klar formulierte the index): a “[…] widely celebrated figu- Untersuchung vorgelegt zu haben, die re, for it is my firm belief that there is not- einen hohen Kenntnisstand über den his- hing in the whole of my book that people torischen, philosophischen und religiösen would be happier to listen to, seeing that Kontext anzeigt. Die Wolfram-Forschung her impressive and highly regarded achie- hat er aber damit kaum produktiv weiter- vements are so much more extraordinary gebracht. than those of any other person.” (172) Albrecht Classen Benoît de Sainte-Maure, best known as a medieval romancer, was the author of this widely read and imitated Roman de Troie, composed around 1165. The Three Anglo-Norman Kings: The Li- Troy romance consisted of a 30,000-plus ves of William the Conqueror and Sons verse re-imagining of Latin narratives by Benoît de Sainte-Maure, trans. Ian purporting to describe the siege of Troy, Short. Mediaeval Sources in Transla- invigorated by what the poet refers to as tion, 57. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of “bons dits” (apposite amplifications). Be- Mediaeval Studies, 2018, viii, 228. noît—an educated monk from the region Respected professor of medieval French of Tours in north-west France—remains and foremost specialist in Anglo- mysterious to us even today, apart from Norman, Ian Short can cast his net wide these two principal texts. and does so brilliantly with the volume Linked to the Norman-Angevin court, under review. Eleven thousand lines co- his reputation as a poet must have reached ver here the period from 1027 (conception the ears of Henry II Plantagenêt who, so- of William the Conqueror) to 1135 (death metime in the late 1160s, commissioned of Henry I)—all lively and dynamic in him to compose a verse history of the mon- this translation, while much historical arch’s ancestors. Benoît thus found himself background is revealed in these vivid successor to the Norman historiographer and impressively-written pages (in spite Wace whose vernacular French Roman of Benoît’s often stilted style): treason de Rou (named after Normandy’s foun- and transgressions, murder and mayhem, der Rollo), was abandoned in favor of Be- betrayals, hypocrisy, depravity, ominous noît’s Histoire des ducs de Normandie (it dream sequences, punishing sieges; but comprises 44,544 lines; the last quarter is also on occasion magnificent festivities translated here—from v. 33445 to the end). amidst peace and prosperity. Revolting The nouveaux arrivés Normans, in descriptions grace the narrative as well: their search for ethnic identity, celebrated “[they drew their…] swords, their trus- their expansionist activities in a corpus ty blades of engraved steel, and dashing of panegyrical historiographic texts in out their enemies’ brains, […gouged] out which the multi-authored and chameleon- their entrails and intestines.” (102) At like Gesta Normannorum Ducum claims this point we encounter a lion and a fire- pride of place. breathing dragon (102–103). Elsewhere This and other histories, both vernacu- a bear is slaughtered (131). On the other lar and Latin, were the sources Benoît de 436 Mediaevistik 32 . 2019

Sainte-Maure adapted into his vernacular by contemporaries, and the Plantagenet poetic narrative. The rational? Dynastic territories, which were not. The focus, legitimacy perhaps foremost. Henry II’s although it is not adhered to rigidly, is royal patronage, it is thought, may have the period of Henry II (1154–1189) in aimed to tie the Anglo-Norman aristocra- the Plantagenet areas of England and cy of late twelfth-century England into a Western France and of Frederick I Bar- cultural homeland from which they were barossa (1152–1190) in the Holy Roman growing increasingly remote. The sense Empire. It contains an introduction and of Norman history that Benoît conveys nine substantive articles, two in German through his French verse was the one that and the rest in English. Each paper ap- the king and his Anglo-Norman contem- pends its own list of sources and biblio- poraries must have assimilated as part of graphy and an abstract in English. There their courtly entertainment. With rhyming is a substantial literature on most topics octosyllabic couplets, Benoît embraces an discussed, to which the authors add their austere, moralizing view of his subject, ai- own interpretations. ming to reconnect the sovereign’s French- One essay concerns the Hohenstaufen speaking aristocracy to their Continental only and another the Plantagenets. Knut heritage and to give a wider secular au- Görich discusses Frederick’s treaties of dience access to the Latin sources. One Venice with Pope Alexander III in 1177 can only agree when Benoît opines: “[…] and of Constance with the Lombard there is great benefit in knowing the noble League in 1183, emphasizing hierarchical deeds of our ancestors.” (100) questions regarding the imperial dignity, Short’s product has much to recom- while Stephen Church reinterprets the mend it (copious notes and bibliography), composition and writing on the dating especially for a class on medieval history. and making of Magna Carta, arguing If a second edition is planned, I would sin- that the charter was not a peace treaty but cerely urge the inclusion of a genealogical rather a separate agreement with those chart, a map of the lands involved, and barons who had already submitted to the the expansion of some biographical detail king. The other articles are comparative. in the index to help the reader distingu- Thomas Foerster’s “Crossing the Alps ish, for example, among the twenty-two and Crossing the Channel. The ‘Empires’ Roberts and twenty-five Williams listed. of Frederick I and Henry II” (pp. 71–119) Raymond Cormier, “First Gent Emeritus”, compares the issues and problems of Longwood University; cormierrj@long- rule in the two largest political units of wood.edu twelfth-century Europe. He notes that if “empire” is extended to polities formed by personal unions, then other medieval states than the Angevin domains would Staufen and Plantagenets. Ed. Alheydis qualify. Foerster gives a very informative Plassmann and Dominik Büschken. discussion of how borders were fortified Bonn: V & R Unipress, Bonn University and perceived and how the ruler’s perso- Press, 2018, 13 figures, 303 pp. nal authority, once he had crossed into This collection deals generally with his own territory, was viewed differently the twelfth-century Hohenstaufen do- from actions that he had taken outside. mains, which were called an “empire” The “imperial” side of the problem also