Gheraert van Viane

Irene Spijker

Nu hort wat seide Aymerijn Tote sinen oem Gheraert: “Hier nu menech sere vervaert. Qualike ghedinct ons das, Dat onse gheslachte oint was Seere gheducht ende ontsien! Mi dinke, hier soude menech vlien Gherne, wisti waerwaert. Bi mire wet, lieve oem Gheraert, Ic segghe wat mi dinket goet Ende wat ic rade dat men doet: Dat wi alle sterven, Eer wi ons laten ontherven, No oec den coninc comen te ghenaden, Up aventure of hijt dade. Wine moghen niet verdinghen In ghere wijs, no daertoe bringhen Dat wijs bliven in die ere, Hen si dat hem elc kere Ter were ende bliven doet Of wreken onsen wederstoet. Het gaet met ons al uten spele: Wine ebben spisen binnen niet vele. Die wile dat wi ebben onse macht, Eer ons die hongher neemt de cracht Ende ons hier binnen verqueelt, Ic rade wel dat elc speelt ‘Al ghewonnen of verloren’.

23.1 64 Irene Spijker

Jane weten wi wel tevoren Wi moeten alle sterven Ende ons lives derven, Alst God ghebiet, onse Heere? Niemen vervarem te sere Dor hare ghesciet, dor hare cracht. Jane heeft God die meeste macht, Die ons wel mach beraden Dor sine doecht ende staen in staden? Trecht es onse ende tonrecht hare. Ic was ghetrocken biden hare Jammerlike ende sere teblouwen. Dies clagic Gode ende onser Vrouwen Ende u, oem, ende minen maghen Dieghene die mi achterdraghen Ende mi niet helpen wreken Die grote slaghe, die sware steken Die ic in sconincs hof ontfinc Van harde meneghen jonghelinc. God ghevem lachter ende toren! Ic hadde nalijc mijn lijf verloren.” (7-55)1

Now listen to what Aymerijn said to his uncle Gheraert: “At present many people here are very frightened. We are hardly aware of the fact that our family used to be feared and respected once! It seems to me that many would like to flee, if they but knew where to go. I swear to you, dear uncle Gheraert, I will tell you what I think is right and what one ought to do: it is better for us all to die than to

1 This text is based on the manuscript. See pp. 153-58 of Kalff, Middel- nederlandsche epische fragmenten. For a translation in modern French, see Emden, “Les Girart et leur(s) femme(s).”

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 65

be robbed of our land or to beg the king for mercy, given that we do not know whether he would grant us mercy. In no way will we be able to reach an agreement or manage to preserve our honour unless everybody takes up arms and dies or avenges our adversity. Our situation is appalling: there is not much food in the city. I urge everyone to fight to the death, if necessary, as long as we still have our physical power, before it is wasted away by hunger. We know only too well that we all have to die and lose our lives if that is what God, our Lord, wants. Nobody needs to be overly frightened, in spite of their shooting, in spite of their great number. Is it not the case that God has the greatest power and in his mercy will assist us and come to our rescue? We are within our rights; they are the guilty party. My hair was pulled in a pitiful way, and I was vigorously beaten. Therefore, I complain to God and our Lady and you, my uncle, and my relatives about those who abandon me and do not help me to avenge the beatings and punches many young men at court have given me. God bring shame and grief upon them! I nearly lost my life.2

The lines quoted above are taken from one of the two short fragments that have been preserved from the Middle Dutch Gheraert van Viane. It is not certain what preceded this passage in the Middle Dutch text. Possibly it corresponded to what Bertrand de Bar-sur-Aube tells us in Girart de Vienne, his chanson de geste:3

One day the four sons of Garin de Monglane go out into the world. The two youngest, Renier and Girart, take

2 All translations from the Middle Dutch are the author’s. 3 See Wolfgang van Emden’s edition of Bertrand.

23.1 66 Irene Spijker

service with Charlemagne. When in time Renier demands a fief as reward for his services, Charlemagne gives him Genvres;4 Girart remains at court. Then a messenger suddenly informs Charlemagne that the Duke of Burgundy has died. The king promises Girart the duchess’s hand in marriage and her land. However, no sooner has he told the widow that he intends the splendid Girart for her than it occurs to him that she is very beautiful, and he reconsiders his decision. He asks her to marry him. The duchess prefers the young knight for a husband and asks Girart straight out to marry her. A woman who proposes to a man! Girart finds this so unbecoming that he rejects her. Deeply insulted the woman marries Charlemagne. Girart receives the city of Vienne by way of compensation. In order to show his gratitude, Girart wants to kiss the king’s foot. Charlemagne is already in bed with his wife beside him. Then the scorned woman sees an opportunity to avenge herself: she offers Girart her foot, and he unknowingly kisses it instead of the king’s foot. Hereafter he leaves for Vienne. Later, Aimeri, son of Girart’s brother Hernaut de Beaulande, visits the royal court. Confronted with the nephew of the man who has rejected her, the queen avenges herself a second time: in public (but in the absence of Charlemagne) she cleverly narrates how Girart scorned her at the time and how she got her own back on him. Aimeri is seething and would certainly have killed her were it not for the knights who throw him out of the

4 Genvres probably refers to Geneva. See Bertrand, Girart de Vienne, pp. 354-55.

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 67

hall. In great haste he rides to Vienne, where he informs Girart about what has happened. A war between Girart and Charlemagne follows. The king lays siege to Vienne. Girart is helped by his brothers Hernaut, Milon, and Renier. They all take an army to Vienne. Renier also brings his son and daughter, Olivier and Aude, and of course Aimeri joins in. The war lasts for years on end.

In the first of the two preserved Middle Dutch fragments, of which more than half is quoted above, we read about a meeting that takes place one day in Vienne. Aymerijn argues passionately that a fight to the death is the only honourable way open to them. His uncle Gheraert agrees with him. Then Olivier gets up to speak. The fragment ends just before he has been able to give his opinion. It is clear from the second fragment that Olivier must have argued in favour of negotiation. In this fragment he appears as a messenger before Charlemagne, in the camp of the Franks. The king would have liked to kill him immediately; Olivier is only given the opportunity to say something because of the Duke of Bavaria. He points out to the king that on seeing Aymerijn the members of his family will continue to remember the shame that the queen has brought upon them. Moreover, how to interpret the fact that she let Gheraert kiss her foot? No wonder the family is seeking revenge! We can only guess at the message Olivier intends to deliver in the name of his uncle and at the continuation of the story: the fragment breaks off just when he is about to deliver his message. We may assume that the famous duel between Olivier and Roland that follows from Olivier’s mission in Bertrand’s chanson and that is so penetratingly described there also appeared in the Middle Dutch Gheraert van Viane. The Roman der Lorreinen, the Middle Dutch story about the Loherains, refers to it.5

5 See lines 3789-99 in Overdiep, Een fragment van den Roman der Lor- reinen. J.B. van der Have was kind enough to establish for me that this ref-

23.1 68 Irene Spijker

Details

The 192 lines of the Middle Dutch Gheraert van Viane were written on two parchment bifolia that are preserved in the Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin (Ms.germ.fol. 751/2). These double leaves originally belonged to the same quire. Assuming that the latter was a quaternion, the preserved bifolia were probably the exterior ones: their text consists of two noncontiguous parts, and the two inner bifolia will have contained the missing intervening text. The leaves seem to come from a modest manuscript: its size is small; apparently no high demands were made of the parchment; and there are no decorations of any kind. The text is otherwise clearly legible. We are dealing with a representative of the group of manuscripts that have been called minstrel manuscripts.6 The date of the manuscript is approximately 1320.7 Judging from the content of the preserved fragments and the traditional verse technique, the text may originate from the thirteenth century. The poet may have been from the County of Flanders or even from the County of Holland.8 The language of the preserved fragments is West Middle Dutch with Flemish characteristics. It is tempting to assume a relation between the Middle Dutch Gheraert van Viane and East Flanders. It is likely that in this text Viane (a toponym that appears in lines 117, 126, and 139) refers to Vienne, the erence does not appear in Garin le Loherain or Gerbert de Mez, the Old French texts that the Middle Dutch poet used as sources. 6 Andrew Taylor discusses the unsuitability of this term for the category of manuscripts referred to here and its too hypothetical character (Taylor, “The myth of the minstrel manuscript”). 7 For a description of the manuscript, see Kienhorst, De handschriften van de Middelnederlandse ridderepiek, vol. 1, pp. 61-62. Illustrations of photo- graphs of two folios appear in vol. 2, pp. 41-42. 8 On verse technique and location, see Berg, “De Karelepiek. Van voor- gedragen naar individueel gelezen literatuur.”

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 69 city on the Rhône that Girart receives from Charlemagne in Bertrand’s chanson de geste. Viane is one variant of the Old French spelling of Vienne; the poet may have encountered the name of this city in this form in a Girart de Vienne manuscript. The Middle Dutch Viane could also have been a written reflection of how the Middle Dutch poet heard the French toponym, of the way in which it sounded to his Dutch ears. However, the Middle Dutch toponym Viane acquires a curious extra dimension when we look at the extratextual reality. Viane is a village in East Flanders. In the Middle Ages it had a castle. Charters show that in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries some lords of Viane were called Gerard.9 It remains to be proven, but it is feasible that the French chanson de geste was adapted into Middle Dutch for one of these (certainly not indigent) Gerards van Viane or that one of them had a manuscript made with the Middle Dutch text.

Tradition

Several versions of the story can be distinguished in the French Girart de Vienne tradition. One narrative element that plays an important part in this respect is the casus belli. Presumably, the Chronique rimée of Philippe Mousket (first half of the thirteenth century) contains an old version of the story, in common with the Old Norse Karlamagnús Saga (shortly after 1250). Here, the casus belli is Girart’s refusal to serve Charlemagne. In Bertrand’s chanson de geste that probably dates from the end of the twelfth century, Charlemagne also accuses Girart of neglecting his feudal obligations towards him, but the most striking casus belli is here the kissing of the foot. Common opinion has it that Bertrand introduced this kiss into the story.10 We find it again in the late medieval version passed down in the so-called “Cheltenham manuscript” (in

9 See both inventories by Verschaeren. 10 See Emden’s edition of Bertrand, pp. xx-xxix, for both the archaic version and the changes attributed to Bertrand.

23.1 70 Irene Spijker verse), in the Paris manuscript Arsenal 3351 (in prose), and in numerous printed editions of the prose Guerin de Montglave.11 However, it is absent from other texts belonging to the Girart de Vienne tradition, such as the fifteenth-century Croniques et conquestes de Charlemaine by David Aubert. Judging from Olivier’s words in the second fragment, the Middle Dutch Gheraert van Viane contained the foot-kissing episode; in this respect the Middle Dutch text conforms to Bertrand’s chanson de geste and the late-medieval French version. Is it possible to determine more precisely the connection between Gheraert van Viane and these two versions? First of all, we are able to establish that Gheraert van Viane is not a precise translation of the French versions in which the foot kissing figures. Furthermore, we are able to establish that in some ways it corresponds to Bertrand’s version, while in other ways it is closer to the late-medieval version. The beating of Aymerijn, of which he reminds his family in the fragment quoted above (ll. 45-55), is not to be found in the late-medieval version, but it does have a parallel in Bertrand’s version:

Aimeri boutent et devant et derrier, fors de leanz ont le danzel chacié,12 par .I. petit ne li font enconbrier. (1878-80)

They hit Aimeri where they can and throw him out. He narrowly escapes an ugly predicament.13

11 The text of the Cheltenham manuscript (Eugene, U of Oregon, Univ. Lib., Cheltenham 26.092) has been published in Dougherty and Barnes’s edition of La Geste de Monglane. I consulted the manuscript Arsenal 3351 on mi- crofilm. I have not investigated the printed editions in detail. Therefore, whenever I have detailed comments on the late-medieval version, I refer only to the representatives of that particular version in these manuscripts. 12 Var. : fors de leanz vont le danzel sachier

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 71

See also lines 2195-98:

“Teus .xxx. cous i oi qant ge i fui [ ...... ] par .I. petit qu’il ne m’orent murtri.”

I received such a beating [. . .], they nearly killed me.

However, while Aymerijn talks of a pending shortage of food in the besieged town of Vienne (l. 29), that is not mentioned in the chanson de geste. The food shortage does occur in the late-medieval version. Not only are provisions stocked in abundance in Bertrand’s version, but there is also an underground passage enabling people to leave Vienne to acquire food. There is no such passage in the late-medieval version, and here an acute shortage of food really exists. See the Cheltenham manuscript, lines 2173-76:

Et sont les pas gardé de chascune partie, Si qu’il n’y pot [passer] vitaille ne denrye, De quoy Vïenne fut durement amendrie, Le plus richë y ot la chiere bien changie.

All access roads were blocked, so that no food or other goods could be brought into the city. Consequently Vienne had a hard time; even the richest person came to look unhealthy.

Few lines of Gheraert van Viane have been preserved, and, consequently, the Middle Dutch text can only be compared with the French sources to a very limited degree. Therefore, it is difficult to say anything about the

13 Translations from Bertrand are the author’s.

23.1 72 Irene Spijker stemmatic position of Gheraert van Viane in relation to these sources.14 It is even more difficult because one ought to consider the serious possibility that the Middle Dutch poet made his adaptation on the basis of his recollections of a recitation of the French equivalent without having a manuscript of the text at his disposal.15 I will leave the relations between the Girart texts and direct my attention to an issue that is fascinating: the emphasis chosen by the Middle Dutch poet himself. I will concentrate upon one aspect of the text: the part played by Aymerijn.16 A well-known theory holds that it was Bertrand who made Aimeri a relative of Girart. In the old versions of the Girart story, Girart is far from sympathetic. By connecting the two houses—the Girart family and the Aimeri de Narbonne family (i.e., Guillaume d’Orange’s family)— Bertrand makes Girart a member of a house that was famous for its loyalty to the king and its struggle to defend the Christian church. It is by creating this family relationship and by introducing the foot-kissing episode into the story (among other things)—as it is usually argued—that Bertrand turns Girart into a sympathetic hero whose rebellion against Charlemagne is justified.17

14 For an attempt in this direction, see my article “Een poging tot lokaliser- ing van de Middelnederlandse Gheraert van Viane in de internationale Gi- rart de Vienne-traditie.” Emden reacted critically in “Les Girart et leur(s) femme(s).” 15 The point that poets of Middle Dutch texts may have (also) worked from memory has been made several times. See for instance my article on Renout van Montalbaen published in this issue of Olifant. 16 Space does not permit me to pay attention to another wonderful textual element the Middle Dutch poet probably introduced into the story: the omi- nous silence awaiting Olivier in Charlemagne’s camp. For this topic, see my article “Een poging tot lokalisering,” pp. 107-108. 17 See for instance Emden’s edition of Bertrand, pp. xxii-xxix.

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 73

Aimeri plays an important part in Bertrand’s chanson de geste. If he had not appeared at Charlemagne’s court, the queen’s scandalous action would perhaps never have been discovered, and Girart and his family would perhaps never have gone to war against the king. Aimeri is the first family member to hear that the queen has made Girart kiss her foot. He shows his fighting spirit and vengefulness, and he is the last person to reconcile himself finally with Charlemagne. Wolfgang van Emden has pointed out that Aimeri only plays an important role in the first and last of the three parts to be distinguished in the chanson de geste, those parts which, it is assumed, Bertrand did not extract from the already existing version of the story (in contrast with the middle part) (Bertrand, Girart de Vienne, pp. xxvi-xxvii). Bertrand’s chanson de geste is inconsistent in this respect, as it is inconsistent about the casus belli: the foot kissing is not mentioned again after the first part. The poet of the late-medieval version contained in the Cheltenham manuscript not only brings out Aimeri’s role more but also gives it a specific emphasis. Several times Charlemagne demands that Aimeri be handed over to him, even in the episode in which Charlemagne reconciles himself with Girart.18 After the queen triumphantly tells the story about the foot kissing, Aimeri attacks her in blind fury. Because of this assault, Charlemagne demands that Aimeri be surrendered. The war between Girart and the king is caused by Girart’s refusal to surrender his nephew (ll. 297-357).19 It is likely that later on in the story Aimeri’s attack on Charlemagne’s wife is not the only reason why he wants Aimeri to be handed over to him. Aimeri’s other actions also strongly determine Charlemagne’s wish to lay his hands on the daring young

18 For the Cheltenham manuscript, see Dougherty and Barnes’s edition of La geste de Monglane, ll. 298-305, 3094-114, 3298-301, and 3340-42. See also ll. 855-60 and 1867-68. 19 For their part, Girart and his family demand the surrender of the queen (even after the first part).

23.1 74 Irene Spijker man.20 Of all the family members, Aimeri bears the greatest malice towards the king and his men; Charlemagne’s hatred seems to be directed mainly at Aimeri.21 The Middle Dutch poet also presents Aymerijn in his own specific way. It is hard to determine the exact size of Aymerijn’s role in Gheraert van Viane because of the fragmentary nature of the tradition. Judging from the remaining fragments, he has a prominent part. In the first fragment he gives an impassioned speech that lasts 70 lines. The meeting at which he speaks is parallel to the meeting that is described in lines 2178-201 of the Cheltenham manuscript. This takes place when the situation in Vienne becomes precarious because of an acute shortage of provisions. At this meeting Olivier proposes to go to Charlemagne and try to negotiate peace with him. In the late-medieval French version only, Olivier comes up with a proposal. In contrast with the Middle Dutch passage, Aimeri does not speak at all. Indeed, his name is not mentioned at all in this passage of the Cheltenham manuscript, nor is he mentioned in the corresponding passage in Bertrand’s chanson de geste (ll. 3710- 51).22 This difference between Gheraert van Viane and the French tradition is even more remarkable because a comparison between the second Middle Dutch fragment and this tradition reveals a similar difference. When Olivier stands before Charlemagne as a messenger in Gheraert van Viane, he points out to the king that on seeing Aymerijn his family members will continue to remember the shame that the queen has

20 A few times Aimeri attacks the king himself. Once he takes him prisoner in the turmoil of battle and nearly manages to bring him to Vienne, and, at the end of the story, he nearly kills Charlemagne. See ll. 1023-108 and 3266-83. 21 The giant Robastre who slays many of Charlemagne’s men with his cudgel is in a category of his own. Charlemagne also demands a number of times that the giant be handed over to him. See ll. 3094-114 and 3298-301. 22 No meeting is described here; Olivier advises Girart in a tête-à-tête during a meal.

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 75 brought upon them. In the corresponding French passage, Olivier does not say a single word about Aimeri—neither in Bertrand’s Girart nor in the late-medieval version.23 Both Middle Dutch fragments have to be placed in the middle part of Bertrand’s chanson de geste in which Aimeri is not important. Judging from the parts of Gheraert van Viane that have been preserved, we may assume that the Middle Dutch text was more consistent about the size of Aymerijn’s role and about the casus belli of the foot kissing than Bertrand’s version. Like his French counterpart, the Middle Dutch Aymerijn shows a great deal of fighting spirit and vengefulness. It is probably not too bold an assumption that in Gheraert van Viane, too, Aymerijn bears a more violent grudge against Charlemagne and his men than other members of his family do. We cannot answer the question whether Charlemagne’s hatred is mainly directed at Aymerijn, as is the case in the Cheltenham manuscript. The small Dutch fragments do, however, show a few other interesting details. These details seem to imply that in his presentation of Aymerijn the Middle Dutch poet used a slightly different tone compared to the poets of the French Girart versions discussed above. In the second fragment, Olivier reminds the king that the queen has made Gheraert kiss her foot, but, even before Olivier reminds him of this, he points out to Charlemagne that on seeing Aymerijn his family members will continue to remember the shame that the queen has brought upon them—on seeing Aymerijn instead of seeing Gheraert. Why Aymerijn? A plausible explanation may be that the disgrace is not caused primarily by the foot kissing as such but by the revelation of that humiliating deed. When the queen made Gheraert kiss her foot, she humiliated Gheraert and with him his entire family. However, she is the only person who knows this; the outside world has no knowledge of Gheraert’s loss of face. The family honour is only truly damaged when the queen publicly reveals the humiliation. Aymerijn is the only member

23 In Arsenal 3351, f. 137V, Roland does ask for Aimeri to be surrendered, but Olivier does not react to this at all.

23.1 76 Irene Spijker of his family present at this revelation. He represents his family on that fateful day at court; in Aymerijn’s presence the family’s reputation is publicly tarnished. This is probably the reason why the sight of him reminds those same family members of this shame. It seems that in Gheraert van Viane Aymerijn becomes the embodiment of the tarnished family honour in the eyes of his relatives. When the queen tells the story of the foot kissing, she ridicules Gheraert, but, of course, she also makes Aymerijn, the nephew of the knight humiliated by her, look a fool. A few moments later Aymerijn has to suffer another humiliation: when he wants to avenge the shame the queen has brought upon his uncle and, consequently, upon his entire family, the knights prevent him from doing so and give him a beating. In the first fragment he reminds his relatives of this. He emphatically tells them that they are obliged to uphold the family honour and that they have justice on their side. In order to elucidate this, he does not refer to the scandalous treatment of Gheraert but to the punches he himself received at court. He complains about those who refrain from helping him seek his revenge, not for the foot kissing or its revelation but for the beating he received. On the basis of the latter we may conclude tentatively (since we only have such a small number of lines at our disposal) that the violation of Aymerijn’s personal honour and his desire to take revenge for this are more important in the Middle Dutch text than they are in the French tradition. It is regrettable that no more lines of Gheraert van Viane have been preserved. Judging from the ones we have, this text had literary qualities. The poet must have dealt with the material at his disposal in an independent way. These few Middle Dutch fragments have a unique place in the international Girart tradition.24

24 The Dutch version of this article was translated into English by Chris- tien Franken.

Olifant Gheraert van Viane 77

Works Cited

Berg, Evert van den. “De Karelepiek. Van voorgedragen naar individueel gelezen literatuur.” Tussentijds. Bundel studies aangeboden aan W.P. Gerritsen ter gelegenheid van zijn vijftigste verjaardag. Eds. A.M.J. van Buuren et al. Utrecht: HES, 1985. 9-24, 326-27.

Bertrand de Bar-sur-Aube. Girart de Vienne. Ed. Wolfgang van Emden. Paris: SATF, 1977.

Dougherty, David M. and E.B. Barnes, eds. La Geste de Monglane: I. Her- naut de Beaulande, II. Renier de Gennes, III. Girart de Vienne. Eugene: U of Oregon Books, 1966.

Emden, Wolfgang G. van. “Les Girart et leur(s) femme(s), et problèmes annexes. À propos de Gheraert van Viane.” The Troubadours and the Epic. Essays in Memory of W. Mary Hackett. Eds. L.M. Paterson and S.B. Gaunt. Warwick: U of Warwick, 1987. 238-69.

Kalff, G., ed. Middelnederlandsche epische fragmenten. Groningen, 1886.

Kienhorst, Hans. De handschriften van de Middelnederlandse ridderepiek. Een codicologische beschrijving. 2 vols. Deventer studiën 9. De- venter: Sub Rosa, 1988.

Overdiep, G.S., ed. Een fragment van den Roman der Lorreinen. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1939.

Spijker, Irene. “Een poging tot lokalisering van de Middelnederlandse Gheraert van Viane in de internationale Girart de Vienne-traditie.” De nieuwe taalgids 76 (1983): 97-108.

23.1 78 Irene Spijker

Taylor, Andrew. “The myth of the minstrel manuscript.” Speculum 66 (1991): 43-73.

Verschaeren, J. Inventaris van het archief van de abdij van Beaupré te Grimminge. Brussels: Algemeen Rijksarchief, 1973.

---. Inventaris van het archief van de Sint-Adriaansabdij te Geraardsber- gen. Brussels: Algemeen Rijksarchief, 1974.

Olifant