NOTES

Introduction 1. Gerard of Bourges (also known as Gerard of Berry), Glosule Super Viaticum, edited and translated in Lovesickness, pp. 200–201. 2. “Courtly” love is the English of Gaston ’s term, amour courtois. See Charrette, p. 519. Fin’amors appears frequently in the Old French verse romance; the Old French version of amour courtois does not. See J.D.Burnley, “Fine Amor: Its Meaning and Context,” Review of English Studies 31 (1980): 129–48. 3. As Pierre Payer notes in his study of sexual behavior as outlined in the penitentials, “Yet I had a feeling while reading these manuals that they were engaged in strenuous combat against urges and forces in human nature which were long in being brought to heel.” Sex and the Penitentials: The Development of a Sexual Code 550–1150 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984), p. 121. 4. The Church was motivated to assert the sacramental nature of marriage in part by challenges from heretic sects claiming that because all matter was evil, marriage could not be considered a sacrament. It can be argued that marriage was already understood to be a sacrament long before the twelfth century,but that it simply was not officially articulated as such until challenges from heretic sects occasioned the defense of marriage as sacrament. For example, in Book I, Chap. 11 of De Bono Coniugali, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 41 (Vienna: F.Tempsky, 1887),Augustine argues that marriage represents a sacramental bond. In the twelfth century Peter Lombard sets out the seven sacraments, the last of which is marriage. See the fourth book of his sentences, dist. 2, chap. 1, Petrus Lombardus, Sententiae, 2 vols. (Grottaferrata: Ed. Collegii S. Bonaventurae ad Claras Aquas, 1971–1981), vol. 2, pp. 239–240.The status of marriage as a sacrament was confirmed at the second Council of Lyons, 1274: “The same Holy Roman Church also holds and teaches that there are seven sacraments of the Church: one is baptism, which has been mentioned above; another is the sacrament of confirmation which bishops confer by the laying on of hands while they anoint the reborn; then penance, the Eucharist, the sacrament of order, mat- rimony and extreme unction which, according to the doctrine of the Blessed James, [ James 5:14–15] is administered to the sick.” The Christian Faith in the 246 N OTES

Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church, ed. Josef Neuner and Jacques Dupuis (New York:Alba House, 1982), p. 20. It is also important to note that the Church was never a monolithic institution and that it debated its own decisions.The debate over marriage practice takes place as much within the Church as between the Church and the laity. 5. See Law, Sex, and Christian Society, pp. 183–203. 6. Exceptions existed. Pope Alexander III (ruled 1159–1181) upheld the prin- ciple of consent even when it caused him political difficulties. See Charles Donohue, Jr., “The Canon Law on the Formation of Marriage and Social Practice in the Later Middle Ages,” Journal of Family History 8, 2 (1983): 144–158 and Law, Sex, and Christian Society,pp.331–337. 7. Keith Nickolaus describes Christian feudal marriage as the outcome of negotiation: “In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, medieval attitudes toward marriage included dogmatic practices and opinions informed in some cases by religious ideology,in others by secular customs, and emerging marriage doctrines negotiated both traditions and relied on both pragmatic and speculative approaches in response to what historians agree was a note- worthy paucity of established precedents and principles for defining a Christian doctrine of marriage.” Marriage Fictions in Old French Secular Narratives, 1170–1250: A Critical Re-evaluation of the Courtly Love Debate (New York:Routledge, 2002), p. 133. 8. The consummation versus consent debate was long and complicated. Gratian originated the so-called “Italian” solution, which held that consent and consummation created an indissoluble marriage bond which would invalidate any later marriage. The “French” solution held that consent to marry alone created an indissoluble marriage bond, which would invalidate any later marriage, even if the first were not consummated. See Law,Sex, and Christian Society, pp. 235–240. 9. See Charles Donohue, Jr., “Canon Law on the Formation of Marriage,” pp. 146–157 and also his “The Policy of Alexander the Third’s Consent Theory of Marriage,” Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Monumenta Iuris Canonica 5, ed. Stephan Kuttner (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1976), pp. 251–281. Clandestine marriage had been addressed at the Council of Rouen of 1072, the Councils of Westminster of 1076 and 1102, the Council of Troyes of 1102, the Council of of 1200, and, most famously, at the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215. Alexander III also pronounced upon clandestine marriages, ruling them valid,although the spouses in question were required to undergo penance. See Michael M. Sheehan, “Marriage Theory and Practice in the Conciliar Legislation and Diocesan Statutes of Medieval ,” Mediaeval Studies 40 (1978): 408–460.Also, Law,Sex, and Christian Society, p. 189–190. 10. Memoirs of the Papal Court, pp. 14–15. 11. In this study I will not discuss the possible connection between treatments of love in the lyric and the romance, because I am interested in the means by which romance composers transform what they imagine as the “raw” N OTES 247

emotion of love into something useful in a narrative context, and the uses to which love in its new form is put.The notion of the transformation of love into a useful emotion plays no role in lyric poetry. On further reasons that the origins of the stories of love in narrative works should not be sought in troubadour lyric, see Keith Nickolaus, Marriage Fictions, chapter one, “Marriage Fictions and the Meaning of ‘Courtly Love,’ ” pp. 1–48. 12. Jeffrey Jerome Cohen, “Masoch/Lancelotism,” New Literary History 28 (1997): 236. 13. On the presence of this contradiction in twelfth-century theories of king- ship see Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political T heory (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957), pp. 95–96. See also Walter Ullmann, Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages (London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1961), pp. 150–154. 14. Ullmann, Principles of Government and Politics,p.151. 15. Ullmann, Principles of Government and Politics, p. 156. 16. To cite a parallel, American society is currently re-examining traditional conceptions of marriage, an institution that has frequently proven incom- patible with individual happiness. Individuals are genuinely eager to re- define marriage in such a way as to enable their own personal satisfaction while at the same time creating social stability. The widespread obsession with the love lives of American political leaders, upon whose bodies are projected a series of conflicting notions about love and marriage, reflects this interest. But at the same time, the bodies of leaders are canvases onto which larger senses of malaise with public institutions are projected. Laura Kipnis writes of American politicians of the late twentieth century that their “marital fidelity had somehow become elevated into something beyond a political requirement: it had begun to resemble a utopian imaginary ...as if once transparency between our politicians’ private and public lives was achieved, faith in our national institutions could be restored once again.” Against Love: A Polemic (New York:Pantheon Book, 2003), p. 168. 17. Robert Bartlett, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings 1075–1225 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000), p.6. 18. Keith Nickolaus, Marriage Fictions. 19. Gabrielle Spiegel, The Past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), p.5. 20. Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger:An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (1966; London and New York City: Routledge, 2002), p. 142.

1 The Problem of Love 1. The Knight, the Lady and the Priest, p. 281. Lambert’s story of Arnoul and Ide is recorded in chapters 93 and 94 of Lambert of Ardres, Lamberti Ardensis his- toria comitum Ghisnensium, Monumenta Germaniae historica inde ab anno Christi quingentesimo usque ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum, Scriptorum 24, 32 vols. (Hannover: Hahn, 1826–1934). The History of the 248 N OTES

Counts of Guines and Lords of Ardres has been translated by Leah Shopkow (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000). For the story of Arnoul and Ide see pp. 125–129. 2. The Knight, the Lady and the Priest, p. 216.The seminal article on the “youths” whose behavior presumably was targeted by the romance is Duby’s “The ‘Youth’ in Twelfth Century Aristocratic Society,” Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, ed. Frederic L. Cheyette (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1968), pp. 198–209. 3. For Paris, amour courtois is a social—rather than merely literary—phenomenon. He writes that the circle of Marie de Champagne “et des siens a été le principal foyer de la propagation en France de l’idéal social, sentimental et poétique” (p. 523) (and her friends and family formed the principal setting for the propa- gation in France of the social, sentimental, and poetic ideal . . .). My translation. 4. See D.W. Robertson, “The Concept of Courtly Love as an Impediment to the Understanding of Medieval Texts,” in The Meaning of Courtly Love,ed. F.X. Newman (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1968), pp. 1–18. On Paris’ use of amour courtois see Henry Ansgar Kelly,“The Varieties of Love in Medieval Literature According to Gaston Paris,” Romance Philology 40 (1986): 301–327. 5. The idea is that to the extent that courtly love is a cover for physical desire, a humorous inconsistency between the fleshly exigencies and spiritual claims of love can be laid bare within the narrative, creating an occasion for comic exploitation. Dennis Green’s work on irony in the romance is an example of this approach. His argument is based upon the idea of a hierarchical arrange- ment of courtly love and physical desire. Green describes as susceptible of an ironic treatment “the discrepancy between emotional pretensions and physi- cal needs.” Irony in the Medieval Romance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 92. 6. Medieval offered three principal words for love: amor, which implied both love and sexual desire, dilectio, which implied admiration and high esteem, and caritas, which implied selfless love.The categories overlap, with amor being the broadest, but they all suggest significantly different nuances. The romance generally uses just one word to describe love: amor. Although “love” in English can encompass similarly conflicting emotions, English speakers tend to distinguish readily between love and lust. To preserve the medieval ambiguity, therefore, I will use the word “amor” in this study, lower case to indicate the concept, upper case to indicate the personification. 7. John Baldwin describes Augustine’s figuring of sexual desire as a paradigm for the lack of self-mastery, writing,“At times, a motion would appear as an unwanted intruder; at other times, it abandoned the lover against his wishes; it could arouse the mind but not the body.Augustine recaptured this loss of control in the experience of orgasm” (Language of Sex, p. 117). 8. Quotations from Le Chevalier au lion (Yvain) from the edition of Mario Roques (Paris: Champion, 1963).Cited by line no. from Chrétien de Troyes: Arthurian Romances, trans. W.W. Comfort (London: Dent, 1975). Cited by page no., p. 197. N OTES 249

9. Recent psychological studies suggest that individuals experience feelings they identify as love when they perform the actions associated with love within their cultures. See G.P.Williams and C.L. Kleinke,“Effects of Mutual Gaze and Touch on Attraction, Mood, and Cardiovascular Reactivity,” Journal of Research in Personality 27 (1993): 170–183. 10. The study of the history of emotions has flourished in recent years. For an overview of this area of study see Barbara Rosenwein’s review essay “Worrying about Emotions in History,” American Historical Review 107, 3 (2002): 821–845. See also Rosenwein’s “Writing Without Fear About Early Medieval Emotions,” Early Medieval Europe 10, 2 (2001): 229–234. Other recent contributions to the study of emotions during the Middle Ages include a series of articles on the history of emotions in Early Modern Europe 10, 2 (2001); Daniel Lord Smail, “Hatred as a Social Institution in Late- Medieval Society,” Speculum:A Journal of Medieval Studies 76 (2001): 90–126; Anger’s Past: The Social Uses of an Emotion in the Middle Ages, ed. Barbara Rosenwein (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998); Peter Haidu, The Subject of Violence:The Song of Roland and the Birth of the State (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1993); William Ian Miller, Humiliation and Other Essays on Honor, Social Discomfort, and Violence (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993); and Jean Delumeau, Sin and Fear : the Emergence of aWestern Guilt Culture, 13th–18th centuries, trans. Eric Nicholson (New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1990). On love in particular see C. Stephen Jaeger, Ennobling Love: In Search of a Lost Sensibility (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999). 11. Rosalind C. Morris, “All Made Up: Performance Theory and the New Anthropology of Sex and Gender,” Annual Review of Anthropology 24 (1995): 571. 12. The Navigation of Feeling, p. 128. The contrast between “constative” and “performative” utterances was formulated by J.L.Austin.Whereas constative utterances simply describe a situation (“The dog has short hair”), performa- tive utterances actually perform an action; they cause something to occur (“I nominate you for president” or “I do” in the marriage ceremony). See J.L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975). 13. Studies of the biological basis of the emotions owe much to the work of Antonio Damasio and Joseph LeDoux. Damasio’s most important works include The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness (Harcourt: New York: 1999) and Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain (New York: Grosset/Putnam, 1994). Among LeDoux’s studies, see in particular The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life (New York:Simon & Schuster,1998).Writing of Stanley Schachter and Jerome Singer, LeDoux explains that the study of the physiology of emotion got started in the 1960s, “with the assumption that physiological responses in emotion (sweaty palms, rapid heart beat, muscle tension) inform our brain that a state of heightened arousal exists. However, since these responses are similar in many different emotions they 250 N OTES

do not identify what kind of aroused state we are in. Schachter and Singer suggested that, on the basis of information about the physical and social context in which we find ourselves, as well as knowledge about what kinds of emotions occur in the particular kinds of situations, we label the aroused state as fear or love or sadness or anger or joy”(p. 47). Thus “emotional feelings result when we explain emotionally ambiguous bodily states to ourselves on the basis of cognitive interpretations” (p. 47). Schachter and Singer predicted that emotions could be biased by injecting subjects with adrenalin and then exposing them to different situations, in other words, that emotions could be “changed” according to the interpretative frameworks available to those experiencing the emotions. “The real impact of this work,” writes LeDoux, was “that it revitalized an old notion, one that was implicit in the philosophical writings of Aristotle, Descartes, and Spinoza,— that emotions might be cognitive interpretations of situations” (p. 49). The study of emotions has attracted philosophers as well as psychologists. Philosopher Martha Nussbaum also describes emotions as cognitive inter- pretations of bodily states. Beyond the physical reactions they encompass, emotions embody ways of seeing an object, Nussbaum writes.They embody beliefs about an object: emotions are distinguished from one another on the basis of thought. She writes that “beliefs are essential to the identity of the emotion: the feeling of agitation all by itself will not reveal to me whether what I am feeling is fear or grief or pity.Only an inspection of the thoughts discriminates. Nor is the thought purely a heuristic device that reveals what I am feeling, where feeling is understood as something without thought. For it seems necessary to put the thought into the definition of the emotion itself. Otherwise, we seem to have no good way of making the requisite discriminations among emotion types.” Martha Nussbaum, Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 29–30. 14. The Navigation of Feeling, p. 111. 15. The Navigation of Feeling, p. 143. 16. Rosenwein,“Writing Without Fear About Early Medieval Emotions,” p. 234. 17. On insisting upon a boundary between courtly and other types of love, see Domenico Polloni’s Amour e Clergie: Un Percorso Testuale da Andrea Cappellano all’Arcipreste de Hita (Bologna: Patron Editore, 1995). According to Polloni, Andreas does not codify courtly love but rather describes the sexual act in the terms of medical treatises.The result is a demystification of “l’ideologia cortese.”Polloni writes that “la concezione dell’amore sessuale come malat- tia, con la correlativa riduzione della psicologia a pura fisiologia, sembra servire presso molti medici latini a demistificare l’ideologia cortese, con cui anch’essi avevano qualche familiarità, elucidando clinicamente le origini in chiave di amor heroicus” (p. 43) (the conception of sexual love as an illness, along with the corresponding reduction of its psychology to the purely physical, seems to have allowed many Latin doctors to demystify the courtly ideology with which they too had some familiarity, clinically elucidating the origins in terms of amor heroicus). My translation. N OTES 251

18. This is despite the recent historicizing of Paris’s “invention” of courtly love. Critics have attributed Paris’s construction of the phenomenon to his misogyny, his relationship with his father, and his effort—motivated by the Franco-Prussian War—to situate the origins of French literature in the “manly” epic, which led him to disparage the romance with its effeminizing interest in love. See R. Howard Bloch, “Mieux vaut tard que jamais,” Representations 36 (1991): 64–86; and David Hult, “Gaston Paris and the Invention of Courtly Love,” Medievalism and the Modernist Temper, ed. R. Howard Bloch and Stephen G. Nichols (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), pp. 192–224. 19. Charrette, p. 530. My translation. 20. C.S. Lewis, The Allegory of Love (Oxford: , 1936), p.2. 21. Jean Frappier, “Structure et sens du Tristan: version commune, version courtoise,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 6 (1963): 255–280; 441–454. My translation. 22. Peter Dronke’s Medieval Latin and the Rise of European Love Lyric, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965–1966) was one of the first works to question seriously the uniqueness of the “courtly love” lyric by showing that all its major themes could be found in lyrics from other times and places. Rüdiger Schnell’s magisterial Causa Amoris: Liebeskonzeption and Liebesdarstellung in der mittelalterlichen Literatur (Bern and Munich:Francke Verlag,1985) exhaustively investigates the differences in the concept of love among different genres of medieval literature. C. Stephen Jaeger creates a context for courtly love in Courtliness, even though he specifically refuses to write about it in this study. But in showing the origins of the concept of “courtliness” he reveals that correct behavior among lovers finds its relevance in the courtly ethos. In Ennobling Love Jaeger demonstrates to what extent the capacity to ennoble, one of courtly love’s most frequent attributions, was attributed to relation- ships other than courtly love relationships. The literature disputing courtly love’s supposedly central tenet of adultery is extensive. See A.R. Press,“The Adulterous Nature of Fin’amors:A Re-examination of the Theory,” Forum for Modern Language Studies 6 (1970): 327–341; William Paden, “The Troubadour’s Lady: Her Marital Status and Social Rank,” Studies in Philology 72 (1975): 28–50 and “Utrum Copularentur: Of Cors,” L’Esprit Créateur 19, 4 (1979): 70–83. In “Fine Amor: Its Meaning and Context,” J.D. Burnley shows that the concept of fin’amor cannot be restricted to lovers but is better under- stood as a “quality of the actual psychological process of loving, and of the nature of the soul concerned” (p. 139). That the expression “courtly love” reductively unites numerous ideas of love has been the critical consensus for years. Even proponents of courtly love like Frappier argued simply that pro- fane love could be viewed favorably during the Middle Ages,not that courtly love should be understood as a monolithic concept. In fact, Frappier, argued for diversity, creating such distinctions as those among “fin’amor,” “amour chevaleresque,” and “amour arthurien.” See “Vues sur les conceptions cour- toises dans les literatures d’oc et d’oïl au XIIe siècle,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 2 (1959): 135–156. 252 N OTES

23. Theresa Tinkle, Medieval Venuses and Cupids: Sexuality, Hermeneutics and English Poetry (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1996), p. 10. 24. Karl Uitti, “Remarks on Old French Narrative: Courtly Love and Poetic Form (I),”review article Romance Philology 26 (1972–1973): 80–81. 25. E. Jane Burns,“Speculum of the Courtly Lady:Women,Love, and Clothes,” The Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 29 (1999): 253. 26. In contrast to this widespread view see Keith Nickolaus, Marriage Fictions in Old French Secular Narratives,1170–1250:A Critical Re-evaluation of the Courtly Love Debate (New York,NY: Routledge, 2002). He writes that “one can only wonder how it is that medievalists have so long insisted on emphasizing the dichotomous view of medieval attitudes toward secular love” (xix). 27. William Calin, “Contre la fin’amorr? Contre la femme? Une relecture de textes du Moyen Age,” Courtly Literature: Culture and Context, ed. Keith Busby and Erik Kooper (Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Co., 1990), p. 80. My translation. 28. Feminist criticism of the notion of courtly love owes much to the work of historian Penny Schine Gold’s The Lady and the Virgin: Image, Attitude, and Experience in Twelfth-Century France (Chicago, IL and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1985), which provided the impetus for a serious re-examination of the attitudes behind courtly love literature. Gold uncovered a fundamental ambivalence in the romance depiction of women: a woman was “an object to be attained by the man—a good, beautiful, and very desir- able object. But the pursuit of the love of a woman invariably interferes with the hero’s pursuit of honor and valor in the sphere of men, and this conflict in turn causes anxiety, tension, and sometime death for the hero” (p. 146). Gold then inserts this ambivalence into its historical context, examining the male/female interaction in property transfer, a phenomenon crucial to financial success, but one that was often characterized by conflict with the rights of the woman’s family. Kathryn Gravdal’s Ravishing Maidens:Writing Rape in Medieval French Literature and Law (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991) which dispells any notion that courtly love litera- ture represented an improvement in attitudes toward women in the real world studies “the naturalization of the subordination of women in medieval French culture by examining representations of rape in different discursive genres, both literary and legal” (p. 1). On the romance see also her “Chrétien de Troyes, Gratian, and the Medieval Romance of Sexual Violence,” Signs 7 (1992): 558–585. For a reading of misogyny as transcend- ing historical boundaries see Howard Bloch’s Medieval Misogyny and the Invention of Western Romantic Love (Chicago, IL and London: Chicago University Press, 1991). The relationship between sexual violence in medieval life and literature, including the romance, has received widespread attention in recent years. See Dietmar Rieger,“Le motif du viol dans la lit- térature de la France médiévale entre norme courtoise et réalité courtoise,” Cahier de Civilisations Médiévales 31 (1988): 241–267; D.D.R.Owen,“Theme and Variations: Sexual Aggression in Chrétien de Troyes,” Forum for Modern Language Studies 21 (1985): 376–385; Antoinette Saly, “La Demoiselle N OTES 253

esforciée dans le roman arthurien” and Kenneth Varty, “Le Viol dans l’Ysengrimus, les branches II-Va, et la branche I du Roman de Renart,” Amour, marriage et transgressions au Moyen Age,ed. Danielle Buschinger and André Crépin (Göppingen: Kümmerle Verlag, 1984), pp. 215–224 and 411–424.Roberta Krueger’s important work,Women Readers and the Ideology of Gender in Old French Verse Romance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), uncovers how the presumed privilege accorded women as objects of love masks their actual displacement, in literature and in real life. See also E. Jane Burns, Bodytalk: When Women Speak in Old French Literature (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993). Burns’ idea is to “listen” carefully to the voices of women in the romance, which represents them as stereotyped bodies, because in their words we can recover women’s resistance to the status accorded them. For a summary of similar critical approaches see E. Jane Burns, “Speculum of the Courtly Lady,” especially 260–262. Simon Gaunt’s chapter on romance in Gender and Genre in Medieval French Literature (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1995) also examines the mystifying effect of courtly love discourse on actual practice. Kathy M. Krause offers a lucid assessment of different types of feminist criticism on twelfth-century heroines in her introduction to Reassessing the Heroine in Medieval French Literature, ed. Kathy M. Krause (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2001). 29. Maureen Fries,“Female Heroes, Heroines, and Counter-Heroes: Images of Women in Arthurian Tradition,” Arthurian Women:A Casebook, intro. and ed. Thelma S. Fenster (New York and London:Garland, 1996), p. 63. 30. Gravdal, Ravishing Maidens,p.75. 31. Gravdal,“Chrétien de Troyes,” p. 561. 32. Krueger, Women Readers,p.35. 33. Simon Gaunt, Gender and Genre, pp. 73–74. 34. Gaunt, Gender and Genre, p. 121. 35. Gaunt, Gender and Genre, p. 121. 36. Gravdal, Ravishing Maidens, p. 84. 37. One way critics have dealt with the problem that romances in practice manifestly do not idealize love has been to see courtly love as an ideal that appears in the early romances but is degraded over time. See Jean-Charles Payen,“La Destruction des mythes courtois dans le roman arthurien:la femme dans le roman en vers après Chrétien de Troyes,”Revue des Langues Romanes 78 (1969): 213–228, and Marie-Noëlle Lefay-Toury,“Roman breton et mythes courtois: l’évolution du personnage féminin dans les romans de Chrétien de Troyes,”Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 15 (1972):193–204;283–293.Another has been to see the “ideal” as taking form only after the first romances, the Romans d’antiquités,and developing into a full-fledged ideal in the romances of Chrétien de Troyes. See Rosemarie Jones, The Theme of Love in the Romans d’Antiquité (London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 1972). 38. See Michael R. McVaugh, ed., Opera Arnaldi omnia III: Tractatus de amore heroico. Epistola de dosi tyriacalium medicinarum (Barcelona: University of Barcelona, 1985), pp. 50–51. 254 N OTES

39. Kathryn Gravdal, “Poetics of Rape Law in Medieval France,” Rape and Representation, ed. Lynn A. Higgins and Brenda R. Silver (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), pp. 207–226. 40. Law, Sex, and Christian Society, p. 210. 41. Law, Sex, and Christian Society,p. 209. 42. Ordericus Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History of Ordericus Vitalis, ed. and tran. Marjorie Chibnall, 6 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), vol. 2, pp. 290–291. 43. Ordericus, Ecclesiastical History, pp. 290–291. 44. Jean Devisse, Hincmar:Archevêque de Reims 845–882, 3 vols. (Geneva: Droz, 1975), vol. 1, p. 375. My translation. 45. Diane Wolfthal, “ ‘A Hue and Cry’: Medieval Rape Imagery and Its Transformation,” Art Bulletin 75 (1993): 40. 46. Wolfthal,“ ‘A Hue and Cry’, ” p. 60. 47. Henriette Benveniste, “Les Enlèvements: stratégies matrimoniales, discours juridique et discours politique en France à la fin du Moyen Age,” Revue Historique 283 (1990): 21. My translation. 48. Benveniste,“Les Enlèvements,”p. 20. 49. Cited in Alison Weir, Eleanor of Aquitaine: By the Wrath of God, Queen of England (London: J.Cape, 1999), p.92. 50. Peggy Reaves Sanday, “Rape-Free versus Rape-prone,” Evolution, Gender, and Rape, ed. Cheryl Brown Travis (Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press, 2003), pp. 337–361. 51. This ongoing debate is among three principal theories: the feminist theory, which argues that domination—most fundamentally economic domination— not passion causes violence toward women; the social learning theory, which argues, like the feminist theory, that violent behavior is learned, but differs from feminist theory in finding the cause in interpersonal rather than economic relations; and the evolutionary or sociobiological theory, which sees rape as a result of an evolutionary adaptation based upon the archaic need to couple with unwilling partners in order to perpetuate the species. For a concise outline of the debates see Lee Ellis, Inquiries into the Causes of Sexual Aggression (New York:Hemisphere Publishing Co., 1989), pp. 9–19. 52. Sanday,“Rape-Free versus Rape-Prone,” p. 351. 53. Sanday,“Rape-Free versus Rape-Prone,”p. 357. 54. M.-D. Chenu, “L’Homme et la nature: perspectives sur la Renaissance du XIIe siècle,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age 19 (1953): 57. My translation. 55. Chenu,“L’Homme et la nature,”p. 57. My translation. 56. Emily Martin makes the case for this position in “What is Rape?—Toward a Historical,Ethnographic Approach,”Evolution,Gender,and Rape,pp.363–381. 57. Aelredi Rievallensis: Opera Omnia, Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis 1–2a and b (Turnhout:Brepols,1971),vol.1,p.23.My translation. 58. In the Confessions,Augustine draws an analogy between the three parts of the mind, memoria, intelligentia, and voluntas, and the three parts of the Trinity,the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one and yet separate. Confessions, ed. James J. O’Donnell,3 vols. (Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1992) vol.1,book 13, chapter 11, N OTES 255

p. 188. He discusses this tripartite division in greater detail in De Trinitate, ed.W.J. Mountain, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 50–50a (Turnhout: Brepols, 1968), vol. 50a, book 15, chapter 20, pp. 515–517. 59. DCD, book 14, chap. 7, lines 21–32, p. 422; trans. p. 557. 60. DCD, book 14, chap. 7, lines 40–41, p. 422; trans. p. 557. 61. John Bugge, Virginitas: An Essay in the History of a Medieval Ideal (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1975), p. 27. Bugge explains that Augustine and the Western Church fathers understood virginity in its literal, physical sense, as opposed to the Eastern Church fathers, for whom virginity represented a state of mind within a world view that saw all matter as evil. 62. DCD,book 14, chap. 16, lines 4–10, pp. 438–39; trans. p. 577. 63. DCD, book 14, chap. 15, lines 31–41, p. 437; trans. p. 575. 64. Anselm, Oratio IVV, in PL 158, 870A. My translation. 65. Citation and translation in Law, Sex and Christian Society, p. 186. 66. See Augustine’s De Bono Coniugali book 3, chapter 3, for his discussion of how marriage transforms lust into a good by directing it toward procreation. Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 41 (Vienna: F.Tempsky, 1887), pp. 190–191. 67. On the widespread acceptance of this view see Marcia Colish’s discussion in Peter Lombard, 2 vols. (Leiden; New York;Cologne: E. J. Brill, 1994), vol. 2, pp. 658–662. 68. On Peter Lombard and twelfth-century discussions of pleasure in sexual relations, see Pierre Payer, The Bridling of Desire: Views of Sex in the Later Middle Ages (Toronto, Buffalo and London: Toronto University Press, 1993), pp. 30–34. 69. See Dyan Elliott on the notion that sexual relations were inherently tainted in Spiritual Marriage: Sexual Abstinence in Medieval Wedlock (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), chap. 4,“The Conjugal Debt and Vows of Chastity: The Theoretical and Pastoral Discourse of the High and Later Middle Ages,”pp. 132–194. 70. Peter Lombard, Sententiae in IV Libris Distinctae, 2 vols. (Grottaferrata: Editiones Collegii S.Bonaventure ad Claras Aquas,1971),vol.2,book 4,dist.31, chap.5,p. 446. Coitus is guilt-free when its goal is reproduction. But citing Jerome, he warns that “Nihil est foedius quam uxorem amare quasi adulteram” (Nothing is fouler than loving one’s wife as one loves an adulteress), p. 447. My translation. 71. See Pierre J.Payer,“Sexual Confession in the Thirteenth Century,” Sex in the Middle Ages: A Book of Essays,ed. Joyce E. Salisbury (New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991), pp. 126–142. The question Payer cites is whether the confessant has known his wife in an undue manner [indebito modo]” (p. 131). 72. William of St.Thierry, Deux Traités de l’amour de Dieu: de la Contemplation de Dieu; de la Nature et de la dignité de l’amour, trans. M.-M. Davy (Paris: Vrin, 1953), p. 72. On the problem of the spiritual versus carnal love in the twelfth century see Ann W.Astell,The Song of Songs in the Middle Ages (Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 1990) and for a more general 256 N OTES

discussion of the problem of distinguishing eros from agape, see Catherine Osborne, Eros Unveiled: and the God of Love (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997). 73. See Peter Abelard’s Ethics, trans. D.E. Luscombe (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971). Luscombe notes:“In pursuing a coherent description of the morality of conduct Abelard carried the principles of intention and of consent beyond Augustine’s own limits” (XXV). 74. Matthew of Vendôme, Ars versificatoria, vol. 3 of Mathei Vindocinensis Opera., ed. Franco Munari, 3 vols. (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1988), p. 109. 75. Body and Society, p. 434. 76. Cited in Pierre Payer, Bridling of Desire,p.51. 77. William of Conches, Glosae super Platonem, ed. Edouard Jeauneau (Paris: Vrin, 1965), p. 216. 78. William of Conches, Glosae super Platonem,p.101. 79. The disease is described by Gerard of Bourges. Lovesickness,p. 56. See also Giorgio Agamben, Stanzas: Words and Phantasms in Western Culture,trans. Ronald L. Martinez (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), pp. 73–131. See also Guy Paoli,“La Relation oeil-coeur. Recherches sur la mystique amoureuse de Chrétien de Troyes dans Cligès,” Senefiance 30 (1991): 233–244; Guido Favati, “Una traccia de cultura neoplatonica in Chrétien de Troyes: il tema degli occhi come specchio (Cligès, vv.629–749),” Studi in onore di Carlo Pellegrini (Turin: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1963), pp. 3–13; and Ruth H. Cline,“Heart and Eyes,” Romance Philology 25 (1971–1972): 263–297. 80. Matthew of Vendôme, pp. 102–103. 81. In this Matthew is very similar to the modern psychologists interested in the emotions. See note 13. 82. Joan Cadden, “Medieval Scientific and Medical Views of Sexuality: Questions of Propriety,” Medievalia et Humanistica 14 (1986): 159. 83. Wack, Lovesickness, pp. 188–189. 84. Margaret R. Miles,“The Body and Human Values in ,” Grace, Politics and Desire: Essays on Augustine, ed. H. A. Meynell (Calgary, Alberta: University of Calgary Press, 1990), p. 61. 85. A large body of critical work on this subject exists. A concise discussion is James Brundage’s “Rape and Seduction in the Medieval Canon Law,” Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church, ed.Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1982), pp. 141–148. See also Gravdal’s discussion of raptus in “Chrétien de Troyes” pp. 556–571 and in her introductory chapter “The Archeology of Rape in Medieval Literature and Law,” Ravishing Maidens. 86. Brundage,“Rape and Seduction,”p. 143. 87. In Law, Sex, and Christian Society,p.312. 88. Brundage,“Rape and Seduction,”p. 143. 89. Alan of Lille, Liber poenitentialis,Analecta medievalia Namurcensia 18 (1965), book 1,chaps.26–32.The final and most sinful case of fornication is that con- tra naturam. N OTES 257

90. Richard W. Kaeuper, Chivalry and Violence in Medieval Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 19. 91. Gerald A. Bond, The Loving Subject: Desire, Eloquence, and Power in Romanesque France (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995), p. 99. See also his related articles “Composing Yourself: Ovid’s Heroides, Baudri of Bourgueil and the Problem of Persona,” Mediaevalia 13 (1989 for 1987): 83–117 and “ ‘Iocus Amoris’: The Poetry of Baudri of Bourgueil and the Formation of the Ovidian Subculture,” Traditio 42 (1986): 143–193. 92. Bond, Loving Subject, p. 99. 93. John F.Benton,“The Court of Champagne as a Literary Center,” Speculum 36 (1961), p. 590. 94. Bond, Loving Subject, p. 99. 95. See Courtliness,chap. 10:“Courtliness in the Chronicles,”pp. 195–210. 96. Courtliness, p. 204. 97. Courtliness, p. 204. 98. Courtliness, p. 205. 99. Courtliness, p. 207. 100. Alastair Minnis, Magister Amoris: The Roman de la Rose and Vernacular Hermeneutics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 202. 101.Minnis, Magister Amoris,p.203.

2 The Mad Lovers of the Ovidian Lais 1. Medieval is a general term, referring to a variety of differ- ent movements.When I use the term, I will further specify what I mean by it. On the variety of medieval see Winthrop Wetherbee, “Philosophy,Cosmology,and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance,” A History of Twelfth-Century Western Philosophy, ed. Peter Dronke (Cambridge: Cambridge Unversity Press, 1988), pp. 21–53. 2. The standard work on the Ovidian sources of romance love descriptions remains Faral’s Recherches sur les sources latines du moyen age (Paris: Champion, 1913). 3. On this point see Raymond Cormier’s introduction to his Three Ovidian Tales of Love:“It has long been recognized that Ovidian ‘states of mind’ in his works were often understood as one continuous narrative and, as such, became popular in vernacular writings around the 1150s and 1160s” (p. 11). Three Ovidian Tales of Love, ed. trans. and Raymond Cormier (NewYork and London:Garland Publishing, Inc., 1986). 4. Many different “Ovids” besides the one embodied in the Magister amoris existed according to the perspectives of medieval readers. Ovid created numerous identities important to medieval conceptions of love—those of the Heroïdes, for example. Michael Calabrese describes Ovid as “one of the originators the female voice in Western literature” in “Ovid and the Female Voice in the De Amore and the Letters of Abelard and Heloise,” 258 N OTES

Modern Philology 95 (1997): 5. For a discussion of the various Ovids recog- nized and used by medieval writers see also Calabrese’s Chaucer’s Ovidian Arts of Love (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 1994). For discussions of the medieval reception of Ovid, see E.K. Rand, Ovid and His Influence (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1928); Paule Demats, Fabula: Trois Etudes de mythographie antique et médiévale (Geneva:Droz,1973);Jean Leclercq, Monks and Love in Twelfth-Century France: Psycho-Historical Essays (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), especially chap. 4, “Another Master in the Art of Loving: Ovid,” pp. 62–85; Ralph Hexter, Ovid and Medieval Schooling (Munich:Arbeo Gesellschaft, 1986); Jean-Yves Tilliette,“Savants et poètes du moyen-âge face à Ovide: les débuts de l’aetas Ovidiana (v. 1050–1200),” Ovidius Redivius: von Ovid zu Dante, ed. Michelangelo Picone and Bernhard Zimmerman (Stuttgart: M und P Verlag,1994), pp. 63–104;Warren Ginsberg, “Ovidius ethicus? Ovid and the Medieval Commentary Tradition,” Desiring Discourse:The Literature of Love, Ovid through Chaucer, ed. James J. Paxson and Cynthia A. Gravlee (London: Associated University Press, 1998), pp. 62–71; and Alastair Minnis, Magister Amoris: The Roman de la Rose and Vernacular Hermeneutics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001). 5. Simone Viarre, La Survie d’Ovide dans la littérature scientifique des XIIe et XIIIe siècles (Poitiers: Centre d’Etudes Supérieures de Civilisation Médiévale, 1966). My translations. About this Ovide Savant she writes that “l’emploi scientifique d’Ovide existe très précisement. Lorsqu’il classe ses auctores, Barthélémy de Glanville range notre poète parmi les philosophi ...c’est encore vrai . . . pour des savants qui connaissent bien les Grecs et les Arabes, pour le traducteur sicilien de l’Almageste . . . pour Raymond de Marseille, pour Albert le Grand ou pour l’auteur de la Summa philosophiae.Au premier chef, l’audience d’Ovide dépend des théories générales sur le monde auxquelles il accorde beaucoup de place dans les Métamorphoses” (p. 81) (the scientific use of Ovid exists very clearly.When he classes his authors, Bartholomew of Glanville places our poet among the philosophers ... this is also true . . . for thinkers who knew the Greeks and the Arabs well, for the Sicilian translator of the Almagest . . . for Raymond of Marseille, for Albert the Great or for the author of the Summa philosophiae. In the first place, the audience of Ovid depends on the general theories of the world to which he accords much space in the Metamorphoses). As for the reasons that Ovid was considered a Neoplatonic philosopher: “Ce mouvement des hommes, déterminé par la nature et par une puissance divine, englobe massivement celui du cosmos et de ses éléments; il englobe aussi, dans ses particularités les plus intimes, celui des pierres, des fleuves, des plantes et des animaux. Car le jaillissement de chaque métamorphose diversifie le mouvement d’ensemble tout en le précisant. Il y a dans chaque récit d’Ovide une implacable contrainte, lente et progressive, qui donne de la vie et de la réalité au ‘miracle’ de la transformation. Parce que le mouvement et le vrai se rejoignent et se confondent dans leur transfiguration même, l’ouvrage qui les décrit devient d’une incroyable plasticité. En laissant une part énorme, certes, aux circonstances historiques et à la personnalité des auteurs médiévaux, on peut N OTES 259

admettre finalement que l’emploi d’Ovide comme source scientifique tient à ce que les Métamorphorses poétisent non pas la science,mais son objet,c’est- à-dire la réalité” (p. 160) (This movement of men, determined by nature and by a divine power, encompasses on a large scale that of the cosmos and its elements;it encompasses also in its smaller particularities that of rocks,rivers, plants, and animals. For the surging of each metamorphosis diversifies the movement overall while making it more precise. In each Ovidian narrative there is an implacable restraint,slow and progressive,that gives life and reality to the “miracle”of the transformation. Because the movment and reality are joined and confused in the transformation itself, the work that describes them is of an incredible plasticity.Even leaving aside the influence of histor- ical circumstances and the personality of the medieval authors, we can say finally that the use of Ovid as a scientific source is due to the fact that the Metamorphoses poetize not just science, but their object, that is to say,reality). 6. Demats, Fabula, p. 132. My translation. 7. Winthrop Wetherbee, and Poetry in the Twelfth Century (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972), p. 13. 8. Robert Hanning, “I Shal Finde it in a Maner Glose,” Medieval Texts and Contemporary Readers, ed. Laurie A. Finke and Martin B. Schichtman (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1987), p.51. 9. Cited in Fausto Ghisalberti’s “Arnolfo d’Orléans: Un cultore di Ovidio nel secolo XII,”Istituto Lombardo di Scienze e Lettere Classe di Lettere Science Morali et Storiche, Memorie 24 (1932): 181. My translation. 10. Wetherbee, Platonism and Poetry, writes that Arnulf’s “assumption that Ovid’s fables are the figural embodiment of philosophical insights, his ready recourse to the structure of the universe for an illustration of the principles of Ovid’s psychology, and the close association he suggests between the perception of cosmic order and the ‘cognition veri creatoris,’ all show him responsive to the influence of the ‘twelfth-century Renaissance,’ with its rediscovery of man and the natural world” (p. 3). 11. Ghisalberti,“Arnolfo d’Orléans,” p. 181. 12. William of Conches, Glosae super Platonem, ed. Edouard Jeauneau (Paris: Vrin, 1965), p. 254. My translation. 13. Bernardus Silvestris, The Cosmographia of Bernardus Silvestris, trans., introduction and notes Winthrop Wetherbee (New York,NY: Columbia University Press, 1973), p. 113. 14. Cosmographia, p. 113. 15. Cosmographia,p.126. 16. Ghisalberti,“Arnolfo d’Orléans,”p. 181. 17. Ghisalberti,“Arnolfo d’Orléans,”p. 201. 18. Ghisalberti,“Arnolfo d’Orléans,”p. 202. 19. Lovesickness, p. 15. Other works on lovesickness during the Middle Ages include part one of I. P. Couliano, Eros et magie à la Renaissance (Paris: Flammarion, 1984); Danielle Jacquart and Claude Thomasset, “L’Amour ‘héroïque’ à travers le traité d’Arnaud de Villeneuve,” La Folie et le corps, ed.Jean Céard (Paris:Presses de l’Ecole Normale Supérieure,1985),pp.143–158, 260 N OTES

and Sexuality and Medicine in the Middle Ages, trans. Matthew Adamson (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988). On the relationship between medical lore and medieval literature see John L. Lowes, “The Loveres Maladye of Hereos,” Modern Philology 11 (1914): 491–546; Domenico Polloni, Amour e Clergie: Un Percorso Testuale da Andrea Cappellano all’Arcipreste de Hita (Bologna: Patron Editore, 1995), pp. 38–66; and Mary Frances Wack, “Imagination, Medicine, and Rhetoric in Andreas Capellanus’ De amore,” Magister Regis: Studies in Honor of Robert Earl Kaske, ed. Arthur Groos (NewYork,NY: Fordham University Press, 1986), pp. 101–116. 20. Lovesickness,p.15. 21. Lovesickness, pp. 200–201. 22. Lovesickness, pp. 200–201. 23. Quoted by Giorgio Agamben, Stanzas:Word and Phantasm in Western Culture, trans. Ronald L. Martinez (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), p. 113. 24. See Lovesickness, p. 173.“The physicians who wrote about love were partic- ularly well placed to articulate this cultural strain, mediating as they did between the worlds—and worldviews—of clergy and laity.From the twelfth century onwards, medicine was increasingly secularised; it moved from the monasteries to the urban universities where it was regulated and profession- alised throughout the course of the later Middle Ages ...Yet, on the other hand,the professors who wrote and argued about lovesickness were also prac- titioners whose clientele was the nobility and the urban well-to-do.”See also Joan Cadden, who writes,“Yet to emphasize a disjunction between science and medicine, on the one hand, and theology and ethics on the other, is to misrepresent the situation. First, many of the medieval writers and natural philosophers were clerics.” “Medieval Scientific and Medical Views of Sexuality: Questions of Propriety,” Medievalia et Humanistica 14 (1986): 162. 25. The Language of Sex, p. 134. 26. Thomas of Chobham, Summa confessorum, ed. Rev. F. Broomfield, Analecta mediaevalia Namurcensia 25 (Louvain: Éditions Nauwelaerts; Paris, Béatrice Nauwelaerts, 1968), p. 389. 27. Remedia, pp. 192–193. 28. Remedia, pp. 198–199. 29. Thomas of Chobham, p. 390. 30. Chrétien was greatly influenced by the “antique” movement, the Roman d’Eneas in particular, as Edmond Faral demonstrated in Recherches sur les sources latines des contes et romans courtois du moyen age (Paris: Champion, 1913), pp. 16–21. 31. On the twelfth-century renaissance of classical letters that gave rise to these works see Raymond Cormier’s introduction to his Three Ovidian Tales of Love, and Aimé Petit’s introduction to his Naissances du roman. Les techniques littéraire dans les romans antiques du XIIe siècle (Paris: Champion, 1985). Besides the three extant lais, two titles of lost lais are known: the Lai d’Orphée and the Lai de Tantale. Others may have disappeared without a trace. N OTES 261

32. For an account of the debate over the identity of the redactor see Elisabeth Schulze-Busacker, “Philomena: une révision de l’attribution de l’oeuvre,” Romania 107 (1986): 459–485. 33. On the characteristics of works of the “antique” movement see Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski, “Old French Narrative Genres: Towards the Definition of the ‘Roman Antique,’ ” Romance Philology 34 (1980–1981): 143–159; Omer Jodogne, “Le caractère des oeuvres antiques dans la littérature française du XIIe et XIIIe siècle,” L’Humanisme médiéval dans les littératures du XIIe au XIVe siècle, ed. Anthime Fourrier (Paris: Klincksieck, 1964) 55–83; and Rosemarie Jones, The Theme of Love in the Romances of Antiquity (London: MHRA, 1972). 34. Per Nykrog, “The Rise of Literary Fiction,” Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, ed. Robert L. Benson, Giles Constable, and Carol D. Lanham (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982), p. 599. 35. The lais are social commentaries.Their goal is thus very different from the ostensible purpose of the tales from Ovid’s Metamorphoses upon which the lais are based. Ovid’s tales depict transformations that result in certain physical features of the earth (the tale of Piramus et Tisbé explains the color of mulberries, Narcissus the presence of the Narcissus flower, and, although the tale of Philomena does not attempt to account for a natural phenomenon, it describes the transformation of the three main characters into birds). In contrast, the Ovidian lais highlight the transformations wrought upon the physical forms of the characters when they fall in love. In the Lai de Narcisus, in fact, Ovid’s transformation disappears altogether.There is no mention of the white flower that remains after Narcissus dies of love. In the other two lais, the transformations are de-emphasized, and, rather than providing the story’s reason for being, they are integrated into the stories as small details. As A.M. Cadot writes of Piramus et Tisbé,“le mythe initial, celui de la méta- morphose du mûrier, s’affaiblit considérablement; il est légèrement christianisé, plus ou moins assimilé à un miracle, et repoussé hors du tableau final du roman.Mais à sa place s’établit un autre ‘mythe’,celui de l’amour fatal conduisant à la mort.”“Etude sur Piramus et Tisbé,” Romania 97 (1976): 446. The individual transformation and resulting disarray created by the arrival of love become the pertinent metamorphoses in the Ovidian lais. 36. The story of Philomena is so distressing, that, as Madeleine Jeay writes,“This story,which relates the sequence of the most horrible and taboo transgres- sions in human society—rape, incest, murder, mutilation, infanticide, and cannibalism—is not rewritten again until the fourteenth-century version in the Ovide moralisé.Thus, there is no direct legacy during the French Middle Ages of the classical myth of Philomela,”“Consuming Passions:Variations on the Eaten Heart Theme,” Violence Against Women in Medieval Texts, ed. Anna Roberts (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida), p. 75. 37. The Navigation of Feeling,p.61. 38. Robert Glendinning, “Pyramus and Thisbe in the Medieval Classroom,” Speculum 61 (1986): 71. 262 N OTES

39. All quotations and translations from the three Ovidian lais discussed in this chapter are from Raymond Cormier’s Three Ovidian Tales of Love, cited by lines. Lines 13–16 (translations on facing pages). 40. Helen Laurie,“Piramus et Tisbé,” Modern Language Review 55 (1960): 29. 41. Cormier, Ovidian Tales, p.5. 42. Cadot,“Piramus et Tisbe”p. 447. 43. All quotations and translations of the Metamorphoses from Ovid in Six Volumes, vol. III and IV, The Metmorphoses, trans. Frank Justus Miller, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984). Quotations cited by page number, translations on facing pages.Vol.III, pp. 182–183. 44. Ghisalberti,“Arnolfo d’Orléans,”p. 210. 45. See Robert Javelet, Image et ressemblance au douzième siècle, de saint Anselme à Alain de Lille (Paris: Letouzey et Aré, 1967). On the relationship between image and truth in twelfth-century writing, see Peter Dronke’s Fabula: Explorations into the Uses of Myth in Medieval Platonism (Leiden: Brill, 1974), pp. 32–78. 46. Michael Camille, The Gothic Idol: Ideology and Image-Making in Medieval Art (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 220–221. 47. For studies on the Narcissus myth during the twelfth century see Jean Frappier, “Variations sur le thème du miroir, de Bernart de Ventadour à Maurice Scève,” Cahiers de l’Association Internationale des Etudes Françaises 11 (1959): 134–158; Guido Favati, “Una traccia de cultura neoplatonica in Chrétien de Troyes: il tema degli occhi come specchio (Cligès, vv. 629–749),” Studi in onore di Carlo Pellegrini (Torino, Società Editrice Internazionale, 1963): 3–13; and Frederick Goldin, The Mirror of Narcissus in the Courtly Love Lyric (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967). 48. On Narcissus’s status as lover during the Middle Ages, see Marie-Noëlle Toury,“Narcisse et Tristan: subversion et usure des mythes aux XIIe et XIIe siècles,” L’Imaginaire courtois et son double, ed. Giovanna Angeli and Luciano Formisano, Collana, Publicazioni dell’ Università degli Studi di Salerno, (Napoli: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 1992). 49. Metamorphoses, book III, pp. 156–157. 50. Metamorphoses, book III, pp. 158–159. 51. Pierre Hadot, “Le Mythe de Narcisse et son interprétation par Plotin,” Nouvelle Revue de Psychanalyse 13 (1976): 107–108. My translation. 52. Pierre Hadot, Plotin ou la simplicité du regard (Paris: Etudes Augustiennes, 1989), p. 65. 53. Jean Wirth, L’Image médiévale: naissance et développements (Paris: Klincksieck, 1989), p. 84. See also chapter 2 of Umberto Eco, Art and Beauty in the Middle Ages (New Haven and London:Yale University Press, 1986). 54. In Hierarchiam Coelestem II, PL 175, 949B. My translation. 55. Julia Kristeva, Histoires d’amour (Paris, Denoël, 1983), p. 102. My translation. 56. Kristeva, Histoires d’amour, p. 102. 57. The function of the prologue has been discussed by Tony Hunt in “The Rhetorical Background to the Arthurian Prologue,” Forum for Modern Languages Studies 6 (1970): 1–23 and “Tradition and Originality in the N OTES 263

Prologues of Chrestien de Troyes,” Forum for Modern Language Studies 8 (1972): 320–344. David Hult also analyzes the prologue in Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: Readership and Authority in the First Roman de la Rose (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 113–137. 58. Narcisus, ed. M.M. Pelan and N.C.W.Spence, Publications de la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de Strasbourg (Paris: Belles Lettres, 1964), p. 75. 59. Ars, pp. 12–13. 60. Cited in Danielle Jacquart and Claude Thomasset, Sexuality and Medicine in the Middle Ages, trans. Matthew Adamson (Cambridge, MA: Polity Press, 1988), p. 176. 61. Metamorphoses, vol. III, p. 150. 62. Ghisalberti,“Arnolfo d’Orléans,” p. 209. 63. Compare Eneas and Dido’s first tryst in the cave: “il fait de li ce que lui sanble,/ ne li fait mie trop grant force . . .”(1522–1523). Eneas forces Dido, even though she consents.The use of the word “force”even in this description of mutually desired sexual relations implies that it is considered a normal part of male–female relations. Roman d’Eneas: roman du XIIe siécle, ed. J.J. Salverda de Grave (Paris: Champion, 1925–1929). 64. E. Jane Burns, Bodytalk: When Women Speak in Old French Literature (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993), p. 141. 65. Peggy McCracken,“Engendering Sacrifice: Blood, Lineage, and Infanticide in Old French Literature,” Speculum 77 (2002): 67. 66. René Girard, Violence and the Sacred, trans. Patrick Gregory (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977), p. 37. 67. Girard, Violence and the Sacred, p.35. 68. Girard, Violence and the Sacred, pp. 35–36.

3 Marriage and Amor 1. Geraldine Heng, Empire of Magic: Medieval Romance and the Politics of Cultural Fantasy (New York:Columbia University Press, 2003), p. 45. 2. E.R. Curtius, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973), p. 124. 3. Anne Llewellyn Barstow, Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy: The Eleventh-Century Debates (New York:The Edwin Mellon Press, 1982), p. 175. 4. For a concise discussion, see John W.Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants: The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970), pp. 337–343. 5. Brundage notes that there were also material considerations: “Practical considerations, mainly economic, supported the drive for an unmarried clergy.Married clergy,the reformers declared, were expensive to maintain— married priests, after all, had to provide food, clothes, and housing for those bawling babies and slatternly wives, and the church’s resources were thereby frittered away, not in the service of God, but in catering to the whims of the wives and children of married clerics. Even worse, married priests, bishops, and others would be tempted to treat their ecclesiastical offices as family 264 N OTES

property and to convert the sacred dignity into the family heritage.This last was close to the mark. Sacerdotal dynasties were common, almost the norm, in some regions of eleventh-century Europe, and had been commonplace for centuries.” Law, Sex, and Christian Society,p.215. 6. Neil Cartlidge, Medieval Marriage: Literary Approaches, 1100–1300 (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1997), p. 15. 7. Cartlidge, Medieval Marriage,p.15. 8. See Christopher N.L. Brooke, The Medieval Idea of Marriage (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), p. 79. 9. Gerd Tellenbach, The Church in Western Europe From the Tenth to the Early Tw elfth Century, trans.Timothy Reuter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 166. See pp. 165–167. See also Colin Morris, The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050–1250 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), pp. 104–105. 10. See Edward J. Kealy, Roger of Salisbury: Viceroy of England (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1972).“Evidently, other contemporary writ- ers found Roger’s behavior unexceptional, were ignorant of it, or were unusually discreet, even after his passing. Since the reforming church was so adamant about enforcing clerical celibacy and the Anglo-Norman bishops themselves were so strict about it, it is rather surprising to find Roger so deliberately,continuously,and successfully defying church law on this major issue” (23). 11. Nancy Partner, Serious Entertainments: The Writing of History in Twelfth-Century England (Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press, 1977), p. 47. 12. Partner, Serious Entertainments,p.47. 13. Partner, Serious Entertainments,p.47. 14. Partner, Serious Entertainments, p. 47. 15. C.N.L. Brooke, “Gregorian Reform in Action: Clerical Marriage in England, 1050–1200,” Cambridge Historical Journal 12 (1956):1. 16. See Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants, pp. 337–343. 17. Barstow, Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy, p. 177. 18. With the Concordat of Worms, 1122, the “Two-Swords” theory that God had assigned authority over secular matters to kings and authority over spiritual matters to the Church was affirmed.The Concordat ostensibly put an end to the conflict that had erupted between Pope Gregory VII (ruled 1073–1085) and Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV with the reform of the Church, intended to free the institution from the power of greedy feudal lords. In practice the division was impossible. Dedicated to extending its sec- ular power from the time of the reform,the Papacy reached its apogee under Innocent III (ruled 1198–1216). Innocent saw himself as the vicar of Christ and his rule as universal, summing up the position he ascribed to himself in a metaphor: as the moon derives light from the sun, so royal power derives its light from pontifical authority. Innocent intervened in conflicts between princes, recovered lost papal territories, determined royal succession, made war on heretics, and organized a crusade. Exerting a tremendous influence over society, Innocent also condemned simony and promoted morality N OTES 265

among the bishops. On the development of the papacy during the twelfth century see Walter Ullmann, A Short History of the Papacy (London: Methuen and Co. Ltd., 1972); Marcel Pacaut, Alexandre III: étude sur la conception du pouvoir pontifical dans sa pensée et dans son oeuvre (Paris:Vrin, 1956); Helen Tillmann, Pope Innocent IIII, trans. Walter Sax (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company,1980); and Augustin Fliche,“The Advocate of Church Reform,” Innocent III:Vicar of Christ or Lord of the World?, ed. James M. Powell (Boston, MA: D. C. Heath and Company,1963), pp. 29–42. 19. Georges Duby makes the case for the two models of marriage, ecclesiastical and aristocratic in Medieval Marriage and The Knight,The Lady, and the Priest. See also Michael M. Sheehan, C.S.B., “Choice of Marriage Partner in the Middle Ages: Development and Mode of Application of a Theory of Marriage,” Marriage, Family, and Law in Medieval Europe: Selected Studies, ed. James K. Farge, intro. Joel T. Rosenthal (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996), pp. 87–117; John Noonan, Jr.“The Power to Choose,” Viator 4 (1973): 419–434; and Law, Sex, and Christian Society,p.194. 20. R.W. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970), p. 126. 21. Keith Nickolaus offers a thorough overview of the process, pp. 131–152 in Marriage Fictions in Old French Secular Narratives, 1170–1250: A Critical Re-evaluation of the Courtly Love Debate (New York:Routledge, 2002). 22. Dyan Elliott, Spiritual Marriage: Sexual Abstinence in Medieval Wedlock (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), p. 141. 23. See Colin Morris, The Papal Monarchy,p.329. 24. Medieval Marriage,p.73. 25. Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants, p. 335. 26. Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants, p. 335. 27. The fourth Lateran Council of 1215 addressed the problem of clandestine marriage. The solution was that a marriage entered into without the presence of a priest would be considered binding, but that it would not be considered “complete” until the vows were repeated before a priest. 28. R.J. Helmholz, Marriage and Litigation in Medieval England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974), p.25. 29. Walter Map’s De Nugis Curialium, trans. Montague R. Janes, ed. E. Sidney Hartland (London: Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, 1923), p. 241. 30. John W. Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1986), pp. 267–268. 31. Law, Sex, and Christian Society, pp. 183–184. 32. Law, Sex, and Christian Society, p. 184. 33. The Life of Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth-Century Recluse, ed. and trans. C.H.Talbot (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959), p. 46. 34. The Life of Christina of Markyate, pp. 58–59. 35. The Life of Christina of Markyate, pp. 64–65. 36. Robert Stanton,“Marriage, Socialization, and Domestic Violence in the Life of Christina of Markyate,” Domestic Violence in Medieval Texts,ed.Eve 266 N OTES

Salisbury, Georgiana Donavin, and Merrall Llewelyn Price (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2002), p. 243. 37. Helmholz, Marriage and Litigation,p.91. 38. Cartlidge, Medieval Marriage,p.19. 39. Michael M. Sheehan,“Choice of Marriage Partner in the Middle Ages,” p. 97. 40. Memoirs of the Papal Court,p.81. 41. Memoirs of the Papal Court,p.82. 42. Memoirs of the Papal Court, pp. 99–100. 43. Medieval Marriage,p.45. 44. See for example Augustin Fliche, Le Règne de Philippe Ier, roi de France (Paris: Société Française d’Imprimerie et de Librairie, 1912), especially “Livre deuxième: le pouvoir royal au temps de Philippe.”Also, Andrew W. Lewis, Royal Succession in Capetian France: Studies on Familial Order and the State (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981), chapter two, “The Consolidation of Dynastic Forms in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries.” 45. Ivo of Chartres, Epistola 15, PL 162, 27D–28A. 46. The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, ed. and trans. Marjoie Chibnall, 6 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), vol. 4, pp. 262–263. 47. Suger, The Deeds of Louis the Fat, trans., intro., and notes Richard C. Cusimano and John Moorhead (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1992), p. 61. 48. Gerald A. Bond, The Loving Subject: Desire, Eloquence, and Power in Romanesque France (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995), p. 100. 49. The Knight, the Lady and the Priest, pp. 5–19. 50. On the topic of literature and new norms of marriage see Jean-Charles Payen,“La ‘Mise en roman’ du mariage dans la littérature française des XIIe et XIIIe siècles: de l’évolution idéologique à la typologie des genres,” Love and Marriage in the Twelfth Century, ed. Willy Van Hoecke and Andries Welkenhuysen (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1981), pp. 219–235. 51. Sarah Kay, Courtly Contradictions: The Emergence of the Literary Object in the Twelfth Century (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001), p.2. 52. Kay, Courtly Contradictions, p. 25. 53. The contradictory structure of much of medieval literature has been the focus of recent critical attention, occasioning Constance Bouchard’s wry remark that “the discourse of opposites may soon become the new paradigm of medieval literary structures, against which future scholars will feel themselves compelled to rebel.” Rev. of Sarah Kay’s Courtly Contradictions: The Emergence of the Literary Object in the Twelfth Century, on-line H-France Book Reviews, June, 2002. But as Bouchard’s own meticulous study of contradiction in medieval literature demonstrates, contradiction is indeed embedded in the very structure of medieval literature. See “Every Valley Shall Be Exalted”: The Discourse of Opposites in Twelfth-Century Thought (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2003). Sarah Kay, too, argues for examining contradiction as a problem worthy of study in its own right, as a defining structure of the medieval “literary object.” See Courtly Contradictions. As for N OTES 267

moderns, Kay writes that our reading habits are shaped by a preference for contradiction, a preference explicable with reference to numerous modern critical approaches, among them Lacanian psychoanalysis, featured in Kay’s text. Kay argues that the primary effect of the literary object with its contradictory structure upon its medieval (like its modern) audience was pleasure,that “[a]lthough its links with didacticism are not altogether severed the literary ‘object’ is henceforth established as a source of pleasure and diversion” (p. 2). 54. Catherine Brown, Contrary Things: Exegesis, Dialectic, and the Poetics of Didacticism (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998). Catherine Brown writes that categorizing was an important means for understanding. Describing the popular medieval practice of teaching through contraries, she writes,“Distinguishing one thing from another is of course the very founda- tion of sense-making, but sense is made, after all,and it is made even more abundantly when such dialectical discrimination is difficult to effect”(p.148). 55. John of Salisbury, Metalogicon, Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis 98, ed. J.B. Hall (Turnhout: Brepols, 1991), book 2, chapter 3, p. 60. Translation, The Metalogicon of John of Salisbury: A Twelfth-Century Defense of the Verbal and Logical Arts of the Trivium, trans. and notes Daniel B. McGarry (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1962), p.81. 56. Metalogicon, book 3, chapter 4. 57. Tony Hunt,“Aristotle, Dialectic, and Courtly Literature,” Viator 10 (1979): 108. Also important for understanding the romance form is the work of Douglas Kelly. See especially his “Topical Invention in Medieval French Literature,” Medieval Eloquence: Studies in the Theory and Practice of Medieval Rhetoric, ed. James J. Murphy (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1978), pp. 231–251. His description of the author’s identification of places in his material for amplification clarifies why the love episodes receive such attention in the romance. “The artist in invention seeks to identify places (loci ) in his matière that are suitable for elaboration or elucidation in conformity with context. Context is the meaning the author gives to his work.The actual material that fills the place is an argumentum” (234).As for the relationship among the parts of the romance, see Peter Haidu,“Au début du roman, l’ironie,” Poétique 9 (1978): 443–466. 58. Hunt,“Aristotle, Dialectic, and Courtly Literature,” p. 108. 59. Hunt,“Aristotle, Dialectic, and Courtly Literature,”p. 128. 60. Hunt,“Aristotle, Dialectic, and Courtly Literature,” p. 119. 61. Hunt,“Aristotle, Dialectic, and Courtly Literature,” p. 119–120. 62. Quotations from Le Chevalier au lion (Yvain) from the edition of Mario Roques (Paris: Champion,1963).Cited by line.Translations from Chrétien de Troyes: Arthurian Romances, trans.W.W.Comfort (London: Dent, 1975), cited by page no., p. 198. 63. Quotations from Le Chevalier au lion (Yvain) and translations from Chrétien de Troyes, p. 198. 64. Peter Damian, Letters, trans. Owen J. Blum, O.F.M. (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1997), p. 14. 268 N OTES

65. Ralph Hexter discusses the use of the Ars amatoria in the classroom in Ovid and Medieval Schooling (Munich:Arbeo Gesellschaft, 1986) Part I, 15–83. See also Language of Sex, pp. 23–25, and E.H.Alton and D.E.W. Wor mell,“Ovid in the Mediaeval Classroom,” Hermathena 94 (1960): 21–38; (1961): 67–82. 66. See Garrett E.P. Epp, “Learning to Write with Venus’s Pen: Sexual Regulation in Matthew of Vendôme’s Ars versificatoria,” Desire and Discipline: Sex and Sexuality in the Premodern West, ed. Jacqueline Murray and Konrad Eisenbichler (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996), pp. 265–279. Explaining Matthew of Vendôme’s frequent use of sexually explicit imagery to illustrate the figures of rhetoric in the Ars versificatoria (ca. 1175) he writes, “Both sexual activity and writing are to be carefully regulated, as they pose parallel dangers to the emerging masculinity of Matthew’s young charges” (p. 266). In controlling one the student gains control over the other: “They are expected to learn masculine control over their material,avoiding the parallel feminizations of rhetorical and moral vice, learning the proper use of their pens” (p. 276). For more on the widespread medieval analogy between grammar and sex see Jan Ziolkowski, Alan of Lille’s Grammar of Sex: The Meaning of Grammar to a Twelfth-Century Intellectual (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), especially pp. 89–107; Michael Camille, “Manuscript Illumination and the Art of Copulation,” Constructing Medieval Sexuality, ed. Karma Lochrie, Peggy McCracken, and James A. Schultz (Minneapolis, MN and London: University of Minnesota Press, 1997), pp. 58–90, especially pp. 80–86. 67. Jody Enders, The Medieval Theatre of Cruelty: Rhetoric, Memory,Violence (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999), p. 161. 68. Enders, Medieval Theatre of Cruelty, p. 161. 69. See Anne Howland Schotter, “Rape in the Medieval Latin Comedies,” Representing Rape in Medieval and Early Modern Literature, eds. Elizabeth Robertson and Christine M. Rose (New York,NY: Palgrave, 2001), p. 244. 70. Robert Glendinning, “Pyramus and Thisbe in the Medieval Classroom,” Speculum 61 (1986):54. 71. “Car il ne faut pas oublier, le répétons, que, dans le passage des Remèdes, le maître qui apprend à aimer et à ne pas aimer c’est Ovide” (For one must not forget, we repeat, that in the passage of the Remedia, the master who teaches how to love and how not to love is Ovid).The “incorrect” attribution results from a misunderstanding: “Et peut-être l’idée de le figurer ainsi est-elle venue au trouveur à la suite du contre-sens que nous avons supposé: il aura entendu que le maître qui s’annonce aux vers 41 ss. des Remèdes, c’était l’Amour et non pas Ovide” (And perhaps the idea to figure it in this way came to the writer as the result of the misunderstanding that we have imagined).“Ovide et quelques autres sources du Roman d’Eneas” in Recherches sur les sources latines du moyen âge, Edmond Faral (Paris: Champion, 1913) note 1, p. 146. 72. C. Stephen Jaeger, The Envy of Angels: Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe, 950–1200 (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994), p. 105. N OTES 269

73. John F. Benton, Self and Society in Medieval France (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1996),p.49.On Guibert see Jody Enders,The Medieval T heater of Cruelty, p. 140. On the status of Latin learning as a rite of passage, see Walter J. Ong, Rhetoric, Romance, and Technology: Studies in the Interaction of Expression and Culture (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1971), especially chapter five, “Latin Language Study as a Renaissance Puberty Rite,”pp. 113–141. 74. Ong, Rhetoric, Romance, and Technology, p. 124. 75. Ars,p.59. 76. Peter Abelard, Historia Calamitatum, ed. and intro. J. Monfrin (Paris: Vrin, 1962), p. 73. Translations from The Letters of Abelard and Heloise, trans. and intro. Betty Radice (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974), p. 67. 77. PL 178, 206C-D. Radice, p. 147. 78. Floire et Blanchflor,ed. Margaret Pelan (Paris: Belles Lettres, 1956), lines 212–216. My translations. 79. On the effacement of gender boundaries in this romance see Phillip McCaffrey,“Sexual Identity in Floire et Blancheflor and Ami et Amile,” Gender Transgressions: Crossing the Normative Barrier in Old French Literature, ed. Karen J. Taylor (New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1998), pp. 129–152. McCaffrey sees the pair’s sexual roles, like their religious roles, as “relatively superficial compared to the deeper and simpler theme of this story, their mutual discovery of (symbolic) identities through their simulta- neous recognition of and devotion to one another. From a psychological point of view,this development . . . must of course precede the construction of sexual identity and the real possibility of mature sexual love” (p. 142). 80. Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality.Volume 1: An Introduction, trans. Robert Hurley (New York: Vintage Books, 1978), p. 34. 81. Abelard, Historia Calamitatum, p. 75. Radice, p. 70. 82. On Heloise’s philosophical views on love see Constant J. Mews, “Philosophical Themes in the Epistolae duorum amantium: The First Letters of Heloise and Abelard,” Listening to Heloise: The Voice of a Twelfth-Century Woman, ed. Bonnie Wheeler (Basingstoke, England: Macmillan, 2000), pp. 35–52. 83. PL 178, 186B. Radice, p. 116. 84. PL 178, 186A. Radice, p. 115. For the possibility that Heloise influenced Abelard’s development of his argument on intention see John Marenbon, The Philosophy of Peter Abelard (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 298–303 and 333. 85. Epistolae duorum amantium. Briefe Abaelards und Heloises? ed.and intro. Ewald Könsgen (Leiden: Brill, 1974). 86. The Lost Love Letters of Heloise and Abelard: Perceptions of Dialogue in Twelfth- Century France, Constant J. Mews with trans. by Neville Chiavaroli and Constant J. Mews (New York:Palgrave Press, 2001). 87. Barbara Newman’s Review of The Lost Love Letters of Heloise and Abelard: Perceptions of Dialogue in Twelfth-Century France, Medieval Review, 00.01.06. Mews’ position has aroused controversy. 88.Mews, Lost Love Letters,pp.224–225. 270 N OTES

89. Mews, Lost Love Letters, pp. 228–229. 90.Mews, Lost Love Letters,pp.232–233. 91. Mews, Lost Love Letters, pp. 240–241. 92.Mews, Lost Love Letters,pp.274–275. 93. Mews, Lost Love Letters, p. 140. 94. Mews, Lost Love Letters, pp. 286–287. 95. Peter Dronke, “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II,” Mediaeval Studies 38 (1976): 193. 96. Mews, Lost Love Letters, pp. 282–283.

4 The Roman d’ Eneas and the Erotics of Empire Building 1. Christopher Baswell, in Medieval England: Figuring the Aeneid from the Tw elfth Century to Chaucer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 150. 2. The scene takes place at lines 7785–7812. Citations from Roman d’Eneas: roman du XIIe siècle, ed. J.J. Salverda de Grave (Paris: Champion, 1925–1929). 3. See Francis Ingledew, “The Book of Troy and the Genealogical Construction of History: The Case of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia regum Britanniae,” Speculum 69 (1994): especially 670–675. 4. On the relationship between the Eneas and its classical sources see Aimé Petit, “Aspects de l’influence d’Ovide sur les romans antiques du XIIe siècle,” Colloque présence d’Ovide, ed. R. Chevalier (Paris: Belles Lettres, 1982) and “De l’hypotexte à l’hypertexte. L’Enéide et le roman d’Enéas: remarques sur la technique de transposition au XIIème siècle,” Bien dire et bien aprandre 4 (1986): 59–74. 5. Barbara Nolan, Chaucer and the Tradition of the “‘Roman Antique’” (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), p.9. 6. Baswell, Virgil, p.12. 7. Henry A. Myers, Medieval Kingship (Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall, 1982), p.13. See also W.M.Spellman, Monarchies 1000–2000 (London: Reaktion Books, 2001), pp. 164–187. 8. Although the king ruled “by the grace of God,”succession was a legal ques- tion. In France, by the time of Philip Augustus, it had been determined that the throne would pass from first son to first son. From 987 until the line of direct descent was broken in 1316, the kingship passed from father to eldest son. The situation was more complicated in England, where the lack of amale heir caused a civil war after the death of Henry I. Even when first sons stood in line for the throne, their right to succession might be con- tested, as in the case of Arthur, son of Geoffrey,third son of Henry II, whom John had murdered to avoid obstacles to his own succession. 9. J.E.A. Jolliffe, Angevin Kingship (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1955), pp. 88–89. 10. Policraticus,p.28. N OTES 271

11. Policraticus, p. 137. 12. Policraticus,p.79–80. 13. Policraticus,p.52. 14. Policraticus,p.18. 15. Policraticus, p.38. 16. Policraticus,p.40. 17. Policraticus, p. 131. 18. Policraticus,p.91. 19. Policraticus,p.91. 20. Cary J. Nederman, “The Changing Face of Tyranny: The Reign of King Stephen in John of Salisbury’s Political Thought,” Nottingham Medieval Studies 33 (1989): 14. 21. Policraticus, p. 178. 22. Translations from Eneas: A Twelfth-Century Romance, trans. John A. Yunck (New York:Columbia University Press, 1974), cited by page. 23. Daniel Poirion,“De l’Enéide à l’Eneas:mythologie et moralisation,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 19 (1976): 226. 24. One example is Raymond Cormier’s assessment of Eneas’s initial motivation and transformation in his important study of the Roman d’Eneas, One Heart, One Mind: The Rebirth of Virgil’s Hero in Medieval French Romance (University, MI.: Romance Monographs, 1973). Cormier writes: “Remorseful Eneas then realizes the one-sidedness of his idolatrous, physical affair with Dido and simultaneously experiences the ecstatic joy and spiritualization which may derive from reciprocal love. Suddenly, the inner tension is released, the dilemma is resolved.The new, romantic hero is born of the transformation: he comprehends the exalting, ennobling effect of true love” (p. 245). 25. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid, trans., intro. and notes Earl G. Schreiber and Thomas E. Maresca (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1979), p. 25. 26. The Roman d’Eneas differs from the Aeneid on this point. In the Aeneid, Venus disguises Cupid as Ascanius and sends him off to carry out the task. 27. David J. Shirt,“The Dido Episode in Eneas: The Reshaping of Tragedy and its Stylistic Consequences,” Medium Aevum 51 (1982): 3–17. On Dido in Eneas see also Irving Singer,“Erotic Transformations in the Legend of Dido and Eneas,” Modern Language Notes 90 (1975): 767–783. 28. Line 2144. On the word “soltaine” see Raymond Cormier’s article, “Comunalement and Soltaine in the Eneas,” Romance Notes 14 (1972): 6–8. 29. Baswell, Virgil, p. 200. 30. Law, Sex, and Christian Society, p. 287. 31. Law, Sex, and Christian Society, p. 287. 32. See John T.Noonan,“Marital Affection in the Canonists,” Studia Gratiana 12 (1967): 495. 33. Compare Cormier’s use of the notion of “marital affection,” One Heart, One Mind, p. 263. 34. Noonan, “Marital Affection,” p. 504. Also see Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, pp. 505–506. 272 N OTES

35. Michel Rousse, “Le Pouvoir, la prouesse et l’amour dans l’Enéas,” Relire le Roman d’Eneas, ed. Jean Dufournet (Paris: Champion, 1985), pp. 149–167. 36. See Barbara Nolan, “Ovid’s Heroides Contextualized:Foolish Love and Legitimate Marriage in the Roman d’Eneas,” Mediaevalia 13 (1987): 162–163. Daniel Poirion has suggested that the change in the attributes of Pallas may reflect the attitude of the ruling knightly class in opposition to religious interpretations of the figure: “L’Eneas apporte donc une conception origi- nale de Pallas, où se reflète la mentalité de la caste militaire dirigeante par opposition à l’orientation religieux du commentateur” (The Eneas therefore offers an original conception of Pallas, where the mentality of the ruling military class is reflected in contrast with the religious orientation of the commentator), Poirion,“De l’Enéide à l’Eneas,” p. 215. My translation. 37. Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski, Reading Myth: Classical Mythology and Its Interpretations in Medieval French Literature (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997), p. 33. 38. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid,p.3. 39. Francine Mora-Lebrun, L’Enéide médievale: la naissance du roman (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1994), p. 192. My translation. 40. Mora-Lebrun, L’Enéide médievale, p. 196. 41. Mora-Lebrun reads this as a symbolic rendering of a more general failing, suggesting that “avaritia” or “coveitise” is the fundamental flaw that Eneas corrects during his journeys (199–205). On transgression as a necessary element of a foundation history, see Christiane Marchello-Nizia, “De l’Énéide à l’ Eneas: les attributs du fondateur,” Lectures médiévales de Virgile (Rome: École Française de Rome, 1985), pp. 251–266. Eneas’s main interest is in founding a dynasty,she writes. Four conditions seem to be necessary to carry out such a task. The second of these is to have transgressed a major interdiction, or at least to be suspected of having done so:“avoir transgressé un interdit majeur ou en être simplement soupçonné” (257). 42. Nolan,“Ovid’s Heroïdes Contextualized,”p. 158. 43. Reddy, p. 128. 44. Blumenfeld-Kosinski, Reading Myth, p. 42. 45. Suzannah Biernoff, Sight and Embodiment in the Middle Ages (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), p. 55. In her analysis of the Eneas, Biernoff demonstrates through her examination of the role of the gaze in love what I have been suggesting, that love in the Old French romance strikes males and females in the same way and with the same force. She writes that “the male gaze was by no means always phallic; and ladies’ eyes were not always chaste, reflective orbs or instruments of material love.The ocular attributes that, for a modern reader, are so sexually resonant—the ‘penetrating’ gaze, the ‘wounded’ eye and all its attendant symptoms—seem repeatedly to be assigned to the wrong sex. Both men and woman are capable of inflicting wounds of love with a glance, and men as well as women receive those wounds in their eyes and hearts” (p. 58). 46. Stephen G. Nichols,“Amorous Imitation: Bakhtin,Augustine, and Le Roman d’Eneas,” Romance: Generic Transformations from Chrétien de Troyes to Cervantes, N OTES 273

ed. Kevin Brownlee and Marina Scordilis Brownlee (Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 1985), p. 71. 47. Jean-Charles Huchet, Le Roman médiéval (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1984), p. 148. 48. John Scottus Eriugena, Johannis Scotti.Annotationes in Marcianum, ed. Cora E. Lutz (New York,NY: Kraus Reprint Co., 1970), p. 67. 49. George D. Economou, “The Two Venuses and Courtly Love,” In Pursuit of Perfection: Courtly Love in Medieval Literature, eds. Joan M. Ferrante and Geroge D. Economou (Port Washington, NY and London: Kennikat Press, 1975), p. 20. 50. Besides George D.Economou, see Peter Dronke,“L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle,” Studi Medievali 6, 1 (1965): 389–422. 51. Economou, p. 19. 52. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid, p. 11. Earlier commentaries on the two Venuses can be found in two ninth- century commentaries, those of Remigius of Auxerre, Remigii Autissiodorensis commentum in Martianum Capellam, ed. and intro. Cora E. Lutz, 2 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1962–1965) and John Scottus Eriugena, Johannis Scotti. Annotationes in Marcianum, ed. Cora E. Lutz (New York:Kraus Reprint Co., 1970).These are both commentaries of Martianus Capella’s The Marriage of Philology and Mercury. See Martianus Capella and the Seven Liberal Arts, trans. William Harris Stahl and Richard Johnson with E.L. Burge, 2 vols., (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977). Further on the idea of the two Venuses in medieval literature, see D.W.Robertson, A Preface to Chaucer (Princeton, PA: Princeton University Press, 1962), pp. 124–127. 53. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid, p. 11. 54. Daniel Poirion, Résurgences: mythe et littérature à l’âge du symbole (XIIe siècle) (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1986), p. 71. My translation. See “De l’Enéide à l’Eneas” for a more detailed analysis of the process of the replacement of Venus by Cupid. 55. Poirion, Résurgences, p.71. 56. Alfred Adler, “Eneas and Lavine:Puer et Puella Senes,” Romanische Forschungen 71 (1959): 73. Love, for Adler, brings about Eneas’s transformation from an old, unregenerated man to a puer senex, old in years, but fresh in spirit (p. 75). 57. Adler, pp. 75–76. 58. Cormier, One Heart, One Mind, p. 247. 59. Ingledew,“The Book of Troy,” p. 668. 60. Ingledew,“The Book of Troy,”p. 671. 61. Ingledew,“The Book of Troy,”p. 668. 62. Augustine, Confessions, ed. and commentary James J. O’Donnell, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), vol. 1, p. 11.Translations Saint Augustine, Confessions, trans., intro., and notes Henry Chadwick (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 17. 63. Alan of Lille,Anticlaudianus, ed. Robert Bossuat (Paris: Vrin, 1955).Translations from Anticlaudianus or the Good and Perfect Man, James J. Sheridan (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1973), listed by page number. 274 N OTES

64. Body and Society, p. 427. 65. Anticlaudianus,Sheridan, p. 210. 66. Poirion,“De l’Enéide à l’Eneas,”p. 226. My translation. 67. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid,p.12. 68. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid, p. 13. 69. Poirion,“De l’Enéide à l’Eneas,” p. 224. 70. On this triangle see Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski, “Old French Narrative Genres:Towards the Definition of the Roman Antique,”Romance Philology 34 (1980): 158. Also on the Roman d’Eneas as an apology for Plantagenet Empire see Giovanna Angeli, L’Eneas e i Primi Romanzi Volgari (Milan: Riccardo Ricciardi, 1971); Christiane Marchello-Nizia,“De l’Enéïde,” cited above; Lee Patterson, “Virgil and Historical Consciousness of the Twelfth Century: The Roman d’Eneas and Erec et Enid,” Negotiating the Past: The Historical Understanding of Medieval Literature,ed. Lee Patterson (Madison,WI: Unversity of Wisconsin Press, 1987), pp. 170–183; and Christopher Baswell, “Men in the Roman d’Eneas: the Construction of Empire,” Medieval Masculinities: Regarding Men in the Middle Ages, ed. Clare A. Lees (Minneapolis, MN; London: University of Minnesota Press, 1994), pp. 149–168. 71. Historians dispute whether or not the loss of Aquitaine was in fact a blow to Louis. Certainly it damaged his reputation. But the province was uncontrol- lable. Robert Fawtier writes that “Louis has been severely criticised, especially by French historians, for himself creating the Angevin menace by repudiating Eleanor of Aquitaine as his wife.Yet it is by no means clear that to repudiate Eleanor was a mistake.In 1137 the French monarchy was hardly ready to assimilate the huge duchy of Aquitaine, whose feudatories were among the most turbulent in Europe. Draw as they might on their own portentous energies, and on the resources of England, Normany,and Anjou, Henry II and Richard I could never subdue Aquitaine.” The Capetian Kings of France: Monarchy and Nation 987–1328, trans. Lionel Butler and R.J. Adam (London and Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press, 1960), p. 24. 72. See W.L.Warren, Henry II (London: Eyre Methuen, 1973), pp. 12–17. 73. Emilie Amt, The Accession of Henry II in England: Royal Government 1149–1159 (Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.:The Boydell Press, 1993), p. 20. 74. Memoirs of the Papal Court, pp. 83–86.The different factions and their reasons for supporting Stephen’s son Eustace as his successor are described. 75. Warren, Henry III,p.19. 76. Warren, Henry II,p.18. 77. Warren, Henry II, pp. 18–19. 78. David Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, 1135–1154 (Harlow, England; New York:Longman, 2000), p. 251. 79.Warren, Henry II,p.44. 80. William of Newburgh, The History of English Affairs, Book I, ed. and trans. P.G. Walsh and M.J.Kennedy (Warminster:Aris and Phillips,1988),pp.128–129. 81. In De principis instructione in Giraldi Cambrensis Opera, ed. J.S. Brewer, vol. 8 of 8, (London: Longman [etc.], 1861–1891), p. 300. 82. PL 212, 1037D. N OTES 275

83. Memoirs of the Papal Court, p.61. 84. Memoirs of the Papal Court,p.61. 85. Régine Pernoud, Eleanor of Aquitaine, trans. Peter Wiley (London: Collins, 1967),p.11. 86. Baswell,“Men in the Roman d’Eneas: the Construction of Empire”, p. 161. 87. Nickolaus, p. 81.

5 “Making Love” in Béroul and Thomas’s Tristans 1. All quotes from Béroul’s Tristan from Tristran et Iseut: poème du XIIe siècle,ed. and trans. Herman Braet and Guy Raynaud de Lage (Paris-Louvain: Peeters, 1989) lines 20–25.The translation for these lines is mine, because I want to emphasize that Iseut denies loving Tristan “madly”—she does not deny loving him altogether—a theme I will develop in this chapter. Further translations from Béroul, The Romance of Tristan, trans. Alan S. Fedrick (London: Penguin, 1970), cited by page numbers. 2. Two distinct notions of what created an irrevocable marriage existed during the twelfth century.Gratian and the “Italian school” maintained that consent followed by consummation trumped consent without marriage. For Peter Lombard and the “French school,” the declaration that one consented to marry (“verba de presenti”) would invalidate subsequent marriages. The “French school” also held that the promise to marry at some future date (“verba de futuro”) followed by consummation would invalidate subsequent marriages. Tristan and Iseut might theoretically fit the requirements for marriage according to any of the three. See Adhémar Esmein, Le Mariage en droit canonique, 2 vols. (Paris: L. Larose et Forcel, 1891), vol. 1, pp. 95–137. It should be noted that Alexander’s position on consent changed during his lifetime. He finished by promoting consent over consummation. See Law, Sex, and Christian Society,pp. 331–338. 3. Law, Sex, and Christian Society, pp. 334–335. 4. Jean Frappier, “Structure et sens du Tristan: version commune, version courtoise,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 6 (1963): 255. 5. Frappier,“Structure et sens du Tristan,”p. 260. 6. The nine fragments are contained in the following manuscripts: Douce, Sneyd (which contains two fragments), Turin (which contains two fragments), Strassburg (no longer extant, but which contained three fragments), and Cambridge. 7. But the question of whether or not Thomas’s or anyone’s version ever existed as a complete, integrated text is no longer central to critical debates. Most recent critics tend to view the Tristan story of the twelfth century as a group of related texts dependent upon intertextual references. See Merrit R. Blakeslee, Love’s Masks: Identity, Intertextuality, and Meaning in the Old French Tristan Poems (Cambridge, England: D.S. Brewer, 1989), p. 127. 8. It is recounted in the Turin fragment of T homas’s manuscript, where Tristan is depicted in the midst of an anguished internal monologue before the statue of Iseut, and in the Norse translation, which recounts the physical 276 N OTES

details of the Salle aux images but omits much of the psychologizing present in Thomas’s version. 9. Several possible “references” exist, but their meanings are significantly differ- ent. The Pygmalion and Galatea episode has been mentioned as well as William of Malmesbury’s story of the youth betrothed to Venus. Several other versions of the youth betrothed to Venus were current during the twelfth century, as Paull Franklin Baum verifies in “The Young Man Betrothed to a Statue,” PMLA 34 (1919): 523–579. In his Tristan in the Underworld: A Study of Gottfried von Strassburg’s Tristan together with the Tristan of Thomas (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991), Neil Thomas mentions a story told by Geoffrey of Monmouth and Wace as “the closest literary parallel.”This story recounts how Locrinus, king of England and engaged to Gwendolen, falls in love with the beautiful Estrildis and proposes marriage to her. Gwendolen’s father is outraged and Locrinus is forced to marry Gwendolen after all. But he has a cave dug where he hides Estrildis and meets with her for seven years (87–89). On statues during the Middle Ages see Danielle Régnier-Bohler,“Le Simulacre Ambigu: Miroirs, Portraits et Statues,” Nouvelle Révue de Psychanalyse 34 (1986): 91–106 and Emanuèle Baumgartner,“Le Temps des automates,” Le Nombre du temps: en hommage à Paul Zumthor (Paris: Champion, 1988), pp. 15–21. 10. In an article on doubles in Thomas’s Tristan, for example,Toril Moi makes no mention of the statue. She analyzes the relationship between the two living Iseuts and that between Tristan and the real Iseut,but does not comment on the statue of Iseut. See “ ‘She Died Because She Came Too Late’: Knowledge, Doubles and Death in Thomas’s Tristan,” Exemplaria 4 (1992): 105–133. Studies of the statue scene include Aurelio Roncaglia, “La Statua d’Isotta,” Cultura Neolatina 31 (1971): 41–67, which analyzes the Salle aux images as a product of art and memory and Leslie W.Rabine’s “Love and the New Patriarchy:Tristan and Isolde,” Tristan and Isolde: A Casebook, ed. and intro. Joan Trasker Grimbert (New York and London:Garland Publishing Co., 1995), pp. 37–74. 11. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,” Tristan et Iseut: les poèmes françaises, la saga norroise, trans. Daniel Lacroix and Philippe Walter (Lettres Gothiques, Librairie Générale Française, 1989), p. 515. 12. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 515. 13. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,” p. 515. 14. See Michael Benskin,Tony Hunt and Ian Short,“Un Nouveau Fragment du Tristan de Thomas,” Romania 113, (1992–1995): 289–319. 15. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 582. 16. See Body and Society, p. 434. Brown describes Augustine’s distress at the human will’s frailty, legacy of Adam and Eve. Before the Fall, the bodies of Adam and Eve responded to their wills.This meant that what they could not have, they did not want, and in effect that they could have whatever they wanted.“In Adam and Eve’s first state,”Brown continues,“sexual desire was not absent, but it coincided perfectly with the conscious will: it would have introduced no disruptive element into the clear serenity of their marriage.” N OTES 277

17. All quotations and translations from Stewart Gregory’s Thomas of Britain: Tristan (New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).Translations given on facing pages. Quoted by lines. 445–446. 18. DCD, book 14, chap. 15, line 34–35, p. 437; trans. p. 575. 19. DCD, book 14, chap. 6, lines 5–6, p. 437; trans. p. 555. 20. DCD, book 14, chap. 6, lines 5–6, p. 421; trans. p. 555–556. 21. DCD, book 14, chap. 6, lines 9–13, p. 421; trans. p. 555–556. 22. See also Gerard J. Brault’s article on the situation of the four,“Entre ces quatre ot estrange amor: Thomas’Analysis of the Tangled Relationships of Mark,Isolt, Tristan, and Isolt of the White Hands,” Romania 114 (1996): 70–89. 23. Frappier,“Structure et sens du Tristan,” p. 265. 24. Rabine,“Love and the New Patriarchy:Tristan and Isolde.” p.71. 25. Rabine,“Love and the New Patriarchy,”p. 71. 26. Rabine,“Love and the New Patriarchy,”pp. 71–72. 27. Hans Belting, Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image Before the Era of Art, trans. Edmond Jephcott (Chicago, IL and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994), p. 330. 28. Enneads,p.250. 29. See William of Conches, Glosae super Platonem, ed. Edouard Jeauneau (Paris: Vrin, 1965), p. 176. 30. Philippe Walter, Le Gant de verre: le mythe de Tristan et Yseut (La Gacilly: Editions Artus, 1990), p. 235. 31. See Paull Franklin Baum,“The Young Man Betrothed to a Statue.”See also Lucy Polak,“The Two Caves of Love in the Tristan by Thomas,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 33 (1970): 652–669, especially 60–63. 32. The Latin source, found in manuscript 18134, fol. 153 of the Bibliothèque Nationale’s Latin collection has been printed by Adolfo Mussafia.See Baum, “Young Man Betrothed to a statue,”p. 549. 33. Sister Mary Vincentine Gripkey cites evidence from Lanfranc that the miracles constituted an oral tradition. See The Blessed Virgin Mary as Mediatrix in the Latin and Old French Legend prior to the Fourteenth Century (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1938), p. 31. 34. Gautier de Coinci,Deux Miracles de la Sainte Vierge,ed.Erik Rankka (Uppsla: Almquist & Wirksells Boktryckeri AB, 1955), p. 109. 35. The relationship between material sign and divine reality was complicated, and this is why T homas chose to represent the mind/body problem in terms of an analysis of images.As I suggest in my reading of the Lai de Narcisus, the image was considered simultaneously valuable—Christianity of the twelfth century defined itself in terms of the images it produced—and dangerous.As material objects, images contained contradictions that medieval discourse about the relationship between God’s and earthly reality attempted to rec- oncile. In their materiality, images could not help but draw attention to the impossible gulf between the earthly and the divine, a gulf that was privileged by the Incarnation whereby an immaterial God assumed a material form. The Incarnation authorized a material object to act as a medium to God. 278 N OTES

But while the Incarnation legitimated the icon’s use, various discourses sustained the perplexing issues this use raised.They also posed a risk to their viewers who might become entranced with their material beauty, as did Dané and Narcisus.While it could be explained under what circumstances one should use an icon, the nature of the union one might hope to achieve in this way remained inexplicable, and this discrepancy is picked up and applied by Thomas to his scenes in the Salle aux images. 36. Once again this scene survives only in the Norse translation. Citations from this translation are from “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 632. 37. Polak,“The Two Caves,”p. 68. 38. Polak,“The Two Caves,”p. 67. 39. Georges Duby, Le Temps des cathédrales: l’art et la société 980–1420 (Paris: Gallimard, 1976), p. 339. My translation. 40. James Snyder, Medieval Art: Painting-Sculpture-Architecture Fourth—Fourteenth Century (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1989), p. 245. 41. Snyder, Medieval Art,p.245. 42. Master Gregorious: The Marvels of Rome, trans. and commentary John Osborne (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1987), p. 26. 43. For the reaction of travelers to Rome in the twelfth century see James Bruce Ross,“A Study of Twelfth-Century Interest in the Antiquities of Rome,”in Medieval and Historiographical Essays in Honour of James Westfall Thompson,ed. James Cate and Eugene Anderson (Chicago,IL:University of Chicago Press, 1938), pp. 302–321. 44. Polak suggests a similarity between automatons and Iseut’s statue in “The Two Caves.” 45. A figure stamping on a bronze dwarf appears in Master Gregorious’s recounting of the marvels of Rome.The bronze statue of a rider before the papal palace, identified by Gregorious as Constantine,Theodoric, Marcus, or Quintus Quirinus, is described as follows:“[U]nder the hoofs there is a sort of dwarf, who is being trodden upon. He makes a wonderful image of the agonies of death” (p. 20). 46. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,” p. 637. 47. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,” p. 635. 48. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 635. 49. On the relationship between love and loss see Brent A. Pitts, “Absence, Memory, and the Ritual of Love in Thomas’s Roman de Tristan,” French Review 63 (1990): 790–799. 50. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 636. 51. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 637. 52. “La Saga de Tristan et Yseut,”p. 641. 53. Frederick Whitehead,“The Early French Tristan Poems,” in R.S. Loomis, ed., Arthurian Literature in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1959), p. 143. 54. Belting, Likeness and Presence, p. 410. 55. Conrad Rudolph, Artistic Change at Saint-Denis (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990),p.13. N OTES 279

56. Jean Wirth, L’Image médiévale: naissance et développements (Paris: Klincksieck, 1989), p. 156. 57. Frappier,“Structure et sens du Tristan,” p. 265. 58. Frappier,“Structure et sens du Tristan,” p. 265. 59. Frappier,“Structure et sens du Tristan,”p. 275. 60. Frappier,“Structure et sens du Tristan,”p. 454. 61. On this see Peggy McCracken, The Romance of Adultery: Queenship and Sexual Transgression in Old French Literature (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998), p. 101. 62. On the text’s moral aspects see Nancy Freeman Regalado, “Tristan and Renart: Two Tricksters,” L’Esprit Créateur 16,1 (1976): 30–38, and Barbara Nelson Sargent-Baur, “La dimension morale dans le Roman de Tristan de Béroul,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 31 (1988): 49–56. 63. My indebtedness to E. Jane Burns’s reading of this pivotal scene is obvious. See “How Lovers Lie Together: Infidelity and Fictive Discourse in the Roman de Tristan,” Tristania 8,2 (1983): 15–30, and Bodytalk:When Women Speak in Old French Literature (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993), pp. 203–240. 64. Decretales Gregorii IX (Liber Extra), Corpus iuris canonici, ed. Emil Friedberg and Aemilius Richter, 2 vols. (Graz: Akademische Druck, 1959), vol. 2, Titulus 8: De coniugio leprosorum, Cap. 2. My translation. 65. Keith Burgess-Jackon, Rape:A Philosophical Investigation (Aldershot, England: Dartmouth Publishing Co., 1996), pp. 18–37. Burgess-Jackson explains that the expression “persuasive definition” originated with Charles L. Stevenson in “Persuasive Definitions,” Mind 47 ( July l 1938), pp. 331–350. 66. Trudy Govier,A Practical Study of Argument, 3rd ed. (Belmont, CA:Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1992), p. 96, quoted in Burgess-Jackson, pp. 20–21. 67. R. Howard Bloch, Medieval French Literature and Law (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1977), p. 247. 68. Bloch, Medieval French Literature pp. 247–248. 69. See also John Fisher,“Tristan and Courtly Adultery,” Comparative Literature 9, 2 (1957): 150–164. Fisher argues that Tristan and Mark represent the vestiges of a matrilineal kinship and inheritance in opposition to the barons, who represent the patrilineal system. 70. Roland Carron, Enfant et parenté dans la France médiévale: Xe-XIIIe siecles, (Genève: Droz, 1989), p.9. 71. Carron, Enfant et parenté p.6. 72. Peggy McCracken, The Romance of Adultery,p.101. 73. Courtliness,p.62. 74. Courtliness, p. 62. 75. Pauline Stafford, Queens, Concubines, and Dowagers:The King’s Wife in the Early Middle Ages (Athens, GA:The University of Georgia Press, 1983), p. 3. 76. Christiane Marchello-Nizia, “Amour courtois, société masculine et figure du pouvoir,’ ” Annales: Economies, Sociétés, Civilisations 36 (1981): 981. 77. Geneviève Bührer-Thierry, “La Reine adultère,’ ” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 35 (1992): 301. 280 N OTES

78. Although the episode of the dragon does not appear in Béroul’s version, in the exculpatory letter Tristan has written to Marc after the love potion has worn off, he alludes to the act. See lines 2556–2561. 79. André Poulet, “Capetian Women and the Regency: The Genesis of a Vocation,’ ” Medieval Queenship, ed. John Carmi Parsons (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993), p. 115. 80. Louise Olga Fradenburg, “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship,” Women and Sovereignty, ed. Louise Olga Fradenburg (Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press, 1992), p. 5. 81. Annette Weiner, Inalienable Possessions:The Paradox of Keeping-While-Giving (Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, 1992). 82. Weiner, Inalienable Possessions, p.6. 83. Louise Fradenberg, City, Marriage,Tournament: Arts of Rule in Late Medieval Scotland (Madison,WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1991), p. 75. 84. Natalie Zemon Davis, “Boundaries and the Sense of Self in Sixteenth- Century France,’”Reconstructing Individualism:Autonomy,Individuality,and the Self in Western Thought, ed.Thomas C. Heller, Morton Sosna, and David E. Wellbery (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986), p. 56.

6 The Magister Amoris and his Willful Lovers: Cligés and the Chevalier de la Charrete 1. Brigitte Cazelles, The Unholy Grail: a Social Reading of Chrétien de Troyes’s Conte du Graal (Stanford, CA Stanford University Press, 1996), p. 226. 2. Cazelles, Unholy Grail, p. 226. 3. Les Romans de Chrétien de Troyes: Cligés, ed. Alexandre Micha (Paris: Champion, 1970), cited by line, lines 1–3. 4. All translations of Cligés from Chrétien de Troyes: Arthurian Romances, trans. W. W. C o m fort (London: Dent, 1975), cited by page number, p. 91. 5. Michelle A.Freeman,The Poetics of “Translatio Studii” and “Conjointure”:Chrétien de Troyes’s “Cligès” (Lexington, KY: French Forum Publ., 1979), p. 167. On Chrétien’s borrowings from the romans antiques see Renate Blumenfeld- Kosinski, “Chrétien de Troyes as Reader of the Romans Antiques,” Philological Quarterly 64 (1985): 398–405. Evelyn Birge Vitz has suggested that Chrétien may not have been a cleric at all. See “Chrétien de Troyes: clerc ou ménestrel?” Poétique 81 (1990): 21–42. However, the suggestion has not met with wide- spread agreement. Joseph Duggan offers a response in The Romances of Chrétien de Troyes (New Haven, CT and London:Yale University Press, 2001), p. 27. 6. A.G. Van Hamel, “Cligès et Tristan,” Romania 33 (1904): 465–489. He concludes: “Ne semble-t-il pas que le poète de Cligés ait voulu dire à ses lecteurs:‘Mon héros, plus ingénieux que Tristan, n’a pas besoin de se cacher; il a eu soin d’installer dans la maison de Jehan un oiseau qui sera, pour le public, le motif de ses fréquentes visites: puis, en arrivant, il n’y trouve pas, comme Tristan, pour la baiser et l’acoler, une image de sa bien-aimée, mais sa maîtresse elle-même en chair et en os?’ ” (p. 480). N OTES 281

7. The bibliography surrounding this theme is enormous.The following works represent the principal positions. Gaston Paris,“Cligès,” Mélanges de littérature française du Moyen Age (Paris: Mario Roques, 1912), pp. 229–327; Arthur Franz, “Die reflektierte Handlung im Cliges,” Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 47 (1927): 61–86; E. Hoepffner, “Chrétien de Troyes et Thomas d’Angleterre,” Romania 55 (1929): 1–16;Alexandre Micha,“Eneas et Cligès” et “Tristan et Cligès”: de la chanson de geste au roman (Geneva: Droz, 1976), pp. 55–61 et pp. 63–72; Jean Frappier, Le Roman breton, Chrétien de Troyes: “Cligès,”(Paris: CDU, 1951); D.W.Robertson, Jr.,“Chrétien’s Cligés and the Ovidian Spirit,” Comparative Literature 7 (1955): 32–42;Valeria Bertolucci, “Di nuovo su Cligès e Tristan,” Studi Francesi 18 (1962): 401–413; Peter Haidu,Aesthetic Distance in Chrétien de Troyes:Irony and Comedy in “Cligès”and “Perceval,” (Geneva: Droz, 1968) and “Au Début du roman, l’ironie,” Poétique 9 (1978): 443–466; P.R. Lonigan, “The Cligés and the Tristan Legend,” Studi Francesi 53 (1974): 202–203; Michelle A. Freeman, see note above; Peter Noble, Love and Marriage in Chrétien de Troyes (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1982); Lucie Polak, “Cligès, Fénice et l’arbre d’amour,” Romania 93 (1972): 303–316 and Chrétien de Troyes:“Cligès” (London: Grant and Cutler, 1983); Helen Laurie, “Cligès and the Legend of Abelard and Héloïse,” Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 107 (1991):324–342;David J.Shirt,“Cligès, a Twelfth-Century Matrimonial Casebook?” Forum for Modern Language Studies 18 (1982): 75–89. 8. Jean Frappier, Chrétien de Troyes: l’homme et l’oeuvre (Paris: Hatier, 1968), p. 113. Frappier also discusses the relationship in “Structure et sens du Tristan: version commune, version courtoise,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 6 (1963): 255–288; 441–454. “Plus subtil ou moins audacieux, Chrétien de Troyes a senti mieux que lui combien on s’exposait à l’insuccès en voulant attirer le Tristan dans l’orbite de la fine amor; aussi, dans son Cligés, le poète champenois ne s’est pas risqué à composer un néo-Tristan sans recourir à un subterfuge: il a inventé une autre intrigue, imaginé des per- sonages nouveaux” (p. 266). See Joan Tasker Grimbert’s response to Frappier in “On Fenice’s Vain Attempts to Revise a Romantic Archetype and Chrétien’s Fabled Hostility to the Tristan Legend,” Reassessing the Heroine in Medieval French Literature, ed. Kathy M. Krause (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2001), p. 87. 9. Frappier, Chrétien de Troyes, p. 113. 10. See D.W. Robertson, “The Idea of Fame in Chrétien’s Cligès,” Studies in Philology 69 (1972): 414–33. 11. Polak, Chétien de Troyes,p.62 12. Haidu, Aesthetic Distance, p. 92. 13. Haidu, Aesthetic Distance,p.93. 14. Haidu, Aesthetic Distance, p. 110. 15. Haidu,“L’Ironie,”pp. 464–465. 16. Noble, Love and Marriage, p. 99. 17. Noble, Love and Marriage, p. 99. 282 N OTES

18. On the Facetus see Peter Dronke, “Pseudo-Ovid, Facetus, and the Arts of Love,” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 11 (1974): 126–131. 19. “The Facetus:or,The Art of Courtly Living,” trans. Alison Goddard Elliott, Allegorica 2, 2 (1977): 33. 20. Facetus, pp. 34–37. 21. Courtliness,p.62. 22. Courtliness,p.63. 23. Peggy McCracken, The Romance of Adultery: Queenship and Sexual Transgression in Old French Literature (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998), p. 38. See also her article “The Queen’s Secret: Adultery and Political Structure in the Feudal Courts of the Old French Romance,” Romanic Review 86 (1995): 289–306. 24. David J. Shirt,“Cligés.A Twelfth-Century Matrimonial Case-book?” 84–85. 25. James Brundage, “The Treatment of Marriage in the Questiones Londinenses (MS Royal 9.E.VII),” Manuscripta 19 (1975): 90. 26. Brundage,“The Treatment of Marriage,”p. 91. 27. Robert W.Hanning,“Courtly Contexts for Urban cultus: Responses to Ovid in Chrétien’s Cligès and Marie’s Guigemar,” Symposium 35 (1981):40. 28. Hanning,“Courtly Contexts for Urban cultus,” p. 41. 29. Ars, p. 164–165. 30. Haidu, Aesthetic Distance, p. 106. 31. René Nelli, Le Roman de Flamenca: un art d’aimer occitanien du XIIIe siècle (Beziers: Institut d’estudis occitans, 1989), p. 25. 32. Lionel J. Friedman,“Occulta Cordis,” Romance Philology 11 (1957): 107. 33. Gabriele Taylor, Pride, Shame, and Guilt: Emotions of Self-Assessment (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), p. 54. The concept of “shame-culture” was first articulated by E.R. Dodds in The Greek and the Irrational (University of California Press, 1951). Dodds traces the development of a sense of individ- ual responsibility in a universe previously believed to be controlled by the gods. Another seminal work on “shame-culture” is Ruth Benedict’s on the Japanese, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1967). 34. Taylor, Pride, Shame, and Guilt, p.55. 35. Enneads, p. 150. 36. See Jean-Pierre Vernant, Religions, Histoires, Raisons (Paris: François Maspero, 1979).Vernant writes: “C’est en opposant plus nettement le paraître à l’être, en les coupant l’un de l’autre, au lieu de les associer en des équilibres divers, comme on l’avait fait avant lui, que Platon confère à l’image sa forme d’ex- istence propre, qu’il la dote d’un statut phénoménal particulier. Définie comme semblance, l’image possède un caractère distinctif d’autant plus mar- qué que l’apparence n’est plus considéré désormais comme un aspect, un mode, un niveau de la réalité, une sorte de dimension du réel, mais comme une catégorie spécifique posée en face de l’être dans un rapport ambigu de ‘faux semblant’ ” (It is in opposing more sharply appearance to being, in separating one from the other, instead of associating them in varying pro- portions, as had been done before him, that Plato confers upon the image its N OTES 283

own form of existence, to which he gives a particular phenomenological status. Defined as appearance, the image possesses a distinct character all the more marked because it does not exist as an aspect, a mode, a level of reality, a sort of dimension of the real, but as a specific category poised across from “being” in the ambiguous relationship of “false-seeming”) (p. 131). 37. See Stephen G. Nichols, “Picture, Image, and Subjectivity in Medieval Culture,” Modern Language Notes 108 (1993): 617–637, especially 628–637. 38. Jean-Claude Schmitt, La Raison des gestes dans l’occident médiéval (Paris: Gallimard, 1990), p. 18. 39. Schmitt, La Raison, p. 176. 40. Guillelmi a Sancto Theodorico Opera omnia, Par. II, ed.Paul Verdeyen, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis 87 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1997), lines 16–17, p. 159. My translation. On the notion of conjugal relations as sign of love in Rupert of Deutz see Hubert Silvestre, “La Prière des époux selon Rupert de Liège,” Studi Medievali 24 (1983): 725–728. It is interesting to note that both William and Rupert were born in Liège in around 1080. I am grateful to Constant Mews for bringing Silvestre’s article to my attention. 41. Guillelmi a Sancto Theodorico, lines 20–21, p. 159. 42. Grover A. Zinn, Jr.“Mandala Symbolism and Use in the Mysticism of Hugh of St.Victor,” History of Religions 12 (1973): 318. See also Zinn’s “Hugh of St.Victor and the Ark of Noah: A New Look,” Church History 40 (1971): 261–272. 43. The introduction does not appear in the PL edition of De Arca Noe Morali. It is included in the translation of A Little Book About Constructing Noah’s Ark by Jessica Weiss in The Medieval Craft of Memory: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, ed. Mary Carruthers and Jan M. Ziolkowski (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), p. 45. 44. PL 176, 635A. My translation. 45. PL 176, 622A. My translation. 46. See Norris J. Lacy,“Form and Pattern in Cligés,” Orbis Litterarum 15 (1970): 307–313. 47. See the articles of Ruth Cline and Guido Favati for detailed analyses of the imagery and language of the love attacks in Cligés. Ruth H. Cline, “Heart and Eyes,” Romance Philology 25 (1971–1972): 263–297; Guido Favati,“Una Traccia de cultura neoplatonica in Chrétien de Troyes: il tema degli occhi come specchio (Cligés, vv.629–749),” Studi in onore di Carlo Pellegrini (Tur in: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1963), pp. 3–13. 48. Cicero, De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Divinitatione, trans.William Armistead Falconer (London:William Heinemann Ltd.;New York:G.P.Putnam’s Sons, 1927), pp. 130–131. 49. On the medieval friendship treatises stemming from Cicero’s De Amicitia see M.M. Davy, Un Traité de l’amour du XIIe siècle: Pierre de Blois (Paris: E. De Boccard, 1932); E.Vansteenberghe,“Deux Théoreticiens de l’amitié du XIIe siècle: Pierre de Blois et Aelred de Riéval,” Revue des Sciences Religieuses 12 (1932): 572–588; Anselme Hoste, “Le Traité pseudo-Augustienien De Amicitia. Un Résume d’un ouvrage authentique d’Aelred de Rievaulx,” 284 N OTES

Revue des Etudes Augustiennes 6 (1960): 155–160; Jacques Thomas, “Un Art d’aimer du XIIIe siècle: L’Amistié de vraie amour,” Revue Belge de philologie et d’histoire 36 (1958): 786–811. 50. On the nature of friendship in monastic life see Brian Patrick McGuire, Friendship and Community: the Monastic Experience, 350–1250 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1988) and Friendship and Faith: Cistercian Men, Women, and their Stories, 1100–1200 (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2002). 51. De Spiritali Amicitia, Aelredi Rievallensis: Opera Omnia, Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis 1 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1971), I.13, p. 291. Translations Spiritual Friendship, trans. Mary Eugenia Laker, SSND, intro. Douglass Roby (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1977), p.54. 52. Charrette, p. 520. 53. Quotations from Lancelot,or,the The Knight of the Cart,ed.and trans.William W. Kibler (New York and London: Garland Publishing Com., 1981). Translations on facing pages. Quoted by line and page. 54. See the article of Jean Rychner, “Le Prologue du ‘Chevalier de la Charrette,’ ” Vox Romanica 26 (1967): 1–23, and Jean Frappier’s analysis of this article, “Le Prologue du Chevalier de la Charrette,” Romania 93 (1972): 337–377 for the debate over the meaning of the word sens in the prologue. The information Chrétien provides about his reasons for composing the romance in his prologue has been interpreted to support both perspectives. 55. Jeffrey Jerome Cohen, “Masoch/Lancelotism,” New Literary History 28 (1997): 231–232. 56. Peter Noble, Love and Marriage in Chrétien de Troyes. 57. There are dissenters to this perspective. Emanuel J. Mickel, Jr. argues that honor, not love, is the true issue of the romance in “The Theme of Honor in Chrétien’s Lancelot,” Zeitung für romanische Forschungen 91 (1975): 244. Donald Maddox also disagrees with the traditional assessment of the love affair between Lancelot and Guenevere as forming the sens of the romance. Citing Godefroiz de Leigni’s conclusion as evidence, he notes that the Godefroiz claims to have brought the story to completion. Clearly the love story is not finished, but other elements of the story are. Therefore, some other aspect of the story must be considered its sens. Maddox explains: “The intent here is apparent: if the love intrigue lacks closure, the matter on which the Charrete is based is itself complete. At the end, the new narrator must therefore forestall any possible disappointment on the part of the public. Ruled out is any possibility that Godefroiz, a less capable clerk, has not entirely finished his master’s work; he emphasizes that the project which at the outset proclaimed a perfect harmony between ‘matter and meaning’ (v. 26) has been fully realized. If indeed there is meaning in this matter that must not be exceeded, it must thus obtain in more than just the scan- dalous love intrigue that remains unresolved at the end of the work.” The Arthurian Romances of Chrétien de Troyes: Once and Future Fictions N OTES 285

(Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1991),p.49.In this regard,see also Edmund Condren, “The Paradox of Chrétien’s Lancelot,” Modern Language Notes 85 (1970): 434–453. Condren argues that Chrétien emphatically de-emphasizes the adulterous nature of Lancelot and Guenievere’s relationship. 58. See Roberta Krueger, “Desire, Meaning, and the Female Reader: The Problem in Chrétien’s Chevalier,” The Passing of Arthur: New Essays in Arthurian Tradition, eds. Christopher Baswell and William Sharpe (New York: Garland, 1988), pp. 31–51. 59. Marie-Noëlle Lefay-Toury,“Roman breton et mythes courtois. L’évolution du personnage féminin dans les romans de Chrétien de Troyes,” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 15 (1972): 197. 60. Kathryn Gravdal,“Chrétien de Troyes, Gratian, and the Medieval Romance of Sexual Violence,” Signs 17 (1992): 564. 61. Charrette,p.517. 62. Charrette, p. 530. 63. See Roberta Krueger,“Desire,Meaning,and the Female Reader,”pp.31–51. 64. Lovesickness,p.56. 65. Lovesickness,p.56. 66. Lovesickness, pp. 200–201. 67. Quotations from Lancelot, or, Knight of the Cart, Translations on facing pages. Quoted by line and page. 68. See also Gerald of Wales’s discussion of Louis VII’s illness supposedly caused by his distance from his wife,Alis. His physicians prescribed an affair with a young women. However, Louis refused to commit adultery,claiming that his spiritual health was more important to him than his physical well-being. De Principis Instructione in Giraldi Cambrensis Opera, ed. J.S. Brewer, vol. 8 of 8 (London: Longman, 1861–1891), pp. 131–133. 69. Lovesickness, pp. 200–201. 70. Lovesickness,p.41. 71. These lines are disputed: in the Guiot manuscript the line reads “Ha roi se vos ...”rather than ami. Although Kibler bases his edition on the Guiot manuscript, at this point he departs in favor of ami, which seems a better alternative for reasons he explains in his note on p. 298. 72. John of Salisbury, Policraticus: Of the Frivolities of Courtiers and the Footprints of Philosophers, ed. and translated by Cary J. Nederman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), p.28. 73. De Spiritali Amicitia, I.15, p. 291, trans. p. 54. 74. Jacques Ribard, Chrétien de Troyes, le Chevalier de la charrette. Essai d’interpréta- tion symbolique (Paris, Nizet, 1972). 75. The Lost Love Letters of Heloise and Abelard: Perceptions of Dialogue in Twelfth- Century France, Constant J. Mews with trans. by Neville Chiavaroli and Constant J. Mews (New York:Palgrave Press, 2001), p. 229. 76. De Spiritali Amicitia, II.15, p. 305, trans. p. 73. 77. De Spiritali Amicitia, II.11, p. 304, trans. p. 73. 78. De Spiritali Amicitia, I.36, 295, trans. p. 59. 286 N OTES

Conclusion 1. John C. Moore,“Love in Twelfth-Century France,” Traditio 24 (1968): 434. 2. Bruno Roy, Une culture de l’équivoque (Montreal: University of Montreal Press; Paris: Champion-Slatkine, 1992), p. 62. 3. Moore,“Love in Twelfth-Century France,”p. 443. 4. Reddy, p.55. 5. Gerald Morgan, “The Conflict of Love and Chivalry in Le Chevalier de la Charrette,” Romania 102 (1981): 177. 6. Morgan,“Love in Twelfth-Century France,”p. 175. 7. A.R. Press,“The Adulterous Nature of Fin’Amors:A Re-Examination of the Theory,” Forum for Language Studies 6 (1970): 328. 8. Press,“The Adulterous Nature of Fin’Amors,” p. 336. 9. On this tendency see Jean-Charles Payen, “La Destruction des mythes courtois dans le roman arthurien: la femme dans le roman en vers après Chrétien de Troyes,” Revue des Langues Romanes 78 (1969): 213–225 and by the same author “La Crise du mariage à la fin du XIIIème siècle d’après la littérature française du temps,” Famille et parenté dans l’occident medieval, ed. Georges Duby and Jacques Le Goff (Rome: Ecole Française de Rome, 1977) 413–426; Beate Schmolke-Hasselmann, The Evolution of Arthurian Romance: the Verse Tradition from Chrétien to Froissart, trans. Margaret and Roger Middleton. (Cambridge and New York:Cambridge University Press, 1998); Keith Busby, Gauvain in old French Literature (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1980). 10. Michel Zink, The Invention of Literary Subjectivity, trans. David Sices (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), p. 37. 11. Eugene Vinaver, “Landmarks in Arthurian Romance,” The Expansion and Transformation of Courtly Literature,ed.Nathaniel B.Smith and Joseph T.Snow (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1980), p. 24. 12. Gabrielle Spiegel, Romancing the Past: the Rise of Vernacular Prose Historiography in Thirteenth-Century France (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1992), pp. 112–113. Also see Sandra Hindman for an account of how the romance was read differently by different groups during the thirteenth century, some emphasizing the martial aspect of those works over the amorous. Sealed in Parchment: Rereadings of Knighthood in the Illuminated Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes (Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994). 13. Lamberti Ardensis historia comitum Ghisnensium, Monumenta Germaniae historica inde ab anno Christi quingentesimo usque ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum, Scriptorum 24 (Hannover: Hahn, 1826–1934), p. 605. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Texts and Translations Aelred of Rievaulx. Aelredi Rievallensis: Opera Omnia. Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis 1–2a and b.Turnhout: Brepols, 1971. ———. Spiritual Friendship. Trans. Mary Eugenia Laker, SSND, intro. Douglass Roby.Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1977. Alan of Lille. Anticlaudianus or the Good and Perfect Man. Trans. James J. Sheridan. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1973. ———. Anticlaudianus. Ed. Robert Bossuat. Paris:Vrin, 1955. ———. Liber poenitentialis. Analecta mediaevalia Namurcensia 17–18. Louvain: Éditions Nauwelaerts, 1965. ———. Plaint of Nature. Trans. and commentary James J. Sheridan. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1980. Arnauld of Villanova. (Opera Arnaldi Omnia.) Opera Medica Omnia III:Tractatus de amore heroico. Epistola de dosi tyriacalium medicinarum. Ed. Michael R. McVaugh. Barcelona: University of Barcelona, 1985. Augustine. Confessions. Ed. and commentary James J. O’Donnell. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. ———. Confessions. Trans., intro., and notes Henry Chadwick. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. ———. Concerning Against the Pagans.Trans.Henry Bettenson, intro. John O’Meara. London: Penguin Books, 1984. ———. De Bono Coniugali. Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 41. Vienna: F. Tempsky,1887. ———. De Civitate Dei. Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 48–49. Turnhout: Brepols, 1955. Bernardus Silvestris. Commentary on the First Six Book of Virgil’s Aeneid.Trans., intro. and notes Earl G. Schreiber and Thomas E. Maresca. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1979. ———. The Cosmographia of Bernardus Silvestris. Trans., intro. and notes Winthrop Wetherbee. New York:Columbia University Press, 1973. Béroul. The Romance of Tristan.Trans.Alan S. Fedrick. London: Penguin, 1970. ———. Tristran et Iseut: poème du XIIe siècle. Ed. and trans. Herman Braet and Guy Raynaud de Lage. Paris-Louvain: Peeters, 1989. 288 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boethius. The Consolation of Philosophy. Ed. and intro. Irwin Edman. New York: Random House, 1943. Chrétien de Troyes. Chrétien de Troyes: Arthurian Romances. Trans. W.W. Comfort. London: Dent, 1975. ———. Le Chevalier au lion (Yvain). Ed. Mario Roques. Paris: Champion, 1963. ———. Lancelot, or, the The Knight of the Cart. Ed. and trans. William W. Kibler. NewYork and London:Garland Publishing Com., 1981. ———. Les Romans de Chrétien de Troyes: Cligés. Ed. Alexandre Micha. Paris: Champion, 1970. Cicero. De Senectute, De Amicitia,De Divinitatione.Trans.William Armistead Falconer. London:William Heinemann Ltd.; New York: G.P.Putnam’s Sons, 1927. Corpus Iuris Canonici. Eds. Emil Friedberg and Aemilius Richters. 2 vols. Graz: Akademische Druck, 1959. Eneas: A Twelfth-Century Romance. Trans. John A. Yunck.New York:Columbia University Press, 1974. Epistolae duorum amantium. Briefe Abaelards und Heloises? Ed.and intro. Ewald Könsgen. Leiden: Brill, 1974. “The Facetus: or,The Art of Courtly Living.” Trans.Alison Goddard Elliott.Allegorica 2:2 (1977): 34–37. Floire et Blanchflor. Ed. Margaret Pelan. Paris: Belles Lettres, 1956. Gautier de Coinci. Deux Miracles de la Sainte Vierge. Ed. Erik Rankka. Uppsala: Almquist & Wirksells Boktryckeri AB, 1955. Gerald of Wales. De Principis Instructione. Vol.8 of Giraldi Cambrensis Opera. Ed. J.S. Brewer. 8 vols. London: Longman, 1861–1891. Hugh of St.Victor.“A Little Book About Constructing Noah’s Ark.”Trans.Jessica Weiss. The Medieval Craft of Memory: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Eds. Mary Carruthers and Jan M. Ziolkowski. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002. pp. 41–70. Huygens, R.B.C. Accessus ad Auctores. Bruxelles: Latomus, 1954. John of Salisbury. Memoirs of the Papal Court. Trans., intro. and notes Marjorie Chibnall. London: Nelson, 1956. ———. Metalogicon. Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis 98. Ed. J.B. Hall.Turnhout: Brepols, 1991. ———. The Metalogicon of John of Salisbury:A Twelfth-Century Defense of the Verbal and Logical Arts of the Trivium.Trans., intro. and notes Daniel B. McGarry. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1962. ———. Policraticus: Of the Frivolities of Courtiers and the Footprints of Philosophers. Ed.and trans. Cary J. Nederman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. John Scottus Eriugena. Johannis Scotti.Annotationes in Marcianum. Ed. Cora E. Lutz. New York:Kraus Reprint Co., 1970. The Lai de l’ombre. Ed. Margaret E.Winters. Birmingham,AL: Summa Publications, Inc., 1986. Le Lai de Narcisus: poème du XIIe siècle. Ed. M.M. Pelan and N.C.W.Spence. Paris: Belles Lettres, 1964. Lambert of Ardres. Lamberti Ardensis historia comitum Ghisnensium. Monumenta Germaniae historica inde ab anno Christi quingentesimo usque ad annum BIBLIOGRAPHY 289

millesimum et quingentesimum. Scriptorum 24. 32 vols. Hannover: Hahn, 1826–1934. ———. History of the Counts of Guines and Lords of Ardres. Trans. Leah Shopkow. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000. The Letters of Abelard and Heloise. Trans. and intro. Betty Radice. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1974. The Life of Christina of Markyate:A Twelfth-Century Recluse. Ed. and trans. C.H.Talbot. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959. Martianus Capella. Martianus Capella and the Seven Liberal Arts.Trans.William Harris Stahl and Richard Johnson with E.L. Burge. 2 vols. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977. Master Gregorius. Master Gregorious: The Marvels of Rome. Trans. John Osborne. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1987. Matthew of Vendôme. Ars versificatoria.Vol.3 of Mathei Vindocinensis Opera. Ed. Franco Munari. 3 vols. Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1988. Migne, Jacques-Paul, ed. Patrologiae cursus completus, series Latina. 221 vols. Paris: Garnier, 1844–1864. Ordericus Vitalis. The Ecclesiastical History of Ordericus Vitalis. Ed. and trans. Marjorie Chibnall. 6 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969–1980. Ovid.Ars amandi and Remedia amoris.Vol.2 of Ovid in Six Volumes.Trans. J.H.Mozley and Rev. G.P. Goold. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985. ———. Heroides and Amores.Vol.1 of Ovid in Six Volumes.Trans.Grant Showerman. Loeb Classical Library.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986. ———. The Metamorphoses.Vols. 3 and 4 of Ovid in Six Volumes.Trans. Frank Justus Miller. Loeb Classical Library.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984. Peter Abelard. Historia Calamitatum. Ed. and intro. J. Monfrin. Paris: Vrin, 1962. ———. Peter Abelard’s Ethics.Trans. D.E.Luscombe. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971. Peter Damian. Letters. Trans. Owen J. Blum, O.F.M.Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1997. Peter Lombard. Petrus Lombardus. Sententiae. 2 vols. Grottaferrata: Ed. Collegii S. Bonaventurae ad Claras Aquas, 1971–1981. ..Trans.Stephen MacKenna.2nd ed.London:Faber and Faber Ltd., 1956. Remigius of Auxerre. Remigii Autissiodorensis commentum in Martianum Capellam. Ed. and intro. Cora E. Lutz. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1962–5. Roman d’Eneas: roman du XIIe siècle. Ed. J.J. Salverda de Grave. Paris: Champion, 1925–1929. Suger. The Deeds of Louis the Fat.Trans., intro., and notes Richard C. Cusimano and John Moorhead. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1992. Thomas. Thomas of Britain: Tristan. Ed. and trans. Stewart Gregory. New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991. Thomas of Chobham. Summa Confessorum.Ed. Rev. F. Broomfield. Analecta mediaevalia Namurcensia 25. Louvain: Éditions Nauwelaerts; Paris, Béatrice Nauwelaerts, 1968. 290 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Three Ovidian Tales of Love. Trans. and ed. Raymond Cormier. New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1986. Les Tristan en vers.Ed.and French trans. Jean-Charles Payen. Paris: Garnier, 1974. Tristan et Iseut: les poèmes français et la saga norroise.Trans. Daniel Lacroix et Philippe Walter. Lettres Gothiques: Librairie Générale Française, 1989. Walter Map. De Nugis Curialium.Trans. Montague R. Janes, ed. E. Sidney Hartland. London: Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, 1923. William of Conches. Glosae super Platonem. Ed. Edouard Jeauneau. Paris:Vrin, 1965. William of Newburgh. The History of English Affairs, Book I. Ed. and trans. P.G.Walsh and M. J. Kennedy.Warminster:Aris and Phillips, 1988. William of St.Thierry. Deux Traités de l’amour de Dieu: de la Contemplation de dieu; de la Nature et de la dignité de l’amour.Trans. M.-M. Davy. Paris:Vrin, 1953. ———. Guillelmi a Sancto Theodorico Opera omnia. Ed. Paul Verdeyen. Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Medievalis 87.Turnhout: Brepols, 1997.

Critical Studies Adler, Alfred. “Eneas and Lavinia: Puer et Puella Senes.” Romanische Forschungen 71 (1959): 73–91. Agamben, Giorgio. Stanzas:Word and Phantasm in Western Culture.Trans. Ronald L. Martinez. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1993. Allen, Peter L. The Art of Love:Amatory Fiction from Ovid to the Romance of the Rose. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992. Alton, E.H. and D.E.W.Wormell.“Ovid in the Mediaeval Classroom.” Hermathena 94 (1960): 21–38; (1961): 67–82. Amt, Emilie. The Accession of Henry II in England: Royal Government 1149–1159. Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.: The Boydell Press, 1993. Angeli,Giovanna.L’Eneas e i Primi Romanzi Volgari.Milan:Riccardo Ricciardi,1971. Astell,Ann W. The Song of Songs in the Middle Ages. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 1990. Austin, J.L. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard UP,1975. Baldwin, John W. “L’Ars amatoria au XIIe siècle en France: Ovide,Abélard,André le Chapelain et Pierre le Chantre.” Le couple, l’ami et le prochain: mélanges offerts à Georges Duby.Aix-en-Provence: University of Provence, 1992. pp. 19–29. ———. The Government of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1986. ———. The Language of Sex: Five Voices from Northern France Around 1200. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994. ———. Masters, Princes, and Merchants:The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle. 2 vols. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970. Baron, F.Xavier.“Love in Chrétien’s Charette: Revised Values and Isolation.” Modern Language Quarterly 34 (1973): 372–383. Barstow, Anne Llewellyn. Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy: The Eleventh- Century Debates. New York:The Edwin Mellon Press, 1982. BIBLIOGRAPHY 291

Bartlett, Robert. England under the Norman and Angevin Kings 1075–1225.Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000. Baswell,Christopher. “Men in the Roman d’Eneas:the Construction of Empire.” Medieval Masculinities: Regarding Men in the Middle Ages. Ed. Clare A. Lees. Minneapolis, MN and London: University of Minnesota Press, 1994. pp. 149–168. ———. Virgil in Medieval England: Figuring the Aeneid from the Twelfth Century to Chaucer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Baum, Paull Franklin. “The Young Man Betrothed to a Statue.” PMLA 34 (1919): 523–579. Baumgartner, Emanuèle.“Le Temps des automates.” Le Nombre du temps: en hommage à Paul Zumthor. Paris: Champion, 1988. pp. 15–21. Belting, Hans. Likeness and Presence:A History of the Image Before the Era of Art.Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Benedict, Ruth. The Chrysanthemum and the Sword. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1967. Benskin, Michael,Tony Hunt and Ian Short.“Un Nouveau Fragment du Tristan de Thomas.” Romania 113 (1992–1995): 289–319. Benton, John F. “The Court of Champagne as a Literary Center.” Speculum 36 (1961): 551–591. Benveniste, Henriette. “Les Enlèvements: stratégies matrimoniales, discours juridique et discours politique en France à la fin du Moyen Age.” Revue Historique 283 (1990): 13–35. Bertolucci,Valeria.“Di nuovo su Cligès e Tristan.” Studi Francesi 18 (1962): 401–413. Biernoff, Suzannah. Sight and Embodiment in the Middle Ages. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. Blakeslee, Merrit R. Love’s Masks: Identity, Intertextuality, and Meaning in the Old French Tristan Poems. Cambridge, England: D.S. Brewer, 1989. Bloch, R. Howard. Medieval French Literature and Law. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1977. ———. Medieval Misogyny and the Invention of Western Romantic Love. Chicago, IL and London: Chicago University Press, 1991. ———.“Mieux vaut tard que jamais.” Representations 36 (1991): 64–86. Blumenfeld-Kosinski, Renate. “Chrétien de Troyes as Reader of the Romans Antiques.” Philological Quarterly 64 (1985): 398–405. ———. “Old French Narrative Genres: Towards the Definition of the Roman Antique.” Romance Philology 34 (1980): 143–159. ———. Reading Myth: Classical Mythology and Its Interpretations in Medieval French Literature. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997. Boase, Roger. The Origin and Meaning of Courtly Love: A Critical Study of European Scholarship. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1977. Bond, Gerald A.“Composing Yourself: Ovid’s Heroides, Baudri of Bourgueil and the Problem of Persona.” Mediaevalia 13 (1989 for 1987): 83–117. ———. “ ‘Iocus Amoris’:The Poetry of Baudri of Bourgueil and the Formation of the Ovidian Subculture.” Traditio 42 (1986): 143–193. ———. The Loving Subject: Desire, Eloquence, and Power in Romanesque France. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995. 292 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Born, Lester K.“Ovid and Allegory.” Speculum 9 (1934): 362–379. Bouchard, Constance. “Every Valley Shall Be Exalted”: The Discourse of Opposites in Tw elfth-Century Thought. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2003. ———.“On the Possible Non-existence of Thomas,Author of Tristan and Isolde.” Modern Philology 79 (1981–1982): 66–72. ———. Rev. of Courtly Contradictions: The Emergence of the Literary Object in the Twelfth Century by Sarah Kay.On-line H-France Book Reviews, June, 2002. Brault, G.J. “Chrétien de Troye’s Lancelot: The Eye and the Heart.” Bibliographical Bulletin of the International Arthurian Society 24 (1972): 142–155. ———. “Entre ces quatre ot estrange amor: Thomas’ Analysis of the Tangled Relationships of Mark, Isolt,Tristan, and Isolt of the White Hands.” Romania 114 (1996): 70–89. Brooke, C.N.L. “Gregorian Reform in Action: Clerical Marriage in England, 1050–1200.” Cambridge Historical Journal 12 (1956): 1–21. ———. The Medieval Idea of Marriage. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980. Brown, Catherine. Contrary Things: Exegesis, Dialectic, and the Poetics of Didacticism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998. Brown, Peter. The Body and Society: Men, Women and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity. New York:Columbia University Press, 1988. Brownmiller, Susan. Against Our Will:Men,Women and Rape. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1975. Bruckner, Matilda Tomaryn. “An Interpreter’s Dilemma:Why Are There So Many Interpretations of Chrétien’s Chevalier de la Charrette?” Romance Philology 40 (1986): 159–180. Brundage, James A.Law,Sex,and Christian Society in Medieval Europe.Chicago,IL and London: University of Chicago Press, 1987. ———.“Rape and Seduction in the Medieval Canon Law.” Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church. Ed. Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1982, pp. 141–148. ———. Sex, Law and Marriage in the Middle Ages. Brookfield,VT: Variorum, 1993. ———. “The Treatment of Marriage in the Questiones Londinenses (MS Royal 9.E.VII).” Manuscripta 19 (1975): 86–97. Bugge, John. Virginitas: An Essay in the History of a Medieval Ideal. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1975. Bührer-Thierry, Geneviève.“La Reine adultère.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 35 (1992): 299–312. Burgess-Jackon, Keith. Rape: A Philosophical Investigation. Aldershot, England: Dartmouth Publishing Co., 1996. Burnley, J.D. “Fine Amor. Its Meaning and Context.” Review of English Studies 31 (1980): 129–148. Burns, E. Jane. Bodytalk:When Women Speak in Old French Literature. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. ———.“How Lovers Lie Together: Infidelity and Fictive Discourse in the Roman de Tristan.” Tristania 8, 2 (1983): 15–30. ———.“Speculum of the Courtly Lady:Women,Love, and Clothes.” The Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 29 (1999): 253–292. BIBLIOGRAPHY 293

Busby, Keith. Gauvain in old French Literature.Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1980. Cadden, Joan. Meanings of Sex Difference in the Middle Ages: Medicine, Science and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. ———. “Medieval Scientific and Medical Views of Sexuality: Questions of Propriety.” Medievalia et Humanistica 14 (1986): 157–171. Cadot,A.M.“Etude sur Piramus et Tisbé.” Romania 97 (1976): 433–461. Calabrese, Michael.“Ovid and the Female Voice in the De Amore and the Letters of Abelard and Heloise.” Modern Philology 95 (1997): 1–26. ———.Chaucer’s Ovidian Arts of Love.Gainesville,FL:University Press of Florida,1994. Calin,William. “Contre la fin’amorr? Contre la femme? Une relecture de textes du Moyen Age.” Courtly Literature: Culture and Context.Ed. Keith Busby and Erik Kooper.Amsterdam and Philadelphia,PA: John Benjamins Publishing Co.,1990. pp. 61–82. Camille, Michael. The Gothic Idol:Ideology and Image-Making in Medieval Art Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. ———.“Manuscript Illumination and the Art of Copulation.” Constructing Medieval Sexuality. Eds. Karma Lochrie, Peggy McCracken, and James A. Schultz. Minneapolis, MN and London: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. pp. 58–90. Carron, Roland. Enfant et parenté dans la France médiévale: Xe-XIIIe siecles.Geneva: Droz, 1989. Cartlidge, Neil. Medieval Marriage: Literary Approaches, 1100–1300. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1997. Cazelles, Brigitte. The Unholy Grail: a Social Reading of Chrétien de Troyes’s Conte du Graal. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1996. Chenu, M.-D. “L’Homme et la nature: perspectives sur la Renaissance du XIIe siècle.” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age 19 (1953): 39–66. Cline, Ruth H.“Heart and Eyes.” Romance Philology 25 (1971–1972): 263–297. Cohen, Jeffrey Jerome. “Masoch/Lancelotism.” New Literary History 28 (1997): 230–260. Cohen, Jeffrey Jerome and Bonnie Wheeler, eds. Becoming Male in the Middle Ages. New York,NY and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1997. ———. Rev. of Feminist Approaches to the Body in Medieval Literature. Ed. Linda Lomperis and Sarah Stanbury. Bryn Mawr Medieval on-line Review 94.4.6. Colish, Marcia. Peter Lombard. Leiden; New York;Cologne: E. J. Brill, 1994. Condren, Edmund.“The Paradox of Chrétien’s Lancelot.” Modern Language Notes 85 (1970): 434–453. Cormier, Raymond. One Heart, One Mind: The Rebirth of Virgil’s Hero in Medieval French Romance. University,MI.: Romance Monographs, 1973. ———.“Comunalement and Soltaine in the Eneas.” Romance Notes 14 (1972): 6–8. Couliano, I.P. Eros et magie à la Renaissance. Paris: Flammarion, 1984. Crouch, David. The Reign of King Stephen, 1135–1154. Harlow,England; New York: Longman, 2000. Curtius, E.R. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973. Damasio,Antonio. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Grosset/Putnam, 1994. 294 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Damasio, Antonio. The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. Harcourt: New York,1999. Davis, Natalie Zemon. “Boundaries and the Sense of Self in Sixteenth-Century France.” Reconstructing Individualism:Autonomy,Individuality,and the Self in Western Thought. Eds.Thomas C. Heller, Morton Sosna, and David E.Wellbery. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986. pp. 53–63. Davy,M.M.Un Traité de l’amour du XIIe siècle:Pierre de Blois.Paris:E.De Boccard,1932. Delhaye, Philippe. “Deux Adaptations du De Amicitia de Cicéron au XIIe siècle.” Recherches de Théologie ancienne et médiévale 15 (1948). Delumeau, Jean. Sin and Fear: the Emergence of a Western Guilt Culture, 13th–18th Centuries.Trans. Eric Nicholson. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990. Demats, Paule. Fabula.Trois Etudes de mythographie antique et médiévale. Geneva: Droz, 1973. Devisse, Jean. Hincmar:Archevêque de Reims 845–882.3 vols. Geneva: Droz, 1975. Dodds, E.R. The Greek and the Irrational. University of California Press, 1951. Donohue, Charles, Jr.,“The Canon Law on the Formation of Marriage and Social Practice in the Later Middle Ages.” Journal of Family History 8, 2 (1983): 144–158. ———. “The Policy of Alexander the Third’s Consent Theory of Marriage.” Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Monumenta Iuris Canonica 5. Ed. Stephan Kuttner. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana,1976, pp. 251–281. Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London and New York City:Routledge, 2002. Dronke, Peter.“L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.” Studi Medievali 6, 1 (1965): 389–422. ———. Fabula: Exploration into the Uses of Myth in Medieval Platonism. Leiden and Cologne: E.J. Brill, 1985. ———. Medieval Latin and the Rise of the European Love-Lyric. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965–6. ———. “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II.” Mediaeval Studies 38 (1976): 185–235. ———. “Pseudo-Ovid, Facetus, and the Arts of Love.” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 11 (1974): 126–131. Duby,Georges. The Knight, the Lady and the Priest:The Making of Modern Marriage in Medieval France. New York:Pantheon Books, 1983. ———. Medieval Marriage: Two Models from Twelfth-Century France. Trans. Elborg Forster. Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978. ———. Le Temps des cathédrales: l’art et la société 980–1420. Paris: Gallimard, 1976. ———. “The ‘Youth’ in Twelfth Century Aristocratic Society.” Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe. Ed. Frederic L. Cheyette. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1968. pp. 198–209. Eco, Umberto. Art and Beauty in the Middle Ages. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1986. Economou, George D. “The Two Venuses and Courtly Love.” In Pursuit of Perfection: Courtly Love in Medieval Literature. Eds. Joan M. Ferrante and Geroge D. Economou, Port Washington, N.Y.and London:Kennikat Press, 1975. pp.17–49. BIBLIOGRAPHY 295

Elliott, Dyan. Spiritual Marriage: Sexual Abstinence in Medieval Wedlock. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993. Ellis, Lee. Inquiries into the Causes of Sexual Aggression. New York: Hemisphere Publishing Co., 1989. Enders, Jody. The Medieval Theater of Cruelty: Rhetoric, Memory,Violence. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999. ———.“Rhetoric, coercion, and the memory of violence.” Criticism and Dissent in the Middle Ages. Ed. Rita Copeland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. pp. 24–55. Epp, Garrett E.P. “Learning to Write with Venus’s Pen: Sexual Regulation in Matthew of Vendôme’s Ars versificatoria.” Desire and Discipline: Sex and Sexuality in the Premodern West.Ed.Jacqueline Murray and Konrad Eisenbichler. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996. pp. 265–279. Faral,Edmond. Les Arts poétiques du XIIe et du XIIIe siècle: recherches et documents sur la technique littéraire du moyen age. Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes 238. Paris: Champion, 1962. ———. Recherches sur les sources latines des contes et romans courtois du moyen age. Paris: Champion, 1913. Favati, Guido. “Una traccia de cultura neoplatonica in Chrétien de Troyes: il tema degli occhi come specchio (Cligès,vv.629–749).”Studi in onore di Carlo Pellegrini. Turin: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1963. pp. 3–13. Fawtier, Robert. The Capetian Kings of France: Monarchy and Nation 987–1328. Trans. Lionel Butler and R.J. Adam.London and Basingstoke:The Macmillan Press,1960. Fliche, Augustin.“The Advocate of Church Reform.” Innocent III:Vicar of Christ or Lord of the World? Ed. James M. Powell. Boston, MA: D. C. Heath and Company, 1963. pp. 29–42. ———. Le Règne de Philippe Ier, roi de France. Paris: Société Française d’Imprimerie et de Librairie, 1912. Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality.Volume 1: An Introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley.New York:Vintage Books, 1978. Fradenburg, Louise Olga. City, Marriage, Tournament: Arts of Rule in Late Medieval Scotland. Madison,WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1991. ———.“Introduction: Rethinking Queenship.” Women and Sovereignty. Ed. Louise Olga Fradenburg. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press, 1992. pp. 1–13. Franz, Arthur. “Die reflektierte Handlung im Cliges.” Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 47 (1927): 61–86. Frappier, Jean. Amour courtois et la Table Ronde. Geneva: Droz, 1973. ———. “Le Prologue du Chevalier de la Charrette et son interprétation.” Romania 93 (1972): 337–377. ———. Le Roman breton: Introduction: des origines à Chrétien de Troyes:“Cligès.” Paris: Centre de Documentation Universitaire, 1950. ———.“Structure et sens du Tristan: version commune, version courtoise.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 6 (1963): 255–80; 441–454. ———. “Variations sur le thème du miroir, de Bernart de Ventadour à Maurice Scève.” Cahiers de l’Association Internationale des Etudes Françaises 11 (1959): 134–158. 296 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Frappier, Jean.“Vues sur les conceptions courtoises dans les littératures d’oc et d’oïl au XIIe siècle.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 2 (1959): 135–156. Freeman, Michelle A. The Poetics of “Translatio Studii” and “Conjointure”: Chrétien de Troyes’s “Cligès”. Lexington: French Forum Publ., 1979. ———. “Problems of Romance Composition: Ovid, Chrétien de Troyes and the Romance of the Rose.” Romance Philology 30 (1976–1977): 158–168. Friedman, Lionel J. “Gradus Amoris.” Romance Philology 19 (1965): 167–177. ———. “Occulta Cordis.” Romance Philology 11 (1957): 103–119. Fries, Maureen,“Female Heroes, Heroines, and Counter-Heroes: Images of Women in Arthurian Tradition.” Arthurian Women:A Casebook. Intro. and ed.Thelma S. Fenster. New York and London: Garland, 1996. pp. 59–73. Gaunt, Simon. Gender and Genre in Medieval French Literature. New York:Cambridge University Press, 1995. Ghisalberti, Fausto.“Arnolfo d’Orléans, un cultore de Ovidio nel secolo XII.”Reale Istituto Lombardo di Scienze e Lettere (Milan). Memorie, Classe di Lettere, Scienze Morali e storiche 24 (1932): 157–234. ———. “Medieval Biographies of Ovid.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institute 9 (1946): 10–59. Ginsberg,Warren.“Ovidius ethicus? Ovid and the Medieval Commentary Tradition.” Desiring Discourse:The Literature of Love, Ovid through Chaucer. Eds. James J. Paxson and Cynthia A. Gravlee. London:Associated University Press, 1998. pp. 62–71. Girard, René. Violence and the Sacred.Trans. Patrick Gregory. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977. Glendinning, Robert.“Eros,Agape, and Rhetoric around 1200: Gervase of Melkley’s Ars poetica and Gottfried von Strassburg’s Tristan.” Speculum 67 (1992): 892–925. ———. “Pyramus and Thisbe in the Medieval Classroom.”Speculum 61 (1986):51–78. Gold, Penny Schine. The Lady and the Virgin:Image,Attitude, and Experience in Twelfth- Century France. Chicago, IL and London:The University of Chicago Press, 1985. Goldin, Frederick. The Mirror of Narcissus in the Courtly Love Lyric. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967. Gottlieb, Beatrice.“The Meaning of Clandestine Marriage.” Family and Sexuality in French History. Ed. Robert Wheaton and Tamara K. Hareven. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980. Gravdal, Kathryn. “Chrétien de Troyes, Gratian, and the Medieval Romance of Sexual Violence.” Signs 17 (1992): 558–585. ———. “Poetics of Rape Law in Medieval France.” Rape and Representation, ed. Lynn A. Higgins and Brenda R. Silver. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.pp.207–226. ———. Ravishing Maidens: Writing Rape in Medieval French Literature and Law. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991. Green, Dennis. Irony in the Medieval Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Grimbert, Joan Tasker.“On Fenice’s Vain Attempts to Revise a Romantic Archetype and Chrétien’s Fabled Hostility to the Tristan Legend.” Reassessing the Heroine in Medieval French Literature. Ed. Kathy M. Krause. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2001. pp. 87–106. BIBLIOGRAPHY 297

Grimbert, Joan Tasker. “Voleir vs. Poeir: Frustrated Desire in Thomas’s Tristan.” Philological Quarterly 69 (1990): 153–165. Gripkey,Sister Mary Vincentine. The Blessed Virgin Mary as Mediatrix in the Latin and Old French Legend prior to the Fourteenth Century. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1938. Hadot, Pierre. “Le Mythe de Narcisse et son interprétation par Plotin.” Nouvelle Revue de Psychanalyse 13 (1976). ———. Plotin ou la simplicité du regard. Paris: Etudes Augustiennes, 1989. Haidu, Peter. Aesthetic Distance in Chrétien de Troyes: Irony and Comedy in “Cligès” and “Perceval”. Geneva: Droz, 1968. ———. “Au Début du roman, l’ironie.”Poétique 9 (1978): 443–466. ———. The Subject of Violence: The Song of Roland and the Birth of the State. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993. Hanning, Robert. “Courtly Contexts for Urban cultus: Responses to Ovid in Chrétien’s Cligès and Marie’s Guigemar.” Symposium 35 (1981): 34–56. ———. The Individual in Twelfth-Century Romance. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977. ———. “I Shal Finde it in a Maner Glose:” Medieval Texts and Contemporary Readers. Ed. Laurie A. Finke and Martin B. Schichtman. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press. pp. 27–50. Heng, Geraldine. Empire of Magic: Medieval Romance and the Politics of Cultural Fantasy. New York:Columbia University Press, 2003. Hexter, Ralph. Ovid and Medieval Schooling. Munich:Arbeo Gesellschaft, 1986. Hindman, Sandra. Sealed in Parchment: Rereadings of Knighthood in the Illuminated Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Hoepffner, E.“Chrétien de Troyes et Thomas d’Angleterre.” Romania 55 (1929): 1–16. Hoste, Anselme. “Le Traité pseudo-Augustienien De amicitia. Un Résume d’un ouvrage authentique d’Aelred de Rievaulx.” Revue des Etudes Augustiennes 6 (1960): 155–160. Huchet, Jean-Charles. Le Roman médiéval. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1984. Hult, David.“Gaston Paris and the Invention of Courtly Love.” Medievalism and the Modernist Temper. Eds. R. Howard Bloch and Stephen G. Nichols. Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996. pp. 192–224. ———. “Lancelot’s Shame.” Romance Philology 42 (1988): 30–50. ———. Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: Readership and Authority in the First Roman de la Rose. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Hunt,Tony.“Aristotle, Dialectic and Courtly Literature.” Viator 10 (1979): 95–129. ———. “Chrestien and the Comediae.” Mediaeval Studies 40 (1978): 120–156. ———.“The Rhetorical Background to the Arthurian Prologue.”Forum for Modern Languages Studies 6 (1970): 1–23. ———. “Tradition and Originality in the Prologues of Chrestien de Troyes.” Forum for Modern Language Studies 8 (1972) 320–344. ———. “The Tristan Illustrations in MS London BL Add. 11619.” Rewards and Punishments in the Arthurian Romances and Lyric Poetry of Mediaeval France.Eds.Peter V.Davies and Angus J. Kennedy.Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1987. pp. 45–60. 298 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ingledew, Francis. “The Book of Troy and the Genealogical Construction of History: The Case of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia regum Britanniae.” Speculum 69 (1994): 665–704. Jacquart, Danielle and Claude Thomasset. “L’Amour ‘héroïque’ à travers le traité d’Arnaud de Villeneuve.” La Folie et le corps. Ed. Jean Céard. Paris: Presses de l’Ecole Normale Supérieure, 1985. pp. 143–158. ———. Sexuality and Medicine in the Middle Ages. Trans. Matthew Adamson. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988. Jaeger, C. Stephen. Ennobling Love: In Search of a Lost Sensibility. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999. ———. The Envy of Angels: Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe, 950–1200. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994. ———. The Origins of Courtliness: Civilizing Trends and the Formation of Courtly Ideals 930–1210. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985. Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as Socially Symbolic Act. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981. Javelet, Robert. Image et ressemblance au douzième siècle, de saint Anselme à Alain de Lille. Paris: Letouzey et Aré, 1967. Jeay, Madeleine. “Consuming Passions: Variations on the Eaten Heart Theme.” Violence Against Women in Medieval Texts. Ed. Anna Roberts. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. pp. 75–96. Jones, Rosemarie. The Theme of Love in the Romans d’Antiquité. London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 1972. Joris, André. “Un Seul Amour . . . ou plusieurs femmes?” Femmes, mariages, lignages XIIe—XIVe siècles. Mélanges offerts à Georges Duby. Brussels: De Boeck University, 1992. pp. 197–214. Kaeuper, Richard W. Chivalry and Violence in Medieval Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Kantorowicz, Ernst. The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957. Karnein,Alfred.“Amor est Passio—A Definition of Courtly Love?” Court and Poet. Ed. Glyn S. Burgess. Liverpool: Francis Cairns, 1981. pp. 215–221. Kay, Sarah. Courtly Contradictions: The Emergence of the Literary Object in the Twelfth Century. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001. Kealy, Edward J. Roger of Salisbury: Viceroy of England. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1972. Kelly, Douglas. “The Scope of the Treatment of Composition in the Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Arts of Poetry.” Speculum 41 (1966): 261–278. ———. “Topical Invention in Medieval French Literature.” Medieval Eloquence: Studies in the Theory and Practice of Medieval Rhetoric. Ed. James J. Murphy. Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, 1978. pp. 231–251. Kelly, Henry Ansgar. “The Varieties of Love in Medieval Literature According to Gaston Paris.” Romance Philology 40 (1986): 301–327. Kipnis, Laura. Against Love:A Polemic. New York:Pantheon Book, 2003. Knoespel, Kenneth. Narcissus and the Invention of Personal History. New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1985. BIBLIOGRAPHY 299

Köhler, Erich. Ideal und Wirklichkeit in der Höfischen Epik.Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag,1956. ———. “Observations linguistiques et sociologiques sur la poésie des troubadours.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 7 (1964): 27–51. Krause, Kathy M., ed. Reassessing the Heroine in Medieval French Literature. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2001. Kristeva, Julia. Histoires d’amour. Paris: Editions Denoël, 1983. Krueger, Roberta. “Desire, Meaning, and the Female Reader: The Problem in Chrétien’s Chevalier.” The Passing of Arthur: New Essays in Arthurian Tradition. Eds. Christopher Baswell and William Sharpe. New York:Garland, 1988. pp. 31–51. ———. Women Readers and the Ideology of Gender in Old French Verse Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Lacy,Norris J.“Form and Pattern in Cligès.” Orbis Litterarum 15 (1970): 307–313. Laurie, Helen C.“Narcissus.” Medium Aevum 35, 2 (1966): 111–116. ———.“Piramus et Tisbé.” Modern Language Review 55 (1960): 24–32. LeClercq, Jean. Monks and Love in Twelfth-Century France: Psycho-Historical Essays. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979. LeDoux, Joseph. The Emotional Brain: the Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. New York:Simon & Schuster, 1998. Lefay-Toury, Marie-Noëlle. “Roman breton et mythes courtois: l’évolution du personnage féminin dans les romans de Chrétien de Troyes.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 15 (1972): 193–204; 283–293. Lewis,Andrew W. Royal Succession in Capetian France: Studies on Familial Order and the State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981. Lewis, C.S. The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1936. Lonigan, P.R.“The Cligés and the Tristan Legend.” Studi Francesi 53 (1974): 201–212. Lowes, John L.“The Loveres Maladye of Hereos.”Modern Philology 11 (1914):491–546. Maddox, Donald L. The Arthurian Romances of Chrétien de Troyes: Once and Future Fictions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. ———. “Critical Trends and Recent Works on the Cligès of Chrétien de Troyes.” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 74 (1973): 730–745. Marchello-Nizia, Christiane. “Amour courtois, société masculine et figure du pouvoir.” Annales: Economies, Sociétés, Civilisations 36 (1981): 969–982. ———. “De l’Énéide à l’Eneas: les attributs du fondateur.” Lectures médiévales de Virgile. Rome: École Française de Rome, 1985. pp. 251–266. Marenbon, John. The Philosophy of Peter Abelard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Martin, Emily. “What is Rape?—Toward a Historical, Ethnographic Approach.” Evolution, Gender,and Rape. Ed. Cheryl Brown Travis. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press, 2003. pp. 363–381. McCaffrey, Philip.“Sexual Identity in Floire et Blancheflor and Ami et Amile.” Gender Transgressions: Crossing the Normative Barrier in Old French Literature. Ed. Karen J. Taylor. New York and London:Garland Publishing, Inc., 1998. pp. 129–152. McCracken, Peggy.“Engendering Sacrifice: Blood, Lineage, and Infanticide in Old French Literature.” Speculum 77 (2002): 55–75. 300 BIBLIOGRAPHY

McCracken, Peggy.The Romance of Adultery: Queenship and Sexual Transgression in Old French Literature.Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998. ———. “The Queen’s Secret:Adultery and Political Structure in the Feudal Courts of the Old French Romance.” Romanic Review 86 (1995): 289–306. McGuire, Brian Patrick. Friendship and Community: the Monastic Experience, 350–1250. Kalamazoo, MI.: Cistercian Publications, 1988. ———. Friendship and Faith: Cistercian Men, Women, and their Stories, 1100–1200. Aldershot, England; Burlington,VT:Ashgate, 2002. Méla, Charles. Le Beau trouvé: études de théorie et de critique littéraires sur l’art des “trouvères” au Moyen Age. Caen: Paradigme, 1993. ———. La Reine et le graal: la conjointure du graal de Chrétien de Troyes au Livre de Lancelot. Paris: Seuil, 1984. Mews, Constant J. The Lost Love Letters of Heloise and Abelard: Perceptions of Dialogue in Twelfth-Century France. Trans. by Neville Chiavaroli and Constant J. Mews. New York:Palgrave Press, 2001. ———.“Philosophical Themes in the Epistolae Duorum Amantium:The First Letters of Heloise and Abelard.” Listening to Heloise: The Voice of Twelfth-Century Woman. Ed. Bonnie Wheeler. Basingstoke, England: Macmillan; New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. pp. 35–52. Micha,Alexandre. Essais sur le cycle du Lancelot-Graal. Geneva: Droz, 1987. Mickel, Emmanuel J., Jr.“The Theme of Honor in Chrétien’s Lancelot.” Zeitung für romanische Philologie 91 (1975): 243–272. Miles, Margaret R. “The Body and Human Values in Augustine of Hippo.” Grace, Politics and Desire: Essays on Augustine. Ed. H.A. Meynell. Calgary, Alberta: University of Calgary Press, 1990. pp. 55–67. Miller, William Ian. Humiliation and Other Essays on Honor, Social Discomfort, and Violence. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993. Minnis, Alastair. Magister Amoris:The Roman de la Rose and Vernacular Hermeneutics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Moi, Toril. “ ‘She Died Because She Came Too Late’: Knowledge, Doubles, and Death in Thomas’s Tristan.” Exemplaria 4, 1 (1992): 105–133. Moore, John C.“Love in Twelfth-Century France.” Traditio 24 (1968): 429–443. Mora-Lebrun, Francine. L’Enéide Médievale. La Naissance du roman. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1994. Morgan, Gerald. “The Conflict of Love and Chivalry in the Chevalier de la Charrete.” Romania 102 (1981): 172–201. Morris, Colin. The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050–1250. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Morris, Rosalind C. “All Made Up: Performance Theory and the New Anthropology of Sex and Gender.” Annual Review of Anthropology 24 (1995): 567–592. Myers, Henry. Medieval Kingship.Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall, 1982. Nederman, Cary J.“The Changing Face of Tyranny:The Reign of King Stephen in John of Salisbury’s Political Thought.”Nottingham Medieval Studies 33 (1989): 1–20. Nelli, René. Le Roman de Flamenca: un art d’aimer occitanien du XIIIe siècle. Beziers: Institut d’Estudis Occitans, 1989. BIBLIOGRAPHY 301

Neuner, Josef and Jacques Dupuis, eds. The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church. New York,NY:Alba House, 1982. Newman, Barbara. Rev. of The Lost Love Letters of Heloise and Abelard: Perceptions of Dialogue in Twelfth-Century France. On-line Medieval Review,00.01.06. Nichols, Stephen G. “Amorous Imitation: Bakhtin, Augustine, and Le Roman d’Eneas.” Romance: Generic Transformations from Chrétien de Troyes to Cervantes. Ed. Kevin Brownlee and Marina Scordilis Brownlee. Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 1985. pp. 47–73. ———. “Picture, Image, and Subjectivity in Medieval Culture.” Modern Language Notes 108 (1993): 617–637. Nickolaus, Keith. Marriage Fictions in Old French Secular Narratives, 1170–1250: A Critical Re-evaluation of the Courtly Love Debate. New York,NY: Routledge, 2002. Noble, Peter. Love and Marriage in Chrétien de Troyes. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1982. Nolan, Barbara. Chaucer and the Tradition of the “Roman Antique.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. ———.“Ovid’s Heroides Contextualized: Foolish Love and Legitimate Marriage in the Roman d’Eneas.” Mediaevalia 13 (1987): 157–187. Noonan, John Jr. “Marital Affection in the Canonists.” Studia Gratiana 12 (1967): 479–509. ———.“The Power to Choose.” Viator 4 (1973): 419–434. Nussbaum, Martha. Upheavals of Thought:The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Nykrog, Per. “The Rise of Literary Fiction.” Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century. Ed. Robert L. Benson, Giles Constable, and Carol D. Lanham. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982. pp. 593–612. Ong,Walter J. Rhetoric, Romance, and Technology: Studies in the Interaction of Expression and Culture. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1971. Osborne, Catherine. Eros Unveiled: Plato and the God of Love. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Owen, D.D.R.“Theme and Variations: Sexual Aggression in Chrétien de Troyes.” Forum for Modern Language Studies 21 (1985): 376–385. Pacaut, Marcle. Alexandre III: étude sur la conception du pouvoir pontifical dans sa pensée et dans son oeuvre. Paris:Vrin, 1956. Paden, William. “The Troubadour’s Lady: Her Marital Status and Social Rank.” Studies in Philology 72 (1975): 28–50. ———.“Utrum Copularentur: Of Cors.” L’Esprit Créateur 19:4 (1979): 70–83. Paoli, Guy. “La Relation oeil-coeur. Recherches sur la mystique amoureuse de Chrétien de Troyes dans Cligès.” Senefiance 30 (1991): 233–244. Paris, Gaston.“II. Le conte de la Charrette.” Romania 12 (1883): 459–534. ———.“Cligès.” Mélanges de littérature française du Moyen Age. Paris: Mario Roques, 1912. pp. 229–327. Partner, Nancy. Serious Entertainments: The Writing of History in Twelfth-Century England. Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press, 1977. Patterson, Lee. “Virgil and Historical Consciousness of the Twelfth Century:The Roman d’Eneas and Erec et Enide.” Negotiating the Past:The Historical Understanding 302 BIBLIOGRAPHY

of Medieval Literature. Ed. Lee Patterson. Madison, WI: Unversity of Wisconsin Press, 1987. pp. 170–183. Paxson, James J. and Cynthia A.Gravlee., eds. Desiring Discourse:The Literature of Love, Ovid through Chaucer. Selinsgrove, PA: Susquehanna University Press, 1998. Payen, Jean Charles. “La Crise du mariage à la fin du XIIIème siècle d’après la littérature française du temps.” Famille et parenté dans l’occident médiéval. Ed. Georges Duby and Jacques Le Goff. Rome: Ecole Française de Rome, 1977. pp. 413–426. ———. “La Destruction des mythes courtois dans le roman arthurien: la femme dans le roman en vers après Chrétien de Troyes.” Revue des Langues Romanes 78 (1969): 213–225. ———. “La ‘Mise en roman’ du mariage dans la littérature française des XIIe et XIIIe siècles: de l’évolution idéologique à la typologie des genres.” Love and Marriage in the Twelfth Century. Ed.Willy Von Hoecke and Andries Welkenhuysen. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1981. pp. 219–235. Payer, Pierre. The Bridling of Desire:Views of Sex in the Later Middle Ages.Toronto, Buffalo and London:Toronto University Press, 1993. ———. Sex and the Penitentials: The Development of a Sexual Code 550–1150. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984. ———. “Sexual Confession in the Thirteenth Century.” Sex in the Middle Ages: A Book of Essays.Ed.Joyce E.Salisbury.New York and London:Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991. pp. 126–142. Pernoud, Régine. Eleanor of Aquitaine.Trans. Peter Wiley.London: Collins, 1967. Petit,Aimé.“Aspects de l’influence d’Ovide sur les romans antiques du XIIe siècle.” Colloque présence d’Ovide. Ed. R. Chevalier. Paris: Belles Lettres, 1982. ———.“De l’hypotexte à l’hypertexte. L’Enéide et le roman d’Enéas: remarques sur la technique de transposition au XIIème siècle.” Bien dire et bien aprandre 4 (1986): 59–74. ———. Naissances du roman. Les Techniques littéraire dans les romans antiques du XIIe siècle. Paris: Champion, 1985. Pitts, Brent A. “Absence, Memory, and the Ritual of Love in Thomas’s Roman de Tristan.” French Review 63 (1990): 790–799. Poirion, Daniel. “De l’Enéide à l’Enéas:mythologie et moralisation.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 19 (1976): 213–229. ———. “L’Ecriture épique: du sublime au symbole.” Relire le Roman d’Eneas. Ed. Jean Dufournet. Paris: Champion, 1985. I–XIII. ———. Résurgences: mythe et littérature à l’âge du symbole (XIIe siècle). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1986. Polak, Lucie. Chrétien de Troyes:“Cligès.” London: Grant and Cutler, 1983. ———. “The Two Caves of Love in the Tristan by Thomas.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 33 (1970): 52–69. ———. “Cligès, Fénice et l’arbre d’amour.” Romania 93 (1972): 303–316. Polloni, Domenico. Amour e Clergie: Un Percorso Testuale da Andrea Cappellano all’Arcipreste de Hita. Bologna: Patron Editore, 1995. Poulet, André. “Capetian Women and the Regency: The Genesis of a Vocation.” Medieval Queenship. Ed.John Carmi Parsons. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993. pp. 93–116. BIBLIOGRAPHY 303

Press, A.R. “The Adulterous Nature of Fin’Amors: A Re-Examination of the Theory.” Forum for Language Studies 6 (1970): 327–341. Quain, Edwin A., S.J. “The Medieval Accessus ad Auctores.” Traditio 3 (1945): 215–264. Rabine, Leslie W.“Love And the New Patriarchy: Tristan and Isolde.” Tristan and Isolde:A Casebook. Ed. and intro. Joan Trasker Grimbert. New York and London: Garland Publishing Co., 1995. pp. 37–74. Rand, E.K. Ovid and His Influence. New York:Longmans, Green and Co., 1928. Reddy,William M. The Navigation of Feeling:A Framework for the History of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Regalado, Nancy Freeman. “Tristan and Renart: Two Tricksters.” L’Esprit Créateur 16, 1 (1976): 30–38. Régnier-Bohler, Danielle. “Le Simulacre ambigu: miroirs, portraits et statues.” Nouvelle Révue de Psychanalyse 34 (1986): 91–106. Ribard, Jacques. Chrétien de Troyes, le Chevalier de la charrette. Essai d’interprétation symbolique.Paris, Nizet, 1972. Rieger, Dietmar.“Le Motif du viol dans la littérature de la France médiévale entre norme courtoise et réalité courtoise.” Cahiers de Civilisations Médiévale 31 (1988): 241–267. Robertson, D.W., Jr. A Preface to Chaucer. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1962.pp.124–127. ———.“Chrétien’s Cligés and the Ovidian Spirit.” Comparative Literature 7 (1955): 32–42. ———.“The Concept of Courtly Love as an Impediment to the Understanding of Medieval Texts.” The Meaning of Courtly Love. Ed. F.X. Newman. Albany: St. University of New York Press, 1968. pp. 1–18. ———. “The Idea of Fame in Chrétien’s Cligès.” Studies in Philology 69 (1972): 414–433. Roncaglia,Aurelio.“La Statua d’Isotta.” Cultura Neolatina 31 (1971): 41–67. Roques, Mario. “Pour l’interprétation du Chevalier de la Charrete de Chrétien de Troyes.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 1 (1958): 141–152. Rosenwein, Barbara, ed. Anger’s Past: The Social Uses of an Emotion in the Middle Ages. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998. ———. “Worrying about Emotions in History.” American Historical Review 107, 3 (2002): 821–845. ———. “Writing Without Fear About Early Medieval Emotions.” Early Medieval Europe 10, 2 (2001): 229–234. Ross, James Bruce. “A Study of Twe lfth-Century Interest in the Antiquities of Rome.” Medieval and Historiographical Essays in Honour of James Westfall Thompson. Ed. James Cate and Eugene Anderson. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1938. pp. 302–321. Rousse, Michel.“Le Pouvoir, la prouesse et l’amour dans l’Enéas.” Relire le Roman d’Eneas. Ed. Jean Dufournet. Paris: Champion, 1985. pp. 149–167. Roy, Bruno. Une Culture de l’équivoque. Montreal: University of Montreal Press; Paris: Champion-Slatkine, 1992. Rudolph, Conrad. Artistic Change at Saint-Denis.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990. 304 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ruhe, Doris. Le Dieu d’amours avec son paradis: Untersuchung zur Mythenbildung um Amor in Spätantike und Mittelalter. München:Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1974. Rychner, Jean. “Le Prologue du ‘Chevalier de la Charrette.’” Vox Romanica 26 (1967): 1–23. Saly,Antoinette.“La Demoiselle esforciée dans le roman arthurien.” Amour, marriage et transgressions au Moyen Age. Ed. Danielle Buschinger and André Crépin. Göppingen: Kümmerle Verlag,1984. pp. 215–224. Sanday,Peggy Reaves.“Rape-Free versus Rape-prone.” Evolution, Gender, and Rape. Ed. Cheryl Brown Travis. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press, 2003. Sargent-Baur, Barbara Nelson. “La Dimension morale dan le Roman de Tristan de Béroul.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 31 (1988): 49–56. Schmitt,Jean-Claude.La Raison des gestes dans l’occident médiéval.Paris:Gallimard,1990. Schmolke-Hasselmann, Beate. The Evolution of Arthurian Romance: the Verse Tradition from Chrétien to Froissart. Trans. Margaret and Roger Middleton. Cambridge and New York:Cambridge University Press, 1998. Schnell, Rüdiger. Causa Amoris: Liebeskonzeption and Liebesdarstellung in der Mittelalterlichen Literatur. Bern and Munich: Francke Verlag,1985. ———.“Ovids Ars amatoria und die höfische Minnetheorie.” Euphorion 69 (1975): 132–159. Schotter, Anne Howland. “Rape in the Medieval Latin Comedies.” Representing Rape in Medieval and Early Modern Literature.Eds. Elizabeth Robertson and Christine M. Rose. New York,NY: Palgrave, 2001. pp. 241–255. Schulze-Busacker, Elisabeth.“Philomena: une révision de l’attribution de l’oeuvre.” Romania 107 (1986): 459–485. Sheehan, Michael M., C.S.B. “Choice of a Marriage Partner in the Middle Ages: Development and Mode of Application of a Theory of Marriage.” Marriage, Family and Law in Medieval Europe: Selected Studies. Ed. James K. Farge, intro. Joel T.Rosenthal.Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996, pp. 87–117. ———.“Marriage Theory and Practice in the Conciliar Legislation and Diocesan Statutes of Medieval England.” Mediaeval Studies 40 (1978): 408–460. Shirt, David J.“Cligès, a XIIth C. Matrimonial Casebook?” Forum for Modern Language Studies 18 (1982): 75–89. ———. “The Dido Episode in Eneas: The Reshaping of Tragedy and its Stylistic Consequences.” Medium Aevum 51 (1982): 3–17. Singer, Irving. “Erotic Transformations in the Legend of Dido and Eneas.” Modern Language Notes 90 (1975): 767–783. Silvestre, Hubert. “La Prière des époux selon Rupert de Liège.” Studi Medievali 24 (1983): 725–728. Smail, Daniel Lord. “Hatred as a Social Institution in Late-Medieval Society.” Speculum 76 (2001): 90–126. Snyder, James. Medieval Art: Painting-Sculpture-Architecture Fourth—Fourteenth Century. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1989. Southern, R.W. Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970. Spellman,W.M. Monarchies 1000–2000. London: Reaktion Books, 2001. pp. 164–187. BIBLIOGRAPHY 305

Spiegel, Gabrielle. The Past as Text:The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography. Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997. ———. Romancing the Past: the Rise of Vernacular Prose Historiography in Thirteenth- Century France. Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, 1992. Stanton, Robert. “Marriage, Socialization, and Domestic Violence in the Life of Christina of Markyate.” Domestic Violence in Medieval Texts.Ed.Eve Salisbury, Georgiana Donavin, and Merrall Llewelyn Price. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2002. pp. 242–271. Taylor, Gabriele. Pride, Shame, and Guilt: Emotions of Self-Assessment. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. Te llenbach, Gerd. The Church in Western Europe From the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century.Trans.Timothy Reuter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Thiry-Stassin, Martine.“Une Autre Source ovidienne du Narcisse?” Le Moyen Age 33 (1978): 211–226. Thomas, Jacques.“Un Art d’aimer du XIIIe siècle: L’Amistié de vraie amour.” Revue Belge de philologie et d’histoire 36 (1958):786–811. Thomas, Neil. Tristan in the Underworld: A Study of Gottfried von Strassburg’s Tristan Together With the Tristan of Thomas. Lewiston, NY:The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991. Tilliette, Jean-Yves. “Savants et poètes du moyen-age face à Ovide: les débuts de l’Aetas Ovidiana (v. 1050–1200).” Ovidius Redivius: von Ovid zu Dante. Ed. Michelangelo Picone and Bernhard Zimmerman. Stuttgart: M und P Verlag, 1994. pp. 64–103. Tillmann, Helen. Pope Innocent IIII. Trans. Walter Sax. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company,1980. Tinkle, Theresa. Medieval Venuses and Cupids: Sexuality, Hermeneutics and English Poetry. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1996. Toury, Marie-Noëlle.“Narcisse et Tristan: subversion et usure des mythes aux XIIe et XIIIe siècles.” L’Imaginaire courtois et son double. Ed. Giovanna Angeli and Luciano Formisano. Collana: Pubblicazioni dell’Università degli Studi di Salerno. Napoli: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 1992. Tyssens, Madeleine. “Les Sources du Piramus.” C’est la fin pourquoy nous sommes ensemble: hommage à Jean Dufournet. Ed. Jean-Claude Aubailly and Emmanuèle Baumgartner. Paris: Champion, 1993. pp. 1411–1419. Uitti, Karl. “Remarks on Old French Narrative: Courtly Love and Poetic Form (I).” Review article. Romance Philology 26 (1972–1973): 77–93. Ullmann, Walter. Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1961. ———. A Short History of the Papacy. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd., 1972. Van Hamel,A.G. “Cligès et Tristan.” Romania 33 (1904): 465–489. Vansteenberghe, E.“Deux Théoreticiens de l’amitié du XIIe siècle: Pierre de Blois et Aelred de Riéval.” Revue des Sciences Religieuses 12 (1932): 572–588. Varty, Kenneth Varty.“Le Viol dans l’Ysengrimus, les branches II-Va, et la branche I du Roman de Renart.” Amour, mariage et transgressions au Moyen Age, ed. Danielle Buschinger and André Crépin. Göppingen: Kümmerle Verlag,1984. pp. 411–424. Vernant, Jean-Pierre. Religions, Histoires, Raisons. Paris: François Maspero, 1979. 306 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Viarre, Simone. La Survie d’Ovide dans la littérature scientifique des XIIe et XIIIe siècles. Poitiers: Centre d’Etudes Supérieures de Civilisation Médiévale, 1966. Vinaver, Eugene. “Landmarks in Arthurian Romance.” The Expansion and Transformation of Courtly Literature. Ed. Nathaniel B. Smith and Joseph T. Snow. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1980. Wack, Mary Frances.“Imagination, Medicine, and Rhetoric in Andreas Capellanus’ De amore.” Magister Regis: Studies in Honor of Robert Earl Kaske. Ed.Arthur Groos. New York:Fordham University Press, 1986. pp. 101–116. ———. Lovesickness in the Middle Ages The Viaticum and Its Commentaries. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990. Walter, Philippe. Le Gant de verre: le mythe de Tristan et Yseut. Editions Artus, 1990. Warren,W.L. Henry III. London: Eyre Methuen, 1973. Weiner, Annette. Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping-While-Giving. Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, 1992. Weir, Alison. Eleanor of Aquitaine: by the Wrath of God, Queen of England. London: J. Cape, 1999. Wetherbee, Winthrop. “Philosophy, Cosmology, and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance.” A History of Twelfth-Century Western Philosophy. Ed. Peter Dronke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. pp. 21–53. ———. Platonism and Poetry in the Twelfth Century:The Literary Influence of the School of Chartres. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972. Whitehead, Frederick. “The Early French Tristan Poems.” Arthurian Literature in the Middle Ages. Ed. R.S. Loomis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1959. pp. 134–144. Williams, G.P.and C.L. Kleinke.“Effects of Mutual Gaze and Touch on Attraction, Mood, and Cardiovascular Reactivity.” Journal of Research in Personality 27 (1993): 170–183. Wirth, Jean. L’Image médiévale: naissance et développements. Paris: Klincksieck, 1989. Wolfthal, Diane. “ ‘A Hue and Cry’: Medieval Rape Imagery and Its Transformation.” Art Bulletin 75 (1993). pp. 39–64. Woods, Marjorie Curry.“Rape and the Pedagogical Rhetoric of Sexual Violence.” Criticism and Dissent in the Middle Ages. Ed. Rita Copeland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. pp. 56–86. Zink, Michel. The Invention of Literary Subjectivity. Trans. David Sices. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999. Zinn, Grover. “Hugh of St. Victor and the Ark of Noah: A New Look.” Church History 40 (1971): 261–272. ———. “Mandala Symbolism and Use in the Mysticism of Hugh of St.Victor.” History of Religions 12 (1973): 317–341. Ziolkowski, Jan. Alan of Lille’s Grammar of Sex:The Meaning of Grammar to a Twelfth- Century Intellectual. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985. INDEX

Abelard, Peter, 28, 96, 99–106 Bartlett, Robert, 4 Adler,Alfred, 134 Barstow,Anne Llewellyn, 76, 78 Aelred of Rievaulx, 23–24, 90, 213, Baswell, Christopher, 107, 109, 233, 235 118, 143 Aeneas, 108, 122–123, 135–136, 138 Belting, Hans, 160, 170 The Aeneid, 45, 109, 132, 136, 138 Benton, John, 34 Alan of Lille, Liber poenitentialis,33; Benveniste, Henriette, 22 Anticlaudianus, 136–137 Bernard of Clairvaux, 235 Alexander III, Pope, 146, 177 Bernard Gordonio, 43 Alexandre (Cligés), 195–196, 210, 212 Bernard Sylvester, 39, 41, 114, 122, Alis (Cligés), 7–8, 192–197, 200–201, 132, 138 209, 212, 232 Béroul, 6, 145, 148–150, 175–177, 179, Amicitia, 103, 213, 234 181, 183, 190, 197 Amt, Emilie, 140 Biernoff, Suzannah, 127, 272 n45 Anselm,Archbishop of Canterbury, Blensinbil, 150–151 26–27, 62, 77, 221 Bloch, R. Howard, 180 Anna (Roman d’Eneas), 115–117 Blumenfeld-Kosinski, Renate, 121, Apollo, 42 127, 129 Archetype, 152, 159–161, 164, 169 , 38, 132 Arnauld of Villanova, 20 Bond, Gerald, 24–25, 88 Arnoul II of Guines, 11, 244 Brooke, C.N.L., 78 Arnulf of Orleans, 40–42, 47, 53–54, Brother Robert, 7, 149, 150–152 60, 65, 170 Brown, Catherine, 267 n54 Aristotle, 29, 73 Brown, Peter, 29, 137 Arthur, King, 8, 178, 184, 196, Brundage, James, 20, 82, 119, 224–225, 230–234, 239 146, 197 Ascanius (Roman d’Eneas), 115, 119, Bugge, John, 25 133 Bührer-Thierry,Geneviève, 183 Augustine, 23–29, 32, 104, 108, Burgess-Jackson, Keith, 179 135–136, 153–154, 156, 173, Burns, E. Jane, 17, 70 206, 221 Cadden Joan, 31, 260 n24 Bademagu (Chevalier de la Charrete), Cadot,A.M., 49 215, 216, 225–226 Camille (Roman d’Eneas), 121–122 Baldwin, John, 43, 80–81 Camille, Michael, 55 308 INDEX

Caritas and cupiditas, 12, 24, 90, 132, Duby,Georges, 11, 80, 88, 165, 244 159, 241 Dudo of St. Quentin, 108 Carron, Roland, 181 Cartlidge, Neil, 77, 84 Economou, George D., 132 Cazelles, Brigitte, 187 Eleanor of Aquitaine, 22, 81, 105, Chalcidius, 39 109–110, 139, 141–143 Chenu, M.-D., 23 Elliott, Dyan, 79 Chevalier au lion,12 Enders, Jody,93–94 Chevalier de la Charrete, 7, 12, 187–189, Eneas, 6, 8, 107–110, 113–123, 212–219, 222–223, 225, 229, 125–131, 133–139, 141, 143–144 233–234, 238, 239, 242 Eneas, Le Roman d’, 6, 45, 99, 107–110, Chrétien de Troyes, 7, 13, 19, 35, 113–136, 138, 143–144, 210 45–46, 91–93, 187–192, 202, 209, Epp, Garrett E. P., 268 n66 212, 214, 216–219, 229, 230, 233, Eriugena, John Scottus, 56, 131 235, 240, 242, 243 Eros hereos,20 Christina of Markyate, 82–83 Eugenius III, Pope, 84–85, 140, Cicero, 103, 213, 233–234 142, 143 Clandestine marriage, 2, 246 n. 9, 265 n. 27 Facetus, 193 Clement III, Pope, 120 Faral, Edmond, 95 Clerical celibacy,1, 6, 76–78 Fawtier, Robert, 274 n71 Cligés, 7–8, 91, 191–197, 199–200, Fénice, 7, 190–203, 206–207, 202–203, 206–212 209–212 Cligés (romance), 7, 91, 187–191, 195, Floire et Blancheflor, 97–99 197, 199–200, 210 Foucault, Michel, 99 Cohen, Jeffrey Jerome, 3, 217 Fradenburg, Louis, 183, 185–186 Constantine the African, 31 Frappier, Jean, 16, 148, 157, 172–175, Conte du Graal, 187 190–191 Cormier, Raymond, 49, 135, 271 n24 Fredegar, Chronicles off 135 Crouch, David, 141 Freeman, Michelle, 189 Cupid, 42, 59, 73, 95, 119, 128–129, Fries, Maureen, 18 133–134 Curtius, E.R., 76, 134 Gaunt, Simon, 19 Gauvain (Gawain), 232–233, 241 Dané, 57–58, 60–66 Geoffrey of Anjou (Plantagenet), 35, Dares Phrygius, 122–123 79, 140 Davis, Natalie Zemon, 186 Geoffrey of Monmouth, 108 Demats, Paule, 39 Gerald of Wales,78, 142 Despars, Jacques, 63 Gerard of Bourges (Berry), 43, 227 Devisse, Jean, 21 Girard, René, 71, 98 Dialectic, 89–92 Glendinning, Robert, 48, 94 Dictys of Crete, 122–123 Godefroiz de Leigni, 216 Dido, 6, 8, 107–108, 112–125, Gottfried von Strassburg,149 127–128, 130, 132–135, 137, 210 Govier,Trudy,179 Dronke, Peter, 17, 105 Gratian, 32, 119, 275 n2 I N DEX 309

Gravdal, Kathryn, 18–20, 218 Kaeuper, Richard,33 Gregory VII, Pope, 1, 264 n18 Kay (Chevalier de la Charrete), 229, 230, Gregorious, Master, 167 232, 234 Guenevere, 8, 12, 18, 212–220, Kay,Sarah, 89 224–226, 228–236, 239, 243 Kristeva, Julia, 57 Guibert of Nogent, 96 Krueger, Roberta, 19, 217 Guillaume de Lorris, 241–242 Lambert of Ardres, 1, 244 Hadot, Pierre, 55 Lancelot, 8, 12, 18, 76, 212, 214–229, Haidu, Peter, 191–192, 209 232–236, 239, 242, 243 Hanning, Robert, 39, 200 Lateran Council, Fourth, 78, 80–81 Hélinand of Froidmont, 142 Lateran Council, Second, 77–78 Helmholz, R.J., 80, 83 Laudine (Le Chevalier au lion), 12–13, Heloise, 96, 99–104, 106 92–93 Heng, Geraldine, 75–76 Laurie, Helen, 49 Henry I, King of England, 77–78, Lavine, 6, 107–110, 120–134, 137–139, 81, 139 143, 194, 202, 210 Henry II, King of England, 22, 35, 81, Lefay-Toury, Marie-Noëlle, 218 105, 109–110, 135, 139–143 Lewis, C.S., 16, 20; Allegory of Love,16 Henry of Huntingdon, 77–78 Louis VII, King of France, 81, 139, 141, Hincmar of Rheims, 21 143 Homo duplex, 202–204 Huchet, Jean-Claude, 129 Magister amoris, 6, 7, 28, 37–40, 60, 63, Hugh of St.Victor, 56, 191, 72–73, 95, 124, 128, 134, 138–139, 205, 207 152, 188–189, 199–202 Hunt,Tony,90–91, 93 Marc (Tristan), 7, 8, 145–147, 150, 157–159, 167–168, 174, 176–186, Ide of Boulogne, 11, 244 195–196 Ingledew,Francis, 135 Marchello-Nizia, Christiane, 182 Innocent III, Pope, 1, 264 n18 Marie de Champagne, 216, 218 Iseut, 7, 8, 17, 145–149, 153–161, “Marital affection,”2, 119–120 163–168, 171–185, 190, 192, 194, Matthew of Vendôme, 29–30 195, 197–199; Iseut of the White McCaffrey, Phillip, 269 n79 Hands, 152–156, 158, 160–162, 165, McCracken, Peggy, 70, 71, 181 168–170, 173, 178 Méléagant (Le Chevalier de la Ivo of Chartres, 86 Charrete), 215, 224–226, 228–230, 234, 236 Jaeger, C. Stephen, 17, 35–36, 95, Metamorphoses, 37, 39–42, 49, 65, 170, 182, 193–194 188–189 Jean de Meun, 241–242 Mews, Constant, 102, 104 John of La Rochelle, 29 Micha,Alexandre, 243 John of Salisbury,3, 84–85, 90, Miles, Margaret R., 32 111–113, 142, 230, 232–233 Minnis,Alastair, 36 Joliffe, J.E.A., 110 Moore, John C., 237 Juno, 120–122, 129 Mora-Lebrun, Francine, 122–123 310 I N DEX

Morgan, Gerald, 238 Piramus, 47–54, 66, 69, 84 Morris, Rosalind C., 14 Piramus et Tisbé, Le Lai de, 45–46, Myers, Henry A., 110 47–55, 66, 93 Plato, 93, 204 Narcissus, 55–57, 63, 65; Narcissus and Plotinus, 55–56, 65, 160, Echo, 63, 65 204–206, 212 Narcisus, 57–58, 60–66, 72–73, Poirion, Daniel, 114, 132–133, 128, 177 137, 139 Narcisus, Le Lai de, 38, 54–55, Polak, Lucy,165–166, 191 57–66, 99 Poulet,André, 183 Nederman, Cary,113 Press,A.R., 239, 240 Nelli, René, 202 Procné, 67, 70–71 Newman, Barbara, 102 Prometheus, 42 Nichols, Stephen G., 128–129 Pygmalion and Galatea, 170–171 Nickolaus, Keith, 5, 144 Noble, Peter, 192, 217 Rabine, Leslie, 158 Nolan, Barbara, 109, 121, 124 Ralph of Vermandois, 3, 119 Noonan, John T., 119–120 Rape, 19, 22–24, 32–33, 52, 66, 69–71, Nykrog,Per,46 96, 179, 218, 225 Reddy,William M., 14, 47, 89, Ong,Walter, 96 126, 238 Ordericus Vitalis, 21, 77, 86 Renart the Fox, 18, 19 Ovid, 6, 28–29, 34, 37–41, 43–45, 49, Ribard, Jacques, 234 53–54, 57, 60, 63, 65, 72–73, 94–96, Robert Courson, 78 98, 100, 128–129, 134, 136, 139, Robertson, D.W.,12 151–152, 191, 199–202, 234; Ars Roger of Salisbury,77 amatoria, 6, 37–39, 66, 72, 93, 117, Le Roman de la Rose, 241–242 126–129, 133–134, 152, 188–189, Romans antiques, 109, 240 199, 201; Heroides, 124, 125; Remedia Rosenwein, Barbara, 14 amoris, 38, 44, 93, 159 Rousse, Michel, 121 Roy, Bruno, 237 Pallas, 121–122, 129, 272 n. 36 Rudolph, Conrad, 171 Paris (Roman d’Eneas), 120, 123, 129, 131, 143 Sanday,Peggy Reaves, 22 Paris, Gaston, 12, 16, 214–217 Schmitt, Jean-Claude, 205 Partner, Nancy, 77–78 Schnell, Rüdiger, 17 Pernoud, Régine, 143 Shame-cultures, 203–204, Peter of Blois, 105, 213 282 n33 Peter the Chanter, 43, 80 Sheehan, Michael M., 84 Peter Lombard, 28, 245 n4 Shirt, David, 117, 196 Philip I, King of France, 3–4, 86–88 Snyder, James, 166 Philip Augustus, King of France, 81 Soredamor (Cligés), 210, 212 Philomena, 67–70 Southern, R.W.,79 Philomena et Procné, Le Lai de, 45–46, Spiegel, Gabrielle, 8, 243 66–72 Stafford, Pauline, 182 INDEX 311

Stanton, Robert, 83 Vernant, Jean-Pierre, 282 n36 Stephen of Tournai, 32 Viarre, Simone, 39 Suger, 87 Vinaver, Eugene, 242 Virgil, 135 Taylor, Gabriele, 204 Virgin Mary,163–164, 166–167, 177 Tellenbach,Gerd, 77 Tereus, 66–72 Wack,Mary Frances, 43, 227 Thomas Becket, 194 Walter Map, 81 Thomas of Brittany,6, 17, 46, 49, 145, Walter, Philippe, 162–163 148–150, 152–154, 157–159, 161, Warren,W.L.,140–141 164, 166–167, 169, 171–172, 175, Weiner,Annette, 185 186, 190–191 Wetherbee,Winthrop, 39 Thomas of Chobham, 43–45, 47, Whitehead, Frederick, 170 63,78 Will (voluntas, voleirr), 24–26, 28–29, Tinkle,Theresa, 17 153–158, 172–173, 190–191, Tisbé, 47–54, 94 210–214, 219, 222, 225–226, Tristan, 7, 17, 76, 145–186, 190, 192, 228–230, 232–236, 243, 244 195–197, 199, 202–203, 210 William of Conches, 29, 40, 161 Tristan (romance),6,190, William of Malmesbury,163 240, 243 William of Newburgh, 141 Troy,108, 135, 137 William of St.Thierry,28, 206 Turnus, 107, 126, 129 Wirth, Jean, 171 Wolfthal,Diane, 22 Uitti, Karl, 17 Ullmann,Walter, 4, 180 Yvain, 12–13, 15, 91–93

Venus, 62, 108, 115, 119, 120–122, 128, Zink, Michel, 241 131–134, 137–138, 162–163 Zinn, Grover, 206