Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1963 A Re-Examination of the Roland Legend, a Comparative Study of Selected Matieres in the Traditions of the Oxford Version, the 'Chronicle of Turpin,' and the Provencal Epic Poem, 'Ronsasuals'. Duane Alfred Adams Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Adams, Duane Alfred, "A Re-Examination of the Roland Legend, a Comparative Study of Selected Matieres in the Traditions of the Oxford Version, the 'Chronicle of Turpin,' and the Provencal Epic Poem, 'Ronsasuals'." (1963). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 804. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/804 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been 63-6208 microfilmed exactly as received ADAMS, Duane Alfred, 1923- A RE-EXAMINATION OF THE ROLAND LEGEND, A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SELECTED MATIERES IN THE TRADITIONS OF THE OXFORD VERSION, THE CHRONICLE OF TURPIN, AND THE PROVENCAL? EPIC POEM,'-------------- RONSASVALS. Louisiana State University, Ph.D., 1963 Language and Literature, general University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan A RE-EXAMINATION OF THE ROLAND LEGEND A comparative study of selected matieres in the traditions of the Oxford version, the Chronicle of Turpin, and the Provencal epic poem, Ronsasvals. A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Foreign Languages by Duane Alfred Adams M.A., The University of Nebraska, 19^9 January, 1963 Acknowledgement The writer is deeply indebted to Professors Elliott D. Healy and Wyatt A. Pickens for their constructive criticism, patience and guidance, and to Arlington State College and the College Library for invaluable assistance. il TABLE OP CONTENTS I THE PROBLEM......................................... 1 II LES MATIERES........................................ 24 Names of persons..................................24 Swords and horses.................................33 Comparable and contrasting features of theaction..35 Some general remarks and observations on the con­ cordances ........................................ 44 III CATEGORICAL COMPARISONS............................. k6 Descriptive style.................................47 Descriptive style in the Chronicle of Turpin....... 48 Descriptive style in Ronsasvals.............'..... 49 Individual portraits and other items in all three versions......................................... 50 The prodigious blow as apoetic device............. 56 A comparison of specific numbers................. 58 "Hidden matieres".................................63 IV SOURCES OP DIVERGENCIES INRONSASVALS, "Un autre accent"............................................ 79 Galian de Raynier.................................79 Summary of results from the Galiancomparison ...... 87 iii iv Spanish echoes.................................89 Regional! sms................................... 91 Relics and Portajoyas.......................... 9k "Mon nep e mon enfant"......................... 98 Arthurian and northern connections?........... 100 V SIGNIFICANT VARIATIONS.......................... 103 "Nostre emper(er)e magnes".................... 104 "Naimes li dux"............................... 110 "Le destre braz del cors"..................... Ill "Li arcevesques"........... 114 "Li proz e li gentilz"........................ 117 "Aide la bele"................................ 118 "Ki la trai’sun fist".......................... 121 CONCLUSION......................................124 A resume of the Concordance of Matieres....... 126 Evaluation of the core story of OTuR.......... 129 Independent sources in Ronsasvals............. 131 The apparent isolation of the Provengal epic...135 Monk and jongleur?............................ 138 Dating of the Ronsasvals...................... 139 Provenqal epic traditions?.......... % ........ 142 Summation.................. 143 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................... 146 AUTOBIOGRAPHY................................... 154 TABLE OP SYMBOLS EMPLOYED C .................. Ms. of Chateauroux Carmen............. Ms. of Carmen de prodlcione guenonls fl................ Lorraine Fragments Galiens............ Ms. Galiens li restores K .................. Ms. Konrad (Ruoldndes Liet) L ......Ms. of Lyons MTL............... Names not found in the Table langlois n ................. Ms. Karolusmagnussaga 0 ................. Ms. of Oxford (Dlgby 23) OTuR...............Common to Oxford, the Chronicle of Turpin and Ronsasvals OTu................Common to Oxford and the Chronicle of Turpin OR................ Common to Oxford and Ronsasvals ?..................Ms. of Paris (P)................Pagan R ................. Ms. of Ronsasvals (at Apt in Provence) (S)................Saracen T ................. Ms. of Cambridge (Trinity) Tu................ Ms. Chronicle of Turpin TuR............... Common to Turpin and Ronsasvals V4................ Ms. Venice 4 V7................ Ms. Venice 7 Viaggio............Ms. II viaggio di Carlo Magno in Ispagna v TABLES I Concordance of names of persons.................. 26 II Ratio of Christians to Saracens in OTuR...........30 III Names of horses in OTuR.......................... 33 IV Names of swords in OTuR.......................... 3^ V Concordance of selected matieres in OTuR........ .. 3 6 VI Major prodigious blows in _0...................... 57 VII The Twelve Peers according to 0 and R .............59 VIII Summary of selected items involving specific numbers in OTuR................................... 62 IX Comparison of Falsaron-Falsabron occurrences in 0-R 66 X Comparison of matieres pertinent to Aelroth of 0 and the black Saracen of R ...................... 71 XI Condensed concordance of matieres with the core story of OTuR.................................... 127 XII Revised table of affiliation of OTuR............. 142 vi ABSTRACT The problem of this study is three-fold and deals with the relationships of the Provenqal epic poem, Ronsasvals, with the Oxford Roland, and the Chronicle of Turpin, the nature of the origins of Ronsasvals (and of Turpin to a limited degree) which makes these versions so divergent from the main stream of Oxford and its remaniements, and the Importance of the study as it reflects on general problems in Roland research. The main line of research has been to undertake a systematic comparison of the Oxford, Turpin and Ronsasvals, emphasizing ideas rather than phonological minutiae or metric variations, and to provide concordances of selected matieres and proper names, a categorical comparison of important elements, an amplification of areas showing the greatest divergency among the three versions, a study of sources and contaminations in Ronsasvals, and a discussion of attitudes on the part of the three authors toward the principle characters. The study reveals that Ronsasvals is based upon a vii viii primitive Roland which stems from a pre-Oxonian form which has been contaminated by various sources resulting in the version found in the manuscript of Apt. The identification of the Ronsasvals1 core story (matieres common to Oxford, Turpin and Ronsasvals) with a primitive Roland concurs with the composite of findings by R. Menendez Pidal and Andre Burger on the probable nature of the pre-Oxonian Roland. Although the Ronsasvals is shown to have been contami­ nated by several independent sources, it is also apparent that the work developed in some sort of isolation. A part of this isolation is accounted for by the assumption of oral transmission which explains much of the peculiar nature of this version, especially the paucity of close concordan­ ces with Oxford and Turpin as well as matiere survivals which are greatly distorted as to details. Elements identifiable as being connected with the Church point to a degree of clerical influence in Ronsasvals midway between that of the Turpin and the Oxford. Strong enough evidence of poetic talent on the part of the author of Ronsasvals also suggests the probability of the monk- jongleur collaboration proposed by Joseph Bedier. In addition to other implications of the three-fold study there is the suggestion that a foreign version, such as Ronsasvals, not tied to the Church like the Turpin, and not bound by patriotism like the Oxford, tended to reveal, ix with respect to the main characters, attitudes not found in either the Oxford or Turpin traditions. It is felt that the main, or underlying value in research as demonstrated by this study is that much Roland research has long held too closely to the investi­ gation of those manuscripts which are all close cousins and which involve copying of written manuscripts related to 0, and that important keys to some old Roland mysteries lie in studying the versions such as Ronsasvals outside of the main stream of Roland legend. I t CHAPTER I The Problem The Roland legend has probably received more scholarly attention during the past century and a third than any other phase of the Old French chansons de geste. But in spite of