Morris & Co. The Vision of the Holy Grail to Sir Galahad, Sir Bors, and Sir Perceval. Tapestry. 1891-94.
Chrétien de Troyes needed a martial source of inspiration to continue his romances of the Arthur from the earlier Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia Regum Britanniæ. He found just that within the popular chansons de geste – translated from French as “songs of deed” or “epics” – entertaining fashionable courts across France beginning in the late eleventh century and reaching pinnacle between the mid-twelfth and mid-thirteenth centuries and in the glorious tales of crusader knights recently returned from the Holy Land, particularly those stories of Count Phillip I of Flanders. Chansons described deeds of great knights which illustrated the values and virtues of the knight class as presented to higher nobles. Stories from the Crusades showcased the honor and piety of pilgrim-knights defending the church. These benchmarks of chivalry eased the new knight class into civil and honorable society. It was no surprise that Chrétien appropriated portions of the chansons and included elements of crusader knights to answer his patroness, Marie, in her want to infuse social standards into the Briton-Norman shared history presented by Geoffrey.
Chrétien borrowed from the preeminent example of chansons de geste: the most famous, the Song of Roland, composed between 1098 and 1100, during the reign of Henry I. The Song of Roland depicted the eighth century campaigns of Charlemagne and his knights; chief among them was Roland. The chanson described Roland as a loyal vassal of his liege lord – Charlemagne, his code of conduct as a chevalier, his epic deeds, and his ultimate betrayal by Ganelon, resulting in his death at the hands of Saracens. Roland’s code of conduct, deciphered from the chanson, became the chivalric code guiding the emerging knight class. According to the rules of chivalry, knights must have been pious, loyal, generous, honorable, virtuous, truthful, faithful, obedient to authority, and neither boastful nor insulting. Knights were required to protect the weak, despise pecuniary reward, fight for the welfare of all, guard the honor of fellow knights, respect the honor of women, never refuse a challenge from an equal, never turn their back to an enemy, commit to every endeavor started, and eschew unfairness, meanness, and deceit (The Order of Saint Isidore of Seville Library).
Chrétien needed an martial icon to serve as inspiration and patron. He needed to look no further than the cousin of his own patroness, Marie: Count Philip I of Flanders. Phillip I frequently visited the court of Champagne and its hostess before embarking for Jerusalem at the onset of the Third Crusade. He was renowned for piety as a holy pilgrim during the First and Second Crusades after refusing regency and command of the army of the Kingdom of Jerusalem from Baldwin IV, the Leper King. Chrétien was familiar with the crusader knight, both from reputation and from popular recitations of his stories during gatherings at the high noble court. An easy conclusion was to include elements of Phillip I’s stories into his romances of Arthur – which intentionally provided more familiarity, thus ownership, to the Briton-Norman shared history.
Chrétien began his final poem with a dedication to his new patron:
On behalf of the worthiest man in the empire of Rome… Philip, Count of Flanders, whose worthiness surpasses that of Alexander… The count loves righteousness and justice, loyalty and Holy Church, and despises all baseness. None knows the extent of his generosity… His generosity is known only to his recipients and to God… (Chrétien, 399).
While the dedication seemed to flatter, it showcased Philip I within chivalric code deciphered from chansons de geste.
Chrétien compiled the best chivalric traits of Phillip I and the chansons, then allotted to his knight, Perceval – protagonist of arguably the most recognizable of all Arthurian legends: “The Story of the Grail.” Chrétien’s poem was the first inclusion of Perceval in Arthurian Legend. Because no prior documents mentioned him, scholars debated the historical accuracy and existence of Perceval.
According to Chrétien, Perceval hailed from the Waste Forest of Wales, raised by his mother to be ignorant of knights and chivalry. His father, the knight Gahmuret, was wounded, lost his reputation and wealth, and returned home to die of a broken heart. His brothers joined the knighthood and died in combat. When Perceval matured to adolescence, he encountered a band of knights which he mistook for gods: “My mother told me no idle tale when she said to me that angels were the most beautiful creatures there are except for God… Here I behold the Lord God, I believe, for one of them is so beautiful to behold that the others… have not a tenth of his beauty… and I shall worship that one” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 341). King Arthur knighted that man at Carlisle and Perceval would have the same. His main goal was to go to Arthur’s court and get arms. Once accomplished, his goal was to return to his mother. Reluctantly, his mother agreed to his vocation and advised him in basic chivalry, particularly to protect those in need and serve ladies well.
While traveling to Carlisle, Perceval encountered the Vermillion Knight of the Forest of Quinqueroi who laid claim to Arthur’s land. In accordance with the chivalric code, Perceval was bound to guard the honor of his king. He killed the Vermillion Knight, taking his armor and horse. Then, Perceval encountered Gornemant of Gohort, who mentored the young knight in chivalry. Gornemant gave Perceval a sword, conferring on him knighthood. Gornemant instructed Perceval to be charitable, pious, and not too talkative. These traits were consistent with those deciphered from the Song of Roland.
Perceval encountered the maiden Blancheflor, Gornemant’s niece, at her seaside castle. Famine weakened she and her followers and the knight Clamadeu and his seneschal Anguingueron beset them. True to chivalric rule, Perceval vowed to aid Blancheflor in exchange for her love. To protect the weak and fight for the welfare of all, he bested Anguingueron, twenty other knights of Clamadeu, and Clamadeu, who Perceval showed mercy and allowed to live on the condition that he traveled to Arthur’s court and served a maiden once slighted by Sir Kay. Jeff Rider noticed, “Perceval is the perfect embodiment… of the hopes and dreams of the juvenes [unmarried, not-yet-enfeoffed knights in the twelfth century], of the young adventurer who gains the love of a rich heiress by his valour, and thus succeeds in establishing a great lordship far from his own people and founding a powerful dynasty” (Rider, 7).
The most important episode in “the Story of the Grail” was Perceval’s encounter with the Fisher King. Perceval was praying, practicing the chivalric rule of piety, when he came upon two men in a boat – one rowing, the other fishing. The fisherman offered to lodge the young knight and directed him to a house in the valley. Perceval was astonished at the fisherman’s lodging. “Constructed of grey stone, it was square and flanked by turrets. The great hall stood in front of the tower, and the living quarters in front of the hall” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 377). The house was that of the Fisher King.
In the great hall, The Fisher King greeted Perceval and apologized for not rising to meet him as he was wounded in battle, suffering a lance to the thigh, and was in constant discomfort. Perceval exemplified chivalry with his response: “In God’s name,” showing his exaltation of faith, “sir, do not speak of it,” guarding the honor of a fellow of chivalry, “God grant me joy and health, I take no offense,” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 378) refraining from wonton offense.
While dining, Perceval witnessed a precession of wonders. First, an attendant entered with “a sword hanging by rings from his neck… made of such fine steel that it could not break into pieces except by a singular peril known only to the man who had forged it…and can never again forge another sword like this one” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 378). The Fisher King took the sword and examined it. He gifted it to Perceval, as it was “appointed and destined” for the young knight on account of his virtue and nobility (Chrétien, “Grail,” 378). Then, another attendant entered holding a lance with a bleeding tip. Perceval “remembered the warning of the man who had made him a knight, he who had instructed and taught him to guard against speaking too much… therefore asked nothing” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 379). Again, two additional attendants entered with gold and inlaid candelabra, each holding ten candles. They were accompanied by “a beautiful, gracious, and elegantly attired young lady holding between her two hands a [grail]” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 379). The grail appeared so brilliant “that the candles lost their brightness just as the stars and the moon do with the appearance of the sun… [and] was of fine pure gold, adorned with many kinds of precious jewels, the richest and most costly found on sea or land” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 379). Again, Perceval asked no question of his host, remembering his lessons in chivalry.
Chrétien warned, “There are times when too much silence is the same as too much speech” (Chrétien, “Grail,” 379). Unfortunately, the advice of Sir Gornemant caused Perceval to miss the opportunity to heal the sufferings of the Fisher King. By asking, Perceval would have cured the king who would have regained the use of his legs and returned to governing his land. Perceval felt guilt and confusion.
Finally, Perceval encountered a holy hermit in isolation and begged:
Sir, I was at the home of the Fisher King. I saw the lance with the head that does truly bleed. And about the drop of blood I saw falling from the tip of the shining head, I made no inquiry. Since then, to be certain, I have done nothing to make amends. I saw the [grail] there, but do not know who was served from it. Since then such a heavy sorrow has been mine that I would gladly die. Thus have I forgotten the Lord God, for since then I have never implored His mercy, or, to my knowledge, done anything to obtain mercy (Chrétien, “Grail,” 416).
The hermit responded:
Brother… misfortune has befallen you for a sin of which you are ignorant… Sin cut off your tongue when you did not ask why the lancehead you saw pass before you never ceases to bleed. Foolish were you not to learn who was served from the [grail]. The man who is served from it was my bother… And as for that rich Fisher King, he is, I believe, the son of this king who has himself served from the [grail]… With a single host carried to him in the [grail], we know, he sustains and nourishes his life. Such a holy object is the [grail], and so pure in spirit is he himself that his life requires no further nourishment than the host that comes… For fifteen years now he has been served in this manner, never leaving the room where you saw the [grail] enter. Now I would instruct you and give you penance for this sin… Each day go as a penitent to the minister before you go anywhere else (Chrétien, “Grail,” 416-417).
As penance, the hermit demanded Perceval devote himself wholly to chivalry. He was to be pious, faithful to God and to his liege lord, honor nobility, be humble, and give charity to women. Upon returning to Arthur’s court, Perceval swore fealty to his liege. Gawain complemented Perceval’s naiveté, being a courtly knight from an uncourt-like beginning.
Chrétien’s romance of Perceval was unfinished, mid-sentence. “Because The Story of the Grail remains unfinished, we might assume that Chrétien abandoned his longest work upon the news of [Count Phillip I of Flanders’] death or, more likely, that he himself died before he could complete the poem” (Staines, xi). Though incomplete, the legend of Perceval was a true testament to the code of chivalry and expectations of knightly behavior in twelfth century France.
So relevant was “The Story of the Grail,” other literati continued the romance in sections, albeit with the addition of a different protagonist: Sir Galahad. The First Continuation, itself unfinished, was attributed to Wauchier de Denain, but recent scholarship contested his authorship. The Second Continuation, completed before 1200, was also attributed to Waucheir or Gerbert de Montreuil, though often omitted in collections of Grail stories. The Third Continuation, written by Manessier in Flanders between 1214 and 1227, finally gave the poem an ending.
The most popular continuation of “The Story of the Grail” was Parzival, composed in the early thirteenth century by Wolfram von Eschenbach. Eschenbach recreated the original Chrétien prose and completed it. Eschenbach was a knight serving the German nobility in the imperial Hohenstauffen period that afforded him a deeper understanding of chivalry; more inclined to Chrétien’s original intent than the first three recognized continuations.
What Chrétien could not have know was the staying power of his romances of King Arthur. Complying with Countess Marie of Champagne’s instructions to combine social standards of French court – the rules of courtly love and chivalry – with the shared Briton-Norman history of Geoffrey of Monmouth, Chrétien succeeded in furthering Marie’s socio-political stance on Norman sovereignty in the British Isles. Inadvertently, he also cemented the foundation of Arthurian Legend in the romantic tradition – a foundation upon which numerous building blocks have been laid by literati in France, Britain, and beyond.
© 2017 Lori Minchey.
phantasmenagerie 