Logo DBNL
De Nieuwe Taalgids. Jaargang 73 (1980)

De Nieuwe Taalgids. Jaargang 73

(1980)– [tijdschrift] Nieuwe Taalgids, De–rechtenstatus Auteursrechtelijk beschermd

Vorige Volgende

The Middle-Dutch version of La Queste del Saint Graal

J.C. Prins-S'Jacob

The Middle-Dutch Lancelot compilation1 has received increasing attention in the last few decades, attention different in kind and tone from that in Arthurian Literature in the Middle Ages,2 with its characteristic deference to foreign ‘originals.’ Maartje Draak's impressive article on the state of Lancelot studies in 1954 caused, in her own words, ‘some results and a greater number of unresolved questions.’3 Scholarly interest was aroused and acknowledged by the decision of the Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen (afdeling Letterkunde), made in 1977, to sponsor an integral edition of all Middel-Dutch versions of the prose Lancelot. The present article deals only with La Queste del Saint Graal4 and its Middle-Dutch counterpart, hitherto not included in the critical examination. It will show how, though much of the work has remained the same, the translator's technique has affected the areas of psychological depth and artistic expression, and has changed its theological doctrine.

La Queste del Saint Graal is in a somewhat favorable position for study because we need not rely simply on Sommer's edition,5 based on a limited number of manuscripts, but can consult, in addition, Pauphilet's edition and his extensive accounting of this edition in his Etudes sur la Queste del Saint Graal.6 This article uses Pauphilet's edition, taking into account his variants and those named by Sommer. For the Middle-Dutch version Jonckbloet's edition was used. As far as we know at the present time there are no other Middle-Dutch versions of the Queste, though there are of several other parts of the Lancelot compilation. This, of course, does not mean that there never were any other Middle-Dutch versions, or that the one in the compilation necessarily is a direct translation of the French without any intermediaries. But the present study deals with the status quo, comparing what is available in Middle-Dutch with what we know about what is available in French.

In spite of the extensive material in Pauphilet's edition and his Etudes it remains impossible to identify the manuscript which formed the basis for the Dutch translation. On close examination Pauphilet's stemma raises many questions. The fact that it is based almost entirely on the ‘Légende de l'Arbre de Vie’, a fairly detached episode

within the work, diminishes its validity, and his listing of variants is by no means complete.7 Gerritsen's suggestion to examine first the three manuscripts sharing a significant variant with the Dutch8 leaves out certain differences in circumstances and proves impossible in practice.9 The manuscript used, and this is all we can say, was most likely one of the α branch, with a possible connection to manuscripts Q, T and X, and with several connections with the manuscripts of the Σ group.10 Further identification will have to await inspection of the manuscripts.

In the following discussion of the differences between the French Queste and the Middle-Dutch one care has been taken to check all examples for variants in Pauphilet and Sommer. As was mentioned above, reference to the Middle-Dutch translator or translation reflects the present situation only, and in no way precludes the possibility of intermediate versions.

Gerritsen has devoted considerable attention to the various techniques of

translation found in the Dutch, which might be summed up as: a) more or less close translation, b) passages with parallel content rendered differently, either by the process of abbreviatio or that of amplificatio, and c) passages with significantly different content, brought about either through cuts or through insertions, only rarely through substitutions.11

The beginning of the work is a textbook example of an abbreviatio:

 
Ende die messe was gedaen,
 
Ende men eten soude gaen,
 
Quam ene joncfrouwe met haesten groet
 
Int hof gereden te Carmeloet
 
Ende vrachde oft Lanceloet daer ware.
 
Men seide: jaet, ende wiesden hare;
 
Ende sie bat hem doe daer des,
 
Van des conincs halven Pelles,
 
Dat hi met hare varen woude
 
Inden bosch, daer sine leiden soude,
 
Ende alte hant soe vragede hi:
 
‘Joncfrouwe, met wien soe sidi?’
 
‘Ic ben metten genen, sekerleke,
 
Daer ic u hier nu af spreke.’
 
Ende Lanceloet beval alsoe houde
 
Dat men sijn gereide lecgen soude.
 
Ende alse die coninc verstont dese sake
 
Hi wasere af sere tongemake,
 
Entie coninginne ende alt hof doe.
 
Entie joncfrouwe antwerder toe:
 
‘Hi sal morgen hier weder wesen
 
Ter maeltijt.’ Hi voer wech mettesen.
 
(lines 10-32)
In tsinxenen avonde, alst none was, A la veille de la Pentecoste, quant li compaignon de la Tabel Reonde furent venu a Kamaalot et il orent oï le servise et len vouloit metre les tabels a hore de none, lors entra en la sale a cheval une molt bele damoisele; et fu venu si grant oirre que bien le pooit len veoir, car ses chevaus en fu encore toz tressuez. Et ele descent et vient devant le roi; si le salue, et il dit que Diex la beneie. ‘Sire, fet ele, por Dieu, dites moi se Lancelot est ceenz.’ - ‘Oïl voir, fet li rois, veez le la.’ Si li mostre. Et ele va maintenant la ou il est et li dit: ‘Lancelot, je vos di de par le roi Pellés que vos avec moi venez jusqu'en cele forest.’ Et il li demande a qui ele est. ‘Je sui, fet ele, a celui dont je vos parol.’ ‘Et quel besoign, fet il, avez vos de moi?’ ‘Ce verroiz vos bien,’ fet ele. ‘De par Dieu, fet il, et je irai volentiers.’ Lors dist a un escuier qu'il mete la sele en son cheval et li aport ses armes. Et cil si fet tout maintenant. Et quant li rois et li autre qui ou palés estoient voient ce, si lor en poise molt. Et neporquant, quant il voient qu'il ne remaindroit. il l'en lessent aler. Et la reine li dit: ‘Que est ce, Lancelot, nos lairez vos a cest jor qui si est hauz?’ ‘Dame, fet la damoiselle, sachiez que vos le ravroiz demain ceenz ainz hore de disner.’ ‘Or i voist donc, fet ele; car se il demain ne deust revenir, il n'i alast hui par ma volenté.’ Et il monte et la damoisele ausi. (Queste, p. 1)

Note that the essential facts are retained, but illustrative details such as that the lady is ‘molt bele’ and her horse covered with sweat are left out. There is no consistent cutting of direct speech, but only of the greetings exchanged with the king and of the queen's remonstrances. The abbreviation is so drastic that the lady answers antwerder,

30) remarks not made in the Dutch text but summarized by ‘Hi wasere af sere tongemake/Entie coninginne ende alt hof doe.’An example of the close translation follows only a few lines further:

 
Binnen dien dat si dus spraken
 
Quamen .iiij. nonnen, dine versochten,
 
(Queste, p. 2)
 
Ende Galate met hen brochten,
 
Die soe scone was ende soe besneden
 
Van algader sinen leden,
 
Datmen niweren in eertrike
 
Vonden hadde sinen gelike.
 
Ene nonne hilt kint in die hant,
 
Ende si weende sere te hant,
 
Ende seide: ‘Here, ic bringe u
 
Dat kint, dat ic tote nu
 
Gevoet hebbe, dat al mine
 
Bliscap ende troest plach te sine;
 
Ende ic soude gerne sien dat hi
 
Van uwer hant ridder werde, wildi;
 
Bedie van beteren man, sonder waen,
 
En mochti ridderscap niet ontfaen.’
 
(lines 48-64)
Et endementiers qu'il parloient einsi, si entrerent laienz troi nonains qui amenoient devant eles Galaad, si bel enfant et si bien taillié de toz membres que a peines trovast len son pareil ou monde. Et cele qui estoit la plus dame le menoit par la main et ploroit mout tendrement. Et quant ele vint devant Lancelot, si li dist: ‘Sire, je vos ameign nostre norriçon, itant de joie com nos avons, nostre confort et nostre espoir, que vos en façoiz chevalier. Car de nul plus preudome de vos ne porroit il, a nostre cuidier, recevoir l'ordre de chevalerie.’

Note, for instance, the correspondence between besneden (‘cut’ as by a tailor) in 1.51 and taillié, between dat ic... gevoet hebbe and nostre norriçon, remarkable words to use for a nun. There are, indeed, many instances of such very close translations, a very striking one in king Mordrain's exclamation: ‘Biaus douz peres, ne m'oubliez mie de ma rente!’ (Queste, p. 82) and ‘Ne verget mins niet, heilege vader,/Van mire renten!’ (3485-6), uncommon usage of the word rente in both languages. Correspondences such as these should be kept in mind since a discussion of the differences between the two texts might easily obscure the many resemblances.

Examples of the rhetorical process of amplificatio are much rarer than those of abbreviatio, but also present, as in Gauvain's oath after the appearance of the grail at Arthur's court.

 
Vord seide min her Walewein: Daer of
 
Soe doe ic hierter wilen een belof,
 
(Queste, p. 16)
 
Dat ic porren sal mergen vroe
 
Ende soeken jaer ende dach daertoe,
 
Ende meer, ees noet, inne sal
 
Dat heilege grael soeken overal,
 
Ende sal doen macht ende pine;
 
Ende dan sal ic laten dor gene gescine
 
Op aventure oft ic werde verlost.
 
Ende in al sparen pine no cost,
 
Ende ine sal in gere maniren
 
Van soekene iet falgiren,
 
Hoet mi werden mach te sure;
 
Ende bliven altoes in daventure
Por coi je endroit moi faz orendroit un veu, que le matin sanz plus atendre enterrai en la Queste en tel maniere que je la maintendrai un an et un jor et encor plus se mestiers est; ne ne revendrai a cort por chose qui aveigne devant que je l'aie veu plus apertement qu'il ne m'a ci esté demostrez, s'il puet estre en nule maniere que je lou puisse veoir ne doie. Et s'il ne puet estre, je m'en retornerai.’
 
Ende niet te hove kere vordien,
 
Dat ict oppenbaerre hebbe gesien
 
Dant ons hier getoget es,
 
Op dat ic macht hebbe des,
 
Ende ict bi orlove moge sien.
 
En mach mi dat oec niet gescien,
 
Ic sal dan weder keren int hof
 
Ende houden mi gepait daer of.’
 
(689-710)

Here, too, the amplificatio follows the rules given by the treatises. After the rem simpliciter pronuntiare of lines 689-33 (Por coi... se mestiers est) the Dutch adds two lines of eamdem rem dicere sed commutate, followed by six lines of afferre contrarium.12 The second half of the oath, including its conclusio, is translated fairly closely (if one takes into account what happens when prose is turned into eight-to-ten syllable rhymed couplets) until the truly new touch in line 710-a worthy expression of courtines by the paragon of (the old) courtliness: ‘ic sal mi houden gepait daerof,’ even in case of failure the effort will be its own reward.

Note that the inserted lines fit in seamlessly, and that, apart from the somewhat plodding polysyndeton (ten out of twenty-two lines start with ende), the whole speech is free-flowing, almost one long sentence, which really does not need all of Jonckbloet's punctuation. In some cases this punctuation obscures a number of enjambments (699-700, 703-4-5), which add to the sweep of Gauvain's speech. These enjambments must be mentioned since Gerritsen notes his impression that the compiler avoids enjambments.13 In the few passages inserted in the Dutch Queste several enjambments occur.

The passages in which the content of the Dutch differs significantly from the French are interesting for a variety of reasons. There are insertions, deletions and, more rarely even, substitutions. In general, the Dutch tends to shorten the text rather than lengthen it. Many of the cuts are eliminations of repetitions: a dream, which in French is told at its occurrence and repeated verbatim in search for an interpretation, is told only once in Dutch. But most of the cuts fall into one of three distinct categories: large parts of the theological discussions between the various wise men and the knights, expressions of devotion and religious sentiment on the part of the knights, and vignettes of practical daily life, of human intercourse and sustenance, of care for men and horses, and of the scenery in which they live their adventures.

To follow Lancelot through his quest will give a fair idea of what has been done to the story by the deletions in these different respects. After the distressing episode in which Lancelot-in a trance-observes the sick knight being cured by the miraculous powers of the grail, he goes to a hermit for advice. Pauphilet has analyzed this and the following exchanges between Lancelot and the hermits. Though parts of them are in dialogue, the overall effect is clearly that of a sermon with an eloquent balance of

exhortation, biblical exempla, consolation and the application of the doctrine to his particular circumstances.14

In the first sermon the parable of the talents (Queste, p. 63-4), which sets the theme, is left out completely. The hermit urges Lancelot to turn away from the devil and accept Christ's mercy, starting with a complete confession of his sins. After some understandable hesitation he confesses his sinful relationship with Guenievre and the priest advises him that his confession has to be accompanied by complete faith in God and repudiation of his sin for the future: ‘Car ce seroit ausi com cil qui fet drecier sor fondement mauvés une tor fort et haute: si li avient, quant il a grant piece maçonné, que tout ce qu'il a fet chiet en un mont... Et ce seroit la semence que len gite sus la roche, que li oiesel enportent et degietent et ne vient a nul preu.’ (p. 66-7). Here another characteristic element of the sermon, the exempla picturing how Lancelot's spiritual recovery might fall, are left out in the Dutch.

The explanation of the three ‘words’ addressed to Lancelot is considerably shortened. In the discussion of his being ‘plus durs que pierre’ the scriptural reference to the people of Israel thirsting in the desert and Moses striking water from a rock is cut. In the discussion of his being ‘plus nuz et plus despoilliez que figuiers’ Christ's words to the figtree are kept, but left out is the lyrical introduction of his entry into Jerusalem, ‘le jor que li enfent des Hebreux chantoient encontre sa venue les douz chanz dont Sainte Eglise fet chascun an mencion, celui jor que len apele le jor des Flors.’ (p. 69-70) The whole passage is considerably drier because of this omission.

In the second stage of his conversion Lancelot hears a long sermon from a hermit who describes his virtuous character at the start of his knighthood, enumerating all his virtues beginning with the important ‘virginité’ then listing, and elaborating on, his humility, his patience and his rectitude. (Queste, p. 123-5) The Dutch retains only the last and least of the French virtues, that of caritas, and omits the vices into which the devil changed these virtues. The devil had effected these changes in Lancelot through Guenievre:

 
Dus trac die viant bi sinne
 
In Genoevren, der coninginne,
 
Ende hi porretse oec daertoe,
 
Dat si gerne op di sach doe;
 
(5031-4)
Lors entra en la reine Guenievre, qui ne s'ert pas bien fete confesse puis que ele entra primes en mariage, et l'esmut a ce qu'ele te resgarda volentiers...(p. 125)

Note the closeness of the translation and (the more remarkable because of that closeness) the complete disappearance of the doctrinal explanation, to which we will return later.

Between this episode and the third stage in his conversion Lancelot spends some time riding around isolation. One night he sleeps out of doors and has the vision about his illustrious ancestors, the next day he meets an aggressive knight whom he strikes down in self-defense. After this ‘si se met a la voie et chevauche jusqu'au soir. Et lors fu vains et las, come cil qui n'avoit mengié de tot le jor ne de l'autre devant; si ot chevauchié deus granz jornees qui assez l'orent lassé et traveillié,’ (p. 132) a practical

detail lacking in translation, as is the subsequent very kind and very simple hospitality shown by another hermit: ‘et li preudons prent le cheval et le meine en un apentiz qui estoit devant son ostel, et li oste il meismes la sele et le frain, et li done de l'erbe dont il avoit laienz a plenté. Puis prent l'escu et le glaive Lancelot et le porte a son ostel...’ (p. 133). How much more meaningful are these small gestures of hospitality than:

 
Ende daer hi staende sach enen man,
 
Dine herbergede ende vragede vort
 
Oft hi vespere hadde gehort? (5274-6)

The third sermon and Lancelot's further wanderings follow the same pattern: the sermons are somewhat shortened, details on his austere new lifestyle are left out. At the end his state of mind has changed considerably, but the Dutch version barely indicates this:

 
Hi dede af doe sine wapen
 
Ende beval hem Gode ende ginc slapen.
 
(9541-2)
Lancelot oste ses armes et se couche dejoste et se comande a Nostre Seignor et fet sa proiere tele come il la savoit, que Nostre Sires ne l'oubliast pas, ainz li envoiast secors tel come il savoit que mestiers li estoit a l'ame at au cors. Et quant il ot ce dit, si s'endort en tel point que ses cuers pensoit plus a Nostre Seignor que as terriennes choses. (Queste, p. 246).

The most significant cut in his later adventures is the description of the twenty-four days of his trance after the vision of the grail. More than just a vignette, this is a passage of more than a page of details on the utmost care lavished on him, the comfortable bed, the avoidance of noise, the examinations and different prognoses, and the weighty pronouncements by a wise old man (256-7).

A similar survey could be made of the adventures of Bohort or Perceval; of what has remained (the ‘facts,’ the plot) and of what has been changed. The effect on the story of Lancelot, ‘le plus ancien de nos romans d'analyse psychologique,’15 is saddening. His conversion in the Queste is undeniably a simple assemblage of humiliations, visions and sermons, with the latter providing the explanations for the visions and guidance for future conduct. But the process rises above the mechanical and comes to life by the small touches of psychology and the sincerity of the devotion. It is Lancelot's despair at his misadventures which makes him receptive to the words of the hermits. His humility towards them, his attention to their teaching render his conversion believable. His fallability, his lack of faith in the face of the lions guarding the grail-castle, remind us that he is, still, Lancelot, that he will never reach the perfection of Galaad, Perceval or Bohort.

In the Middle-Dutch version expressions of devotion have been frequently limited or cut altogether. When Perceval finds himself alone on the island he prays that God will protect him. The Dutch gives only the first half of the prayer and leaves out the most touching part:

Biax douz peres, qui deistes en l'evangile de vos meismes: ‘Je sui bons pastres, et li bons pastres met s'ame por ses oeilles, mes ce ne fet pas li marcheanz pastres; ançois let ses oeilles sanz garde tant que li leux les estrangle et devore si tost come il i vient;’ Sire vos me soiez pastres et deffenderres et conduisierres, si que je soie de vos oeilles. Et s'il avient, biax sire Diex, que je soie la centieme oeille folle et chetive qui se departi des nonante nuef et s'en ala foloiant es deserz, sire, pregne vos de moi pitié et ne me lessiez pas ou desert, mes ramenez moi a vostre part... (p. 96)

The investing of acts of devotion with true, powerful sentiment is not limited to the grail-knights. King Mordrain's waiting for the coming of Galaad is compared to Simeon's waiting for the coming of Christ:

 
Ende ontbeit also te dier stede
 
Des ridders comste, alse wilen dede
 
(p. 86)
 
Symon naden hemelschen coninc,
 
Die hi in sine arme ontfinc.
 
(3939-42)
Si fet ausi come Symeon li vielz fist, qui tant atendi la venue Nostre Seignor que il fu aportez ou temple, et la le reçut li vielz hom et le prist entre ses braz, liez et joianz de ce que sa promesse ert acompli... Et quant il le vit, si chanta la douce chançon, dont David li prophetes fet remembrance...

The Dutch is here more an excerpt than a translation. The vignette of the old Simeon in his joy for Christ's coming is cut completely. But passages like these seem to me to be touchstones of faith. To the Queste as a whole their presence imparts the difference between sincere religious conviction and pious moralizing.

A different question is: what happens to the religious doctrine which is presented in La Queste del Saint Graal? As we saw above the longest cuts are taken from the theological discussions, the sermons addressed to the knights at the different stages in their quest. Most often these are paraphrases of parts of the Bible, like the parable of the talents and the parable of the wedding feast. Just as much Scripture has been left in, but what is diminished is the easy connecting of one story with an entirely different one, the free range over the storehouse of biblical vignettes to be used as exempla, the remarkable eloquence of the sermons in general.

There are also some very specific doctrinal points which have been changed. We saw the excision of the reference to confession in Guenievre's seduction of Lancelot. The French text suggests clearly that her delinquency on the point of confession facilitated the devil's entrance into her soul. A long and detailed discourse to Bohort on the absolute necessity of confession (Queste, p. 163) has been equally cut in Dutch.

But the most important doctrinal change is actually made in the substitution of one word, accompanied by some cuts, resulting in a completely different interpretation of the mass and especially of the transsubstantiation in the whole work. In the French, Bohort has already referred to the seeming paradox of his absolute knowledge that the host represents his Saviour versus the inability of the human eye to see matters of the spirit. This concept becomes even more explicit during the ‘Liturgie du Graal’ in Pelles' castle. Josephus performs the rituals of the mass and when he raises the host the figure of a child descends from heaven: ‘...et se feri ou pain, si que cil qui ou palés estoient virent apertement que li pains avoit forme d'ome charnel.’ (p. 269). When Josephes retires the knights see, emerging from the grail, a man with bleeding hands,

feet and body, who gives communion to each of them: ‘...ne n'i ot nus a qui il ne fust avis que len li meist la piece en semblance de pain en sa bouche.’ (p. 270).

The exact nature of the transsubstantiation had been the subject of fierce controversy during the eleventh century, with Berengarius of Tours suggesting the notion of a symbolic and spiritual presence of Christ. Berengarius was officially refuted in 1079, and the theory of transsubstantiation defined by the fourth Lateran council in 1215. According to this theory the substance of the bread changes into Christ's body by divine omnipotence, but the species, i.e. the appearance and physico-chemical properties of bread and wine remain. The heated disputes led to a desire (on the part of the laity) to see the host, which led to the ritual of raising the host at its consecration.16

We see from this that La Queste del Saint Graal, dated circa 1220 by Pauphilet, stands squarely in the official dogma of its time. The translator has clearly not shared or not understood the author's view. He has omitted all the above quoted passages except that of the beginning of the miraculous mass, and there he says, when Josephes lifts the host:

 
Dattet hadde die vorme dan
 
Van enen geesteliken man, (10423-4)

so that the real man of flesh has been changed into a spiritual man. The doctrinal implications of this change certainly merit further investigation.

Whether because of the translator's misunderstanding or his disagreement, the doctrine of the Dutch Queste also differs in other important aspects from that of the French. It is noteworthy that some of these differences have to do with aspects which Pauphilet specifically identifies with the Cistercian order: the description of true confession as it is taught to Bohort, for instance, and the eloquence of the sermons for which the order was known.17

In comparison to the matters of doctrine the deletions in the practical aspects of the story seem minor, perhaps negligible. Many are concerned with the contacts between the different knights. Thus when Gauvain and Hestor meet and discuss their lack of adventures:

 
Si drogen over een tien tiden
 
Dat si te gader souden riden,
 
Ende andere wege daer anevaen
 
Dan si te voren hadden gedaen;
 
(5853-6)
Quant il ont grant piece parlé ensemble, si dist Hestor: ‘Sire, vos avez grant piece chevauchié toz seuls et je toz seuls, ne n'avons riens trové. Or chevauchons ensemble, savoir se nos serions plus chaanz de trover aucune aventure que chascun par soi.’ ‘Par foi, fet messires Gauvain, vos dites bien et je l'otroi. Or alons ensemble, que Diex nos conduie en tel leu ou nos truissons aucune chose de ce que nos alons querant...’ (p. 148)

Somewhat later, when Gauvain has injured Yvain, the latter begs to be taken to a nearby abbey to receive the last sacrement:

 
Ende min her Walewein dede alsoe
 
Ende voerdene ter abdien toe
 
(6057-8)
Lors le met messire Gauvain devant soi sus le cheval et baille a Hestor son escu a porter, et l'embrace par les flans por ce qu'il ne chaïst. Et li chevaliers conduit le cheval droit a une abeie... (p. 153)

Yvain dies the same day:

 
Daer min her Walewein om hadde rouwe groet;
 
Ende hi was begraven daer
 
(p. 154)
 
Indie kerke vorden outaer
 
(6102-4)
Messires Gauvains en est trop dolenz et ausi est Hestor: car mainte bele proece li avoient veu fere. Il le firent ensevelir bel et richement, en un drap de soie que li frere de laienz li aporterent quant il sorent qu'il ert filz de roi, et li firent tel servise come len doit fere pour mort, et l'enfoïrent devant le mestre autel de laienz, et mistrent une bele tombe sus lui, et i firent son non escrire et le non de celui qui l'ocist.

By this time the two knights are quite shaken by their dreams and by Yvain's death, and they go for advice to a hermit who has been recommended for his wisdom. They ride their horses as far as they can, then tie them up,

 
Ane bome ende gingen op daer naer,
 
Ende si vonden den goeden man
 
In sijn hof netelen lesende dan
 
Om te etene dien dach
 
Alse di els gene spise plach.
 
(6110-14)
si atachierent lor chevax a deus chesnes. Lors se metent en un estroit sentier qui aloit amont ou tertre et le troverent si roiste et si anuiex a monter qu'il sont tuit las et travallié ainz qu'il viegnent amont. Quant il sont venu amont, si voient il l'ermitage ou li preudons manoit, qui avoit non Nasciens. Et ce ert une povre meson et une petite chapele. Il vienent cele part et voient, en un cortil qui emprés la chapele estoit, un preudome viel et ancien qui coilloit orties a son mengier, come cil qui d'autre viande n'avoit gosté lonc tens avoit passé. (p. 154)

In each single instance the Dutch text tells us more or less the same as the French, yet taken together the many small discrepancies add up to a sizeable difference. The little dialogue between Gauvain and Hestor show them to us as real people, interacting both with liveliness and within a code of mutual courtesy. Similarly, the realistic, concerned transporting of the injured knight (whose identity they do not know yet) lends an ironic reality to the ritualistic, almost automatic attack whenever two knights chance to meet.

The standard description of the hermit's bare and isolated dwelling, with here just a little more stress on its austerity than usual, contrasts sharply with the rich splendor of

Yvain's interment from which Gauvain and Hestor have just come and which belongs so much more to their usual environment. Their fatigue when they have arrived-in contrast with the lustiness with which Gauvain jumped at Yvain's challenge shortly before-is like Lancelot's weariness mentioned before: in both cases there have been disquieting dreams, in both cases there have been distressing incidents, violent encounters. But in Lancelot the fatigue appears as the physical manifestation in this valiant knight of his psychological turmoil, his conversion to the higher ideals of Christian knighthood. Gauvain and Hestor have the same chances as Lancelot: they receive similar warnings in their dreams, and they are given equally explicit admonitions by the hermit, but they fail miserably. With physical fatigue worn off, they revert to the courtly flourishes (‘se je eusse loisir de parler a vos, je i parlasse volentiers’) of the old chivalric code, so entirely inadequate to the new chivalry with which the Queste is concerned.

In his chapter on the ‘execution littéraire’ of the Queste Pauphilet writes: ‘La réalité matérielle est absente de ce livre; les personnages y flottent dans un décor étrange, impossible, et qui ne parle guère à la sensibilité.’18 As my discussion of the practical details above has shown, I do not entirely agree with him. It is true that the physical details are sparse, too sparse perhaps in relation to the sermonizing and moralizing. But where they do appear those elements of material reality help to keep the tale ‘rooted,’ prevent it from floating away completely into religious allegory. In this sense the changes in practical detail during translation from French into Dutch have had more effect on the style and tone of the work than on the content, this in contrast to the changes in religious material.

The changes we have discussed up till now have been mostly cuts and this is representative of the whole of the work. Elaborations and insertions are rare. One of the insertions has already been discussed by Gerritsen; it is the preparation of the Ragisel in a prophecy made by a hermit to Gauvain after his adventure at the ‘Chastel as Puceles’ (Queste p. 55).19 It shows the compiler's care to interlace his stories even at a distance of 8563 verses. A similar process may have taken place in the conversation between Perceval and his aunt (Queste, p. 81). Perceval tells his aunt that he has conquered his own land with his brother Acglavaal, who has remained there. These lines do not occur in the French. Before the Queste the compiler has inserted a fragmentary version of Chrétien de Troyes' Conte del Graal and it, too, refers to this conquest of Percevals and Acglavaal's land. Jonckbloet already noted that the actual incident does not appear in the manuscript, but that it is a fair conclusion that at one of the existing lacunae another exploit of Perceval was inserted.20

There are two other additions of some length, which by their nature tell us something about the translator. As the knights depart on the quest the king notes that Galaad has no shield and offers him one, but Galaad declines to accept one ‘devant que aventure le m'amaint.’ The king assents in two short sentences invoking God's blessing (Queste, p. 25). In Dutch this becomes twenty-five lines (by Jonckbloet's

punctuation rather arbitrarily divided into twelve lines spoken by the king and thirteen lines of commentary by the translator). The king invokes God's blessing on Galaad because he wants to hear from him the truth about the grail and the adventures suffered for its sake. The translator comments on the risk of adventures in general, showing his love of proverbs: it is often said ‘Dat vligende craie bejaget iet / ende oec hevet gevallen bi wilen’ (that (only) when flying a crow catches a prey, and is sometimes lucky), adding further that people often meet with adventures which they could not have had if they had quietly stayed at home (1091-1118). This seems true enough, but a decidedly pedestrian beginning for a tale of chivalric adventure.

The next insertion, shortly hereafter, is in a similar vein. It occurs when the knights go on their separate ways (Queste, p. 26) and the narrator is faced with the technical problem of telling their separate adventures. He tells us that this will be difficult and therefore he will go slowly, because ‘Quade haeste is dicke onspoet’ (misguided haste is often slower in the end) and ‘daert glat is moet men gliden’ (where it is slippery one has to slide) (1181-1206). Such passages tend to confirm Gerritsen's impression that the Ragisel in the compilation seems intended for a less cultivated public than the earlier translation.21

It is, of course, not the body of the insertions, nor even the combination of additions and cuts which determine the quality, the style and the tone of the Dutch version of La Queste del Saint Graal. It should be emphasized again that very large parts have been translated almost word for word. But the more visible changes dramatize what has happened in a subtle way elsewhere. The writing of the French Queste is not particularly poetic, rich or artistic. The most eloquent parts are the sermons and those have been cut most severely. The most moving aspects of the Queste are the depth of its religious conviction and its psychological insights. Much of these have been eliminated.

To summarize: the translation of La Queste del Saint Graal which is incorporated in the Roman van Lancelot differs from its original both in theological content and in artistic expression in its widest sense, that is: in the form of the stories which tell the doctrine and in the wording of these stories. Pauphilet's judgement of the French Queste, that its elements ‘étaient trop attachés à un temps et l'assemblage en était trop subtil pour qu'ils fussent longtemps goutés. Le symbolisme perpétuel surtout en devint vite inintelligible. Avant la fin du XIIIe siècle on peut affirmer que ce livre n'est plus réellement compris: les remaniements qu'on en fit en sont la preuve,’22 is particularly applicable to the Dutch. The re-working of the theological content often testifies to a lack of understanding on the translator's part, and to a great discrepancy in force and intensity of faith as well as in specific doctrine.

The artistic expression has suffered too, though less drastically. The removal of psychological and practical detail directs all our attention to the religious element. Yet compared to the religious intensity of the French the Dutch seems rather anemic. A slight dullness indicates that it is an imitation rather than a work in true sympathy with

its original. The Dutch Queste has moved a few steps away from the French, from being a testimony of faith toward being a moralizing tract.

 

390 First Avenue Apt. 11 G

New York, N.Y. 10010, U.S.A.


Vorige Volgende

Over dit hoofdstuk/artikel

titels


auteurs