French StudiesVolume XLIII July 1989 No. 3

PATTERNS OF FAITH AND DOUBT: GAUTIERD'ARRAS'S ERACLE and ILLE ET GALERON

GAUTIER D'ARRAS was probably an exact contemporary of Chretien deTroyes. He is known to us as the author of two verse narratives, Erodeand Me el Galeron, which have survived in a total of five manuscripts.1The fact that so few manuscript versions of his works survive maysuggest that, despite his being listed alongside Chretien as one of thecelebrated writers of the past in a thirteenth-century Miracle de NostreDame,2 Gautier was not so well liked in the Middle Ages as his famousconfrere. In modern times, there can be no doubt as to which of the twowriters is the more popular. Editions, translations, and critical studiesof Chretien's romances far outnumber those devoted to the works ofGautier.3 Yet those critics who have turned their attention to Gautierd'Arras have found in him a master craftsman, less gifted, perhaps, thanChretien in creating a distinctive poetic universe, but skilled in rhetoricand the art of story-telling, and a subtle and thoughtful observer of hishuman and physical surroundings.4 My aim in this article is tocomplement their studies with a closer look at one aspect of the thematiccontent of Gautier's poems. I intend to trace the recurring patterns of athematic constant the interaction of faith and doubt which notonly forms a bridge between two ostensibly very different narratives,but also suggests ways of approaching two of the problems associatedwith Gautier's work: namely, the apparent lack of unity in Erode, andthe reason why, in Ille et Galeron, our poet should have chosen to re-tellthe story of the 'man with two wives' in a way which most modernreaders have found so much less satisfying than Marie de France'sEliduc.

I should note at the outset that the two terms 'faith' and 'doubt' areused here in a rather broad sense, as markers for two contrastedsemantic fields. 'Faith' for my purposes covers not only religious belief,but also the notion of 'faithfulness' on the human plane, and as such will

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

258 PENNY ELEY

include the ideas of keeping faith, trust, loyalty, and confidence as well.Likewise, 'doubt' will function as a label for the complex of negativeconcepts which stands in opposition to 'faith': unbelief, lack of trust,breach of faith, and loss of confidence. This is not purely a matter ofconvenience. The use of a simple pair of contrasted terms reflects theidea that Gautier's work can profitably be read in terms of a fairly simplepolarity between positive and negative attitudes towards God and one'sfellow man.

This contrast is most obvious in Erode, probably the earlier ofGautier's two works.5 Erode has been a source of puzzlement to manyscholars, because it appears to tell three quite different stories, in at leastthree different registers, within the overall framework of a poeticbiography of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius.6 It falls into threedistinct sections, the material for which is drawn from quite unrelatedsources. The first is a variation on the well-known tale of the three gifts,with New Testament overtones. It tells of the birth and boyhood of thehero, and the testing of his God-given knowledge of precious stones,horses, and women by the emperor of Constantinople. In the secondsection an incident from the career of the real-life emperor Theodosiusprovides the basis for a love-story which does not involve the hero, andin which a fairly sophisticated concept of Amor rubs shoulders with ahumorous realism reminiscent of fabliaux such as Richeut and AubirSe.Finally, liturgical texts dealing with the Invention of the True Cross bySaint Helena, its capture by a pagan king, and re-capture by Heracliusare combined to form an epic narration of the final chapters of Eracle'slife.7

The hybrid nature of the text has elicited a variety of responses fromcritics. Some have come to the conclusion that it represents a failure onGautier's part: an unsuccessful attempt to synthesize incompatiblematerials which a wiser poet might have chosen to treat separately or notat all.8 Others have looked for thematic rather than formal unity, andhave suggested that it is to be found either in an underlying religiousinspiration,9 or in a 'never-ending concern for the hero's personalentelechy'.10 Both these interpretations successfully establish linksbetween the first and third sections of the poem, but are less convincingwhen it comes to showing how the central love-affair fits into an overallthematic structure. It is hard to find a sustained religious current in thestory of an empress's adultery, narrated as it is with a considerabledegree of sympathy for the lovers; and equally difficult to see a'never-ending' concern with Eracle's personal development in a majorepisode (some 2,300 lines) from which he is largely absent. In animportant recent article, Paul Zumthor has argued that the question ofunity should be posed in different terms. In his view, the text of Erode is

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

GAUTIER D'ARRAS 259

essentially fragmentary, 'un patchwork tres attentivement conc.u maispiece a piece, a mesure que l'ensemble se construit et s'etend', whosecomposite nature is one of the clearest indicators of its fundamentalorality.11 Its principal unity is that of the author's voice, in the fullestsense of the word.12 However, the quest for unity of a more 'literary'kind is not necessarily incompatible with recognizing pronounced oralqualities in the text, as Zumthor implicitly acknowledges in hisdiscussion of the recurrent theme ofvSridiciti associated by Gautier withthe figures of Eracle and his detractors.13 There are discernible patternsin the patchwork. My contention is that it is possible to go beyond thisand say that there is one overall pattern in the work, created by twointerlocking themes faith and doubt which run consistentlythrough all three sections of the poem. It can be argued, I believe, thatEracle was conceived not only not primarily, even as a poeticbiography of a Christian emperor, but as a meditation on the nature offaith, for which the life of Heraclius provided a convenient vehicle. Eachof the three sections of the text explores one or more aspects of thesubject, inviting the audience or reader to consider the positiveconsequences of believing in God and His creatures, and the negativeeffects of lack of belief. Together they form a kind of summa of faith anddoubt, illustrating their working on the religious and the non-religiousplanes, in the greatest possible variety of situations. Seen from this pointof view, the choice of widely differing source materials ceases to bepuzzling evidence of authorial eclecticism, and becomes instead thenecessary basis for a comprehensive demonstration.

The opening scenes of the work are rich in signposts indicating thethematic path to be followed. The story of Eracle's conception and birthis an exemphtm of Christian faith, which shows how trust in God isrewarded. Miriados, Roman senator and 'loiaus hom' (1.118), and hiswife Cassine have been married for eighteen months, but she shows nosign of conceiving a child. Both pray long and hard for the gift of a son,never giving up hope that their prayers will be answered. After sevenyears have passed, Cassine is visited in a dream by an angel who tells herthat if Miriados will put on his best cloak, sit down on a silk cloth spreadon top of a carpet, call her to him, and make love to her before daybreak,she will conceive a son who will bring joy to all of Rome. After amoment's hesitation, she obeys, and the hero is duly conceived. Hisbirth is marked by another visit from the angel, bringing a letter whichwill invest him with three special kinds of knowledge when he is oldenough to read it.

Many of the key terms and ideas of the work are to be found in thisbrief episode. The concepts of faith and trust are omnipresent. Gautierdescribes the way of life of Miriados and Cassine in terms which tell the

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

26O PENNY ELEY

audience little about their social position, wealth, or influence, butwhich direct attention instead to their piety:

Bide ert li vie qu'il menoientet por Diu grant avoir donnoient.A Diu, au siecle si s'acrdentque l'un por l'autre pas ne perdcnt.

(11.125-28)The hero's parents represent an ideal of active faith, which strikes aharmonious balance between living in the world and living for God.This idea of balance seems to have had some special significance for theauthor, for it reappears as the principal feature in a list of virtuesdisplayed by Athanais during her seven unclouded years as empress ofRome (11.2935-58). Faith is also highlighted in the fact that, despitetheir extreme distress at not being able to have children (11.132-34), thecouple never give way to despair. When their prayers are finallyanswered, the angelic messenger stresses that it is their unwaveringbelief which has won them divine favour: ' "Ne puet perir qui en Diucroit; / il n'i a pas creu en vain" ' (11.170-71). Gautier also introduces theidea of doubt into these early scenes, in the form of Cassine's momentaryreluctance to carry out the angel's commands, as if to remind theaudience that faith is an act of will which needs to be constantlyrenewed, and to prepare them for the important role which lack of faithis to play in the remainder of the story. This moment of hesitation, asCassine becomes aware of the conflict between what she has been told todo and her normal behaviour patterns, is beautifully realized. Cassine'sfirst reaction to the angel's visit is to leap out of bed and make ready to doas he has said. This immediate, active response then gives way toinaction as doubt begins to form. Cassine climbs back into bed again tothink things over (what will her husband think of her if she wakes himup and tells him she wants to make love on the floor?), before finallyre-affirming her faith in God's messenger:

' . . . li angles le m'encarjaet cose u Dius ait rien a fairene puet pas tomer a contraire.'

(11. 194-^ 6)Her decision to trust God and her husband is shown to be the right one.Miriados does not react, as she had feared, with accusations ofwantonness. He trusts his wife implicitly and immediately does as sheasks:

cil n'est ne vilains ne leciere,se feme croit et dent molt ciere;saut sus et si l'apiele a lui.

(11. 203-05)

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

GAUTIER D'ARRAS 261

One aspect of the relationship between love and trust, which forms thethematic backbone of the Athanals-Parid6s episode, is thus brieflyilluminated: Miriados obeys his wife's peculiar request because his lovefor her means that he respects her judgement.

In the remainder of the first section of the poem, Gautier takes up thesemotifs of obedience, faith in God, and trust between human beings, anddevelops them in a variety of ways. The death of Miriados is used tointroduce a change of key and a quickening of the tempo. As a widow,Cassine is no longer required to maintain a balance between the claims ofsociety and religion. With her husband dead and her son endowed withgifts which will guarantee him an honourable place in the world, thepossibility of self-denial is now open to her. She becomes a model ofChristian charity and faithfulness to the memory of her dead partner.Before retiring to a convent she sells everything she has, including her son,and gives the proceeds to the poor in order to speed the soul of Miriados onits way to Paradise.14 Cassine's departure from the world is the signal forEracle's entry into it, through the curious medium of the market-place.The selling of Eracle marks the start of a series of graded contrasts, inwhich the rewards of faith and the adverse consequences of doubt arepresented to the audience in ever clearer and more dramatic terms.

The counterpoint begins with a contrast between the calm self-confidence of Cassine and Eracle and the scepticism of would-be buyerswho refuse to believe that a child often can be worth the asking price of athousand besants. As the scene shifts to the imperial court, so attentionshifts to the relationship between Eracle and his new owner, the emperorLaius, which provides a context for major thematic development. Theemperor, too, is initially sceptical. He has serious suspicions aboutEracle, which he is determined to confirm or allay by means of a test of theboy's self-proclaimed knowledge of precious stones. He cannot takeEracle's abilities on trust; only empirical proof will satisfy him:

Esprouves ert [i.e. Eracle] ains quinze dis,car l'empereres le mescroit,ja nel kerra s'il cou ne voit.

(11. 724-26)Eracle, on the other hand, does not need practical proof of his powers tobe convinced that they exist. His faith is absolute. Upon finding thestone he has been looking for, the hero breaks into a triumphantcelebration of faith, which foreshadows his rejoicing after the defeat ofCordro6's son in the final section of the poem (11. 5819-26):

'Or ai, fait il, ma desiredOr se taisent li recreant,li menfoignier, li mescreant!Dius a sen home revid6;

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

262 PENNY ELEY

ne puet perir qui croit en De,molt par est caitis qui n'i croit,et cil qui sor sa mort acroitn'est mie certes bien sens.'

(11. 850-57)The parallel between Eracle's faith and that of his parents both ofwhich are gloriously rewarded is underscored here by an exact reprisein line 854 of the angel's words to Cassine some 700 lines earlier (1.170,quoted above). The contrast between Eracle and Laius is sustainedthroughout the description of the testing of the stone, to be resolved asthe emperor is gradually convinced that the unprepossessing mineralselected by Eracle does indeed have extraordinary powers. Tests of twoof the stone's three properties are enough to satisfy Laius, but Eracleinsists on a third demonstration, which involves exposing himself toattack by an armed opponent, as proof of his own good faith.

The account of the testing of Eracle's second gift sees the introductionof two new motifs, which add darker and more subtle tones to thepicture of faith and doubt. The first is the tenacity of doubt in the face ofexperience. Despite incontrovertible evidence of the truth of the boy'sclaims about his knowledge of precious stones, the emperor still cannotbring himself to trust him without reserve. He has to put Eracle'sknowledge of horses to the test, too; and when the boy ignores the besthorse from the imperial stables and chooses a poor man's foal instead,the emperor rejects his warning and insists that the foal be put to the testas well. The death of the foal at the end of a race in which it out-runsthree of the finest horses in Rome strikes the second new note in thisepisode. Hitherto, Gautier has focused on the benefits of faith withoutdwelling overmuch on the consequences of doubt. Now, the audience ismade aware for the first time that lack of faith is a fundamentallydestructive force. The emperor's refusal to believe Eracle when he tellshim that the foal will reach its true potential only if it is not raced for atleast a year is directly responsible for its death and the deaths of twoother horses in the race. Three peerless creatures are destroyed becauseof his stubbornness. As if to counterbalance this increase in the stakes onthe side of doubt, Gautier also shows the rewards of faith to be greaterthan on previous occasions. The testing of the stone had led to Eracle'sbeing held in high esteem at court, where, we are told, the emperorloved him like a cousin or a brother (11.1135-36); the testing of the horseresults in his becoming the emperor's most trusted counsellor, whom heloves 'con fait li pere son enfant' (1.1906).

This progression is maintained in the final test, the finding of a wifefor the emperor. Laius's doubts appear to have vanished, for he makesno attempt to trick Eracle by 'planting' candidates at the Bride Show.

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

GAUT1ER D'ARRAS 263

He accepts the boy's unlikely choice of a poor meschine with completeconfidence. Eracle's loyalty is rewarded once again, this time by hisbeing knighted and acknowledged as a de facto 'prince de la terre'(1.2890) by the whole empire. The emperor has his reward, too, in theform of Athanais, who proves herself to be the perfect empress: loyal,upright, devout, charitable, and loved by all who know her.

With this, the first leaf of the triptych is complete, and Gautier moveson to the second, in which the principal subject will be faith on thehuman level, in particular between man and wife, but also betweenadviser and advised. The apparently incongruous transformation ofAthanais from perfect empress into adulterous lover, which some criticshave found hard to accept,15 becomes less problematic if we can readthis central section of the work as an extended demonstration, whichtakes up where the testing of the horse left off, of the severe andfar-reaching consequences of lack of faith. Gautier's decision to place aeulogy of Athanais immediately before the account of her downfall is, Isuggest, quite deliberate: the point being to show that lack of trust is sopowerful and so invidious a poison that even the brightest and best arenot immune to its effects.16

The story begins with a long conversation between Laius and Eracleabout what should happen to the empress while her husband is away atwar. The drama of faith and doubt which has been played out in each oftheir previous exchanges is re-enacted, but with greater intensity thanbefore. Once again a contrast is established, between the portrayal ofEracle as an example of unwavering confidence in himself and those hehas chosen, and the picture of Laius as a personality incapable of thehighest levels of trust. The emperor has fallen prey to jealousy andcannot bear the idea of leaving his wife unguarded while he goes away.He calls Eracle aside and asks for his advice on how best to keep watchon her. Eracle's reply is brief and to the point: there is no need for anyspecial precautions, as Athanais is totally trustworthy (11. 3020-23).Laius, however, will not listen to advice which runs counter to hisemotional reaction. He decides to confine his wife in a tower under thewatchful eyes of twenty-four elderly knights and their wives. Eraclewarns him that this will inevitably turn Athanais against him, but to noavail: the emperor says that he loves his wife too much to do otherwise.A further contrast is surely implied here between Laius and Miriados,whose love for his wife was mediated by trust rather than suspicion.

As far as the empress is concerned, Laius's refusal to trust herdestroys whatever affection she may have had for him. Gautier'sportrayal of Athanais is built around a complex interaction between loveand trust, in which love becomes both cause and effect of a breach offaith. Athanais experiences the loss of self-respect which Eracle had

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

264 PENNY ELEY

identified as one of the consequences of harsh treatment of women(11. 3097-101 and 3550), and in this emotionally vulnerable state seizesupon the idea of love, and then its reality, as a means of escape from anintolerable situation. The depth of Gautier's psychological insight inthis respect has often been commented upon. The author makesexcellent use of the technique of interior dialogue, probably derivedfrom Eneas, to dramatize the workings of conscience and the subtleemotional casuistry which leads to unfaithfulness. In terms of theparadoxical logic of Amor, Athanals keeps faith with her better nature bygiving in to her feelings for the handsome Parid6s, for, as she sees it,

' . . . cui Amors tient as6s pr6s,orguel li taut et felonnieet faussete et vilonie,et si l'estruit de grant largece,de cortoisie et de prouece.'

(11.3710-14)The thematic structure of this central section is further enhanced bythe way in which a minor character is used to mirror and comment onthe attitudes of the protagonists. The old woman who brings Athanalsand Paride's together is in many respects a comic reflection of the hero,exhibiting a loyalty and trustworthiness which provide another impli-cit commentary on the behaviour of Laius. Gautier stresses that lavieille's intervention in the affair is prompted in the first instance byher deep affection for the lovesick Parid6s and her sense of loyaltytowards his family (11.4015 and 4045). He introduces a lengthyconversation between the old woman and the young man, in which sheoffers good advice and he responds positively to it, as a contrast to therecent exchange between Eracle and Laius, in which the emperor flatlyrejected his adviser's suggestions. Parid6s is shown to have absolutefaith in la vieille, as is Athanals, who chooses her to be theirgo-between; both are subsequently rewarded with the consummationof their love, while Laius's suspicious nature brings him nothing buthumiliation

The ending of the story, which sees Laius repudiating his wife andagreeing to let her marry her lover, is less a vindication oifin'amors than areminder that no one can escape the consequences of a lack of trust.There is a certain heavy-handed irony in the fact that Laius is shown tohave no doubts whatsoever about Eracle's report that his wife hascommitted adultery ('et il ne le mescrei mie', 1.4726); and a good deal ofpoignancy in the description of the emperor's grudging, but genuine,acceptance of responsibility for what has happened (11.5045-64).Significantly, the final image in this section is not of the lovers, nowjoyfully united, but of Laius, bitterly regretting his foolishness, and

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

GAUTIER D'ARRAS 265

only too aware that if he had believed Eracle earlier, he and his peoplewould not have lost the empress they loved.17

In the final section of the poem Gautier leaves court intrigues behind,to concentrate in more detail on the workings of religious faith. Thisaspect of faith was explored earlier on an individual basis in the figures ofCassine and the younger Eracle. Now a conflict between Christians andpagans provides a context for assessing its wider implications. Hereagain techniques of contrast and parallelism are used to highlightimportant ideas. Elected emperor of Constantinople, Eracle faces amajor threat from the East, in the form of king Cordro6 and his son, tworather stereotypically cruel, ruthless, and arrogant enemies of Christen-dom.18 The hero swiftly puts paid to the son's extravagant ambition toconquer the whole of western Europe, and then goes on to confront thefather in his equally extravagant del, where he has himself worshippedas a god by his subjects (11. 5869-90). It proves to be a very unequalcontest: after a ritual exchange of insults, Eracle simply removes theportion of the True Cross which the king has blasphemously placed inhis 'sanctuary', and then cuts off Cordro6's head. Two things, however,save this section of the work from reading like a second-rate chanson degeste. One is the portrayal of Cordro6, who, in addition to his stockcharacteristics, has a kind of perverted faith in himself which lifts himout of the common herd of epic opponents of Christianity and provides anice negative image of the hero's unshakeable belief. The otherredeeming feature is Gautier's decision to include the story of the wallsof Jerusalem closing up to deny Eracle entry to the Holy City. Theinclusion of this miracle introduces a thoughtful note into a rathersuperficial picture of militant Christianity, and sets up a thematicparallel with the central section of the poem which helps to draw thewhole more closely together. Just as the story of Athanais showed thateven an ideal empress can, in certain circumstances, be unfaithful to herhusband, so the account of the miracle shows that even an ideal emperorcan, in certain circumstances, neglect the teachings of his religion. Witha surer sense of irony this time, Gautier has his hero fall prey to the samesin of pride as his erstwhile opponent Cordroe\ It takes a publichumiliation, in front of his army, to remind him that humility was one ofChrist's most important qualities, and that without it his own remarka-ble faith is not acceptable to God. In the closing stages of the narrativethe pattern of faith and doubt turns neatly back on itself to end, as itbegan, with the figures of Miriados and Cassine. Having summed upEracle's achievements ('Molt par ama justice et foi/et molt essaucanostre loi', 11.6455-56), the author invokes blessings on his parents,whose steadfast faith has won for them an eternal mansion in heaven(11.6463-66).

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

266 PENNY ELEY

Similar thematic patterns, though rather less dense in texture, are to befound in Gautier's second romance, Ilk et Galeron, a work whichoutwardly appears to have little in common with Erode. It is a storyrelated to that of Marie de France's Eliduc, about one man's relationshipwith two women. Gautier's source was either Marie's poem itself, orsomething sufficiently like it for us to be able to use Eliduc as a point ofreference in discussing the changes which Gautier made in the story.19Both the author's decision to use this story as the basis of his romance,and the ways in which he modified it, reveal a continuing preoccupationwith the question of faith and doubt.

Eliduc is a love-story, like the rest of Marie's Lais, but it is also a storyabout conflicting loyalties, and it is this, I suggest, which may haveattracted Gautier,to it. Starting from a situation in which he has twoclear-cut ties of loyalty to his overlord and to his wife Eliduc findshimself drawn into a sequence of events which create an increasinglycomplex web of new obligations, which then conflict with the old andwith each other. By the end, he has broken faith with all the importantfigures in his life, with the possible exception of the king of Brittany. Hebetrays his wife by falling in love with another woman; betrays the otherwoman by not telling her that he is already married; and betrays herfather, to whom he has a moral though not technically a feudalobligation, by eloping with his only daughter and heiress when he is notin a position to marry her. The situation is only resolved by aquasi-supernatural intervention and the wife's sudden decision to retirefrom the world to enable her husband to marry his new love.

In Gautier's version of the story the pattern of conflicts and betrayalsis profoundly altered by the fact that the hero's two relationships areplaced in series rather than in parallel. Die leaves his wife Galeron inBrittany and travels to Rome, where the emperor's daughter Ganor fallsin love with him. Somewhat reluctantly, he agrees to marry her,believing that Galeron is dead. When Galeron re-appears, he goes backto his native land with her, and only returns to Ganor once his wife hasretired to a convent for reasons totally unconnected with the emperor'sdaughter. The reason why Gautier did not take the story as it stood canbe understood, partly at least, by reference to Erode. In Erode thethemes of faith and doubt are treated in a positive mode. The earlierpoem is an optimistic meditation, in which instances of faith outnumberinstances of doubt. Those breaches of faith which do occur are alsoclearly motivated and easy to understand in rational terms. Theemperor's refusal to trust Eracle in the matter of the foal stems from hisneed for reassurance before venturing into matrimony; his refusal totrust Athanais is the result of jealousy coupled with a more generalmistrust of women. Bearing in mind the manifold vices of women which

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

GAUTIER D*ARRAS 267

are revealed to Eracle during the Bride Show, who is to say that hissuspicions are completely without rational foundation? Eliduc, on theother hand, is neither optimistic nor rational in this respect. It seems tobe almost impossible for the hero to remain loyal to anyone, and hisfailures are all the result of the supremely irrational force of passion. Thechanges Gautier made in Ilk et Galeron bring the story more into linewithEracle as having something positive to say about the effects of faith.

Two familiar ideas, the importance of religious faith and the need fortrust between human beings, are highlighted in the restructuring. Onecrucial change in the story also allows Gautier to introduce a newelement self-doubt into the pattern. In this version, the hero'sdeparture from Brittany is motivated not by external forces (in Eliduc,banishment from court for reasons which are never fully explained), butby his own loss of self-confidence and failure to trust his wife. When Illeloses an eye in combat, he becomes convinced that Galeron will rejecthim because of his disfigurement, and so goes into self-imposed exile, tostart life afresh in a foreign country. This initial modification opens uptwo major possibilities for the author. In the first place, he is able toexpand the role of the first wife and so realize the full potential of thecontrast between her and her husband which is only hinted at in Eliduc.Gautier gives us a well-developed picture of Galeron as an ideal of loveand active loyalty, for whom Ille's injury is proof of his prowess, andwho is prepared to search the length and breadth of Europe for him afterhis disappearance. She is also presented as a model of religious faith,who bears more than a passing resemblance to Cassine. When she fails tofind Ille, Galeron goes to live the life of a humble seamstress in Rome, asan act of penance for having caused the deaths of fourteen knights whoaccompanied her on her quest. Her eventual withdrawal from the worldis the fulfilment of a vow made to God during the difficult birth of herthird child (11.4383-99).

Secondly, the characterization of the hero is now open to sweepingchanges. In place of the self-confident adventurer Eliduc, Gautier givesus a more complicated personality who can be seen to mature, bothsocially and psychologically, as the action progresses.20 Perhaps themost interesting aspect of Ille's characterization is what Franz Rauhuthas described as his inferiority complex.21 Ille is portrayed as a youngman who falls prey to self-doubt and has to learn to overcome it in orderto take his rightful place in the world. His immediate reaction to hisinjury is to hide himself away where his wife cannot see him. Eventhough Galeron then seeks him out and reassures him that the injurymakes no difference to her feelings for him, Ille refuses to believe her.His feelings of inadequacy reinforced by the recollection that his wife isof considerably higher social status than himself (11. 1245-47), the hero

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

268 PENNY ELEY

flees to Italy. Here, as in the central section of Eracle, Gautier sets out tocreate a context within which to explore the relationship between loveand trust. Once again a happy couple become estranged because of theman's failure to see the connection between love and faithin this casefaith in himself as well as faith in his partner.

Interest in the hero's subsequent career is heightened by showing thatthis is no momentary lapse, but a serious crisis in his inner life. Once inRome, and despite his earlier glittering successes in Brittany, Illepresents himself to the emperor as a knight of little consequence lookingfor employment:

'Jo ne sui pas de g[ra]nt afaireNe gaires ne promec a faire,Ne ne quier mie grant merite;Por petit claim mon loier quite.'

(11.1338-4OThis is in stark contrast to the presentation of the hero of Eracle, who ischaracterized by unwavering faith in himself. Gautier further developsthis new strand in the pattern by going on to show how the hero comes tobelieve in himself again: firstly by proving his prowess on the battlefield,and secondly by inspiring ardent love in no less a person than theemperor's daughter Ganor. Modification of the hero's role does not stopthere. In Gautier's re-working of the tale the central character is guilty ofonly one breach of faith, rather than several, and even this is shown notto be irreparable. Ille is given the opportunity to redeem his initial lackof trust by believing in Galeron when she makes herself known to him onthe day when he is supposed to marry Ganor. Having regained his faithin himself, he is now in a position to respond to Galeron's declaration ofcontinuing faith in him (11. 3370-89). He refuses to give her permissionto make the sacrifice of entering a convent there and then, and himselfsacrifices Ganor and through her the prospect of becoming emperor to return to his wife and home.

One further, but less fortunate, consequence of the re-modelling isthat the final section of the poem becomes thematically rather light-weight. The early resolution of such conflicts of loyalty as remain,coupled with the expansion of the role of Galeron, has the effect ofshifting the centre of gravity of the story forwards, with the result thatthe mounting drama of Eliduc is replaced by a rather flat narration ofDie's eventual, and predictable, return to Rome.22 With the exceptionof one skilfully-handled passage in which Gautier shows how Ille's lovefor the now inaccessible Galeron is gradually overcome by pity, and thenlove, for Ganor, action replaces analysis in an accelerating galloptowards a happy ending. Even so, Gautier is careful not to allow h imajor themes to be completely lost in the excitement. Aspects of faith

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from

GAUTIER D'ARRAS 269

and doubt are still highlighted in the episodes dealing with Ille's returnto Rome, and the overall pattern is brought to a satisfying conclusion notunlike that oiEracle. It is made clear that Ille's decision to leave Brittanyfor the second time is prompted by loyalty as well as love: he hadpromised that he would come to Ganor's assistance if ever she shouldneed him, and now, on hearing that she is in danger, he sets out to fulfilthat promise. In this he is contrasted with the ten Roman barons whobreak their sworn oaths of allegiance by plotting to hand Ganor over toher enemy, the emperor of Constantinople. At the end of the poem loveand faith go hand in hand as Ille defeats the barons, rescues Ganor, routsthe Greeks, and receives Ganor's hand and the title of emperor as hisreward. As in Eracle, the pattern ends with the triumph of faithfulness.SHEFFIELD PENNY ELEY

1 Details of the manuscript traditions of the two works are given in the introductions to the

editions by E. Ldseth, (EKorwieGauar

2 7 0 PENNY ELEY

by kind permission of the Director of Central Library Services, University of LondonLibrary).

5 Cf. IUe el Galtron, 11. 5805-06: 'Gaiters d'Arras qui s'entremist / D'Eracle, ains qu'il fesist

ceste uevre'. Becker suggested that the composition of the two works was interwoven, an ideawhich has found favour with a number of critics. For a well-argued refutation of this theory,see Calin, 'On the Chronology of Gautier d'Arras'.

6 Erode is usually classified as a romance in histories of medieval French literature, on the

basis of its metrical form (octosyllabic rhyming couplets) and a slightly ambiguous reference tothe work as a roman in 1. 102 (*si com m'ores d romans dire'). There is, none the less, a strongtendency for scholars to discuss it in terms of other types of literature. Pierre Gallais, forinstance, has described Erode as a work '[qui] hesite encore entre lTiistoire, l'hagiographie et leconte edifiant' {Histotre de la lattraturejrqncatse. Tome I. Du Mqyen Age a la findu XVII' aide,sous la direction de J. Roger et J.-C. Payen (Pans, Colin, 1969), p. 61), while Renzi remarksthat 'nella prima pane alia narrazione realistica e preposto un vero ''preludio" agiografico; nellaseconda ll "fabhau" si mescola al romanzo d'amore cortese; torna mfine nella terza panel'agiografia per confondersi e altemarsi con la tematica della "chanson de geste"' (pp. 148-49).

7 On the various sources of Erode, see Fourrier, pp. 210-57; Alhnson, pp. 38-173, and

Edmond Faral, 'D'un "passionaire" latin a un roman francais: Quelques sources immediatesdu roman d'Eracle', Romama, 46 (1920), 512-36.

8 See Alhnson, p 190.

' See Fourrier, p. 209, and Mary Lou Morris Wolsey, 'The Erode of Gautier d'Arras: ACritical Study* (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Universty of Minnesota, 1972); DA, 33 (1972-73),1751A.

10 Calm, 'Structure and Meaning m the Erode', p. 286.

11 'L'Ecnture et la voix', p. 194.

12 Ibid., pp. 161-62.

13 Ibid., pp.' 165 and 181.

14 The 'pronounced spirituality* of these passages has been examined by Guy Raynaud de

Lage, 'La Religion d'Erade', in Mtlanges de langue et de luterature mtdievales offerts a Pierre LeGenalpar tet colligues, ses tleves et us arms, 2 vols (Pans, SEDES, 1973), pp. 707-13 (p. 710).

15 See, for example, Jean-Charles Payen, 'Compte rendu de Lorenzo Renzi, Tradizione

corteu',Le Mqyen Age, 74 (1968), 344-49 (pp. 346-47)-16

Another motif which re-appears in We et Galeron: see below, p. 267.17

Cf. Eracle's own summing up of the situation in 11.5043-44:' Certes s'Erades fust creus, /Lais ne fust |a decheus"'.

18 Interestingly, Gautier twice uses the word 'mescreant*, rather than 'paien' or 'malfe' or

'sarasin', to describe Cordroe and his son during their crucial encounters with the hero (11.5500and 5891). The use of this term highlights the role of the two characters as foils to the supreme'cream1, Eracle.

19 On the question of sources, see John E. Matzke, 'The Source and Composition of IUe et

Galeron', MPh, 4 (1906-07), 471-88; F. A. G. Cowper, T h e Sources of IUe et Galeron',MPh,20 (1922-23), 35-44, and Ernest Hoepffner, 'Le Roman d'llle et Galeron et le lai d'Eltduc', inStudies m French Language and Medieval Literature presented to Professor Mildred K. Pope(University of Manchester, 1939), pp. 125-44. Some critics, such as Matzke and Fourrier,believe that IUe et Galeron was conceived specifically as an 'anu-Eliduc'; for others, such asHoepffner, it represents an attempt simply to remove fantastic and morally dubious elementsfrom the tale. Most have concluded that Gautier's romance is artistically inferior to the lax,primarily because of the changes which Gautier made to the story: see lean Rychner, 'Compterendu de Lorenzo Renzi, Tradizione cortese', CCM, 9 (1966), 249-51 (p. 250); Jean Frappier,'Compte rendu de Anthime Foumer, Le Courant reahste', Romama, 82 (1961), 536-50(p. 546), and Wilmotte, L'EvoUaum, p. 37.* See Ashton Laurent Ray, 'A Translation and Criticism of IUe et Galeron by Gautier d'Arras

(unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of South Carolina, 1974); DA, 35 (1974-75),2238-39A.

21 'Das Psychologische.. ', pp. 150-69. Rauhut's analysis is less convincing, however, when

he attempts to extend the idea of an inferiority complex to the characterization of Galeron.22

On Lie's return to Rome, see Jean Batany, '"Home and Rome", a Device in Epic andRomance: Le Couronnementde Louis and IUe et Galeron', YaleFrenchStudtes,si ( i974),42-6o.

by guest on January 5, 2011fs.oxfordjournals.org

Dow

nloaded from