K A R L H E I N Z G Ö L L E R
T h e text o f the Alliterative Morte Arthure1 (henceforth AMA) is now a v a i l a b l e in several adequate editions. D . S. Brewer and A . E . B . O w e n have p u b l i s h e d a facsimile edition o f the T h o r n t o n manuscript together w i t h a useful analysis o f its characteristic features.2
I n 1865 G . G . P e r r y edited the text for the E a r l y E n g l i s h T e x t Society, as d i d E d m u n d B r o c k i n 1871, both under the number O . S . 8 .3 In 1900 M a r y M . B a n k s supervised a new edition of the poem, w h i c h E r i k B j ö r k m a n used i n 1915 i n his edition of the AMA in the series A l t - u n d M i t t e l e n g l i s c h e T e x t e .4
B j ö r k m a n ' s edition was regarded as the standard text of the poem for m a n y decades. It contains, however, hundreds of unnecessary emenda- tions, most of w h i c h are based on the work of the B o n n School of M e t r i c s (e.g. T r a u t m a n n a n d M e n n i c k e n ) . T h u s B j ö r k m a n ' s edition was a l r e a d y out o f date at the time of its appearance.
T h e discovery o f the Winchester M S . of M a l o r y ' s Morte d3Arthur (1934) made a new e d i t i o n o f the AMA imperative.5 It was promised by O ' L o u g h l i n i n 1935.6 I n 1959 the prospective editor announced that the new edition was ' n e a r l y ready'.7 In the meantime several other editors have stolen the m a r c h on h i m . J o h n F i n l a y s o n edited an abridged study e d i t i o n in 1967 ( Y o r k M e d i e v a l T e x t s ) .8 In 1972 this was followed by S. D . Spangehl's e d i t i o n , an as yet unpublished dissertation for the U n i v e r s i t y of P e n n s y l v a n i a .9 In 1974 L a r r y D . Benson presented a s i m p l i f i e d version 'for readers who have had little or no t r a i n i n g in M i d d l e E n g l i s h ' .1 0 T h e best edition of the AMA — in spite of its shortcomings — is V a l e r i e K r i s h n a ' s , w h i c h appeared in 1976; it contains an extensive i n t r o d u c t i o n , a complete glossary, and a separate c o m m e n t a r y w h i c h has taken the entire spectrum of research into account.
I n a s u r p r i s i n g consensus of o p i n i o n , nearly all critics agree that the AMA is one o f the most significant works o f the A l l i t e r a t i v e R e v i v a l , or even, possibly, of M i d d l e E n g l i s h literature. H e l a i n e Newstead has c a l l e d the poem 'one o f the most powerful and original treatments of the A r t h u r i a n t r a d i t i o n ' .1 1 J o h n G a r d n e r once termed it 'a major poetic a c h i e v e m e n t ' ,1 2 a n d J o h n Stevens, 'one of the best poems of the A l l i t e r a t i v e M o v e m e n t ' .1 3 T h e pathos, h u m o u r and realism of the AMA have been stressed by both the histories of literature and e n c y c l o p e d i a s .1 4
T h e connection of the AMA w i t h the Brut tradition was seen by the first scholars who dealt w i t h the p o e m .1 5 In regard to further sources b e y o n d this t r a d i t i o n , a major c o n t r i b u t i o n was made by B r a n s c h e i d .1 6 M a t t h e w s hypothesised a fourteenth-century F r e n c h source, and traced the influence o f certain A l e x a n d e r - r o m a n c e s .1 7 F i n l a y s o n suggested the c o n n e c t i o n o f the poem to Sir Firumbras, Destruction of Troy, and further w o r k s , as for instance Vows of the Heron}* T h e relationship to the F r e n c h chansons de geste has been mentioned a n u m b e r of times.1 9 It w o u l d seem that d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the genre of the AMA depends on the sources postulated for the p o e m .2 0
M o r e recent critics dispense with attempts to assign the poem to a c e r t a i n genre. Instead, they note differences in form and content from other literary traditions o f E n g l a n d and, more often, of the Continent.
YV. R . J . B a r r o n identifies realistic elements, but also a certain degree of n a t i o n a l consciousness w h i c h he sees as typical of the A l l i t e r a t i v e R e v i v a l ( i n c l u d i n g L a y a m o n ' s Brut). H e regards the dynastic theme centred on the figure of A r t h u r as the basis of the p o e m .2 1
W h e r e a s the epic-heroic character of the AMA was emphasised by the o l d e r generation of critics, it is now, in concordance with M a t t h e w s , considered a m e d i e v a l tragedy of fortune.2 2 A n d yet even today there is s t i l l disagreement as to the message of the poem. P a r t i c u l a r l y con- t r o v e r s i a l is the question of whether the poet describes the rise of a m o r a l l y blameless A r t h u r d u r i n g the first part of the poem, or whether he presents the k i n g as corrupt and evil from the very b e g i n n i n g .2 3
I n this respect, c r i t i c a l opinions contradict each other to such an extent that one has the feeling the critics are not even speaking o f the same w o r k . R o g e r S h e r m a n L o o m i s , for instance, denies that the poet a t t r i b u t e d any guilt to K i n g A r t h u r .2 4 S i m i l a r l y , Helaine News trad refutes the idea of r e t r i b u t i o n , and sees the poem as an affirmation of A r t h u r ' s greatness.2 5 M a t t h e w s , on the other h a n d , claims that A r t h u r was sinful from the s t a r t .2 6 M o s t critics, however, take the middle road.
D . S. B r e w e r speaks of the u p w a r d and d o w n w a r d movement of F o r t u n e ' s wheel, thus t a k i n g the traditional concept of tragedy as his p o i n t o f d e p a r t u r e .2 7 A s i m i l a r position is voiced by Finlayson in several m a j o r c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the study of the p o e m .2 8
E v e n a cursory glance at critical evaluations o f the AMA makes it clear that essential problems have not yet been solved. T h u s there has been no close analysis o f the d r e a m of the D r a g o n and Bear, although it contains significant clues to the intention of the poet.2 9 T h e dream of F o r t u n e , however, has often been treated, usually in connection with the p r o b l e m of g e n r e .3 0 T h e topos of the N i n e W o r t h i e s , its derivation, a n d function has also been the subject o f extensive treatment.
H . Schroeder's major work on the topos, however, has been completely o v e r l o o k e d by A n g l o - S a x o n critics, although it must be regarded as the standard w o r k on the subject; s i m i l a r l y , other important
research articles w r i t t e n in G e r m a n have been i g n o r e d .3 1
C l o s e l y connected w i t h the p r o b l e m of how A r t h u r is to be j u d g e d , is the role his knights p l a y in the poem. T o some extent they have been seen as c o n t r a s t i n g figures and foils for the K i n g . T h i s is particularly- true o f G a w a i n . O p i n i o n s on his character are no less contradictory than those on K i n g A r t h u r .3 2 O n the one hand he is seen as an embodiment o f the entire g a m u t of c o u r t l y virtues, and on the other, as a projection o f A r t h u r ' s a m b i t i o n .3 3 M o r d r e d presents a unique p r o b l e m . O ' L o u g h l i n is c o n v i n c e d that A r t h u r ' s fall i n the AMA 'is brought about by the A r i s t o t e l i a n hamartia o f his begetting M o r d r e d ' ,3 4 while C h a r l e s R e g a n finds no sign i n the p o e m that the traitor is A r t h u r ' s son, 'not as m u c h as a hint from either the poet or a c h a r a c t e r . '3 5 N a t u r a l l y these positions are m u t u a l l y exclusive, but the text itself contains sufficient evidence for the s o l u t i o n o f the p r o b l e m .
A n u m b e r o f questions have h a r d l y been treated by the critics, or r e m a i n to be dealt w i t h adequately. T h e r e is, for example, the poet's u n i q u e b r a n d o f h u m o u r ,3 6 his tendency towards irony and parody, and above a l l his subtle use of indirect connotation and innuendo, w h i c h u l t i m a t e l y c o n t r i b u t e to indirect characterisation o f the figures. Some authors recognise a m b i g u i t i e s in the AMA?1 and deduce that the poet has a n i r o n i c , or at least a m b i v a l e n t attitude towards A r t h u r and his w o r l d .3 8 B a r n i e speaks of 'unresolved a m b i g u i t y in the poet's attitude towards A r t h u r ' .3 9 O t h e r critics focus on the degeneration of the protagonist from the majestic c h a m p i o n o f C h r i s t i a n i t y to a b r u t a l c o n q u e r o r 4 0
T h e f o r m u l a i c character of the AMA was recognised and dealt w i t h very early, p a r t i c u l a r l y in connection w i t h the H u c h o w n question. O n the basis o f language, metre and verse formation, several critics attempted to prove that the same poet had written several alliterative works, i n c l u d i n g the AMA.41 A refutation of the theory is no longer necessary. F o r quite a n u m b e r o f years it has been clear that nearly a l l so-called ' p a r a l l e l s ' were 'accidents o f convention in the alliterative t y p e ' .4 2
T h e conclusions d r a w n by the same school on the basis of metre were e q u a l l y tenuous. T r a u t m a n n and M e n n i c k e n claimed that the allitera- tive long-line o f the AMA was to be read w i t h seven stresses, and that e m e n d a t i o n was needed wherever a line d i d not comply w i t h this r e q u i r e m e n t .4 3 M e n n i c k e n sometimes resorted to desperate measures to achieve his g o a l , as for instance by s o u n d i n g the end -e, even before a f o l l o w i n g v o w e l ,4 4 w h i c h is contradictory to the historical evidence as s h o w n by L u i c k .4 5 J . L . N . O ' L o u g h l i n has pointed out that irregularities i n metre a n d a l l i t e r a t i o n follow a certain pattern, and that the stress a n d r h y t h m o f the p o e m were not h a l f as r i g i d as had been c l a i m e d .4 6 In the m e a n t i m e a new a p p r o a c h has been taken to the p r o b l e m of metrics i n the p o e m . D u g g a n a n d V a u g h a n have argued that runs
o f a l l i t e r a t i o n indicate four-line strophic structure.4 7
W h a t has given rise to difficulty is the fact that the metric c r i t e r i a d r a w n from O l d E n g l i s h cannot be a p p l i e d without alteration to the contingencies o f M i d d l e E n g l i s h because of the greater flexibility of l o n g - l i n e in the latter.
VVith the a p p l i c a t i o n of the so-called 'oral formulaic theory* to O l d a n d M i d d l e E n g l i s h , the phenomenon of repetition in medieval poetry was seen in a new light. It soon became apparent that there was m o r e to the f o r m u l a than a mere syntactical pattern or "mould', and that m e a n i n g a n d function had to be taken into consideration as w e l l . F i n l a y s o n a n d those after h i m thus rightly objected to W a l d r o r v s f o r m a l i s t i c a p p r o a c h ;4 8 but L a w r e n c e later defended its usefulness w h e n a p p l i e d i n conjunction w i t h the usual techniques of oral f o r m u l a i c a n a l y s i s .4 9 A l t h o u g h there have been some attempts to formulate consistent a n d adequate definitions o f the oral formulaic elements as used i n M i d d l e E n g l i s h .5 0 these have generally been disregarded by critics d e a l i n g w i t h the AMA. T h e lack of progress in this direction has led to recent negative statements, such as Tonsfeldt's contention that v e r b a l style a n d f o r m u l a i s m i n the AMA are far less interesting than the n a r r a t i v e f o r m u l a i c elements it c o n t a i n s ,5 1 or that of T u r v i l l e - P e t r e , whose recent book on the A l l i t e r a t i v e R e v i v a l states polemically:
' F o u r t e e n t h - c e n t u r y alliterative poetry cannot . . . be described as f o r m u l a i c i n any meaningful sense . . . \5 2
M a n y scholars w r i t i n g before T u r v i l l e - P e t r e have chosen to describe v e r b a l repetition in M i d d l e E n g l i s h alliterative poetry in terms o f w o r d c o l l o c a t i o n ,5 3 but few except F i n l a y s o n have seen a connection between this p h e n o m e n o n and the o r a l formulaic theory o f Parry and L o r d . O n l y F i n l a y s o n a n d T u r v i l l e - P e t r e have dealt w i t h collocations of more than two words or those extending beyond two lines in length. M o s t who have dealt w i t h the AMA have noted areas where formulas and verbal repetition are h e a v i l y concentrated in contrast to the rest of the p o e m .5 4 a n d a connection between these and the so-called 'runs' of alliteration on the same letters has been noted, although no causal relationship was p o s t u l a t e d .5 5
M o s t scholars agree that the AMA a n d many other M i d d l e E n g l i s h poems were meant to be recited, and thus made use of and were influenced by the style and conventions o f oral popular poetry, even t h o u g h they were composed in w r i t i n g .5 6 T h u s some inconsistencies in the AMA. such as the fact that L u c i u s apparently dies twice, have been a t t r i b u t e d to the process of o r a l c o m p o s i t i o n .5 7
M o r e controversial than the question o f oral or written composition i n M i d d l e E n g l i s h is that of the m e t r i c a l function of the formula. M u c h e a r l y research on formulaism in the AMA made a distinction between formulas o f the first half-line, a n d those of the s e c o n d .5 8 O n e recent definition of the M i d d l e E n g l i s h formula requires, among other things.
that it be repeated ' i n s i m i l a r contexts and in the same m e t r i c a l p o s i t i o n ' .5 9 T h i s is, however, true neither o f O l d E n g l i s h poetry nor o f M i d d l e E n g l i s h . M a n y formulas do occur in both half-lines and in v a r i o u s contexts. In a d d i t i o n , there is no economy in the older sense o f that w o r d6 0 (namely that a given idea was always expressed in the same w a y ) , a l t h o u g h one recent author has c l a i m e d the c o n t r a r y .6 1
A major step i n formulaic research was the recognition that the interpretative value o f f o r m u l a i s m rested in the function and m e a n i n g o f f o r m u l a s and f o r m u l a i c elements in the context of the whole. H e r e , too lay the answer to the question o f poetic creativity and originality w i t h i n the f r a m e w o r k o f stereotyped convention. P a r a l l e l to a shift of interest to such matters i n O l d E n g l i s h research, a call was issued for more a t t e n t i o n to the m e a n i n g and function of formulaic expressions as a key to o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the text and of the work of the poet. E x a m p l e s from the AMA m a d e it evident that a hierarchy of values could be o b s e r v e d : semantic m e a n i n g might be sacrified to fulfil metric con- tingencies (alliteration), w h i l e metric correctness, in turn, might be sacrified in order to retain the h a b i t u a l w o r d i n g of the f o r m u l a .6 2
O t h e r studies of i n d i v i d u a l formulas a n d their significance followed, e m p h a s i s i n g the o r i g i n a l i t y a n d i n d i v i d u a l achievement of the poet to a greater degree than earlier critics, such as F i n l a y s o n .6 3 L a i l a G r o s s a n a l y s e d the use o f the w o r d ' r i o t ' in formulas and elsewhere, p o s t u l a t i n g that f o r m u l a i c occurrences of the w o r d w o u l d exhibit little or no change of m e a n i n g .6 4 T h e i n d i v i d u a l and creative use of formulas p l a c e d i n an alien context wras pointed out by T u r v i l l e - P e t r e . who noted that the t w o - w o r d c o l l o c a t i o n ' k i n g ' a n d ' c r o w n ' generally used for A r t h u r is significantly a p p l i e d to G a w a i n at the end of the p o e m .6 5 A s i m i l a r phenomenon has been mentioned by G r e n i e r , namely the reversal o f a stock motif, 'exultation over a fallen foe'. Both Frederick a n d M o r d r e d lament the death o f G a w a i n rather than, as usual, t a u n t i n g the fallen f o e .6 6
L i t t l e work has been done on formulaic themes in the poem. F i n l a y s o n concentrated on battle and k n i g h t h o o d in his 1963 article, and his work has been extended by T o n s f e l d t .6 7 J o h n s o n has attempted to prove the occurrence o f an O l d E n g l i s h 'theme' called ' T h e - H e r o - o n - t h e - B e a c h ' in the AMA.68 In short, it is evident that work on the creative use of f o r m u l a i c style i n the AMA has only begun.
T h e date of c o m p o s i t i o n o f the AMA has been a matter of controversy since its first p u b l i c a t i o n . T h e m a n u s c r i p t can be dated at about 1440, since the name o f the c o m p i l e r , Robert T h o r n t o n , and his b i o g r a p h i c a l details have come d o w n to u s .6 9 T h e date o f the text is more difficult to determine; critics have had to turn to i n t r i n s i c indications in the poem itself.
T h e first h i s t o r i c a l interpretation of the AMA was offered by G . N e i l s o n in his book on Huchown of the Awle Ryale.70 Neilson made
H u c h o w n the author o f nearly all extant M i d d l e E n g l i s h alliterative verse, a supposition w h i c h proved m u c h more tenuous than his very interesting study o f historical parallels, w h i c h even today has to be given careful consideration. A c c o r d i n g to N e i l s o n , the battle of Sessoyne is C r e c y , the Sea Battle is W i n c h e l s e a . M o r d r e d is M o r t i m e r , and the V i s c o u n t of R o m e is the M i l a n e s e V i s c o n t i .7 1 T h i s w o u l d place the date o f the text at about 1365. I n m a n pointed out that allusions to E d w a r d I l l ' s reign do not necessarily mean that the poem originated d u r i n g E d w a r d ' s l i f e t i m e .7 2
T h e first attempt to use the description of costume as a criterion for d a t i n g was by H . E a g l e s o n .7 3 In the long sleeves (lappes) o f L a d y F o r t u n e , he saw a p a r a l l e l to feminine dress of E d w a r d I l l ' s period.
J . L . N . O T o u g h l i n noted a resemblance to a description in Wynnere and Wastoure ('slabbande sleues sleght to \>e grounded 411). and therefore c o n c l u d e d that the AMA must have originated shortly after that poem, w h i c h was w r i t t e n i n the winter o f 1352—53.74 T h e doubtfulness of this k i n d o f argument became apparent when E . S c h r ö d e r tried to d e m o n - strate that Wynnere and Wastoure was dependent on the AMA. thus a r g u i n g for an even earlier date of the latter.7 5
T h e element o f the p i l g r i m a g e to R o m e was brought into the d i s c u s s i o n by G . B . P a r k s .7 6 H e takes the view that the author of the AMA h i m s e l f made a p i l g r i m a g e to R o m e , probably i n the H o l y Y e a r of
1350. H i s arguments are based on the author's intimate knowledge of details o f the route to R o m e . A further criterion for the d a t i n g of the p o e m was seen in the vows the A r t h u r i a n knights made on the vernacle, an e m b l e m o f the veil of V e r o n i c a , w h i c h was w o r n by pilgrims to R o m e i n the fourteenth c e n t u r y .7 7 O t h e r critics commented on the connection between historical conditions and the realistic description of battle in the p o e m . T h e first to point out the uncourtly character of K i n g A r t h u r a n d his knights was D o r o t h y Everett in 1955; her seminal article i n i t i a t e d a new line of thought in regard to the p o e m .7 8
In his book on the Tragedy of Arthur (1960), W i l l i a m M a t t h e w s argues for a date 'soon after 1375 . . . when the ordinary E n g l i s h m a n was weary o f the tragic futility of his rulers' i m p e r i a l conquests'.7 9 L a r r y Benson accepts M a t t h e w s ' view- that the poem truly portrays the fourteenth- c e n t u r y attitude towards warfare. A t the same time, however, he warns against d r a w i n g a concrete parallel between the treason of G u i n e v e r e a n d M o r d r e d and that of Isabella and M o r t i m e r . Benson also remains u n c o n v i n c e d that the poet drewT 'a portrait of A r t h u r in the likeness of E d w a r d I I I ' .8 0
A n o t h e r c r i t i c w h o followed in the footsteps of G . Neilson in looking for h i s t o r i c a l parallels was Roger Sherman L o o m i s . w h o recognised in the AMA the spirit o f the fifties.81 In his o p i n i o n , the poem is a panegyric on E d w a r d I l l ' s exploits on the C o n t i n e n t . Later, even Benson, f o l l o w i n g D o r o t h y Everett's lead, came to recognise historical parallels
w h i c h m a d e the AMA a poem o f its o w n place and p e r i o d .8 2 T h u s , for e x a m p l e , he perceived in A r t h u r ' s g r i m h u m o u r a parallel to the c h a r a c t e r o f the B l a c k P r i n c e . F i n l a y s o n . on the other hand, remained s c e p t i c a l towards h i s t o r i c a l parallels. T h e description o f Fortune's lappes is i n his o p i n i o n too vague to suggest a p a r t i c u l a r date. H e w o u l d deny n e a r l y a l l o f N e i l s o n ' s parallels, with the one exception o f the B a t t l e o f VVinchelsea. A l t h o u g h he admits that the poem reflects the reign o f E d w a r d I I I i n a general w a v . he rejects the idea o f a roman a rief"
In h i s m o d e r n E n g l i s h translation J o h n G a r d n e r takes up N e i l s o n s a n d M a t t h e w s ' h i s t o r i c a l parallels, although he himself is not convinced that the poetic power o f the poem lies 'chiefly in what may have been its i m m e d i a t e p o l i t i c a l p u r p o s e ' .8 4 G a r d n e r emphasises 'that the reader w h o enters into the situation behind the poem w i l l appreciate more than the r e a d e r w h o does n o t ' .8 5 A lop-sided view o f the historical parallels was presented by G . K e i s e r . w h o dismisses the entire palette o f alleged t o p i c a l allusio ns: ' T h e complete uncertainty about the authorship a n d the d a t i n g o f the poem as well as the circumstances in which the poem was w r i t t e n w o u l d seem an unsurmountable problem for those w h o w o u l d find a pattern o f " c r y p t i c " a l l u s i o n s /8 6 A more balanced view o f the p r o b l e m is presented by J . B a r n i e in his book on War in Medieval Society. H e sees the poem as far too subtle to be regarded as a mere catalogue o f t o p i c a l allusions a n d political parallels. C o n t r a r y to his o w n premises a n d promises, he only deals with the AMA i n an a p p e n d i x , thus i n d i c a t i n g his doubts as to the historical source value o f w o r k s o f this k i n d .8 7
I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the historical a n d political background of the poem w i l l n o doubt continue. L a r r y D . Benson's article o f 1976 has focussed on the year 1400. i n view o f the fact that no detailed description o f the travel route to R o m e was available prior to 1402 from which the poet c o u l d have d r a w n the Italian place-names. T h o u g h he recognises R i c h a r d II in M o r d r e d a n d H e n r y I V in A r t h u r . Benson, too. rejects the i d e a that the poem is a roman ä clef8* J. V a l e , as well, is convinced that c o n t e m p o r a r y conditions are reflected realistically in the AMA. a n d that 'it provides a remarkable insight into the attitudes and preoccupa- tions o f a d i p l o m a t a n d a d m i n i s t r a t o r in the second h a l f of the reign o f E d w a r d I I I . '8 9 A c c o r d i n g to this theory, the author of the AMA m a y have been a p u b l i c servant at the court o f K i n g E d w a r d I I I . P r o m i s i n g c o n c l u s i o n s a n d affirmation o f the necessity o f taking the historical a n d p o l i t i c a l b a c k g r o u n d into account may be expected from the forth- c o m i n g book b y Beate S c h m o l k e - H a s s e l m a n n entitled Der arthurische
Versroman von Chrestien bis Froissart.90
M o d e r n literary c r i t i c i s m now tends to take literary works o f art.
i n c l u d i n g the romances, far more seriously — not only as sources o f h i s t o r i c a l facts, but also as comments on and even interpretations o f the
course o f contemporary events by those who were in a position to u n d e r s t a n d them. I n this sense literature is a reflection of what people thought, feared a n d h o p e d . W o r k s such as the AMA are even more o u t s p o k e n i n this respect than the chronicles, and the picture presented is m o r e comprehensive. B u t it is subtly encoded in the form o f literary devices a n d thus i n need o f interpretation by the literary critic. It is the a i m o f the authors of the following essays to contribute to this goal.