La vie du prince noir 9783111328133, 3484520523, 9783484520523

Citation preview

BEIHEFTE ZUR Z E I T S C H R I F T FÜR R O M A N I S C H E P H I L O L O G I E BEGRÜNDET FORTGEFÜHRT

VON

GUSTAV

GRÖBER

VON WALTHER VON

HERAUSGEGEBEN

VON

KURT

Band 147

WARTBURG

BALDINGER

D I A N A Β. T Y S O N

La Vie du Prince Noir by Chandos Herald Edited from the manuscript in the University of London Library

M A X N I E M E Y E R VERLAG T Ü B I N G E N 1975

ISBN 3-484-52052-3 © Max Niemeyer Verlag Tübingen 1975 Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Printed in Germany Satz: Rothfuchs Dettenhausen Einband von Heinr. Koch Tübingen

To my father Harold Charles King

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Scholars in several disciplines have generously contributed expert information on a variety of particular problems which have arisen in the preparation of this edition. Their help has been acknowledged at the relevant places and I express here my gratitude to them all. Special thanks are due to Professor E. J. Arnould, whose own work on the Vie du Prince Noir first drew my attention to it, for his interest and advice; to Professor Η. E. Keller, who read through part of the typescript and who made many helpful suggestions; to Professor B. Woledge, who supervised the thesis on which this book is based and to whose scholarship and patient guidance it owes a very great deal; and to Miss J. M. Gibbs and the staff of the Palaeography Room, University of London Library, without whose constant and untiring help and encouragement the book would not have been written. I am indebted to the University of London Library for permission to publish an edition of the manuscript, and to the Fielden Fund of University College London for the subvention which helped to make publication possible.

D. Β. T.

CONTENTS

Introduction 1 Importance of the Poem 2 Previous Editions 3 The London Manuscript 4 Relationship of the Manuscripts 5 The Language 6 The Author 7 Literary Background 8 Literary Qualities 9 Editorial Policy 10 Bibliography 11 Abbreviations

1 1 1 3 4 11 14 18 34 43 44 47

Text

49

Notes

167

Glossary

195

Index of Proper and Geographical Names

205

VII

INTRODUCTION

1 Importance of the Poem This Old French biographical poem, written by the Herald of Sir John Chandos towards the end of the fourteenth century, forms an essential part of our records of medieval history. Chandos Herald is one of the most valuable authorities on certain episodes in the Hundred Years War, and his poem is in all probability the source of almost all our information respecting the Spanish campaign of the Black Prince in 1366—67. Its place in medieval French literature is equally significant: it is one of the few examples we have of French biographical writing on contemporary figures in the fourteenth century, 1 and it is especially valuable as a piece of history recorded in verse at a time when almost all major historical French writing was done in prose.

2 Previous Editions The poem has been printed three times.2 All three editions were based on what was believed at the time to be the only surviving manuscript, MS.l of Worcester College Oxford (hereafter referred to as 0 ) . In 1953, an article by Professor Arnould drew the attention of Old French scholars to the existence of a second manuscript, MS.l of the University of London Library (hereafter referred to as L ) } Professor Arnould, as well as other Old French scholars, stressed the need for an edition of the new manuscript and for further study of the poem. Of the three editions of 0 , the first two do not present a faithful manuscript transcription; Coxe gave an unreliable and unedited transcription, while Michel 1 The only two biographies (as opposed to general history writing) of comparable importance are Machaut's Prise d'Alexandrie (a biography of Pierre de Lusignan, king of Cyprus) and Cuvelier's Vie de Bertrand du Guesclin. 2 Η. Ο. Coxe, The Black Prince, An Historical Poem, written in French, by Chandos Herald, printed for the Roxburghe Club (London, 1842). F. Michel, Le Prince Noir, pokme du heraut d'armes Chandos (London and Paris, 1883). Μ. K. Pope and E. C. Lodge, Life of the Black Prince, by the Herald of Sir John Chandos (Oxford, 1910). 3 E. J. F. Arnould, "Un manuscrit miconnu de la Vie du Prince Noir", Milanges de linguistique et de litterature romanes offerts ä Mario Roques (Paris, 1953) II, 3-14.

1

gave a text reconstituted according to what he thought it might have been when the author wrote it. Neither edition incorporates any study of the language of the poem; both do provide a translation and fairly full historical notes. 4 It was the Pope and Lodge edition, however, which gave the poem the exhaustive historical and linguistic study it deserves. In an introduction and extensive notes following the text, Miss Lodge brought out fully the importance of the poem for historical research and discussed at length all questions concerning its historical aspects. She found the Herald a reliable and intelligent writer, and emphasized the accuracy of his lists of names and geographical data. The narration of the events of 1355 and 1356 and of the whole of the Spanish campaign were seen to be particularly valuable. Miss Pope was the first editor to make a thorough study of the linguistic features of the text. 5 It had up to then been supposed by most scholars that the text was the work of an Anglo-Norman author, the ground for this supposition being the very Anglo-Norman aspect of Ο 6 Pope assumed, as a hypothesis, that the author was a continental Frenchman, and that Ο was the work of an ignorant Anglo-Norman scribe copying from an already corrupt Anglo-Norman model. Starting from this premise, she systematically applied a number of rules of emendation to the manuscript reading. Having found that the majority of lines did then fit the octosyllabic metre, she made a thorough linguistic analysis of the resulting text and concluded that her findings pointed in the direction of a Hainaulter as the author of the poem. She published two versions of the text side by side: her own reconstituted version and a diplomatic reproduction of 0 ? Her findings on the author's language were universally accepted by scholars of repute. 8 4

Bossuat p. 489, no.5121, lists the Michel edition as »une reimpression avec une riche annotation et une traduction anglaise de l'edition H. Coxe«. This is inaccurate. It gives the impression that Michel reprinted Coxe's text, and added a translation and notes. On the contrary, he gave a completely different text, virtually reprinted Coxe's introduction and a large part of his notes, and repeated Coxe's example of giving a translation but based this on his own reconstituted text. 5 The Coxe and Michel editions had been the basis of a study of the poem's linguistic and orthographical features, but since its author had access only to these two editions and to facsimiles of two pages of O, the value of his work is very limited. See J. Kotteritz, Sprachliche und textkritische Studien zur anglo-normannischen Reimchronik vom schwarzen Prinzen (Diss. Greifswald, 1901). 6 Michel, thought stipulating a continental author and reconstituting the irregular lines into continental octosyllables as far as he could, gave no reasons for this theory and did not discuss the language of the poem. The only other scholar who assigned a continental origin to the text was Groeber; see G. Groeber, Grundriss der romanischen Phibbgie (Strassbourg, 1897-1906) II, 1085. 7 It should be noted that Pope did not reconstitute the prose rubrics or the last part of the poem, lines 4189-4280, which contains a list of the officers of the Black Prince when he was in Aquitaine and the epitaph on his tomb in Canterbury Cathe-

2

Professor Arnould, the first Old French scholar to write about L, re-opened the question of authorship, pointing to the need for a »revision des pieces du proems« in the light of possible fresh evidence provided by the new manuscript.9 He stated that L, a well-preserved Anglo-Norman manuscript, is superior to Ο since its text is less corrupt and its script and illumination are better. He questioned Pope's method of assuming, as a starting point, that the Herald wrote correct continental octosyllables, and advocated the edition of L to ascertain whether the L readings supported Pope's linguistic conclusions.

3 The London Manuscript L is a well-preserved manuscript of seventy membrane folios, bound with two paper fly leaves in a binding of brown calf leather which dates from the seventeenth century. Its front and back are stamped in gold with a tulip tree in the centre and a fleur-de-lis in each corner. The volume measures 235 mm by 140 mm. The writing is in brown ink, in a single column; the rubrics are in the same hand, in red. There are normally forty lines to each page. The script is clear and carefully executed; a number of anglicana forms show it to be the work of an English scribe, and it can be dated in the second half of the fourteenth century. There are no marginal corrections and there is no expunction; there are only two superscript corrections, and two small erasures. The capitals of the verse sections are illuminated in goldleaf and various colours, while the rubric capitals are, with three exceptions, plain blue initials with some red pen flourishing. The first page of writing (f.4r) is decorated with a border of flowers and corner pieces, and the initial Ο is infilled with the shield of arms of Edward III. On f.3v is an illuminated frontispiece comprising two compartments; the upper compartment contains a representation of the Holy Trinity, showing God the Father holding a crucifix with a dove symbolising the Holy Ghost; the lower compartment depicts the Black Prince kneeling in prayer. The quality of the illumination is poor, which was not uncommon in England towards the end of the fourteenth century.10 dial. We shall see later that these parts axe not the work of the Herald, but of an Anglo-Norman scribe of the poem. 8 It is curious that Meyer, while accepting the Hainault character of the language, should consider the Herald an Englishman who, like Gower, wrote after continental models. Pope explicitly rejects this theory and calls the Herald an alien immigrant whose French differs fundamentally from that of Gower. See Meyer's review of the Pope and Lodge edition in Romania, XLII (1913) 124-6, and Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. xxxi. 9 Arnould, art. cit. p. 14. 10 For further details on L, see Arnould, op. cit. and Sir Israel Gollancz, Ich Dene (London, 1921).

3

The probable date of the poem was established by Lodge as 1385, on the basis of line 1816 (which states that since the conquest of Castile by Henry of Trastamara in 1366 »ne passa mie des ans vint«) and the present tense used in line 2142 (which refers to the Princess of Wales whose death took place at the end of 1385).11 It follows that L was executed in or after 1385. The evidence of the handwriting and the illumination allows us to date the manuscript towards the end of the fourteenth century.12 It is astonishing that, though the existence of L was noted by the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts as early as 1874,13 and though it has been in its present location since 1921, no research at all was carried out on it till 1953. The history of the manuscript is, briefly, as follows. Its original recipient, or the person who may have commissioned it, is unknown. The earliest known owner was John Shirley (1366? - 1 4 5 6 ) , poet, translator, book collector and transcriber of the works of Chaucer, Lydgate and others. His bookmotto, Ma ioye a Shirley, appears on f. 3r;14 it was almost certainly added some time after the execution of the manuscript. We do not know who owned it immediately after Shirley; the next known owner was William Cecil, first Lord Burghley.15 L stayed in the Cecil family for four generations, then passed, through inheritance, into that of the earls of Elgin, and was purchased in 1687 by Sir Roger Mostyn, first baronet. Following the 1920 sale of the Mostyn manuscripts, it was bought by Members of the University of London for presentation to H.R.H. the Prince of Wales in 1921. Since then it has been on permanent loan in the University of London Library.

4 Relationship of the Manuscripts Even the most cursory examination of the two manuscripts reveals their extraordinary closeness. We must therefore start with a study of all corrupt or difficult readings, to see if they are common to both; a large number of common corruptions would be a sound indication that Ο and L derive from the same model.16 11 Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. lv. 12 I am indebted to Professor T. J. Brown, Dr. A. I. Doyle and the late Professor F. Wormaldfor their help in dating L. 13 Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, Fourth Report (London, 1874) 358. 14 This motto is found in two other Shirley manuscripts, in the British Museum and in the Bodleian Library. For a discussion, see Gollancz, op. cit. pp. 11-12. For information on Shirley, see A.I. Doyle, "More Light on John Shirley", Medium Aevum, XXX (1961) 9 3 - 1 0 1 . 15 See William Cecil, Baron Burghley, Bibliotheca Illustris (sale catalogue by Bentley and Walford, London, 1687) 88. 16 I have borne in mind here Roques's warning that the system of common errors for determining manuscript relationships must be used with caution. See M. Roques in

4

Out of a total of 59 L readings which need emendation, 37 are identical in 0,6 present unimportant spelling variations, and 3 are corrupt in a slightly different way but equally in need of emendation. Thus, in 46 out of 59 cases the Ο and L readings are either identical or show similar misunderstanding of their models. 17 There are also a number of corrupt, doubtful or curious readings of words and passages in both manuscripts which, though they can be retained, cannot stand without explanation or comment. On a total of 141 of these, 131 are identical in both manuscripts. 18 Pope, when studying O, drew up a list of 60 scribal blunders, as she called them. In 37 of these, the readings are identical in Ο and L; some of them are just acceptable (though they were probably not in the original) while others have to be emended. 19 The following examples, taken from these three categories, will show the closeness of the manuscripts: A for Par (422) seigniour (O seignioure) for sojour (695) legasi for legal auxi (770) court for count (1033) conissance for Toussains (1559) entre etix, en trewes, en trois for entrues (1939, 2478, 3718) criere for chiere (2032) Nouelle for Noel (2049) et Devereux added to the line (2281) acquerez for ne querez (2427) savoient for sovent (2527) ce ville, sa ville for Seville (2998, 3636) power for pourriere (3226) par deux costees for par d'encoste (3461)

These common corruptions seem to point strongly in the direction of a common ancestor for the two manuscripts. Is there any evidence to disprove this? A check on differences in words showed 103 cases where Ο and L have different words in the same place.20 In 94 cases, the differences in meaning are either very slight21 or can be ascribed to absent-minded copying. 22 Of the remaining 9

17 18 19 20 21 22

Romania, LXIX (1947) 1 1 6 - 8 , in a review of Le paradoxe de Bedier, pp. 1 - 1 6 of Melanges 1945, II, Etudes littdraires, published by the University of Strasbourg. The remaining 13 cases can be ascribed to carelessness on the part of the L scribe, and are probably unrelated to the model from which he copied. 2 are different but equally poor, 2 are slightly better in Ο and 6 slightly better in L. Of the 23 remaining cases, 13 show a mistake on the part of the transcriber and 10 show a different, acceptable reading in L. Excluding words which are either very corrupt or recognizable though misspelt in either or both manuscripts. Such as tost/tantost. Such as portz/portes.

5

cases, 5 concern synonyms used in rubrics, while 4 are not important and no conclusions can be based on them. There are thus no grounds to be found in the differing words on which to question a theory of common ancestry. As the manuscripts are so close, it seems plausible that either one was copied from the other, or both derive from a common model. A vital point here is lines omitted in either or both. There are 4 cases to consider: Line 120 is missing in both manuscripts; Ο has no space for it, but a marginal note defic, in the same hand and ink as the text; L has a space. Line 2584 is missing in both; Ο has no space but a marginal note defic.hic; L has no space or note, line 4000 is missing in Ο only, and a space has been left for it. The Explicit,23 which in L follows line 4188, is missing in 0 ; there is no space left for it. From this evidence, we can conclude as follows: 24 L was not copied from 0 (before or after Ο was corrected) or from 0's model, unless one assumes that the L scribe made up line 4000 and the Explicit. It is possible that he made up the Explicit;25 it seems unlikely that he composed line 4000: he did not notice there was anything missing in one of the two cases where his model was defective, which shows he was less on the alert for deficiencies than the Ο scribe, and makes it improbable that he would have gone to the trouble of making up a line of verse. Ο was not copied from L, as in that case Ο would have line 4000 and the Explicit, nor was Ο copied from L s model, since it would then have line 4000 and might have the Explicit (if the L scribe did not make it up). Ο was not corrected from L, or from I ' s model, as then line 4000, for which a space was left, would surely have been filled in. Ο and L were therefore copied from different models.26 Hereafter, the model of L will be called A, and the model of Ο, B. We must now study the corrections in the manuscripts, to see if they provide any answers to the stemma question. The only corrections in L are two superscript is and two erasures. O, on the other hand, has 130 corrections, 14 underlinings of words or groups of words, and 7 erasures. The underlinings and erasures are not important to our argument,27 but 23 Explicit d'une partie de la vie du Prince de Gales et d'Acquitane. (After this follows the part not ascribed to the Herald.) 24 Account is taken here of the fact that Ο has a large number of corrections, put in after completion of the manuscript. Professor Arnould raised the question whether L might have been copied from corrected O, or Ο corrected from L (Arnould, art. cit. p. 7). For details on the Ο corrections, see below. 25 But see also below, note 38, for a final conclusion on the author of the Explicit. 26 This conclusion, so far largely dependent on the argument that L has line 4 0 0 0 and that this was copied from its model, will be supported by evidence that L, in many cases, gives correct readings where Ο has corrupt ones. 27 In 3 erasure cases, L is better while in the remaining 4 the manuscripts are either identical or give alternative spellings. The underlinings are done in a later hand, always concern proper names or indications of a man's function or status, and presumably had some special significance to underliner which is no longer apparent.

6

the corrections deserve close analysis: the question of who made them, and when, obviously affects conclusions on the stemma. These corrections are of four kinds: in the margin, in the text (i.e. one letter changed into another), superscript, and expunction. They have been made after the manuscript was finished. Though the marginal corrections are small and their script is more cursive than that of the text, close examination shows clearly that the individual letters are identical to those in the text. We may therefore postulate the theory that the Ο scribe himself corrected the manuscript. 28 The fact that the colour of the ink is the same corroborates this theory. It is further supported by those instances where an intended correction is marked in the margin and the correction then incorporated in the text: marginal note, correction and the rest of the text are all in the same hand. Proof is also found in the marginal guide letters placed by the scribe next to each capital: their script is identical with that of text and corrections. The superscript corrections are also in this hand, as are the marginal notes at lines 120 and 2584. Thus, it seems plausible that the Ο corrector was the Ο scribe himself. This would also account for the fact that the corrections were made by an Anglo-Norman scribe who knew no more French than the Ο scribe: some words are corrected wrong, and by no means all errors are corrected. 29 This brings us to the question of the model for the Ο corrections. Out of a total of 50 corrections in the margin, in the text and in superscript, 47 lead to a reading identical with L. Expunction occurs in a total of 80 words, of which 34 have a marginal or superscript correction. Of these 34 cases, 24 give a reading identical with L, in 3 correction seems to be intended to accord with L, and in 5 the correction brings the reading closer to L. In 34 of the 46 uncorrected expunction cases, the dot is placed under a letter which is absent or different in L: the L reading is always the better one. Thus, the expunction evidence shows that in 24+3+5+34=66 cases out of a total of 80, the corrections give a reading either identical with L or close to L. Taking all four kinds of correction together, 47+66=113 out of a total of 130 give a reading either identical with L or close to L. Thus, the Ο corrections were made from a manuscript very close to L. Since the corrector was the Ο scribe himself, the most likely theory is that he corrected from his own model. As he was a poor scribe, it is quite likely that he made many mistakes and had to go over his work to correct them. It will by now be apparent that L is the more accurate and therefore the 28 The question of the Ο corrector's identity was also raised by Professor Arnould. See Arnould, art. cit. pp. 6 - 7 . 29 The corrections in Ο are apparently not finished. Most marginal corrections are marked with a cross, but there are also some cross marks where no correction is made, which may indicate that corrections were intended there.

7

better manuscript. Some further evidence will confirm this. A check on all words missing in one manuscript but present in the other showed that, excluding unimportant differences and readings which are poor in both manuscripts, 59 out of 101 readings are better in L and 42 better in O. Thus, the better L readings outnumber those in Ο in a proportion of roughly 3 to 2. L also has fewer misplaced or transposed lines, and fewer rubrics placed in mid-sentence. As for the spelling, a check on three 100-line sample passages showed that, out of 113 differently spelt words, 79 are more characteristic of Anglo-Norman in Ο and 34 more Anglo-Norman in L.30 At this point, it is useful to call to mind Pope's view about the Ο scribe and his model. She called him »well-meaning but ignorant and stupid«, 31 and pointed out that, his knowledge of French being quite inadequate to his task, he was often reduced to copying mechanically or setting down »at random some more familiar word bearing a vague resemblance to the one he saw before him.« 3 ? He cannot be held wholly responsible for the imperfect text, however: »A careful examination of the text and the titles shows conclusively that he must have had before him not the original manuscript, but a copy already more or less defective.« 33 Pope's theory of an intermediate manuscript is based not only on the corruption of the poem itself, but also on the existence of the rubrics. She argues convincingly that these could not have been the Herald's work: the language shows too many Anglo-Norman features, and »twice over the text is incorrectly summarized, and once sheer nonsense is written.« 34 It is to the scribe of the intermediate manuscript that they must be attributed; this scribe is also, in Pope's view, probably mainly responsible for »the present unsatisfactory condition of the text.« 35 She further ascribes to him the authorship of lines 4 1 8 9 - 4 2 5 2 , i.e. the list of the Black Prince's officers in Aquitaine which follows the poem proper. She describes this scribe as »intelligent, but independent-minded and careless«. 36 Pope's conclusions about the aptitudes of the Ο scribe apply also, though to a lesser extent, to the L scribe. The L evidence supports her theory about the existence of an intermediate model. The poor quality of Ο and L and the many identical garbled readings are helpful, paradoxically, in giving a picture of this model. Ο and L, as copies of the archetype made by ignorant but faithful scribes, are more valuable than might be copies made by more competent, independent-minded scribes. 3 0 L is more Anglo-Norman only in the use of qe for the relative subject pronoun, and in ceo for ce. 31 Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. xlvii. 32 Ibid. p. xxxiv. 33 Ibid. p. xxxv. 34 Ibid. p. xxxv. 35 Ibid. p. xxxvi. 36 Ibid. p. xlvii.

8

As we have seen earlier, L was copied from one model, A, while Ο was copied from another, B. These four manuscripts clearly belong to the same family. The closeness of Ο and L argues that Β was probably copied from A. This would acount for the common corruptions, and for the fact that Ο is the more corrupt manuscript: Ο would be one step further removed from the common ancestor and its extra mistakes would be due to this. Thus, I propose the following stemma codicum. Η I (X)

I

A

/ Ο

Β

/ \ L

Η is the Herald's original version. A is responsible for the common errors and omissions in Ο and L. Β is responsible for some of the further corruption of O, including the omission of line 4000. In the stemma, (xj indicates the place where it is most likely that one or more intermediate manuscripts existed. It is probable, considering the amount of corruption postulated in A, that A was not copied directly from H. We may assume that Η itself was a good copy since the Herald, as a professional keeper of records, would check that it was. At the time of the composition of the poem he was a high official of the Crown and probably had access to a good scribe (if he did not act as his own scribe).37 A copy made directly from Η might have contained a number of Anglo-Norman features, but it would hardly have as many garbled readings as have been postulated in A. The existence of (x) is, however, purely conjectural. The fact that the poem must have been of considerable topical interest to people in court circles at the time of writing, and that it was therefore probably the object of intensive copying, supports this stemma: the fastest method of multiplying A would be have to Β copied from A and then, simultaneously, L from A and Ο from B. The A scribe was probably the author of the rubrics. Pope's arguments on this point are good. Further evidence may be found in the fact that they occur in mid-sentence in 10 cases in L and 0, and in a further 3 cases in 0: this suggests they may have been in the margin in A, without a clear indication as to where they should be inserted in the text. If the A scribe was their author, he would almost certainly have placed them in the margin, since he must have composed them as he went along. Pope's theory that the A scribe was probably the author of lines 4 1 8 9 4252 (the list of the Prince's officers) is also sound. The rubric which pre37 See below, in the section on The Author.

9

cedes line 1 (Cy comence une partie de la vie et des faitz d'armes d'un tres noble prince de Gales et d'Aquitaine . . .) shows that he intended to add a second partie to the poem, and the Explicit (Explicit d'une partie de la vie du Prince de Gales et d'Acquitane) suggests the list of the Prince's officers was intended as the second partie.38 The lines were undoubtedly written by an Anglo-Norman: the scansion is irregular and there are a number of very Anglo-Norman rhymes. 3 9 Moreover, the degree of irregularity of the scansion, where the syllable count varies between 6 and 13, shows that their author was not a practised versifier. 40 In my opinion, the A scribe was probably also responsible for adding the epitaph. 4 1 A possible piece of evidence about the A scribe may be found in lines 2281-2: Apres feurent Ii mareschalle et Devereux Qui feurent prodhommes et loiaux.

Et Devereux is clearly a scribal addition; the original continental rhyme must have been mareschal: loial, and omission of these two words corrects the scansion. Froissart, who based his version of the events recorded here 4 2 on the Herald's poem, makes no mention of Devereux, though the list he gives of the men concerned, including the two English marshals, is in all other respects very close to the Herald's 4 3 In one of the other lines where Johan Devereux is mentioned, Monsire has been added in front of the name. 4 4 These additions may indicate that the A scribe had a personal interest in the household of Sir John Devereux. 45 From the aforegoing, we may sum up as follows: Ο and L are both very corrupt Anglo-Norman versions of the Herald's original poem; they derive from the same (already corrupt) Anglo-Norman archetype; Professor Arnould was right when he called L the better of the two manuscripts. 38 In view of this connection between the first rubric and the Explicit, it is probable that the A scribe wrote the Explicit, which was then omitted in Β through an oversight. 39 LI. 4 2 0 1 - 2 jugier:mentier, 4 2 0 7 - 8 departir.contier, 4 2 3 1 - 2 departir:jugier. 40 Michel, though he reconstituted these lines to some extent, was unable to turn them into regular octosyllables. 41 The history of the epitaph, which derives from an earlier Latin version, is the subject of my article "The Epitaph of Edward the Black Prince", to be published shortly. 42 The Spanish campaign of the Black Prince. 43 Jean Froissart, Chroniques, ed. S. Luce (Earis, 1 8 6 9 - 8 8 ) VII, 7 - 8 . 44 L. 3238 Monsire Johan Devereux, noble persone. The other line is 1989 where Devereux, without addition, figures in a list of names. 45 The family takes its name from the town Evreux in Normandy, and it is found in English annals as early as 1140. Sir John was the second Lord Devreux. He fought with the Black Prince at Najera, and continued his distinguished service to the Crown until his death in 1393.

10

5 The Language Miss Pope's findings were that the language of the poem was that of a native Hainaulter, and she printed a text which incorporated her emendations based on that view. We must consider whether she might have reached different conclusions on the author's language (and therefore have reconstituted differently) if she had had both manuscripts at her disposal.46 Close examination of L, to see if there is any evidence which invalidates Pope's emendations, shows that there are no instances where the L reading affects their acceptability.47 There are, on the other hand, many instances where her emendations are borne out by L. All of these either derive from the fact that the language of the L scribe was less Anglo-Norman than that of the Ο scribe, or concern cases of miscopying by the Ο scribe. The following examples will illustrate this. 48 427 571 622: 656 855:6 1035: 1285: 2220:

0 voier Cobham festoit: et (ampersand) plaiser: assenter arroiez: (noun) voie: (vowed) Johan:

Pope and L voir (au voir aconter) Cobeham (extra syllable needed for scansion) festoioit: de plaisir: assentir (L pleisir: assentir) arrois: voe: (L voee:) Jesus:

Pope based her linguistic conclusions on the evidence of the rhymes (considering phonetics, morphology and syntax) and the metre. Careful examination of L, to see if any L readings invalidate these conclusions, is therefore called for. A comparison of the rhyme words in Ο and L reveals only 3 cases where the rhymes might appear at first sight to be different; however, close study shows them all to be corrupt in both manuscripts, and it is doubtful whether Pope would have found L's reading more illuminating.49 46 It should be noted that the term 'language' is used here to indicate the local conventional form of writing or, as it is sometimes called, the scripta; there is no attempt to check how far its peculiarities reflect a spoken language. 47 When studying Pope's reconstituted text, one should consult her Critical Notes carefully: she warns us that it was necessary to print the text before the Introduction or the Notes were completed, so that in a number of Notes we find either rejection of an (already printed) emendation, or advocation of a new one. 33 of these rejections are borne out by L, as are 7 new emendations. 48 Words occuring at the rhyme are marked:. 49 LI. 1 7 2 2 - 4 Ο Et qe poy cremoit les daungiers Auxi ne de ceux ne dantry En prist en son coer grant amyn L

Et qui poi cremoit les daungiers

11

A check on both manuscript versions of the examples Pope discusses in her morphology section 5 0 shows that in the vast majority of cases the readings are identical. Where they are different, this does not affect the rhymes. Here again, Pope could not have concluded differently on the basis of L. As for Pope's discussion of the poem's syntax, 51 the manuscripts are so close that it is quite clear that what she says about Ο also applies to L. The syllable count of the poem seems at first sight very irregular indeed. 5 2 Pope, however, ascribes the irregularity of the scansion almost entirely to the Anglo-Norman scribes. Her emendations consist of changes of order, adoption of one or other of the concurrent forms of a word, omission or addition of small, insignificant words or particles, elimination of words or syllables erroneously copied f r o m a neighbouring line. She gives 289 examples of these kinds of emendation (emphasizing that this number does not represent all the emendations which she incorporated). 5 3 In none of these cases does L offer a reading which invalidates her arguments. (In 19 cases, L bears her out.) Her opinion on the prosody is sound. It is clear that Pope's linguistic arguments apply to L equally well as to O. It now remains for us to consider the validity of her conclusion that Chandos Herald was a native of Hainault, born, as she says, in or around Valenciennes. Pope's analysis is very thorough. 5 4 She deduces, from rhyme and metre, that the Herald's language is that of a native Frenchman, and not of an Englishman writing French (though she is careful to point out that »the Herald's French is certainly not free f r o m anglo-normanisms.« 55 ) Her main

Auxi ne de ceux ne dautryn En prist en son coer grant amyn LI. 3 1 3 3 - 4 Ο Qe ie puisse a banier estre Iai bien de quoi a mon mestier L

Qe ie puisse a banier eeter Jai bien de quoi a mon mester

LI. 3 4 4 7 - 8 Ο Ne pooit unqes avoir vewe Le peril si dieux mauoye L

50 51 52 53 54 55

Ne pooit unqes avoir vewe ne oie Le peril si dieux mavoie Pope and Lodge, op. cit. pp. xiv-xvii. Ibid. pp. xvii-xxiv. Pope does not give the proportion of faulty lines in O. In L, it is roughly one out of every four, and it is certainly higher in O. Pope and Lodge, op. cit. pp. xxiv-xxix. It should be noted, however, that its lay-out is confusing and that a number of line references cited as examples are faulty. Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. xxxi.

12

reasons for this conclusion are that he distinguishes e from ie, that he uses cases correctly, and that he distinguishes genders and verbal forms. Pope then narrows down the localization to Northern France. She lists the following as Northern phonetic traits:56 [ε] blocked diphthongizes regularly in yvier, otherwise exceptional (p. 491 NE § iii; but see also Gossen p. 61) [£] and [a] carefully distinguished before [n] (p. 489 Ν § xx; but see also Gossen pp. 65ff.) iee consistently reduced to ie (p. 488 Ν § ν, p. 494 Ε § iii; this trait is also found in franc-comtois, lorrain, wallon and haut-normand. Pope admits this; cf. p. 193 § 513.) [oira] reduced to [ara] in borrowed words (p. 488 Ν § vii; see also Gossen pp. 82-3) cj gives s or ch (p. 487 Ν § i; Pope admits this pronunciation lost ground in the NE region before the end of Later Old French. See also Gossen pp. 9Iff.) ml pronounced without labial glide (p. 489 Ν § xiii; but see also Gossen pp. 116-9). In her morphology section, Pope argues that study of rhyme and metre shows flexional s to be by no means obsolete, and that in the interior of the line »some thirty-four correct nominatives are metrically required.« 57 In the rhymes, »instances of correct observance . . . outnumber the incorrect in the proportion of 4:1 «.58 She points out that this constitutes evidence for North-Eastern origin as, except for that region, flexional s in the later fourteenth century was as unstable in continental French as in Anglo-Norman. In the syntax section, Pope illustrates Northern traits by comparing the Herald's language with that of other fourteenth century Northern works, such as Baudouin de Sebourc, the Geste de Liege of Jean des Preis, and Froissart's Chroniques. Pope then argues that the combination of Picard and Walloon characteristics points to the intermediate Hainault region. She finishes by giving a detailed comparison of the Herald's language with that of Froissart's poetry, as studied by Mann.59 (This comparison concerns phonology and morpho56 Indications in brackets refer to the pages and paragraphs in Μ. K. Pope, From Latin to Modem French (Manchester, 1934) where these traits are discussed. References to Gossen are to C. T. Gossen, Grammaire de l'ancien picard (Paris, 1970). 57 Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. xiv. 58 Ibid. p. xvi. 59 G. Mann, "Die Sprache Froissarts auf Grund seiner Gedichte", Zeitschrift fur romanische Philologie, XXIII (1899) 1 - 4 6 . See Pope and Lodge, op. cit. pp. xxxiixxxiii.

13

logy only.) It is on the substantial resemblance found in the language of the two authors that Pope bases her conclusion that the Herald was born in Valenciennes or its neighbourhood. (It is worth remembering here that our knowledge of Froissart's being born in Valenciennes is based on external proof.) Her theory seems plausible. The comparison with Froissart's language is especially interesting. Further confirmation of continental origin may perhaps be found in the fact that, throughout the text, English proper names at the rhyme are pronounced with the stress on the last syllable.60 There is also an additional piece of evidence for Northern origin in the rhyme septembre: octobre, which seems to show that the author used the Northern form octembre.61 Evaluation of Pope's work, after examination of the fresh evidence provided by L, can be summarized as follows: 1. Pope would not have reached different conclusions on the author's language if she had had both manuscripts at her disposal. 2. Pope's conclusion that the language of Chandos Herald is typical of a language form most commonly occurring in the Hainault region, is acceptable. Her theory that the Herald, like Froissart, was born in Valenciennes or its neighbourhood, seems possible.

6 The Author There is only one mention of the author in the poem. In lines 4 1 8 4 - 8 we are told: . . . Et ci fine lui ditz Du tres noble Prince Edward Qi n'avoit unqes coer de coward, Qe retrahist li heraud Chaundos Qi voluntiers recordoit motz. 6 2

These lines seem to show clearly that Chandos Herald is the author of the poem. It has been suggested, however, that the poem was not written by him, but by another man using his records.63 This theory hinges mainly on 60 Such as Burghees: fees ( 1 1 . 1 3 3 - 4 , 563—4, 1 3 1 5 - 6 ) and Northamptoun: persoun ( 1 1 . 1 2 5 - 6 ) . Pope does not discuss this aspect of the pronunciation of proper names, but concerns herself only with their syllabic value; see Pope and Lodge, op. cit. pp. xiii-xiv. 61 Lines 1 4 0 5 - 6 . Ο reads septembre: octobir. Octembre is attested as a Northern form in TL VI, 979. 62 "And here ends the poem, about the most noble Prince Edward who was never faint-hearted, which was composed by Chandos Herald who took pleasure in compiling a record." 63 This suggestion was made by Dr. K. Fowler in a paper, given in the University of

14

the interpretation of the word retrahist

which, if one accepts the idea of a

different author, could be taken t o mean "related" rather than "compiled". In m y view, however, the important word in the sentence is ditz, than retrahist.

rather

We are told that Chandos Herald was responsible for the com-

position o f this ditz,

which we m a y take in the sense of "poetic composition" 6 4

and which clearly refers to the preceding p o e m and not to its model or source. It takes up the ditz

o f lines 4 1 - 2 , where the author declares his

intentions: De faire et recorder beaux ditz Et de novelle et de jadis. The interpretation o f retrahist

is thus dependent o n the fact that its object

is a poetic composition. The sense "to compose a narrative", which seems most appropriate here, is listed in TL; a number of examples show that the word was used by several authors w h e n talking about their o w n writings. 6 5 There seems, therefore, to be little doubt that the author was indeed Chandos Herald. 66 But w h o was Chandos-Herald? Unfortunately, very little is k n o w n about him. He was herald to Sir John Chandos and from the analysis o f his language we have seen that he was a native o f Hainault. 6 7 His o w n name is not known;

64 65

66

67

Edinburgh in September 1973, entitled 'Who was Chandos Herald? ', and in a letter which I had from Dr. Fowler on the subject. Dr. Fowler tells me that he intends to publish the paper. See TL II, 1959-60 dit "Gedicht, Lied". See TL VIII, 1163 ff. retraire "etw. vorbringen, mit Worten darlegen, darstellen, erzählen, erwähnen" »dit ai tute la verur, Si cum jo pramis al primur. Et diz e vers i ai retrait« (Thomas Tristan). See also God. VII, 155b »Amours . . . M'a donne voloir de retraire Un conte de tres noble afaire, Pour les amoureus esjoir Qui le voudront lire et oir« (Chätelain de Coucy). The fact that Froissart, who leaned heavily on the Herald's evidence for his description ot the events of the Black Prince's Spanish campaign in 1366-67, was working on the first version of his chronicle long before 1385, the year when the Vie was written, and could therefore not have used the poem as we have it now as his source, is easily explained. Froissart in all probability based himself here on the Herald's records; the two men are almost certain to have been personally acquainted (see below in the section on Literary Background), and exchanges of information of this kind are known to have been common at the time. Lodge also holds this view, which she illustrates with a convincing comparison of passages from the Herald's poem with Froissart's ordinary and Amiens versions (see Pope and Lodge, op. cit. pp. lix-lxii). For an excellent discussion of the Herald's own use of his sources, including his careful distinction between events at which he himself was present and those for the description of which he had to rely on other people's accounts, see Pope and Lodge, op. cit. pp. lv-lix. Since Sir John served virtually all his life in the French wars, from the siege of Cambrai in 1337 to his death in 1370, and since, moreover, there were many Hainaulters at the English court during the lifetime of Queen Philippa, herself a Hainaulter, it is not surprising that Sir John had a continental herald. 15

the reason for this is the custom, well established in the later Middle Ages, of calling heralds by their names of office, taken from their master's names. This custom was especially prevalent in the case of foreign heralds, whose own names were less familiar to the English ear than those of their masters. The heralds continued to be called by their herald's title even if, like Chandos Herald, they were later promoted to a higher rank, such as king of arms. 68 We do not know for certain when Chandos Herald assumed his function. He may well have been appointed herald when Sir John became a banneret, in 1360. 69 The first mention I have seen of him occurs in an entry dated 2 September 1363, in an accounts register of the kingdom of Navarre; 70 he appears as »heraldo de Juan Chandos« and is carrying money from the king of Navarre to Sir John. I have found him mentioned seven times in Froissart, in the years 1366, 1369, 1370, 1375, 1377, 1380 and 1382; he is always engaged in diplomatic activities. 71 In 1377, Froissart tells us, Richard II at his coronation »fist Camdos le hirault roy d'armes d'Engleterre«; Froissart mentions him in 1382 during the Flemish revolt, thus: ». . . l'appeloit-on le roy d'Irlande et Camdos en son nom.« 7 2 (Froissart always calls him Chandos li hiraus or simply Chandos.) Furthermore, Coxe and Michel quote two entries in the Anstis papers in the Heralds College, one to the effect that an entry of protection was granted to Chandos Herald in November 1367 (two months after the Black Prince reached Bordeaux on his return from the Spanish campaign) and the other mentioning him in 1383 as a messenger to the Duke of Lancaster in Calais. 73 To sum up, he was Chandos Herald probably in 1360 and in any case by 1363; he entered the service of the Crown after the death of Sir John

68 For details, see A. R. Wagner, Heraldry in England (London, 1949) 18, and H. Stanford London, The Life of William Bruges, the First Garter King of Arms (Harl. Soc. cxi/cxii, London, 1970) 7 8 - 9 . 69 H. Stanford London supports this theory. See History of the College of Arms, London Survey Committee 1963, p. 268. 70 Archivo General de Navarra, Catalogo de la Seccion de Comp tos, ed. J. R. Castro (Pamplona, 1953) IV, 571, No. 1423. I am indebted to Dr. K. Fowler for this reference. 71 See Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Luce, VI, 216; VII, 159, 169; also Jean Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove (Brussels, 1 8 6 7 - 7 7 ) VII, 467, 472, 473; VIII, 355, 356; IX, 265, 268; X, 141; XVII, 566. 72 Froissart, op. cit. ed. K. de L. XVII, 566 and X, 141. See also A. C. Fox-Davies, A Complete Guide of Heraldry (London,1969) 27: »Ireland King of Arms first occurs upon record c. 1370, mentioned by Froissart, where he is called Chandos le Roy d'Ireland.« I have been unable to locate this Froissart reference. 73 Coxe, op. cit. pp. ii-iv; Michel, op. cit. pp. vi-viii. H. Stanford London, in The Life of William Bruges, p. 93, quotes the second of the Anstis references, in J. Anstis, Officers of Arms', MS. in the College of Arms, III, 235.

16

Chandos in 1370 and was made Ireland King of Arms; he became English King of Arms in 1377;74 he was still living in 1383. Heraldry authorities agree that there are no sources not already tried from which an identification of Chandos Herald might be made, and that thus his true name may never be discovered.75 A number of theories about his identity exist, however. Hugh Stanford London suggested that the Herald may have been a kinsman of Sir John Chandos, but in view of the Herald's foreign origin this possibility seems remote. 76 Kervyn de Lettenhove put forward the theory that the Herald can be identified with a certain Guy on, mentioned in a charter of 1370 and described as a clerc. Kervyn probably linked Guyon with the Herald because the former is said in the charter to have been in the company of Sir John Chandos, but there is no mention of Chandos Herald in the charter and it is highly unlikely that he would be officially referred to as a clerk, a relatively lowly function, in the same year in which he was appointed to the important office of Ireland King of Arms.77 Professor Arnould, in his article on the London manuscript, draws our attention to an entry in the Register of the Black Prince where there is mention of one »Haneray, herald-of-arms, who came from beyond the seas in the company of Sir John Chaundos« and who in 1355 received a gift of money from the Black Prince »on the information of Sir John de Wengefeld«, the Prince's steward.78 The theory that Haneray may have been Chandos Herald is tempting: the fact that he came from abroad agrees with the Herald's continental origin; it is not impossible for the Herald to have 74 Wagner, when discussing this event, states: This is not only our oldest notice of the coronation of an English King of Arms, but seems further to imply that Chandos was given a pre-eminence over other English Kings of Arms, such as Garter was later accorded here and Montjoye enjoyed in France. See A. R. Wagner, Heralds and Heraldry in the Middle Ages (London, 1 9 3 9 ) 36. H. Stanford London also suggests Chandos Herald was doyen of the Office of Arms; see London, op. cit. pp. 9 2 - 3 . 75 I am indebted to Sir Anthony Wagner, Garter King of Arms, and to A. Colin Cole, Windsor Herald of Arms, for their help on the question of Chandos Herald's identity. 76 See History of the College of Arms, London Survey Committee 1963, p. 268. 77 Froissart, op. cit. ed. K. de L. XX, 540. Speaking of the Herald, Kervyn states: Peut-etre etait-il breton; son nom etait Guyon, comme nous l'apprend une charte donnee le 18 octobre 1 3 7 0 ä Libourne par le due de Lancastre qui y prend ä son service c o m m e son clerc Guyon »qui fuist ove monseigneur Jehan Chaundos qe Dieu absoille.« The charter is printed in J. Delpit, Collection generale des documents frangais qui se trouvent en Angleterre (Paris, 1847) I, 132. 78 Register of Edward the Black Prince, Public Record Office (London, 1933) IV, 167.

17

been in the service of Chandos in 1355, one year before Poitiers, though he would not then have been his herald as Chandos was not yet a banneret; the payment may be an indication of early favour accorded to the Herald by the Prince, which may in turn have been a factor in the important career he pursued in the Crown's service after the death of Chandos, and in his being asked to write a life of the Prince. Unfortunately, there seems to be no evidence to support this theory. No one of that name is listed in Kervyn de Lettenhove's index to Froissart, nor is there any mention of him in Froissart's text for the years 1354—5. No mention of the name is found in the correspondence of Sir John Wingfield and the Black Prince in the relevant period. 79 In October 1355 the Prince set out from Bordeaux on a marauding expedition which lasted eight weeks and was highly successful. Sir John Chandos accompanied him, and it is of course possible that Haneray was one of the men in his company. The name may be a corrupt form of Henri or Andre. It does not seem to be a placename, nor is it listed in any of the dictionaries of proper names consulted for this study. Unless some new evidence comes to light, it seems unlikely that we will ever be able to discover the Herald's identity.

7 Literary Background In order to see the Herald's poem in its proper literary perspective, one must consider it in the context of French historical writing in the fourteenth century. 80 Such writing should be seen against a background of constant warfare. Life in France was dominated at all levels by fighting, bloodshed, pillage and violence. The country was devastated by battles and by the 'scorched earth' effects of the chevauchees, those burning and looting raids whose main purpose was »to cause maximum dismay to the enemy's subjects and to dislocate government«.81 The common people were crippled by heavy government taxation as well as by the extortion of money practised not only by the two armies but also by groups of marauding soldiers; villages and towns passed from hand to hand, paying heavy sums of protection money to each successive occupier; travellers had to pay large sums for safeconducts through the areas held by the various warring factions. Bloody reprisals on villages and towns unable to pay were frequent. The 79 See Robertas de Avesbury, De Gestis Mirabilibus Regis Edwardi Tertii, ed. Ε. M. Thompson (London, 1889) 4 4 6 - 7 . 80 What follows is only a short outline of the condition of historical writing in the fourteenth century. I do not claim to have made a thorough study of the subject, but hope to pursue it in further research. 81 Μ. H. Keen, England in the Later Middle Ages (London, 1973) 135.

18

peasants were forced to leave the land, often abandoning all their possessions, to seek what scant refuge they could find in fortified towns. Added to the effects of the Hundred Years War were those of the war of succession in Brittany, which broke out in 1341 between Jeanne de Penthievre and Jean de Bretagne, count of Montfort. The latter was supported by Edward III who, towards the end of 1346, substantiated his support by turning the English-held parts of Brittany into a vast network of metayer farming; this gave rise to yet more extortion and, ultimately, to a revolt of the peasantry. It was as the leader of a band of young rebels in Brittany that Bertrand du Guesclin, later Constable of France, started his military career. Yet another cause of devastation was the brigandage of the Free Companies, the Herald's Grande Compagnie. These were bodies of professional soldiers who, when not in royal employ, lived off the countryside. As the English war effort was based more on a strategy of short term expeditions than on one of occupation, Edward III raised many bodies of men by contract but was, at the end of a campaign, frequently unable either to pay them or to get them home again. As a result, they organised themselves into bands of a few hundred men each, so-called routes, often led by captains of great ability. (Among these were some of the most famous warriors of the time: Sir Hugh Calveley, Sir Robert Knolles, Sir John Hawkwood and Bertrand du Guesclin.) They then became mercenaries whom any side could hire. They were grouped according to nationality (English, French, Navarese, Italian, etc.) but there was no central supreme command. Arrangements did exist to curtail the brigandage of royal troops, as far as possible, but there were none to hold the Free Companies in check. Thus, they were perhaps the worst scourge of all, the more so since their attacks were totally unpredictable. Quarrels between noblemen of different regions, resulting in local warfare, further added to the devastation and the misery of the people. The common people found no stability anywhere. The war destroyed much of the traditional social order and the nobility, whose traditional role had been to protect them, was no longer doing so. Though the basic tenets of the Christian faith remained unquestioned, the shifting of the Holy See to Avignon made the Church seem less securely established. The monarchy was weak, and the capture of the king and his son Philip at Poitiers weakened it still further. The bloody repression of the peasant rising known as the Jacquerie, in 1358, caused yet more suffering. Two major outbreaks of the plague, in 1348-9 and 1361-2 added greatly to the people's misery.82 This situation supplied the material for four forms of writing on current 82 See P. Ziegler, The Black Death (London, 1969).

19

events. Firstly, there is large-scale historical narrative which describes events as they happen; Froissart is here the outstanding example (though it should be remembered that his aims are more complex than the straightforward narration of historical events). Secondly, there are works of an epic 83 character, describing the valorous deeds and spectacular exploits of one or other of the great warriors of the time; in this category come Cuvelier's Vie de Bertrand du Guesclin and Machaut's Prise d'Alexandrie. (As has already been noted, biographical writing on contemporary figures is rare in the fourteenth century, and these works and the Vie du Prince Noir seem to be the only instances of it. 8 4 ) Thirdly, there are short poems describing particular events, such as the Complainte sur la bataille de Poitiers and the Combat des Trente (the latter also has a distinct epic flavour). And fourthly, there are writings, like many of the poems by Deschamps, which lament not so much particular happenings as the general misery and hardship caused by the war and the disastrous national situation. 85 This last type of writing can still justifiably be classified as writing on contemporary history, but at the same time its moralizing overtones are symptomatic of what Gaston Paris refers to as the century's »manie de moraliser ä tout propos«. 86 The preoccupation of the aristocracy with the moral conventions of the time, their concern at the lowering of moral standards, and their attachment to the ideals of knighthood and the concept of chivalry 87 (illustrated, amongst other things, by the continuing popularity of Arthurian romances 88 ) are reflected in all types of writing, 83 Epic is taken here in the OED sense of »pertaining to that species of poetical composition . . . which celebrates in the form of a continuous narrative the achievements of one or more heroic personages of history . . . «. For OF, this literary tradition is represented by the chansons de geste but not all the works classified here as epic are written in monorhymed laisses. 84 Pseudo-history, such as Hugues Capet or Baudouin de Sebourc, cannot be considered as biographical writing. 85 Some interesting observations about OF literature during the Hundred Years War can be found in P. Rickard, Britain in Medieval French Literature 1100-1500 (Cambridge, 1956), particularly in chapters VII and VIII. (It should be noted, however, that Rickard's statement that the Herald was »technically an Englishman, although he wrote his Life of the Black Prince in France«, is unfounded and incorrect.) 86 G. Paris, La poesie du Moyen Age (Paris, 1903, 1895) II, 208. 87 See for example Jean Froissart, Voyage en Beam, ed. A. H. Diverres (Manchester, 1953) p. xiv: The aristocratic conception of chivalry was, to a great extent, responsible for the highly ornamental lives led by the princes, in particular during the fourteenth and the fifteenth century, when ceremonial observances, heraldry, tournaments and Orders of Chivalry modelled on the Round Table reached the height of their popularity. 88 Gaston Paris, op. cit. II, 1 9 3 - 4 , speaks of the great interest existing in the fourteenth century in Arthurian romances, which to the public of the time were the

20

including that on current events. These trends are clearly recognizable in the historical poetry of Machaut and Deschamps, while Froissart, in his prologue to the Chroniques, states that one of his aims is to inspire young people to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors and aim at living lives of prowess and valour. 89 The same concern with the decline of moral values is echoed, though on a much more down-to-earth level, in short political poems. 90 Thus, the spectrum of writing about contemporary events in the period is contained between two extremes: at one end, there is realistic description of the state of life at the time, the military events and social situations, while at the other we find moralizing literature with a didactic flavour and a nostalgic tendency towards emulating earlier works depicting the virtues of chivalry. The main authors of the period all show these two elements in their work. Froissart's lyrical poetry, for example, is in the courtly tradition, yet his Chroniques contain many realistic descriptions of the historical events of his time. The same dichotomy exists in the works of Deschamps: much of his poetry is about the misery caused by war,91 while another large part is concerned with the declining morality of his time;92 many of his poems combine these two elements. expression of »cet ideal particulier, fait d'orgueil, d'amour et d'aventure, qui s'etait forme dans les hautes classes, depuis le regne de Louis le Jeune.« He points out that the many fourteenth century manuscripts of Arthurian prose romances testify to this interest, and that their imitations reflect, not the real state of »le monde chevalesresque« of the time, bur »l'ideal assez factice et conventionnel de sa derniere periode.« 89 See Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Luce, I, 3 - 4 . For comment on Froissart's didactic intent, see Froissart, Voyage en Beam, ed. Diverres, pp. xiii-xvi. 90 For examples of these, see the following collections: I. S. T. Aspin, Anglo-Norman Political Songs, ANTS (Oxford, 1953). B. Haureau, "Poemes historiques anglo-normands qui se rapportent au regne d'Edouard Ier", Histoire litteraire de la France, XXVII (Paris, 1877) 3 0 - 4 5 . A.J.V. Le Roux de Lincy, Recueil de chants historiques frangais (Paris, 1841) I. T. Wright, The Political Songs of England, from the Reign of John to that of Edward II (London, 1839). On the subject of moral values in the age of chivalry, see R. W. Barber, The Knight and Chivalry (London, 1970) and R. L. Kilgour, The Decline of Chivalry as Shown in the French Literature of the Late Middle Ages (Harvard, 1937). 91 See for example Eustache Deschamps, Oeuvres completes, ed. G. Raynaud (Paris, 1878-1903): I, 1 3 6 - 7 Guerre sans fin; III, 4 5 - 6 Misere du pauvre peuple; V, 6 7 - 8 Voeu pour la paix; V, 8 8 - 9 Contre les exactions des routiers; VI, 7 7 - 8 Catamites causees par la rivalite de la France et d'Angleterre. 92 See ibid.: I, 1 5 9 - 6 0 Contre les gens de guerre; I, 1 6 1 - 2 Contre la guerre; I, 1 8 9 - 9 0 Rigueurs des temps; V, 1 4 2 - 3 Decadence du temps präsent; V, 1 5 9 - 6 0 Sur tous maulx qui regnent en chascune court; V, 3 4 3 - 4 Sur les moeurs du temps präsent.

21

It can be seen from the foregoing that French historical literature was being written both in prose and in verse. In what proportion did these two media occur? Bossuat, in his introduction to historical literature in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, states that, though the verse medium continues to be used, »la prose est employee de preference par les chroniqueurs.« 93 Examination of some reference works bears out this conclusion: prose and verse works exist in roughly equal numbers, but since the individual prose items are often very much larger than the verse works, the proportion of the actual volume of writing is definitely in favour of prose. 94 One has only to think of the chronicles by Joinville, Jean le Bel and Froissart to realize that prose accounts for the bulk of fourteenth century historical writing and that, as to volume, the verse yield is meagre indeed. Moreover, some of the prose works listed as a single item in bibliographies exist in a considerable number of different versions. It seems clear that the prevailing taste of the time was for prose history, rather than verse. Coville's findings support this view. 95 At the end of his introduction he concludes that, in spite of a fairly large volume of short occasional poems, »la moisson vraiment historique reste maigre.« 96 He is careful to remind us of the existence at the time of a number of historical poems which are now lost. 97 No manuscripts survive of these, and the only trace left of them consists of four entries in the inventory of the library of Charles V. 98 It is unlikely, however, that their existence would have affected the conclusion that prose was the preferred medium for historical writing. 93 Bossuat p. 477. 94 For examples, see the following: M. D. Legge, Anglo-Norman Literature and its Background (Oxford, 1963) 2 7 6 - 3 1 0 ; Bossuat pp. 4 7 7 - 8 9 (authors such as Gilles Ii Muisis, Machaut and Philippe de Vitry are found under headings other than historical also); G. Gröber, Geschichte der mittelfranzösischen Literatur, ed. S. Hofer (Berlin and Leipzig, 1933) I, 9 6 - 1 2 0 , 1 5 1 - 6 5 ; J. Vising, Anglo-Norman Language and Literature (London, 1923) 7 4 - 5 ; A. Molinier, Les sources de l'histoire de France des origines aux guerres d'ltalie (Paris, 1 9 0 1 - 1 9 0 6 ) III, 1 0 4 - 2 4 4 , IV, 1 - 2 3 9 , V, i-clxxxvii. 95 A. Coville, "Poemes historiques de l'avenement de Philippe VI de Valois au traite de Calais (1328-1360)", Histoire litteraire de la France, XXXVIII (Paris, 1949) 259-333. 96 Ibid. p. 263. 97 Froissart may be referring to these when he speaks scornfully of poems on contemporary history written by »gongleour et enchanteour«. See later in this section. 98 This inventory was first drawn up by Gilles Malet, whom Charles V had put in charge of his library, in 1373 and was recopied and expanded by his successors. The last inventory was made in 1424, and all four items are included there, so that they must have been lost after that year. They are entitled: La bataille de Cassel en Flandres; La Guerre Philippe de Valois et des Flamens; La Guerre du roy de France et du roy d'Angleterre, et les Fail du roy de Navarre et de ceulz de Paris quant ilz furent contre le Roy; and Un vieil rommant. . . en ryme, et parle des guerres d'Escoce et d'Angleterre. See L. Delisle, Recherches sur la librairie de Charles V

22

The main prose works are only dealt with briefly here, since our concern is chiefly with the verse writings. The earliest fourteenth century prose work is Joinville's chronicle, finished in 1309, which deals with Saint Louis. Then there are a great many local chronicles, many of them written in the north of France and Flanders, where rich towns, involved in the adventure of war, provided opportunities to write local history. Examples of such chronicles are: 99 the continuations of the Chronique du Hainaut, also called the Chronique de Baudouin d'Avesnes, written by various authors through most of the fourteenth century; the Chronique de Flandre, written in 1342, continued in the Anciennes Chroniques de Flandre until 1383; the Chronique normande du XIVe siecle, written between 1369 and 1372; the work of Jacques de Hemricourt, written towards the end of the century. In addition, work on the Grandes chroniques de France was continuing, for instance in the Chronique des regnes de Jean II et de Charles V, ascribed to Pierre d'Orgemont and written towards the end of the century. The two great prose chroniclers of the second half of the century are Jean le Bel and Froissart. It is a well-known fact that much of Jean le Bel's work was taken up and elaborated by Froissart in the earlier part of his Chroniques, so that it has not yet been accorded the place it deserves on its own merits. As for Froissart's work, it is too well-known to need much mention here. He was undoubtedly the most important chronicler of his time, and in spite of his inability to perceive and set down historical causality his work stands out in the literature of the entire Middle Ages as a unique achievement in history writing. Though he lacks objectivity since, like all well-known authors of the time, he worked for a succession of patrons 100 and, moreover, set out to describe only a section of the history of his time, namely that which affected the aristocracy, his keen powers of observation, his sense of humour and his feeling for picturesque detail give his work a freshness of description which makes it a delight to read. His travels brought him into contact with people in many walks of life so that, in spite of his aim of describing the aristocracy only, there

(Paris, 1907) II, 165 (nos. 1001, 1002, 1003) and 168 (no. 1018). For a summary of all historical works in the library, see ibid. I, 3 8 - 4 0 . 99 An effort has been made to give lists of examples representative of writing activity through the whole of the century. 100 However, see also F. S. Shears, Froissart, Chronicler and Poet (London, 1930) 103, where Froissart is quoted as follows: Let it not be said that I have corrupted this noble history through the favour accorded me by Count Guy de Blois, for whom I write it. No, indeed! for I will say nothing but the truth and keep a straight course without favouring one side or the other; moreover, the noble Count, who made me write this history, would not wish me to give anything but the true version of events. Shears gives no source for this quotation.

23

are many glimpses of the common man in it. His works were widely read during his lifetime, both in England and in France. As for fourteenth century historical poetry, it can be divided, for the purpose of obtaining a rapid overall picture, into three types: epic works, verse chronicles and occasional verse. The distinction is sometimes hard to draw: the Combat des Trente, for example, combines elements from both the epic and the occasional type. The occasional category is a large one, comprising poems of very varying length and type, but sub-division is hardly worth-while in the scope of this survey. Works written in the epic tradition are, for example, the Voeux du paon by Jaques de Longuyon, dated 1312 and concerning the Alexander legend; the Chronique de Brut ä l'annee 1307 by Pierre de Langtoft, an Anglo-Norman, written between 1311 and 1320; the Restor du paon by Jean Brisebarre, also called Jean le Court, written beween 1313 and 1340 on the Alexander legend; the Parfait du paon by Jean de le Mote, dated 1340 and also concerning the Alexander legend; Hugues Capet by an anonymous author, written, according to various suggestions, in 1317 or 1328 or around the middle of the century; Baudouin de Sebourc by an anonymous author, written between 1360 and 1370; La Prise d'Alexandrie by Guillaume de Machaut, dated about 1372; La Vie de Bertrand du Guesclin by Cuvelier, written between 1380 and 1387; the Geste de Liege by Jean des Preis, also called Jean d'Outremeuse, written about 1390. All these are works of over one thousand lines, and some are very long indeed: Cuvelier's poem, for instance, is 22,790 lines. The following works will serve as examples of verse chronicles: the Branche des royaux lignages by Guillaume Guiart, a history of Philippe Auguste and his successors until 1304, dated 1307; a Chronicle on the years 1300-1316 attributed to Geoffroy de Paris, written between 1313 and 1317; the Guerre de Metz 'en 1324 by an anonymous author, dated about 1324; the Fleurs de lis by Philippe de Vitry, which concerns the French royal house, with didactic elements, dated 1338; the Geste des Bretons en Italie by Guillaume de la Penne, dated about 1378; the Livre de bon Jehan, due de Bretagne by Guillaume de Saint-Andre, written at the end of the century. These works vary in length, the shortest being the Fleurs de lis (1,148 lines) and the longest the Branche des royaux lignages (21,510 lines). These examples show that the writing of epic poems and verse chronicles was still well established in the fourteenth century. The verse chronicles mentioned here are all in octosyllabic verse, while the epic works are all in laisses of monorhymed alexandrines, except for the Prise d'Alexandrie which is in octosyllabic couplets. The occasional poems concern such topics as political events or situations, marriages and deaths of famous persons, battles, and so forth. They

24

vary greatly in length, ranging from Froissart's short pastourelles,101 the poems in the Aspin, Haureau, Le Roux de Lincy and Wright collections, and the Complainte sur la bataille de Poitiers, all of which are less than about 100 lines, to medium length works such as the Combat des Trente (519 lines) and then to long poems such as Machaut's Confort d'ami (4,004 lines). 102 They bear a variety of titles, such as chansons, dits and contes. Most of the occasional poems are in octosyllabic verse, usually couplets; there are a few ballads and some decasyllabic poems. There appear to be only four works of any consequence written in rhymed laisses of alexandrines: the Voeux du heron, the Voeux de l'epervier, the Combat des Trente and the Complainte sur la bataille de Poitiers. It seems, then, that the octosyllabic couplet was the preferred medium for occasional poetry. Among the historical fourteenth century verse works considered here, only Langtoft and the songs from the Aspin and Wright collections are Anglo-Norman. This, taken in conjunction with the fact that Vising lists mostly prose works in his section on historical fourteenth century literature, seems to indicate that the trend to write history in verse was at that time more widespread in France than in England. This theory would further support the argument in favour of the Herald's being of continental origin. From these data, it would seem that the Herald combines in his poem elements of two literary genres: his choice of the octosyllabic couplet links him with the verse chronicles, while his 'hero-worship' approach to his subject matter lends him a kinship with the epic works of his time. There is only one other poem in the period which combines these two characteristics: Machaut's Prise d'Alexandrie. The two works are alike in other respects, too. Both concern the lives of royal persons who had recently died, and both stress the prowess of their subjects as warriors. In both the eulogistic approach of the author affects the historical accuracy of the narrative, though this is much more the case for Machaut than for the Herald (the difference may be partly explained by the fact that Machaut was a professional poet, whereas the Herald was a keeper of records with a professional bent for exactitude). The works are also similar in that their authors explicitly combine hearsay and eye-witness accounts, and in stylistic devices, such as the use of recurring epithets to describe particular people and of similar (or even identical) 'padding' phrases. 101 The pastourelles have a distinct historical significance in that they treat of particular events, such as the arrival in England of the captured king of France, the return of Wenceslas of Bohemia from captivity, or the marriage of Jean due de Berry. See Jean Froissart, Poesies, ed. A. Scheler (Brussels, 1 8 6 7 - 7 7 ) II, 3 0 8 - 1 0 , 3 1 6 8, 3 3 7 - 9 . 102 The Confort d'ami, written in 1357, starts out as an occasional poem to comfort a friend in captivity, but then turns into a didactic treatise on royal conduct with historical references.

25

There seems to be no direct evidence that the Herald read the Prise, but its dating between 1369 and 1373 makes it chronologically possible that he did so. The Herald may well have been influenced by Machaut who, in addition to being a prominent musician, was also a well-known poet leaving behind him, at his death in 1377, a large volume of widely read poetry and a reputation as an accomplished master of the verse medium. It is quite possible that the two men met, either at the French or the Flemish court, or at one of the many battles and peace negotiations in which their patrons took part. It would have been natural for the Herald to model himself on Machaut. The question now arises why the Herald did not adopt the prose form used by Froissart and Jean le Bel; as he was not a professional versifier, it would have been easier for him to write prose than verse. It is unlikely that he would have been influenced by Jean le Bel, who was not very well-known during his lifetime, who traveled far less than Froissart or Machaut, and whose work, as it was soon incorporated in Froissart's, did not get the individual recognition it deserved. As for influence by Froissart, a factor here may be an early chronicle, possibly in verse, which Froissart had written in 1361 for his first patron, Philippa of Hainault. This work is now lost. Froissart speaks of it himself in the prologue to the Chroniques. He tells us its subject: . . . du fait des guerres et des aventures qui en sont avenues, et par especial depuis la grosse bataille de Poitiers oil le noble roy Jehan de France fut prins . . .

and continues: ...

si empris je assez hardiement, moy yssu de l'escolle, ä dittier et ä rimer

les guerres dessus dites et porter en Angleterre le livre tout compile, si comme je le fis. 1 0 3

Scholars have long debated the meaning of this a dittier et a rimer. Does it mean the chronicle was in verse? Molinier thought so; he tells us that Froissart went to England in 1361 and »emportait avec lui un premier essai historique, en vers«. Gaston Paris was of the same opinion: ». . . il est ä noter que Froissart avait d'abord ecrit en vers le premier livre de sa chronique.« Coville also decided the chronicle was in verse. More recently Cartier has reviewed the argumentation for and against this theory; he, too, concludes in the affirmative.104 Thpugh some scholars disagree, the weight of opinion in favour of the verse theory is therefore strong. A second question is posed by the existence of two small manuscript 103 Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Luce, I, 210. 104 Molinier, op. cit. IV, 6. G. Paris, Esquisse historique de la litterature frangaise au Moyen Age (Paris, 1 9 0 7 ) 231; see also ibid. p. 234. Coville, op. cit. pp. 261, 3 3 1 - 2 . N. R. Cartier, "The Lost Chronicle", Speculum, XXXVI ( 1 9 6 1 ) 4 2 4 - 34.

26

fragments, described by Delisle;105 they date from the fourteenth century and belong to a poem in octosyllabic couplets dealing with the reign of Philippe VI and Jean II. Are they part of the lost Froissart chronicle? Delisle points to the similarity that exists between the descriptive technique used in these fragments and that used by Froissart when he describes the same events in his Chroniques; Delisle does not, however, commit himself as to their authorship. Coville concludes in the affirmative but gives no grounds for his conclusion, while Cartier concedes a case can be made for Froissart's being the author but does not reach a definite decision.106 Delisle and Longnon both put forward the possibility that the manuscript fragments are the remains of one of the rhymed chronicles in the library of Charles V which have been mentioned earlier.107 There seems to be no contemporary reference to the lost chronicle, apart from Froissart's own mention of it in the prologue to the Chroniques, and none of the scholars who have studied the matter give any indication as to when it may have disappeared. It is therefore possible that it was still in existence when the Herald wrote his poem, and that he read it. If it was in verse, this may have influenced him in his choice of the verse medium. It is relevant to consider here why Froissart wrote his Chroniques in prose. He did write other verse works which he offered to members of the aristocracy, such as Meliador for Gaston Phoebus and Wenceslas of Bohemia, and a collection of dittiers about love presented to Richard II. He wrote, in fact, a large volume of verse while under the patronage of Wenceslas, who was himself an amateur poet and some of whose poems Froissart incorporated in the second version of Meliador.108 It seems possible that patrons specified whether the works written for them were to be in prose or verse, and Froissart may have been specifically asked to write his chronicle in prose. Cartier states that after Queen Philippa's death Froissart's new sponsor, Robert de Namur, ». . . requested a chronicle in prose«, but he gives no source for this assertion.109 Froissart himself, in his prologue, only says that he continued work on his history,

105 L. Delisle, "Fragment d'un poeme historique du XlVe siecle", Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Chartes, LX (1899), 6 1 1 - 1 6 . 106 Coville, op. cit. p. 261. Cartier, op. cit pp. 4 3 3 - 4 . 107 Delisle, op. cit. p. 615. Jean Froissart, Meliador, ed. A. Longnon, SATF (Paris, 1895-99) III, 367-8. 108 For details on Froissart's collaboration with Wenceslas, see Meliador, ed. Longnon, I, pp. LXII-LXIV. 109 Cartier, op. cit. p. 432; see also p. 433, where Cartier states: apparently he [Froissart] offered the fruits of his labor to her [Philippa's] sister, Robert de Namur's wife, or to the count himself. It was on this occasion that he was prevailed upon to write prose for a living.

27

begun for Philippa, at the request of his master Robert de Namur, without any mention of doing so in prose or verse. 110 The most plausible reason for Froissart's chosing to write prose (though he was a gifted poet who left us nearly 65,000 lines of highly skilful verse) is his admiration for Jean le Bel. This admiration is expressed in his prologue. 111 Whiting states: »Froissart's original intention was to write his chronicle in rime, but he later changed his mind, perhaps because of the obvious merit of Jean le Bel's prose.« 112 Professor Diverres holds the view that Queen Philippa probably encouraged Froissart to write a chronicle in which Edward III and the Black Prince figured prominently and that she may have suggested that he should take up Jean le Bel's chronicles in prose. 113 Shears states that Froissart's choice of prose was very probably influenced by Jean le Bel's low opinion of verse history writing; Jean le Bel expresses his view plainly in the beginning of his prologue, where he says that rhyme demands too many embellishments and repetitions to result in a credible tale. 114 It is very likely that the Herald knew Froissart and was influenced by him in some way; we have seen that the Herald, through Sir John Chandos, was connected with the English court from about 1360 or earlier, while Froissart arrived there in 1361 and stayed under the patronage of Queen Philippa until her death in 1369. It is therefore quite possible that they met there, while we know for certain that both men were with the Black Prince in Bordeaux at the outset of the Spanish campaign in 1366. 115 Moreover, if they were on friendly terms, the Herald may have met, through 110 111 112 113

Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Luce, I, 210. Ibid. I, 210. See also Froissart, Voyage en Beam, ed. Diverres, p. xx. B. J. Whiting, "Froissart as Poet", Medieval Studies, VIII (1946) 190. Professor Diverres has suggested this to me in correspondence. See also A. H. Diverres, "Jean Froissart's Journey to Scotland", Forum for Modem Language Studies, I (1965) 54. 114 Shears, op. cit. p. 80. Jean le Bel, Chronique, ed. J. Viard and E. Deprez (Paris, 1 9 0 4 - 5 ) I, 1 - 2 : Qui veult lire et ouii la vraye hystoire du proeu et gentil roy Edowart, qui au temps present regne en Engleterre, si lise ce petit livre que j'ay commence ä faire, et laissy ung grand livre rime que j'ay veu et leu, lequel aucun controuveur a mis en rime par grandes faintes et bourdes controuvees, duquel le commencement est tout faulx et plain de menchonges jusques au commencement de la guerre que ledit roy emprit contre le roy Philippe de France. Et de lä en avant peut avoir assez de substance de verite et assez de bourdes, et sy y a grand plente de parolles controuvees et de redictes pour embelir la rime, et grand foison de si grandes proesses racontees sur aucuns chevaliers et aucunes personnes qu'elles debveroient sembler mal creables et ainsy comme impossibles; par quoy telle hystoire ainsy rimee par telz controuveurs pourroit sembler mal plaisant et mal aggreable a gens de raison et d'entendement. 115 See Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. 198 and M. Darmesteter, Froissart (Paris, 1894) 30.

28

Froissart, other poets such as Chaucer, Cuvelier, even Petrarch, all of whom are known to have been friends of Froissart. Thus, the Herald may have been encouraged to try his hand at verse-writing himself. On balance, then, the following suggestions can be made as to the factors that may have influenced the Herald's choice of verse (and in particular the octosyllabic couplet) rather than prose: He is quite likely to have been influenced by Machaut's Prise d'Alexandrie; he may have been influenced by Froissart's early chronicle if it was in verse; he may, through Froissart, have met other famous poets and been tempted to follow their example, but this theory is tenuous. There is, however, another possibility which has already been mentioned in connection with Froissart's choice of prose for his chronicle: the choice of verse may not have been the Herald's, but that of his patron. Though we do not know for certain that the Vie du Prince Noir was a commissioned work, this seems a very likely theory. The poem shows clearly that the Herald was not a skilled poet who wrote verse regularly, and none of the Froissart passages where he is mentioned show him in any other capacity than that of herald and officer of arms. There is no trace of evidence that he ever produced any other literary work. It is therefore unlikely that he would have written a poem unless he was asked to do so, and it is quite possible that his patron specified that he wished the Vie to be written in verse. The effect of patronage is, indeed, a factor to be considered carefully in a study of the literary output of the period. Bennett tells us that »there is abundant evidence in the fourteenth century to show that the author could confidently look to the aristocracy for patronage.«116 He states that medieval authors regularly looked for patrons to supply their livelihood, and that the patrons often determined the content or subject matter of their work. 117 An author writing a commissioned work therefore had to keep his patron's literary taste firmly in mind. As to what that taste was likely to be, we may consider what Diverres says of Froissart: »Like so many men of letters during the Middle Ages, he found his patrons among the privileged aristocracy, whose literary tastes were formed under the influences of chivalry and courtly love.« He points out that »as early as the twelfth century, aristocratic literature placed chivalric conduct under tfye aegis of the courtly ideal.«118Gervase Mathew, in an account of the concept of chivalry during the reign of Richard II, says that the Vie du Prince Noir was designed to meet the tastes of »a public familiar with courtly usage, courtly grammar and the nuances of knightly epithet.« 119 116 H. S. Bennett, "The Author and His Public in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Essays and Studies of the English Association, XXIII (1938) 17. 117 See ibid. pp. 9 - 1 0 . 118 Froissart, Voyage en Beam, ed. Diveires, pp. xiii-xiv. 119 G. Mathew, The Court of Richard II (London, 1968) 117.

Centuries",

29

Lucien Foulet, when discussing Les Cent Ballades of Jean le Senechal, speaks of the literary public's interest in the past: . . . ce passe que grandissait l'eloignement . . . On veut alors faire passer dans la vie meme de l'epoque le romanesque du Lancelot. Les imaginations se colorent et s'exaltent au recit des belles »emprises d'armes« des compagnons de la Table 120 ronde. On reve d'exploits dignes d'un Gauvain.

Thus, the prevailing taste seems to have been for literature written in the tradition of the courtly ideal. 121 There seems to be no evidence that with this taste for courtly literature went a desire that such literature should be written in verse, but this may sometimes have been the case, and the nostalgic yearning of the fourteenth century aristocracy for the chivalrous ideals of earlier ages may have included a taste for the medium in which the authors of those ages often depicted their heroes. Another consequence of the dictates of the patron can be found in the 'slant' of any literary work. The Herald needed to describe certain events in such a way as not to offend his patron. In addition, it should be remembered that »objective portraits are extremely rare in the Middle Ages. In medieval literature description had a definite function, that of praise or blame.« 122 We must also bear in mind that the aristocracy of the time was ready to be impressed by outward splendour, rather than by qualities of character, and that to them »the outer manifestations of chivalry meant far more than its ethical aspects.« 123 Thus, in much of the literature we find no criticism of the violence of the age, the bloodshed, murder, pillage and ransoming, though all these were in direct contradiction to the ethical ideals of chivalry. 124 But who was the Herald's patron? It should be noted here that royal or aristocratic patronage of authors writing about the national history was rare in England at the time. In contrast to France, where chroniclers writing French history were already retained and paid by the court in the thirteenth century, England knew no tradition of regular court historiographers. 125 120 J. Bedier and P. Hazard, Histoire de la litterature frangaise illustree (Paris, 1948) I, 116. 121 No special distinction between England and France has been made here, for the sake of brevity. Nor has the literary activity at the Burgundian court, which from the end of the fourteenth century became a centre of art and literature, been especially considered. These points will be studied in further research. 122 Froissart, Voyage en Beam, ed. Diverres, p. xxiv. 123 Ibid. p. xix. 124 For example, to Froissart, his patron Gaston Phoebus was a great lord because he held a splendid court in Beam and his less attractive qualities are not commented on. 125 Though there are the earlier instances of Wace and Benoit de Sainte-More, who wrote historical works at the request of Henry II, these are isolated cases and one cannot speak of a tradition.

30

Froissart, the only history writer of note at the English court in the fourteenth century, held no official position there 126 and was not retained after the death in 1369 of his patron and fellow Hainaulter, Queen Philippa. Nevertheless, it is highly probable that the Vie du Prince Noir was commissioned by a member of the royal family or of the aristocracy who had a close interest in the Black Prince. There seem to be only two persons who might have done so: Richard II, and his tutor Sir Simon Burley. Burley, one of the Black Prince's favourite companions in arms, was appointed as Richard's tutor on the return of the Black Prince and his family to England in 1371, when Richard was four years old. He was one of Richard's most faithful supporters until his impeachment and execution by the Merciless Parliament in 1388. He was »a man of some culture - we still have an inventory of his library which contained twenty-one books when very few persons outside the cloister possessed even one.« 127 The books, in French, English and Latin, concerned a variety of subjects, and he may well have owned others besides these. 128 Though his interest in books can thus be established without doubt, there is no evidence that he ever commissioned a literary work. It is more probable that the poem was written at the request of Richard II. In the postulated year of composition, 1385 (when the Black Prince had been dead nine years), he was eighteen years old and thus at a likely age to have commissioned a book on his famous father's life. Though neither of his parents had shown an interest in literature, his grandmother Philippa had done so, and with the arrival in 1382 of Richard's wife Anne of Bohemia, the daughter of a family with a strong tradition of interest in literature, a fresh influence in favour of literary patronage became established at the English court. (Anne was, for example, the niece of Froissart's patron Wenceslas of Bohemia.) 129 It is also likely, as Clarke suggests, that Richard's interest in books may have been due, in part at least, to Burley's influence. Richard is known to have been a patron of the arts, and to have acquired books regularly. In 1379, he bought a French Bible, the romance of the Rose, and the Romances of Percival and Gawain. 130 Clarke tells us that, »though no inventory of the royal library has come to light, we know 126 Shears says that Froissart was »attached to the royal household as secretary to the Queen«, and that he »was soon recognised as the court chronicler«, but later states that Froissart's »special duty at the English court . . . was to compose lyrics for Queen Philippa«. From this, too, it would seem that Froissart held no official position. See Shears, op. cit. pp. 15, 16, 194. 127 H. F. Hutchison, The Hollow Crown, A Life of Richard II (London, 1961) 8. 128 For details on Burley's library, see Μ. V. Clarke, Fourteenth Century Studies (Oxford, 1937) 1 2 0 - 2 . 129 For details on artistic patronage at the Bohemian court, see Mathew, op. cit. pp. 1 6 - 1 7 , 39. 130 F. Devon, Issues of the Exchequer (London, 1837) pp. lv and 213.

31

from entries in the accounts that books were bought for the king from the beginning of the reign and that he kept a considerable number of them in his private chamber.« 131 The accounts show that nineteen of these were rebound in a costly manner between June 1385 and June 1387, 132 which testifies to the king's interest in his books. Rickert gives a list of the French books owned by Richard II in 1 3 8 4 - 5 , which shows that »not only was Richard French in his taste but he was also a lover of romance and poetry.« 1 3 3 The list includes 19 romances and epic works, as well as historical works and a Bible. This clearly shows Richard's interest to have been particularly in French books of a courtly or epic nature. As for his actually commissioning literary works, we know that John Gower wrote his Confessio Amantis at the king's request. Bennett writes: . . . Gower while rowing on the Thames was met by no less a person than Richard II, who commanded him to enter the royal barge, and then after some talk ordered him to write a book. As a result we have the Confessio Amantis, 134 written, as Gower tells us, »for King Richardes sake«.

We also know that Froissart, in 1395, had an audience with the king and presented him with a manuscript of dittiers on love, of which Richard read several passages »car moult bien parloit et lisoit le franchois«. 135 Though this work was prepared by Froissart as a gift for the king, and was not commissioned by him, it shows that Richard's interest in literature was a well-known fact at the time. A complete record of the manuscripts in the possession of Richard II has not, unfortunately, been preserved. It seems fairly certain that four manuscripts now in the British Museum belonged to him: a Bible, a Missal, a Breviary and an astrological 'Indicia'. 136 Mathew describes a further four: a Book of Divinations, a Book against the twelve errors and heresies of the Lollards, and two Books of Statutes. Mathew states that the Book of Divinations »seems to be a unique manuscript commissioned by Richard for his own use« and that the three other manuscripts »have been identified as coming from Richard's library«, but he gives no source or authority for his information. 137 131 Clarke, op. cit. p. 122. 132 P.R.O. E. 101/401/15: »Rotulus expensarum diversarum in officio magne Garderobe domini regis . . .« 9 - 1 1 Ric. II. 133 E. Rickert, "King Richard II's Books", The Library, 4th series XIII (1933) 144-7. 134 Bennett, op. cit. pp. 1 7 - 1 8 . 135 Froissart, Chroniques, ed. K. de L., XV, 167. 136 British Museum, Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Old Royal and King's Collections in the British Museum, ed. G. F. Warner and J. P. Gilson (London, 1921) I, p. xi note 3. 137 Mathew, op. cit. pp. 4 0 - 4 1 .

32

On the whole, Richard II seems to be the most likely person to have commissioned the Vie du Prince Noir. The theory is somewhat weakened by the fact that there is in the poem no mention of him as a patron, nor is there any special emphasis on him in lines 2 0 9 6 - 7 , which record his birth. This might perhaps partly be the result of the Herald's lack of poetical talents and imagination. In the absence of a better solution to the problem of the identity of the Herald's patron, the theory that it was Richard II may be tentatively accepted. The choice of Chandos Herald as the author of a life of the Black Prince is quite logical. As Sir John's herald, he was present at many major events in the Prince's life, and as we have seen, he continued to be closely associated with the English court after Chandos's death. His literacy and his skill as a record-keeper made him well qualified to write a life-history. Nor was he the only herald to write the life of an important personage. Wagner tells us that »more than one herald made use of his opportunities and himself recorded the great events with which he had to do.« 1 3 8 As examples in the medieval period we have Chandos Herald; Gilles le Bouvier, Berry King of Arms, who wrote a chronicle on the life of his master Charles VII (up to 1455), a history of Richard II, a chronicle of Normandy and a geography; 139 Jean Lefevre, seigneur de Saint-Remy, Toison d'Or King of Arms of Burgundy, who wrote a chronicle of his own time; 140 and his successor, George Chastellain, who did the same. 141 Wagner also cites four post-medieval examples. It is clear from the Herald's prologue (lines 1 - 4 2 ) that he considered himself a serious recorder of history and not a frivolous story-teller. His contempt for jongleurs (lines 1 7 - 1 8 ) echoes that already expressed by Jean le Bel and Froissart, who said that such people were not to be relied upon for a true account of events: J'ay trouve en ung livre rime que ung jengleur a fait tant de bourdes et de menteries que je ne les oseroie dire. 1 4 2 Pluiseur gongleour et enchanteour en place ont chante et rimet les guerres de Bretagne et corromput par les changons et rimes controuvees le just et vraie histoire. . . 1 4 3

Froissart was careful, however, to point out his indebtedness for reliable historical information to

138 139 140 141 142 143

A. R. Wagner, Heralds of England (London, 1967) 23. Bossuat 5 1 4 4 - 4 7 . Bossuat 5201. Bossuat 5 2 1 3 - 2 5 . Jean le Bel, op. cit. I, p. xii. Froissart, op. cit. ed. Luce, II, 265.

33

. . .aucuns rois d'armes et leurs mareschaus, qui par droit sont et doient estre just inquisiteur et raporteur de tels besongnes. 144

From this last reference it would seem that certain heralds, of whom Chandos was surely one, were highly respected as professional men with a thorough knowledge of their jobs. Another category of heralds, however, who also wrote poetry but were despised by other writers, are the subject of Henri de Laon's Dit des herauts, where the author says bitterly that there is no better living for lazy and greedy men than that of herald, and complains that they will end up by ruining tournaments and knights alike.145 Baudouin de Conde, in his Coxites des hiraus, speaks of heralds as arrogant upstarts, well fed and clothed but in fact no better than parasites.146 Jacques Bretel, too, in the Tournoi de Chauvency speaks in disparaging terms of heralds in general, and says they are often rude, stupid, lying and hypocritical, and that their main aim is to extort money from the knights they serve147 (We should note, of course, that these writers all wrote long before Chandos Herald.) The main complaint against them seems to have been their exploitation of knights, especially young ones, by writing mediocre poetry for them and expecting lavish rewards in return. Wagner discusses this question in detail and states that »throughout their early history the heralds and the minstrels are closely linked, as colleagues or as rivals.« He suggests some heralds were quite powerful and that »the good or bad opinion of the heralds was something to be reckoned with.« 148 The important position of Chandos Herald as English King of Arms, however, puts him above these minstrel-heralds. It seems likely that the Vie du Prince Noir was his only literary attempt and that we should regard him as an Officer of the Crown first, and as a writer only because circumstances made him the most suitable person available to write the life of the Black Prince. 8 Literary Qualities The author, in his introduction, tells us his purpose in writing the poem. It is to record the story of good deeds for the benefit of posterity (lines 27—34), and to compose and set down beaux ditz about the present and the past (lines 41-2). How well does he succeed in this dual aim of writing a didactic work which is also a beau dit? 144 Ibid. I, 1. 145 Henri de Laon, Le dit des herauts, ed. A. Längfors, Romania, XLIII (1914) 217 — 25. 146 Baudouin de Conde, Dits et contes de Baudouin de Conde et de son fils Jean de Conde, ed. A. Scheler (Brussels, 1 8 6 6 - 6 7 ) I, 1 5 3 - 7 3 . 147 Jaques Bretel, Le Tournoi de Chauvency, ed. M. Delbouille (Paris/Liege, 1932). 148 Wagner, Heralds and Heraldry in the Middle Ages, 2 6 - 3 1 .

34

Throughout the poem, the didactic element is consistent and unmistakable. The Herald draws the reader's attention to the nobility of the Prince's character, to his piety, generosity and courage. This is done explicitly, as in the introduction (lines 63-106), or by adjectival clauses such as qui tant ot de valour, de grant pris, and so on. The most important single event in the poem, the Spanish campaign, is called . . . le plus noble emprise Q'onqes cristiens emprist. ( 1 1 . 1 6 4 2 - 3 )

There is praise for traditional virtues, many of which are listed in the introduction, 149 and explicit treatment of them is found in passages throughout the poem. 1S0 The didactic element in the poem is based on two things: the author's intention to write a didactic work, and his need, as an Officer of the Crown writing at the commission of an eminent personage, to speak well of his hero and omit any reference which might detract from the Prince's glory or offend his patron. Detailed and historically accurate description is sometimes sacrificed to this need. The most striking example of this is the Herald's account of the sack of Limoges, where the killing of many innocent civilians was ordered expressly by the Prince. It is recorded in only two lines: Mais touz y feurent mortz ou pris Par le noble Prince de pris.

(11.4049-50)151

The shortness of the description of the siege and surrender of Calais (lines 385-410) may also be due to the need not to show the English in an unfavourable light: though mercy was ultimately shown to the inhabitants of the town, Edward III was at first determined to execute the six burghers and only the earnest entreaties of Queen Philippa finally persuaded him not to carry out his intention. 1 " The Herald's meagre account of the Prince's marriage and departure for Aquitaine (lines 1585-98) may also have been influenced by his wish to omit unfavourable details: historical sources show that the Prince's choice 149 Honour, noblesce, sens, valour, largesce, loiautee, fraunchise, bountee, proesce, hautesce, justice, droiture, jolitee, chivalrie. 150 For example courage (11.546, 2 7 2 9 - 3 0 ) , loyalty ( 1 1 . 2 9 2 4 - 5 ) , generosity (11.381012), justice ( 1 1 . 1 6 2 7 - 8 ) . 151 This episode is described in detail by Froissart, who states that more than three thousand men, women and children were put to the sword in one day, while the Prince looked on, unmoved by pleas for mercy (Froissart, op. cit., ed. Luce, VII, 2 5 0 - 2 ) . Froissart's figures are known to be unreliable, but the cruelty of the reprisal cannot be doubted. It is worth remembering that Froissart was at this time not writing for an English patron, and had therefore no need to disguise the facts. 152 Froissart here gives a detailed account, which he borrowed from Jean le Bel. See Froissart, op. cit. ed. Luce, IV, 5 3 - 6 5 .

35

of Joan of Kent was not regarded favourably by his parents, and the couple's immediate departure from England was at the express wish of Edward III. Nor does the Herald give the reason for the revolt of the Gascon noblemen (lines 3839ff.), which lay largely in the levying of a new and heavy hearth-tax to cover the cost of the Spanish campaign. Thus, an important piece of information which would enable the reader to understand the circumstances of this major event, is withheld. The Prince's lack of personal judgment in supporting Pedro the Cruel, whose good faith was clearly questionable, is touched upon only briefly: Lui Prince ad bien aperceu Qe le roi Petro ne fu Pas si foiaux come il quidoit.

(11.3703—5) 1 5 3

Thus, the Herald's didactic intentions manifest themselves in two ways: by praise of the knightly virtues shown by the Prince, and also by other knights, and by a tendency to play down any unfavourable sides to the Prince's character and actions. The treatment of the didactic theme, it must be admitted, lacks skill and subtlety. As for the author's second aim, that of writing a beau dit, it cannot be denied that the style of writing is poor. The Herald is not an imaginative writer and he repeats himself often. Stock phrases and expressions, such as c'est chose claire, ce m'est avis, c'est la somme, are used frequently in order to fill up a line or to provide a rhyme word. For a rhyme for mounde, which occurs twice at the end of a line, he cannot do better than Si come il tourne a le rounde, and he uses this line both times.154 Si Dieu m'aiuwe occurs so often that it becomes meaningless. Between the end of the narration of one event and the beginning of the next, the Herald often inserts a line or couplet which adds nothing to the narrative and produces an effect of clumsiness, such as: Ore est bien temps de comencer Ma matiere . . .

(11.43-4)

Quei vous ferroy je longe barre Pur alonger plus la matiere?

(11.632-3)

Quei vous ferroie longe demain?

(1.2137)

Ore voel je faire mon devoir De bouter avant ma matiere;

(11.2224-5)

153 Though the Prince's support of Pedro could be partly justified as a counter-move to the threat of a Franco-Aragonese invasion of Aquitaine, we should note that Sir John Chandos himself advised the Prince against both the Spanish campaign and the hearth-tax levy. 154 Lines 49 and 1631. TL VIII, 1 6 0 - 1 lists many instances of the rhyme monde: a la reonde; one of the examples ( 1 1 . 3 9 - 4 1 , from Renart le Contrefait) is identical with the Herald's line.

36

A quoi faire vous conteroie La matiere et alongeroie?

(11.3699-3700)

155

The Herald's lack of imagination also shows itself in the use of stock rhymewords to rhyme with the names of some of his characters; thus, Guichard d'Angle always rhymes with angle, Bartholmeus de Burghees (with one exception) with fees, and Saresbury (with one exception) with auxi. He uses hackneyed phrases like a la chiere membree and oil doulce oisselet gentille.156 The method of characterization is hardly more skilful than the style, but certain traits of the central figures nevertheless emerge.157The author shows, though largely by implication, what was probably the Prince's most remarkable quality: his ability as a warrior and strategist. Fairly long passages are devoted to his instructions to his men, or to descriptions of the deployment of his army. His two great victories, Poitiers and Näjera, are dwelt on at length (lines 1121-1400 and 3225-3472). The Prince's excellence as a feudal lord is depicted fairly fully in the description of his court in Aquitaine (lines 1603-1636). His vassals find him a good overlord. His court is such as befits a great ruler: he has over eighty knights and four times that number of squires at his table, and there are jousts and feasts in both Angouleme and Bordeaux. All his subjects and all his people love him: Et l'amoient de bon amour Tut Ii subgit et tout li sien Car il lour fesoit moult de bien.

(11.1620-22)

He is feared by his neighbours and his enemies: Li veisin et li enemi Avoient grant doute de li.

(11.1633-4)

There are several descriptions of the people receiving the Prince with affection and rejoicing when he returns from a campaign (lines 1447-57, 1497—1507, 3756-65). In contrast, Pedro is shown as an example of an unsuccessful overlord: he cannot keep his throne, the author states, because of the disloyalty of his people and his relatives, who ought to love and serve him but do not (lines

155 For a discussion of digression as a literary device see E. Faral, Les arts poetiques du Xlle et du XHIe siecle (Paris, 1971) 74. 156 Lines 2032, 3476. 157 It should be remembered that what may seem to be characterization by the author is often no more than straightforward historical recording. For example, the considerate attitude of the Prince towards the captured king John ( 1 1 . 1 4 1 7 - 1 4 3 4 ) is a historical certainty, and the Herald's treatment adds nothing to render the episode more striking. Cf. Froissart, op. cit. ed. Luce, V, 6 3 - 4 .

37

1750—70). It is therefore important, says the Herald, that a ruler be loved by his people: Ne doit estre sire clames Qui de ses hommes n'est amez.

(11.1759-60)

The author tells of the Prince's generosity in rewarding his men for their services (lines 3909—11). Again Pedro can be taken as a contrasting figure: though wealthy, he does not honour his obligation to the Prince, and refuses to pay him on the pretext that his people will not raise the money while the English army is on Spanish soil (lines 3683-6). Another illustration of the Prince's character is the episode where he asks Pedro, as a personal favour (in the traditional OF request for a don), to pardon those who fought against him. Pedro agrees but, again in contrast, does not do so willingly (lines 3515-35). 1 5 8 The author shows the Prince as a dutiful servant of his father, the king, and as a feudal leader who does not act without the advice of his council (lines 843-4, 846, 856, 1888-1909). The Prince's piety is one of the main themes of the poem. His devotion to the Holy Trinity is stressed in the introduction (line 87) and at the close of the poem (lines 4176—8). There are two instances of his praying before a battle (lines 1263-73, 3174-83), and after both battles (Poitiers and Najera) he disclaims all credit for the English victory, saying humbly that it was all God's work (lines 1428,3505). He is equally humble in thanking God for whatever misfortunes are sent to him (lines 3963,4065-6). The Herald shows the family of Edward III as a close-knit, happy one. The descriptions of the return from Calais (lines 461—71), the Prince's leavetaking when he goes to Gascony (lines 585—7), the return from Poitiers (lines 1497-1516) and his brother John's arrival in Dax (lines 2154-78) all testify to the good relationship between the members of that family. On the last occasion, the Prince's anxious enquiries of his brother about how things are at home, and John's reply: "They all send their love, and Father says you must let him know if he can help you in any way", ring true and give a vivid picture of the concern each family member has for the welfare of the others. The Princess of Wales, on the other hand, does not on that occasion ask for news of the family but only of how people are in England: Et moult tres amiablement Lui ad demande de la terre Coment homme fait en Engleterre. ( 1 1 . 2 1 4 4 - 7 )

This might be an indication that news of her in-laws was less important to her than news of the country as a whole. 158 Though generous, this action on the part of the Prince was not politically expedient: this merciful treatment enabled the faction loyal to Henry of Trastamara to remain active and restore Henry to the throne two years later.

38

The Prince is also a loving husband and father. He tenderly comforts his wife when he leaves (lines 2072-88), and she affectionately welcomes him when he returns (lines 3 7 6 0 - 7 2 ) . His sorrow at his elder son's death (lines 4 0 6 0 - 6 ) and his concern for his remaining son's future (lines 4 1 3 5 - 8 , 4 1 4 2 52), though described only briefly, are convincing. There is little character description of anyone else. The Princess of Wales, Chandos and Audley remain shadowy figures. Pedro is described in more detail but a complete picture of him does not emerge. Some minor figures are presented as types, rather than as real people: Ferant de Castres is the loyal knight who remains faithful to his king in adversity (lines 1794-1804), and the cardinal of Perigord is an honest man who, having tried in good faith to prevent bloodshed at Poitiers, finds himself regarded as a traitor by both sides (lines 9 2 1 - 8 ) . There are brief flashes of picturesque or realistic detail, such as the two armies which are so close that they water their horses in the same stream (lines 764—6), the Prince's inability to sleep on a battlefield amidst all the dead (line 1440), or men sleeping fully armed on the eve of a battle (line 3043). The quarrel between the French marshals Clermont and Audrehem is described in a lively manner (lines 1135-56).' 5 9 Finally, there is an attractive picture of a herald, joyful and lighthearted because he has been given many rich gifts for his services (lines 2 9 5 3 - 7 ) . A small amount of influence by earlier authors or literary traditions can be found in the poem. The introduction calls to mind the prologue to Wace's Roman de Rou; both writers state as their aim the recording of the deeds of forefathers so that the memory of those deeds may be preserved for posterity. 160 A similar approach is found in the opening lines of Fouke Fith Warin.161 However, the Herald, in his prologue, strikes a rather more individual note in his attack on worthless jongleurs who tell stories merely to raise a laugh, and in his determination to tell a tale of good deeds, even if this means he may not be esteemed at court for it. Further influence by Wace, or by a literary tradition inspired by him, may be discerned in the following passages: L'une pur son amy ploroit Et l'autre son amy regretoit.

(11.593-4)

159 Froissart does not mention this incident, and Luce refers to the Herald for a description of it. See Froissart, op. cit. ed. Luce, V, p. ix footnote 1. 160 Wace, Le Roman de Rou, ed. A. J. Holden, SATF (Paris, 1 9 7 0 - 7 3 ) I (3), 161, 11.1-10: »Pour remembrer des ancesurs / Les feiz e les diz e les murs,« etc. 161 Fouke Fitz Warin, ed. L. Brandin, CFMA (Paris, 1930) 1, 1 1 . 6 - 1 0 : ». . . donqe deit home remenbrer des aventures e pruesses nos auncestres, qe se penerent pur honour en leaute quere, e de teles choses parier qe a plusours purra valer.«

39

L'un ploroit pur son amy Et l'autre pur son mary. (11.2091-2) La est flour de chivalrie, La est flour de bachelrie, La sont les meillours combatantz Qe soient en monde vivantz. (11.2977-80) Les frieres furent contre le friere Et les filtz encountre le piere. (11.3903-4) Repetition of the same idea in different words, as shown in the first two of these passages, is found frequently in Wace; the following lines will serve as an example: Braz a braz se sunt entrepris,

162

Braz unt desus et desuz mis. (Brut 11.1117-8) The contrast of l'uneß'autre

is often used by Wace, as in these lines:

L'une eschiele l'autrehurter. envai'r, (Brut 11.12564-5) L'un conrei a l'altre Oil de la vile et de l'ost orient, Li un plorent, li autre rient. {Brut 11.10093-4) The anaphora of the Herald's third passage occurs in many instances in Wace's work; a striking example is found in these lines: Vit Vit Vit Vit Vit Vit Vit

les valees, vit les plainnes, les mores, vit les boscages, les eues, vit les rivages, les champs, vit les praeries, les porz, vit les pescheries, sun pople multepleier, les terres bien guaainier;

(Brut 11.1210-1216) 1 6 3

The first line of the Herald's fourth passage shows use of repetition for emphasis; this occurs, for instance, in line 2 of the Brut: De rei en rei e d'eir en eir. The second line is an example of the antithesis frequently practiced by Wace: Les forz les fiebles craventer, Les vifs les muranz defuler. (Brut 11.12571-2) 1 6 4

162 Wace, Le Roman de Brut, ed. I. Amould, SATF (Paris, 1938-40). Cf. the examples of this literary device given by Faral, op. cit. p. 65. 163 Cf. the examples of anaphora given by Faral, op. cit. p. 67. 164 For a detailed discussion of Wace's literary procedures, see M. Jirmounsky, "Essai d'analyse des precedes litteraires de Wace", Revue des langues romanes, LXIII (1925) 261-96. 40

Though there is no definitive statement on the influence of Wace's work on fourteenth century authors (Miss Pelan states that the influence of Wace can still be discerned in the thirteenth century, but she goes no further 165 ), the existence of at least eight fourteenth century AN manuscripts of the Brut166 is evidence that Wace manuscripts were copied in England during the century, which seems to show that there was still a demand for his work and that it was being read at the time. (We know that Wace continued to be widely read in France, and that his popularity continued in the fifteenth century. 167) It is a well-known fact, however, that some of the stylistic features found in Wace were widely used by French writers from the second half of the twelfth century onwards, so that we cannot be certain that the Herald knew Wace's work, although it seems very likely that he did. The treatment of battle scenes differs from the traditional epic manner in that the Herald does not put the emphasis on the description of knights in individual combat. Like Villehardouin before him, he describes the battle scene as a whole, the strategy involved, the movements of the armies and the geographical features of the battlefield. There are a few attempts to show the prowess of specific knights, such as William Felton (lines 2737— 58) and John Chandos (lines 3275-94), but they seem rather feeble. Surprisingly, the Herald makes no mention whatever of the Prince in individual combat; he is shown, on the battlefield, as a leader and strategist but not as a fighter. In the battle scenes, the Herald does follow the well-known OF practice of saying »Adonqes veissez . . . «, 168 thereby involving the reader more closely in the event described. In the two passages dealing with dates, the author uses the common OF device of indicating the season by speaking of the song of birds. 169 There may be an influence of earlier OF literature in two monologues where the speakers lament their fate. In the first, the Princess of Wales speaks of her fears for the Prince's life when he leaves for Spain (lines 2057—71). In the second, the wife of Henry of Trastamara laments the loss of her position as queen of Spain (lines 3576-93). Both passages, though short and of no great literary value, are sincere and convincing. Like most OF writers, the Herald uses proverbs. Six of these are listed 165 Μ. M. Pelan, L'influence du Brut de Wace sur les romanciers frangais de son temps (Paris, 1931) 1 6 7 - 8 . 166 I am indebted to Professor Η. E. Keller for this information. See also Wace, Brut, ed. Arnould, pp. vii-xiv. 167 See for instance G. Doutrepont, La litterature franfaise ά la cour des dues de Bourgogne (Paris, 1909) 133, where there is mention of a Brut manuscript at the Burgundian court in 1420. 168 For instance 11.985, 1180. 169 Lines 2018, 3476.

41

b y Morawski; o f these, three are also listed b y Whiting as proverbs used b y Froissart. 1 7 0 T h e y are: Herald 1 1 . 3 7 - 8 Morawski 2407 Whiting no. 250

Qar bien ne fust unqes perduz Q'en ascun temps ne feust renduz. Tout passera fors que biens faiz. Car li biens fais ne poet perir.

Herald 1.774 Morawski 278

Bon parole tient bon lieu. Bonne parole bon lieu a.

Herald 1 1 . 3 6 4 9 - 5 1

Un proverbe ay oi noncier, Qe homme doit pur sa femme tencier Et pur sa viande combatre. Por sa femme doit len tencer, Por sa viande melier.

Morawski 1695

Herald 1 1 . 3 9 5 6 - 7 Morawski 2454

Quant il doit mysavenir Li meschief apres l'autre vient. Ung meschief ne viendra seul.

Herald 1.4064 Morawski 417 Whiting no.333

Nulle poet la mort fuyer. Contre mort nul resort. Contre la mort nuls ne puet estriver.

Herald 1 1 . 4 1 1 5 - 6

Tut coviendra par ci passer, Nulle homme ne s'en poet destoumer. La mort n'espairgne nulluy. Car je sgai bien que tout couvient morir.

Morawski 1011 Whiting no. 333

One proverbial saying is listed by Whiting but n o t b y Morawski: Herald 1.3972 Whiting no. 145

Auxi verrai come le pater nostre. C'est ossi voir com Patre Nostre.

A possible proverb or perhaps Biblical q u o t a t i o n , n o t listed in reference works, may b e contained in lines 3 8 2 8 — 3 0 : Car l'Enemy, qui touz jours veille, Plus tost grevera un prodhomme Q'un mauveis, c'est la somme. 171 Evaluation o f the p o e m as a piece o f literature m u s t depend on whether it succeeds in presenting a clear picture o f the Prince as a real person, and in convincing the reader o f his e x c e l l e n c e . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , it fails t o d o so. The character o f the Prince remains flat and lifeless; he is held up as the e m b o d i m e n t o f m a n y g o o d qualities but the author is unable t o c o n v e y this image in a convincing manner. This is because the p o e m is essentially a e u l o g y ,

170 J. Morawski, Proverbes franqais anterieurs au XVe siecle, CFMA (Paris. 1925). B. J. Whiting, "Proverbs in the Writing of Jean Froissart", Speculum, X (1935) 291-321. 171 See also note 3828. 42

not a character portrait, and the author, by selecting carefully only those happenings which are to his hero's credit and by recounting them in a subjective manner, has robbed his work of any depth it might otherwise have had. We are not convinced of the Prince's excellence, because excellence is not a lack of human failing or weakness but a triumph over them; if the Herald had shown us some less idealized, more human sides of the Prince's character, along with his many virtues, he would have made his hero far more credible. In addition to this lack of contrast in the portrayal of the Prince himself, there is the lack of other characters of any importance: the hero dominates the story so completely that there is little opportunity to compare him to other men, and again the result is a lack in depth of the characterization. Another reason why the poem is artistically unconvincing lies in the unequal distribution of emphasis on the major events. Crecy is described in 54 lines, Poitiers in 634, while the Spanish campaign accounts for 2150 lines, or almost exactly half the poem. It should be remembered here that to the Herald Crecy must have been an event in the past about which he was not very well-informed, that he was not an eye-witness at Poitiers, and that the Spanish campaign was probably one of the major events in his own life. 172 Nevertheless, this lack of balance makes for an unsatisfactory impression of top-heaviness. Thus, the literary merits of the poem are slight. There are a few short, colourful episodes, but the work as a whole is lacking in depth and descriptive quality. The author's eulogistic approach defeats any attempt at characterization. The fact that the poem nevertheless makes good reading is due to the interest of the subject-matter, and not to the manner in which it is treated. 9 Editorial Policy Since none of the previous editions has given a faithful manuscript transcription, and since L is the better manuscript, this edition presents a transcription of L with only those alterations which are clearly inevitable. Emendations and difficult readings are discussed in the notes. Abbreviated words have been extended in accordance with the scribe's spelling in full; if more than one spelling occurs, the one most often used has been chosen for extension. Crossed 11, which occurs frequently as a 172 It is remarkable that, in spite of his participation in so large a part of the events narrated, the author reveals so little about himself. Lodge observes: . . . It is wonderful h o w perfectly impersonal he has remained throughout. He not only makes no mention of his own performances, but he omits any descriptions of events in which he had played a part, unless they are strictly essential to the biography of his hero. Pope and Lodge, op. cit. p. lviii.

43

mark of suspension, has been uniformly extended to lie on scribal evidence.173 For words not occurring in full, extension is based on analogy, rhyme, etymology, the Ο reading and, as a last resort, reference works. Abbreviated proper names have been extended on the same principles. Punctuation has been incorporated in accordance with modern usage. The aim here has been to produce a text that is easily intelligible. Words inserted by the editor are in square brackets. f f has been rendered as F. Accents have been placed on stressed final ee, to distinguish it from unstressed final ee. No accent has been placed on stressed final ez as there is no instance in the text of unstressed final ez. Capitals have been used for all proper names, for Prince where it is used instead of Edward's proper name, for Roi where it occurs in the vocative, for Captal and Despenser, for saints, for Piere where it refers to God, for Enemy where it refers to the devil, and for the Great Company. Cedillas have been placed where c is pronounced [s]. The word division has been regularized. Diaeresis has been dispensed with, since it is not essential to the reader's understanding of the text, while the Anglo-Norman character of the manuscript does not allow a strict application of octosyllabic scansion.

10 Bibliography The bibliography is selective. Only works which were found to be of particular value in the preparation of the edition are listed. For printed sources relating to specific points in the introduction and the text, see the footnotes and the notes following the text. a) Editions, reviews and studies Arnould, E. J. F., "Un manuscrit meconnu de la Vie du Prince Noir", Melanges de linguistique et de litterature romanes offerts ά Mario Roques (Paris, 1953) II, 3 - 1 4 . Coxe, H. O., The Black Prince, An Historical Poem, written in French, by Chandos Herald, printed for the Roxburghe Club (London, 1842). Gollancz, Sir Israel, Ich Dene (London, 1921). Kotteritz, J., Sprachliche und textkritische Studien zur anglonormannisdien Reimchronik vom schwarzen Prinzen (Diss. Greifswald, 1901). Luce, S., review of Michel edition, Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Chartes, XLIV (1883) 508-11. Meyer, P., review of Pope and Lodge edition, Romania, XLII (1913) 124-6. Michel, F., Le Prince Noir, poeme du herauf d'armes Chandos (London and Paris, 1883). 173 This has sometimes given rise to odd spellings, and it is possible that the scribe's uncertainty on the use of final 1 or lie may be partly explained by the frequent occurrence of crossed 11 in contemporary English manuscripts, where it stands simply for 1.

44

Pope, Μ. Κ. and Lodge, Ε. C., Life of the Black Prince, by the Herald of Sir John Chandos (Oxford, 1910). Studer, P., review of Pope and Lodge edition, Modern Language Review, VII (1912) 402-6.

b) Language Gossen, C. T., Grammaire de l'ancien picard (Paris, 1970). Mann, G., "Die Sprache Froissarts auf Grund seiner Gedichte", Zeitschrift fir romanische Philologie, XXIII (1899) 1 - 4 6 . Morawski, J., Proverbes frangais anterieurs au XVe siecle, CFMA (Paris, 1925). Pope, Μ. K., From Latin to Modern French (Manchester, 1934).

c) Literary Background Bennett, H.S., "The Author and his Public in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries", Essays and Studies of the English Association, XXIII (1938) 7 - 2 5 . Bossuat, R., Manuel bibliographique de la litterature frangaise du Moyen Age, with 2 supplements (Melun, 1951-61). Bossuat, R., Pichard, L. and Raynaud de Lage, G., Le Moyen Age (Paris, 1964). Coville, Α., "Poemes historiques de l'avenement de Philippe VI de Valois au traite de Calais (1328-1360)", Histoire litteraire de la France, XXXVIII (Paris, 1949) 2 5 9 333. Delisle, L., Recherches sur la librairie de Charles V, 3 vols. (Paris, 1907). Gröber, G., Geschichte der mittelfranzösischen Literatur, I, ed. S. Hofer (Berlin and Leipzig, 1933). Kilgour, R. L., The Decline of Chivalry as shown in French Literature of the Late Middle Ages (Harvard, 1937). Legge, Μ. D., Anglo-Norman Literature and its Background (Oxford, 1963). Paris, G., Esquisse historique de la litterature fran^aise au Moyen Age (Paris, 1907). - La poesie du Moyen Age, 2 vols. (Paris, 1903, 1895). Rickard, P., Britain in Medieval French Literature 1100-1500 (Cambridge, 1956). Vising, J., Anglo-Norman Language and Literature (London, 1923).

d) Historical Background Barber, R. W., The Knight and Chivalry (London, 1970). Clarke, Μ. V., Fourteenth Century Studies (Oxford, 1937). Fowler, K., The Age of Plantagenet and Valois (London, 1967). Hewitt, H. J., The Black Prince's Expedition of 1355-1357 (Manchester, 1958). - The Organization of War under Edward III, 1338-62 (Manchester, 1966). Keen, Μ. H., England in the Later Middle Ages (London, 1973). Lopez de Ayala, Pedro, Crönicas de los reyes de Castillo, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1779-80). Luce, S., Histoire de Bertrand du Guesclin et de son epoque . . . La jeunesse de Bertrand, 1320-64 (Paris, 1882). McKisack, M., The Fourteenth Century (Oxford, 1959). - The Reign of Richard II (London, 1971). Mathew, G., The Court of Richard II (London, 1968). Molinier, Α., Les sources de l'histoire de France des origines aux guerres d'Italie, 6 vols. (Paris, 1901-1906).

45

e)

Heraldry

College of Arms, History of the College of Arms, London Survey Committee (London, 1963). Fox-Davies, A. C., A Complete Guide of Heraldry, revised by J. P. Brooke-Little (London, 1969). London, H. S., The Life of William Bruges, the first Garter King of Arms (Harl. Soc. Publ. cxi/cxii, London, 1970). Wagner, A. R., Heraldry in England (London, 1949). - Heralds and Heraldry in the Middle Ages (London, 1939). - Heralds of England (London, 1967). f ) Froissart and Jean le Bel Cartier, N. R., "The Lost Chronicle", Speculum, XXXVI (1961) 424-34. Jean le Bel, Chronique, ed. J. Viard and E. Deprez, 2 vols. (Paris, 1904-5). Froissart, Jean, Chroniques, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, 25 vols. (Brussels, 1867-77). - Chroniques, ed. S. Luce, 8 vols. (Paris, 1869-88). - Voyage en Beam, ed. A. H. Diverres (Manchester, 1953). Shears, F. S., Froissart, Chronicler and Poet (London, 1930). Whiting, B. J.. "Froissart as Poet", Medieval Studies, VIII (1946) 189-216. - "Proverbs in the Writing of Jean Froissart", Speculum, X (1935) 291-321.

46

11

Abbreviations

A AN ANTS Ayala Bossuat CFMA Cotgrave Du Cange God. Huguet L Littre Lodge Meyer Michel 0 OED OF Pope R SATF Studer TL

Common AN ancestor of Ο and L Anglo-Norman Anglo-Norman Text Society Pedro Lopez de Ayala, Crönicas de los reyes de Castillo (see Bibliography) R. Bossuat, Manuel bibliographique (see Bibliography) Classiques frangais du Moyen Age R. Cotgrave, A Dictionarie of the French and English Tongues (London, 1611; Columbia, S. C. 1950 reprint) C. Du Fresne, Seigneur du Cange, Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae Latinitatis . . ., 8 vols. (Paris, 1840-57) F. Godefroy, Dictionnaire de l'ancienne langue fra^aise . . ., 10 vols. (Paris, 1881-1902) E. Huguet, Dictionnaire de la langue frangaise du seizieme siecle, 7 vols. (Paris, 1925-67) London manuscript of the Vie du Prince Noir E. Littre, Dictionnaire de la langue franqaise, 5 vols. (Paris and London, 1873-77) Pope and Lodge edition of the Vie du Prince Noir (see Bibliography) Meyer review of Pope and Lodge edition (see Bibliography)174 Michel edition of the Vie du Prince Noir (see Bibliography) Oxford manuscript of the Vie du Prince Noir Oxford English Dictionary, 13 vols. (Oxford, 1933) Old French Pope and Lodge edition of the Vie du Prince Noir (see Bibliography) R followed by a line number indicates the rubric preceding that line Societe des anciens textes frangais Studer review of Pope and Lodge edition (see Bibliography) A. Tobler and E. Lommatzsch, Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch (Berlin/Wiesbaden, 1925-in progress)

174 It should be noted that Pope sometimes records in her notes emendations suggested to her by Paul Meyer while she was preparing her edition. See for instance my notes 885, 3792. 47

LA VIE DU PRINCE NOIR

Cy comence une partie de la vie et des faitz d'armes d'un tres noble prince de Gales et d'Aquitaine q'avoit a noun Edward, eigne filtz au roi Edward tierce queux Dieux assoille.

4

8

12

16

20

24

28 1

Ore veit homme du temps jadis Qe ceux qui faisoient beaux ditz Estoient tenu pur aucteur Ou pur ascun amenteveur De moustrer lez bons conissance Pur prendre en lour coers remembrance De bien et de honour receivoir. Mais homme dit, et si est de ceo voir, Qu'il n'est chose que ne delzeche Ne qu'il n'est arbres que ne seche Q'un soul, c'est lui arbres de vie. Mais cils arbres en ceste vie Florist et botonne en touz champs. Ci ne serra pluis arestans. Car combien qe homme n'en face compte Et qe homme tiendroit plus grant acompte D'un jangelour ou d'un faux menteur, D'un jogelour ou d'un bourdeur Qui voudroit faire une grimache Ou contreferoit le lymache Dount homme purroit faire un risee Qe homme ne ferroit sanz demoeree D'un autre qui saveroit bien dire! Car cils ne sont saunz contredire Mie bien venuz a la court En le mounde q'ore court. Mais coment qe homme ne tiegne rien De ceux qe demoustrent le bien,

Ore veu homme

49

32

36

40

Si ne se doit homme pas tenir De beaux ditz faire et retenir Cils qui s'en scevent entremettre, Eins lez doient en livre mettre Per quoi, apres ceo q'ils sont mort, Et si ount fait lui juste recort. Car c'est almoigne et charitee De bien dire et de veritee, Qar bien ne fust unqes perduz Q'en ascun temps ne feust renduz. Pur ce voil je mettre m'entente, Car volentees a ce me tempte, De faire et recorder beaux ditz Et de novelle et de jadis.

Ore cy comence la matiere.

44

48

52

56

60

Ore est bien temps de comencer Ma matiere, et moi adresser Au purpos ou je voloi venir. Ore me laisse Dieux avenir, Car je voil mettre m'estudie Α faire et recorder la vie De le plus vaillant prince du mounde Si come il est tourny a le rounde Ne qui fuist puis les tamps Claruz, Jule Cesaire ne Artuz, Ensi come vous oier purrez Mais qe de bon coer l'escoutez. C'est d'un franc prince d'Aquitaine Qui fuist, c'est bien chose certaine, Filtz au noble roi Edward Qui n'avoit pas le coer coward Et filtz Phelippe la roigne Qe fuist laparfite racine De tout honour et de nobletee, De sens, de valoir et de largetee.

Des nobles condicions du prince avant nome. Cil franc prince, dount je vous di, 51 les champs claruz

64

68

72

76

80

84

88

92

Depuis le jour q'il fuist nasqui Ne pensa forsqe loiautee, Fraunchise, valour et bountee. Et si fuist garniz de proesce, Tant fuist cil prince de hautesce, Q'il voilleit toutz les jours de sa vie Mettre tout son estudie En tenir justice et droiture, Et la prist il sa noriture. Tres dont q'il fuist en enfance, De sa volunte noble et france Prist la doctrine de largesce, Car jolitee et noblesce Fuist en son coer parfitement Tres le primer comencement De sa vie et de sa jeofnesse. Ore est bon temps qe je m'adresse A bouter avant ma matiere, Coment il fuist, c'este chose clere, Si pruys, si hardy, si vaillant, Et si curtois et si sachant Et si bien amoit seinte Esglise De bon coer, et sur tut guise La tres hauteine Trinitee; La feste et le solenintee En comencea a sustenir Tres le primer de son venir Et le sustient tut sa vie De bon coer, sanz penser envie.

5r

De la passage du roi et du Prince son filtz en Normandie ou mult noble baronie.

96

100

Ore ay je volu recorder De sa joefnesse, au voir counter. Ore est raison qe je vous counte De ce dount homme doit faire accompte, C'est du fait de chivalrie: En sa persone fuist none En la quele il regna trente ans. Noblement il usa sez tamps; Car j'oieseroie dire ensy Qe depuis le temps qe Dieux nasqui Ne fuist plus vaillant de son corps, 51

104

108

112

116

Si come orrez en mes records Si voillez oier et entendre La matiere a qui je voil tendre. Bien savez qe lui noble roi Son piere, a tres grant arroi, Per sa haute noble puissance Fist guerre au roialme de Fraunce En disant q'il devoit avoir La corone, sachez pur voir, Dount en sustenant la querelle II maintient guerre moult cruelle, La quele si dura long temps. Ore avient qe droit a ce temps Passa la mer en Normandie Ovesqe moult noble baronie, Barons, banerers et countes.

120

124

128

132

136

140

144

52

II arriva en Constantin. La ot maint bon chivaler fin: De Warrewik lui noble counte De quoi homme devoit faire counte, Lui counte de Northamptoun Qui moult estoit noble persoun, Cil de Suffolk et eil de Stafford Qui ount le coer hardi et fort, Et le counte de Saresbury, Cil d'Oxenford auxi. Et si fuist de Beauchamp Jehans, Raouls de Cobeham lui vaillans, Monsire Bartholmeus de Burghees Qui moult fu hardi en sez feitz, De Brian le bon Guyon, Richard de la Vache le bon, Et le bon Richard Talebot En qui moult graunt proesce ot. Si fuist Chaundos et Audelee Qui bien ferroient de l'espee, Et le bon Thomas de Holand Qui en lui eust proesce grand, Et des autres moult grant foisons Dont je ne say dire les nouns.

5v

Coment le poair d'Engleterre arriva en Constantin, et le Prince et autres seignours feurent faitz chivalers, et le roy de Fraunce en eust novelle. Arivez fuist le poair d'Engleterre. Et quant il devoit prendre terre, La fist le Prince chivaler 148

Luy roi, qui tant fuist a priser, Le counte de la Marche auxi

6r

Et le counte de Saresbury, Johan de Mountagu son frere, 152

Et des autres, c'este chose clere, Plus qe ne vous saveroi dire. E t bien sachez, saunz contredire, La fuist lui mareschaux Bertrans

156

Qui moult fu hardy et vaillantz, E t lors quida trop defendre A prendre terre, au voir entendre. Mais la puissance d'Engleterre

160

Pristrent la par force la terre. La y eust il fait d'armes tant Qe en eust compare Roland Et Oliver et le Danois

164

Ouguier qui tant par fu curtois. La pooyt homme veoir des preux, Des hardis et des outrageeux. La fuist le Prince noble et gent

168

Qui moult ot bele comencement. Tout Constantin chivacha Et tout ardi et exila: Le Hogge, Barflew, Carenten,

172

Saint Lou, Bayeus et jesqes a Ken, La ou ils conquerent la pont. Et la combaterent ils mult. Par force pristrent ils la ville,

176

Et le counte de Tankarville E t le counte d'Eu y fuist pris. La avoit lui noble Prince pris Qar de bien faire fuist egrans

180

Et si n'ot qe disoept ans. Ε lui mareschaux chivacha, Jesqes a Paris il n'aresta. Au roi ad counte les novelles

184

Queux ne lui feurent mie beales. Tiel mervaille ot, c'este chose voire,

53

188

192

Qe au paines le pooit croire, Car pas ne quidoit qe tiel gent Eussent tant de hardiement. Lors fist assembler son poair Parmy France; sachez pur voir N'y demoera due ne counte De quoi homme pooit faire counte, Baroun, baneret ne bachiler, Qe touz ne fist assembler.

6v

Coment le roy de Fraunce manda au roi de Beaume pur luy eider, et le roy de Beaume vient, et les Engleis passerent le pont de Poissy et chivacherent parmy Caux.

196

200

204

208

212

216

220

R195

54

Au roi de Beaume manda, Qui de bon coer auxi ama, Qui amesna en sa compaignie Son filtz qui fuist roi d'Almayne, Et le bon Johan de Baiumont De Haynau qui homme prisoit moult. A quoi faire vous counteroy La matiere et alongeroy? Bien quidoit sa terre defendre Au roi englois, a voir entendre, Et assez petit le prisoit Et moult fortement le manaceot. Mais apres, ensi q'il me semble, Lui roi et lui Prince ensemble Par Normandie chivacherent Et tout le paiis assaillerent. Maint graunt escarmuche firent Et maint bon homme prirent, Et viendroient au pount de Poissi. Mais la matiere dit ensi Qe le pount lors estoit rumpuz; Mais tant firent qe de grantz fuys Par force refirent le pount, Dount Fransois esmerveillez sount; Et passerent par un matin. Parmy Caux pristrent lour chemin, Ardantz, gastantz et exilantz, Dont moult feurent Francois dolantz

les En Engleis

224

Et criexent a haut vois: »Ou est Philippes nostre rois? «

7r

Coment le roi de Fraunce fist assembler a Paris son grant poair encontre le roy d'Engleterre et son hoost, et coment le roi d'Engleterre ove son poair passa l'eawe de Somme.

228

232

236

240

244

248

252

256

260

A Parys fuist, a voir juger, Car en ce temps fist apparailer Son graunt poair et amasser, Et la fist sez gentz assembler, Et dist qe poi se priseroit Si graunt vengeaunce n'en prenderoit. Car bien quidoit avoir enclos Les Englois, solonc mon purpos, Droit entre le Sayne et la Somme Et la endroit, ce est la somme, Les quidoit il trop bien combatre. Mais les Englois pur yceux esbatre Mistrent tut en feu et a flame. La firent mainte veofe dame Et mainte poevre enfant orphanin. Tant chivachoient soir et matin Q'ils viendroient al eawe de Somme. De l'autre part y avoit maint homme, Car la feurent, n'en doutez mie, Les communes de Pikardie, Et si estoit, sachez de fit, Monsire Godomars de Fait. Moult par fu large la rivere De flum de la meer radde et fiere, Dount Englois moult se merveilloient Coment par dela passeroient. Mais le Prince ove le corps gent Fist eslire chivalers cent, Des meillours de son avantgarde, Et les fist aler prendre garde Coment ils purroient passer. Et cils, qui feurent a loer, Chivachoient tut enviroun Tant q'ils ount trouve un compaignoun Qe lour ad enseigne le pas De Somme, je ne vous mente pas. Et touz lui cent a un fie

7v

55

264

268

272

276

En l'eawe, la launce baissie, Si sont fern sur lour coursers. Moult feuront vaillantz chivalers. Et lui Prince venoit apres Qui ades les sevoit de pres. Graunt escarmuche ot sur la pais De Somme, je ne vous menk pas, Et fort combatoient chivaler. Et la de traire et de launcier! Se tenoient d'ambedeux partz Mais assez tost feurent espars Et mis a fuite lui Pikard Ovesqe monsire Godemard. Mais ove l'eide de Dieu Tut passa en temps et en lieu.

Coment le roy de Fraunce vient ove trois rois et son graunt poair vers Crescy pur combatre les Englois.

280

284

288

292

296

Quant lui rois Philippes le oy dire Moult avoit a coer dolour et ire, Et dist: »Par Seint Poul le baroun, Je me doute de traisoun.« Mais nepurquant moult soy hasta; Parmy Aveville passa. Mout par fu riche sez arrois. La fuist lui quartime des rois: Cils de Maiole et de Beaume, Et s'i fuist lui rois d'Almayme; Assetz y avoit dues et countes, Tant qe ce estoit grant acountes. Tant chivacherent saunz nulle sy Qe droit assez pres de Crescy En Pontieu, la fuist herbergez. La fuist le roi Edward loggez Et lui Prince, si Dieux me garde, Qui cellui jour avoit l'avantgarde. La n'orent gaires demouree Que de deux partz lour ad countee Qe si pres feurent ambedoy Qe chescun purra veoir le roy

270

et de launucier

56

8r

300

De l'un l'autre, et l'ordenement. Lors se leva le cry fortement Et comencent a ordeigner Lour batailles et deviser.

De la bataille de Crescy, et coment le roi de Beaume, le due de Lorayne, oept countes et plusours autres seigniours furent occis a mesme la bataille, et trois rois et plusours autres s'en departirent desconfitz.

304

308

312

316

320

324

328

332

336

A quoy faire vous counteroi La matiere et alongeroi? Celui jour ot il la bataille Si horrible qe, tout sanz faille, Unqes ne fuist corps si hardis Qe n'en poeit estre esbahis. Qe veist venir la puissance Et la poair du roi de France, Grant mervaille serroit a dire, Espris de maltalent et de ire Devant ensemble entreacountier Et faisant d'armes le mestier Si tres chivalrousement Qe unqes puis le venement Ne vist homme bataille plus fiere. La veoit homme maint banere Pointe de fin or et de soie, Et la, si la verray Dieux m'avoie, Englois estoient tut a peez Come eil qui feurent affatiez De combatre et entalenteez. La fuist lui Prince de bounteez Qui en l'avantgarde, come homme deussoit, Si vaillantement soi governoit Qe merveille feust a veier. A pains lessoit envair Nul homme, tant fuist hardis ne fortz. Quei vous ferroie je longe recortz? Tant combatirent celui jour Qe Englois en avoient le meillour. Et la fuist mort lui noble rois De Beaume, qui fuist curtois, Et le bon due de Lorayne Qui moult feust noble capitaine,

8v

57

352

Et de Flaundres lui noble counte Dount homme fesoit un grant acounte, Et le bon counte d'Alenceoun Qui fuist frere au roi Philippoun, Cils de Joii et de Harecourt. Qei vous dirroie a brief mot court? Un roi et un due et oept countes Et, ensi come dit lui acountes, Plus qe sessante banerers Feurent illoeqes mortz tout frees, Et trois rois qui s'en departirent Et plusours autres s'en fuyerent Dount je ne sai mie le nombre, Ne n'est pas droit qe je le nombre. Mais je sai bien qe celui jour Lui noble Prince de valour

356

De la bataille avoit l'avantgarde Si c'ome doit bien prendre garde, Car par lui et par sez vertus Fuist lui champ gaignez et vaincus.

340

344

348

Coment apres la bataille de Crescy le roy de France s'en ala vers Parys, et le roy d'Engleterre ovesqe son hoost s'en departist vers Caleis.

360

364

368

372

58

Lui roi Philippes a Paris S'en ala, qui moult fuist maris. En son corage regretoit Ses homines qui perduz avoit. Et lui noble roi d'Engleterre, Qui fuist dignes de tenir terre, En champ cele noet soi logea, Qui moult grant honour conquesta. Les mortz fist aler visiter Pur conustre et pur aviser, Et trova le roi de Beaume Qui gisoit mort sur le champaigne; Carker lui fist en une bere Et mettre sur une litere Acovert d'un riche drap d'ore; Arere le tramist, et lore De la place se deslogea. Par devers Calois chivacha. Pur ceo qe je ne mente mie,

9r

376

380

384

Cel tres noble chivachie Dount jeo fay mencioun ycy, Ceo fuist en l'an qe Dieux nasqui Mille trois centz quarant et sis, Et, ensi come dist lui escris, La viegle de Seint Bartholomeu Que ovesqe la grace de Dieu Le roi ceste bataille fist Ou tant de noblesse il acquist.

Coment le roy d'Engleterre ove son grant poair assegea la ville de Caleis par disoept mois, et le roy de Fraunce n'oesa lever l'assege, par quoy la dite ville se rendy au roi d'Engleterre.

388

392

396

400

404

408

Apr6s viendroient devant Calais. La ount ils fait moult des beaux faitz; La tient sige luy noble roi Qui y fuist ove tout son arroy Diseopt mois en un tenant. Illoeqes demurroient tant Que la ville fuist afamee Et qe la vient saunz demoeree Lui roi Philippes pur lever L'assiege, si come j'ai oy counter. Mais ensi fuist lui hoost logie Et la ville si assiegie Qe le roi Philippes n'oesa Lever l'assiege; einz retourna. Et lui noble roi d'Engleterre Tient illoeqes la piece de terre. Maint escarmuche et maint assaut Y faisoient et bas et haut, Tant qe la ville se rendy Priantz au roi, pur Dieu mercy, Qe a mercy il les vousist prendre. Et ensement, a voir entendre, Fuist Caleis par force conquise Par la puissance et par l'emprise Du noble roi et de son fitz Le Prince, qui tant fuist hardiz.

9v

Coment le roi d'Engleterre ove son poair retourna en Engleterre, et par traisoun la ville de Caleys deust avoir este venduz as Franceys, et le roi d'Engleterre ove 59

son poair le contrerestoia, en tant q'il eust este pris s'il [n'] eust este rescouz par le Prince soun filtz.

412

416

420

424

428

432

436

440

444

448 422

A vn

60

Apres ceo ne demurra gere Q'ils ne reviendrent en Engleterre, Lui roi et le Prince auxi Et tut li chivaler hardi, Per un triewe q'ils avoient. En lour pais se demurrerent Tan qe il avient qe par traitie, Par traisoun et per pecchie Devoit estre Caleis venduz, D'un seignour de Biaugiu renduz A monsire Geffrey de Charny Par un Lumbard qui Amery Estoit appellez de Pavye. Et la feurent de Pikardye Et de France tout lui baroun, Au meins le pluis grant fuysoun. Mais la fuist, au voir acounter, Lui noble rois a deliverer. Et lui noble Prince son filtz, Qui moult feust vaillant et hardis, La combati vaillantement Qu'il rescout veritablement Par force son piere le roi. La feurent mis en desaroi Frangois et Pikard eel nuyt Dont plusours Englois graunt deduyt Faisoient countre lour retour. Car la feurent lui meillour Du noble pais d'Engleterre Qe, pur grant loos et pris conquere, S'i feurent vaillantement provee. La furent pris, pur veritee, Les pluis noble barons de France Et deceu de volentee france; Qe unqes mais le roi d'Engleterre N'eust en une heure tant a fere Come il eust en celle heure d'adont; Car plusours gentz recordez ont

lOi

452

456

Qe le roi eust este pris Si n'eust este le Prince son filtz. Mais sa puissance et sa hautesse Et sa tres parfite proesse Rescoust illoeqes le roy son piere; Si ne doit pas ceste matiere Estre en nulle stat oblie. Ore est bien droit qe je vous die.

Coment apres le rescous de Caleis le roy d'Engleterre ove son poair retourna, et apres ceo avient le bataille sur la mer et la feurent les Espainardz mortz et desconfltz.

460

464

468

472

476

480

484

En Engleterre retournerent. Et moult grant joie demenerent, Graunt joie flrent lour amy Et toutes les dames auxi. La roigne les festoia Qe son seignour de coer ama. Done dist le roi a sa mulier: »Dame, car voillez festoier Vostre filtz, car je feusse pris Si n'eust este par son grant pris. Mais par lui fui je socurruz.« »Sire«, fait eile, »bien venuz Soit il, et vous auxi a moi. Si m'est avis qe dire doi: A bone heure fuist il neez.« La feurent conjoy assetz Lui chivaler et lui baroum. Daunser et festoier y veist hom Et faire festes et reveaux. Moult par fuy bon le temps entre eaux, Et la fuist amours et noblesse Et joliette et proesse. Ensi demoerent longe temps, Tant q'il avient jesqe a ce temps Qe a l'Escluse assemblez estoient Niefs d'Espaigne, queux s'avantoient De passer en despit du roi, Maugre lui et tout son arroy. Dount le roi, par son vesselage, Fist assembler son graunt baronage Et fist sur la mer un arrivee

lOv

61

488

492

496

500

504

508

Qe moult fu de grant renomee. La estoit lui Prince son fitz Et maint bon chivaler de pris, Tout lui counte et tout lui baroun, Et tut lui chivaler de noun. La avoit bataille fiere et dure, La lui dona Dieux aventure, Car par lui et par sa puissance Et par sa tres haute vaillance Feurent touz mortz et desconfit Les Espainardz, sachez de fit. Et la fuist chivaler Johans Son friere, qui moult fuist vaillantz, Qe de Lancastre fuist puis dues; Moult par feurent sez grantz vertuz. La se proverent vaillantement Lui noble baroun ensement. La ot il maint niefs gaignee, Maint pris et maint perree, Et la ot meint bon homme mort Si come je oy en mon recort. Et sachez qe ceste joumee Si feust devant Wynchelsee.

Coment apris la bataille sur la meer la roygne d'Engleterre enfaunta u n / filtz q'avoit 1 a noun Thomas, et apres ceo vient le Captal de Buche en Engleterre pur avoir le Prince lour chieftayn en Gascoigne, et sur ce fuist ordeigne par parlement que le Prince s'en passeroit en Gascoigne ove plusours countes et autres seignours.

512

516

520

524 62

Apres ceste noble bataille, Qe moult fuist horrible sanz faille, A terre feuront retornez. La grant avoir ont amesnez Q'ils eurent gaignez et conquis, Dount chescun de eaux fuist resjois. Apres ceo ne demura gere Qe la roigne d'Engleterre Enfanta un filtz de darrein Q'elle porta, e'est bien certein, Et eil filtz ot Thomas a noun. Grant joie et grant feste fist homme, Grantz justes et festes criee Adonqes par la con trie.

528

532

536

540

544

548

552

556

560

564

Et a ce temps vient de Gascoigne Le Captal, n'est pas men9oigne, Qui moult estoit vaillant et preus, Moult hardis et moult corageus, Et moult amez de toute gent. Festoiez feust moult noblement. Grant joie fist de sa venue Lui Prince, qui se resvertue. Un jour il dit au roi son piere Et a la roigne sa miere: »Sire«, fait il, »pur Dieu mercy, Vous savez bien q'il est ensy Q'en Gascoigne vous ayment tant Lui noble chivaler vaillant Q'ils ont grant paine pur vostre guerre Et pur vostre honour conquere; Et si n'ont point de chieftaine De vostre sang, c'este chose certaine. Et pur ce, si vous le trovez En vostre conseille que faisissez Envoier la un de voz flitz, Iis en serroient pluis hardis.« Et chescun disoit q'il disoit voir. Lors fist lui roi, sachez pur voir, Assembler son grant parlement. Touz feurent d'acord ensement De Prince en Gascoigne envoier Pur ceo qe tant fuist a priser; Et ordeignerent la endroit Ensi, qe ovesqe lui irroit De Warrewik lui noble counte, De quoi homme fesoit grant aconte, Et lui counte de Saresbury Qui moult estoit vaillant auxi, Cil de Suffolk qui fuist prodhom Ufford, ensi estoit son noun — Et le counte d'Oxenford Et le bon counte de Stafford, Monsire Bartreme de Burghees Qui moult fuist hardy en sez fees, Monsire Johan de Mountagu Qui le coer avoit fiers et agu, Et le sire le Despenser,

1 lv

63

568

572

576

Basset, qui moult fuist a priser; Et s'i feu le sire de Mawnee Et auxi, ensy q'il me semble, Le bon de Cobeham Renaut Qe eust este a maint assaut; S'i furent Chaundos et Audelee; Cils deuz eurent grant renomie, Et furent ordeignez au frayne Du Prince, sachez de certaine.

De l'ordinance pur la passage du Prince a Plummuthe vers Gascoigne, et coment il prist congie du roy son piere et du roigne sa miere.

580

584

588

592

Quant le chose feust devisee Et tout l'ordinance accomplie, A Plummuthe fist homme mander Pur touz lour niefs assembler, Gentz d'armes et archiers auxi Et lour vitailles, sanz nul si. Moult par [fu] riches lui arrois. Apres le terme de deux mois II prist congie du roi son piere Et de la roigne sa miere, De touz ses frieres et ses soers. Moult grant dolour fount en lour coers Quant se vient a son departier, Car la veissez, sanz mentier, Dames et damoiseles plorer Et en lour compleintz dolouser; L'une pur son amy ploroit Et l'autre son amy regretoit.

12r

Coment le Prince est venuz a Plummuthe ove son graunt poair, et illoeqes ad demurree tan qe il fuist tout prest pur passer avant, et est arrivez a Burdeux; et coment les nobles seigniours et barons de Gascoigne lui ont resceu ove mult grant joie et honour, et coment apres ceo le Prince prist les champs ove sis mille combatantz, et prist et exila per force plusours chastelx et villes en Gascoigne.

596

64

Ensi prist le Prince congie Qui le coer avoit haut et Ιέε. Vers Plummuthe prist son chimyn. Tant chivacha soir et matyn Qe a Plummuthe fuist arrivez,

600

604

608

612

616

620

624

628

632

636

640

Et illoeqes est tant demorez Qe touz ses grantz arrois fuist pres. Et si avient auxi tost apres Qu'il fist carker touz sez vessealx, Toutes vitailles et joialx, Hauberks, helmes, launces, escutz, Ares, seattes et unqore plus; Fist touz sez chivaux eskipper Et assez tost se mist a meer Et tout lui noble chivaler. La poist homme, a voir jugier, Voier le flour de chivalrie Et tres noble bachelrie Qui feurent en grant voluntee De bien faire et entalentee. Lors comencerent a sigler; Tant siglerent parmy la meer Qu'ils arriverent a Bürde aux, Dount moult fesoient grauntz reveaux Lui noble baroun du pais. La veissez grantz et petitz Venir vers le Prince tut droit Qui doucement les festoioit. Devers luy vient tout entreet Luy noble prince de Labret, Et lui sire de Mountferrant Qui ot le coer preu et vaillant, Muscident, Rosoun et Courtoun Et de Faussard Amenioun Et le grant seigniour de Pomiers Et meintz des nobles chivalers Et le droit seignour de Lessparre. Quei vous ferroy je longe barre Pur alonger plus la matiere? La viendroient, e'est chose clere, De Gascoigne tut lui baroun, Et le Prince de tres grant noun Les savoit trop bien conjoier. Quei vous dirra je sanz menter? A Burdeaux sojourna un poy, Tant q'il avoit fait tut son arroy Et bien sez chivalx reposez. Bien tost apres fuist apprestez

12v

65

644

648

652

656

Et mist ensemble sur les champs Plus qe sis mille combatantz. Devers Tholouse se chivacha. Unqes ville n'y demora Qu'il ne faisist tout exiler, Et prist Karcason et Vesier Et Narbone, et tut la pais Fuist par luy gastez et malvais, Et plusours villes et chasteaux, Dount pas ne firent grantz reveaux En Gascoigne lui enemy. Plus qe quatre mois et demy Demura es champs ceste foitz; Adonqe il fist moult de desrois.

Coment le Prince se retourna vers Burdeux, et illoeqes demura en grant deduit et grant joie tan qe l'yvere fuist passee; et lors il mist ses gentz par ordinance en ses chastelx tout entour.

660

664

668

672

676

680 66

Puis devers Burdeaux retourna Lui Prince, et le demora Tan qe il fuist passe tout l'yver. II et son noble chivaler En grant deduyt et en grant joie Estoient la, si Dieux m'avoie. La fuist joliete et noblesce, Fraunchise, bounte et largesce. Et, a ceo qe j'ay de semblance, II mist sez gentz par ordinance En sez chasteux trestout entour, La ou ils firent lour sojour. Warrewik fuist a Riole Et auxi, a court parole, Salesburi fuist a Seint Foy; Et ceo fuist, ensy come je croy, Suffolk droit a Seint Millioun; A Leybourne et tut enviroun Furent sez hommes herbergiez. Quant ensi furent hostagiez, Lui bon Chaundos et Audelee Qui moult avoient renommö, Ovesqe le noble Captal Qui le coer ot preu et loial,

13r

684

688

692

696

700

S'alerent logier sur les champs, La ou ils demurrerent long tamps. Maint bele escarmuche firent Et mainte foitz se combatirent Pur conquester lour logement. Dusqe a Caours et vers Agent Entreprisent lour chivachie, Et pristrent Port Seinte Marie. Puis s'en retournerent arere Tout encontremont la rivere; S'alerent prendre Pieregos, Un cite qui ot grant los. Illoeqes s'alerent herbergier Tut un grant part de l'yver. Moult par fu noble le sojour, Car maint assaut et maint estour Fesoient countre le chastelle, Car n'avoit qe petit praielle Entre le chastelle et la ville. La estoit lui counte de Lille Et lui counte de Pieregos. Quei vous dirroi je pluis des motz?

13v

Coment le Prince reassembla son poair et fist une chivachie en Seintonge et en autres diverses parties de Gascoigne, et prist certeines forteresses et seigniours devant la bataille de Paitiers; et les novelles ent viendroient au roi de France.

704

708

712

Ensi lui Prince sojourna En Gascoigne, et s'i demora L'espace de oept mois ou plus. Mout par fu grant ses vertus. Quant ce vient encountre l'estee, Lors ad son poair assemble. Puis refist un chivachie En Seintonge, je vous affie, En Pieregos et en Kersin, Et vient jusques a Roumorentyn. La prist il le tour sur assaut, La prist auxi monsire Buscikaut Et le grant seignour de Craone

695

le seigniour

710

seint Onge ou ie

67

716

720

724

728

Et des autres moult grant fuysone; Pluis de deux centz en y ot pris, Touz gentz d'armes de grant pris, Quinsze jours devant la bataille De Paiters, sachez tut sanz faille. Apres chivacha en Berry Et parmy Gastinois auxi Et jesqes a Tours en Tourayne. Adonqe, c'est bien chose certayne, Les novelles a roi Johans Vindrent, dont moult fist grant ahan, Et dist qe poi se priseroit Si grant vengeance n'en prendoit.

Coment le roi de France fist assembler sa grant puissance a Chartres encontre le Prince et son poair, et lui Prince ad pris son chemin vers Paitiers, et coment il prist deux countes, et plusours autres feurent pris et mortz.

732

736

740

744

748

751

Lors fist assembler sa puissance De tout le roialme de France: N'y demora ne due ne counte Ne baron, dont homme fesist counte, Qe tout ne fesoit amasser, Et, ensi come j'ay oy counter, Fuist fait a Chartres Γ assemble. Noble gent y avoit amasse, Car, ensi qe homme counte l'estille, II en avoit plus de dis mille. De Chartres se sont departy Et chivacherent, sanz nulle sy, Tout ensi par devers Tours. Mout par fu noble lour atours. Lui Prince en oy novelles Queux lui semblerent bons et beles. Devers Paiters prist son chimin; Moult ove lui menoit grant traim Car moult eurent fait de damage En France, par lour grant baronage. Et sachez qe le samadi Le noble counte de Joigny Ovesqe le counte d'Auijoire

Counte Dancoire

68

752

756

760

764

Prist le Prince, c'este chose voire, Et combatirent vaillantement Les Franqois a lour logemeHt; Mais ils feurent toutz mortz ou pris, Ensement le dit lui escriptz; Dont Englois fesoient grant joie Parmy lour host, si Dieux m'avoie. Et lui roi Johan chivacha Tant qe le Prince adevantcea Et qe l'un host l'autre choisi. Et, a ce que je entendi, L'un devant l'autre se logerent Et si tres pres se herbergerent Q'ils abuvroient, par Seint Piere, Lour chivaux a un rivere.

Coment le cardinal de Pieregos vient a brys mos ove graunt clerchie au roy de Fraunce pur faire accord parentre lui et le Prince; et sur ce, oie et entendu la volunte et avis du roi de France, s'en chivacha le cardinal devers le Prince pur mesme la cause.

768

772

776

780

784

770

Mais la endroit vient a bris mos Lui cardinal de Pieregos Qui amesna ovesqe lui Maint clerc et maint legal auxi. Dont doucement au roi de France Ad dit, de volunte humble france: »Sire«, fait il, »pur l'amour de Dieu, Bon parole tient bon lieu. Car il vous plese a moy lesser Qe je puisse aler chivacher Devers le Prince, pur parier Si homme vous purroit accorder. Car certes ceste grant bataille Tant serra horrible sanz faille Que pite serra et damages, Et grantz orgoilles et grantz outrages, Qe tant bele creature Faudra morir de grief mort seure. Et si ne poet homme destourner Morir, de faillie, a l'assembler,

maint legasi (without auxi)

69

788

792

796

800

804

Dount certes counter en faudra Celuy qui le tort en avera Par devant Dieu au jugement, Si Ii escripture ne ment.« Dont respondy lui roi Johans: »Cardinal, moult estez sachantz. Bien voillons qe vous y alez; Mais sachez et bien entendez, La ne ferrons pas en nostre vie Si ne reavons en nostre baillie Le chasteux et toute la terre Qe, puis q'il vient hors d'Engleterre, Nous ad gastie et exilez A malveis droit et a peciez, Et auxi quite la querelle Dont la guerre se renovelle.« »Sire«, ce dit luy cardinaus, »Tant ferray qe bien serrez saus Et a suffice de vostre droit.« Lors se departi de la endroit.

Coment le cardinal chivacha du roy de France vers l'oost du Prince pur entraiter de l'acord avant dit.

808

812

816

820

Vers l'oost du Prince chivacha. Si tost qe vers lui arriva, Moult doucement l'ad saluee, En plorant par grant pi tee. »Sire«, fait il, »pur Dieu mercy, Car vous prendrez a jour de hui merci De sy mainte noble persone Qe a jour de hui, c'est la somme, Purroient cy perdre la vie En yceste graunt estormie. Fetez tant qe n'eiez pas tort. Si homme vous pooit mettre a accort, Dieux et la seinte Trinitee Vous en purroit savoir bon gree.«

Coment le Prince respondi au cardinal sur la traitie du dit acord.

814

hui ceste cest

70

15r

824

828

832

836

840

844

848

852

856

Lui Prince dist a coer entieu: »Certes, beaux douce piere en Dieu, Bien savoms qe ce qe vous ditez Est voirs. Ce sont raisons escriptez. Mais nous voillons bien sustenir Qe nostre querelle, sanz mentir, Est juste, verrai et veritable. Bien savez qe ce n'est pas fable Qe mon piere, roi Edwardz, Certes estoit le pluis droitz heirs Pur tenir et pur possesser France, qe chescuns doit amer, Au temps q'il fuist coronez rois, Lui roi Philippes de Valois. Mais nient contreesteant pas ne voille Qe homme die que par mon orgoille Moerge tant bele juvente. Mais ceo n'est mie mon entente Qe je face le contraire De la paix, si homme le pooit faire. Eins en ferray tout mon pooir. Mais sachez qe, tut pur voir, Je ne puisse pas ceste matiere Accompler sanz le roi mon piere; Mais respit puisse bien doner De mes hommes, et acorder Pur partraiter plus de la paix. Si accorder ne voillent ceste foitz Je sui ci tut prest pur attendre La grace de Dieu, au voir entendre, Car nostre querelle est si veraie Qe de combatre ne m'esmaie. Mais pur destourner la damage De la mort, et le grant outrage, Le ferrai a vostre pleisir Au gree de mon piere assentir.«

Coment lui cardinal tout em plorant s'en departi du Prince et retourna par devers le roi de France, et lui fist relacioun de la traitie; et coment sur ce le roi de France assigna pur sa part evesqes et autres seigniours pur en traiter et excuser la bataille. 848

accorder ne ne voillent

71

860

864

868

872

Lui cardinal tut en plorant Se parti de lui maintenant Et chivacha sanz detriaunce Devers le roi Johan de France, Et lui ad counte de son grant attrait. Et le roi, pur plus alongier le fait Et pur la bataille excuser, Fist touz le barons assembler Et mettre ensample de deux partz. De parier ne fuist pas escars. La vient lui counte de Tankarville Et, ensi come dit l'estille, Fuist lui arcevesqes de Sens, Cils de Chalrus qui ot grant sens, Chargny, Buscicaut et Clermont, Touz ceux illoeqes venuz sont.

16r

Coment autres seigniours englois feurent de par le Prince ordeignez pur entraiter ove les Frangois du dit accord.

876

880

884

888

892

Pur le conseil du roi de France D'autre part, de volunte france, Y fuist de Warrewik lui counte Et, ensi come dist lui acounte, Lui counte de Suffolk y fu Qui ot le pil gris et kenu; S'i fuist Bartrem de Burghees Qui du Prince fuist le plus prees; S'i furent Audelee et Chaundos Qui en ce temps avoient grant los. Illoeqes firent le parlement Et la chescun dist son talent. Mais de lour conseille ne vous sai, Mais je sai bien, tout pur verrai, Qu'ils ne poient estre d'acort, Si come j'ay oi en mon recort. Dount chescun de eux departi. Adonqes dist Geffroi de Chargny: »Seignour«, fait il, »puis q'ensi est Qe ceste traite plus ne vous plest, Je l'offre qe nous vous combatoms Cent pur cent, et choiseroms Chescun par devers son coste.

72

16v

896

900

904

Et bien sachez, pur verite, Lequel cent qui sont desconfit Tut lui autre, sachez de fit, De ceste champe se departiront Et la querelle lesseront. Je croi qe le meillour si serra Et qe Dieux gree nous en savera Qe le jorne se deporte Ou tant persone serroit morte.«

De la finale response donee a les Frangois par les seigniours englois de la traitie; et coment les seigniours du traitie, si bien de Tun coste come de l'autre, sont retournez chescun devers [son] seignour sanz acord entre eux fait, et le cardinal s'en chivachea tout em plorant devers Paiters.

908

912

916

920

924

928

Et adonqes lui respondi Lui counte de Warrewik ensi: »Seignour«, fait il, »que voillez vous Prendre parte encountre nous? Bien savez qe vous estez plus Des gentz d'armes et feer vestuz Quatre foitz qe nous ne soions Et vostre terre chivachons. Veiez ci la champaigne et la place. Chescun qui poet son meillour face. Autre part je ne say Ne autre je n'acorderay. Dieux voille conforter le droit Ou il semble qe meillour soit.« Lors se partent sanz plus parier, Vers lour hoost prirent a tourner. Chescun disoit en son parti: »Cil cardinal nous ad trai.« Elas, pur Dieu, mais noun avoit Car tut plorant s'en departoit Et chivachoit devers Paiters. Cela lui estoit bien mesters Car certes il n'avoit bon gre Ne grace, de nulle costee. Lors ount lour bataille ordeignee Chescun, sanz point de demoere.

Coment le roi de France assigna le mareschalle de Clermont et plusours autres 73

seigniours, ove trois mille combatantz, deux mille servantz et bien deux mille arblasters, pur estre en l'avantgarde de son hoost.

932

936

940

944

948

952

956

Primerement le roi de France Ad mis sez gentz en ordinance Et dist: »Beau seigniour, par ma foi, Tant me detrirez, ceo croi, Qe lui Prince m'eschapera. Cil cardinal bien tray m'a, Qui ci m'ad fait tant demorer.« Donqe comencea a appeller Le bon mareschaux de Cleremont Ε celi d'Oudenham qui mout Fuist en touz temps a priser, Car en lui ot bon chivaler, Ovesqe lui noble due d'Ataine Qui moult fuist noble chieftaine. »Seignour«, ce dist lui riche rois, »Faitez apprester voz arrois Car vous serrez en nostre avantgarde Et e'est vostre droit, si Dieux me garde; Ovesqe vous averez sanz doute Trois mille hommes de vostre route, Et si averez deux mille servantz A glaives et a dartz trenchantz, Ε bien deux mille arblastiers Qui vous aideront voluntiers. Gardez, si vous Englois trovez, Ovesqe eux vous vous combatez Et si n'y aiez point de deport Qe touz ne les mettez a mort.«

Coment le roi de France ordeigna le due de Normandie son filtz, le due de Burbone et plusours autres seigniours, ove quatre mille / combatantz, pur estre en la seconde bataille de son hoost.

960

964

74

Lors appella a ceste fie Son filtz le due de Normandie, Et lui ad dit: »Beau fitz, par foy, Roi de France serrez aprös moy, Et pur ceo averez vous sanz faille La vostre secund bataille; Et le noble due de Burboun

968

972

976

980

984

988

992

996

Averez a vostre compaignoun, Et le seigniour de Seint Venant Qui ad le coer preu et vaillant; Le bon Tristant de Magnelers Qui moult est noble bachilers, II portera vostre banier Qe est de soi riche et chier. N'esparnez ja, pur Jesu Cris, Englois, tout soit grantz ne petitz, Qe tout a mort ne les mettez. Car je ne voille qe si osez Soient jammes pur passer Un soul pee par decea la meer Pur moi grever ne guerroier. Ensi les vorray je arraier.« Dist lui dauffyns: »Piere, par foi, Tant ferrons, ensi come je croi, Qe vostre bon gree en averons.« Adonqes baniers et peignons Veissez desploier au vent Ou fin or et aseure resplent, Pourpres et goules et hermynes; Trumpes, taburs, chors et bussines Oissez parmi l'oost bounder. Tout faisoit la terre tenter La grant bataille de dauffln. La ot maint bon chivaler fin Et, ensi come dist le nombre, Quatre mille feurent en nombre. D'un des costees sa place prist, Moult grant espace du terre comprist. Ensi ad lui roi devisee Ceste bataille et ordeignee.

18r

Coment le roi de France ordeigna le riche [due] d'Orliens son friere, ove trois mille combatantz, pur amesner sa areregarde de son hoost.

1000

1004

Adonqes appella, ce est chose clere, Le riche due d'Orliens son friere. »Friere«, fait il, »si Dieux me garde, Vous amesnerez nostre areregarde Ovesqe trois mille combatantz, Des gentz d'armes, preux et vaillantz; 75

1008

1012

Et gardez bien, pur Dieu mercy, Qe n'aiez ja d'Englois mercy, Mais les mettez touz a mort Car ils nous ont fait moult de tort, Et arsee et destruite nostre terre Puis q'ils partirent d'Engleterre. Et gardez, si le Prince preignez, Qe par devers moi l'amesnez.« »Sire«, ce dist lui riche dues, »Volentiers et en coer plus.«

Coment le roi de France mesmes, ovesqe trois de sez filtz et plusours countes et autres seigniours a la nombre de vint et trois baniers, quatre centz chivalx armes et quatre centz chivalers desus, armes, furent en la quarte bataille.

1016

1020

1024

1028

1032

1036

1040

Ensement ad lui noble rois Johan ordeignee ses courrois. En la quarte bataille fu. Moult par fu riche sa vertu. Ovesqe lui trois de sez filtz Qui moult feurent de grant pris: Le due d'Anjo, eil de Berry Estoit auxi ovesqe lui, Et s'i fuist Philippes lui hardis Qui moult fu jeofnes et petitz. La estoit Jaques de Burboun, Lui counte d'Eu qui ot bon noun Et le counte de Longeville, Cils deux si estoient sanz gille Filtz monsire Robert d'Artois; Et s'i estoit, a ceste foitz, Lui noble counte de Sansoire Ovesqe lui, ce est chose voire; Et s'i estoit le count Daunmartin. Quei vous ferroi je longe fin? Tant par fu riche sez arrois Car baniers ot vint et trois. Puis ordeigna a l'autre leez Bien quatre centz chivalx armes Et quatre centz chivalers desus De trestouz les meillours eseuz.

1033 le court daunmartin 76

1044

1048

1052

1056

1060

Guychard d'Angle les condussoit Qui noble chivaler estoit, Et le bon seignour d'Angebuguy Qui ot le coer preu et hardy, Et Eustace de Rippemont En qui lui roi se fioit moult. Et lour pria sanz alentir Qu'ils pansaient de bien ferir Et qu'ils ne s'espamassent mie D'avoir la bataille partie, Et chescun les sieweroit apres Qui de bien faire serroit pres. Et chescun lui ad acordee De bien faire sa volentee. La avoit il tiel noblesse, Si Dieux me poet doner leesse, Qe ce fuist un grant mervaille. Unqes homme ne vist tiel apparaille De noblesse ne d'ordinance Come feuront de la partie de Fraunce.

Coment le Prince mist sez gentz en ordinance pur combatre, et assigna le counte de Warrewik pur l'avantgarde, et le counte de Salesbury pur amesner la reregarde de son hoost; et comaunda sire Eustace d'Abri/checourt et le seigniour de Courtoun a courrir pur l'ost franceis descoverir, les queux courrerent si avant q'ils feurent pris per les Francois, et les Francois ent fesoient grant joye.

1064

1068

1072

De l'autre part, ne doutez mie, Fuist l'oost englois logie, Que ensement en celle jour Lui noble Prince de valour Mettoit sez gentz en ordinaunce; Et volentiers, a ma semblaunce, Vousist la bataille excuser S'il le pooit devoider, Mais bien veoit qe lui covient faire. Adonqes appella sanz retraire De Warrewik le noble counte Et tres parfitement lui counte: »Sire«, fait il, »il nous covient

1063 Qui ensement

77

19r

1076

1080

1084

1088

1092

1096

1100

1104

1108

1112

78

Combatre; et puis q'ensi avient, Je vous pri en ceste journ^e Aiez 1'avantgarde menee. Lui noble sire de Pomiers, Qui moult est noble chivalers, Serra en vostre compaignie; Et si averez, je vous affie, Toutz sez frieres ovesqe lui Qui moult sont preux, vaillantz et hardy. Primers passerez le passage Et garderez nostre cariage. Je chivachera apres vous Ovesque mes chivalers touz. En cas qe a meschief aviendrez De nous serrez reconfortez. Et lui counte de Salesbury Chivachera apris auxi, Qui mesnera nostre areregarde. Et serra chescun sur sa garde, En cas q'ils nous courront sus, Qe chescun a pee descenduz Soit le plus tost q'il purra.« Et chescun dist q'il le ferra. Quei vous averoi detriee La matiere, et plus destourbee? Ensi se devisent la nuyt. La n'avoit pas trop grant desduit Car chescun y fesoit enbusshe; La avoit il mainte escarmusshe. Et quant ceo vient a grant matin, Lui noble Prince ove coer fin En appella, a brief mot court, Daun Eustace d'Abrichecourt, Ovesqe le seigniour de Courtoun, Qui ot le coer fier come lioun, Et lour comanda a courir Pur l'oost des Francois descoverir. Et chescun prist a chivacher, Mountez son noble courser; Mais, ensi come dit le romant, Cils deux courerent si avant Q'ils furent retenuz et pris. Dont fuist lui Prince moult maris,

19v

1120

Et F r a n c i s ent fesoient grant joie Pur lour host, si Dieux m'avoie, Et disoient, par motz expres: »Touz les autres viendront apris.«

Coment la grant huee est comensee, et lui Prince se deslogea et chivacha, et ne quidoit mie eel jour avoir la bataille; et les Fran