Speranza
PERCEVAL : THE GOLD GRAIL
The
story of the Holy Grail begins with a medieval French romance (an epic poem),
composed by Crestien (Chrétien) de Troyes, late in the twelfth century, and
entitled
"Le Roman de Perceval" (The Romance of Perceval) or Le Conte del Graal
(The Tale of the Grail).
In the Waste Forest the Widow-Lady’s unnamed son
has his first encounter with knights.
He decides to leave home and become a
knight. His distraught mother gives him advice:
(1) Help women in need;
accept a kiss, a ring, or a purse as a reward
(2) Seek the company of noble
people, and ask their name
(3) Go to church and pray to God
As he departs
he sees her fall down as if dead, but he does not turn back.
First adventure,
damsel in a tent; extracts kisses and a ring from her, leaves her in
distress!
He goes to King Arthur (Artus) and demands to be knighted.
He
defeats the wicked Red Knight (his cousin) and takes his armour.
At the castle of the
venerable Gornemant de Goort, he receives his spur, and learns chivalry:
(1)
Show mercy to a defeated adversary if he pleads for it
(2) Be discreet and do
not talk excessively
(3) Assist women in need, married or unmarried
(4) Go
to church and pray for God’s mercy and protection
(5) Do not be an idiot
quoting your mother; quote the man who gave you your spur
The hero thinks
compassionately about his mother and heads homewards.
He is sidetracked by an
adventure with a princess, Blancheflor of Beaurepaire castle.
He vanquishes two
of her enemies.
He wants to marry her, but first he must see how his mother
is.
He is lodged for a night in the castle of the Fisher-King. At a banquet
he sees the grail and a bleeding white lance, but fails to ask the required
questions about them.
He meets a weeping damsel and her slain lover. She asks
him his name; he remembers it or makes it up as Perceval the Welshman (Galois).
She scolds him for not asking the questions, which would have healed the king.
She is his cousin, and she tells him his mother is dead.
He meets a
disheveled woman; the one from the tent; reconciles her with her angry lover.
He sees on the snow 3 drops of blood from a wounded goose; reminds him of
Blancheflor.
Gawain finds him, and takes him to King Arthur and Queen
Guenevere, and he is now a knight of the Round Table.
At a celebration
feast, the Hideous Damsel appears, condemns Perceval for his failure at the
Grail castle, and predicts dire outcomes. He forswears the worldly chivalry of
Gawain (tournaments and amours).
After five years, in which he has not
worshipped God, Perceval encounters a party of knights and ladies walking
barefoot and wearing hairshirts, on Good Friday.
Perceval resorts to a hermit
to confess his sins. He learns that this hermit and the Fisher-King are brothers
of his mother, hence his uncles. The Grail serves the Fisher-King’s father [in
the room adjoining the hall of the castle]; his life is sustained by a single
eucharistic wafer. The Grail is a holy thing. Perceval’s penance is imposed, and
he receives holy communion.
Perceval is clearly in line to be the next
Grail-King, but the poem is unfinished.
What is the Grail? A serving dish, ‘a
platter, broad and somewhat deep’ (according to a contemporary definition of the
Latin term gradalis). Crestien’s grail is made of gold, and shines brilliantly.
It is accompanied by a silver carving platter, and also a bleeding spear. The
Grail is carried back and forth for each course of the meal, so it provides the
desired food and drink?
Where is the Grail? In the castle of the Fisher-King,
an uncle of Perceval. It is in the same land as King Arthur’s realm, and thus in
Britain. But the Grail is not available to the Round Table.
Whence is the
Grail? Crestien gives no answer in the uncompleted poem.
Whose is the Grail?
It serves the Fisher-King and his father (both unnamed) and sustains them.
Presumably Perceval, the Welsh country-bumpkin, will attain wisdom and
compassion, and become the guardian of the Grail.
PERCEVAL : THE
GOLD GRAIL
The story of the Holy Grail begins with a medieval French romance
(an epic poem), composed by Crestien (Chrétien) de Troyes, late in the twelfth
century, and entitled Le Roman de Perceval (The Romance of Perceval) or Le Conte
del Graal (The Tale of the Grail).
For the English-speaking peoples it goes
back to the fifteenth century, when Sir Thomas Malory produced Le Morte d’Arthur
(The Death of Arthur, 1470). [An English book with a French title? Anglo-Norman
influence?] In his collection of Arthurian stories he included The Quest of the
Holy Grail (translated from French).
Crestien’s Perceval opens with a
prologue of sixty-eight lines (out of 9,235), starting with a pious little
saying (a sententia): “Whosoever sows little gathers little”. (Ki petit semme
petit quelt or Qui petit seme petit quialt) [cueillir, ‘gather’]. Now that I
have translated the words into English we have a ‘homophonic’ problem. Is it
‘sewing’ with thread or 'sowing' with seed?
Is it a woman ‘sewing’ at home
and ‘gathering’, making a gathered skirt, gathering the material in folds, or
puckering (her lips, sexily thinking of her knight?), drawing together part of a
dress by running a thread through? If you don’t sew often you won’t have
occasion to do much ‘gathering’. Makes sense. Or is it a man out in the field
planting his seed in the furrows?
What Crestien says is this:
“He who
sows little reaps little, but he who wishes to reap plentifully casts his seed
on ground that will increase his fruit a hundredfold”.
The good ground
that Crestien is cultivating and in which he is sowing his seeds, meaning the
words of his story, is a person, namely Count Philip of Flanders, his bountiful
patron. Philip is as noble as Alexander, but he is worthier, because his
generosity is in accordance with the Gospel pattern or paradigm, from the sermon
on the mount (Matthew 6:3):
“Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand
doeth”.
[Let us be a mite antiquated, to maintain a medieval
tone.]
As Crestien sees it, the left hand represents vainglory, while the
right hand signifies love, caritas, charité, charity. Love is the nobler way,
because “God is Love”. Crestien, good Christian that he was, may have faltered
here; he seems to attribute the identifying of God and Charity to Saint Paul.
But the statement “God is Love” is not found in the epistles of the apostle
Paul, but in the First Letter of John (chapter 4, verse 8).
You are getting
worried now; this looks as if it is turning into a Bible-study session, and you
are thinking you have been enticed here on false pretences. Fear not, little
flock (another quotation from the Bible), we shall come to the ripping yarns and
the raging controversies ere long.
Paul of Tarsus did not explicitly say
“God is Love”, but he did write a beautiful piece about Christian love (agapé),
a noble steed (not to say war-horse) which is regularly trotted out at weddings
(1 Corinthians 13). The main point in it is: “if I do not have love, I am
nothing” (13:2). And the climax is: “Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three,
but the greatest of these is love” (13:13). Moreover, Paul does declare (in 2
Corinthians 13:11) that the Christian God is “the God of love”, and so he
enjoins them (verily a suitable word for the sacred conjoining he is proposing)
to “salute one another with a holy kiss” (13:12).
Besides the danger of
saliva-trafficking spreading a plague, one thing could lead to another, and we
are back in the garden of Eden, where the problem was, perchance, not just the
apple on the tree but the pear on the ground.
Other apostolic pronouncements
about love and God turn up at wedding breakfasts. This is relevant because there
are marriages in The Tale of the Grail. One example is the telegram sent to a
bride, perhaps to allay her fears over the imagined terrors of consummation:
“Perfect love casteth out fear”. This was from1 John 4:18, ten verses on from
“God is Love” (4:8). To save money only the Bible reference was sent, not the
words. Horror of horrors, a numeral 1 was omitted in transmission; not the 1
before the 8 (giving “God is Love”) but the 1 before John, and the best man
opened a Bible and redd out 4:18 from the Gospel, not the Epistle: “thou hast
had five husbands and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband”. These words
would have fitted that point in the wedding ceremony, where the invitation is
given for intervention by anyone who can show just cause why the couple should
not be matrimonially conjunctified, or else ‘conjugally matrimonified’.
In that context, Jesus was addressing a Samaritan, the woman at the
well. Please note very carefully, he was not talking to Mary Magdalene.
But what has that got to do with the Holy Grail? Well, there is a rumour
going around at present, and may have been circulating for some two thousand
years, that Mary of Magdala was the Grail, the sacred receptive vessel, the
receptacle for something very holy and precious. This was a secret, which was
allegedly kept in a particular family, who functioned as the keepers of the
Grail.
May we hope that when we delve deep into the evidence for the
identity of the Grail, we will find it is not about sex, but something
wholesome, like . . . food. And drink.
This is an opportune moment to
mention another Mary, Marie de Champagne (speaking of drink, things are really
bubbling now, champagne in the evening, real pain in the morning). She was the
previous patron of Crestien de Troyes; to her he dedicated his romance entitled
Lancelot: The Knight of the Cart.
[the adventures of the Cart-Knight on the
Knight-cart? And why his name Lancelot? In the movies I have seen he does lance
a lot of knights.]
As a piece of gossip, Marie de Champagne was courted
(in vain) by Crestien’s patron Philippe d’Alsace, Philip of Alsace and Flanders,
an Alsatian, no less.
[and for once you can not correct me and make me say
‘German shepherd’]
Playing with words and sounds. I should be ashamed to
say there is a plethora of paronomasia (punning) in our passage through the
Perceval poetry and prose, and rhyming and alliteration, too. To prove it exists
in the texts themselves, here is a quotation from the prologue to Crestien’s
Tale of the Grail.
At the command of the Count (le Conte), Crestien had
undertaken “to rhyme the best tale (conte) that has ever been told (contez) in
royal court”, namely “The Tale of the Grail, whose book was given to him by the
Count (quiens)” (64-67).
Crestien was playing on the conte words. To
reproduce the same effect in English we might say: the Count wanted the account
to be recounted. The end-rhymes are: conte twice (for count and tale), and roial
with graal.
All this adds up to a typical prologue for a romance: the author
has been named, as Crestien; it begins with a motto, here stating a theme of
sowing seed and harvesting produce; he offers praise for the patron, count
Philip of Flanders. But, by quoting the Christian Scriptures, Crestien has added
a new dimension to his art: the exploration of spirituality, in which we would
expect charity, ‘love divine, all loves excelling’, to play a significant part.
As we set out on our pilgrimage through The Tale of the Grail, notice
that Crestien calls the object simply ‘the Grail’ (graal), not the Holy Grail,
though once (line 6425) a hermit calls the Grail ‘a holy thing’ (tant sainte
chose est li graals).
‘Twas a lovely springtime morning; trees were
sprouting new leaves; meadows were sporting green grass; and our stripling hero
had a spring in his step.
[all that spitting and spraying suggests there were
spring showers in the air]
We are not told the name of the youth, and the
poor silly fool does not know his name either.
He is just “the widow-lady’s
son”.
They dwell in the Waste Forest (Gaste Forest), leading a sheltered life,
away from combat and strife.
The reason for this intentional isolation was that
the boy’s mother had lost her husband through warfare, and she was anxious to
protect her son from such a fate.
However, things are about to change
drasticly; she cannot stifle the stirrings of adolescence, or steer his
testosterone level.
He has ridden off on his horse to check up on the plowmen
sowing oats in his mother’s fields (there’s the sowing theme straight away), and
he is feeling his own oats.
He is playing with his war-toys (as boys are
naturally wont to do), promiscuously casting his three wooden spears.
[Is he
a budding Shakespeare? A spunky alliterater, anyway.]
Of a sudden, a racket
and clatter disturbed the peace of the place. The lad thought it must be those
demons his mother had warned him against. He would not make the sign of the
cross to ward them off, as his mother had advised; he would stick one of his
spears into the leader of those dirty devils, and that would frighten them all
off.
[they don’t like it up ‘em]
But lo and behold, there came into view,
not a horde of unclean spirits, but five valiant knights in shining armour, with
their mail shirts gleaming, and their bright helmets, shields, and spears
flashing in the sunlight, and sparkling with the colour purple, and blue, and
green, and silver, and gold. The hapless youth was aghast, astonisht, and
abasht; he asked their forgiveness for his sin of not recognizing that they were
angels, and that their leader was God.
But straightway they put him to
rights;
they told him that they were just knights (chevaliers).
(The
whole poem is in rhyming couplets of eight syllables. This one, of my own
making, bears no resemblance to the original in metre or in meaning.)
The
leading knight had a simple question: “Have you seen five knights and three
girls in this vicinity today?” But a comical scene now unfolds, lengthily, as
the boy ignores the repeated query, and babbles his own questions about the
armour and the weapons. Finally, he conducted the knights to the plowmen, who
became stricken with fear, because the mother would be hopping mad: all those
years she had tried to keep him from ever seeing a knight or hearing about them,
and now he was being told how to become a knight, by going to Carlisle
(Cardoeil), where the king was residing at that time.
Having established
that the other party of knights had indeed passed that way, the leader asked the
lad his name, thrice, only to receive the same sort of reply.
“I’m called
‘Fair Son’ (Biax fix).”
“Yes, but I’m sure you have another name.” “Yes, I’m
called Fair Brother.”
“Come now, you must have a proper name.” “Yes, they
call me Good Master.”
So, off went the knights, firm in their belief that he
was yet another scatter-brained dim-witted Welshman to add to their
stereotype-collection.
The excited boy hurried home to his worrying
mother, who welcomed him joyfully, exclaiming “Fair Son”, a hundred times and
more. Happily he told her of the wonderful creatures he had encountered, but
when he pronounced the dread word knight, unhappily it was good night for her:
she fainted (and she was not feinting, as some women are wont to do, and as
other women won’t do). When she regained her senses she spoke in sorrow and in
anger, confessing that she had constantly endeavoured to keep such knowledge
from him. She herself had a noble chivalric lineage, as also his father, whose
chivalry had been the death of him. He was treacherously wounded between the
legs (nasty, usually means castration); he died a lingering death, in impotence
and poverty. Moreover, the boy’s two brothers were killed in battle, and this
grief finished their father off, and left the mother with her infant as her only
comfort and pleasure in life.
Our anonymous protagonist paid no heed to
her agony. Within three days he was ready to go to the king who made knights. He
was saying goodbye to his mother, and wearing the coarse hemp shirt [keep away
from naked flame] and the Welsh breeches she had sewn [there’s that word we’ve
been waiting for].
By way of counsel, the distraught woman gave her son a
distaff-discourse on how to behave out in the world.
(1) Assist ladies in
need, and aid maidens in distress, for the sake of honour; if a woman grants you
a kiss, do not take anything more, except a ring or a purse.
(2) If you
accept hospitality, ask the names of your companions; and always seek out the
company of prodomes (people who are worthy, loyal, and wise).
(3) Go to
churches and pray. (eglises, mostiers [minsters, not cathedrals but monastery
chapels])
“Mother, what’s a church?”
Here his mother had to catechize
him: “A place where one worships God, who made heaven and earth, and put men and
women there. . . . and where we sacrifice the body of Jesus Christ, to whom Jews
did much shame. [What about the Romans?] . . . He saved us from the
Devil.”
She wept and kist him tenderly. But he would not be dissuaded. As
he rode away he looked back once and saw that his mother had fallen down
unconscious, as if stone dead. But he galloped off. [Buuuuuuuw & Buw
huw]
After only a day and a night he had his first adventure (635-780).
He came upon a tent, which was so magnificent that it must be a church, he
weened, archaicly; and so he entered it to give adoration to God, as his mother
had instructed him to do. There he found a girl sleeping on a silken bed. She
awakes with a fright, and she begs him to leave before her friend (ami) returns
and sees him. But the innocent fool carried on regardless, and thinking to obey
his mother’s injunctions he moved in for a kiss. In his strong arms he claspt
her, albeit awkwardly; he lay on top of her, and though she struggled hard he
had his way with her a score of times or more, stealing kiss after kiss from her
(text-critical footnote: one version only allows him seven); and he found the
taste of her lips sweeter than he had ever had from the mouths of his mother’s
chamber-maids.
Then he noticed that she had an emerald finger-ring. Again
in mistaken obedience to his mother’s teaching, he took the ring from the young
woman’s resisting hand, and put it on his own. She was now indeed a damsel in
distress! When her knight came back she would really be in deep water (like the
ordeal-trial by water, for witches, a no-win situation); he had given her that
ring.
After that, the lad (that term is taking on an unpleasant odour;
he’s a bit of a lad; so, for a change, let’s use the same word as Crestien does,
le valet, or the varlet) the varlet gobbled one of her three venison pies
(pastez); and guzzled a goblet of her wine. The fact that he covers the
leftovers with a cloth seems to show that this scene has been a profaning of the
Mass. You’ll pay for this, she intimated to him. I’ll pay you back before I die,
he said as he departed. Presently the man-friend returns, refuses to listen,
goes into a jealous rage, accuses her of wilful infidelity. Her punishment will
be: no feed for her horse, and no clothes for her body, until he has cut off the
head of the despoiler. We shall meet this dysfunctional couple again, forsooth.
Not a good outcome for the young adventurer’s first enterprise: he had
totally botched the articles in his mission statement, as drawn up by his
mother. He moves on, blithely unaware of the havoc he has wreaked at home and
abroad.
On arrival at King Arthur’s court, he rode right into the royal
presence (900). King Artus (as he is yclept by Crestien) was sitting silent and
sullen at the table, with his merry band of knights chattering away. When the
bold varlet finally got his attention, the king told him about the Red Knight
who had just made off with a golden cup, shamefully spilling the wine on the
queen as he grabbed it, causing her to run off and lock herself in her room.
The venturesome varlet seizes his opportunity, demands to be a dubbed a
knight, and this done, or so he supposes, he races off in pursuit of that
villainous Scarlet Knight. Having caught him (1076) he challenged him, and for
his pains he received a savage blow from him; in retaliation our hero (we are on
his side now) hurled a sharpened stick, which pierced one of the eyes of the
antihero; blood spurted out and and brains spilled out, and he fell back
dead.
With the help of the squire Yonet, who had come to gawk, he
appropriated the red armour, rather clumsily. He sent Yonet back to the king,
bearing the precious golden cup. Listen very carefully, I will say this only
once: this is not the Grail.
The young victor travelled on, looking for
more exploits, and came to a distant castle (1320). There he was welcomed by a
prodome, a distinguished nobleman in ermine robes, the type of person his mother
had recommended to him. As his mother had taught him, he greeted the man, who
gave him an impromptu lesson in knightly combat (1420-1530). Rather belatedly,
perhaps, once again quoting his mother, he asked the name of his host. He was
Gornemant de Goort (or Gornemans de Gorhaut), the Gurnemanz of Wagner’s
Parsifal, but it is not said that this Gornemans was, like Gurnemanz, a knight
of the Grail.
The following day, the young man (we still don’t know his
name!) thinks about his mother, wondering whether she is alive or dead. This
must be the first time he has thought about anyone other than himself. Is he
beginning to achieve a midgen of maturity? Compassion seems to be stirring
within him. Is he on the same track as Wagner’s Parsifal: through compassion
[suffering with another person] the pure fool becomes knowing (durch Mitleid
wissend der reine Tor)? Remember, however, that he has deliberately slain one
opponent, and unwittingly made an innocent woman’s life a misery. And now he
wants to see how his mother is: “She fainted from sadness, because I was
leaving, I know it”. He can not linger any longer.
Speaking of long
linggerie/lingerie (linen-ware), Gornemant gave him some new clothing, including
a linen shirt and pants; also a coat made in India and sewn of silk; and red
shoes (to match his armour). His reaction? What’s wrong with the good Welsh
clothes my mother made me? Trust me, Gornemant says, and puts the fine
fashionable apparel on him. After affixing a spur to the boy’s right foot
(giving him his spurs, as we say), he kissed him (there’s that holy kiss again),
and conferred on him the highest distinction God had ever created, namely the
order of knighthood, otherwise known as chivalry, which is devoid of villainy
(1635).
Gornemant dismisses him with his blessing and with some wise
advice (1639).
(1) If you defeat an adversary in combat, and he cries out
for mercy, spare him.
(2) Be courteously discreet, not gossiping or talking
too much, which is a sin.
(3) Provide assistance and advice to women, whether
married or unmarried.
(4) Go to church and pray to the maker of all that he
will bless and protect you.
(5) Oh, and do not keep saying that your mother
told you to do this and that, or you will become a laughing-stock. Just tell
them that the man who gave you your spur taught you (1698).
What
Gornemant has done is to superimpose manly virtues on the rules the newly-made
knight had learned from his mother. Thus, he reiterates assistance of women, and
attendance at church; he adds showing mercy to defeated foes, and holding one’s
tongue.
Our hero heads homewards, but he is diverted from his purpose by
a new adventure. He comes to a castle named Belrepaire (or Beaurepaire), but it
is in a bad state of repair (Malrepaire?); it is now the Waste Castle, because
it has long been under siege, and is expected to capitulate the next day. (The
besieging forces must have been taking a brief vacation when our beau chevalier,
whatever his name is, comes by and gains admittance. He is conducted to the
palace, and to its owner, a surpassingly beautiful golden-haired maiden named
Blancheflor (blanche fleur, ‘white flower’). She takes him by the hand and leads
him to a secret room, where she sits with him on a bed, while a host of knights
look on, gossiping in whispers about them being a perfect couple.
The
hero of the hour remembered the warning his noble teacher had given him, not to
be a chatterbox, and he kept quiet (and rightly so, we are constantly being
cautioned and told that we have the right to remain silent). So, the princess
had to break the conventions and the silence. Courteously she asked him where he
had just come from, and immediately they found they had something in common: she
was Gornemant’s niece (1902).
A meagre supper is served (it’s the siege,
you know, we are in dire straits). He goes to bed and falls asleep. His hostess
can not go to sleep. Her mind is churning over her plight: tomorrow she will be
taken by the vile Anguigueron, who desires her lands and her body. In
desperation Blancheflor went to the young knight’s room, tremulous and tearful.
Her weeping awoke him, and he drew her down into the bed. Being appraised of her
woes he promised to be her champion, in accordance with the counsel of his
mother and of her uncle. He then reverted to his mother’s instruction about
kissing, this time consensually not merely sensually. Unlike the hapless damsel
in the tent, Blancheflor was not displeased with his kissing, and so they lay
together all night, mouth to mouth, practising what we might technically term
‘oscillation-osculation’ (osculate, to kiss with the mouth; oscillate, to move
to and fro between two points). But, be aware that when he was being tucked into
bed by the servants, earlier that night, it was affirmed that he knew nothing
about the amatorial art (1941). (He had received no sex-education from his
mother.) But he is learning compassion, and how to comfort a sorrowing maiden
(Come to me my melancholy baby; but her melancholia is only temporary, not
chronic).
In the following two days he cleaned up the two insolent
rogues who would have done harm to his lover. In the intervening night she had
occasion to turn the key of love in his heart again. Both of the vanquished
knights pleaded for mercy, which was duly and chivalrously granted. Their heads
were not severed, but severe was their punishment: to report to the headmaster
after school and do several impositions. Off they went to King Arthur’s court to
be reformed. The flourishing young knight now had three trophies for the king to
record on the honour-roll.
The victorious chevalier spent considerable
time with the delighted and delightful Blancheflor. However, thoughts of Mother,
and Wales, haunted him. His belovèd would not let him go, but he swore a solemn
oath that he would soon return and stay by her side, and defend her lands for
ever. They are engaged. We have lift-off. This is true love.
He was given
a festive farewell, and he rode on (we don’t know his horse’s name, either) till
he came to an impassable river, where two men were sitting in an anchored boat.
One of them was fishing with a line, and he offered the traveller lodgings for
the night, directing him to a rock above the river, where he would espy the
dwelling.
At first the young man sees nothing, and loses his temper,
muttering and cursing about the fishermen telling lies [typical? anglers are
inveterate liars?]. Suddenly, in the valley below, he perceived the top of a
tower, and Crestien exultantly declares: “from there to Beirut there was nothing
finer or better built”. Is this Eastern allusion to make us think of the
Jerusalem Temple?(Holmes & Klenke)
Our anonymous hero entered the
castle’s courtyard, where he was welcomed and given a costly scarlet mantle to
wear into the great hall. There he saw a white-haired man dressed in black,
half-reclining on a bed, and he recognized him as the selfsame fisherman, who
now invited him to sit beside him. The host presented his guest with a
magnificent sword, which was in turn a gift from a golden-haired girl, a niece
of the lord of the castle.
Now we come to the mysteries of the
Fisher-King’s castle (3190-3315). Two mysterious objects were brough into the
hall. First, a white lance, carried by a servant; a drop of blood ran down from
the iron point until it reached his hand. The young knight, ever mindful of his
mentor’s admonitions, repressed the urge to ask his host about the meaning of
this wondrous spectacle.
Next came a ‘grail’ (un graal), borne by a
lovely maiden, preceded by a pair of handsome boys lighting its way with two
candlesticks, and another girl carrying a silver carving platter (tailleor). The
grail was of fine gold and ornamented with precious stones. The grail glowed
with such intensity that it outshone the score of candles that accompanied it,
like the moon and the stars when the sun appears in the sky.
The lance
and the grail passed by the king’s bed and into a neighbouring room, presumably
to serve someone else; but again the young man overcame his curiosity and held
his tongue. But here Crestien inserts a warning, that not speaking can cause as
much damage as talking overmuch.
A glorious meal is served to host and
guest. (And no one else? There was seating-room for 400 men [3097f].) They drank
wine from golden cups (none of which was the Grail). The first course was
roasted venison, carved on the silver platter. [Not a lamb? No fish at the
Fisherman’s table?!] With every course the grail was carried back and forth, and
he did not know why. He told himself he would wait till morning, and then ask
his questions. After dinner they spent the rest of the evening in conversation,
and finally they enjoyed fruit, fresh and dried, and special drinks.
And
so to bed. He slept until the sun was well up. No one responded to his calls for
assistance, so he dressed himself, mounted his horse, and crossed the
drawbridge. Unnervingly, it began to close just before they reached the end of
it. Yet there was no one to answer his questions: why the lance dripped blood?
why they carried the grail in procession? and “Whom does the Grail
serve?”.
Disconsolate, he rode on through the forest and came upon a
sorrowing damsel. [Another opportunity for a boy-scout-good-deed? Can he get it
right this time? But old ladies don’t always want or need to be helped across a
road.] This woman was sitting beneath an oak tree, nursing in her arms a dead
knight, headless withal, freshly killed that very morning, by a dastardly
chevalier. [dastard originally meant a damfool, a dullard, more applicable to
Perceval].
She was able to enlighten Perceval about his experiences the
night before. The Fisher was a maimed king, wounded in battle by a spear between
the legs (just like his own father, notice, but the king is not his father in
disguise). This makes it too painful for him to ride a horse and go hunting;
fishing is his only sport. The lady upbraided Perceval for not inquiring about
the bleeding lance and the grail.
Then she asked him what his name was!
This will test him. What is he going to say? “Fair Son” and “Fair Brother” have
passed their use-by date. “The Red Knight”, a soubriquet he had made his own?
Crestien says this: “Not knowing his own name, he guessed (devine) and said that
Perceval the Welshman (Perchevax li Galois) was his name”. No, she retorted,
your name is now Perceval the Wretched (chaitis), the Miserable (maleurous), the
Unfortunate (mal aventurous). If only he had asked those questions he could have
healed the good king; but now miseries will befall himself and many others, as
punishment for the terrible sin he had previously committed: against his mother,
who died sorrowing over him. She was there when his mother (still nameless)
passed away, and she attended the burial ceremony. And, surprise surprise, she
was in fact Perceval’s cousin.
This epic-romance is like a Dickens novel,
with more twists than Oliver Twist.
Everybody keeps finding that they are
related to everybody else.
Perceval will discover more relatives before he is
finished, among the characters he and we have already met. Here is an example
from the other half of the book (which we will bypass), in which the adventures
of Gauvain/Gawain are recounted: in a beautiful castle this knight meets a
number of women who are unknown to him, and yet the white-haired queen is
Arthur’s mother, and Gawain’s grandmother; the other queen is his own long-lost
mother; and the princess is his sister! It’s sad how families can drift apart,
and members lose touch.
Back to "Perceval".
"Perceval" seems to be his name now,
either discovered by a fantastic feat of memory or invented in a panic.
"Perceval"
could mean the one who pierces the veil or the vale.
Think on this.
Vale could
mean valley, or furrow (Perceval the ‘furrow-piercer’?)
More on this matter
anon.
Perceval was keen to pursue and punish the blackgauard who had so
foully slain his kinswoman’s belovèd. His cousin bade him leave her to grieve
and bury her dead, but she warned him that the sword he had acquired would
eventually fail him.
Perceval’s next encounter (3692-3995) is with a
dishevelled woman, her clothing so torn as to be hardly able to cover her
nakedness.
Perceval is here the veil-piercer.
She has
a scrawny palfrey [poolfriy, small horse for women], on his last legs; obviously
he has been denied his oats.
Remember a threat to starve a horse, made by a
jealous lover? It’s the damsel from the tent. (Amazingly, she is not related to
him.) He only had enough time to apologize profusely and comfort her before her
disgruntled lover galloped up and challenged Perceval. He, the Haughty Knight by
nickname, who had so ill-used his innocent lover, is treated to a humble
confession by Perceval. He was the one who stole her kisses and her/his ring,
and drank his wine, and gobbled one-and-a-half of his meat pies. All this only
makes the angry knight more determined to cut off the head of the one who had
wronged him (as he says, he had saved those pies for himself).
The
jousting begins. Both lances are shattered, both riders are unhorsed. Now for
the obligatory sword-fight scene. Perceval’s blade prevails (wondrous to tell,
it remains intact, so maybe next time it will be smashed, as foretold).
Perceval shows his accustomed mercy, reconciles the lovers, and
dispatches them to Arthur’s court with another message from the Red Knight, as
he still styles himself.
Thereafter, Perceval does not set out to go to
King Arthur. However, the king and the queen and all the knights of the Round
Table decide to come out in search of this fabulous champion of ladies, this
masterly righter of wrongs. By chance, they set up a camp in close proximity to
where he happens to be.
It snows during the night, and in the morning,
as he is riding along, he spots three drops of blood on the snow (from a wounded
goose, which had managed to fly away, nonetheless).
The red and white
pattern reminds him of his dearly loved Blancheflor’s complexion. He becomes
rapt in blissful contemplation of his sweetheart in his mind’s eye, oblivious to
the world.
Two of Arthur’s knights, one after the other, ride out to
escort him to the king. Each one in turn attacks him for not responding to their
call, but he dreamily knocks them to the ground. The irascible Kay (who has
already insulted him at their first meeting, when the lad first went to Arthur
demanding to be dubbed) is carried off to a surgeon to attend to his dislocated
and broken bones. Then Gawain sallies forth and speaks politely to Perceval ,
and befriends him.
After Perceval’s armour is removed, he appears once again
before the king, and this time he introduces himself as Perceval the Welshman
(le Galois).
On the third day of the ensuing celebration, the young hag
known as the Hideous Damsel arrives on her mule, to act the part of the
proverbial death’s head at the feast. She hoes into Perceval, condemning him for
neglecting to ask the questions that would have healed the Fisher-King and his
waste-land. Perceval’s failure will have ghastly consequences, she warns.
Thereupon, Perceval vows that he will not sleep for two nights in one place
until he has solved the mystery of the grail and the bleeding lance.
Now
the narrative becomes focussed on Gawain’s adventures (4715-6180), with his
famous sword Escalibor.
My sword is keen, my heart is pure, and so is Wood’s
Great Peppermint Cure. That was ‘In days of old, when knights were bold, and
nights were cold, and knights caught colds.
Gawain is sent in search of
the bleeding lance; it is predicted that it will one day destroy Logres,
Arthur’s kingdom. We may speculate that he will get too involved in chivalry
(tournaments and love-affairs, jousts and amours) to succeed in his quest,
whereas Perceval, who has renounced such worldly pursuits, will achieve his
spiritual goal.
When the narrator returns to Perceval (6217-6516) five
years have passed, in which time he has never been to church to worship God and
the Cross. It is Good Friday, he is in a wilderness, and he meets a party of
five knights and ten ladies. They are walking unshod and wearing hairshirts, or
rough wool clothing, and doing penance for their sins. They are astonished to
find him in his armour and on his horse. Doesn’t he believe in Jesus Christ and
his New Law? Doesn’t he know that this is the very day of his death, and it is
sinful to bear arms on it? They then give him instruction in the creed
(6267-6301).
There are important comparisons and contrasts to be made
here, between the two encounters he has made with a party of knights. Both were
in the springtime: the first was secular spring with worldly knights showing off
their finery; the second was spiritual spring, Easter, the time of fruitful
death and life-giving resurrection.
Perceval resorts to a hermit to
confess his sins. Perceval’s penance is imposed, and he receives holy communion
on Easter Day. The profane ‘Mass’ he attended five years earlier was in a tent
that he took to be a church. (Remember how he covered the left-overs of the
meat-pies with a cloth?) This time it is a proper church service, in a little
chapel, with a priest (provoire = prestre), a choir boy (clerçon, acolyte, altar
boy), and a saintly kinsman (the hermit). Perceval is making progress on the
path of spirtuality and wisdom.
He now learns that this hermit and the
Fisher-King are brothers of his mother, hence his uncles. The Grail serves the
Fisher-King’s father; he was glimpsed reclining in the room adjoining the hall
of the castle; his life is sustained by a single eucharistic wafer. The Grail is
a holy thing, the hermit says. So this should give us licence to speak of ‘the
Holy Grail’ in Crestien’s account.
Perceval is clearly in line to be the
next Grail-King, but we don’t know the outcome of his quest; the poem is
unfinished. It stops short in mid-stream, at line 9235. At line 6519 Crestien
had said that he would speak a good deal about Gawain before he mentioned
Perceval again. In fact, Perceval’s name does not appear again (except in the
continuations that have been composed by other writers: see
Perlesvaus).
What is the etymology, meaning and significance, and why, not etymythology, of the name "Perceval"?
We remember that it was first used by Perceval himself, when his cousin,
for some reason, posed the question to him:
"What is your name?"
"Perceval"
At this point, one wonders: does Perceval dredge
his name up from his memory? Or, more plausibly, does he invent it on the spot?
It is not clear from where Perceval
got his name "Perceval".
Besides, what does "Perceval" mean?
There are several possible answers that are
swimming around in people's brain.
Here is a synthesis of ideas some minds have thrown
up, and some suggestions made by others.
(1) Vale-penetrater.
Taking
‘perce’ as ‘pierce’ (Old French percer, from Romanic *pertusiare, originally
Latin pertundere (pertusus, ‘pierced’) ‘thrust through’ or ‘bore through’;
percer and ‘pierce’ mean ‘put a hole in’, and also ‘penetrate’.
So, what is the
‘val’ that is pierced or penetrated?
The ‘val’ could be a valley (French val or
vallée, English ‘vale’ or ‘valley’).
Recall that the fisher in the boat told
Perceval that his home was in a valley ("en un val", line 3032), and though Perceval
initially has difficulty making out the building, he eventually sees it, and goes
into the valley to reach the castle.
We do not know if any one else has offered
this simple solution.
It seems significant that the name "Perceval" is only used
AFTER Perceval's visit to the Fisher-King, when the young man penetrated the
vale/valley and found the Grail-Castle.
This, then, would be the literal level
of meaning for the name "Perceval".
(2) Veil-penetrater.
Then we might
think of ‘penetrating the veil’, a covering cloth (as in ‘Saint Veronica’s
veil’), or a curtain (as in ‘the veil of the Temple’, curtaining off the Holy of
Holies, the most sacred place in the Jerusalem Temple, where the Ark of the
Covenant was kept; this ‘ark’ represented the throne and footstool of Yahweh the
God of Israel, with the guardian kerubim on either side of it [kerubim: winged
sphinxes, not ‘cherubs’] ).
This kind of ‘veil-penetrating’ works well in
English, with ‘veil’ (covering) and ‘vale’ (valley) as homophones (words with
the same sounds but different meanings).
But in French it is ‘val’ versus
‘voile’ or ‘veile’ (Latin velum, plural vela).
In the Queste [see Galahad], the
Grail has a samite covering, and has to be unveiled. Samite: rich silk cloth,
with gold thread.)
Recall the idea of Urban Holmes and Sister Amelia
Klenke, that when Crestien declares, with regard to the Fisher-King’s castle:
“from there to Beirut there was nothing finer or better built”, his Eastern
allusion was to make us think of the Jerusalem Temple in connection with the
grail-castle? They make a number of connecting contrasts between Old Testament
and New Testament (remember the penitent knights mentioning the New Law of Jesus
Christ); between Synagoga and Ecclesia (on the map of Crestien’s town Troyes,
which they provide I notice a synagogue, a Rue du Temple, and references to
Jews; and churches; the name Madeleine (Magdalene) appearing twice).
The
castle of the grail represents the Old Testament temple. The maimed king is
Jacob Israel, the archetypal Israelite (injured in his wrestling-match with an
angel, remember). The closed room is like the Holy of Holies in the
Tabernacle-tent and later the Temple; its occupant represents Melkisedeq, the
ancient priest-king of Jerusalem who administered bread and wine to Abraham;
alongside the Ark of the Covenan there was a container of manna, the food
provided by God to the Hebrews in their desert-wanderings, and the rod of Aaron,
the symbol of the High Priest’s power. The equivalent of the rod is the spear,
and the vessel of manna corresponds to the grail. In the main room of the Temple
there was a table with loaves of bread on it. In the hall of the grail-castle
the food is placed not on plates or dishes but on gastels, flat pieces of bread
(unlike its descendant gâteau, ‘cake’, and in English a rich cake with cream).
All these coincidences add up to a very interesting collection of
allegorical types and antitypes.
But Perceval has not yet penetrated the
veil of the temple.
(3) Percipient
Can we find a paronomastic
connection (that is, a pun) between Perceval and
‘perceive’ (percevoir, Latin
percipere, ‘take in through the senses’)?
In this interpretation, "Perceval" is
the perceptive percipient person.
He begins as a simpleton, but through
experience he attains perspicacity and insight, and becomes a seer who can look
deep into the mysteries. He will perhaps be a counterpart to Jesus Christ and
transform the grail-castle into a spiritual temple. The veil of the Temple, as
on the day of the crucifixion, was torn from the top to the bottom, giving open
access to the Holy of Holies. According to the Letter to the Hebrews, Jesus
Christ leads his followers into that place, into the presence of
God.
What is the Grail?
A serving dish, ‘a platter, broad and
somewhat deep’ (according to a contemporary definition of the Latin term
gradalis, by Helinand). Crestien’s grail is made of gold, and shines
brilliantly. It is accompanied by a silver carving-platter, and also a bleeding
spear. The Grail is carried back and forth for each course of the meal, so it
provides the desired food and drink? (Such a magical object was owned by the
giant hero or god named Bran, in Celtic folklore: a platter on which whatever
food one wished for was instantly obtained.)
Where is the Grail?
In
the castle of the Fisher-King, an uncle of Perceval. It is in the same region as
King Arthur’s realm, and thus (I presume) in Britain. But the Grail is not
available to the knights of the Round Table.
Whence is the Grail?
Crestien gives no answer in the uncompleted poem, as far as I can see, but I
may have overlooked something.
Whose is the Grail?
It serves the
Fisher-King and his father (both unnamed) and sustains them. Presumably
Perceval, the Welsh country-bumpkin, will attain wisdom and compassion, and
become the guardian of the Grail.
We are left in the dark about so many
things, because the poem is unfinished. What were the names of all the members
of the grail-family (as we may call it): Perceval’s father and mother, the
Fisher-king and his father?
In his opera Parsifal, Richard Wagner calls
them Gamuret and Herzeleide, Amfortas and Titurel. Where did he get these names
from?
Let’s hope that we will attain some clarity on such matters from
Wolfram von Eschenbach, when we study his epic poem on the same subject,
Parzival.
Chrétien de Troyes, Le Roman de Perceval ou Le Conte du Graal, ed.
William Roach (Paris 1959)
Chrétien de Troyes, Perceval, The Story of the
Grail, translated by Burton Raffel (New Haven 1999)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment