Review the online readings on courtly love and Translatio (paying particular attention to comments on Chrétien de Troyes and his Lancelot romance, The Knight of the Cart).   If you like, read through the Introduction found in Chrétien de Troyes, Arthurian Romances (pp. 1-22).  Note discussion of the manuscript tradition of Chrétien's romances (pp. 1-3) and of what's known of Chrétien's biography (pp. 1-7); recall that he was active ca. 1170-1190. Note comments on the prologues to his five romances (pp. 9-12 and 15; review the online reading on Medieval Attitudes towards Vernacular Literature, which serves as a study guide to several of his prologues). The Introduction in your textbook specifically discusses the Knight of the Cart on pp. 8, 10, 13-14, 16-17 (but some of these assertions should be taken with a grain of salt; see comments below).  You should also be aware of Chrétien's influence on later Arthurian romance (review Translatio; also see Introduction pp. 20-22). 

Chrétien is a seminal figure in the development of vernacular narrative fiction in the 12th century.  He was the the author not only of the five extant romances printed in our textbook, but of numerous other works that have been lost (some of which are listed at the beginning of the Prologue to Cligés-- a romance which we are reading in its entirety after the Knight of the Cart).  His first romance, Erec and Enide (of which we have previously discussed the Prologue) is a celebration of married love.  It recounts a young knight's struggle to find the proper balance between his public duty as an Arthurian knight (and future King) and his private obligations towards his wife.   Today's reading, The Knight of the Cart, introduces the love affair between Lancelot and Guinevere into Arthurian tradition.  It was probably composed simultaneously with another romance, The Knight With the Lion (Yvain) which, like Erec and Enide, concerns a married knight's quest to find the proper balance between love and duty.  It is thought that the Yvain and Lancelot romances were composed simultaneously -- and possibly first recited aloud in alternation with each other -- because of the ways in which their plots are intertwined (see intro. pp. 16-17):  in each work, there are references to characters and events which are recounted in the other work. Chrétien's fifth and final romance, The Story of the Grail (Perceval), was left unfinished at his death; it introduces the idea of the Holy Grail into Arthurian literature.
 
 

Chrétien's Knight of the Cart is a good illustration of the fragmentary nature of manuscript transmission (on the manuscript tradition of Chrétien's romances, see Introduction pp. 1-3). It has been preserved in eight full or partial manuscripts. The oldest dates from the first half of the thirteenth century. None were copied during the lifetime of the poet, who died in the early 1190s, leaving his Story of the Grail unfinished. Thus, none of the extant manuscripts of the poem can be considered "authentic" versions written by the hand of the poet. And no two of them are alike. You can explore the fragments of these eight manuscripts in the Web-based Charrette project (French for "Cart") found at

This web site is an excellent resource containing information on Chrétien de Troyes and his Lancelot romance--see esp.

Through the website, you can scrutinize actual pages of the extant medieval manuscript and compare them to a modern edition of the poem. From the Charrette Project home page, click on "Browsing the On-Line Archive" or point your browser at

This page allows you to link to the text of the modern edition (click on "U") or go directly to the virtual version of each of the eight manuscripts (labelled A, C, E, F, G, I, T and V). An example: click on "U" and then on "1-30" to link to the text of the Prologue in a modern edition. (These first thirty lines of Chrétien's poem correspond to the first two paragraphs on p. 207 of Arthurian Romances). It doesn't matter that you don't understand the Old French text--simply note that the first line begins with the words "Des que" (as soon as). Now click in turn on the links to each of the manuscripts: A, C, E, F, G, I, T and V. Note that four of these pages are blank, indicating that manuscripts A, F, I and V are fragmentary (the Prologue has not been preserved).

Now click on E, C, G, and T to link to the four remaining manuscripts. On the transcription pages, scroll up and click on the link "Image" at the top of the transcription to see the actual manuscript page which contains the Prologue, with line numbers keyed to that in the edition. Note that three of these manuscripts begin with an illuminated letter "D": In E, G and T the first line begins with "Des que" (as soon as), which the editor of the edition (U) chose to print. One manuscript (C) begins with an illuminated letter "P"; its first line begins "Puis que" (since). Interestingly, Kibler, the translator of our edition, has chosen to follow the reading found ONLY in manuscript C ("Puis que" or "Since") rather than that found in the THREE other extant manuscripts ("Des que" or "as soon as").

Browse around in the archive, clicking on various images, and you will have a good notion of the beauty and diversity of medieval manuscripts. "f" means "folio," Latin for a page. The page number is followed by "r" for "recto" (the "right" side, like the first page in a book) and "v" for "verso" (the back side of a given page). You will be able to see the pores left by hair follicles on one side of the parchment and note the smoothness of the flesh side. You will see some beautiful illustrations and illuminated letters (which are not present in all manuscripts or all in the same place in a given manuscript).
 
 

In the prologue, Chrétien claims to have composed The Knight of the Cart at the request of the Countess Marie of Champagne, the daughter of Eleanor of Aquitaine. He presents himself as the servant of Marie who devotes his clerkly skill to doing her bidding, just as the knight Lancelot serves his lady, Queen Guinevere, with chivalric skill. This implicit parallel of clerkly and knightly service recalls the linking of clerkliness and chivalry in the notion of translatio studii et imperii (see e.g. the Prologue to Cligés, p. 123). Chrétien states that Marie furnished him with his "subject matter and meaning" (207) but neglects to identify precisely what that "subject" and "meaning" were. As a result, there has been a lot of debate about it. Some critics (including Kibler, the author of the Introduction in our textbook) take seriously the claim that the romance was left unfinished by Chrétien and completed by one Godefroy de Lagny according to Chrétien's instructions (see the epilogue, p. 294). Such critics argue that Chrétien disliked and disapproved of the story Marie asked him to tell, since they see the Knight of the Cart as a glorification of adultery (whereas Chrétien elsewhere glorifies married love, for instance in Erec and Enide). According to these critics, Chrétien couldn't bring himself to finish the Knight of the Cart due to his distaste for the subject.  He therefore asked Godefroy to complete it, turning his own attention to The Knight with the Lion (Yvain), a work about which he was more enthusiastic since, like Erec and Enide, it glorifies married love rather than an adulterous affair. This explanation is shaky, since 1) close examination shows that Chrétien's Knight of the Cart DOESN'T in fact glorify adultery and 2) there's no proof that Chrétien DIDN'T finish the romance -- "Godefroy" may be a fiction made up by Chrétien to warn potential continuators not to add to or change his poem, since any addition or omission to it would "harm the story" (p. 294). In any event, the reference to "Godefroy" reminds us that in the Middle Ages, poetry was typically conceived of more as an on-going process than a product: one poet's work was frequently changed and added to by future poets. (Chrétien's resistance to this tendency is unusual and very "modern"; recall also his pride in his personal poetic achievement as expressed in the Prologues to Erec and Enide and Cligés, pp. 37 and 123).

Whether or not "Godefroy" really existed, the poem was carefully constructed. The midpoints of Chrétien's poems are very significant and frequently concern the hero's identity. In the Knight of the Cart, Lancelot is named for the first time very near the midpoint of the extant poem (line 3676 of 7134 in Uitti's edition-- the one found in the Charrette Project; line 3660 of 7112 in the edition used by our translator, Kibler; p. 252 in our translation). Lancelot's name is a much commented-on mystery throughout the first half of the romance, where he is simply called "The Knight of the Cart" ("Chevalier de la Charrette"). It is extremely unlikely that his identity would just happen to be revealed at the midpoint of the poem unless "Godefroy" was following Chrétien's instructions closely -- or never existed!
 
 

The Knight of the Cart suggests that Chrétien deliberately imitated the situation found in the Romance of Tristan -- a love triangle involving a King, his Queen, and his best knight -- in order to contradict the claims of some clerics who attacked vernacular romance as a dangerous and immoral form capable of leading its audience astray. Chrétien borrows the love triangle found in the Tristan romances -- the best-sellers of the twelfth century -- but presents it as force for good rather than evil. Because his love for Guenevere leads him to rescue her from the Land of Gorre -- the "Land from which no one returns" (pp. 215, 231, etc.; possibly a reference to the land of the dead) -- Lancelot becomes the savior of Arthur's kingdom, Logres. He liberates the citizens of Logres from prison in Meleagant's kingdom, Gorre, according to the "Custom of Gorre," the law that all the prisoners will be liberated if any one of them is (pp. 231, 233-4, 270, etc.). ( Some critics even see Lancelot as a figure of Christ, citing e.g. the wounds on his hand and feet which he gets crossing the Sword Bridge into the Land of Gorre -- see pp. 245-6.) In any event, Lancelot does save Arthur's wife AND RESTORE HER TO HER HUSBAND, despite his passionate love for her (p. 272). Moreover, their "love affair" is limited to ONE night together during which, according to the laws of Arthur's own Kingdom, Logres, he has EVERY RIGHT TO ENJOY HER. The "Custom of Logres" (pp. 223-4) states that if a knight encounters an unescorted lady, he must respect her utterly. But if she is travelling with a male companion and a knight defeats him in battle, the victor knight has the right to do anything he wants with the lady, without incurring any blame. By this law, Arthur lost his "right" to Guinevere when he sent her into the woods under the escort of Kay, who was defeated by Meleagant. Lancelot "won" her from Meleagant in turn, so he has the legitimate right to enjoy her favors by Arthur's own law. Although they both love each other, they have never slept together before (see Guenevere's lament when she thinks he is dead, p. 259) and they never will again (see Lancelot's sadness upon leaving her after their one night together: "It grieved him that no second tryst had been arranged, but such was impossible" [p. 265]).

In addition to the love triangle of King, Queen and best Knight, note the way Chrétien plays with other elements that are borrowed from the Tristan story. The "Flour on the Floor" and "Ambiguous Oath" episodes in Béroul's Tristan (pp. 63-4; 133-6, 141-2) are playfully combined and reworked by Chrétien in the aftermath of Lancelot and Guinevere's night together (Knight of the Cart pp. 265-8). Unaware that he has cut his fingers on the bars in the window to Guinevere's room, Lancelot bleeds all over her bed. That night, Kay's wounds reopen and he bleeds in his bed as well. The next morning, Meleagant discovers the blood in both beds and accuses Guinevere of having slept with Kay. Lancelot comes to her defense, swearing (ambiguously) that Guinevere has not slept with Kay (but not revealing that she has slept with him!) But Chrétien takes great care to indicate that Lancelot and Guinevere's "affair" is NOT in fact like that of Tristan and Yseult -- it is strictly a one-time occurrence (see pp. 259, 265) rather than an on-going affair involving repeated sneaking around behind the back of the king. "Godefroy"'s closing comment indicates that Chrétien did NOT want anyone to continue the tale of an on-going love affair -- but it happened anyway!
 
 

The fact that Chretien's invention took off in directions he presumably never anticipated (nor would have approved of) is a striking illustration of a key difference between medieval and modern conceptions of literature:  Chrétien could not control what future writers would do with his story once he wrote it and set it before the public.  Because there was no such thing as intellectual property in the Middle Ages, Chrétien had no way of controlling the literary posterity of his poetic creation.  And just as he had borrowed certain elements from the Tristan romances and incorporated them into his romance -- using those elements in different ways, and to serve different meanings, than they had in the works from which he borrowed them -- so too would Chrétien's romance itself be subjected to the medieval process of Translatio.  Poets working after Chrétien were free to borrow and elaborate upon whatever elements of the romance they found most interesting.  And clearly, what they found most interesting -- the element they picked up and ran with -- was the adulterous liaison of King Arthur's queen with his best knight, a model for which they saw in the popular Tristan romances. These poets spun tales of an ongoing adulterous love affair between Lancelot and Guenevere along the Tristan model, with the lovers sneaking around behind the King's back and sleeping together as often as they could. 

What was lost in this translatio were the specific details in Chrétien's romance which suggest that his Lancelot romance was written against the Tristan tradition rather than in imitation of it.  That these subtle details would go unnoticed or be forgotten is not surprising, given that Chrétien's medieval audience heard his work as it was recited aloud (and given that, in all probability, it was not typically recited in its entirety in a single sitting).  The original audience, therefore, could not go back to check details as a modern reader can do.  They remembered the broad lines, not the details, of the plot invented by Chrétien.  And while his intention (as voiced by "Godefroi" in the epilogue) was clearly that nothing should be added to his romance (e.g. no accounts of future liaisons between Lancelot and Guenvere) and that nothing should be left out (such as the details that establish their single night of love as a once-only occurence legitimized by the laws of Arthur's own kingdom), that decidedly modern plea for the respect of his intellectual "property rights" went unheeded.  Indeed, we can be thankful that the poets working after Chrétien ignored his wishes, as their elaboration upon his invention inaugurated a rich new literary tradition:  stories of the rise and fall of the Arthurian court that are centered on the passionate, Tristan-like love triangle linking King Arthur, Queen Guenevere, and Lancelot, Arthur's best knight..
 

Contents of this and linked pages Copyright Debora B. Schwartz, 1999-2015

Return to ENGL 252 homepage

Return to Dr. Schwartz's teaching page

Return to Dr. Schwartz's homepage

Send me mail!