 |
| Walter Map taking down a story of the adventures of the Knights of the Round Table on the quest of the Holy Grail at the dictation of King Arthur, from the Manchester Arthurian Romance, c.1300 |
The elements of the Vulgate Cycle, comprising The History of the Holy Grail, The Story of Merlin, Lancelot, The Quest of the Holy Grail and The
Death of King Arthur, are cleverly interlaced in a number of ways. The last
two are linked, or better, locked together, by the introduction of a putative
author, Walter Map. Here are the passages which outline this linking; first
from the end of The Quest of the Holy
Grail,
When they had dined King Arthur
summoned his clerks who were keeping a record of all the adventures undergone
by the knights of his household. When Bors had related to them the adventures
of the Holy Grail as witnessed by himself, they were written down and the
record kept in the library at Salisbury,
whence Master Walter Map extracted them in order to make his book of the Holy
Grail for love of his lord King Henry, who had the story translated from Latin
into French. And with that the tale falls silent and has no more to say about
the Adventures of the Holy Grail.
Next, from the beginning of The Death of King Arthur:
After Master Walter Map had put
down in writing as much as he thought sufficient about the Adventures of the Holy Grail, his lord King Henry II felt that what
he had done would not be satisfactory unless he told about the rest of the
lives of those he had previously mentioned and the deaths of those whose
prowess he had related in his book. So he began this last part; and when he had
put it together he called it The Death of
King Arthur, because the end of it relates how King Arthur was wounded at
the battle of Salisbury and left Girflet who had long been his companion, and
how no one ever again saw him alive. So Master Walter begins this last part
accordingly.
And finally from the end of The Death of King Arthur:
At this point Master Walter Map
will end the Story of Lancelot,
because he has brought everything to a proper conclusion according to the way
it happened; and he finishes his book here so completely that no one can
afterwards add anything to the story that is not complete falsehood.
This seems very convincing evidence that the author of these
two last works and perhaps of the cycle as a whole was Master Walter Map.
Unfortunately “Map died before the works attributed to him were written”.
 |
| The body of Elaine, the Maid of Astolat, arrives at Camelot |
BLOG QUESTION: Why would the group of anonymous Cistercian
monks responsible for constructing the Vulgate Cycle want to see the work
attributed to Walter Map?
Some stories within the ‘Vulgate cycle’ of the Arthurian Corpus are attributed to the clerk of the court of Henry the I of Champagne, Walter Map. This Clerk cannot be the author of these romances as he died before their composition, thus, a question arises. Why is it that the authors of these romances elected to attribute their work to a different author? The most important reason for this is that the location of authorship in a deceased clerk of the Count of Champagne, is that it lends Authority to the account, both as a source in its own right and because of its connection to a figure of reputation. To claim a discovery as being one’s own, is to allow critique of oneself, but to claim that one is using the works resulting from another’s discovery means that both the reputation of the claimed primary source and the secondary author must be dismissed, before the story can be cast aside. The fact that the figure was dead at the time may even be an attempt to place these words in the mouth of a man, who cannot be questioned being beyond interrogation, owing to his death. The reasons for attributing the works to an author of reputation, who was deceased, are that it lends authority because two reputations are staked to its authenticity and that the author to whom the work is attributed, is respected, but importantly cannot be questioned as to the authenticity of the documents.
ReplyDeleteTom Daley
The authors of the Vulgate Cycle most likely attributed their work to Walter Map in order to give some historical reliability to the world of Arthurian legend. Arthur had a legendary association with Henry II (who is supposed to have launched the discovery of Arthur and Guenevere's graves at Glastonbury). And indeed, Henry II and Walter Map were known to have had a good relationship in Henry's court. Thus, it makes perfect sense how accrediting the work to Walter Map would provide a sense of authenticity and historical accuracy to the work of the anonymous Cistercian monks.
ReplyDeleteThe main aim of these monks in crediting Walter Map with constructing the Vulgate Cycle was to add credibility and legitimacy to these stories. If these romances were written by anyone it would be easy to criticise or dismiss the events in the Vulgate Cycle as myth or legend. However if the author of the Vulgate Cycle was a man in the court of Henry II, King of England, then these romances would be harder to dismiss as complete fiction. So by linking them to Walter Map, the argument that the romances and the events that took place in them gain some degree of historical credibility and strengthen the argument that these stories are historically accurate. A group of anonymous monks do not hold the same authority or reputation as Walter Map so they attempted to attribute the Vulgate Cycle to him in order to gain the credibility/legitimacy that Walter Map could give to these romances.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the claim of credibility, the other main agenda would be to attribute instant popularity by association, and therefore by way of the last stories of the Vulgate Cycle being attributed to Map it is seen as completing the series - another legitimising factor.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that Walter Map was a courtier in the court of Henry II and was sent on a number of diplomatic missions to the Pope and French King indicates that he was a character of renown and influence, who was held in reasonably high esteem by his contemporaries. Therefore, the works attributed to him are automatically lent an air of authenticity and credibility that a group of anonymous monks could simply not match. The Vulgate Cycle is a piece that contains a number of important messages that its authors are eager to convey to their audience, but they are faced with the difficulty of convincing their audience that the facts are true, and therefore relevant. By attributing the work to Map, the authors are able to increase the historical credibility of the story, while also connecting it in the minds of the audience with the respected figure of Henry II.
ReplyDeleteBut what did Walter Map actually write? historia? or fabula? Could the opposite be intended here? Attaching the Vulgate Cycle to Map - a collector of folk tales - might, ironically, delegitimise the historical and emphasise the mythological?
ReplyDeleteI wanted to your question ages ago Steve, so here we go!
ReplyDeleteWalter Map was known for writing gossip, folk tales and satirical pieces about life in Henry's Court. Yet, despite the fact that he obviously altered and exaggerated the truth in his pseudo-histories of life in the Court, Walter innocently claimed that he wrote the 'sayings and doings' of life at the Court.
Some believe that Walter's obvious lack of historical accuracy seems to have been overshadowed by his simple claim to historical veracity. Indeed, despite the fact that he is falsely claimed to the author of the Vulgate Cycle, the stories are written in a way that are not to be considered exaggerated or story like, but rather as true recounts of history.
I believe that it probably was the intentions of the monks to legitimize the historical accuracy of the Vulgate Cycle by 'casting' Map as the story teller of a history which is correct in every way. However, I think that their intention ultimately results in the reverse. Indeed, by attributing their work to Walter Map, the monks undermined the very purpose of citing someone as the guarantor of the Vulgate Cycle's value.