CHRÉTIEN AND HIS TIMES

Chrétien de Troyes wrote during a period of time often referred to as a renaissance, and the geographic region within which this event occurred corresponds to the area in which Chrétien undoubtedly worked.[1]  The combination of these two facts naturally gives rise to the idea that Chrétien, whether he was conscious or not of his participation in a literary rebirth or was simply a writer working under its influence without actually realizing it, would have in either case been inspired by this movement.  Such a conclusion seems entirely plausible, and even more so given that scholarly, theological and literary work undertaken in the North of France during the 12th Century bear witness to a renewed interest in the work of Greek and Roman writers.  Even Chrétien claims to have written works based on Ovid.[2]  A return to classical sources and forms is, of course, the identifying characteristic par excellence of a renaissance, especially if one takes into account the traditional connotation of the word.[3]  Such a loose and over generalized usage of the term ‘renaissance’ is controversial, however, if for no other reason than that the vague definition of the word itself is problematical.  If Chrétien was the product of a renaissance, can his romances then be reduced to simple representations of antique Celtic or Roman traditions?  Chrétien was certainly fascinated by these traditions and incorporated them into his writing, but to overemphasize their influence is to deafen the voice of a unique and creative author with a gift for originality, a vision that extended from Ireland to Rome and the Orient, and who had a strong conceptual grasp of many of the key principles of his epoch, including formative and influential definitions of those chivalric and courtly virtues that play such an important role in his writings.  If Chrétien participated in a renaissance, it will be necessary to define more clearly exactly what this means. 

Other modern thinkers, recognizing the inadequacy of the traditional definition of the word ‘renaissance,’ have sought to free it from its conceptual rigidity.  M-D Chenu, for example, argued the following:

Le fait « renaissance » ne se réduit pas à une imitation passionnée des chefs-d’œuvre littéraires, esthétiques, scientifiques, philosophiques, de l’antiquité gréco-romaine, imitation qui, à la limite, s’accomplirait dans une restitution archéologique.  Il comporte à la lettre, avec toute la relativité des temps, des lieux et des personnes, une re-naissance, une existence nouvelle, une initiative d’autant plus irréductible à son alimentation antique qu’il s’agit d’une initiative de l’esprit.  L’imitation est alors au service de l’invention, là même ou elle la nourrit.  Le sens des démarches de ce réveil est retourné, et donc aussi, chez l’historien, de la qualification des contextes, géographiques, économiques, sociaux, politiques, religieux, qui ne sont plus seulement les conditions extérieures d’une restauration…mais les engagements intérieurs d’une découverte jusque-là inimaginée.[4]

In the same way, one can attribute the genius and influence of Chrétien to a confluence of literary and historical factors transformed by him, through his own capacities and innate creativity, into new forms expressing his own thought and reasoning.  Chrétien was limited neither by the antique sources he had available to him or the various socio-political factors operative at the time in which he lived; instead, this variegated dynamic informed and fed his creativity.[5]  Further, as Chrétien drew upon and evaluated these sources and historical factors through conscious, intellectual exercise and analysis, he gradually clarified his own ideas and expressed them in his own distinct voice.  This voice and these ideas developed and were rendered ever more lucid as a result of the process of reflection to which Chrétien necessarily submitted himself while composing his series of romances.

It would be inconceivable to consider Chrétien as the simple product of a renaissance, a plagiarist of old ideas drawn from the matters of Britain and Rome.  It would be just as implausible to judge that each of his works represents his fully developed voice and ideas.  Chrétien’s first task was, without doubt, to please his patrons and cultivate a readership, but through the process of writing, his style and thought undoubtedly became more precise.  Once he had established himself as an accomplished writer, once the creation of several romances had progressively permitted him to acquire valuable experience, Chrétien was able to reveal his guiding principles and esthetic competencies with greater art and clarity.

Seen from this perspective, Chrétien’s romances bear witness to his gradual maturation.  This should not be understood to imply that each individual work is somehow of greater worth than the one preceding it, but there do exist valid reasons that lead to the conclusion that in the romance Le Conte du Graal, Chrétien truly begins to explore and express in a more detailed manner the themes representing his most personal and profound thoughts, for this composition articulates a veritable and unique philosophy of Christian chivalry.  What justifies this conclusion?  A few brief reasons follow.

It is Chrétien’s longest romance.  In its unfinished state, this work extends to some 9,000 lines, indicating that Chrétien put greater effort into the composition of his chef d’œuvre and that he undoubtedly develops his themes well beyond his sources, be they Breton or otherwise.

The story is more complex.  For the first time in one of Chrétien’s works, two independent stories are intertwined so that they correspond at precise points and thereby highlight important themes in the narrative.  Chrétien went beyond the simple narration of events that served to accentuate useful principles and added an additional layer of allegorical representation, as he is careful to indicate to the reader in the prologue, where the major theme of the work is introduced: the superiority of charity to vainglory.  This superiority is illustrated first in direct fashion through the comparison of Philip of Flanders to Alexander, and in greater length and depth through an implied comparison of the character and actions of Perceval to those of Gauvain.

In this last of romances attributed to Chrétien, the principles and qualities praised in prior novels are now subjugated to charity.  All of the most important attributes praised in Chrétien’s other romances – love, prowess and generosity, the great courtly and chivalric virtues – are subordinated in Le Conte du Graal to a principle of supreme importance that is decidedly not found in the rest of his opus: charity, or the love of God and neighbor.  In the story of Perceval’s development, the presence of the former principles and the addition of the latter indicate that Chrétien’s ideas have undergone a conscious reevaluation in his mind.  It is striking that the generosity of Alexander, for example, so much praised in Cligés, is now of less value than the charity of Philip.[6]

Chrétien de Troyes, then, was an author of creative genius and not simply the product of a renaissance; rather, he was an author who relied on ancient sources and current factors to whatever extent best suited his needs, drawing from them only what was necessary in order to create new stories that consisted of narratives serving to illustrate first of all chivalric and courtly virtues, and which finally evolved into the demonstration of a principle with primacy over all the aforementioned qualities, or charity.  For this reason, the romance Perceval holds a privileged place among the writings of Chrétien, for it is in this work that one encounters the apex of Chrétien’s thought, as well as his most original story.  If nothing else, these reasons amply justify a detailed analysis of this work.

How should such an analysis be undertaken?  Is it necessary to deconstruct an ancient book from a more modern point of view that criticizes and scrutinizes in accordance with the academic norms of a society more that one thousand years older than that of Chrétien?  Such a procedure may produce an impressive scholarly effect, but it is an ineffective methodology in the hands of anyone desiring to understand a medieval author and obtain as pure a grasp as conditions permit of his or her message, the milieu that it targets, and the means of conveying that message.[7]  Indeed, it seems preferable instead to begin the examination of Le Conte du Graal where Chrétien himself began: with the prologue.  While brief, a precise understanding of the author’s introductory comments is of the utmost importance in comprehending the narrative that follows, and critics have not assigned enough importance to this task. 

The analysis will rely upon an understanding of allegory and its usage in the Twelfth Century, since Chrétien subtly uses the prologue to guide the reader, in advance, to an understanding of the allegorical signification of the two principal characters in the story, Perceval and Gauvain, and the events in which they participate.  This, of course, will require the laying of some basic groundwork by which will be shown the adequacy and appropriateness of an allegorical interpretation of Le Conte du Graal.  It will be done by first analyzing current thought concerning the role of the prologue, then by carefully demonstrating the strengths and inadequacies of these critiques, and finally, by proceeding to form a precise definition of religious allegory as it exists in Chrétien’s poem.  The message Chrétien wished to convey in this work will be identifiable with the allegorical signification of the characters and events of the narrative.   

In addition, proof must be provided to bolster the contention that Chrétien de Troyes intended for Le Conte du Graal to differ substantially from his other works, for it must be demonstrated that Chrétien was himself responsible for the religious coloration of his composition.  This will be accomplished through a comparison of the prologues Chrétien wrote to accompany his various romances.  Lastly, all conclusions will be verified against a methodology proposed in order to help critics avoid the pitfalls that have hindered previous interpretations, thereby illustrating how an understanding of the seamless connection between the prologue and the narrative places the reader firmly on the path to comprehending Perceval, Gauvain, and their adventures as Chrétien intended that they be understood.

[1] Cf. Charles Homer Haskins.  The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979.

[2] Cf. Cligès, v. 2-3.  All citations from Chrétien de Troyes.  Cligès.  Ed. A. Micha.  Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion, 1957.

[3] For an explanation of perhaps the most influential and enduring expression of the concept of ‘renaissance,’ the reader is referred to Jakob Burckhardt.  The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy: An Essay.  Trans. S.G.C. Middlemore.  London: Phaidon, 1950.  Burckhardt’s book was first published in the original German in 1860, and while modern scholarship has largely closed the debate on his ideas, they still persist in generalized definitions and widely held conceptions of the Renaissance.  For criticism of Burckhardt, see Wallace Ferguson.  The Renaissance in Historical Thought: Five Centuries of Interpretation.  Brooklyn: AMS Press, 1982.

[4] Marie-Dominique Chenu.  La Théologie au Douzième Siècle.  Paris: Vrin, 1976, p. 20.

[5] As a matter of method, J.-J. Vincensini concurs.  He criticizes the numerous attempts that have been made to connect characters in Chrétien’s stories with personages appearing in Celtic and Greco-Roman works, since those making these connections often work under the assumption that the role of characters in Chrétien’s stories can be meaningfully equated with the roles played by those upon which Chrétien has supposedly based them: “La compilation et l’identification servent d’explication.  Or non seulement cette recherche déçoit puisqu’elle ne fournit pas les résultats attendus, mais, plus profondément, rien ne dit que le sens des narrations et des protagonistes étudiés soit, comme elle le prétend, équivalent à leur origine et à leur génèse.”  J.-J. Vincensini.  “Impatience et impotence: l’Etrangeté des Rois du Château du Graal dans le Conte du Graal.”  Romania 116 (1998), p. 119.

[6] Cligès, v. 188-213.

[7] We are here suggesting that any modern analysis of the writings of another period must be anchored in a comprehension of its object as it existed in its social and chronological surroundings and that it is only after this comprehension is reached to the greatest extent permitted by extant historical sources that modern methods of criticism may become useful.  Though it may maintain a certain limited validity, modern analysis of ancient works is, without this foundation, only a dry, academic exercise.