The Legend of Sir Lancelot du Lac

e of the Welsh origin of the Arthurian stories, derived the name from the French l'ancelot, a youth or servant, which he held to be a translation of the Welsh Melwas, or Maelwas. This solution was

he characters,' says Professor Rhys, 'were originally the same, though their respective developments eventually differed very widely.' I doubt if this solution ever found any adherents except its author: it is sufficient to remark that the derivation of Peredur, on which it rests, is by no means unive

a name of Germanic origin for one of Breton form strange to the ears of their French audiences, e.g. it might be a diminutive form of Lanzo. This is also the conclusio

ette, recently published,[14] Professor Foerste

to the original 'stoff' of the cycle; the entire silence of Welsh literature, and the practical silence of English vernacular romances,[15] seem to show that he formed no part of the insular Ar

ecial importance, yet if I mistake not this is just the significant point of the Lancelot story, and that which from the very outset differentiates it from the legends connected with Peredur or Maelwas. From the moment of his appearance in

nal evidence it represented an early and immature version of the Lancelot legend. The story as related in the Lanzelet is as follows: Lanzelet was son to King Pant of Genew?s and his wife Clarine. By a revolt of his people Pant was driven from his kingdom with his wife and child. In his flight he came to a stream, and there, overcome by his wounds, sank down and died. The queen had laid her child under a tree while she tended her husband, and before she could reach it again a water-fairy (mer-feine) came in a cloud of mist and carried off the infant. The fairy was a queen, ruling over ten thousand maidens, w

not know how to ride, so let the bridle hang loose and held on by the saddle-bow. In this fashion he rode till he met a knight, Johfrit de Liez, who rebuked him for his

ds the maiden. One day he rode forth seeking adventures, and found a road which led him to the castle of Limors. The folk attacked, and would have slain him, but for the intervention of Ade, niece to the lord of the castle. Lanzelet is thrown into prison, and only escapes by fighting single-

terminated by the arrival of a messenger with tidings of a tournament between King Lot of Johen?s and Gurnemanz, den fürsten w?s. Lanzelet betakes himself hither, wearing each day a different s

e land of Mab?z adjoins that of Iweret of Beforet, who is in the habit of raiding his neighbour's territory. Mab?z, who is by nature a coward, determines that Lanzelet, whose fame is well known to him, shall be his champion. He has him carried by his men without the walls of the castle, when his natural courage at once returns. He rides to a fountain, beside which hangs a brazen cymbal on which he must strike three times with a hammer to

son Mab?z from his too powerful enemy. Lanzelet decides to seek Gawain, whom he now knows to be his kinsman. On their way they meet a squire who informs them that the King Valer?n (or Faler?n, the spelling varies), has appeared at Arthur's court

eventive character, i.e. he saves her from the possibility of abdu

allenged by one hundred knights, whom he successively overthrows, and weds the queen (Ulrich says quaintly, 'ich enweiz ob erz ungerne tet, wan diu k?nig?n was ein sch?ne maget, 5530-1). Ibl?s rema

et?), Erec, and Tristan go in search of him, and, by means of a ruse,

beleten Se), who will enable them to penetrate Valer?n's stronghold. Erec announces that neither he nor Gawain should take part in the expedition as they have respectively slain Malduc's father and brother. Arthur therefore sets forth accompanied by Karjet (Gaheriet), Tristan and Lanzelet (this is the order), and are later joined by Dodine le Sauvage. By the good of

he plays practically no part in the story, all he does is to accompany the king. The rescuer is Malduc; recourse to him is suggested by Tristan and made possible by th

rescued by one hundred of Arthur's knights, headed by Lanzelet and aided by a gian

menting. Lanzelet resolves to test the adventure, rides to the forest, finds the dragon, and gives the desired kiss. The monster bathes in a stream at hand, and becomes a fair maiden, Elidia, daughter to the king of Thile; she has been tr

r did. He and Ibl?s betake themselves to the heritage of the latter, Beforet, where they receive Arthur and Guinevere with great pomp. The poem conclude

tself; (b) those which affect its relation to the other Lancelot romances. For the first it is obvious that we are dealing with a poem of very loose construction; the various parts do not harmonise with each other, and no attempt has been made to make them do so. Thus we have no fewer than four love affairs attributed to Lanzelet, and in three out of the four he weds the lady; yet the

ated from those occurring elsewhere, strung together more or less cleverly on the thread of a hero's individuality. The incidents are all to be found in other romances, and as a rule none of them have any suggestion of Celt

some of them of distinctly antique and mythic character: the literary style is poor and the whole is less a romance, properly speaking, than the material out of wh

he Fier Baiser, now found with other adventures, probably originally did so.[24] Certain of the episodes, too, possess a distinctly archaic character, e.g. the description of the fairy's kingdom as a isle of women where no man penetrates, a conception much older than the Fata Morgana of the prose Lancelot; and t

ently probable. Professor Foerster feels this difficulty, and suggests a solution, which a little more consideration would have shown him to be untenable. On page xlvi. of his introduction to the Karrenritter, he says, 'wenn wirklich Kristian zuerst den Ehebruch eingeführt hat, so ist doch die Annahme zul?ssig dass Verehrer Arturs und seiner Frau diese neue ehrenrührische Erfindung zwar gekannt, aber mit Entrüstung abgewiesen haben, um ja nicht des idealen K?nigs Ehrenschild zu beschmutzen.' But a few pages further on the writer h

literary shape. When the scattered Lancelot stories did this, it was under the influence of a motif foreign to the original legend, his love for Guinevere. How that came to be introduced into the legend is a matter for separate consideration, but

at one time his father is a tyrant, 'chassé' by his own people; again he is a noble king, the victim of treachery and a foreign foe. Sometimes Lancelot's mother lives to see him restored to his kingdom; sometimes she dies while he is yet in the care of the fairy, and never sees her son again. He has two cousins on the father's side, Bohort and Lionel, and a bastard half-brother Hector; he has no relations on his father's side, but is cousin to Gawain through his mother. He is Guinevere's lover; he is not Guinevere's love

n the Lanzelet the motive of the theft is clear, the fairy desires a champion and protector for her cowardly son;

nne, but as the lai gained popularity, and it became necessary to supply details as to her kingdom, etc., it would be supplemented from other legendary sources. Ulrich's own description, the land of ten thousand maidens where no man penetrates, is manifestly the Meide-land which in Diu Kr?ne Gawain visits, and which is universally admitted to be a remembrance of the 'Isle o

z vil reht

z di

t an i

in dem sê.'-

, redacted by some one familiar with the real character of the kingdom, may have represented him as the queen's lover. It is also not impossible, were this the case, that the story of the imprisonment of Guinevere in the other

ved of more as a mortal versed in enchantment than as a fairy proper. In the Suite de Merlin she is identified with the Demoiselle Chaceresse, daughter of the King of Northumberland;[28] and in both these romances, the Lancelot and the Merlin Suite

ital; such a tale would be assured of welcome, and practically independent of musical aid. But in the case of Lancelot we have no such prehistoric tradition, no striking parallels in early legends. Previously unknown, he leaps into popularity, as it were, at a bound. Even the most ardent adherent of Chrétien de Troyes cannot appeal to the popularity of that writer to help us with a solution, for his Lancelot poem, the Charrette, is but seldom referred to in contemporary literature. Much of Lancelot's later popularity is doubtless due to his r?le as the queen's lover; but how account for the initial popularity which caused him to be chosen for that r?le? I can only explain the phenomenon of a knight, whose very name is unknown before the middle of the twelfth century, becoming before the end of that century the leading hero of a cycle to which he was originally a stranger, by supposing that there was some special charm in the lai originally connected with him, by means of which his story took hold of the public f

close one. Take for instance the passage describing the hero's departure from his magic home for the world of men, a passage extending over two hundred lines (ll. 400-666). He does not know how to sit his horse, how to hold the bridle,[

r's court has been undertaken between King Lot von Johenis and Gu

n der v

ber jen

da her dr?.'

d of the tourney before Kanvoleis

ytóuwe

emanz de

ierten ?f

diu vesp

e, dort wol dr

ot in Chrétien; Iwan de Nonel, l. 2935 (Parzival, v. 312); Ibl?s, l. 4060 (Parzival, xiii. 895). Ulrich's Ibl?s is connected with the cloister jaemerlichen urbor, Wolfram's with Terra de Labur; Kailet, l. 6032 (Parzival, ii. 737); Maur?n, whose name in each case is similarly qualified, mit den li

er als ei

'so lichtes

der wapen

n kleine.'-Parziva

s other points of contact with Wolfram's poem in details where he differs notably from Chrétien. It is not probable that Wolfram, who never alludes to any adventures related in the Lanzelet, and to all appearance knows nothing of the hero save the Charrette adventure, should have borrowed from two such widely different versions of his story. The fact that where Lancelot appears to have borrowed from the Perceval legend, the borrowed matter is marked by characteristics special to one version of the story is, to say the lea

Ulrich than on that of Wolfram, who by his own confession could not read or write, and must have become orally familiar with his source. But it is quite clear that a critical comparison of the two works is urgently needed, both in the interests of Arthurian tradition and of German literature. The popular impression, i.e. that Wolfram merely borrowed a few names from the Lanzelet, will not stand the test of investiga