Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 10.djvu/171

 vs.x.Aoo.30,1902,] NOTES AND QUERIES.

163

In the contree of Constantyne no kynde has he

levede Withowttyn kydd castells enclosid wyth walles.

The duchez of Bretayne todaye has he takyn Beside Reynes as scho rade witk hire ryche knyghttes.

Scho was flour of all Fraunce or of fyfe rewmes And one of the fayreste that fourmede was evere, The gentilleste jo well ajuggede with lordes Fro Geen unto Geron by Jhesu of heyen ! Scho was thy wyfes cosyn, knowe it if the lykez, Comen of the rycheste that rengnez in erthe.

' M. A.,' 11. 84S-9, 852-3, 860-5.

That these are poetical allusions to the war of Brittany is inferred because of the pointed intrusions upon the base-narrative of Geoffrey. Brittany was overrun by Charles of Blois, supported by the French king ; in 1342 he was besieging its chief fortresses ; the duchess was Jeanne de Montfort, wife of Jean de Montfort, who had done homage to Ed- ward III. for Brittany, and whose cause Edward had espoused ; Ilennes was the capital of Brittany, and Montfort itself, the name-giving seat of the ducal family, was, as may be seen from modern maps, quite close to Ilennes. As regards the picture of the qualities of the duchess, it is enough to recall the words of Jehan le Bel, given wider vogue by Froissart, declaring that she had the heart of a lion("avoit cuer de lyon "), and was a woman of grand courage ('Jehan le Bel,' ed. Polain, i. 248).

One element only of the description re- mains unnoticed. Geoffrey calls her Helen, never dubs her duchess, and mentions no kinship to Arthur ; our poet suppresses the Christian name, and styles herduchess and the cousin of Arthur's wife. Historically, Jeanne de Flandre, wife of Jean de Montfort, Cornte de Montfort and Duke of Brittany, was a daughter of Count Louis I. of Flanders. Pedigrees are troublesome things, and I do not profess them; but this is certain that whether Jeanne de Montfort was or was not a cousin of Queen Philippa of Hainault, she was styled in 1344 by Edward III. " dilecta consanguinea nostra Ducissa Britannie " (Rymer's 'Foxiera,' 10 July, 1344). Perhaps the combination of these things will suffice to let me start to other elements of my argu- ment with an initial acceptance of pro- bability and reason for my case. If Pyrrho is not yet dead, peradventure he will favour me with his rival method of explaining why the poet chose to vary in these particular

Particulars, both positive and negative, from is original.

We leave the episode of the giant behind us ; the poet deals with it much in the manner

of Geoffrey's story. We pass beyond the victorious march of Arthur to the scene of battle with the emperor ; we see the Romans vanquished, and then we reach the episode of Metz, which is entirely unexplained by anything in Geoffrey. Mrs. Banks has very correctly said, in her notes to ' Morte Arthure,' 1. 2396, that from the beginning of the Metz episode "to the landing in Britain the poet departs entirely from the chronicles." Re- course to Jeanne de Montfort will, however, give us very considerable help towards the solution of the problem of poetic source. First note of all struck in describing the events that culminate at Metz is a dispute over the succession to a lordship or dukedom. Arthur declares that he will arbitrate and judge, and dispose of "that ducherye" at his will, settling accounts at the same time very sternly with a rebellious duke :

That es Lorayne the leje I kepe noghte to layne, The lordchipe es lovely as ledes me telles. I will that ducherye devyse and dele as me lykes And seyn dresse with the duke if destyny suffre : The renke rebell has bene unto my rownde table Redy aye with Romaynes and ryotte my landes. We sail rekken full rathe, if reson so happen, Who has ryghte to that rente by ryche Gode of heven! 'M. A.,' 11. 2398-405.

Processes of explanation are usually the sounder the simpler,fhey are; ReadJLorayne as a poetic equivalent of Brittany (the successsion to which was left debatable on the death of Duke Jean III. in 1341), and the interpretation is historically perfect. It gives us the disputed dukedom claimed by Jean de Montfort, uncle of Duke Jean III., and by Charles of Blois, husband of theduke's niece. Montfort is the vassal and the ally, and is under the wing of Edward III., who supported his claim to the duchy. Charles of Blois has the duchy awarded to him by the "Romaynes," in the person of Philip de Valois, King of France. Fate was on the side of the Mont- fort claim backed by the Round Table of Edward III., who, indeed, "dressed with the [rival] duke "'to very effective purpose. The story is told in all the French histories ; but perhaps a single reference may be made to the historical poem 'C'est le Libvre du Bon Jehan, Due de Bretaigne,' edited as an afterpiece to Cuvelier's ' Chronique de Bertrand du Guesclin,' by E. Charriere, in 1839.

In the poem of ' Morte Arthure,' after many adventures intervening, the advance of Arthur and his knights toward Metz accomplishes its aim. There has been battle with varying fortune. On the one hand the duke has been taken (3023) ; on Arthur's side, as a messenger tells him,