Chapter 5

Of what ambition sought, beguil'd, His crimes thus fruitless! and his child, The beautiful, the rich and young-- Now, in his most triumphant hours! The darling he had nurs'd in flowers! His pride, the prais'd of every tongue! So gentle as she was!--the rein Of influence holding, to restrain His harsher power, without pretence, In graceful, gay beneficence-- An angel deem'd, her only care To comfort and to please! Whose smiling, whose unconscious air, Bespoke a heart at ease-- By her--on whom sweet hopes were built, His cup when fill'd thus rashly spilt! The treasures he had heap'd in vain, Thrown thankless on his hands again! While--father to this being blest, He saw a dagger pierce her breast, In knowledge of his former guilt! And of his projects thus bereft, What had the wretched parent left? Oh! from the wreck of all, he bore A richer, nobler freight ashore! And filial love could well dispense On earth a dearer recompense, If he its real worth had known, Than full success had made his own.

So ardent and so kind of late, Is Marie careless of their fate, That, wrapt in this demeanour cold, Her spirits some enchantments hold? That thus her countenance is clos'd, Where high and lovely thoughts repos'd! Quench'd the pure light that us'd to fly To the smooth cheek and lucid eye! And fled the harmonizing cloud Which could that light benignly shroud, Soothing its radiance to our view, And melting each opposing hue, Till deepening tints and blendings meet Made contrast' self serene and sweet.

Vainly do voices tidings bring, That succours from the former king, Too late for that intent,--are come To take the dead and wounded home; Waiting, impatient, in the bay, Till they can safely bear away,-- Not men that temporize and yield, But heroes stricken in the field; True sons of England, who, unmov'd, Could hear their fears, their interest plead; Led by no lure they disapprov'd, Stooping to no unsanction'd deed! Spirits so finely tun'd, so high, That grovelling influences die Assailing them! The venal mind Can neither fit inducement find To lead their purpose or their fate-- To sway, to probe, or stimulate! What knowledge can they gain of such Whom worldly motives may not touch? Those who, the instant they are known, Each generous mind springs forth to own! Joyful, as if in distant land, Amid mistrust, and hate, and guile, Insidious speech, and lurking wile, They grasp'd a brother's cordial hand! Hearts so embued with fire from heaven, That all their failings are forgiven! Nay, o'er, perchance, whose laurel wreath When tears of pity shine, We softer, fonder sighs bequeath; More dear, though less divine.

Can kind and loyal bosoms bleed, And Marie not bewail the deed? Can England's valiant sons be slain, In whose fair isle so long she dwelt-- To whom she sang, with whom she felt! Can kindred Normans die in vain! Or, banish'd from their native shore, Enjoy their sire's domains no more! Brothers, with whom her mind was nurs'd, Who shar'd her young ideas first!-- And not her tears their doom arraign?

Alas! no stimulus avails! Each former potent influence fails: No longer e'en a sigh can part From that oppress'd and wearied heart.

What broke, at length, the spell? There came The sound of Hugh de Lacy's name! It struck like lightning on her ear-- But did she truly, rightly hear? For terror through her senses ran, E'en as the song of hope began.-- His charge arriv'd on England's coast, Consign'd where they had wish'd it most, Had brave De Lacy join'd the train Which sought the Norman shores again?-- _Then_ liv'd her darling and her pride! What anguish was awaken'd there! A joy close mating with despair-- He liv'd for whom her Eustace died!

Yes! yes! he lives! the sea could spare That Island warrior's infant heir! For whom, when thick-surrounding foes, Nigh spent with toil, had sought repose, Slow stealing forth, with wary feet, From covert of secure retreat,-- A soldier leading on the way To where his dear commander lay,-- Over the field, at dead midnight, By a pale torch's flickering light, Did _Friendship_ wander to behold, Breathing, but senseless, pallid, cold, With many a gash, and many a stain, Him,--whom the morrow sought in vain! _Love_ had not dar'd that form to find, Ungifted with excelling grace! Nor, thus without a glimpse of mind, Acknowledg'd that familiar face! Disfigur'd now with many a trace Of recent agony!--Its power Had not withstood this fatal hour! _Friendship_ firm-nerv'd, resolv'd, mature, With hand more steady, strong, and sore, Can torpid Horror's veil remove, Which palsies all the force of _Love!_

What is _Love's_ office, then? To tend The hero rescued by a friend! All unperceiv'd, with balmy wing To wave away each restless thing That wakes to breathe disturbance round! To temper all in peace profound. With whisper soft and lightsome touch, To aid, assuage,--relieving much Of trouble neither seen nor told-- Of pain, which it alone divines, Which scarcely he who feels defines, Which lynx-like eyes alone behold!

And heavy were De Stafford's sighs, And oft impatient would they rise; Though Friendship, Honour's self was there, Until he found a nurse more fair! A nicer tact, a finer skill, To know and to perform his will-- Until he felt the healing look, The tones that only Marie spoke!

How patient, then, awaiting ease, And suffering pain, he cross'd the seas! How patient, when they reach'd the shore, A long, long tract he journey'd o'er! Though days and months flow'd past, at length, Ere he regain'd his former strength, He yet had courage to sustain, Without a murmur, every pain! "At home once more--with friends so true-- My boy recover'd thus"--he cried, "His mother smiling by my side-- Resigned each lesser ill I view! As bubbles on the Ocean's breast, When gloriously calm, will rise; As shadows from o'er-clouded skies, Or some few angry waves may dance Nor ruffle that serene expanse; So lightly o'er my comfort glides Each adverse feeling--so subsides Each discontent--and leaves me blest!"

NOTES.

NOTE I.

_The Lay of Marie_.--Title.

The words _roman, fabliau_, and _lai_, are so often used indifferently by the old French writers, that it is difficult to lay down any positive rule for discriminating between them. But I believe the word _roman_ particularly applies to such works as were to be supposed strictly historical: such are the romances of Arthur, Charlemagne, the Trojan War, &c. The _fabliaux_ were generally, stories supposed to have been invented for the purpose of illustrating some moral; or real anecdotes, capable of being so applied. The _lai_, according to Le Grand, chiefly differed from the _fabliau_, in being interspersed with musical interludes; but I suspect they were generally translations from the British. The word is said to be derived from _leudus_; but _laoi_ seems to be the general name of a class of Irish metrical compositions, as "Laoi na Seilge" and others, quoted by Mr. Walker (Hist. Mem. of Irish Bards), and it may be doubted whether the word was not formerly common to the Welsh and American dialects.--_Ellis's Specimens_.

The conclusion of Orfeo and Herodiis, in the Auchinlech MS, seems to prove that the lay was set to music:

That lay Orfeo is yhote, Gode is the lay, swete is the note.

In Sir Tristrem also, the Irish harper is expressly said to sing to the harp a merry _lay_.

It is not to be supposed, what we now call metrical romances were always read. On the contrary, several of them bear internal evidence that they were occasionally chaunted to the harp. The Creseide of Chaucer, a long performance, is written expressly to be read, or else sung. It is evident that the minstrels could derive no advantage from these compositions, unless by reciting or singing them; and later poems have been said to be composed to their _tunes_.--_Notes to Sir Tristrem_.

NOTE II.

_Baron De Brehan seem'd to stand_.--p. 6. l. 10.

Brehan--Maison reconnue pour une des plus anciennes. _Vraie race d'ancienne Noblesse de Chevalerie_, qui dans les onxieme et douzieme siecles, tenoit rang parmi les _anciens Barons_, avant la reduction faite en 1451.

NOTE III.

_Where does this idle Minstrel stay?_--p. 5. l. 13.

It appears that female minstrels were not uncommon, as one is mentioned in the Romance of Richard Coeur de Lion, without any remark on the strangeness of the circumstance.

A goose they dight to their dinner In a tavern where they were. King Richard the fire bet; Thomas to the spit him set; Fouk Doyley tempered the wood: Dear abought they that good! When they had drunken well, a fin, A minstralle com theirin, And said, "Gentlemen, wittily, Will ye have any minstrelsy?" Richard bade that she should go; That turned him to mickle woe! The minstralle _took in mind_,[1] And said, "Ye are men unkind; And, if I may, ye shall _for-think_[2] Ye gave me neither meat ne drink. For gentlemen should bede To minstrels that abouten yede, Of their meat, wine, and ale; For _los_[3] rises of minstrale." She was English, and well true, By speech, and sight, and hide, and hue.

_Ellis's Specimens of early English Metrical Romances_.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Was offended.

[2] Repent.

[3] Reputation, glory.

NOTE IV.

_On which the slightest touch alone would kill_.--p. 24. l. 6.

An unfortunate mistake in printing the word _trill_ instead of _kill_, has made this appear ridiculous: it alludes to the old proverb--

You should neither tell friend nor foe Where life-blood go.

Any wound in a place while this pulsation passed through being esteemed fatal.

NOTE V.

_Abrupt his native accents broke_.--p. 50. l. 7.

The Anglo-Norman dynasty, with their martial nobility, down to the reign of Edward III. continued to use, almost exclusively, the Romance or ancient French language; while the Saxon, although spoken chiefly by the vulgar, was gradually adopting, from the rival tongue, those improvements and changes, which fitted it for the use of Chaucer and Gower. In the introduction to the Metrical Romance of _Arthur and Merlin_, written during the minority of Edward V. it appears that the English language was then gaining ground. The author says, he has even seen many gentlemen who could speak no French (though generally used by persons of that rank), while persons of every quality understood English.--_Sir Tristrem_.

NOTE VI.

_The broider'd scarf might wave in vain_.--p. 57. l. 1.

To such as were victorious, prizes were awarded by the judges, and presented by the hands of the ladies; who also honoured the combatants with the wreath or chaplet, silken drapery, and other appropriate ornaments; and by presenting them with ribbands, or scarfs, of chosen colours, called liveries, spoken of in romance, appear to have been the origin of the ribbands which still distinguish knighthood.

NOTE VII.

_Laden with presents and with praise_.--p. 57. l. 9.

In the ancient metrical romance of Sir Tristrem, an Irish earl arrives at the court of Cornwall, in the disguise of a minstrel, and bearing a harp of curious workmanship. He excites the curiosity of King Mark, by refusing to play upon it till he shall grant him a boon. The king having pledged his knighthood to satisfy his request, he sings to the harp a lay, in which he demands the queen as his promised gift--

"Y prove the for fals man, Or Y shall have thi quen."

He accordingly carries her off; but her lover Tristrem, who had been absent at the time,

"chidde with the king, Gifstow glewemen thy quen, Hastow no other thing?"

The usual gifts to minstrels when they sung were often profuse; rich clothes, &c. They were, by rank, classed with knights and heralds, and permitted to wear silk robes, a dress limited to persons who could spend a hundred pounds of land rent.--_Sir Tristrem, edited by Walter Scott, Esq_.

Generosity to minstrels is perpetually recommended in the lays, of fabliaux and romances.

NOTE VIII.

_The peacock crown with all its eyes_.--p. 57. l.17.

According to Menestria and St. Palaye, the troubadours, or poets of Provence, were adorned by the ladies with crowns, interwoven with peacock's feathers; (the eyes of which expressed the universal attention they attracted)--a plumage in great request, and equivalent to the laurel of the academic bards. Differing, perhaps, little in intrinsic value, but superior in beauty and permanence, and more consonant with the decorations of chivalry. They were not restricted to the troubadours; for such a diadem, ornamented with gold, was sent by Pope Urban III. to Henry II. wherewith one of his sons was crowned King of Ireland; as mentioned by Selden, under the title Lord, and by Lord Lyttleton, under the year MCLXXXVI. _A Summary Review of Heraldry, by Thomas Brydson, F.A.S. Edinburgh_.

APPENDIX I

_Extracts from a Dissertation on the Life and Writings of Marie, an Anglo-Norman Poetess of the thirteenth century. By Monsieur La Rue. Archaelogia, vol. 13._

Mary must be regarded as the Sappho of her age; she made so considerable a figure amongst the Anglo Norman _Trouveurs_, that she may very fairly lay claim to the minutest investigation of whatever concerns her memory. She informs us that she was born in France, but has neither mentioned the province that gave her birth, her family name, nor the reasons of her going to England. As she appears, however, to have resided in that country at the commencement of the 13th century, we may reasonably conclude that she was a native of Normandy. Philip Augustus having made himself master of that province in 1204, many Norman families, whether from regard to affinity, from motive of adventure, or from attachment to the English government, went over to Great Britain, and there established themselves. If this opinion be not adopted, it will be impossible to fix upon any other province of France under the dominion of the English, as her birth-place, because her language is neither that of Gascony, nor of Poitou, &c. She appears, however, to have been acquainted with the _Bas-Breton_, or Armoric tongue; whence it may be inferred that she was born in Bretayne. The Duke of that province was then Earl of Richmond in England; many of his subjects were in possession of knight's fees in that honour, and Mary might have belonged to one of these families. She was, besides, extremely well versed in the literature of this province; and we shall have occasion to remark, that she frequently borrowed much from the works of its writers in the composition of her own. If, however, a preference should be given to the first opinion, we must suppose that Mary got her knowledge, both of the Armoric and English languages, in Great Britain. She was, at the same time, equally mistress of the Latin; and from her application to three several languages, we must take it for granted that she possessed a readiness, a capacity, and even a certain rank in life, that afforded time and means to attain them. It should seem that she was solicitous to be personally known only at the time she lived in. Hence we find in her works those general denominations, those vague expressions, which discourage the curious antiquary, or compel him to enter into dry and laborious discussions, the result of which, often turns out to be little more than conjecture. In short, the silence or the modesty of this lady, has contributed, in a great degree, to conceal from us the names of those illustrious persons whose patronage her talents obtained.

The first poems of Mary are a collection of Lays, in French verse; forming various histories and gallant adventures of our valiant knights: and, according to the usage of those times, they are generally remarkable for some singular, and often marvellous catastrophe. These Lays are in the British Museum, among the Harleian MSS. No. 978. They constitute the largest, and, at the same time, most ancient specimen of Anglo-Norman poetry, of this kind, that has been handed down to us. The romances of chivalry, amongst the old Welsh and Armoric Britons, appear to have furnished the subjects of these various Lays; not that the manuscripts of those people were continually before her when she composed them; but, as she herself has told us, depending upon an excellent memory, she sometimes committed them to verse, after hearing them recited only: and, at others, composed her poems from what she had read in the Welsh and Armoric MSS.

Plusurs en ai oi conter, Nes voil laisser ne oublies, &c.[4] Plusurs le me ant conte et dit Et jeo l'ai trove en escrit, &c[5]

She confined herself to these subjects, and the event justifies her choice. To the singularity of such a measure was owing its celebrity. By treating of love and chivalry, she was certain of attuning her lyre to the feelings of the age; and consequently of ensuring success. Upon this account her Lays were extremely well received by the people. Denis Pyramus, an Anglo-Norman poet, and the contemporary of Mary, informs us that they were heard with pleasure in all the castles of the English barons, but that they were particularly relished by the women of her time. He even praises them himself; and this from the mouth of a rival, could not but have been sincere and well deserved, since our equals are always the best judges of our merit.[6] Insomuch as Mary was a foreigner, she expected to be criticised with severity, and therefore applied herself with great care to the due polishing of her works. Besides, she thought, as she says herself, that the chief reward of a poet, consists in perceiving the superiority of his own performance, and its claims to public esteem. Hence the repeated efforts to attain so honourable a distinction, and the constant apprehensions of that chagrin which results from disappointment, and which she has expressed with so much natural simplicity.

Ki de bone mateire traite, Mult li peise si bien n'est faite, &c.[7]

She has dedicated her lays to some king,[8] whom she thus addresses in her Prologue:

En le honur de vos nobles reis, Ki tant estes preux et curteis, M'entremis de Lais assembler. Par rime faire et reconter;

En mon quoer pensoe et diseie, Sire, le vos presentereie. Si vos les plaist a receveir.

Mult me ferez grant joie aveir, A tuz juirs mais en serai lie, &c.[9]

But who is this monarch? 1. We may perceive in it her apprehension of the envy which her success might excite in a strange country: for this reason she could not have written in France. 2. When at a loss for some single syllable, she sometimes intermixes in her verses words that are pure English, when the French word would not have suited the measure.--"Fire et chaundelez alumez." It should seem, therefore, that she wrote for the English, since her lines contain words that essentially belong to their language, and not at all to the _Romance_. 3. She dedicates her lays to a king who understood English, because she takes care to translate into that tongue all the Welsh and Armoric proper names that she was obliged to introduce. Thus in the Lay of _Bisclaveret_, she says, the English translate this name by that of _Garwaf_, (Were-wolf); in that of _Laustic_, that they call it _Nihtgale_ (Nightingale); and in that of _Chevrefeuille, Gotelef_, (Goatleaf) &c. It is certain, then, she composed for a king who understood English. 4. She tells us that she had declined translating Latin histories into _Romance_; because so many others having been thus occupied, her name would have been confounded with the multitude, and her labours unattended with honour. Now this circumstance perfectly corresponds with the reign of Henry III. when such a number of Normans and Anglo-Normans had, for more than half a century, translated from the Latin so many romances of chivalry; and especially those of the Round Table, which we owe to the Kings of England. 5. Fauchet and Pasquier inform us, that Mary lived about the middle of the 13th century, and this would exactly coincide with the reign of that prince.[10] 6. Denis Pyramu[11], an Anglo-Norman poet, speaks of Mary as an author, whose person was as much beloved as her writings, and who therefore must have lived in his own time. Now it is known that this poet wrote under Henry III. and this opinion could only be confuted by maintaining that it was rather a King of France of whom she speaks, which king must have been Louis VIII. or St. Louis his son. But this alteration will not bear the slightest examination; for how could it be necessary to explain Welsh and Armoric words to a French king in the English language? How could the writer permit herself to make use of English words, in many parts of her work, which would most probably be unintelligible to that prince, and most certainly so to the greatest part of his subjects? It is true that she sometimes explains them in Romance, but not always; and when, upon the other hand, she makes a constant practice of translating them into English, she proves to what sort of readers she was principally addressing herself. The list of the lays of Mary is omitted here, as a translation follows.

The smaller poems of Mary are, in general, of much importance, as to the knowledge of ancient chivalry. Their author has described manners with a pencil at once faithful and pleasing. She arrests the attention of her readers by the subjects of her stories, by the interest which she skilfully blends in them, and by the simple and natural language in which she relates them. In spite of her rapid and flowing style, nothing is forgotten in her details--nothing escapes her in her descriptions. With what grace has she depicted the charming deliverer of the unhappy Lanval! Her beauty is equally impressive, engaging, and seductive; an immense crowd follows but to admire her; the while palfrey on which she rides seems proud of his fair burden; the greyhound which follows her, and the falcon which she carries, announce her nobility. How splendid and commanding her appearance; and with what accuracy is the costume of the age she lived in observed! But Mary did not only possess a most refined taste, she had also to boast of a mind of sensibility. The English muse seems to have inspired her; all her subjects are sad and melancholy; she appears to have designed to melt the hearts of her readers, either by the unfortunate situation of her hero, or by some truly afflicting catastrophe. Thus she always speaks to the soul, calls forth all its feelings, and very frequently throws it into the utmost consternation.

Fauchet was unacquainted with the Lays of Mary, for he only mentions her fables[12]. But, what is more astonishing, Monsieur le Grand, who published many of her lays, has not ascribed them all to her. He had probably never met with a complete collection like that in the British Museum; but only some of those that had been separately transcribed; and, in that case, he could not have seen the preface, in which Mary has named herself.