Book IV. _Mort Artur_, 13,054 ll. The united three books thus

comprising a total of over 87,000 lines.

It will be seen from the above brief summary that the =D. L.= presents many features of great interest for the student of the Arthurian story, but so far, with the exception of the studies published by M. Gaston Paris, to which I have just referred, it does not appear to have attracted much attention from scholars. It is especially to be regretted that Dr. Sommer did not use it for the purpose of his 'Malory' collation; had he done so, he would certainly have come, on many points, to a very different conclusion from that at which he ultimately arrived.

In the following comparison I shall confine my remarks chiefly to such decided variants as cannot possibly be ascribed to the mistakes or emendations of copyists; nor shall I include those minor verbal differences which, however important for a critical edition of the text, do not in themselves definitely prove a divergence of sources. The point I desire to prove is that the versions =D. L.= and =1533= represent a text radically different from that consulted by Dr. Sommer; and that, in conjunction with Malory, they may be held to represent a family of MSS. hitherto unregarded, or unsuspected.

As readers of Malory are aware, he gives no account of the birth or early adventures of Lancelot; the section dealing with that hero begins with Book VI., and takes up his adventures at a point well advanced in what, following M. Paulin Paris, I have called the _Agravain_ section (l. 13,351 in =D. L.=). That Malory had before him any version of the earlier section of the _Lancelot_ I very much doubt. It must be apparent to any careful reader that, in his view, the Lady of the Lake is connected rather with Arthur than with Lancelot; whenever she intervenes in the story it is to aid the former, rather than the latter. I incline to the belief that Malory's MS. only began at an advanced point of the story, and that he knew little, or nothing, of what had preceded it.

At the commencement of the Terriquen (=D. L.= gives the name as Tarquijn) adventure, =D. L.=, =1533=, and =M.= all represent Lancelot and Lionel as sleeping under the shadow of a '_pomier_' instead of a _perron_ as in =S.=[164]

When Hector comes to the fountain he finds =D. L.= LX. shields and helmets, and XL. swords (the first letters have evidently been transposed and should read XL.). =1533.= Forty-five helmets, forty-five swords, and 'more than' forty-five shields. =S.= Forty swords, forty-five shields, and five spears: helmets are not mentioned. Here =S.= appears to have a confused version of the two preceding accounts.

In the account of the queens who carry off Lancelot =D. L.= and =1533= agree with =S.= in naming the ladies (the queen in =D. L.= is of Foreestan, _not_ Sorestan); otherwise the accounts seem to vary. =D. L.= and =1533= do not say, as does =S.=, that the first-named is on her way to Norgales through 'Sorelois,' but that her land 'borders on' these kingdoms. It is not the _three_ but only the two last-named, Morgain le Fay and Sibile (Cybele) l'enchanteresse, who are learned in enchantments; and neither =D. L.= nor =1533= give any indication of their being the 'queen's ladies' as =S.= represents; they are simply travelling with her.[165]

The lands of the heiress of Rochedon were not seized by the _King_ of Sorestan, as =S.= states, but by the _queen_ who had been left her guardian (=D. L.= and =1533=). This is much more in accordance with the rest of the story. Otherwise these three versions agree against =M.=

Later on both =D. L.= and =1533= agree in speaking of Galehodyn as the _neveu_, not the _filz_ of Gallehault, as in =S.= They are of course right.

In the account of the tournament there are a number of small variants. Judging from =S.=, who gives a very condensed summary, =D. L.= and =1533= are again more correct in details.

On p. 186 of =S.= the summary departs widely from =D. L.= and =1533=. Thus, according to =S.=, Lancelot, seeking for Hector and Lionel, has met with Bohort, Yvain, and four other knights at the 'Chastel du Trespas.' Lancelot proposes that each of the _six_ knights (_sic_) (there were of course seven) shall each ride forth separately and return to the castle 'a la feste de toussainz.' In =D. L.= and =1533= Lancelot has started _accompanied_ by Bohort, Baudemagus, and Gaheret. _En route_ they meet Mordred, naked, and being thrashed with thorns by 'Mathoeus die felle' (Marchant li felon), rescue him, and ride to Chastel du Trespas, where Yvain is imprisoned, whom they also free. It is Yvain, not Lancelot, who suggests the separation and quest.

Again, in the fight between Lancelot and 'Terriquen,' both =D. L.= and =1533= agree against =S.= and =M.= in failing to mention Gaheret's (they have the correct spelling) horse, and saying that Lancelot rides off on his own. Whereas, later on, =S.= and =1533= agree in giving 'three varlets and three sommiers' and =D. L.= and =M.= agree in a 'foster' with four horses.

In the question of the final disposal of the castle =D. L.= and =1533= again fall into line against =S.= The latter says that the knights exchange Terriquen's castle for horses, though not very good ones. I suspect this of being a hasty summary which does not represent the text; =D. L.= and =1533= are so much more detailed. =D. L.= says that 'Die grave van den _Pale_ (later on _Parke_, which is I think the correct reading) is rejoiced at the event as his '_neve_' was one of the prisoners. He gives all Arthur's knights very good horses. That he receives the castle is not told, though he afterwards appears as the owner. =1533= says that 'Keux[166] du Parc' has a 'brother' prisoner: delighted at his safety he gives them all horses, very good to Arthur's knights, not so good to the others. Out of gratitude they offer him the castle. If =S.= correctly represents the text of 1513, it is clear, I think, that =1533= gives the original reading, which has been condensed, but rightly understood, by =D. L.=, and confused in =S.=

In the account of the adventures at the castle =D. L.=, agreeing in the main with =S.= and =1533=, as against =M.=, yet in one point falls into line with this latter against the other two. Both =S.= and =1533= agree in saying that Lancelot ties his horse to a _tree_, =M.= says 'to a ringe on the walle'; in =D. L.= he ties his horse, when he comes to the '_meester torre, vor die porte al te hant_,' which seems to imply =M.='s 'ringe.'[167]

I now come to a most extraordinary oversight on the part of Dr. Sommer. On p. 191 and again on p. 274 of his _Sources of Malory_ he commits himself to the statement that =M.= is the only known source for certain adventures of Lancelot, his rescue of Kay, his riding off in Kay's armour, etc., and proceeds from this supposed peculiarity to postulate a lost '_Suite de Lancelot_,' of which this is a precious fragment. Now, not only are these adventures recorded both in =D. L.= and =1533=, but they are found in the summary given by M. Paulin Paris on p. 323 of vol. v. of the _Romans de la Table Ronde_.[168]

The adventure with Kay does not, in the original, occur at this point, but follows after Lancelot's long imprisonment by Morgain; his freeing Lionel from the dungeon of the King of Estrangeloet; winning the hill guarded by Bohort; and discovering the tomb of his grandfather;--a sequence of incident in which =D. L.= and =1533= agree perfectly.

Of the following adventures contained in Book VI. =S.= consequently gives no summary. Throughout =M.= very closely agrees with =D. L.= and =1533=, but he omits to state, as do both these versions, that Lancelot's arraying himself in Kay's armour was due to the dim light of early morning. He believed himself to be donning his own, and was unaware of the error till his host detected it, when he refused to change, foreseeing the amusing complications which would result. This, having no bearing on the story, which is concerned with the _fact_, not with the motive, was probably omitted by =M.= Another slight variation in =M.='s version is that he gives three knights and three pavilions, whereas the other two agree in giving two knights and four pavilions. Nor are the knights named as in =M.=, but this is most probably due to the English writer, who hardly ever fails to name his characters.

The four knights of the Round Table are the same in all three cases, and =M.= and =D. L.= agree in the order, while =1533= makes Yvain the last to joust. The two first are probably correct, as Gawain, being the most noted of the four, would probably be the last to try his fate. Both =D. L.= and =1533= agree in a feature omitted by =M.=, that Mordred was originally in the company of these four, but being severely wounded on a previous occasion cannot joust (=D. L.=); has been left at a castle that morning (=1533=). =M.= also omits to say that Segramore reveals their names to Lancelot, who, overcome with grief at having so ill-treated his friends, throws away his shield, and rides off weeping. This causes the four knights to suspect his identity, and they take the shield and carry it with them to court. I suspect that this was in =M.='s original, as he makes Gawain say 'whan we come to the courte than (s)hal we wete,' which is the reason they give in the other versions for taking the shield; accordingly, they hang it on a pillar in the middle of the hall until it is recognised.

Immediately after this adventure =D. L.= and =1533= record one of which =M.= gives no hint, but which is important in view of a remark made by Dr. Sommer on p. 204 of his study. Lancelot, having overthrown these four knights, comes to two pavilions, in one of which is the lady who cured him from his illness at the Poisoned Spring;[169] as they talk a party of knights and ladies ride up, with them a fair child three years old (=D. L.=); two years old (=1533=). This is Bohort's son, Hélie le Blank, whom Lancelot is delighted to see. Now, Dr. Sommer tells us that, saving in the record of this infant's birth, the allusion to it in the _Queste_, and the mention of Hélie being at Arthur's court when Lancelot, Hector, and Perceval return from l'Île de Joie, there is no mention of him in the prose _Lancelot_. It seems clear that a large section of the _Agravain_ must have been omitted in the versions consulted by Dr. Sommer.

Of the three subsequent adventures in Book VI., the final one, that of the knight who smites off his lady's head, and is compelled by Lancelot to do penance for his crime by carrying the dead body from one court to another, is also in our two versions, but occurs at an earlier point in the story. In both he is to go first to Arthur's court, then to that of Baudemagus, and lastly to the King of Norgales. If all spare his life he may live. =M.= departs from this by only directing him in the first instance to go to Arthur's court: it is Guinevere who sends him on to the Pope. The variant is probably Malory's own.

The other two adventures are not in either =D. L.= or =1533=. The Perilous Chapel, I suspect, was taken over from a Perceval section. Meliot de Logres, and the fetching of a piece of cloth from the chapel of a 'Perilous Cemetery' are both in _Perceval li Gallois_ though not connected with each other. It is noticeable that =M.= never refers to the 'Perilous Cemetery' of the _Lancelot_ proper, that of the upright swords, but drops out the reference to Galahad's achieving of it, which must certainly have been in his copy of the _Queste_. I think there may have been two Perilous Cemeteries, one of the Borron _Lancelot-Perceval_, the other of the Map _Lancelot-Galahad_ cycles, and that this is the first and older.

The adventure of the Lady and the Hawk in chap. xvi. I have not been able to trace.

The events of =M.=, Book VII., are not recorded in either =D. L.= or =1533=, with this possible exception, that when the knights return to court after the adventures recorded above, and are called upon for an account of their doings, Gawain relates how he fought with Gariette, _not knowing that he was his brother_; which looks as if the story (not related in detail) might represent a version of the similar encounter in Book VII. It seems clear that, full as is the account given in both these versions, the compilers still knew a great deal more than they included.[170]

Books VIII., IX., and X. of =M.= follow the prose _Tristan_, and not till Book XI. do we return to the _Lancelot_. This book opens with the adventures at Corbenic (=D. L.=, Cambenoyc, Cambenoyt, or Cabenoyt). =D. L.= fails to mention that the lady of the bath is naked, and consistently calls the serpent of the tomb a serpent, never a dragon, in this differing from the other versions. =1533=, at this point, after relating the achievement of their adventures, has a curious remark: '_Ainsi prend fin le premier volume des vertus et glorieulx fais et gestes du noble et puissant chevalier Lancelot du Lac et des compaignons de la Table Ronde_,' and then continues, without any break of chapter, to relate the succeeding adventure with the Grail and King Pelles' daughter. So far from this passage occurring at the end of vol. i., the _Agravain_ section does not begin till fol. xxxix. of the second volume of this edition. It is possible that when a critical edition of the _Lancelot_ is prepared the above remark may be a guide to an earlier redaction, in which Lancelot was not the father of the Grail Winner. =D. L.= has nothing corresponding to this.

In the account given by =D. L.= of Bohort's visit to Corbenic, the fight with the knight who keeps the bridge for love of Elaine is omitted, but it was evidently in the source, as later on the knight arrives at court as vanquished, and his name is then given as _Brimol van Pleiche_, thus agreeing with =M.=, _Bromel la Pleche_, against the _Brunet du Plaissis_ or _Plessis_ of =1533= and =S.= =1533= records the combat.

On page 195 of the _Studies_ we read that Dr. Sommer's source contained no passage to the effect of =M.=, p. 576, 30-32: 'Mervelle not said sir bors / for this half yere he (Lancelot) hath ben in pryson with Morgan le fay, kyng Arthurs syster /.' But =1533= gives it: 'il a este en la prison ou il y a une dame plus dung an entier,' which is nearer the real duration of Lancelot's imprisonment. This seems to indicate that =M.= had a fairly full MS. source, from which he selected at pleasure.

Dr. Sommer gives no summary of Bohort's Grail adventures, so I cannot tell if there be any interesting variants between the French versions, but both =1533= and =D. L.= contain two features, not reproduced in =M.=, which seem to indicate a knowledge of an older Grail tradition. In both the old man tells Bohort that he has seen '_la lance Vengeresse_' the '_wrake spere_,' he who sits in the Siege Perilous shall know the truth of adventure.'[171] (This, of course, might be Perceval equally as well as Galahad.) Galahad and Lancelot are not mentioned throughout.[172] The Maimed King and the Fisher King are one and the same person. All these points confirm my suspicion that the Corbenic adventure was originally taken over from an earlier, probably a Gawain, _Queste_.

In the events relating Elayne's visit to the court and Lancelot's madness, =1533= and =D. L.= in the main agree with =S.=, but with small variants. In both Elayne leaves the court of her own free will, but Arthur does not escort her; she speaks to Bohort before leaving. The knight encountered by Bohort is alone in =D. L.=, thus agreeing with =M.=; while in =1533= he does not meet him till after he has rejoined Lionel and Hector. The knights who go in search of Lancelot are in =D. L.= thirty-two in number, and as later on we are told that twenty-five have returned, this does not seem to be a mistake for twenty-three, as we might otherwise think. =1533= does not give the original number as thirty-two, but agrees with =D. L.= as to those who return, which confirms this supposition.

In all that relates to Perceval and his first appearance at court, =D. L.= and =1533= agree on the whole with =S.= rather than with =M.=, but neither of them give any names of Perceval's brothers (save Agloval, who fetches him from his home), nor say how many there were. Lamorak is never mentioned (I believe this character belongs to quite a late redaction). In this and in the reference to Gawain's having slain Perceval's father, I think we have the influence of the _Tristan_.

In the account of Perceval's being driven from court by the mockery of Kay and Mordred, =D. L.= has a remark which again shows the influence of an earlier tradition: Perceval is described as '_Eene harde jonge creature, ende die wel simpel sceen te dien_.' Nowhere else is there any sign of the simplicity which is a primitive trait of Perceval's character. Later on, after the 'Patrides' adventure (which appears to be differently related from =S.= as it is from =M.=, Patrides and the lady having fled together, been overtaken, and imprisoned), both =1533= and =D. L.= agree in the words spoken by Patrides (=D. L.=) or the king (=1533=), _i.e._ that Kay and Mordred have driven from court one who should be a better knight _than all save Gawain_.

'_Ghi hebt entrouwen, dat secgic u, Uter herbergen verdreven nu Den besten ridder dier in was Sonder Walewein sijt seker das._'--ll. 36247-50.

(=1533= says 'When he is grown to manhood' he shall be as good, etc.) This certainly points to an earlier stage of tradition, when Perceval and Gawain are the leading knights and Lancelot subordinate to both.

In view of what we now know, I think it is not an unreasonable hypothesis that these two versions, which agree so closely, represent an earlier pseudo-Borron _Lancelot-Perceval_ redaction, which has been worked over in the interest of the later pseudo-Map _Galahad_ version.[173]