The Mammoth Book of King Arthur (55 page)

Perlesvaus
has some features that associate it with the Cathars, or Albigensians. It promotes the concept of self-determination, that an individual can transcend from earthly flesh, which
the Cathars believed was corrupt, into the purity of the spiritual, through adherence to strict rules and disciplines. Because the Cathars did not conform to the church of Rome, they were
considered heretics. This meant that Grail literature might also be considered subversive, but it appears that during this dangerous period everyone was preparing their own version of the Grail in
order to achieve their own ends.

Because
Perlesvaus
gave a set of values in addition to a fascinating treatment of the Grail story, it provided a basis for the immense work that would come in the next decade, the most
subversive and successful version of them all, the
Roman de Graal.

6. The Vulgate Cycle

The success of the Grail stories, and the continued popularity of Chrétien’s work, meant that by the second decade of the thirteenth century Arthurian stories were
tumbling from every direction. The pseudonymous Guillaume le Clerc saw the same potential for political comment as the Grail writers in producing his Scottish adventure
Fergus of Galloway
,
whilst the equally pseudonymous Paien de Maisières produced a slightly bawdy Gawain adventure in
Le Chevalier à l’Épée.
Many new knights came forward to
share the limelight in
Wigalois, Meraugis, Yder, Jaufré
, and so on.

The proliferation of stories showed that a bedrock of tales had always been there, just ripe for the taking, amongst the Welsh and the Bretons and it seems every court poet, most of them French,
but also German, Spanish, Italian, and even Norwegian, had a dozen or more Arthurian tales in their repertoire.

In addition to these writers, deep in the heart of Poitou someone was creating a masterpiece. The Vulgate Cycle, as it is called, runs to over 1,800 pages in translation (and that’s just
the first three books), and forms the basis of the Arthurian story as we know it. The title “Vulgate Cycle” is not very helpful; it was so named because of a similarity in form to the
early Latin Bible, also called the Vulgate. More recently, scholars have called it the
Lancelot-Grail
, and it is steadily acquiring other names. My own preference is for these three volumes
to be known as the
Roman de Lancelot
, but because the term Vulgate Cycle has become so attached, I shall still use that as and when suitable.

The first three books (later expanded to five) took a totally new approach. The author chose Lancelot as the central character, and the books tell of his life. The first book,
Lancelot
,
tells of Lancelot’s background and birth, his upbringing by the Lady of the Lake, his arrival at Arthur’s court, his early adventures, including the capture of the Dolorous Garde, and
his involvement in Arthur’s war with Galehaut, who becomes Lancelot’s firm friend. It also introduces Lancelot’s love for Guenevere, and
his relationship with
Elaine of Astolat, which leads to the birth of Galahad. Along with a few mystical experiences, these last two facts are key to the second volume, the
Queste del Saint Graal.
This starts with
the arrival of Galahad at Arthur’s court, and the declaration by the knights that they would search ceaselessly for the Grail. The quest by Galahad serves as the framework for the quests by
other knights, including Lancelot and Gawain, both of whom fail early, with only Bors and Perceval joining Galahad at the end. The third volume,
Mort Artu
, continues from the conclusion of
the Grail quest, with the return of Bors to Arthur’s court to tell the story. It charts the downfall of Arthur, from the plots by Agravain and Mordred to unveil Guenevere’s adultery,
the fracturing of the Round Table, the wars between Arthur and Lancelot, Mordred’s usurpation of the throne, to the Battle of Camlann and the last days of the knights.

Although each book shows a different style, suggesting that they were written by different authors, there is a unified scheme to all three, which led Jean Frappier, writing in Loomis’
Arthurian Literature In The Middle Ages
, to suggest that the three books had an “architect” who plotted them all, and may even have written the
Lancelot,
but did not write
all three. Curiously, the
Lancelot
is the one volume that has a separate life. There is an earlier version,
Lancelot do Lac
, which is not as long as the Vulgate
Lancelot
,
taking events only as far as the end of the war with Galehaut, but which is otherwise identical. This was written only a few years before the Vulgate trilogy was started, and it’s difficult
to know where to draw the line. It is possible that
Lancelot do Lac
is a draft or early version of the Vulgate
Lancelot
, which was then extended when the Vulgate Cycle was conceived.
We may well, therefore, have four authors, one of whom was also the grand “architect”. First came the author of the original
Lancelot do Lac
, then the author who continued it as
the Vulgate
Lancelot
(also known as the
Lancelot
Proper), and finally the two separate authors of the
Queste del Saint Graal
and the
Mort Artu.

Curiously, all three books ascribe their authorship internally to Walter Map, yet all modern day scholars (with the exception of Noel Currer-Briggs) are adamant that Map could not have written
them. There are three reasons for this. Firstly, Map was dead by 1209, and most evidence suggests that the Vulgate
Cycle was not started until 1215 at the earliest. Secondly,
the stories show a limited knowledge of Wales and southern Britain, but a thorough knowledge of Poitou, where the trilogy is believe to have been composed. Thirdly, all three books are written from
a Cistercian viewpoint and Map was vehemently anti-Cistercian. This last point is crucial to an understanding of the development of the Arthurian romance.

Map was born in or near Hereford, sometime around 1137. He regarded himself as English by birth but Welsh by association, and was probably of Welsh descent. He studied in Paris from 1154 to
1160, and thereafter was a clerk and justiciar to the court of Henry II, before becoming a canon of St. Paul’s (and later of Lincoln and Hereford). He was Henry’s representative at the
Third Lateran Council in 1179, where he spoke out against the Waldensians (the followers of Peter Waldo who had denounced all wealth and may be seen as amongst the earliest Protestants). He was
made archdeacon of Oxford in 1197, the post previously held by another Walter, the man who gave Geoffrey of Monmouth the “ancient” book to translate into Latin.

Map is known to have written a variety of works, but all that survives that is unarguably his is a collection of miscellaneous notes called
Be Nugis Curialium
(“Courtier’s
Jottings”), consisting mostly of anecdotes and gossip, with Walter’s wry observations on court life. It includes some poems and folk tales, and though there is nothing overtly
Arthurian, there are short tales such as “Filii Mortue”, about a knight who grieves after his wife’s death but is then delighted to find her amongst a fairy host, which seems to
have been the basis for the Breton
lai, Sir Orfeo.
That makes it possible, though not certain, that Map may have collected other folktales, and perhaps even composed items upon which later
Arthurian stories were based. It has been claimed, though with no evidence, that Map may have written a Lancelot poem upon which
Lancelot do Lac
is based. Since the rest of the Vulgate
Lancelot
grew from the
Lancelot do Lac
, it might explain why Map’s name is mentioned in the text. With Map’s delight in court gossip, the idea of a story of adultery
between queen and knight might have appealed to him. As Map served in the court of Henry II and Queen Eleanor, the subject of Arthurian tales would almost certainly have arisen.

So, all the circumstantial evidence is there, but it is sadly lacking in hard facts. Most damning of all is that Map was a close friend of Gerald of Wales, who, as we have
seen, had written ingratiatingly about the exhumation of Arthur’s remains at Glastonbury. Gerald refers to Walter several times in his writings, and it seems remarkable that Gerald makes no
mention of Walter having written anything Arthurian. We must therefore concede that it is very unlikely that Walter Map wrote any of the Vulgate Cycle.

The question remains: why was this work attributed to him? Did his name give it a certain authority? Did he perhaps keep some records or other information that formed the basis of the cycle? I
mentioned that Map attended the Lateran Council in 1179. Also there was William of Tyre, now archbishop, who had come to seek the Pope’s support for a new Crusade. This was only a few months
after Philippe d’Alsace had visited the Holy Land and met William. With Map’s interest in folk tales, it is possible that he and William discussed similar matters. Noel Currer-Briggs is
convinced that they did, and that Map composed the
Lancelot
Proper and the
Quest del Saint Graal
between 1183 and 1189 (when Henry II died), and the
Mort Artu
sometime after
1192, when he had finished
De Nugis Curialium.

I am not convinced that Map wrote them. The variance in style is sufficient to suggest different authorship, but also there is something in what survives of Map’s writings to suggest that
he was not the type to write such a huge, sustained work. Someone who writes courtly jottings and anecdotes as much for fun as for any other purpose seldom produces a complicated, labyrinthine work
of such magnitude. Also, someone renowned for speaking out against heretics and anyone who defied the Church would not then write a mystical, revelatory work containing some of the principles of
those heretics.

This brings us to the matter of the Cistercians. Map’s writings include several anti-Cistercian comments, primarily because he stood for the orthodox status quo and against any schism or
fragmentation. However, his main argument against the Cistercians was their use of military force. He actually denounced them at the Lateran Council, remarking that, “Christ had forbidden
Christians to use force and by using force the Templars had lost
all the territory that the apostles had won by peaceful preaching.” Map’s argument was not against
the Cistercian movement as such, but against what they had become.

The success and evolution of the Cistercians had been fast, and was due primarily to Bernard of Clairvaux (for whom the famous monastery and the breed of mountain dog are named). The Cistercians
had been founded in 1098 by Robert of Molesme, who was related to the counts of Champagne. Robert had become dissatisfied with the practices undertaken by the Benedictines, obtained a dispensation
to undertake reforms, and set up a new religious order at Cîteaux. Bernard joined the order in 1112, bringing a new vitality and charisma with him. New foundations were established, including
one at Clairvaux in 1115, of which Bernard became the abbot. It was Bernard who championed the Knights Templar. At the Synod of Troyes in 1128, Bernard succeeded in securing official recognition of
the Order and drew up the organisation’s rules.

The first Cistercian pope, Eugenius III, was elected in 1145, and it was in response to his demands that, in the following year, Bernard made a rousing speech in the presence of Louis VII and
Queen Eleanor, promoting the Second Crusade. Louis prostrated himself before Bernard and “took the Cross”, a stage-managed affair if ever there was one. The Second Crusade was a
disaster and Bernard, not understanding how it could have failed, believed it must be because of the sins of the Crusaders. He vowed to lead a new crusade himself, but was eventually talked out of
it because of his ill health. He died soon after.

Over the next fifty years, the heads of the Cistercian order became more active and violent. Their condoning of the destruction of Constantinople in 1204 was another blot on an already saturated
copybook.

Unfortunately, worse was to come. One of the heretical movements threatening the Catholic church were the Cathars, who claimed themselves as the “pure” ones, and railed against the
corruption of the Catholic clergy and the pompousness of church doctrine. The Pope was determined to eliminate them, but all attempts failed. The last straw came when the Papal legate, Peter of
Castelnau, was murdered in 1208, at the instigation – it was believed – of Raymond, count of Toulouse. The Pope sanctioned
revenge and in 1209 Simon de Montfort,
who was acting on behalf of the abbot of Cîteaux, Arnaud Amaury, seized Raymond’s lands. The entire population of Béziers, over 20,000 men, women and children, were slaughtered.
When de Montfort hesitated and asked the abbot how he would identify the heretics, Arnaud famously replied: “Kill them all. God will recognise His own.”

By 1209, the same year that Walter Map died, the reputation of the Cistercians was exceedingly low. Might there be a way to redeem themselves? That must have been when someone turned his
thoughts to the story of the Holy Grail. Although the Cistercians are not identified by name in the Vulgate Cycle, there are references throughout to the “white monks” and “white
abbeys”, as well as to procedures newly adopted by the Cistercians for confession and absolution. Roger Sherman Loomis, in
The Development of Arthurian Romance
, states: “Picture,
then, the author as a monk in a white robe bending over a desk in a scriptorium or cloister, transforming the rough materials of chivalric fiction into an allegory of the search for God’s
grace.”

The image may be sound, though a work of this scale must have required many monks, especially if they were producing several copies in addition to composing it. This project would have required
approval by the abbot, possibly even the head of the order. It was a major project to redeem the Cistercians by featuring them at the centre of a holy quest conducted by the purest knight in the
world, Galahad. Throughout the three books, it is repeatedly demonstrated that the smallest sin counts against you. Gawain, who has lustful thoughts, is soon ejected from the quest. Lancelot, once
the greatest knight in the world, had sinned with Guenevere and could not achieve the quest. Each knight is put through many severe challenges to test their spiritual and moral resolve. Only then
can they be rewarded with God’s grace. What better way of making their case acceptable than for the Cistercians to claim that this is all the work of their greatest critic, Walter Map?