I am also still of opinion that the table of descent given on p. 283 of Volume II. of my _Perceval_ studies, represents the most probable evolution of the literature; at the same time, in the light of further research, I should feel inclined to add the Grail section of _Sone de Nansai_ as deriving from the same source which gave us Kiot’s poem, and the _Perlesvaus_.[16] As evidence for a French original combining important features of these two versions, and at the same time retaining unmistakably archaic elements which have disappeared from both, I hold this section of the poem to be of extreme value for the criticism of the cycle. While there are still missing links in the chain of descent, versions to be reconstructed, writers to be identified, I believe that in its _ensemble_ the theory set forth in these pages will be found to be the only one which will satisfactorily meet all the conditions of the problem; which will cover the whole ground of investigation, omitting no element, evading no difficulty; which will harmonize apparently hopeless contradictions, explain apparently meaningless terminology, and thus provide a secure foundation for the criticism of a body of literature as important as it is fascinating. The study and the criticism of the Grail literature will possess an even deeper interest, a more absorbing fascination, when it is definitely recognized that we possess in that literature a unique example of the restatement of an ancient and august Ritual in terms of imperishable Romance. NOTES CHAPTER II [1] MS. Bibl. Nat., f. Franç. 12576 fo. 90. [2] _Ibid_. fo. 90_vo_, 91. [3] _Diû Crône_ (ed. Stoll, Stuttgart, 1852). Cf. _Sir Gawain of the Grail Castle_ for both versions. [4] Cf. MS. B.N. 12576, fo. 154. [5] _Perceval_, ed. Hucher, p. 466; Modena, p. 61. [6] Cf. Hucher, p. 482; Modena, p. 82. [7] _Perceval li Gallois_, ed. Potvin, ll. 6048-52. [8] _Ib_. ll. 6056-60. [9] Potvin, Vol. I. p. 15. [10] _Ib_. p. 26. [11] _Ib_. p. 86. [12] _Ib_. pp. 176, 178. [13] MS. B.N. 12576, ff. 221-222vo. [14] _Mabinogion_, ed. Nutt, p. 282. [15] Cf. _Peredur_ (ed. Nutt), pp. 282, 291-92. [16] _Parzival_, Book v. ll. 947-50. [17] _Ib_. Book VI. ll. 1078-80. [18] _Parzival_, Book XVI, ll 275-86. [19] Cf. _Morte Arthure_, Malory, Book XVII. Chap. 18. Note the remark of Mordrains that his flesh which has waxen old shall become young again. [20] _Parzival_, Bk. IX. ll. 1388-92. [21] _Sone de Nansai_ (ed. Goldschmidt, Stuttgart, 1899), ll 4775-76. [22] _Sone de Nansai_, ll. 4841-56. [23] It is evidently such a version as that of _Sone de Nansai_, and _Parzival_, which underlies the curious statement of the _Merlin_ MS. B.N. f. Fr. 337, where the wife of the Fisher King is known as ‘la Veve Dame,’ while her husband is yet in life, though sorely wounded. CHAPTER III [1] Cf. _Rig-Veda Sanhita_, trans. H. H. Wilson, 6 vols. 1854-1888. Vol. I. p. 88, v. 12. 172, v. 8 206, v. 10 Vol. III. p. 157, vv. 2, 5, 7, 8.