King Horn, Floriz and Blauncheflur, The Assumption of Our Lady — John Shaqi
King Horn, Floriz and Blauncheflur, The Assumption of Our Lady
General
King Horn, Floriz and Blauncheflur, The Assumption of Our Lady
English poetry -- Middle English, 1100-1500; Mary, Blessed Virgin, Saint -- Legends; Romances, English
Our story had a wide circulation also in the North, as one must infer
from the number of Scandinavian versions preserved: (1) the old Norweg.
fragment of a saga (ed. by G. Storm, _Nordisk Tidskrift for Filologi og
Pædagogik_, Copenhagen, 1874, pp. 24-28), (2) the complete Icelandic
saga of _Flóres ok Blankiflúr_, (3) the fragments of a second Icelandic
Saga (ed. by Brynjolf Snorrason, _Annaler for nordisk old kyndighed og
historie_, 1850); (4) the Old Swed. poem (ed. by E. Klemming, _Samlingar
utgifna af svenska formskrift-sällskapet_, I., Stockholm, 1844); and (5)
the Danish translations from the Swedish (ed. by C. J. Brandt,
_Romantisk Digtning fra Middelalderen_, I. and II. København, 1869-77).
The distinguishing characteristic of the Northern versions is the
conclusion. According to the Norse version, Floris, to refute the charge
that he has gained admittance to Bl.’s tower by the use of magic tricks,
offers to fight in single combat the bravest of the Admiral’s knights.
In the ensuing combat he overcomes the Admiral’s champion, and receives
as his guerdon, Blauncheflur. If we accept Herzog’s conclusions (pp. 15,
35, 45-6, 66) we must assume as an original for the Scandinavian
versions, a French original, N, with the ending peculiar to the Northern
versions. The development from this original is shown by the following
plan (also borrowed from Herzog, p. 92).
[Illustration:
Fr. N
\
\
Norw. M*
/ \
/ \
/ \
Icel. M Norw. N*
/ \
/ \
/ \
Icel. N Swed.
|
|
Dan. ]
_(f) In Italy._
In Italy also the story of Fl. and Bl. enjoyed great popularity. The two
chief versions were: (1) the _Cantare_, written by a popular poet in
_ottave rime_; and (2) Boccaccio’s youthful production, his first prose
romance, _Filocolo_. That the I. version of the story, the one most
popular in France, was also current in Italy, we see in these two
versions, both of which show, in addition to the special traits of II.,
many traits peculiar to version I. To determine exactly the
interrelations of these two versions is no easy matter. From allusions
in the _Filocolo_ we know that the _Cantare_ was the older. Internal
evidence, however, forbids the supposition that the _Filocolo_ has
sprung from the _Cantare_. Rather the two versions go back to a common
source. This Italian, or Franco-Italian, version, which probably had no
differences of real moment from the _Cantare_ in its present form, must
in many points have been more ample and complete, and in individual
instances nearer the French tradition, than the _Cantare_ is.
In connection with the Italian group must also be mentioned the Greek
poem of Florios and Platziaflore, composed in the 14th century and
founded upon the _Cantare_.
_(g) In Spain._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account