We also find the same ideas introduced in a different context; thus, when Perceval leaves his mother to go out into the world, among her counsels the French poet includes, '_Preudom ne forconselle nie celui ki tient sa compagnie_'; in Wolfram we have no such phrase, but when Parzival arrives at Gurnemanz's Castle we find him saying, '_Mîn muoter saget al wâr, Alt mannes rede stêt niht se vâr_,' which in the Parzival she did _not_ say. It is evident that in the two versions counsel and application have become separated, and in this case again it seems more probable that the counsel would originally have been given without the application, as by Chrêtien, than _vice versa_ as by Wolfram. On the other hand, Mr. Nutt points out in his _Studies_ that Perceval's recognition of the knights as _angels_ is quite at variance with his mother's representation of armed men as _devils_, whereas in the _Parzival_ the whole episode is clear and consistent. Here the French poet has evidently dropped out something, and there are other instances, such as the names of Gurnemanz's sons, in which the German poem seems to have followed an older tradition. But on the whole, a careful comparison of the two poems seems to show that Wolfram's version is further removed from the original form of the story than is Chrêtien's, and that therefore the probability is that the common basis of the two poems was a work known to the two _French_ poets. In support of this theory it may be noted as a curious fact that while _Chrêtien_ avowedly bases his poem on a book given to him by the Count of Flanders, _Wolfram's_ poem really contains more references to Flanders than Chrêtien's does. Thus we have several allusions to Lambekein, Duke of Brabant; Brandelidelein of Punturtois figures prominently both in the second and in the later books, and his city 'Der Wazzervesten stat von Punt' (_punt_=_pont_=bridge) is suspiciously like Bruges; to say nothing of the connection of the Lohengrin story with Brabant and Antwerp. It has been pointed out already by critics that Gerbert, one of Chrêtien's continuators, has the same connection of the Grail winner with the knight of the swan, which seems to indicate that the stories were not first connected by the _German_ poet (Gerbert also connects with the Swan Knight with the Deliverer of the Holy Sepulchre, an Oriental and Crusading feature quite in harmony with what has been suggested with regard to Wolfram's French source). On the whole, the evidence seems to point to the conclusion that the source of Kiot's poem was identical with the book delivered to Chrêtien by the Count of Flanders; and the connection between Wolfram and Chrêtien is that of a source from which Chrêtien drew at first, Wolfram at second hand, Wolfram's medium having treated the legend with far more freedom and boldness than was common at that date. EXCURSUS C THE INTERPRETATION AND RELIGIOUS TEACHING OF THE POEM