M. Potvin has carefully collated for his edition all that is preserved
of the Romance in this manuscript, comprising all the beginning of the
work as far as Branch III. Title 8, about the middle, and from Branch
XIX. Title 23, near the beginning, to Branch XXX. Title 5, in the
middle. Making allowance for variations of spelling and sundry minor
differences of reading, by no means always in favour of the earlier
scribe, the Berne fragments are identical with the corresponding
portions of the Brussels manuscript, and it is therefore safe to assume
that the latter is on the whole an accurate transcript of the entire
original Romance.
The only note of time in the book itself is contained in the
declaration at the end. From this it appears that it was written by
order of the Seingnor of Cambrein for Messire Jehan the Seingnor of
Neele. M. Potvin, without giving any reason for so doing, assumes that
this Lord of Cambrein is none other than the Bishop of Cambrai. If
this assumption be correct, the person referred to was probably either
John of Berhune, who held the see from 1200 till July 27, 1219, or his
successor Godfrey of Fontaines (Conde), who held it till 1237. To me,
however, it seems more likely that the personage intended was in
reality the 'Seingnor' of Cambrin, the chef-lieu of a canton of the
same name, on a small hill overlooking the peat-marshes of Bethune,
albeit I can find no other record of any such landed proprietor's
existence.
Be this as it may, the Messire Jehan, Seingnor of Neele, can hardly be
other than the John de Nesle who was present at the battle of Bouvines
in 1214, and who in 1225 sold the lordship of Bruges to Joan of
Flanders. (5) These dates therefore may be regarded as defining that
of the original Romance within fairly narrow limits.
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