Medieval Academy of America

A Rapprochement between Bisclavret and Lanval

Author(s): Judith Rice Rothschild
Source: Speculum, Vol. 48, No. 1 (Jan., 1973), pp. 78-88
Published by: Medieval Academy of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2856271
Accessed: 29/10/2009 17:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacad.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Medieval Academy of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Speculum.

http://www.jstor.org

A RAPPROCHEMENT BETWEEN BISCLAVRET

AND LANVAL
BY JUDITH RICE ROTHSCHILD

IN her Lais,l Marie de France uses certain basic narrative motifs or themes, which
may be either primary or secondary elements of the individual plot structure.
Throughout the lays these themes or situations are repeated, each time with at
least one different variation.2 Upon these variants S. Foster Damon3 attempts to
build a system of classification of the Lais, according to analogues or parallels
(which he confines to pairs of poems or groups of four) in the treatment of certain
themes (i.e., selfishness and its opposite; the father-son relationship).4 Damon
was not the only critic to note the repetitions in Marie's narrative poems, and to
comment upon them;' so did Ernest Hoepffner6 a few years later.
Among the analogues pointed out by Damon, he mentions (quite rightly, I
think) a thematic relationship between Bisclavret and Equitan.7 In somewhat
Freudian terms, he contrasts (perhaps not correctly) the youthful heroes of
Guigemarand Lanval.8As for Hoepffner, he notes the theme of the innocent wife
who has been locked up by her husband, in the lays Yonec and Guigemar.9Yet not
all the parallels of theme and motif pertain to adults and youths; in Milun and
Le Fresne' Hoepffner finds the situation of a child exposed by its parents.l Al1 All references to the poems will be to the edition of Alfred Ewert, ed. Marie de France: Lais
(Oxford, 1947; reprinted 1958).
2 Several
paragraphs in this article are taken from the author's doctoral dissertation, Narrative
Techniquein the Lais of Marie de France: Themes and Variations, of which Professor Anna Granville
Hatcher, then of The Johns Hopkins University, was the director. The results of my investigation of
the relationship between Bisclavret and Lanval are, however, presented here for the first time. The
dissertation, with minor revisions, is to be published under the same title, Vol. I, by the University
of North Carolina Press in its series UNCSRLL.
3 "Marie de France: Psychologist of Courtly Love," PMLA, XLIV(1929), 968-96.
4Damon (p. 969) perceived that "the lays fit together into distinct couplets or quadruplets, as
though one suggested the other by the simple process of inverting the situation or the characters." I,
too, have found the parallelism in Marie's lays, but sometimes between more than the two- or four-lay
combination. Furthermore, I have also found that Marie often does more in her variations than to
simply invert the character or the situation.
6 The presence of analogues and repetitions in Marie's Lais had indeed been noticed long before the
publication of Damon's article, although he was the first to attempt a systematization of her narratives. At the beginning of the twentieth century, W. H. Schofield had studied some of the analogues
in the lays ("The Lays of Grailent and Lanval," PMLA, xv (1900), stressing the similarities more
than the differences. A few years earlier, when speaking of Marie's narrative technique, Joseph
Bedier had faulted the poetess for her "secheresse d'imagination," mentioning too the repetitions
("Les Lais de Marie de France," RDM, cviI (1891), 853-63). And in 1905, Bedier mentioned Marie's
repeated use of some phrases and rhymes (Romania, xxxIv (1905), 479-80).
6 "Marie de France et les Lais anonymes," Studi Medievali (Nuova Serie), Iv (1931), 1-31.
7 Damon,
op. cit., p. 971.
8 Ibid., p. 986.
9 Hoepffner, op. cit., pp. 16-17. A variant of this basic theme is found in Laiistic, where the wife is
guarded only when the young next-door neighbor is in the area.
10Ibid.
11It should be pointed out that Ioepffner is not exactly correct in his remark that the child was
78

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

79

though it is true that Damon classifies Bisclavret and Lanval as supernatural lays,
he, as well as Hoepffner, fails to notice a possible rapprochementbetween these
two poems.12
That such a rapprochementexists results not from a basic similarity of the two
story-lines, but rather from the presence of multiple analogues, some of which are
obvious only to the reader who has an extremely close familiarity with the Lais.
This parallelism pertains to characters, to certain narrative motifs, to episodes
and incidents, even to diction. Some of the analogues to be discussed in this study
are, paradoxically, at once contrasting and similar.
An immediately obvious feature in Bisclavret and Lanval is the presence of a
king among the dramatis personae.l3Moreover, he is not the protagonist in either
lay, although his r61ewill be vital to the plot development. In Bisclavret the king
(who remains nameless) is noble, compassionate, perceptive. In this lay Marie's
technique of characterization is to let us, the readers, see the king's nature revealed through action. It is only long after we have come to know his qualities
that Marie presents him as ". . . tant . . . sages e curteis" (v. 222), perhaps to
confirm, at that point in the narration, the readers' already-formed judgment,
perhaps also to anticipate the second important occasion on which these virtues
of the king will be shown.
In forceful contrast to such nobility and perceptiveness is the portrait of King
Arthur. This king, the first character to be introduced in Lanval, is immediately
described as "Artur, li pruz e li curteis" (v. 6); indeed, much later (v. 607) Marie
will insist upon his good manners. Nevertheless, throughout the lay Arthur's behavior reveals him to be quite different from Marie's first presentation. At the
beginning of the narrative, Arthur neglects Lanval when he is lavishly rewarding
his vassals for military service. Later on, he shows himself to be gullible, instantly
believing his queen's charges against Lanval. Arthur is quick to anger, and swears
an extreme punishment of burning or hanging if Lanval cannot defend himself in
court. Furthermore, the reader wonders if Marie is not deliberately making sport
of Arthur's "prowess," for immediately after his characterization we learn (vv.
7-10) of the incursions of the Scots and the Picts: yet at no time in the lay will
we see Arthur (nor any of his knights, for that matter) perform a valiant deed!
At the beginning of the two poems, another analogue, more significant for its
difference than for its likeness, may be remarked in the relationship of the protagonist to his king and to society. Whereas the principal character in Bisclavret
"exposed." Of the two lays in question, it is only in Le Fresne that a child is "exposed," and by only
one parent (the other does not even know of the child's birth). In Milun the parents do not "expose"
the child; they entrust it to the care of the mother's sister.
12 For the
relationship that I perceive between Bisclavret and Lanval, it may be significant that in
ms. H (the only ms. to contain not only the Prologue, and all the twelve Lais of Marie de France, but
her Fables as well) Bisclavretprecedes Lanval, just as there is a certain significance in the arrangement
of the three "bird-lays" (Yonec, Laiistic, Milun).
13 The reader will not fail to'perceive two other obvious parallels: the presence of a love-triangle (of
whose characters the sexual identity varies by the process of inversion mentioned by Damon: wife,
husband, lover in Bisclavret; queen, fairy mistress, Lanval), as well as a character who serves as counsellor or advisor (the wise man in Bisclavret,the Duke of Cornwall in Lanval).

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

80

is presented as "privez" (v. 19) to his lord, and is beloved by all his neighbors
(v. 20),14at King Arthur's court Lanval is a foreigner, alone, jealously envied by
the majority of the courtiers. (To be sure, their respective situations will change
in the course of the narrative.)
A third distinction pertinent to this study is the relative absence or presence of
description within Bisclavret and Lanval. Although it is true that the husband in
Bisclavret twice mentions to his wife a few descriptive details (first, when he discloses where he goes, vv. 64-5, then when (in vv. 89-96) he reveals where he puts
his clothes), it is also equally true that in this lay not a place, not a person, not an
object15is physically described in visualizable terms.16Indeed, some of the scenes
are not even staged. At the beginning of the poem, for example, the reader does
not know where the husband and wife are conversing. In addition to the lack of
visualizable details, there is a relative scarcity of personal emotions and reactions
reported in this lay. The suppression of such information results in a more intense
focus upon both the unfolding action and the moral problem of the wife's infidelity.
The notable presence of descriptive passages in Lanval affords a salient contrast to the paucity of description in Bisclavret. In Lanval not only are objects
described in detail (and I know of no other of Marie's lays where there is so great
an emphasis upon the financial), but there are, in fact, five occasions when we are
made aware, to some degree, of women's bodies (and their clothes). Yet such
visualizable description pertains, it must be pointed out, only to fairy beings and
to objects associated with them. In Lanval description has a dual function: it
causes the figures of the fairy maidens to stand out in relief against the background of mortals, and, more importantly, it offers the visual evidence necessary
to exonerate Lanval. In accord with the many descriptive details, there are frequent accounts of emotional responses and also physiological reactions, especially on the part of Lanval.
A stylistic detail common to both poems is the phrase 'love and body' in combination with the feudal verb otrier, used when the woman bestows her love. In
Bisclavret the faithless wife tells the lover, " 'M'amur e mun cors vus otrei' " (v.
115); in Lanval, Marie relates how the fairy maiden acceeds to Lanval's request:
"Quant la meschine ol parler, / Celui que tant la poet amer, / S'amur e sun cors
li otreie" (vv. 131-3). It is very meaningful that Marie limits the use of this precise phrase, conjoined with otrier,to just these two lays: to Bisclavret,in which the
wife exploits her sexuality as a means to make the lover her accomplice in the
spiritual death of her husband, and to Lanval, where not only do sensuous details
abound, especially in the depiction of female figures, but where there is also great
stress upon the physical relationship of Lanval and his amie, and of sensual
14

Very rare is Marie's use of the epithet "beloved by all." In only one other lay does she say of the
protagonist (and there she twice states of the maiden Le Fresne in the poem of the same name) that
she is "loved by all who know her" (cf. w. 241-2 and vv. 310-12).
16In respect to Marie's narrative technique, it is significant that in a lay where clothing is so vitally
important she refrains from pictorially describing such items.
16Bisclavret and Chaitivel are, I believe, the only two lays of Marie so flat in their descriptive
narration.

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

81

pleasures (cf. 215-18: "Mut ot Lanval joie e deduit: / U seit par jur u seit par
nuit, / S'amie peot veer sovent, / Tut est a sun comandement").
A further analogue between the two poems may be discerned, perhaps only
after a very long and very close study of all of Marie's lays, in the treatment accorded to certain episodes, and thereby to legalistic procedures. Lanval's foolish
boast to the queen of his mistress' gentility and beauty (his immediate retort to
her accusation of homosexuality) is the incident that serves to complicate the
plot, with the eventual result that Lanval will have his day in court. In the episode
of Lanval's trial (the longest of the three narrative divisions) the action will rise
to a crisis, then be resolved. By the testimony and presence of the fairy mistress
who has arrived at the last possible moment, Lanval is acquitted of the charges of
felunie and of a mesfait (accusations upheld by the king alone). And with the
acquittal, the judicial procedures (so distinguishing a feature of this poem) have
come to an end. The defense of Lanval before an assembled court is an extremely
appropriate narrative device to point up the theme of Lanval's dual vassalage to
his lord and to his amie. Of all of Marie's lays, it is meaningful that only in Lanval
does she herself name the protagonist vassal.
The trial-scene in Lanval has been discussed in at least two studies, that of
Ernest Hoepffner17and of E. A. Francis.18Yet, to the best of my knowledge, no
one has noticed the legalistic aspects of Bisclavret.That they are present, although
in a much reduced form, is unquestionable.l9 Furthermore, that in her Lais Marie
de France shows herself knowledgeable in legal matters should not be surprising,
given both her supposed background and residence,20and "the most remarkable
17Romania LIX,351.
18 "The Trial in
Lanval," in Studies in French language and medievalliterature,presentedto Professor
Mildred K. Pope (Manchester, 1939), pp. 115-24.
19In OF literature it is not unusual to note a legalistic tone, legal terms, even scenes at law. One has
only to think of the legal flavor of Adam's lament after his fall in Le Mystere d'Adam of the 12th century; of Iseut's trial by ordeal in Beroul's Tristan; of Ysengrin's suit against Renart in Le Roman de
Renart; and the appearance of Pathelin at the law-court in La Farce de Maistre Pierre Pathelin.
20 Since the first modern publication of the Lais of Marie de France in the early 19th century,
scholars have attempted to establish the identity of the poetess as, variously Marie de Compiegne
(E. Mall, "Noch Einmal: Marie de Compiegne und das "Evangile aux femmes," ZRPH, I (1877),
337-56), Marie de Champagne (E. Winkler, FranzosischeDichter des Mittelalters;Ti.Marie de France,
Vienna, 1918), Marie the daughter of Count Galeran of Meulan, and of his wife, Agnes (this identification suggested by U. T. Holmes, in his History of Old French Literature, New York, 1937, p. 189,
is supported by later evidence by P. N. Flum, "Additional Thoughts on Marie de France," Romance
Notes, II, i (1961), 53-6). Still others would attribute to her an ecclesiastical identity: Mary, the
abbess of Reading (Ezio Levi, "Maria di Francia e le abbazie d'Inghilterra," Arch. Rom., v (1921),
472-93, especially 484-88), or the natural daughter of Geoffrey of Anjou (and thus the sister of
Henry II), who became the abbess of Shaftesbury (J. C. Fox, "Marie de France," Engl. Hist. Rev.,
xxv (1910), 303 ff., and xxvi (1911), 317 ff.
Of Marie herself, Ewert (Lais, Oxford, 1947; reprinted 1958, p. vi) says that "it is reasonable to
conclude from her own words that Marie was a native of France, that she lived and wrote in England,
that she knew English, as well as Latin, that she was well known to (and possibly on familiar terms
with) royalty ...." Of all the identifications proposed, Ewert (op. cit., pp. ix-x) believes that "the
most plausible identification is that proposed by the late Sir John Fox, who sees in her, Marie, natural
daughter of Godefroy d'Anjou (father of Henry II). She became abbess of the Abbey of Shaftesbury
[the largest convent in medieval England] in 1181 or earlier and died about the year 1216."

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

development"'2 of legal procedure in the entourage of Henry II of England. In

her discussion of the legalistic aspects in Lanval, E. A. Francis even ventures to
suggest that Marie "may have had knowledge, whether at first or second hand, of
cases heard. . . "22

In Bisclavret, when Marie has the king announce his perspicacious decision to
save the life of the beast, the reader should not overlook the use of feudal legal
terminology: " 'A la beste durrai ma pes' " (v. 159).23It is the lord who 'gives his
peace' to his vassal.24Somewhat later in the narrative, a second legal term appears
in the words of the wise man who is summarizing to his king the animal's conduct
up to the time of its attack on the lady: "'Unke mes humme ne tucha / Ne
felunie ne mustra, / Fors a la dame que ici vei' " (vv. 245-7). The term felunie26
is of great importance, for it reveals the point of view from which the wise man
(as well as the king and his entourage) considers the animal.
To appreciate more fully the words spoken by the wise man, the twentiethcentury reader should become acquainted with the medieval use of the terms
felunie and felun. In a highly informative lexicographical study, K.-J. Hollyman
defines felon as follows: "Le felon etait un noble qui avait enfreint le code qu'il
devait observer en tant que noble et chretien: en vertu de sa naissance il faisait
toujours preuve d'adresse guerriere.... Appeler un noble felon, c'est done
formuler une accusation contre son honneur.... "26 This interpretation is corE. A. Francis, "Marie de France et son temps," Romania, LXXII (1951), 78-99, pp. 83.
"The Trial in Lanval," p. 123. Miss Francis had earlier declared that "it is evident that the stages
in the trial and much of the vocabulary used to describe them are in close agreement with the practice
indicated by Maitland [Pollock and Maitland, The History of English Law].... It will be found that
the lai of Lanval gives a much greater impression of precision" (pp. 119-20).
23 The king's perspicacious decision to save the life of the beast becomes even more
prominent when
the reader notices that it is expressed in the line ending the first half of the lay (159). From this moment on, the beast will no longer be a hunted animal.
And when the reader finds that King Arthur's decision is also expressed in the verse ending the first
half of Lanval ("Jure en ad sun serement": v. 323, and note the legal term), another similarity between
the two lays becomes apparent. In fact, Bisclavret and Lanval are among the ten lays of Marie in
which significant subject material is found at the precise center of the poem.
24 Although the following information may or may not confirm Marie's knowledge of the law, it is
none the less interesting, in conjunction with v. 159 of Bisclavret, to mention the concept of "the
king's peace." According to Sir Frederick Pollock and Frederic William Maitland, The History of
English Law, beforethe time of Edward I, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1898, reprinted 1952), I, 45:
21

22

The notion of the king's peace appears to have had two distinct origins. These were, first, the special
sancttty of the king's house, which may be regarded as differing only in degree from that which
Germanic usage attached everywhere to the homestead of a free man: and, secondly, the special
protectionof the king's attendants and servants, and other persons whom he thoughtfit to place on the
same footing.... The rapid extension of the king's peace till it becomes, after the Norman Conquest, the normal and general safeguard of public order, seems peculiarly English. On the continent
the king appears at an early time to have been recognized as protector of the general peace, besides
having power to grant special protection or peace of a higher order. [Italics mine.]
2i With the use of felunie, an additional correspondance between Bisclavret and Lanval is evident,
Moreover, in both poems the term is employed in respect to the actions of the protagonist. In Lanval,
the Duke of Cornwall announces to the barons assembled in court: "'Li reis parla vers sun vassal,
/ Que jeo vus oi numer Lanval; / De felunie le retta' " (vv. 437-9).
26Le Developpementdu vocabulairefeodalen France pendant le haut moyen age (Geneve, 1957), p. 16q.

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

83

roborated by Carl Stephenson who states that "very generally any action unbefitting a feudal gentleman might be called felonious."27The reader should, however, also be cognizant of the medieval association of the word felun (felon) with
traistre.2 Yet in the situation of the beast's attack upon the lady (on which the
wise man's words are a comment), the reader well knows that it is not Bisclavret
who is a traitor; he justifiably strikes out at the two individuals who had betrayed
him, first, the lover-accomplice, then his wife.
Pollock and Maitland, in their explanation of felonia, "the distinctively feudal
crime," trace the changing meaning of the term within English law. At first, the
charge of felonia referred only to those crimes in which there was a breach of faith
and trust between man and lord. Indeed, in the Leges Henrici [drawn up during
the reign of Henry I]felonia is merely one among numerous crimes. Slightly later,
the term apparently designates "every crime of considerable gravity," referring
to the feudal relationship only in that the felon's land escheats to his lord. Even
more significant is a wider application of the word: the charge of felonia becomes
"an indispensable part of every charge of every crime that is to be punished by
death or mutilation." However this semantic amplification occurred, "it bears
witness to a deep change in thought and feeling. All the hatred and contempt
which are behind the word felon are enlisted against the criminal, murderer, robber, thief, without reference to any breach of the bond of homage and fealty."29
In the Leges Henrici, the Anglo-Saxon practices of wer, blood-feud, bot and
wite are still evident. However, in the course of the twelfth century there occurs
a transition towards new definitions of crimes as well as substitutes for old punishments. In fact, it is upon what was to be the later criminal law that the twelfth
century left its greatest mark. By the end of that period, as Pollock and Maitland
assert, one can "already see the broad outlines which will be visible throughout
the coming ages."30
In connection with criminal law and the jurisdictional powers of the king, it is
very important to point out several significant changes that took place in the
latter half of the twelfth century: the development of the doctrine of felony, the
supplantation of the wites by capital punishment, the introduction of the royal
procedures of indictment and inquest.31Furthermore, the definition of the royal
pleas at that time is meaningful. Of the king we learn that "he reserves nothing
for himself 'except those things which belong to the king's crown,' 'except justice
of life and member,' 'except murder, treasure trove, rape and breach of the
peace.' " For the purpose of the present study, it is imperative to note that there
will be an extension of both the concept of the king's peace and that of felony. In
fact, all grave crimes will become felonies punishable by life and limb.32
2

Medieval Feudalism (Ithaca, 1956), p. 34.

28Hollyman, p. 152.
29Pollock and Maitland, I, 303-4.
30Ibid., ii, 448.

31Ibid., I, 576.
32 Ibid., I, 577. For a more recent, but briefer account of many of the same points, see T. F. T.
Plucknett, Edward I and Criminal Law (Cambridge, 1965), especially pp. 28, 48-9, 65-76 for references to Henry II.

84

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

The notion of felony expands so much and becomes so complicated that a

definition offelonia itself was no longer possible; one could merely list those crimes
comprising the category of felonies. A few generalizations, however, may be
offered about the "legal effects" of felony during the early thirteenth century. A
felony is an offence that can be prosecuted by an appeal in which the accuser
usually offers battle. The penalties for felony are several: there can be either loss
of life or limb, even outlawry, if a man accused of felony has become fugitive. The
felon's lands escheat to his lord or to his king, and there is confiscation of his
goods. So pertinent to the discussion of Marie's narrative of Bisclavret is the following information that it merits our full attention. As we might expect, by
Bracton's time the term felony not only implies "a certain gravity in the harm
done" but also, and even more significantly, "a certain wickedness in the doer of
it." In addition, felonia has come to designate a moral guilt deserving a punishment of the highest sort, so that there is a frequent distinction between various
homicides, including "homicide by felony" and "homicide by misadventure."
Moreover, within this context felonia is often associated with the term malitia
excogitata, or malitia praecogitata (malice aforethoughtor malice prepense). In the
thirteenth century the chancery was beginning to draw a contrast between a
homicide by misadventure, which was deserving of pardon, and a homicide committed in felonia et per malitiam praecogitatam.33
Our knowledge of the evolving meaning of felonia has almost been completed.
We have already learned that, about the year 1200, felonious homicide is distinguished from other kinds of homicide. But we must also be aware that "every
treason was a felony." About the year 1200, furthermore, men were not outlawed
except for felony. Pollock and Maitland elaborate their view of utlagatio, adding
that "the extension of outlawry to smaller offences, in particular, trespass contra
pacem Regis, was just taking place in Bracton's day." For the thirteenth century
in general, it can be said that, with minor exceptions, "the gulf between the felonies and the minor offences was broad and deep."34
We, the readers, remembering well what we have learned concerning felonia,
should now turn again to the text of Bisclavret. The king carries out, successfully,
the counsel given him by the wise man (vv. 255-60) to learn from the lady why
the beast hates her. In the wife's account (in which she tells the king everything
about her husband and his aventure), it is significant that she mentions at once
her act of treachery ("Comment ele l'aveit trahi / E sa despoille li toli": vv. 2678). The verb trahir not only reminds us of Marie's earlier judgment upon the
lady's behavior ("Issi fu Bisclavret trahiz / E par sa femme maubailiz"; vv.
125-6) but also immediately suggests to us the word traisun. (And we already
know with what other term of law the word traisun is associated.) Yet the sover83 Pollock and Maitland, II, 466-8. A
fascinating discussion of the concept of malice aforethoughtis
Maitland's early article, "The Early History of Malice Aforethought," reprinted in CollectedPapers,
ed. H. A. L. Fisher (Cambridge, 1911), I, 304-28). Page 316, where felony is equated with treason,
and pp. 317-18 where reference is made to the king's peace, are relevant to the present study.
84Ibid., II, 467, n. 3.

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

85

eign, at this point in the story, does not comment upon the lady's treachery, or
even call her wicked. All that is known to us of the king's reaction to the lady's
story is his peremptory command that the stolen clothing be sent for. His reaction
to the part the wife played in her husband's aventureis delayed until a much later
moment, after the beast has undergone the animal-to-man transformation possible through the retrieval of the clothing, and after the king has joyously welcomed the lost knight, asleep upon his sovereign's bed.3
Before we are allowed to see the baron arise from the bed, Marie shifts to narrative summary (vv. 302-14) in which she recounts how the king metes out reward and punishment. It is precisely at this point in the story-line of Bisclavret
that Marie's technique of narration again diverges from that seen in Lanval. For
not only is there the afore-mentioned shift from a staged scene in the king's bedroom (where Marie allows the events to unfold themselves before our eyes) to a
narrative summary, there is also a lack of emphasis given to the events so briefly
presented in vv. 302-8. The brevity of the resume strikingly contrasts with the
expanded episode of the trial in Lanval. What is more, that the events recounted
in those few lines are as juridical in nature as the trial in Lanval is a remarkable
narrative detail which no critic of Marie's Lais, I think, has ever before seen.
Marie now concisely presents a lengthy legal action when she states "Tute sa
tere li rendi" (v. 303).36But the event reported in vv. 302-3 (v. 304, "Plus li duna
ke jeo ne di," is parenthetical)37logically follows in time the events that Marie
relates a few lines later, in vv. 305-8. The shift in sequence of events that the
reader thus finds here is an effective variant of the rhetorical procedure of hysteron
proteron,so often used by Marie. This reversal of order in the events recounted is
surely intended to emphasize the legal punishment of the couple meted out by
the king.
The last time we see the shadowy forms of the wife and her lover ("La femme
ad del pais ostee / E chacie de la cuntree. / Cil s'en alat ensemble od li, / Pur ki
sun seignur ot trahi": vv. 305-8),38 her predominance is insisted upon once more
in the story. In vv. 305-6 where she is the object of the king's action,39her exile
is twice predicated. The lover, who had served as her tool ("Pur ki sun seignur ot
trahi": v. 308), is presented as merely following her, to share in her punishment.
36Another example of a human who was made to live like a beast in the field is that of Nebuchadnezzar, although his exile was God's punishment for his sin of pride, and the duration of his banishment was seven years.
36In connection with the forfeiture of the felon's land to his lord or to his king, the important phrase
to remember is 'year, day and waste.' Pollock and Maitland state (II, 449-50) that "even in the nineteenth century the king's right to 'year, day and waste' of the felon's lands remained as a memorial
of the time when the decree of outlawry was a decree of fire and sword."
87Marie's interpolation is enigmatic. Is she simply being humorous (for she has not even told us
what the king gave), or does she wish to imply something else?
38For the third and final time, the wife's betrayal of her husband is explicitly stated.
39Among the types of puinishment for adultery listed by Stith Thompson, Motif-Index of Folk
Literature (6 vols.; rev. and enlarged ed.; Bloomington: 1955-1958), are the cutting-off of the nose,
and banishment (v (1957), 231 and 227); banishment is also mentioned as a punishment for treachery
(v (1957), 296).

86

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

Why does Marie choose banishment as the punishment for the guilty pair of
lovers? One reason could be that they had sought to banish, with much more
horrible consequences, spiritual and physical, the husband. Thus, just as in the
lay of Equitan, where also the wife betrays her good husband with a lover and
seeks to rid herself of him, the guilty pair would be made to suffer a fate similar to
the one they had intended for her husband. As to the fate suffered only by the
wife, the similarity of her punishment by Bisclavret who marks her as a beast,
and her crime committed against him, is fully obvious.
There may well have been another reason for Marie's choice of punishment. In
English medieval law the wolf was associated with the ceremony of outlawry. The
sentence passed upon the outlaw contained the formula 'let him bear (he wears)
the head of a wolf'; it is found in the laws of Canute (7, 3): "Lupinum enim gerit
caput quod anglice wulfes heafod dicitur"), and continues in use in the thirteenth
century.40

It is true that banishment and outlawry represent different legal procedures.

There is, however, enough in common between them to have suggested to Marie
as penalty for the guilty pair who had, with malice prepense, I believe, sought to
make a wolf forever of Bisclavret, a punishment similar, at least, to that which
confers the status of a wolf on a condemned man. And we have already learned
that, by the year 1200, "every treason was a felony," and also that about the year
1200 "men were not outlawed for crimes falling short of felony."'4 Might not
Marie's use of the verb chacier in v. 306 faintly recall the following form of sentence: "he [the outlaw] shall be driven away as a wolf, and chased so far as men
chase wolves farthest"?42

It would seem that, by the time of Marie, the two penalties of banishment and
outlawry were almost indistinguishable. In fact, Andre Reville43has declared:
Ouipouvait vivre l'outlaw?Pour echappera la mort, il devait se soustraireaux regards
de ses compatriotes,se refugierau sein des forets ou en des regionsmarecageuseset
inhabitees.Deja c'etait, sous une forme deguisee, le bannissement,1'expulsionhors
du cercledes vivants. Mais en outre il arrivapeu a peu, a mesureque les conquerants
saxons et danois se fixerenta demeuresur le sol anglaiset s'y multiplierent,que les
forets furent entamees, defricheesou sillonneesde sentiers, les marecageslentement
desseches:alors, pour vivre, l'outlawdut fuir dans les royaumesvoisins.Ainsi la mise
hors la loi fut fatalementdoubleede 1'exil.Cette transformationlogiquese manifeste
clairementdans les textes eux-memes.PItreun outlaw,au temps d'Edgar, c'est etre
exile; rentreren grace, c'est revenirdans la patrie: "Sit utlaga, id est exul vel exlex,
nisi rex ei patriamconcedat."Dans les lois d'Aethelred,dans celles de Canut, les mots
d'utlahet de forisbannitusparaissentconcurremment,dans les m6mestextes et avec
le meme sens. Enfin Canut ordonnaitformellementde quitterle pays a tous ceux qui
avaient subi cette condamnation:"Praecipimusut... apostatae et utlagae Dei et
40See KirbyFlowerSmith, "AnHistoricalStudy of the Werewolf
in Literature,"PMLA, ix (New
Series,Vol. II) [1894],1-42, especiallypp. 26-7, and also Pollockand Maitland,I, 476. The title of
Felons.
the chapter-division
beginningon p. 476 deservesour attention:Outlawsand Convicted

41Pollock and Maitland, II, 467, n. 3.

4 SabineBaring-Gould,TheBookof Were-wolves
(London,1865),p. 49.
43 "L'"Abjuratio

especiallyp. 7.

Regni," Histoire d'une institution anglaise," Revue Historique,

(1892), 1-42,

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

87

hominum patriam exeant, si non resipuerint et digne poeniteant." Entre la peine de

1'abjuration,qui entratnaitl'exil perp6tuel,la mort civile, la confiscationdes biens,

et la mise hors la loi qui, au temps des Anglo-Saxons,produisaittous les memeseffets,
il y avait, on l'avouera,de singulieresanalogies.
We have learned how severe was the penalty of outlawry under the AngloSaxons. As laws and kingship become stronger, it is the king who decides the fate
of numerous criminals. It is in the king's power to take life and to select the kind
of death, just as it is his right to take only a limb. He can just as well "insist on
banishment or abjuration of his realm," or even the confiscation of chattels. An
important fact not to be overlooked is that the person who has committed any
of the grave crimes causing outlawry does not have a right to any particular punishment. This principle explains the ease with which the Norman kings changed
punishments, without recourse to legislation. Under Henry II, loss of hand and
foot became the practice, but we also learn that "he hanged homicides and exiled
traitors."44
Given our knowledge both of English law and of Marie's habitual technique of
variation, it is perfectly clear that in the narrative summary of vv. 302-3 and
vv. 305-8 in Bisclavret Marie "throws away" an effect. Whereas the episode of
Lanval's trial is the longest narrative division of that poem, in Bisclavret Marie
has chosen to reduce to their essential facts two juridical procedures (restitution
of land to Bisclavret, the outlawry of the treacherous wife and her lover), procedures that might well have been familiar to her contemporaries, just as the
legal proceedings of a jugement might well have been known to them.
To return to the account of the wife's punishment, we learn (in vv. 309-14)45
that the disfigurement inflicted by the beast is not limited to her alone; it is transmitted to some of the couple's female offspring. Thus the children themselves will
be a punishment of the wife. We may, then, discern three stages in the wife's punishment for treachery; first, the ripping off of her nose; next, the expulsion from
the kingdom; and then, the noseless children. From the use of plusurs and del
lignage (v. 312), the reader has the feeling that this punishment will go on for
countless generations. And why is the wife's noseless condition passed on only to
her female progeny? Is Marie suggesting that the wife's was a particularly female
sin? That the wife's punishment is three-fold,46in contrast to that of the lover,
may be due to the fact that, in the act of treachery committed against Bisclavret,
her guilt was by far the greater.
Several more distinctions between Bisclavret and Lanval are apparent in the
44Pollockand Maitland,ii, 461.
4aWhy shouldthe couplewait to have children?Is it becausethe wife has to have the markof the
beastuponherbeforehermotherhoodcouldbecomea curse?
46The deviceof numberparallelism(so effectivelyusedby Mariein Le Fresne)is now apparentin
the wife'sthree-foldpunishmentand the threeoccasionsin the narrativewhentreasonis mentioned:
first,in Marie'scondemnationof the wife'ssin: "Issifu Bisclavrettrahiz/ E parsa femmemaubailiz"
(vv. 125-6); secondly,in the wife'sself-accusationspokento the king: "Tut li cunta de sun seignur:
/ Comentele l'aveit trahi / E sa despoilleli toli" (vv. 266-8); thirdly,in the summaryof the king's
punishmentof the untrustworthywife and her lover: "La femmead del pais ostee / E chaciede la
cuntree./ Cil s'en alat od li, / Pur ki sun seignurot trahi" (vv. 305-8).

88

A Rapprochement betweenBisclavret and Lanval

treatment of the respective conclusions. Lanval's hasty departure from King

Arthur's court merits our consideration. For in spite of his acquittal, Lanval, by
his assertive movement, not only exiles himself from the king (and from the
court), he also loses the service of the king. These were, as the reader may recall,
the two possible outcomes of his trial predicted (cf. vv. 459-60: " 'Tut sun servise
pert del rei, / E sil deit cungeer de sei' "), should Lanval be unable to produce his
warrantor and thus free himself of the two charges (felunie and a mesfait, cf. vv.
439-40) against him. Thus this lay, which begins with Lanval being estranged
from human relationship because of the king's neglect and the courtiers' envy,
ends with his severing of human relationships forever. The ending corresponds to
Lanval's offer to the lady at the beginning of the action (cf. v. 128, 'Pur vus
guerpirai tutes genz'). And just as his adventure begins with Lanval upon a horse,
so does it end. But this time, Lanval is not all alone, as he was in the beginning.
The lay of Bisclavret, on the contrary, opens with the protagonist's periodic
exile from humanity which becomes, for one year, a complete exile from mankind.
With the king's recognition of the animal's humanity, gentleness and humility,
and his order that the beast not be killed, the first stage of Bisclavret's return to
mankind begins, ending with the king's discovery of the lost baron asleep on the
king's bed. The king's restitution of Bisclavret's domain is most probably accompanied by the knight's restoration to the king's service.
In both Lanval and Bisclavret the final portion of the story-line is composed of
narrative summary. In Lanval only four lines ("Od li s'en vait en Avalun, / Ceo
nus recuntent li Bretun, / En un isle que mut est beaus; / La fu ravi li dameiseaus": vv. 641-44) are given over to the resume of events that took place after
Lanval's startling leap upon his mistress' horse. Lanval's agile upward leap is, in
fact, the last human activity to which we are witness in the lay. After that, we see
him no more. It is as if, at one moment, he were there upon the perrun, and at the
next, he had suddenly (and magically) vanished. Indeed, we are told twice about
his departure, first matter-of-factly, with the statement of his own voluntary
activity ("Od li s'en vait en Avalun": v. 641), secondly, his arrival at his destination where he had been precipitously carried ("La fu ravi li dameiseaus": v. 644).
In Bisclavretthe end of the narrative is, as we have already seen, a thirteen-line
passage (vv. 302-14) of narrative summary. Whereas in the four final lines of
Lanval Marie had moved very far in space, away from the dismounting-block
placed outside the sale of Arthur's court, to the mysterious Avalon of faerie, in
Bisclavret Marie moves very far ahead in time. For she moves from the given
moment of the king's embrace which ends the story of Bisclavret, to the timeless
repetition of the curse upon the faithless wife's female descendants. With the final
word of the narrative (esnasees, v. 314) there is a graphic suggestion of noseless
women, generation after generation. Nor have we moved ahead only in time. We
have also moved away in space, from the staged scene in the king's royal chamber
within a human dwelling to beyond the confines of the realm, away from any
human habitation or human being, to nowhere.
BOSTON UNIVERSITY