 |
| Walter Map taking down a story of the adventures of the Knights of the Round Table on the quest of the Holy Grail at the dictation of King Arthur, from the Manchester Arthurian Romance, c.1300 |
The elements of the Vulgate Cycle, comprising The History of the Holy Grail, The Story of Merlin, Lancelot, The Quest of the Holy Grail and The
Death of King Arthur, are cleverly interlaced in a number of ways. The last
two are linked, or better, locked together, by the introduction of a putative
author, Walter Map. Here are the passages which outline this linking; first
from the end of The Quest of the Holy
Grail,
When they had dined King Arthur
summoned his clerks who were keeping a record of all the adventures undergone
by the knights of his household. When Bors had related to them the adventures
of the Holy Grail as witnessed by himself, they were written down and the
record kept in the library at Salisbury,
whence Master Walter Map extracted them in order to make his book of the Holy
Grail for love of his lord King Henry, who had the story translated from Latin
into French. And with that the tale falls silent and has no more to say about
the Adventures of the Holy Grail.
Next, from the beginning of The Death of King Arthur:
After Master Walter Map had put
down in writing as much as he thought sufficient about the Adventures of the Holy Grail, his lord King Henry II felt that what
he had done would not be satisfactory unless he told about the rest of the
lives of those he had previously mentioned and the deaths of those whose
prowess he had related in his book. So he began this last part; and when he had
put it together he called it The Death of
King Arthur, because the end of it relates how King Arthur was wounded at
the battle of Salisbury and left Girflet who had long been his companion, and
how no one ever again saw him alive. So Master Walter begins this last part
accordingly.
And finally from the end of The Death of King Arthur:
At this point Master Walter Map
will end the Story of Lancelot,
because he has brought everything to a proper conclusion according to the way
it happened; and he finishes his book here so completely that no one can
afterwards add anything to the story that is not complete falsehood.
This seems very convincing evidence that the author of these
two last works and perhaps of the cycle as a whole was Master Walter Map.
Unfortunately “Map died before the works attributed to him were written”.
 |
| The body of Elaine, the Maid of Astolat, arrives at Camelot |
BLOG QUESTION: Why would the group of anonymous Cistercian
monks responsible for constructing the Vulgate Cycle want to see the work
attributed to Walter Map?
The Cistercian monks would seek to attribute their work to the likes of Walter Map because then any blame from any party would rest with this man who had already passed. Map was a clerk for Henry II and therefore would have been able to write these stories. The monks referred to Map as the author on numerous occasions because it would convince the readers that he wrote it. If the Saxon’s didn’t like that Arthur was mentioned killing hundreds of their people or if the Church didn’t like that Arthur ignored the Pope when he said not to wage war against Lancelot, it wouldn’t matter because all the blame would lie with a dead man.
ReplyDeleteWalter Map died in 1209; five to ten years before the composition of the Vulgate cycle and therefore he cannot be the author. The true authors are anonymous and may have credited Map for several reasons. Henry II was linked to the Arthurian legend. Walter Map was a cleric in the court of Henry II. Map became a favourite of Henry II and travelled with him. As a cleric he was Henry’s representative at the Third Lateran Council and rouse to becoming archdeacon of Oxford. By associating Map with the Vulgate Cycle the writers may have wished to lend credibility to the writings, giving the Vulgate Cycle a religious authority and validity.
ReplyDeleteThe Vulgate cycle is a series of romantic stories which include magic and fairy tales, these themes are in keeping with Map’s earlier, and only verified works of De nugis curialium, also written in prose.
The real anonymous Cistercian writers of the Vulgate Cycle may have chosen to use Walter Map as the perceived voice to their tales for two reasons – firstly, to gain credibility for their work, and secondly, to distract from the real authorship. As he was already a recognised published author of the De Nugis Curialium, he may have brought some authority to the series or at least extra belief in its importance or relevance as a continuation of his work in relation to courtly life. For this aspect the fact that he had actually died before the Cycle was written is useful as he is not around to dispute the claim but it was still within a recent enough period that the readership of the time may have believed him to be the real author just posthumously published. Modern linguistic analysis allows more accurate dating to show that the Cycle was definitely after his time. The second reason for choosing to use Walter Map is as a scapegoat author, a figure who could be believable, was not around to argue about it and could still distract from the Cistercians who actually wrote the Cycle. It could be that they did not want to be associated directly with a work that referenced courtly dramas, betrayals and illicit affairs, for fear of repercussions, but still desired to communicate Christian values in a manner which suited the social structure of the time. I think it was a bit of both that first prompted the use of a scapegoat and then made the choice to use Walter Map in particular.
ReplyDeleteAs discussed in 'The Romance Tradition', the attribution to Walter Map is considered by some to be an elaborate 'fiction of authority', which uses the existence of Walter Map at the time and place the stories take place as a way of lending credibility and truth to them. Further, the Cisterian monks would encourage and want to see the stories attributed to another author as the plots of the stories are matters with which monks should not be concerned, for example, the tale of the love between Lancelot and Guinevere, where is it said that they 'lapsed into sin' with each other. This is not a topic monks should have been writing about, as it would be seen to be promoting non-religious behaviour. Given that Lancelot's relationship with Guinevere is central to the romance, it would certainly be a dangerous thing for the Cisterian monks to take responsibility for drafting the story.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chelsea and Jordan's main arguments for why the Cisterian monks may have wanted their stories linked to Walter Map. It seems likely that one motivation for attributing the Vulgar Cycle to Walter Map is that it may provide some credibility. This credibility may have arisen from Walter Map's place in Henry II's court, as a cleric. Walter Map would therefore provide an educated and courtly voice for the Vulgar Cycle. The second likely motivation is that if the Vulgar cycle caused political tension or conflict, the Cisterian monks would be safe from blame. Walter Map, being dead, would not be able to dispute any accusations placed on him and therefore the anonymous authors could include potentially politically aggrevating ideas in the Vulgar Cycle.
ReplyDeleteAs stated by Jane Burns, the inclusion of Walter Map as an author of the Vulgate cycle could be ‘a part of an elaborate ‘fiction of authority’’ which also has sources such as Merlin and Christ. In fact, this was possibly done in order to give more authority to the non-sacred writing of the Vulgate cycle. However, in my opinion, the group of anonymous Cistercian monks are probably attributing authorship to Walter Maps because of the conflicting themes of adultery, marriage and celibacy (which is preached by the Church) in the Vulgate Cycle and also because an element of anti-British sentiment (especially in Prose Lancelot – Arthur is portrayed as fairly pathetic, succumbing to the false Guinevere; whilst Lancelot (who is French) is seen as the true hero who saves his love) – thus this may have been less incriminating because Walter was a clerk at the court of King Henry II and supposedly dedicated this writing to his lord.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that I have to agree with the common consensus:
ReplyDeleteIn order for any story to even receive some sort of attention, it needs a strong back-bone. Although Walter Map may have died many years earlier, he was notorious and his writings were 'educated'.
To top it all off, if something were to go horribly wrong, who wouldn't want another person to point the finger to? These monks found an escape route.
One critical element that has been overlooked thus far in the discussion of the attribution of the Vulgate Cycle to Walter Map is the enmity shared between Map and the Cistercian monks. For example, Map vowed to do justice to all men as a king's justice, except to the Jews and the Cistercians (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09635a.htm). This means that the attribution of the cycle to Map is more than likely not a defensive action of deflection of blame or scapegoating, but rather an offensive action of deliberate posthumous slander by the Cistercian monks in order to denigrate their opposition, especially in the eyes of the church. The effect of this can still be seen today, as it is said that "his (i.e. Map's) conversation can hardly have tended to edification", and "the place of Walter Map, however, is rather in the history of profane literature than in ecclesiastical history" in the Catholic Encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09635a.htm)
ReplyDeleteI too agree with the comments above. The monk’s idea of attributing their work to Walter Map was two-fold: mainly concerned with increasing its authority and their safety. Walter Map was a cleric in King Henry II’s court, he lends credibility by virtue of this position and so attributing The Vulgate Cycle to Map increases its influence. Any religious agenda being pushed by the monks through The Vulgate Cycle would stand a greater chance of a positive reception if it came from an established, trusted source associated with the authority of a King. Furthermore, perhaps the monks were tentative about the sinful themes and figured it would be safer for them if there was someone else to cop any potential backlash. Why then, were the monks writing about such themes? I still find it odd that these celibate old monks had such an active imagination. Perhaps they believed this format was the best way to communicate their ethos.
ReplyDeleteThe group of anonymous Cistercian monks responsible for constructing the Vulgate Cycle may have wanted to see the work attributed to Walter map, to add legitimacy to their work. For Walter was not only an already established and famous writer, but was also known to be well educated and a courtier to Henry II of England, who had been sent to see Pope Alexander III and King Louis VII. Additionally, he was established within the church, being nominated for a Bishop position more then once. Therefore, the work would have more power if it cam from him then some unknown monks.
ReplyDeleteAs many of the above comments suggest, it seems as though this depiction of Walter Map as the true author of the Vulgate Cycle is used as a means of both giving the text some authority, as well as allowing the monks to write freely without fear of unfavourable religious ideas being attributed to them. As a cleric in Henry II's court, the figure of Walter Map would have provided the Cistercian monks with a reliable and historical authority to attribute the Vulgate Cycle to. The messages within some of the Vulgate Cycle stories themselves, such as the portrayal of Galahad as a Christ-like figure, would have seemed more reliable if the text was attributed to a widely known and respected cleric who was knowledgeable in such matters. As the Vulgate Cycle also involves stories of courtly love, Walter Map as a member of Henry II's court would have experienced first-hand such experiences, and in this way is portrayed as yet another authority on the theme of the text.
ReplyDeleteThe use of Walter Map is also an interesting contrast to Geoffrey of Monmouth's unknown, ancient British text that he attributes his work to. In the case of Walter, he is portrayed as a well-known and trusted authority, whereas Geoffrey of Monmouth's ancient text that he claims he took influence from is still not known and may not be real at all. As both Geoffrey's work and the Vulgate Cycle appeared to have great influence on other writings, it is difficult to ascertain whether the inclusion of two very different sources had a varying impact on how each text may have been received and, more importantly, believed, by certain members of society. However, both are excellent examples of ways in which different authors have used what they consider to be credible sources or authorities on the Arthurian legend to support their own text and convey an important message of nationality, religious faith or love to their contemporary audience.
The response to this question seems pretty homogenous and I also agree.
ReplyDeleteCrediting Walter Map gives credibility to the story as he has been established as the author of De Nugis Curialium and a cleric of Henry II while also providing an escape route if any were to dislike it.
Alexandra also makes a good point about how the stories in the Vulgate Cycle contained themes that weren't appropriate for monks to be writing about and advocating.
As much as I do not want to be repetitive, I totally agree with the general consensus on this topic. The idea that the monks needed someone in an authoritative position to attribute the Vulgate Cycle to seems to fit perfectly with me. The topics that are themed in the Cycle as someone mentioned earlier ripple around adultery and 'conflicting themes,' of also marriage and celibacy. By having someone not related to the Church by in a respected and educated position to tell these stories, if anything were to backfire on the construction of the Vulgate Cycle, due to Map's death, the Cistercian monks would be free of any involvement and because of Map's reputation, protected their safety. Also, any religious promotion would be recepted positively perhaps due to this authrotiy and respectability of their author. From the passages Carol has given us in the discussion section, it seems to me all they have had to do to ascert Map's involvement is repeat his name a couple of times to get our attention. Well, it worked.
ReplyDeleteEleanor Jackson
ReplyDeleteMy apologies also for reiterating the above comments, as I do agree with them.
The two most probable reasons for the Cistercian monks attributing the Vulgate Cycle to Walter Map, are those of validation and ensuring that they escape blame from displeased audiences. Map was indeed a cleric to King Henry II, so to claim he wrote the Vulgate Cycle does give it credibility, and links it to French royalty. As mentioned above, the contents of the stories are quite controversial, especially the adulterous love affair between Lancelot and Guinevere. If readers had any issues with the writings, the monks would have been able to lay the blame on Map, especially since Lancelot was indeed a Frenchman.
I agree with the above comments. Any potential backlash is directed away from them and they can use a voice of authority to lend credibility to their works. The fact that nobody can debate a point with him any longer and the statement that he has spoken the whole truth and anything else is false also helps establish it as history rather than story. The use of Walter Map may be because they wanted to sully his reputation, or it may have been because they wanted to use someone who they wouldn't care if it was received strongly or poorly.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that Map worked in the court of King Henry II no doubt would have given the story extra credibility, particularly given the ties between Henry and Arthur. I also agree with Steph that crediting Map with the Vulgate Cycle could also have been a way of ensuring that they could avoid any criticisms.
ReplyDelete