highest purity of morals with the manners of chivalry, will be greatly deceived. Indeed, in their moral tendency, many of the romances are highly reprehensible.' In some, as Perceforest, particular passages are exceptionable, and the general scope in others, where the principal character is a knight, engaged, with the approbation of all, in a love intrigue with the wife of his friend or his sovereign. In one of the best of these romances, Tristan carries on an amour through the whole work with the queen of his benefactor and uncle. I need not mention the gallantries of Lancelot and Geneura, nor the cold hard-hearted infidelity of Artus de la Bretagne. "The whole pleasure of these bookes," says Ascham, with some truth and naïveté, "standeth in two specyall poyntes, in open mans slaghter and bolde bawdrie, in which bookes those be counted the noblest knights that doe kill most men without any quarrell, and commit fowlest adoulteries by sutlest shifts, as Syr Launcelott with the wife of Kyng Arthure his maister; Syr Tristram with the wife of Kyng Marke his vncle; Syr Lamerocke with the wife of Kyng Lote, that was his own aunte. This is good stuffe for wise men to laugh at, or honest men to take pleasure at.”

1 Much of the morality blamed by Ascham is doubtless derived from semi-historical material, which the romancer could not suppress any more than Lord Tennyson in his Idylls of the King, without ceasing to embody in his work a mass of received legend which it must be remembered was current and to a large extent believed. In many episodes there seems an attempt to mitigate prior records in accordance with a higher standard. "If it were to be conceded that Wace, Layamon, and the whole cycle of romances of the Round Table, might have been consigned to oblivion without any serious injury to the cause of literature, we may be reminded that Don Quixote certainly, and Ariosto's Orlando most probably arose out of them. Perhaps Gorboduc, and Ferrex, and Porrex, might not be much missed from the dramatic literature of Europe; but what should we think of the loss of Lear and Cymbeline ? Let us, then, thankfully remember Geoffrey of Monmouth, to whom Shakespeare was indebted for the groundwork of those marvellous productions, and without whose Historia Britonum we should probably never have had them."-Quarterly Review, March, 1848, Rev. R. Garnett. Other romances evolved from or connected with Celtic or British traditions, would naturally find a place here, but the limits of our work would be unduly extended by notice of them. It will be sufficient to refer the reader for the most recent information upon them to Mr. Ward's "Catalogue of Romances," in the Department of Manuscripts, British Museum, 1883, etc., where he will find ample indications for the further pursuit of the subject.

CHAPTER IV.

ROMANCES OF CHIVALRY RELATING TO CHARLEMAGNE AND HIS PEERS.-CHRONICLE OF TURPIN.-HUON DE BORDEAUX.-GUERIN DE MONGLAVE.-GALLIEN RHETORÉ. -MILLES ET AMYS.-JOURDAIN DE BLAVES.-OGIER LE DANOIS, ETC.

IT

T was formerly shown that the romances relating to Arthur and the knights of the Round Table were in a great measure derived from the History of Geoffrey of Monmouth. It now remains for us to investigate what influence the chronicle falsely attributed to Turpin, or Tilpin, archbishop of Rheims, the contemporary of Charlemagne, exercised over the fabulous stories concerning that prince and his paladins.

The chronicle of Turpin is feigned to be addressed from Viennes, in Dauphiny, to Leoprandus, dean of Aquisgranensis (Aix la Chapelle), but was not written, in fact, till the end of the eleventh or beginning of the_twelfth century. Its real author seems not to be clearly ascertained, but is supposed by some to have been a Canon of Barcelona, who attributed his work to Turpin.1

1 Tilpinus, or Turpinus, said by Flodoardus (ob. 966) in his Historia Ecclesiæ Remensis, lib. ii. c. 16, to have been Archbishop of Rheims from about 753 to 800. The writers of Gallia Christiana say that he died in 794. He was archbishop in 778, when Charlemagne made his only recorded expedition into Spain, when the French rearguard was defeated in the Pyrenees, and, as Eginhart says, "Hruodlandus, Brittanici limitis præfectus," was slain. It is therefore quite possible that Tilpinus pronounced a funeral oration over Roland at Roncesvaux, an event which forms the climax of the present work, but no one now supposes that there is any real connection between the chronicler and the archbishop.

R. P. A. Dozy (Recherches sur l'histoire de la littérature de l'Espagne pendant le moyen âge, Paris, 1881, ii. pp. 372-431) has shown that the

This production, it is well known, turns on the expedition of Charlemagne to the peninsula. Some French writers have denied that Charlemagne ever was in Spain, but the authority of Eginhart is sufficient to establish the fact. It seems certain, that about the year 777, the assistance of Charlemagne was invoked by one of those numerous sovereigns, among whom the Spanish provinces were at that time divided; that, on pretence of defending this ally from the aggressions of his neighbours, he extended his conquests over a great part of Navarre and Arragon; and, finally, that on his return to France he experienced a partial defeat from the treacherous attack of an unexpected enemy. These simple events have given rise to the famous battle of Roncesvalles, and the other extravagant fictions recorded in the chronicle of Turpin.

Charlemagne, according to that work, having conquered Britain, Italy, Germany, and many other countries, proposed to give himself some repose, though the Saracens were not yet extirpated; but, while in this frame of mind, being fortunately addicted to star-gazing, he one night perceived a cluster of stars,' which, commencing their procession at the Frisian sea, moved by way of Germany and France into Gallicia. This phenomenon being repeated, attracted the thoughts of Charles, but he could form no rational conjecture as to what was portended. The prodigy, which eluded the waking researches of the monarch, was satisfactorily expounded in a vision. A figure appeared to Charles while he was asleep, introduced itself as the apostle James, and announced that the planetary first five chapters of Turpin were the work of a French monk at Compostella, and cannot have been written before 1065, and probably not before 1131. He agrees with Gaston Paris (De Pseudo-Turpino, Paris, 1865) that the remaining chapters are by another hand, or rather by other hands. G. Paris has reviewed Dozy's work in the Romania, July, 1882, pp. 419, etc., accepting most of his conclusions, and finally conjecturing that the whole work may have been completed towards 1150 by Aimeri Picaud, the author of the Itinerary to Compostella. Turpin's Chronicle has been republished by the Montpellier Société pour l'Etude des Langues Romanes, by F. Castets, under the title of Turpini Historia Karoli Magni et Rotholandi, 1880. See Ward, Cat., vol. i. pp. 950, 951 and 546-560.

1 "Intentione sagaci," says Eginhart, "siderum cursum curiosissime rimabatur." (C. 25.)

march typified the conquest of Spain, adding, that he had himself been slain by King Herod, and that his body had long lain concealed in Gallicia. Hence, continued he, I am astonished that you have not delivered my land from the yoke of the Saracens. The apostle's appropriation of territory was somewhat whimsical, but Charles did not dispute his title. This prince, however, seems not to have been renowned for a retentive memory, and accordingly the apostle took the precaution, on the following night, of renewing his suggestion.

In consequence of these successive admonitions, Charles entered Spain with a large army [c. 1], and invested Pampeluna. He lay three months before this town, but could not take it; because, says the chronicle, it was impregnable. At the end of this period, however, he bethought himself of prayer, on which the walls followed the example of their tottering prototypes of Jericho. The Saracens who chose to embrace Christianity were spared, but those who persisted in infidelity were put to the sword. Charles then paid his respects to the sarcophagus of James, and Turpin had the satisfaction of baptizing a great proportion of the Gallicians in the neighbourhood [c. 2].

The main object with this bishop and his master was to destroy all the idols which could be discovered; an undertaking which, among a people who abominate idolatry, must have required a very patient research. At length these images were completely extirpated, except an obstinate mawmet at Cadiz, which could not be broken, because it was inhabited by a cluster of demons [c. 4].

After this Charles founded a number of churches, and endowed them with much wealth; grants which were afterwards reclaimed with great zeal by a successor, who boasted him as a prototype [c. 5].

Charles had scarcely returned to France, when a strenuous pagan, named Aigolandus, recovered the whole country, which obliged the French monarch to return with great armies, of which he gave the command to Milo, the father of Orlando [c. 6].

While these troops were lying at Bayonne, a soldier, named Romaricus, died, after having ordered one of his relations to sell his horse, and distribute the price among

the clergy and the poor. His kinsman sold the horse, but spent the money in carousing. After thirty days the deceased, who had been detained that time in purgatory, appeared in a dream, upbraided his faithless executor for the misapplication of the alms, and notified to him that he might depend on being in Tartarus in the course of the following day. While reporting this uncomfortable assurance next morning to his fellow-soldiers, he is hurried off by a flight of demons, and dashed against a rock as a preliminary to subsequent punishment [c. 7].

After this there follows a long account of the war with Aigolandus, which was first carried on by two hundred, or two thousand, soldiers, on one part, engaging an equal number of the enemy: but at length a general battle was fought, in which were slain forty thousand Christians, Milo the commander of the forces, and the horse of Charles. Next day, however, the French having been reinforced by four thousand men from the coast of Italy, Aigolandus fled to a different part of the peninsula, and Charles departed for France [c. 8].

Aigolandus now carried the war into Gascony, followed by the Moabites, Ethiopians, Parthians, and Africans [c. 9]. At Sanctona (Saintonge), previous to a great battle, certain Christians having fixed their spears in the ground towards night, found them decorated next morning with leaves, which signified to the proprietors of these warlike instruments that they were about to obtain the crown of martyrdom [c. 10]. Aigolandus was defeated in the battle with the loss of four thousand of his troops, and fled to Pampeluna. Thither he was followed by Charles, and an army of a hundred and thirty-four thousand men [c. 11]. On this occasion the reader is presented with a list of the chief warriors, among whom are mentioned the names of Orlando, Rinaldo, Oliviero, and Gano. Charles having arrived at Pampeluna, received a message from Aigolandus, requesting a truce till his army should come forth fully prepared for war [c. 12].

This being granted, Aigolandus in the interval paid a visit to Charles, and was much astonished to hear himself attacked as an usurper in the Arabic tongue, which Charles had learned at Coletus (Toulouse). Aigolandus expostu