Estudi introductori - Einleitende Studie - Introductory study - Estudio introductorio - Introduction - Studio introduttivo - Estudi introductòri

Nicholson, Derek E. T. The Poems of the Troubadour Peire Rogier . Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1976.

CONTENTS: Preface List of abbreviations Introduction I. Life of Peire Rogier II. The Place of Peire Rogier's Work in the Poetry of the Troubadours III. Metric Tables IV. Order of the Poems V. The Manuscripts VI. Choice of Base Manuscript; Establishment of Text; Explanatory Notes and Variants Vida Notes     THE POEMS OF THE TROUBADOUR PEIRE ROGIER   Preface The only previous complete edition of Peire Rogier’s poetry is that of Carl Appel, Das Leben und die Lieder des Trobadors Peire Rogier (Berlin, 1882). Reference should also be made to the duc de la Salle de Rochemaure’s Les Troubadours cantaliens (Aurillac, 1910), in the second volume of which R. Lavaud offers a full collection of Peire’s poems, based generally on Appel’s text and supplemented by notes and a translation. The preparation of a second edition of the twelfth-century troubadour was originally suggested to me by my postgraduate supervisor, Mr John Hathaway, ofthe Department of French Language and Literature at the University of Birmingham. The present volume is a modified form of my thesis, which was accepted for the award of the degree of M.A. of that university in 1969. Carl Appel’s edition has been a valuable guide and of considerable assistance to me; of particular interest is its excellent introduction, which contains an important section on the versification of Peire Rogier’s work in relation to that of the work of other troubadours. I have benefited, in the preparation of the present edition, in having available not only Appel’s work but also numerous editions, articles and commentaries on the poetry of the troubadours which have appeared since the end of the last century. My introduction includes an extensive section on Peire Rogier’s life and his relations with others which, it is hoped, will form a useful supplement to the observations originally made by Appel in his introduction. I have decided to provide for the poems and the Vida a more detailed critical apparatus than Appel does, offering in each case a detailed classification of manuscripts and an exhaustive list of variants. The base manuscript has been followed as far as possible in the establishment of the text and the opportunity taken to include in the notes to each poem and the Vida comments on the choice of particular readings. I have been fortunate in having at my disposal all the manuscripts which are known to contain Peire Rogier’s work, including those which were not available to Appel as well as those containing the relevant extracts from Matfre Ermengaud’s Breviari d’Amor. Although Lavaud offers a translation of the poems, neither his edition nor Appel’s contains a glossary. I have therefore chosen to provide a comprehensive glossary containing every word appearing in the text, parsed and with line references. I have followed Appel in including in this edition Peire Rotgier a trassaillir, Raimbaut d’Orange’s reply to Peire Rogier’s sirventes. In editing the poem I have chosen the same base manuscript (A) as W. T. Pattison in his edition of Raimbaut; (*) the resulting text therefore differs very little from his. It has also seemed appropriate to provide as appendices Jehan de Nostre Dame’s version of Peire Rogier’s life and some notes on the connections which Peire’s patron, the Viscountess Ermengarda of Narbonne, may have had with other troubadours. I am grateful to the following libraries which have provided me with books, manuscripts and other facilities: the library of the University of Birmingham; the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Florence; the reference division of the British Library; the Biblioteca Estense, Modena; the library of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne; the Pierpont Morgan Library of New York; the Bodleian Library, Oxford; the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris; the Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome. I am particularly grateful to my postgraduate supervisor, Mr John Hathaway, who has helped me considerably with his continued interest and knowledgeable advice. My deep gratitude is further expressed to my family for their constant support and encouragement. I wish also to thank Dr D. J. Shirt for his helpful advice in the final preparation of the manuscript. Finally, my sincere thanks are offered to the Sponsorship Committee for Publications of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne for the generous financial assistance which has made the publication of this work possible. Newcastle upon Tyne D. E. T. N.   List of abbreviations (other than references to works listed in the bibliography) acc. accusative adj. adjective adv. adverb art. article comp. comparative cond. conditional conj. conjunction dat. dative def. definite dem. demonstrative emphat. emphatic eth. dat ethic dative f. feminine fut. future imp. imperative imper. impersonal imperf. imperfect indef. indefinite indic. indicative inter. interjection interrog. interrogative intr. intransitive invar. invariable lit. literally m. masculine neut. neuter nom. nominative obj. object(ive) ord. ordinal part. participle partit. partitive perf. perfect pers. personal pl. plural pluperf. pluperfect poss. possessive prep. preposition pres. present pret. preterite pron. pronoun reflex. reflexive s. substantive sing. singular subj. subjunctive superl. superlative tr. transitive v. verb (↑)     INTRODUCTION   I. LIFE OF PEIRE ROGIER   Peire Rogier’s poetic activity is generally placed in the third quarter of the twelfth century, part of the Golden Age of Provençal poetry. (1) Of his work there remain eight cansos, including one of doubtful authenticity, and a sirventes addressed to Raimbaut d’Orange. Not a great deal is known about the poet’s life; the only sources of information at our disposal are the Provençal Vida, the poems themselves and possible references to Peire in the works of other troubadours. The imprecise and inconclusive nature of some of the information, combined with the absence of other independent sources, leaves a number of questions unresolved and makes a certain amount of speculation inevitable.   1. The Provençal Vida. B. Panvini has attempted to show that the Provençal Vidas of the troubadours, including that of Peire Rogier, were based on an independent source. He concludes that all the information contained in Peire’s Vida is, without exception, entirely reliable. (2) However, we prefer, like Appel, (3) to be much more cautious. While for some details, involving persons of the time, the biographer could have had available an independent authority, other parts of the Vida may well be merely an elaboration of assumptions based on the contents of certain of the poems. It is therefore appropriate to examine in detail the Vida’s account of Peire Rogier’s life, given below, in the light of what little biographical information is provided by the poems.   Peire Rogier, a native of the Auvergne, was a canon at Clermont. He was a man of noble character, handsome and affable, and was wise through learning as well as natural intelligence. He was a good singer and composer of songs. He left the canonry, became joglar and wandered from court to court; his songs were well received. He came to Narbonne, to the court of the lady Ermengarda, a lady of great worth and merit. She received him cordially and granted him considerable benefits. He fell in love with her and celebrated her in his vers and cansos. She gladly accepted the poems and he called her Tort-n’ avetz. He stayed with her at the court for a long time and it was thought that he received joy of love from her. She was reproached on this account by the people of that area. Through fear of what people were saying, she dismissed him and sent him away. He went away, doleful and pensive, full of care and grief, and came to Raimbaut d’Orange, as he stated in the sirventes which he composed about this man:   Lord Raimbaut, it is to see the comfort and fellowship you offer rather than on account of your wealth that, promptly and with all speed, I have come here; for when I depart I wish to know whether the praise you are given is justified and whether the reports one hears about you exceed or fall short of reality. I possess so much intelligence and knowledge and am so wise and shrewd that when I have viewed your behaviour I shall know, on my departure, the truth: whether the praise, as it is recounted, is well founded; for people at home are asking me about this.   He remained a long time with Raimbaut. He was next in Spain, where he stayed with the good King Alfonso of Castille and with the good King Alfonso of Aragon; he then stayed with the good Count Raimond of Toulouse. He was held in high esteem all the time he was in the world, but then he retired into the order of Grandmont, and it was there that he died.   Although no documentary evidence has been found to confirm that Peire was born in the Auvergne and was a canon of Clermont cathedral, (4) we should perhaps bear in mind the view of certain scholars that the authors of the Vidas attempted, as a rule, to be accurate and well informed about such details as a troubadour’s place of birth and death, his family background and his social class. (5) At the same time, we should not ignore the possibility, discussed later in this section, that the biographer based his statement about Peire Rogier’s beginnings on the conclusions he had drawn from the reference to the troubadour in Peire d’Alvernhe’s sirventes, Cantarai d’aqestz trobadors.   The Vida describes Peire as a gentils hom, which a number of scholars have taken to mean ‘gentilhomme’. However, we agree with Appel (6) that gentils tells us nothing about Peire’s extraction and prefer to interpret the word as meaning ‘of noble character’ rather than ‘of noble birth’. (7) Only very rarely does the title of nobility En appear with Peire’s name, and it is significant that neither of his contemporaries, Raimbaut d’Orange and Peire d’Alvernhe, uses the title in referring to him in their respective sirventes, Peire Rotgier a trassaillir and Cantarai d’aqestz trobadors. (8) The appearance of the title in the MSS CDRf, in Raimon Vidal’s Abrils issi’ e mais intrava and in the Breviari d’Amor (9) may well be explained by the confusion in the scribe’s mind between the troubadour and Peire Rogier de Mirepoix, a lord prominent in the early part of the thirteenth century. (10) It is also suggested that posthumous admirers of a celebrated troubadour would be quite likely to honour him with the title. (11)   It is appropriate, at this point, to mention the attempt by the duc de la Salle de Rochemaure in Les Troubadours cantaliens (12) to trace Peire Rogier’s ancestry. The conclusions which he reaches should be viewed with a good deal of scepticism. His theory, received with inevitable willingness by fellow Cantaliens (13) but rejected by other scholars, (14) is that Peire Rogier came from the family of the Lords of Rogiers, the present-day Rouziers (canton of Maurs, Cantal). (15) His arguments are accompanied by a number of detailed references to genealogies, but are based on the assumption, which we have shown to be doubtful, that Peire belonged to a family of noble class. (16)   The Vida recounts that, after leaving the canonry and becoming a joglar, Peire visited a number of courts and came to settle at the flourishing court of Ermengarda of Narbonne. The viscountess appears to have been an enthusiastic patron of the troubadours and was renowned for the wisdom and skill with which, for the greater part of half a century, she governed her lands. (17)   According to the Vida, Peire fell in love with Ermengarda and called her Tort-n’avetz. Panvini (18) considers that the biographer could not have deduced from the poems that Ermengarda was designated by this senhal, since nowhere in Peire’s work is her name mentioned. He concludes, therefore, that the biographer probably obtained this information from an independent source. However, the reference in III, l. 64 to n’Aimeric lo tos (cf. the note to this line) and the association of Tort-n’avetz with Narbones in V, l. 43 would seem to point fairly clearly to the viscountess.   It is quite possible, though not certain, that the biographer resorted to Peire’s work as the basis not only for his information about the senhal but also for his entire reference to the troubadour’s visit to Narbonne. No independent evidence has been found to verify the Vida’s account of the suspicion of a familiar relationship between Ermengarda and Peire or of the troubadour’s enforced departure from Narbonne. We suggest later (19) that the biographer may possibly have based the account, at least in part, on sections of poems VII and IX. If this is the case, and the details have not derived from an independent source, then some doubt should be attached to them. For any allusions to actual events or situations found in these poems are too vague for Ermengarda to be identified firmly with the lady concerned or for any other definite conclusions to be drawn. It is also worth remembering, in any consideration of IX, that the poem is of doubtful authenticity. (20) None of the references to Tort-n’avetz found in other songs lends any support to the Vida’s account of the circumstances of Peire’s departure, although each of the poems concerned appears to have been composed while the troubadour was absent from Narbonne. (21)   The Vida states that after leaving Narbonne Peire proceeded, full of grief, to Raimbaut d’Orange’s court, where he composed the sirventes, Seign’en Raymbaut. We might reasonably have expected that this poem, from which the biographer quotes an extract, would make reference to Peire’s distress on being dismissed from Ermengarda’s court. It contains, however, no hint of such a misfortune. In fact Peire explains, in the first stanza, that his reason for visiting Raimbaut is to learn what the situation is at his court and to see whether Raimbaut’s high reputation is merited for, he says, enqeront m’en lai entre nos (l. 7). (22) It is unlikely that anyone dismissed from an eminent court for the reason indicated in the Vida would be asked by members of that court to visit a court elsewhere and to report back on the conditions there. The contents of the first stanza and the absence in the poem of any allusion to Peire’s misfortune thus lead us to one of the following conclusions:     (a) The circumstances of Peire’s departure from Narbonne, as recounted by the Vida, are incorrect. (b) Peire’s visit to Raimbaut’s court took place before any dismissal from Narbonne. (c) Peire had not come to Raimbaut’s court direct from Narbonne but from another place not mentioned in the Vida.    The contents and tone of the sirventes and of the host’s reply would suggest that it is a question of a youthful Raimbaut receiving the older and more established Peire Rogier. Raimbaut’s youth is indicated by l. 33 of Seign’en Raymbaut (pel saur e bai) (23) and is further borne out by the modest and polite way in which he replies to the older troubadour, his senior. (24) His attitude forms, in fact, a sharp contrast with his usual boastful and haughty manner. (25) Peire, for his part, assumes the role of counsellor and for much of the sirventes adopts the familiar didactic tone found elsewhere in his poetry. (26) The advice which he offers to the younger man possibly contains a hint of disillusionment as he perhaps does not find the brilliant welcome which rumours had led him to expect. (27)   Seign’en Raymbautis one of the few poems to which it is possible to give an approximate date. (28) W. T. Pattison produces sound arguments for allocating Raimbaut’s reply to the period 1165-67, (29) and it is therefore in this period that we place Seign’en Raymbaut, on the reasonable assumption that the two poems were composed within a very short space of time.   Panvini considers that for the visit to Orange the biographer must have had available an independent contemporary source, as, in his view, all that could have been deduced from the poem Seign’en Raymbaut on the identity of the person Peire was visiting is that it was a certain Raimbaut, with no other designation. (30) He states that it would have been difficult for the biographer, on the basis of so little information, to identify this Raimbaut with the troubadour in question. There would appear, however, to be adequate evidence in the poem, despite the absence of a surname, to bring the name of Raimbaut d’Orange to the biographer’s mind. Raimbaut’s noble family, indicated by the use of the title Seign’en, the reference to his youth, his growing reputation as a poet and hospitable patron, considered together, help to confirm Raimbaut’s identity. It is also quite possible that the biographer was aware of the troubadours’ common link with Puivert. (31)   If the poem was in fact the only source for the biographer’s reference to Peire’s visit, then some doubt should be attached to the statement in the Vida that Peire remained at Raimbaut’s court for a long time. The poem mentions only one particular occasion and contains no suggestion that the stay was a long one. (32) Peire indicates that he intends to report elsewhere on the conditions he finds at the court and repeats at the end of the poem that he will depart but not before receiving Raimbaut’s reply. (33) On the other hand, the possibility that the two troubadours spent a period of time together at some stage or other following the exchange of sirventes is perhaps suggested by subsequent traces of a connection between their work. (34)   There seems to be little reason to question the visits which, according to the Vida, Peire subsequently made to the courts of King Alfonso VIII of Castille, King Alfonso II of Aragon and Count Raimond V of Toulouse. (35) All three persons were well known for their hospitality towards the troubadours, for whom their courts were an obvious attraction. (36) The close friendship which existed between Alfonso II and Ermengarda (37) renders a visit by Peire to Aragon all the more likely. A connection with the court of Aragon may, in fact, be suggested by a possible reference, in poem No. IV, to Sancho, Alfonso II’s brother. (38)   The Vida recounts that Peire finally entered the religious order of Grandmont. Noted for the austerity of its rule, in the twelfth century the order was among the most flourishing in the Midi. (39) Of the other troubadours who are reputed to have spent the latter part of their life in a cloister, Guilhem Ademar is the only one who, according to his Vida, entered this particular order. (40) No reference to Peire Rogier has come to light in documents and other works concerning Grandmont to confirm the biographer’s information which, in so far as it concerns the troubadour’s place of death, would otherwise normally be considered as reliable. (41)   Jehan de Nostredame included in his Vies des plus célèbres et anciens Poètes provensaux a completely worthless biography of Peire Rogier (see appendix I of this edition). The references to Peire’s position of canon at Clermont and to Ermengarda indicate that the author knew the Provençal Vida. This did not prevent him, however, from attaching the troubadour to Provence and from placing him in the fourteenth century. (42) The Histoire générale de Languedoc singles out the biography as an example of the extent to which Jehan de Nostredame and the authors he used as sources added fables to the Provençal Vidas, introduced anachronisms and attributed to Provence, in order to honour the region, several poets who had been born in other areas. (43)     2. References to Peire Rogier in the works of other troubadours. Peire Rogier is called to witness in the tornada of the poem Lanqan chanton li auzeil en primier, which most of the MSS concerned attribute to Aimeric de Peguilhan:   Salamos, ten lo vers per dreiturier! A garentis en trac Peire Rotgier, Q’el conois ben si li mot son cabau. Si·l sos es bons, midonz ador e lau. (44)   There would appear to be no reason to doubt the authenticity of the tornada, since it appears in all the MSS. The tone of the poem tends to confirm the identification of our troubadour with the Peire Rogier in question; it is appropriate that a canso which criticises false lovers and lays great emphasis on the poet’s discretion and his submissive devotion to his lady should call to witness a troubadour who, throughout his work, is an ardent advocate of such courtly virtues.   W. P. Shepard and F. M. Chambers consider that the author of the poem is more likely to have been Guillem Rainol d’At than Aimeric de Peguilhan. They admit that this attribution poses certain problems, especially relating to the period of Guillem’s activity as a poet, but they regard them as being less serious than the difficulties raised by Aimeric’s authorship, which they produce very sound reasons for questioning. (45) A. Jeanroy places Guillem in the first third of the thirteenth century (46) but Shepard and Chambers find no grounds for assuming that he lived long after 1216. (47) They consider the limit of 1180, normally attached to Peire Rogier’s activity, (48) to be far from definitely fixed and conclude that it would not have been impossible for Guillem to have known Peire towards the end of Peire’s life. They even suggest that, geographically, it would have been very easy for Guillem, born at Apt (Vaucluse), to meet Peire, whose visit to nearby Orange was, in their view, probably made towards the end of his career. We have, however, no firm evidence to suppose that Peire lived much beyond 1180. (49) It should also be remembered that his sirventes to Raimbaut d’Orange was probably written as early as 1165-67 (see supra, 1 The Provençal Vida) and that even if he had stayed on at Raimbaut’s court it would have been only until 1173, the year of Raimbaut’ s death. (50) Guillem Rainol might well have been too young at that time to meet him. Only with strong reservations, therefore, should the poem be attributed to Guillem, particularly in view of the general uncertainty about dates.   Of the few references to Peire Rogier found in the works of other troubadours perhaps the most interesting is the one in Peire d’Alvernhe’s sirventes, Cantarai d’aqestz trobadors. (51) Peire Rogier is the first of the twelve poets to be passed under review, appearing immediately before Giraut de Bornelh and Bernart de Ventadour. The following comments are made about him:   D’aisso mer mal Peire Rotgiers, per qe n’er encolpatz primiers, car chanta d’amor a presen; e valgra li mais us sautiers en la glieis’o us candeliers tener ab gran candel’arden. [ll. 7-12]   The sirventes, in which Raimbaut d’Orange is also named, has generally been placed in the period 1165-73. (52) It is possible that it was composed on an occasion when those named in it were actually present. (53) If this was the case, and Peire Rogier and Raimbaut were both in attendance at Puivert, then the satire is likely to have been composed after the troubadours’ exchange of sirventes at Raimbaut’s court placed in the period 1165-67; for it is fairly clear from the tone, and contents of their sirventes that the meeting at Orange was their first.   The circumstances in which the satire was written and the location of Puivert are uncertain and have given rise to a considerable amount of discussion. Until fairly recently the tendency has been to identify the Puivert in question with the town in the western part of the Department of Aude on the road linking Foix with Carcassonne and Narbonne. (54) Pattison has suggested, in fact, that the troubadours from different regions named in the satire formed part of the wedding party which accompanied Eleanor, the daughter of Henry II of England and Eleanor of Aquitaine, from Bordeaux to Spain for her marriage with Alfonso VIII of Castille in 1170. (55) The party would have been particularly attractive to the troubadours in that it included the bride’s mother, renowned for her interest in poetry, and Alfonso II of Aragon, a well known patron of the troubadours and a troubadour himself. (56) The bride was also to become a patron of the troubadours in her own right.   Geographical and historical objections to this theory are, however, raised by Rita Lejeune, who casts serious doubts upon the identification with Puivert (Aude). (57) She proposes, as an alternative possibility, a Puivert in Catalonia, Puigverd de Agramunt, situated on the road linking Foix, Puigcerdá and Lérida. (58) She sees no reason for supposing that Eleanor’s wedding party passed through either Puigverd or Puivert (Aude) and considers that if Puigverd was connected with Peire d’Alvernhe’s satire it was under circumstances other than the Castilian wedding.   Either of the locations of Puivert proposed above would be consistent with what little information the Vida contains of Peire Rogier’s travels. We have already noted that Peire’s visit to Raimbaut d’Orange’s court is likely to have taken place before the composition of Peire d’Alvernhe’s satire but that his movements immediately before and after the visit are open to speculation. We cannot, therefore, be certain about the starting point of any journey Peire may have made to Puivert. One possibility is that Raimbaut and he travelled together to Puivert direct from Raimbaut’s court. If this was the case, and if the gathering at Puivert took place in 1170, the year of the Castilian wedding, then Peire’s stay at Raimbaut’s court would have probably lasted at least three years. (59) Alternatively Peire might well have returned to Narbonne before proceeding to Puivert, in which case Puivert (Aude) would have been easily accessible to him, as it lies about 100 km or so from Narbonne on the road to Foix. A gathering at Puivert involving the Castilian wedding party would have given Peire the opportunity of meeting members of the Castilian court as well as Alfonso II of Aragon. He would thus have been able to strike up a relationship, at one and the same time, with the two Spanish courts which, according to the Vida, were to receive him in turn at a later stage in his life. (60) As far as the Catalonian Puigverd is concerned, it would not have been difficult for Peire to make the necessary journey if he was already in Spain at the time of the composition of the satire, as the courts of both Castille and Aragon were within fairly easy reach.   It is generally assumed that the remarks Peire d’ Alvernhe makes about Peire in his sirventes refer indirectly to Peire’s early life as a canon. A. Del Monte notes, however, that on the whole the stanzas devoted to the other troubadours are not of a biographical nature. (61) It therefore seems reasonable, before we examine the likelihood of a biographical referece in Peire’s case, to consider alternative explanations which have been offered for Peire d’Alvernhe’s remarks.   Del Monte considers that line 15 of III (a dieu m’autrey) is the only part of Peire Rogier’s known work which could have formed the basis for the contents of the stanza. (62) It is unlikely, however, that a conventional line of this nature has any particular significance and throws any light on the troubadour’s religious beliefs or practices. (63) The content and style of Peire’s sirventes, Seign’en Raymbaut, per vezer, suggest to J. Storost (64) a clumsiness and awkward shyness on Peire’s part. He mentions the possibility —in our view, fairly remote— that it is to these characteristics of the troubadour that Peire d’Alvernhe is alluding in his satire. Perhaps a more likely explanation of Peire d’Alvernhe’s remarks is the didactic tone of much of Peire Rogier’s work. (65) C. de Lollis is more specific on this point, recognising at the same time an ecclesiastical influence in certain aspects of Peire’s style. (66) He suggests that Peire d’Alvernhe had in mind the ‘intonazione generale, ch’étra il predicatorio e il coralo, del canzoniere di Pietro Rogier’, and in particular the poem No sai don chant, in which a number of the lines are in interrogative form and reminiscent, he says, of certain biblical lines.   We prefer, however, on balance, to support the generally accepted view that the stanza is biographical in content. Perhaps Peire d’Alvernhe’s reason for drawing attention to a canonship which had probably been renounced some years before was the close similarity between Peire Rogier’s beginnings and his own. Both troubadours had originated from Clermont and had entered the Church. Peire d’Alvernhe’s Vida states that he was Bishop of Clermont, while a sirventes by Bernart Martí (67) indicates that he was a canon before becoming a troubadour. He is also said to have been among the first Provençal poets to compose religious poems. (68)   The absence in the stanza of any reference to a canonship or to Clermont has led Panvini to suggest that Peire d’Alvernhe’s remarks could not have formed the basis of the statement in the Vida that Peire Rogier had been a canon at Clermont before becoming a joglar. (69) In his view the remarks serve, rather, to confirm the biographer’s information. (70) The biographer is, however, likely to have known the whole of Peire d’Alvernhe’s satire; it is significant that the stanzas devoted to Bernart de Ventadour and Peire d’Alvernhe himself are quoted in full in the respective Vidas. Having therefore possibly deduced from the contents of the stanza concerned with Peire Rogier that Peire had belonged to the Church at one time, the biographer may have gone on to assume that the troubadour had a background similar to Peire d’Alvernhe’s. This assumption would have been strengthened by Peire’s special position in a list which also includes such celebrated poets as Bernart de Ventadour and Giraut de Bornelh and which is therefore unlikely to indicate an order of merit. The doubts attached to the independence of the Vida’s account of Peire Rogier’s early life should, therefore, perhaps lead us to accept the account a little less readily than would normally be the case with biographical statements of this nature, which are generally assumed to be reliable. (71)   Given that Peire’s appearance at the head of Peire d’Alvernhe’s list is not arbitrary, then perhaps the most likely explanation is the similarity in the background of the two troubadours. Other explanations which have been offered should, however, also be mentioned. If the sirventes was composed at Puivert (Aude), Peire could have been named first by virtue of his position as the resident troubadour at Narbonne, which was a fairly short distance away. (72) We have noted above, however, the difficulty in determining whether Peire would have gone to Puivert direct from Narbonne. Appel considers that Peire Rogier’s special position in the sirventes could be explained by the fact that one of his poems may have been heard by the gathering only a short time before. The possibility is suggested to Appel by the appearance in two of the MSS (CR) of the reading chantet (l. 3 of the stanza), which he tends to favour in preference to chanta. It is, however, the present tense which is offered by all the other MSS and which is generally adopted. (73) The suggestion, made by E. Hoepffner, (74) that Peire was perhaps the organiser of the gathering is presumably also based on the troubadour’s position in the poem.   It is quite possible that Peire knew some of the troubadours, apart from Raimbaut d’Orange, who make an appearance in the poem. The close relationship between Peire’s poetry and Bernart de Ventadour’s is generally recognised; (75) we discuss later the similarity between certain aspects of Peire’s work and Giraut de Bornelh’s, observing the influence which the one may have had upon the other. (76) Furthermore Bernart, Giraut and Peire d’Alvernhe may well have all been at Ermengarda’s court at one time or another (77) and could have had the opportunity of meeting Peire there.   Another possible reference to Peire Rogier found in the poetry of other troubadours is suggested by J. Mouzat in his edition of Gaucelm Faidit. (78) Gaucelm ends his canso Una dolors esforciva (79) with the following tornada:             Dieus m’ajut! Que de mi dons no·m remut — Peironet, tu la·m saluda e Linhaure la·m salut!   Mouzat considers that Linhaure, mentioned here and in seven other poems by Gaucelm, is to be identified with Raimbaut d’Orange (80) and he assumes that the Peironet named alongside him is Peire Rogier, whose stay at Raimbaut’s court might have been known to Gaucelm. (81) If Mouzat’s assumption is correct the poem might have been written at some stage during Peire’s visit to Orange, which would place it in the early part of Gaucelm’s career. (82)   It is worth noting that, far from playing a secondary role in the tornada and being named simply as an acquaintance of Raimbaut’s, Peironet is mentioned first, and is in fact addressed in the second person, while the reference to Raimbaut is made in the third person. It would therefore be reasonable to assume that Peironet was known to Gaucelm personally, or at least in his own right, and not merely through an association with Raimbaut. There are, however, no positive grounds for suggesting that Peire Rogier and Gaucelm knew each other. The most that can be said is that, apart from having a common acquaintance in Raimbaut, the two poets reveal in their work a close link with Bernart de Ventadour and may well have both had personal contact with him. (83) The senhal appears in a number of other places in the poetry of the troubadours, where it is clear, in fact, that the person concerned is not Peire Rogier. (84) Furthermore, the request which Gaucelm makes would seem to imply that Peironet knew the lady in question or was near her at the time, but we have no evidence to indicate that Peire was acquainted with any of the ladies who are said to have played a part in Gaucelm’s life. (85) Any connection between Peironet and Peire Rogier should therefore be regarded largely as a matter of conjecture.     3. Peire Rogier’s lady and the senhal ‘Tort-n’avetz’. The origin of the senhal Tort-n’avetz by which Peire Rogier appears to have referred to Ermengarda, is uncertain. It may relate to a particular unknown incident or to Ermengarda’s discouraging attitude to the poet’s supplications. (86) Peire Rogier’s references to his love are almost always made in conventional courtly terms, and we learn very little about it from any of the cansos, including those which allude in some way to Tort-n’avetz.   The only cansos which make no reference to the senhal are IX, which is discussed below, and I and II. The absence of the senhal in I and II is one of the factors which have led us to assume that the poems belong to the same period of composition. (87)   The tornada in I is linked with the main theme of the poem and consists of much more than a mere dedication or address. (88) Peire is clearly referring in the tornada to the lady (midons) mentioned throughout the rest of the poem. However, no indication of her identity is given. In the case of II we are again provided with no clue as to the identity of sidons, named in the tornada as the lady to whom Peire sends the poem. It is not clear whether this lady is the same person as the subject of the poem.   In the introductory stanza of III Peire states that it is Tort-n’avetz who gives him the encouragement to sing. It is to her, in fact, that the troubadour asks, in the second tornada, that the poem be sent. We have observed above that the reference to n’Aimeric lo tos in the following line serves to confirm that the senhal denotes Ermengarda and may have helped to form the basis of the Vida’s reference to the viscountess. (89) In the rest of the poem Peire sings the praises of his lady (midons), emphasising throughout the importance of secrecy and discretion where she is concerned, which leads Appel (90) to conclude that at that time Ermengarcla could not yet have known to whom the senhal alluded. Appel must have based his conclusion upon the assumption that midons and Tort-n’avetz are one and the same, although the contents of the poem do not make clear whether there is a connection between these two persons. It is possible, as L. Cocito suggests, (91) that while Tort-n’avetz is the lady to whom Peire pays homage and dedicates his song, the beloved subject of the poem is midons, an unspecified lady belonging to the conventional world of courtly love. This suggestion is supported by the fact that the tornada addressed to midons, like the tornada in I, continues the motifs of the poem, while the second tornada involving Tort-n’avetz is unrelated to the rest of the poem and is of a formal dedicatory nature. Midons and Tort-n’avetz are both described as a source of joy e pretz (see ll. 9, 20, 31, etc.), which might suggest their common identity, were it not for the frequent appearance of these particular words elsewhere in Peire’s work (92) and for their function as a refrain in this poem. However, the troubadour’s use of the words sai and lai prevents us from ruling out the possibility of a direct connection between midons and Tort-n’avetz. The juxtaposition of the words in ll. 8 and 9 and the reappearance of lai in l. 62 would seem to indicate that at the time the poem was composed Peire was not in Ermengarda’s company. It is possible that, in employing the words to the same effect in stanza III (ll. 29 and 33) with regard to midons, the troubadour was in fact thinking of one and the same lady in both instances.   The reference to Tort-n’avetz in the first tornada of IV takes the form of a dedication and homage to the defender of bon pretz. Both tornadas are independent of the rest of the poem, and there appear to be no positive grounds for associating Tort-n’avetz with the lady mentioned elsewhere in the poem. (93) The use of the word tramet (l. 50) suggests that Peire was not at Narbonne at the time.   V, in which the courtly virtues of amor, pretz and joy are extolled in general terms, contains only a very brief reference to a particular lady (l. 42: midons). Again, nothing suggests that the allusion is to Tort-n’avetz, to whom the troubadour sends greetings in the tornadas. It is appropriate, in view of the subject matter, that the poem should conclude by acknowledging Tort-n’avetz, the staunch upholder of true pretz and joy. The contents of the first tornada indicate that the song was among those composed when Peire was absent from Narbonne.   In the tornada of VI Peire requests that Tort-n’avetz learn the poem and that it be then sent to Dreit-n’avetz, whose identity is unknown. The words lai en Saves which follow Dreit-n’avetz lead Cocito (94) to suggest that the senhal probably denotes the distant lady, mentioned in the body of the poem, near whom the heart and mind of the poet remain (ll. 37-8). However, the tornada as a whole again appears to be divorced from the rest of the poem, and we have no reason to identify either Dreit-n’avetz or Tort-n’avetz with the beloved lady. The use of the word mant (l. 57) would imply that the troubadour was again away from Narbonne when the song was composed.   In VII, as well as in I, it is clear from the contents of the tornada that the lady to whom the poem is dedicated (midons) is also the subject of the poem (95) and that Peire is not merely paying formal homage to her. He refers in the sixth stanza to the separation from his lady and ends by sending the poem to her as a source of encouragement until they meet again. Although the senhal Tort-n’avetz is not mentioned specifically, an allusion to it may well be found in ll. 10-11:   Oc, ben leu, mas sempre n’a tort. — Tort n’a? Qu’ai dig! Boca tu mens. (96)   If these lines were designed to be an indirect reference to Tort-n’avetz they would support the suggestion made earlier that the senhal may have had its origin in the lady’s cool response to the poet’s supplications. If Ermengarda was the lady in question, then the song would have been among those composed at a time when the troubadour was not at Narbonne. It is interesting to note that in this poem Peire departs to some extent from his characteristically discreet tone and implies that his love for his lady is returned. His remarks may be regarded as bearing out the Vida’s reference to the suspicion of a familiar relationship with Ermengarda (97) or may, in fact, have formed part of the basis for the biographer’s statement. (98)   Any information which IX provides on the troubadour’s relations with his lady must of necessity be accepted with reservations in view of the doubt about the poem’s authenticity. While the poem makes no mention of the senhal or of Narbonne, it is the only one which appears to refer to a particular occasion on which the poet and his lady were separated; the references in other poems to Peire’s absence from his lady are made only in general terrns. Again, the allusion may be seen either as support for the Vida’s account of Peire’s enforced departure from Narbonne or as a  possible source from which the biographer obtained his material. (99) It is difficult, however, to identify Narbonne with freidur’e montagna (l. 16). It is perhaps more likely to be a question of the Auvergne which the poet was leaving, (100) in which case the lady mentioned in l. 19 and elsewhere in the poem would probably not be Ermengarda.   The nature of Peire Rogier’s references to Tort-n’avetz would seem to indicate clearly that Ermengarda was the troubadour’s patron. There is, however, inadequate evidence in his work to conclude with absolute certainty that the viscountess was ever the object of his courtly sentiments and combined the role of the beloved lady with that of protector. We should not discount the possibility that the beloved lady of whom Peire sings in the most general terms has no particular identity but is simply an abstract figure essential to the courtly themes of his poetry. (↑)       II. THE PLACE OF PEIRE ROGIER’S WORK IN THE POETRY OF THE TROUBADOURS   The conventional themes of troubadour lyrical poetry form the subject matter of Peire Rogier’s love poems. The attitude of the poet towards his lady and the advice he offers to others in this respect are strictly in line with the standard doctrines of courtly love. He strongly advocates adherence to the courtly virtues of humility, discretion, patience, moderation, and complete loyalty and devotion to the lady who is the source of joy and pretz and from whom the submissive and faithful lover may hope to receive, as his reward, a long-desired favour (merce). The conventional expressions of discouragement or despair found in Peire’s songs usually give way to an appeal for hope and patience, and none of the poems is allowed to end on a pessimistic note.   With the exception of IX, which is of doubtful authorship, the poems do not, on the whole, seem to be concerned with particular events or situations personal to the troubadour; rather, the sentiments they express tend to be couched in objective and general terms. Peire’s work quite often appears to be less a means of voicing the poet’s individual feelings than a vehicle for instruction in courtly behaviour, an impression which is strengthened by the frequent adoption of a didactic tone. (101)   While the subject matter of Peire Rogier’s songs may be conventional and lack originality, his style is generally free from the artificial novelties and contrived obscurities found in the work of many of those troubadours who strove after originality of one kind or another. It is perhaps in the clarity, simplicity and naturalness of his style that Peire’s chief merit as a poet lies. These are the qualities which have led him to be described as a forerunner, with Bemart de Ventadour, of the trohar leu. (102)   Jeanroy observes that, in his versification, Peire adheres closely to the conventions of his day, making frequent use of word refrains and isolated rhymes and showing a clear preference for the octosyllabic line. At the same time, the troubadour differs from his contemporaries in his avoidance of rare rhymes and over-complicated stanza constructions. (103)   Dialogue form. A distinctive feature of Peire Rogier’s poetry and one to which particular attention is usually drawn in references to the troubadour is his skilful use of the dialogue form. (104) It introduces a lively, dramatic element into his poetry, varying the pace of a poem and breaking the uniformity of the lines. In IV, for example, the use of dialogue prevents any heaviness which might have resulted from the monotonous repetition of the long decasyllabic line. (105) In none of the songs does Peire continue the dialogue through all the stanzas; it is his economic and measured use of the device which makes it all the more effective. (106)   In the three poems chiefly concerned (IV, VI and VII), the dialogue may be seen as conveying, in dramatic form, the struggle of the various conflicting emotions between which the poet appears to waver, (107) a struggle which ultimately serves only to emphasise his strength of mind. (108) In IV the dialogue enables the poet to advocate the discreet and patient conduct of the courtly lover by providing the opportunity of replying point by point to the practical objections raised by the interlocutor. (109) The same is true of VI, except that here the poet is not on the defensive but, rather, offers positive advice to combat the discouragement of the interlocutor. It has been observed that the dialogue has the effect of reinforcing the motifs expressed in the first half of the poem. (110) The device is employed differently in VII but the poem, like IV and VI, still ends on a note of encouragement. A series of apparently involuntary complaints and expressions of doubt and despair, interjected in dialogue form, occupy the first half of the song but eventually give way to an uninterrupted reassertion by the poet of his devotion to his lady and of his general optimism.   Peire appears to have been among the first troubadours to use dialogue. A few of his contemporaries include it in some of their work but the difficulty in dating the poems concerned prevents us from determining whether any of them employed the device before Peire. (111) (↑)       III. METRIC TABLES   We have adopted the system of tables employed by Kurt Almqvist in Les Poésies du troubadour Guilhem Adémar (Uppsala, 1951), pp. 76 ff, and by Peter T. Ricketts in Les Poésies de Guilhem de Montanhagol (Toronto, 1964), pp. 33 ff. The first series of tables are also similar to those employed by Appel (pp. 30-1). Short horizontal lines indicate where the tornadas begin. The number of such lines denotes the number of tornadas. Feminine rhymes are indicated by the sign ‘.   (a) Metrical scheme and rhymes of each poem [Table]     (b) Detailed features of Peire Rogier’s metrics [Table]       IV. ORDER OF THE POEMS   It is impossible to establish the chronology of the poems, as only three of them (III, VIII and possibly IV (112)) contain any evidence which enables us to give them an approximate date. We have therefore placed them in the order adopted by Appel, according to the stage in Peire Rogier’s career to which he suggests they might belong. It is in fact the order in which the poems appear in the MSS I and K. (113) Appel (114) observes the following peculiar features shared by poems I and II which suggest that they belong to the same period of composition: they are the only cansos, apart from IX, to make no allusion, direct or indirect, to the senhal Tort n’avetz and, with III, are the only ones in which the dialogue form is not used; they are also alone in including Peire’s name in the tornada and in opening with a reference to the season. (115) IX is placed last in view of its independent nature and the doubt attached to its authenticity, (116) while the position of VIII is governed by its link with VIIIa.   The attempt at a systematic order which Appel sees in I and K (117) may also be found in D; here the order is the same except that III, IV, V appear last after VIIIa. We may thus assume, with Appel, (118) that these poems were originally omitted only to be added later in a different place. An examination of the order of poems in the MSS A and C also reveals a certain similarity to that in IK:   A: VI, I, VII, VIII, VIIIa, II, III. C: IV, III, VI, V, I, II, VII, VIII, VIIIa.     In the case of C it is worth noting that, apart from following the sequence of IK for I, II, VII, VIII, VIIIa, it groups together III, IV, V, VI, but in a different order. Of the other MSS, which on the whole offer an independent order, E links VIII with VIIIa and M VI with VII.   Further justification for choosing the order of IK may be provided by the metre and rhyme schemes employed in the poems (see the metric tables): (a) IV and V have a common rhyme scheme which is fairly similar to that of III and that of VII; (b) I, VI, VII, VIII each have one tornada, while II, III, IV, V each have two; (c) the octosyllabic line is the most common in Peire Rogier’s work; the four poems in which the line is adopted throughout are V, VI, VII, VIII; (d) in most of the poems masculine rhymes only are employed; the only exceptions are I, II, IX, in which the rhymes are mixed.   With the title of each poem we give the number in this edition followed, in brackets, by the number in Pillet and Carstens, Bibliographie der Troubadours. (↑)       V. THE MANUSCRIPTS   In most cases we have obtained microfilms or have consulted the MSS themselves. However, as we have been unable to locate ω, which is no longer at Bergamo, we have resorted to the diplomatic edition of the MS. The only other cases in which use has been made of the diplomatic edition are G in VIII, N2 in the Vida, Dc in VIIIa, and β2 in VIII.   By means of the following abbreviations we indicate at the end of the description of each MS below the kind of document consulted: (M) microfilm, (MS) where the MS itself has been consulted, (ED) diplomatic edition.   The poems of Peire Rogier are found in the following MSS:   A Rome, Biblioteca Vaticana, 5232, Diplom. ed.: Pakscher and De Lollis, Studi di filologia romanza, III, 1-670. (M) Six poems: I, II, III, VI, VII, VIII. Vida. B Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 1592. Collation with A in Pakscher and De Lollis, op. cit., 671 ff. (MS) Two poems: I, III. Vida. C Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 856. (MS) Eight poems: I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII. D Modena, Biblioteca Estense, α, R, 4, 4, ff. 1-151. (M) Five poems: I, II, VI, VII, VIII. Da Ibid., ff. 153-211. (M) Three poems: III, IV, V. Dc Ibid., ff. 243-60. Diplom. ed.: Teulié and Rossi, L’Anthologie provençale de maître Ferrari de Ferrare in AdM, XIII, 60 ff., 199 ff., 371 ff.; XIV, 197 ff., 523 ff. (M) Three poems (all fragmentary): IV (stanzas I and VI), V (stanzas II and IV), VIII (stanzas III, IV and VI). E Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 1749. (MS) Four poems: I, V, VII, VIII. Vida. G Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, R71. Diplom. ed.: Bertoni, Il canzoniere provenzale della Biblioteea Ambrosiana R71, Dresden, 1912 (in Gesellschaft für romanische Literatur, XXVIII). (ED) One poem: VIII. I Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, fr. 854. (MS) Eight poems: I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII. Vida. K Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 12473. (MS) Eight poems: I, II, Ill, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII. Vida. M Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 12474. (MS) Six poems: I, II, IV, V, VI, VII. N New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, MS 819 (formerly Cheltenham Library of Mr T. Fitz-Roy Fenwick, 8335). (M) Two poems: II, III. N2 Berlin, Königliche Bibliothek, cod. Phillips 1910. Diplom. ed.: Pillet, Archiv., 101, 365 ff.; 102, 179 ff. (ED) Vida. O Rome, Biblioteca Vaticana, 3208. Diplom. ed.: De Lollis, ‘Il canzoniere provenzale O (Cod. Vat. 3208)’ in Atti della R. Accademia dei Lincei. Anno CCLXXXIII, 1886. (M) One poem: VI. R Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 22543. (MS) Seven poems: I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, VIII. Vida. S Oxford, Bodleian Library, Douce 269. Diplom. ed.: Shepard, The Oxford Provençal Chansonnier, Princeton and Paris, 1927. (MS) One poem: VI. T Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 1521I. (MS) Four poems: IV, VI, VII, VIII. U Florence, Biblioteca Laurenziana, Plut. XLI, cod. 43. Diplom. ed.: Grützmacher, Archiv., 35, 363 ff. (M) One poem: VIII. a1 Modena, Biblioteca Estense, Campori y. N. 8.4; 11, 12, 13. Diplom. ed.: Bertoni, Il canzoniere provenzale di Bernart Amoros (Complemento Càmpori), Friburg, 1911. (M) Three poems: III, VII, VIII. c Florence, Biblioteca Laurenziana, Plut. XC inf. 26. Diplom. ed.: Mario Pelaez, ‘Il canzoniere provenzale c’ in Studi di filologia romanza, VII, 244 ff.; E. Stengel, Die apr. Liedersammlung c der Laurenziana in Florenz nach einer in seinem Besitz befindlichen alten Abschrift, Leipzig, 1899. (M) Three poems: I, VI, IX. ω Bergamo, Biblioteca di Paolo Gaffuri. Diplom. ed.: De Lollis, ‘Un frammento di canzoniere provenzale’ in Studi medievali, I, 561 ff. (ED) Five poems (fragmentary): I (p. 577), II (pp. 577-8), III (pp. 578-9), IV (p. 579), V (pp. 576-7). β2 Folio 137v of R, constituting the text of Raimon Vidal’s Abrils issi’e mais intrava. Diplom. ed.: Bartsch, Denkmäler, pp. 144 ff.; W. Bohs, ‘ ‘‘Abrils issi’ e mays intrava,” Lehrgedicht von Raimon Vidal von Bezaudun’ in Romanische Forschungen, XV (1904), 204 ff. (ED) One poem: VIII (extract: stanza VI).     Quotations from Peire Rogier’s work (Nos. VI and VIII) are included in the Breviari d’Amor of Matfré Ermengaud de Béziers (ed. G. Azaïs, Béziers and Paris, 1862-81). We have been able to employ all the MSS of this work (119) and denote them by the letters used by Brunel (Bibliographie des Mss littéraires en ancien provençal, Paris, 1935). In order to distinguish them from the other MSS we have placed the letters in brackets.   (A) Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 857. Diplom. ed.: Azaïs, op. cit. (B) Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 9219. (C) Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 858. (D) Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 1601. (F) Vienna, K. K. Hof. Bibliotek, 2563. (G) Vienna, National Library, 2583. (H) Lyons, Bibliothèque Municipale, 1351. (I) Carpentras, Bibliothèque Inguimbertine, 380. (K) London, British Museum, Harleian, 4940. (L) London, British Museum, Royal 19. C. I. (M) Escurial, Biblioteca de San Lorenzo, S, I, No. 3. (N) Leningrad, Public Library, Ms. Prov., F. v. XIV, I.   We list at the head of each poem the MSS concerned, indicating the exact location of the poem in each MS. The references follow Pillet and Carstens, Bibliographie der Troubadours, except in the case of N, where the new foliation is adopted, (120) the old reference being given in brackets. Where appropriate, the page, or number of the poem, in the diplomatic edition follows in brackets immediately afterwards. The other previous editions of the poem are also listed. (↑)       VI. CHOICE OF BASE MANUSCRIPT, ESTABLISHMENT OF TEXT, EXPLANATORY NOTES AND VARIANTS   We have employed C as the base MS for all the poems except VIII, for which A has been preferred, and IX, which is offered only by c. Our reasons for choosing A in the case of VIII are given in the classification of the MSS. In our edition of Raimbaut d’Orange’s reply to Peire Rogier (VIIIa) we have followed Pattison in adopting A as the base MS. For the choice of the base MS in the case of the Vida see the classification of the MSS.   The choice of C as base MS is justified by the quality and general clarity of its readings, which contain few individualisms. In a number of cases it offers a sensible and comprehensible text where other MSS are unintelligible. Another factor in its favour is the general coherence and uniformity of its spelling. However, reference should be made at the same time to the reservations which have been expressed about the chansonnier of C generally (121) and which apply equally to the section containing the work of Peire Rogier. The scribe of C, with a large number of sources at his disposal, tends to offer eclectic texts, establishing the text of the poem on the basis of several traditions. A comparison with other MSS leads us to suspect that the scribe has also, at times, introduced his own version in order to improve upon the reading of his model or where his model appears to him to be either obscure or corrupt. As a result the text offered by C is sometimes rendered suspect by its very quality.   In each poem we have adhered to the base MS as far as possible. The reading of another MS has been chosen only (a) where the metre or meaning requires it and (b) in most of the instances where the base MS is clearly independent and opposed to all the other traditions. In those cases where none of the MSS offers an acceptable reading we have corrected the base MS. The letters and words added are placed in brackets, while replacements and corrections are italicised.   In the notes accompanying the Vida and each poem acconnt has been taken of important textual points, historical and personal references, and problems of interpretation. The notes have also been used, to a great extent, (a) to explain, in each case, the reasons for departing from the base MS, (b) to justify a number of the instances in which it is retained despite its independence, (c) to comment wherever our text differs from Appel’s and, in the case of VIIIa, from Pattison’s.   The text of the Vida and that of each poem is followed by a list of all the variants, essential, secondary and orthographical. Semicolons are used to indicate which variants pertain to a particular word, or group of words, appearing in the text. Where it is not obvious which is the word or group of words concerned we have placed it in front of a single bracket (]) and then listed the variants. (↑)       VIDA   Seven MSS. A 107 (p. 332); B 107 (p. 695; Mahn, Biogr., p. 9); E 189; I 12; K 2; N2 23 (XIV, Archiv., 102, 204); R 3a.   Editions. Parn. Occ., p. 24; Raynouard, Choix, V, 330; MW, I, 116; Appel, p. 34; Chabaneau, Biographies, p. 261; Piccolo, Primavera, p. 96; Riquer, Lírica, p. 219; Panvini, Biografie, p. 113; Favati, Biografie, p. 214; Boutière-Schutz, Biographies, p. 267.   Classification. The MSS may be clearly divided into three groups: AB, ER, IKN2. This classification is borne out particularly by the following instances. (**) AB: omission of e trobava (I) and N’Anfos de Castela (II); independence of B where the text is omitted in A: (6) receup els, (7) et apellava, (9) e partit lo de si; together with the sections in the latter part of the Vida which are omitted in all the other MSS. ER: contain only the first two lines of the quotation from Seign’en Raymbaut; inclusion of N’Anfos de Castela (II). IKN2: inclusion of d’aqella encontrada e per temor del dit (dir) de la gen s’il (8) and (9), and of dolenz e pensius e consiros e marritz (10); inclusion of the second stanza of the quotation; absence of the part of the Vida following the quotation. R, followed by AB, is the most individualistic of the MSS. I is chosen as a base for most of the Vida. (†) E is employed for the latter part, omitted in I, as it is the most consistently reliable of the other MSS, apart from being quite closely linked with IKN2, cf. (I) e trobava (with R); (4) fort (with R); (5) e f.; (6) receup e·ls omitted (with R); (8) cum, elan f.; (10) I senher.     (1) Peire Rogiers si fo d’Alverne e fo canorgues de Clarmon. E fo gentils hom e bels et avinenz, e savis de letras e de sen natural; e cantava e trobava ben. (2) E laisset la canorga e fetz se joglars et anet per cortz, e foron grasit li sieu cantar. (3) E venc s’en a Narbona, en la cort de ma domna Ermengarda, qu’era adoncs de gran valor e de gran pretz. (4) Et ella l’acuilli fort e ill fetz grans bens. (5) E s’enamoret d’ella e fetz sos vers e sas cansos d’ella. (6) Et ella los pres en grat. (7) E la clamava Tort-n’avez. (8) Lonc temps estet ab ela en cort e si fo crezut qu’el agues joi d’amor d’ella; don ella·n fo blasmada per la gen d’aqella encontrada. (9) E per temor del dit de la gen si·l det comjat e·l parti de se. (10) Et el s’en anet dolenz e pensius e consiros e marritz a·n Rambaut d’Aurenga, si cum el dis e·l sirventes que fetz de lui:   Seingner Raimbaut, per vezer de vos lo conort e·l solatz son sai vengutz tost e viatz, mas que non sui per vostr’aver; 5          que saber voill, quant m’en partrai, s’es tals lo caps com hom lo fai, E se n’es plus o meinz o mai Qu’om aug dir ni comtar de vos.   Tant ai de sen e de saber 10        e tant sui savis e membratz, Quant aurai vostres faiz gardatz, Qu’al partir eu sabrai lo ver, S’es tals lo caps com hom retrai, Qu’enqueron m’en lai entre nos.   (11) lonc terns estet ab En Raimbaut. Et estet en Espanha ab lo bon rei N’Anfos de Castela et ab lo bon rei N’Anfos d’Arago, et ab lo bon comte Raimon de Toloza. (12) Gran honor ac e·l mon tan com el hi estet, mas pueis se rendet a l’orde de Granmon e lai el definet.     Variants. (1) Rotgier ER, Rotgiers AB; si lacking R; Alvergne N2, Alvernge AB, Alvernhe ER; d’A. de la ciutat de Clarmon e f. c. N2; e fo lacking R; canorges ABKN2; e fo lacking R; gentils] bels R; homs R, om K; e bels lacking E; bel E; avinen E, avinens ABR; e savis hom de letras A; e cantava be E, e chantava ben N2, e quantava ben K; e trobava lacking AB; be ER. (2) e laisset la canorga lacking R; laiset E; canorgua E; fes ER, fez KN2; joglar IKN2R, jotglar E; e a. p. c. R; e. f. g.] e fō mot grazitz R; foror N2; grazit ABE; li sieu cantar lacking R; sei E, seu N2; chantar ABEN2. (3) Nerbona A; dompna ABN2, dona ER; eimeniarda E, na esmēiartz R, n’Esmengarda AB; qera AN2R, qe era B; adoncs lacking AR, adonx E; e de gran pretz lacking R; between valor and e s’e.: qeil fetz gran ben e gran honor A. (4) Cf. (3) A; ela R; lacoillic B, lacuillit E, laculhi R; fort ben B; between fort (ben) and e ill f.: el honret B, el onret ER; e ill] el R; fes ER, fez KN2; gran R; ben R, bes E. (5) et el s’e. ABEN2R; dela ER; e] en ABR; fazia A, fes ER, fez K; sos vers e lacking A; ses I; cansons K, chansos EN2R, chanssons B, chanssos A; d’ella lacking AR, dela E. (6) et ella up to Tort n’avez lacking A; ella los] elal R; between los and pres: receup els B. (7) Cf. (6) A; et K; e l. c.] et apellava la B, et el la clama N2, et el la clamava ER; t. mavetz B, t. naves E, t. navetz KR. (8) loncs KN2; tems ER; a. e. e. c.] en cort ab ella A; ab] com EK, cum IN2; ella BEKN2; e si] don A, e R; fon ABR; creut KN2, crezutz I; qel BN2R, q¯ el A; j. d’a. d’e.] dela joi damor R; dela E; ella·n] ela R, elan E, ella A, ella en B; fon A; per la gen lacking A, de la gens ER, per la gens K, per las gens BN2; d’aqella encontrada lacking ABER. (9) et A; dir N2; e. p. t. d. d. d. l. g. lacking ABER; s’i. d. c.] e det li comjat AB, el det comjat R, esill det comjat E; e·l parti de se lacking A, e partit lo de si B; partit E; si R. (10) s’en] si sen ER; d. e p. e c. em. lacking ABER; conssiros KN2; Raembaut AB, Raimbaut E, Rambautz N2, Raymbaut R; d’Aurenca R, d’Aurengua E; com ER; e. s. q. f. d. l.] ē .i. loc R; qe N2, qel AB; fes E, fotz N2; after lui: qe ditz B, que ditz AE. (10). 1, Seignen AB, Seinger N2, Senhen R, Senher E; Raembaut A, Rambaut BI, Rambautz N2, Raubaut K, Raymbaut R. (10) 2, vos] vetz R; solas R, saber IKN2. Quotation ends with this line in R. (10) 3, soi EKN2, sui AB. Quotation ends with vengutz in E. (10) 4, mai B, mais AKN2; qe BKN2; soi KN2. (10) 5, qe AN2; vuoill A; qan ABN2; p.] irai AB. (10) 6, gabs B, gaps A; con N2, cum AB; om K. (10) 7, e s. n’e. p.] si n’e. p. A, si ni a tant B; meins AB. (10) 8, qu’om] com N2, cum AB; cointar N2. Lines (10) 9 to (10) 14 lacking ABER. (10) 10, soi KN2; menbratz K. (10) 11, faitz N2. (10) 12, qal N2; eu] en K. (10) 13, cū N2; om K. (10) 14, lacking N2; quenq¯ron I. The Vida ends with this line in I. In KN2 it ends with the following words: e fez (fetz N2) aquestas (aqestas N2) cansons (chansos N2) que vos auzires (autzirez N2) scriptas sai desotz. (11) l. t. e.] el estet lonc temps B; temps A; estec R; Raembaut AB, el R; r. daurenga B; before et ...: e puois sen partic de lui B; e R; e. e. e. E.] et anet sen en espaigna estar B; Espaigna A; ab lo bon rei n’Anfos de Castela et lacking AB; rey (1) R; bon (2) lacking R; rey (2) R; n’Anfos] Amfos AB; daragon AB; e B; before ab: pois estet B; Raimon] R. R; Tolosa AB; after Tolosa: tant qant li plac et el volc B. (12) g. h. a. e. m.] gran honor al mon acA, mout ac gran honor el mon B; onor R; tant AB; cum AB; hi] i BR; estec R; mas] e AB; pois AB; p. el s. r. A; a] en B; orden AB; lay R; el lacking R; definet] fenic AB. In R the Vida ends with the following words: et aysi a de sa obra.   Errors contained in Appel’s list of variants A: 11. It is falsely implied that d’Aurenga follows Raembaut. B: 11. en espaigna omitted from et anet sen en espaigna estar. E: 1. No reference to be after cantava. 3. should read ma dona e, not na dona 8. should read de las gens, not per las gens. 9. should read esill det comjat, not esill dit comjar. 10. should read que, not q’el. 11. should read raimbaut, not raembaut; it is falsely implied that d’Aurenga follows raimbaut and that ab lo bon rei n’Anfos de Castela et is lacking. I: 1. be erroneously included after cantava. 10. should read que, not q’el. K: 5. should read sos vers, not ses vers. 8. should read loncs, not lonc; should read per la gens, not per la gen. 10. should read que, not q’el. 10. I should read raubaut, not ranbaut. R: 1. Typographical error attributes rotgier to M instead of R; should read homs, not hom.     Notes   The reading of I is supported generally by at least K. Both MSS are joined almost always by N2 and not infrequently by ER. Appel follows AB on the whole, and in almost all the cases where our text differs from his it is a question of IK or IKN2 opposing ABER and, in particular, AB (either individually or jointly): (3) Ermengarda; (4) el honret omitted; (5) el omitted, e f., d’ella; (8)-(9) d’aqella encontradae per temor ...; (10) dolenz e pensius e consiros, Rambaut, que fetz, que ditz omitted; (10) 5 m’en partrai; (10) 7 e se n’es plus. On the other hand, in the latter part of the Vida omitted in IKN2 the difference in our choice of texts rests, to a large extent, on the division between AB, still favoured by Appel, and ER.   (1) cantava e t. Appel mistakenly states in his variants that be follows cantava in I. This is true of KN2, however, as well as of E, which he does not mention. The retention of the reading of I is justified here in view of the support of R. AB omit e trobava.   (2) joglars. The accusative form of the word (joglar) is given by EIKN2R. We have chosen, however, the usual form of the nominative offered by AB and required after se faire and other similar expressions, e.g. se tener per, aver nom. See Altprov. Elem., p. 120.   (3) Ermengarda. The Viscountess of Narbonne. The precise year of Ermengarda’s birth is not known but it is likely to have been about 1120 or slightly later. (Cf. Bergert, Damen, p. 6; Appel, P. Rogier, p. 11; Anglade, ‘Les troubadours a Narbonne’ in Mélanges Chabaneau, p. 742.) Being older than her sister Ermessinde, she succeeded her father, Aimeric II, on his death in 1134 (Hist. gen. Lang., III, pp. 691-2; VI, p. 151). However, apparently using Ermengarda’s minority as a pretext, Alphonse-Jourdain, Count of Toulouse, is assumed to have taken possession of her lands from 1134 to 1143. After regaining control of them Ermengarda thenceforth preserved them from the endeavours both of Alphonse-Jourdain and of his son, Raimon V (ibid.). In 1142 she married Alfonso, a Spanish count whose family name is not known (ibid., III, p. 725). Her second marriage, probably in 1145, was to Bernard d’Anduze (ibid., III, p. 777). She exercised sole responsibility for the administration of her lands for over fifty years, and during this time profited from the protection afforded to her by Count Raimon Bérenguer IV of Barcelona and subsequently by King Alfonso II of Aragon. She remained on close terms with each of them and, we are told, acknowledged them as overlords out of friendship and gratitude rather than out of duty (ibid., VI, p. 151). She played an important part in political events in the Midi during the second half of the twelfth century and gained a reputation for her skilful and wise government (ibid.; Anglade, op. cit., p. 738). Both King Louis VII (Le Jeune) and Pope Alexander III held her in special esteem (ibid., III, pp. 821-2, 843, 844, and VI, p. 55). Apart from acting as arbiter in disputes between eminent lords and princes, she obtained from King Louis the prerogative of administering justice in her own name (ibid., VI, p. 151) and placed herself at the head of her troops in various military expeditions (ibid.; cf., in particular, III, pp. 737, 828, 847; VI, p. 102). Reference should also be made to the important services she rendered to Pope Alexander and to her generosity towards churches (ibid., VI, p. 151; cf. also IV, p. 675). As Ermengarda had no heirs she decided in 1168 to call to Narbonne Aimeric de Lara, the son of Ermessinde, her sister, in order to prepare him for government. As he died a few years later, Ermengarda’s other nephew, Pierre de Lara, was brought to Narbonne for the same purpose. (For details of these and related events see note to III, l. 64 (n’Aimeric lo tos).) Although Pierre de Lara succeeded Ermengarda near the end of 1192 (ibid., VI, p. 151; VII, p. 17), he had apparently had a share in the government of Narbonne as early as 1188 (ibid., VI, p. 139). Ermengarda subsequently retired to Perpignan, a domain of Alfonso II’s, where she remained for the rest of her life. She did not die until 1194 at the earliest (ibid., VI, p. 151), and there is some evidence to suggest that it may even have been as late as 1197 (ibid., VII, 18). The extent to which Ermengarda may have been involved in the lives of troubadours other than Peire Rogier is discussed in appendix II.   (5) sos. The reading of all the MSS except I, which has a scribal error (ses).   (7) e la c. Appel follows EN2R in inserting el between e and la. It is notable, however, that B, despite its otherwise independent reading here, supports IK in the omission of el. This section of the Vida is missing in A.   (8) ab. We have preferred the reading of ABR to that of EIKN2 (cum) for the same reason as Boutière, namely that the italianism cum is merely a product of the copyists. Boutière (op. cit., pp. xxviii-xxix) quotes the appearance of cum in IKN2 to illustrate the close relationship of the three MSS and to attempt to disprove Panvini’s thesis whereby N2 occupies the top of his stemma and IK is placed as low as the fourth rank (Panvini, Appunti, p. 105). crezut. The reading of all the MSS except I, which has the usual nominative form (crezutz). The impersonal construction employed here requires the invariable neuter form (see Altprov. Elem., p. 71; Anglade, p. 231).   (10) IKN2 contain two stanzas of the poem, AB the first stanza and ER the first two to three lines only. The stanzas ought to contain seven lines each, but instead the first has eight and the second six. The order of the lines is also disarranged: ll. 6-8 are in fact the last three of the second stanza in the actual poem and l. 14 should be the last line of the first stanza. Line 6 is almost identical to l. 13 and replaces the original l. 6 of the poem (cum es de vos ni cum vos vai). (Boutière, op. cit., p. 270, note 6, indicates l. 7 in error.) Both Boutière (op. cit., p. xliv) and Favati (op. cit., p. 415), observing that the confusion in the line order and the stanza structure, as well as the omission of an original line, applies to all the MSS (except ER, which do not contain a full stanza), consider that the quotation was originally missing in the archetype from which all the MSS stem. They conclude, therefore, that the archetype itself was merely a copy which had already been corrupted. (10), 1 Raimbaut. The trisyllabic version of the word, found in ER and in A (Raembaut), is chosen for reasons of metre. The other MSS all offer versions of two syllables. For the development of the three-syllabled form of the word from the original Raginbald see Altprov. Elem., p. 33. Cf. VIII, l. 50. (10), 2 solatz. The reading of ABER is adopted in preference to that of IKN2 (saber). The rhyme scheme requires the ending -atz. It may well be that the version of IKN2, which is not offered by any MS in the corresponding place in the poem itself, is the result of the influence of saber in the first line of the second stanza. (10), 5 que saber voill. It should be noted that, for this half of the line, the reading of all five MSS (ABIKN2) closely resembles those of CT in the actual poem (C: e vuelh saber; T: eu voigll saber). (10), 6 lo fai. This reading contained in all five MSS is, in fact, the one offered by ET in l. 12 of the actual poem. However, the version of the line repeated in the second stanza in IKN2 (retrai) is that offered by the majority of the MSS for l. 12 of the poem.   (11) The latter part of the Vida, following the quotation from Seign’en Raymbaut, is lacking in IKN2. Like Appel, Favati and Boutière-Schutz, we have followed ABER in including it. It is interesting to note, however, that Panvini (op. cit., p. 113) rejects Favati’s view (Appunti, pp. 88-9) that the omission in IKN2 is erroneous. He refers to the earlier inclusion of dolens e pensius e consiros in IKN2 and of de la ciutat de Clarmon in N2 and, rather, is of the opinion that this part of the Vida was added at a later stage in ABER according to a common original, further evidence of which, he says, is found in the reading of ER, N’Anfos de castela. It is in fact not unusual for R to contain, at the end of certain Vidas, information which is not included in other MSS (cf Boutière and Schutz, op. cit., p. xxxix). Panvini (op. cit., p. 113) considers that the author of this common original was a biographer who not only wrote original biographies (Bertran de Born, Raimon Jordan, etc.) but also added information to biographies which had already been compiled. Panvini includes in this category the Vidas of Aimeric de Peguilhan and Perdigon and, slightly more tentatively, that of Peire Rogier. Raimbaut. It seems reasonable to adhere to the spelling of E, to which that of AB (raembaut), favoured by Appel and Favati, is fairly close. R is independent here (el). The spelling preferred by Boutière and Schutz (rambaut) is not given by any of the MSS but is in fact the version offered by BIKN2 in l. 1 of the quotation. The additional words found only in B (d’aurenga e puois s’en partic de lui) must be regarded as suspect in view of their omission in all the other MSS (AER). Appel encloses them with brackets, as he does later in the case of the other independent versions of B: pois estet andtant qant li plac et el volc. N’Anfos de Castela. The retention of the reading of E is justified by the support of R. AB, followed by Appel, omit the reference to Anfos de Castela (cf. p. 16, note 35). Favati’s version is based on ER but also appears to be influenced by AB. He follows AB for Amfos, ER for de Castela and then omits the second N’Anfos before d’Arago. The king concerned is Alfonso VIII of Castille (1158-1214). Son of King Alfonso VII, who died in 1157, he married in 1170 Eleanor, daughter of Henry II, the Plantagenet. He is described as a valiant warrior and clever politician as well as a champion of Christianity (cf. Jeanroy, Poésie lyrique, I, p. 208). His court was one where many troubadours of various kinds assembled, and his marriage with Eleanor probably attracted, in addition, some of the poetic following of the Plantagenets (cf. Jeanroy, op. cit., I, p. 209). The other troubadours who, according to the Vidas and Razos, visited his court are Giraut de Bornelh, Aimeric de Peguilhan, Folquet de Marseille and Uc de Saint Circ (cf. Boutière and Schutz, op. cit., and Favati, Biografie). (Boutière and Schutz (p. 243, note 11) consider the Anfos mentioned in Uc de Saint Circ’s Vida to be Alfonso VIII of Castille while Favati (op. cit., p. 313) omits the reference to him.) Jeanroy (Les Troubadours en Espagne, p. 165 and p. 170, note 2) also names the following troubadours who, he considers, visited Alfonso’s court: At de Mons, Bernard Calvo, Guiraut Riquer, Pons Barba and Paulet de Marseille. (Milà (De los trovadores en España, p. 131) includes Savaric de Mauléon in the list, but there appears to be no supporting evidence (cf. H. J. Chaytor, Savaric de Mauléon, Baron and Troubadour, Cambridge, 1939).) Alfonso was well known for his hospitality and friendliness towards the troubadours (cf. Jeanroy, Les troubadours en Espagne, p. 172) and his high reputation among them is reflected in the praise with which a number of them sang of him: namely Peire Vidal, Perdigon, Guillem de Bergadan, Aimeric de Peguilhan, Guiraut de Calanson, Raimon Vidal (cf. Jeanroy, Poésie lyrique, I, pp. 209-10). N’Anfos d’Arago. Born in 1152 or 1158, son of Raimon-Bérenger IV, this Alfonso was known initially as Alfonso I. He became Count of Barcelona in 1162, King of Aragon (under the name of Alfonso II) in 1164, Count of Provence in 1166, and died in 1196 (cf. Boutière and Schutz, op. cit., p. 526, note 1). The references to Alfonso in the Vidas, Razos and poems of the troubadours are numerous. Jeanroy (op. cit., I, p. 190) makes the point that the troubadours did not need to cross over into Spain to pay homage to him as he himself had many opportunities to visit their regions: we find him in Provence in 1167 and 1174, in Languedoc in 1179, around Carcassonne and Toulouse in 1181, 1186 and 1193, and at Perpignan (where he died) in 1196. The Vidas or Razos of the following troubadours, apart from Peire Rogier, allude to him: Arnaut de Mareuil, Bertran de Born, Folquet de Marseille, Guillem de Cabestaing, the Monk of Montaudon, Peire Raimon de  Toulouse, Peire Vidal and Uc Brunet (cf. Irénée Cluzel, ‘Princes et troubadours de la maison royale de Barcelone-Aragon’ in Boletín de la Real Academia de Buenas Letras de Barcelona, XXVII (1957-58), 324). One must add the following troubadours who, according to their poems or other evidence, have also been connected with him: Aimeric de Sarlat, Arnaut Daniel, Guillem de Bergadan, Giraut de Bornelh, Guiraut (or Guerau) de Cabrera, Guiraut del Luc, Raimbaut de Vaqueiras, Raimon Vidal de Besalu and perhaps Pons de Capdeuil, Raimbaut d’Orange (cf. Irénée Cluzel, op. cit., XXVII, 323) and the anonymous author(s) of Jaufré (cf. M. de Riquer, ‘Los problemas del “Roman” provenzal de ‘‘Jaufré’’, in Recueil de travaux offert à M. Clovis Brunel, Paris, 1955, pp. 444-7). Bertran de Born and Guillem de Bergadan show themselves hostile towards Alfonso, while the references of most of the other troubadours are favourable. Peire Vidal, regarded as Alfonso’s favourite, is particularly generous in his praises (cf. Irénée Cluzel, loc. cit.). Not content with merely encouraging the troubadours, Alfonso composed poetry himself and has handed down to us one canso and a tenso with Giraut de Bornelh (cf. Pillet and Carstens, 23, 1, and 23, 1a). For further reference to Alfonso’s literary role cf. Boutière and Schutz, op. cit., p. 526, note 2. Throughout his reign Alfonso was closely involved in the affairs of southern France. For much of this period he was engaged in war with Count Raimon V of Toulouse (cf. Hist. gen. Lang., VI, pp. 23-4) while remaining a very close friend and ally of Ermengarda of Narbonne (cf. p. 37 above). Raimon de Toloza. Count Raimon V, 1148-94. Jeanroy (op. cit., I, p. 160) states that in the second half of the twelfth century the Counts of Toulouse together with the Dukes of Aquitaine were the most powerful lords in the Midi, having extended their lands and substantially increased their wealth. The court of Raimon V and that of Raimon VI (1194-1222) were both among the most splendid in the west and therefore attracted a great number of troubadours. Boutière and Schutz (op. cit.) and Favati (op. cit.) see a reference to Raimon V in the Vidas or Razos of the following troubadours, apart from Peire Rogier: Bernart de Ventadour, Bertran de Born, Folquet de Marseille, Arnaut de Mareuil and Peire Vidal. The Histoire générale de Languedoc (VI, p. 162) lays great emphasis on the encouragement which Raimon gave to Provençal poetry: ‘‘Jamais la poésie provençale ne fut en si grand honneur que du vivant de Raimond V et jamais aucun prince ne favorisa tant que lui ceux qui la cultivaient”.   (12) el hi estet. Boutière and Schutz omit el. It seems preferable to include it, however, as it is offered by all four MSS. mas ... definet. In each case Appel chooses the reading of AB (e ... fenic). It appears reasonable, however, to retain the equally acceptable versions of E, particularly in view of the usual support of R (cf. N’Anfos de Castelaabove). l’orde de Granmon. About 1076 Etienne de Muret, born in Thiers in the Auvergne, founded a community of hermits on the mountain at Muret near Limoges. After his death in 1124 they installed themselves at Grandmont in the commune of Saint-Sylvestre, also fairly near Limoges. Etienne’s adoption of the austere rule of the Cantabrian monks no doubt accounted for the severity of the rule followed by the Grandmontains, or Bons-hommes, as the members of the Order came to be known. The rule, which was approved by Pope Adrian IV in 1156, was based on two main themes: poverty and solitude. The members were apparently well known for their virtue and the simplicity of their life. Their reputation for humility is reflected in the following reference, quoted by Appel, from Gaucelm Faidit’s S’om pogues partir son voler:   Vas midonz sui de franc saber, plus humils d’un frair de Granmon, et ill m’es d’orgoillos parer si que, qan la prec, no·m respon. (Cf. Mouzat, Les Poèmes de Gaucelm Faidit, 65, ll. 56-59.)   The Order must have already been flourishing by the time Peire Rogier entered it, in that by 1170 there were as many as sixty communities. However, during the thirteenth century and part of the fourteenth the Order was troubled by internal quarrels, particularly between the frères convers, charged with the administration of temporal affairs, and the clercs. A serious division also arose between the frères anglais and the frères français. In 1317 Pope John XXII reformed the Order by reducing the number of communities, which then stood at 149, (***) to thirty-nine and by converting Grandmont into an abbey, which he placed at their head. Perhaps an important contributory factor in the Order’s decline, apart from its internal dissensions, was the Hundred Years War, during which the abbey and the other convents were extensively ravaged. In 1245, Pope Innocent IV mitigated the Order’s severe rule. As a reaction a section of the Order, led by a Father Frémont, broke away in 1642 to establish their own communities of l’Etroite Observance. Approval for the suppression of the Order was given in 1772 by Pope Clement XIV. (For these notes on the Order reference has been made to the following works: Dom J. Becquet, Les Institutions de l’Ordre de Grandmont au moyen-âge, Mabillon, 1952, pp. 34-6; E. Darras, Le Prieuré Grandmontain de Notre-Dame des bonshommes du Meyrel-lez-Maffliers, 1169-1791, Pontoise-L’Isle-Adam, 1928, pp. 9, 11-12, 18-19; Canon Farcy, Une Page de l’histoire de Rouen. Le Prieuré de Grandmont des origines jusqu’à nos jours, Rouen, 1934, pp. 15-19; R. Farnier, La Condition juridique des personnes et des biens de l’Ordre de Grandmont des origines au XVIIIe siècle, Limoges, 1913, pp. 17, 22, 24-39; Larousse, III, p. 857; Nouveau Larousse Illustré, IV, p. 930.) (↑)       NOTES   *) W. T. Pattison, Life and Works of the Troubadour Raimbaut d’Orange, Minneapolis, 1952. (↑)   1) Cf. Appel, p. 12. Diez (Leben und Werke, p. 79) and Jeanroy (Poésie Lyrique, I, p. 409) indicate, in fact, the period 1160-80. (↑)   2) Le biografie provenzali: valore e attendibilità, Florence, 1952, pp. 113-15. (↑)   3) Page 2. (↑)   4) Appel (p. 4) states that he was unable to find any reference to Peire Rogier in records at Clermont. We have consulted, without success, a number of works on the history of the city, including the following: F. Renaud, Histoire de la commune de Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, 1873; A. Imberdis, Histoire générale de l’Auvergne depuis l’ère gallique jusqu’au XVIIIe siècle, Clermont-Ferrand, 1868, vol. I; A. Tardieu, Histoire de la ville de Clermont-Ferrand, Moulins, 1870-71, vol. I; P. Audigier,Histoire de la ville de Clermont, Clermont-Ferrand, 1887, vol. I. The only references to Peire Rogier which we have discovered are based on Jehan de Nostredame’s erroneous version of Peire’s life (see appendix I): Tardieu (op. cit., p. 263) includes Peire in the list of canons of the old cathedral chapter but with the date 1330. Similarly, Audigier (op. cit., p. 336) mentions him in a list of the houses of Clermont. He describes him as a canon of the cathedral around 1330 and adds that he was assassinated. (↑)   5) A. Jeanroy, Archivum Romanicum, I, (1917), 305, and Poésie Lyrique, I, pp. 127-32; Panvini, op. cit., p. 113. (↑)   6) Page 4. (↑)   7) Boutière and Schutz (Biographies, p. 269) follow this interpretation in their translation of Peire Rogier’s Vida and throughout their edition of the Vidas make a clear distinction between the two meanings of gentils. In other Vidas the word very often appears on its own with hom, without any other adjectives. The translation of ‘gentilhomme’ which is given in these cases is generally borne out by what is known of the particular troubadour’s family; cf. the Vidas of the following troubadours as given in the edition of Boutière and Schutz: Blacasset (p. 515), Gausbert de Poicibot (p. 229), Guilhem Adémar (p. 349), Lanfranc Cigala (p. 569), Monk of de Montaudon (p. 307), Peire de Bussignac (p. 145). (↑)   8) Appel, loc. cit; V. Crescini, Le caricature trobadoriche di Pietro d’Alvernia inAtti del Reale Istituto Veneto di scienza, lettere ed arti, LXXXVI, (1926-27), 212. (↑)   9) We have not checked the appearance of En in f, which does not contain any of Peire’s poems, but rely on Appel’s information (p. 4). In C it appears with Peire Rogier de Mirapeys at the head of No sai don chant, and in R it appears at the head of the Vida. The scribe of D uses it in introducing Raimbaut d’Orange’s Peire Rotgier, a trassaillir, in the same way as Raimon Vidal (Abrils issi’e mais intrava) in his preamble to the quotation from Seign’en Raymbaut, per vezer. The MSS of the Breviari d’Amor also employ it in the introductory line to the first quotation from the same poem (l. 32,616). (↑)   10) Peire Rogier de Mirepoix was prominent in the struggles against the crusaders in the first part of the thirteenth century. During this period Mirepoix, situated in the Department of Ariège, was an established centre of the Cathar heresy and Peire Rogier de Mirepoix one of the most prominent Cathars. The castle was, in fact, attacked and captured by Simon de Montfort in 1209 (cf. P. Belperron, La Croisade contre les Albigeois, p. 193). Peire Rogier is said to have remained closely attached to the sect all his life. It is reported that after being mortally wounded in combat he was taken to Fanjeaux to receive the consolamentum from the eminent Cathar bishop Guillabert de Castres (cf. R. Nelli, L’érotique des troubadours, p. 233). The Mirepoix family is mentioned quite often in the Histoire générale de Languedoc, the earliest date concerned being 1062 (III, p. 340). In 1242, a later Peire Rogier de Mirepoix, presumably the son of the above named, played a prominent role in the massacre of the inquisitors at Avignonet. He also took part in the defence of the castle of Montségur during the subsequent siege of 1243-44. For details of these events and of the lord of Mirepoix’s part in them see Hist. gen. Lang., VI, pp. 738 ff and p. 768, and Belperron’s Croisade contre les Albigeois, pp. 427-33. The MSS C and a1 attribute, in fact, all the poems by Peire which they contain to Peire Rogier de Mirepoix. (*According to Appel (p. 3, note 2), the same title appears in f in the only place in which reference is made to Peire).  It has been assumed from this that the lord of Mirepoix had himself written poetry (cf. Chabaneau, Biographies, p. 166; Nelli, op. cit., p. 234). However, Appel’s explanation (p. 4) of the appearance of his name in these MSS would seem to be more likely: the lord is mentioned in one of the razos of Raimon de Miraval together with the Count of Foix, Olivier de Saissac, Aimeric de Montréal and Peire Vidal, who are all reputed to have courted the Loba of Pennautier, Raimon’s lady; this brief reference in the history of the troubadours may well have provided the scribes of C and a1 with sufficient grounds for giving the lord of Mirepoix’s name to the troubadour. Raimon himself also mentions a Peire Rogier in the sirventes, A Dieu me coman, Bajona, which names a number of lords with whom Raimon is acquainted (see P. Andraud, La Vie et l’oeuvre du troubadour Raimon de Miraval, p. 52; L. T. Topsfield, Les Poésies du troubadour Raimon de Miraval, p. 317). The contents of the poem make it clear that the person concerned is at Carcassonne. As the poem is fixed in the period 1200-04, he is identified with Peire Rogier de Cabaret, who became viguier of Carcassonne in 1204 (cf. Appel, p. 4, note 1; Andraud, op. cit., pp. 59-60 and p. 178; Topsfield, op. cit., p. 26) and who, like Peire Rogier de Mirepoix, took an active part in the Albigensian Crusade. He defended Carcassonne during the siege of 1209 (cf. Hist. gen. Lang., VI, p. 292). His attempt to defend the castle of Cabaret in 1210 against Simon de Montfort failed, and the surrender of the castle was followed by that of several others in the area (cf. ibid., VI, p. 350). (↑)   11) See Crescini, op. cit., LXXXVI, 212, note 4. He draws attention to the Vida of Bernart de Ventadour, in which the biographer begins by describing Bernart as a man de paubra generation, fills d’un sirven qu’era forniers and then proceeds to place En before his name (see Appel, B. von Vent., pp. xi-xvi). (↑)   12) I, pp. 326-70. (↑)   13) R. Four, in the Aurillac journal Croix du Cantal (4 December 1910), accepts with enthusiasm the conclusions of the duc de la Salle, stating that he has made ‘une découverte d’érudition’. Nelli and Lavaud retain the duc de la Salle’s theory for their brief notes on Peire Rogier in their anthology (Les Troubadours, II, p. 84): ‘Peire Rogiers appartenait très probablement à la famille des seigneurs de Rogiers, aujourd’hui Rouziers, ...’ (↑)   14) Jeanroy (Romania, XLII (1913), 115) makes the following comments on the duc de la Salle’s work: ‘C’est l’ouvrage d’un amateur enthousiaste et fort érudit, mais non moins étranger aux procédés et aux scrupules ordinaires de la critique ... Si la plupart des poètes énumérés plus haut sont authentiquement auvergnats, plusieurs, en revanche, ne deviennent “cantaliens” que par la grâce du duc de la Salle, qui rattache, par exemple, Peire Rogier à la famille seigneuriale de Rogiers (aujourd’hui Rouziers, canton de Maurs, arr. d’Aurillac) ...’ Later, in his Bibliographie sommaire des chansonniers provençaux (p. 41), Jeanroy describes the same section of Les Troubadours cantaliens as ‘sans valeur’. (↑)   15) Cf. Annuaire du département du Cantal, Aurillac, 1830, p. 219; J. B. Bouillet, Nobiliaire d’Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, 1852, V, pp. 418-19. (↑)   16) As support for his assumption that Peire was of noble origin the duc de la Salle cites the reference to gentils hom in the Vida (op. cit., I, p. 336). He considers that the troubadour must have belonged to the old family of the lords of Rogiers, since there existed no other of noble status by that name in the whole of the Auvergne (op. cit., I, pp. 335-7). He assumes that Peire was a younger brother and was therefore destined as a child for the Church (op. cit., I, p. 337 and pp. 341-2). A canonry at Clermont Cathedral, he suggests, could have been a mark of appreciation on the part of the Bishop of the Auvergne for the family’s past generosity to the Church of Saint-Julien de Brioude (op. cit., I, p. 342). A number of the family of Rogiers are in fact included in lists of admissions to the chapter of Brioude (cf. M. Laîné, Archives généalogiques et historiques de la noblesse de France, Paris, 1834, IV, p. 29; Bouillet, op. cit., V, p. 418). Tardieu (op. cit., p. 255) states that in the early days of Clermont Cathedral, particularly in the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, almost all its canons belonged to the oldest and most illustrious houses in the Auvergne. (↑)   17) Cf. Vida. (↑)   18) Op. cit., p. 114. (↑)   19) See 3. Peire Rogier’s lady and the senhal‘Tort-n’avetz’. (↑)   20) See the introduction to IX and 3. Peire Rogier’s lady and the senhal‘Tort-n’avetz’. (↑)   21) See 3. Peire Rogier’s lady and the senhal‘Tort-n’avetz’. In V (ll. 45-46) Peire states that he will see Tort-n’avetz shortly si trop grans afars no·m rete, which would seem to suggest that, at that particular time at least, reasons other than those reported by the Vida were keeping the troubadour away from Narbonne. (↑)   22) Appel (Raïmbaut von Orange, p. 19) suggests that Raimbaut’s reputation had perhaps spread as far as Narbonne. (↑)   23) Raimbaut was still fairly young, probably in his late twenties, when he died in 1173 (cf. Pattison, R. d’Orange, pp. 12, 25 and 36). (↑)   24) Cf. Appel, op. cit., p. 20; Pattison, op. cit., p. 90, note 1. (↑)   25) Cf. Appel, Peire Rogier, p. 18; Pattison, loc. cit. See also Peire d’Alvernhe’s remarks on Raimbaut in the satire Cantarai d’ aqestz trobadors (stanza X). (↑)   26) Appel (op. cit., p. 17) quotes other examples of didacticism in Peire’s work: I, ll. 8-28; II, ll. 37-45, 50-4, 59-63; IV, ll. 4-7, 10-14; V, ll. 8-35; VII, ll. 32-3. (↑)   27) Cf. note to VIII, ll. 15 ff., and Jeanroy, Poésie Lyrique, I, p. 169. (↑)   28) The other poems which may be dated approximately are III (see note to l. 64: n’Aimeric lo tos) and possibly IV (see note to l. 54: dons Sanz). (↑)   29) Cf. op. cit., p. 37 and p. 90, note 1. Among the reasons Pattison puts forward is that since Peire speaks of Raimbaut as of one who is only in the early stages of his career the reply must fall fairly near the beginning of Raimbaut’s career but late enough for him to have already achieved some fame. Pattison dates Raimbaut’s first poem around 1162 and therefore fixes the reply some three to five years later. Pietsch (Modern Language Notes, X, col. 401) places the reply around 1170. (↑)   30) Op. cit., p. 114. (↑)   31) See the discussion on Puivert, II. The Place of Peire Rogier’s Work in the Poetry of The Troubadours. (↑)   32) Cf. Diez, op. cit., p. 95. J. Ajalbert (Les Troubadours d’Auvergne, p. 73) assumes, on the other hand, that Peire stayed at the court of Orange until Raimbaut’s death. (↑)   33) J. Storost (Ursprung und Entwicklung des altprovenzalischen sirventes bis auf Bertran de Born, Halle, 1931, p. 103) considers that Peire uses Raimbaut’s reputation and the uncertainty about his marital status merely as an excuse for the visit. In his view Peire’s repeated references to his proposed departure imply, in fact, a desire to be retained by Raimbaut. He suggests that the author of the Vida has interpreted the poem in the same way in stating that Peire was at Raimbaut’s court a long time. (↑)   34) Pattison considers that one of Raimbaut’s gaps may be meant to parody the theme of Peire’s Al pareyssen de las flors (see the notes to this poem) and also mentions Raimbaut’s likely imitation of Peire’s dialogue form (cf. op. cit., p. 23 and p. 54). A. Kolsen even suggests that Raimbaut may possibly have shared in the composition of part of Peire’s Ges non puesc en bon vers fallir (see II. The Place of Peire Rogier’s Work in the Poetry of The Troubadours). (↑)   35) Appel (op. cit., p. 9) has reservations about the reported visit to Castille. He considers that insufficient evidence is available to confirm the visit and claims that only one MS (R) makes reference to it. It should be noted, however, that the visit is also mentioned in E, which we have generally adopted as base for the latter part of the Vida. R. Menéndez Pidal (Poesía juglaresca y juglares, Madrid, 1924, p. 163, note 2) suggests that the omission of the reference in the other MSS (AB) may have been caused by an error on the part of the scribe, whose eye was probably attracted by the second Anfos appearing a few words after the first. (↑)   36) See notes to the Vida. (↑)   37) See notes to the Vida. (↑)   38) See note to l. 54 of IV (No sai don chant). (↑)   39) See notes to the Vida. (↑)   40) It is interesting to note the similarity between the end of Peire’s Vida and that of Guilhem Adémar’s   Peire Rogier   Guilhelm Adémar Gran honor ac e·l mon tan   ... e fo fort honratz per tota com el hi estet, mais pueis se     la bona gen. E pois el se rendet rendet a l’ordre de Granmon   e l’ordre de Granmon. e lai el definet.   [Biographies p. 349] (↑)       41) See note 5 above. We have consulted the following works, which are among those cited by K. Almqvist in connection with his thorough but unproductive search for a record of Guilhem Adémar (see G. Adémar, pp. 14-15): Dom Beaunier, Recueil historique, chronologique, et topographique des archevêchez, évêchez, abbayes et prieurez de France ... two vols., Paris, 1726; Dom Beaunier, Recueil historique des archevêchés, évêchés, abbayes et prieurés de France (Abbayes et prieurés de l’ancienne France) ... (new edition, introduction), 1906, pp. 185-8; C. U. J. Chevalier, Répertoire des sources historiques du moyen-âge, Topobibliographie, two vols., Montbéliard, 1903; C. Couderc, Les Manuscrits de l’abbaye de Grandmont (Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes, vol. 62, 1901); D. de Sainte-Marthe, Gallia Christiana, vol. 2, Paris, 1720; L. Guibert, Les Manuscrits du séminaire de Limoges (Bulletin de la Société archéologique et historique du Limousin, Limoges, 1892, pp. 493-509, Nos. 68-84); A. Lecler, Histoire de l’abbaye de Grandmont (Bulletin de la Société archéologique ... du Limousin, vols. 57-60, Limoges, 1907-10; J. Levesque, Annales ordinis grandimontis, Troyes, 1662; M. Prou, Additions et corrections au Gallia Christiana (Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’Ecole française de Rome, Rome, V, (1885), pp. 254-5). (↑)   42) For an explanation of references contained in the biography by Jehan de Nostredame and other comments on it see the edition of Chabaneau-Anglade, Paris, 1913, pp. 30, 139, 163, 343. (↑)   43) Hist. gen. Lang., III, p. 870. (↑)   44) Lines 50-3 of the critical edition of the poem by W. P. Shepard and F. M. Chambers in Romance Philology, II (1948), 86. (↑)   45) For the discussion by Shepard and Chambers on the authorship of the poem, see op. cit., II, 83-90, and their edition, The Poems of Aimeric de Peguilhan, Evanston (Illinois), 1950, p. 28. Pillet and Carstens had earlier expressed doubts about the poem’s authenticity (cf. Bibliographie der Troubadours, p. 13). Shepard and Chambers point out that important aspects of the poem’s content and style are foreign to Aimeric’s poetry. They mention the picture of spring which introduces the poem and the other references to nature as well as the vocabulary and rhyme forms. Moreover they fix Aimeric’s birth not later than 1175 (see The Poems of Aimeric de Peguilhan, p. 4) and make the point that Peire Rogier is likely to have died while Aimeric was still a child. This is consistent with the approximate period of 1195-1230 in which Jeanroy places Aimeric’s poetic activity (op. cit., I, p. 331). One MS (D) attributes the poem to Guillem Rainol d’At. None of the five extant poems by Guillem is a canso, but the vocabulary and picturesque references to nature in a number of passages which Shepard and Chambers quote from the poems are reminiscent of Lanqan chanton. (↑)   46) Op. cit., I, p. 381. (↑)   47) They refer to a sirventes written to Simon de Montfort, which has been dated around 1216-18, and to a tenso composed with Guillem Magret, who was a protégé of Peter II of Aragon (1196-1213) and Alfonso IX of Léon (1188-1230) and to whom Jeanroy gives the approximate dates 1200-15 (op. cit., I, p. 379). (↑)   48) See note 1 above. (↑)   49) See note to l. 54 of IV (dons Sanz), however, about the possibility of a slight extension of Peire’s career beyond 1180. (↑)   50) See note 23 above. (↑)   51) A. Del Monte, P. d’Alvernha, No. XII (pp. 119-27). (↑)   52) Cf. references quoted by Del Monte in his edition (p. 129); P. Rajna, Romania, XLIX, 81; Appel, B. von Vent., p. liv. Appel (P. Rogier, p. 10) was the first to establish the terminus ad quem of Peire d’Alvernhe’s sirventes by identifying the Raembautz mentioned in the tenth stanza as Raimbaut d’Orange, who died in 1173 (see note 23 above). The earlier limit was proposed by Zenker in his edition of Peire d’Alvernhe. (↑)   53) Among the reasons for supposing that the persons mentioned in the satire were in fact present at its reading is the inclusion of little known and foreign troubadours alongside well known, established ones, together with a certain emphasis, in the descriptions, on the troubadours’ visual and audible features (cf. Appel, B. von Vent., p. xxi; Rajna, op. cit., XLIX, 89 ff; Crescini, op. cit., LXXXVI, 1229 ff; Pattison, Mod. Phil., XXXI, 20; R. Lejeune, ‘“La Galerie littéraire” du troubadour Peire d’Alvernhe’ (Actes et mémoires du IIIe Congrès international de langue et littérature d’oc, Bordeaux, 1964, II, p. 36)). The intended tone of the poem is open to discussion (cf. N. Zingarelli, Ricerche sulla vita e le rime di Bernart de Ventadorn (Studi medievali, I, (1904-05), 319 ff); Appel, op. cit., pp. xix-xx; Rajna, op. cit., XLIX, 91 ff; Crescini, op. cit., LXXXVI, 203 ff; Pattison, op. cit., XXXI, 19; Riquer, Lírica, p. 208). Pattison (loc. cit.) considers that it is a light-hearted poem and suggests that for the playful humour to be fully developed the troubadours in question must have been present in person. (↑)   54) It is on this site that one still finds the imposing ruins of a former castle a brief description of which is given by Rita Lejeune (op. cit., pp. 43-4). Another possibility would be the Puivert in the Department of Vaucluse, but it has been rejected on the grounds that the place in question has preserved no mediaeval ruins and has no mention in mediaeval history (cf. Appel, op. cit., pp. xxi-xxii; Pattison, loc. cit.; R. Lejeune, op. cit., pp. 49-51). (↑)   55) See Pattison, op. cit., XXXI, 23-32, for full details of this theory. Pattison identifies the subject of Peire’s twelfth stanza, Gonzalgo Roitz, as Gonzalo Ruiz de la Burueba, who was among the party of dignitaries charged with accompanying Eleanor to Spain. Pattison explains why, in his view, the party would have been likely to decide against the more normal routes to Tarrazona in order to follow the less direct one through Puivert, situated in the territory of Count Raimond V of Toulouse. Since the journey to Spain lasted from July to September 1170 it is in this period that Pattison places the satire. (↑)   56) Cf. Pattison, op. cit., XXXI, 30-1, and PMLA, I, 22-3. (↑)   57) Cf. op. cit., pp. 39-40, 43-9. Mme Lejeune proposes a much more straightforward route from Bordeaux to Spain, not mentioned by Pattison, which would have taken the party along the road joining Pau and Saragossa via the Somport pass and Jaca. She also observes that in August 1170 Count Raimond V of Toulouse was still an enemy of Henry II of England. A journey through the count’s territory was therefore unlikely. Well documented evidence is provided by Mme Lejeune to show that the castle mentioned by Pattison (see note 54 above) did not in fact exist in 1170. Official records contain no reference to Puivert, the place, before about 1175. The castle is not mentioned until 1210, when it was attacked by Simon de Montfort. (↑)   58) Cf. op. cit., pp. 51-3. Mme Lejeune suggests that Puigverd de Agramunt may have been the forerunner of Puivert (Aude). She considers that it is possible for the Catalonian name to have been transferred to the Aude in the second half of the twelfth century through a family migration, particularly as the lords of this region had paid homage to the King of Aragon, Count of Barcelona. Pattison (Mod. Phil., XXXI, 20) makes reference to three places named Puivert in Catalonia but observes that, like Puivert (Vaucluse), none of them shows any trace of mediaeval ruins or is mentioned in official documents. (↑58a)   59) We have placed the exchange of sirventes between Peire and Raimbaut in the period 1165-67 (see 1. The Provençal Vida). (↑)   60) Pattison (op. cit., XXXI, 30-1, and PMLA, I, 22-3) considers that a number of those troubadours present at Puivert probably followed the wedding party into Tarrazona, since large numbers of troubadours were often found at the lavish Spanish weddings. (↑)   61) Op. cit., p. 129. (↑)   62) Ibid. (↑)   63) The same may be said of the reference to God in VI, l. 61. The reference in IX, l. 11, is perhaps less conventional in that it is supplemented, in the following line, by the description of God as espirital seinhor. Attention has, however, already been drawn to the doubtful authenticity of this poem (see also the introduction to IX). (↑)   64) Op. cit., pp. 102-4. (↑)   65) See note 26 above. (↑)   66) Su e giù per le biografie provenzali, in Mélanges Chabaneau, Rome, 1907, pp. 387-8. De Lollis considers two of the lines (8-9) to be paraphrases of passages from the book of Ecclesiastes. (↑66a)   67) D’entier vers far eu no pes (Pillet-Carstens, 63, 6). (↑)   68) Cf. Jeanroy, op. cit., II, p. 307. (↑)   69) Op. cit., p. 114. (↑)   70) The same view is held by Jeanroy (op. cit., II, p. 137, note 2). (↑)   71) See note 5 above. (↑)   72) Cf. Appel, B. von Vent., p. xx. (↑)   73) Cf. Appel, P. Rogier, pp. 10-11 (note), and B. von Vent., p. xxi. The version of CR (chantet) is later strongly supported by Rajna (op. cit., XLIX, 90) while it is rejected by Crescini (op. cit., LXXXVI, 221 ff and 1229 ff). (↑)   74) Les Troubadours dans leur vie et dans leurs oeuvres, Paris, 1955, p. 65. (↑)   75) Cf. Appel, B. von Vent., p. lii; Jeanroy, op. cit., II, pp. 136-7. The approximate period in which Jeanroy (op. cit., I, p. 347) places Bernart’s poetic activity (1150-80) is also very similar to that given to Peire’s (1160-80). (↑)   76) See note 111 below. (↑)   77) See Appendices. (↑)   78) Les Poèmes de Gaucelm Faidit, Paris, 1965, p. 151. (↑)   79) Op. cit., No. 15 (pp. 149-50). (↑)   80) Op. cit., p. 151 and pp. 31-2. (↑)   81) Op. cit., p. 151. (↑)   82) The poem must have been written before 1173, the year of Raimbaut’s death. Gaucelm’s poetic activity is placed approximately in the period 1170–1205 (cf. Mouzat, op. cit., p. 31, note 17). (↑)   83) Cf. note 75 above and Mouzat, op. cit., p. 31. (↑)   84) Cf. Onomastique, p. 223. (↑)   85) Mouzat mentions the ladies concerned in his section on Gaucelm’s life (op. cit., pp. 25-41). (↑)   86) Appel, P. Rogier, p. 6; Diez, Leben und Werke, p. 81. Jeanroy (op. cit., I, p. 318) cites the senhal as a rare example of one used to describe feelings ‘de dépit ou d’humeur’. Millot’s view (Histoire littéraire des troubadours, I, p. 105) that the senhal is used to express praise of Ermengarda’s conduct would seem to be based on a misinterpretation whereby he has read n’ as a negative. Ginguené (Histoire littéraire de la France, XV, p. 460) appears to have copied the mistake in regarding the senhal as an expression of ‘la haute opinion qu’elle [Ermengarda] avait donnée d’elle par sa manière de gouverner’. Balaguer (Los trovadores, III, p. 355) has done the same. He writes Tort no avetz and translates sin tacha, no tenéis tacha. The duc de la Salle’s interpretation of the senhal indicates that he also has treated the n’ as a negative: ‘... une expression de la langue romane qui ne contient pas seulement une approbation du passé et du présent, mais est encore une sorte de confiante affirmation que l’être adoré ne peut se tromper, prendra en toutes circonstances la décision la plus sage et la plus opportune’. (Troub. Cant., I, p. 353.) (↑)   87) See section on the order of the poems (IV. Order of The Poems). (↑)   88) Cf. L. Cocito, Romania: scritti offerti a F. Piccolo nel suo LXX compleanno, Naples, 1962, p. 234. (↑)   89) See 1. The Provençal Vida above and note to III, l. 64. (↑)   90) Op. cit., pp. 7-8. (↑)   91) Op. cit., pp. 234-5. (↑)   92) Cf. Cocito, op. cit., p. 235 (note). (↑)   93) The second tornada deals with an entirely different matter concerning dons Sanz (cf. note to l. 54 of the poem and Cocito, op. cit., pp. 235-6). There appear to be no strong grounds for supporting Bergert’s suggestion (op. cit., pp. 7-8, note 6) that l. 29 (Tost venra temps que conostra son tort) may allude to the senhal. (↑)   94) Op. cit., pp. 236-7. (↑)   95) Cf. Cocito, op. cit., p. 237. (↑)   96) Cf. Appel, op. cit., p. 7. On the other hand, Cocito (op. cit., pp. 233-4, note) considers n’a tort / tort n’a to be a common expression and doubts whether it is an allusion to the senhal. It should be noted, however, that the expression occurs twice in the two lines. It would not be unreasonable for a poet, reluctant to reveal openly his lady’s identity, to employ this kind of device. Cf. notes to ll. 49 and 50 of VIIIa. (↑)   97) Cf. Appel, op. cit., p. 9; Bergert, op. cit., p. 8. On the other hand, Diez (op. cit., p. 80) finds in the poem no grounds for such a suspicion. (↑)   98) Cf. Bergert, loc. cit. See also 1. The Provençal Vida. (↑)   99) Cf. Cocito, op. cit., p. 233. See also 1. The Provençal Vida and the introduction to IX. (↑)   100) See IX, note to l. 17. (↑)   101) Cf. I. Life of Peire Rogier and note 26 above. Jeanroy (Poésie Lyrique, II, p. 138) makes the following observation: ‘Peire Rogier ne manquait, on le voit, ni de finesse ni d’esprit; mais la poésie n’est pour lui qu’un jeu, et dans ces agréables badinages il serait vain de chercher l’écho d’un sentiment sincère.’ (↑)   102) Cf. Jeanroy, op. cit., II, pp. 136-8. (↑)   103) Cf. Jeanroy, op. cit., II, p. 138. See our section on metrics (III. Metric Tables) for an analysis of the metrical schemes and rhymes employed by Peire. Appel (P. Rogier, pp. 21-33) examines various aspects of the versification of Peire’s work with reference to that of the work of other troubadours. (↑)   104) Reference is made to this particular stylistic device in the Leys d’Amors under the heading cobla tensonada o tensonans, en autra maniera dicha enterrogativa o enterrogans o razonans (J. Anglade, Las Leys d’Amors, II, pp. 165-6). As both Appel and Selbach observe, however, only the filth example quoted may be suitably placed in this category (see Appel, op. cit., p. 16, and L. Selbach, Das Streitgedicht in der altprovenzalischen Lyrik und sein Verhältnis zu ähnlichen Dichtungen anderer Litteraturen, Marburg, 1886, p. 36). It clearly corresponds to the dialogue form found in Peire Rogier’s work:   Halas! ques has? Greu mal. E qual? Fervor d’amor? O yeu. Coral? Q be. De me? De te. Per que? . . .   Cf. VI in this edition. (↑)   105) Cf. Cocito, op. cit., p. 231. (↑)   106) This view is supported by Appel (op. cit., p. 14), Cocito (op. cit., p. 229) and Jeanroy (op. cit., II, p. 138). The latter considers that, in contrast, Giraut de Bornelh is too persistent in his use of dialogue. Nelli and Lavaud are of the same view (Les Troubadours, I, p. 625, note 2). It is interesting to note, however, that M. de Riquer (Resumen de literatura provenzal trovadoresca, Barcelona, 1948, p. 47) is of the opposite opinion and that it is Peire whom he regards as usmg dialogue excessively. (↑)   107) Cf. Appel, loc. cit., and Selbach, loc. cit. As for the identity of the person with whom the poet is conversing in each of the poems, it is clear that, whenever the first person of the verb is used for the interlocutor as well as for the poet, the poet is addressing himself (see VII, ll. 7-22) (cf. Appel, loc. cit.). The two cases found in III of the use of the first person may well be regarded as rhetorical questions rather than examples of the dialogue form (see ll. 16-17 and 40-2). (Rhetorical questions or statements also appear in V, ll. 20, 34, and VI, l. 3.) In the case of IV, V and VI it is evidently a question of two different interlocutors. We agree with Appel (op. cit., pp. 14-16) in ruling out the presence of a second person and in assuming that the poet has in fact imagined a second person in order to provide himself with an adversary. Jeanroy (loc. cit.) implies his support of this view (‘ ... en engageant, avec lui-même ou un interlocuteur supposé, ...’). This interpretation seems to us preferable to that offered by Cocito, who considers the dialogue in each of the three poems, as in VII, to be between the poet and his heart (op. cit., pp. 225 and 230-2). The heart would become, as a result, clearly inconsistent in its attitude and, as Codto himself indicates, would in fact assume two contradictory roles. In IV it would be the opponent, and in VI the advocate, of the conduct of the courtly lover. It is interesting to note that, in the case of IV, Suchier (Goett. gel. Anzeigen (1883), 1343) identifies the interlocutor with the reader. (↑)   108) Cf. Cocito, op. cit., p. 228. (↑)   109) Appel (op. cit., p. 14, note 2) describes the part played by the dialogue in the development of the mood of IV. The dialogue consists initially of long sentences but the exchanges become shorter as the struggle between hope and doubt becomes more intense. The state of uncertainty conveyed by the dialogue finally gives way, in the last stanza, to a mood of confidence and joy. (↑)   110) Cf. Cocito, op. cit., p. 224. (↑)   111) Appel refers to this difficulty (op. cit., p. 16) and names a number of other troubadours who used the dialogue form (pp. 12-13). A comparison of the last two stanzas of Peire Rogier’s Ges non puesc en bon vers fallir with parts of Giraut de Bornelh’s Ailas, com mor! (Kolsen, G. de Born, No. 2 (I, pp. 6-10)) suggests a close connection between the two poems. Kolsen (op. cit., II, p. 17) refers to the similarity between the first lines in each case and goes on to compare ll. 54 and 55-6 of the first poem with ll. 33-4 and 38, 40 respectively of the second. There are, however, other parallels between the two poems both in content and in style. The following comparison provides a fuller indication of the similarities:   Ges non puesc en bon vers fallir Lines 41-3:           Ailas! — Que plangz? — Ia tem murir. — Que as? — Am. -— E trop? — Ieu hoc, tan que·n muer. — Mors? — Oc. — Non potz guerir?   Ailas, com mor! Lines 1-3:             Ailas, com mor! — Quez as, amis? —           Eu sui traïs! —           Per cal razo? — Lines 8-12:           As enaissi to cor en lai? —           Oc eu, plus fort. — Est donc aissi pres de la mort? — Oc eu, plus fort que no·us sai dir. — Per que·t laissas aissi morir? —   Ges non puesc en bon vers fallir Lines 49-56:         Cosselh n’ai. — Qual? — Vuelh m’en partir. — No far! — Si faray. — Quers ton dan. — Que·n puesc als? — Vols t’en ben jauzir? — Oc, mout. — Crei mi. — Era diguatz. — Sias humils, francs, larcx e pros. — Si·m fai mal? — Sufr’en patz. — Suy pres? — Tu oc, s’amar vols; mas si·m cres, aissi·t poiras jauzir de liey.   Ailas, com mor! Lines 25-34:         Senher, e cals conselhs n’er pres?—           Bos e cortes. —           Er lo·m diatz! — Tu venras denan leis viatz Et enquerras la de s’amor. — E si s’o ten a dezonor? —           No·t chal! — E s’ela·m respon lach ni mal? —           Sias sofrens, Que totztems bos sofrire vens! — Lines 37-9:           Nos? — Oc be. — Sol qu’ilh o volgues! —           Er. — Que? — Si·m cres. Crezutz siatz!   Kolsen (op. cit., II, pp. 16-17) considers that in Ailas, com mor! Giraut has not only imagined the presence of a second person, as Peire Rogier generally does, but has a particular friend in mind. He gives reasons for supposing that the friend is, in fact, Raimbaut d’Orange. This leads him to suggest that the poem could have been written jointly by Giraut and Raimbaut during the time of their first acquaintance before Giraut gave Raimbaut the name of Linhaure, and to propose the date 1166. He then makes reference to Peire’s stay at Raimbaut’s court and to the similarity between Ailas, com mor! and Ges non puesc and suggests that Peire and Raimbaut may possibly have been jointly responsible for the composition of the two stanzas of dialogue in Ges non puesc. The fact that the dialogue is introduced suddenly and without warning after five regular stanzas and continues uninterrupted for the whole of the last two stanzas could imply that these stanzas were composed separately from the rest of the poem. It is worth noting that in the case of Peire Rogier’s other songs, IV, V and VII, the dialogue is introduced less obtrusively and fits more naturally into the body of the poem. If we accept the possibility of collaboration on the part of the two troubadours an approximate date may be suggested for Ges non puesc. A good deal of speculation is inevitable, however, in view of the imprecise nature of the other dates we have available. In order to co-operate in any joint project of this kind Peire and Raimbaut would probably have needed to be on more intimate terms than their exchange of sirventes suggests. The long stay which the Vida claims Peire enjoyed at Raimbaut’s court would have given them the opportunity of getting to know each other better. The poem is therefore unlikely to have been composed before the period 1165-67 (if Pattison is correct in placing Raimbaut’s sirventes, Peire Rotgier, a trassaillir, in this period (cf. R. d’Orange, p. 37 and p. 90, note 1)). This assumption is consistent with the stage at which the use of dialogue appears in Raimbaut’s poetic development; it occurs, for the first time, in a poem composed about 1165 (Pattison, op. cit., p. 39) but is common in poems dating from the middle of his career, i.e. about 1167-69 (cf. Pattison, loc. cif.). On p. 45 of his edition Pattison gives a table showing a suggested chronology of Raimbaut’s works. Kolsen (op. cit., II, p. 17) refers to the unexpected way in which the dialogue is introduced in Ges non puesc and sees a close similarity with the gap genre of Raimbaut, particularly with his poem Escotatz, mas no say que s’es (R. d’Orange, XXIV), in which lines of prose alternate with the poetry. Pattison places the gap series of poems between the years 1168 and 1171 (op. cit., p. 43) and, within this period, fixes Escotatz, mas no say que s’es about 1169 (op. cit., p. 42 and p. 154, note 1). If Raimbaut did contribute to Ges non puesc these dates would lend support to the suggestion that the poem was written after the exchange of sirventes with Peire. If Raimbaut was partly responsible for the composition of Ges non puesc in the period suggested above and if Kolsen’s approximate date of 1166 for Ailas, com mor! was correct, then we could conclude that Giraut de Bornelh’s poem had been the forerunner of Peire’s. However, the strong case for placing Ailas, com mor! later than 1166 leaves unresolved the question as to which of the two poems was the earlier. Kolsen himself (op. cit., II, p. 16) remarks that it seems surprising that, at this early stage in a career which dated only from about 1165 (cf. Jeanroy, op. cit., II, p. 51, note 2), Giraut should address his interlocutor, Raimbaut, in the familiar second person in contrast with his much more formal manner a few years later in the tenson on trobar clus, placed by Pattison shortly before Christmas, 1170 (op. cit., p. 23). One may wonder why Giraut should write his part of the tenson with such deference to Raimbaut if they had met and written together as early as 1166. Kolsen (loc. cit.) considers that the apparent discrepancy may be explained by the difference, in nature and content, between the dialogue form and the tenson. Pattison (op. cit., p. 176, note to l. 58) regards Giraut’s constant deference to Raimbaut in the tenson as support for his theory that the troubadours were at Raimbaut’s court at the time of the composition. It is quite possible, of course, that Giraut’s confident attitude at such an early stage in his career was a reflection of Raimbaut’s youth. If Pattison’s conclusions about the year of Raimbaut’s birth are correct (op. cit., p. 12 and p. 36) the troubadour would, in fact, have been only about twenty years old in 1166. There are, however, other possible reasons for placing Ailas, com mor! later than 1166. Firstly, Raimbaut had probably produced by that time only one poem containing dialogue and, according to Pattison, did not begin to employ the device to any great extent until about 1167. Secondly, if Giraut’s career dated from about 1165 (see above) there is the question as to whether his art would have developed sufficiently by 1166, after only one year of writing, for him to produce a work such as Ailas, com mor! Even if it had, one wonders whether he would have been ambitious enough to attempt a work of this kind with Raimbaut who, although still young and with perhaps not more than four years’ experience of writing, was clearly the more established poet (Pattison regards Raimbaut’s career as dating from 1162 (op. cit., p. 36)). It is perhaps appropriate here to observe the similarity between the two stanzas of dialogue in Ges non puesc and parts of the narrative romance Flamenca written in the following century. (Cf. Appel, op. cif., pp. 15-16.) There are several instances of dialogue in the romance, but it is the conversation which Guillaume and his lady succeed in holding in church, at the rate of two or three words every Sunday and Feast day, which is especially reminiscent of Peire Rogier’s two stanzas. (Cf. S. Debenedetti, ‘Flamenca’, in Oposculi di filologia romanza, Turin, 1921; Nelli and Lavaud, op. cit., I, p. 625.) In the course of more than 1,500 lines of poetry the following words are exchanged:   Ailas! — Que plans? — Mur mi. — De que? — D’amor. — Per cui? — Per vos. — Qu’en puesc? — Garir. — Conssi? — Per gein. — Pren l’i! — Pres l’ai. — E cal? — Iretz. — Es on? — Als banz. — Cora? — Jorn breu e gent. — Plas mi.   The beginning of stanza six of Ges non puesc particularly springs to mind when, at one stage in the dialogue, Flamenca and her companions review the individual words exchanged so far in order to find the next suitable word with which to reply to Guillaume. The words are repeated as one line to see if they fit together satisfactorily:   Ailas! — Que plans? — Muer mi. — De que?   (P. Meyer’s edition: l. 4,577; Nelli and Lavaud edition: l. 4,574.) (Cf. Appel, op. cit., p. 14, note 3; Nelli and Lavaud, op. cit., I, p. 625.) (↑)   112) See note to III, l. 64, and IV, l. 54, and 1. The Provençal Vida. (↑)   113) Cf. Appel, P. Rogier, pp. ii–iii and p. 8, note. Like Appel, we prefer a less arbitraty basis for grouping the poems than their alphabetical order, which Bartsch (Grundriss) and Pillet and Carstens (Bibliographie der Troubadours) employ. It should be noted that Bartsch later considers Appel’s order to be justified (Literaturblatt, IV, 66). (↑)   114) Op. cit., p. 7. (↑)   115) Jeanroy (Poésie Lyrique, II, p. 128, note 3) observes that Peire Rogier differs from his contemporaries in departing from the troubadours’ well established tradition of beginning many of their poems with a description of the season. In fact the second of the only two examples found in Peire’s work occupies no more than one line. (↑)   116) Cf. introduction to IX. (↑)   117) Op. cit., p. 8, note. (↑)   118) Ibid. (↑)   119) Dr P. T. Ricketts, Senior Lecturer in Romance Philology at the University of Birmingham, is engaged in preparing a critical edition of the Breviari and kindly consulted all the MSS for us. (↑)   120) Cf. C. F. Buhler, ‘The Phillips manuscript of Provençal poetry now MS 819 of the Pierpont Morgan Library’, in Speculum, XXII (1947), 68-74. (↑)   121) Cf. G. Adémar, p. 92, in which Almqvist quotes from Gröber, Romanische Studien herausgeg. von E. Boehmer, II, pp. 574-6, and from Bertoni, I trovatori d’Italia, p. 188, note 2. Cf. also Bartsch, Literaturblatt, IV, 66 (review of Appel’s edition). (↑)   **) See G. Favati, Biografie (pp. 415-16), for further examples of the relationship between the MSS. (↑)   †) Favati (op. cit.) chooses AB as base while Boutière and Schutz (Biographies) prefer I both for this Vida and for the other Vidas as a whole. The reasons for their general preference of IK to AB are outlined in op. cit., p. xlv. Boutière (op. cit., p. xxxiv and ‘Quelques Observations sur le texte des Vidas et des Razos dans les chansonniers provençaux AB et IK’ in French and Provençal Lexicography, Ohio, 1964, pp. 133-7) cites the respective readings of A(E) and B of the Vida from lonc temps estet to gran honor al mon ac as an example of the numerous occasions on which A and B separate, one of them joining the MSS of a different group and the other being independent. The MS offering the longest text is generally the independent one. He thus attempts to demonstrate that the two MSS which Favati has generally followed were far from being ‘vrais jumeaux’ in the same way as IK and that a number of intermediate versions must have existed between them and the archetype. (↑)   ***) There were also in existence at that time three communities in England and two in Spain. (↑) (↑)