Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-08T05:29:00.703Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AOI in the Chanson de Roland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Grace Frank
Grace Frank*
Affiliation:
Bryn Mawr College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A discussion of the significance of the letters AOI in the Chanson de Roland should properly begin perhaps with a description of the appearance of these letters in the Bodleian manuscript, Digby 23, of Oxford, the only manuscript in which they occur. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way of determining with certainty whether these mysterious letters were invariably written by the hand (or hands) responsible for copying the text of the poem. Sometimes no differences of transcription can be perceived between a line of the poem and the AOI that accompanies it. Occasionally, however, slight variations in the forms of the letters, in the alignment, in the color of the ink, or in the thickness of the strokes would seem to indicate that the AOI was written some time after the verse beside which it stands had been penned. In the latter case, it may be that the scribe waited only until he had copied a whole page—or several pages—of text before adding the letters; it may be, on the contrary, that he waited longer, or that some other person interested in the interpretation of the poem put them there. Certain it is, at any event, that the letters occur at variable intervals: some pages are without them, some present but a single instance, others contain a relatively large number of examples.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , September 1933 , pp. 629 - 635
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1933

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 It seems generally to be agreed that a single scribe copied the whole MS. but that it was retouched by a later scribe and that various corrections in different hands appear. Cf. Stengel, Das altfranzösische Rolandslied, genauer Abdruck, (Heilbronn, 1878), p. iv f.; Bédier, La Chanson de Roland, Commentaires (Paris, 1927), p. 66.

2 Of the three letters, only the A shows marked variations of form in the different examples, but all these variations can be matched in one page or another of the text of the poem.

3 It seems probable that the letters were in any case added after the colored initials marking the beginning of each laisse were made. See infra, p. 634.

4 Cf. Wolfgang Storost, “Geschichte der altfranzösischen und altprovenzalischen Romanzenstrophe,” Romanistische Arbeiten xvi (Halle 1930), 44, n. 1.

5 These statistics have been compiled from the manuscript where, contrary to the statements of some authorities, no uncertainty exists regarding the exact position of AOI. The statistics may be verified in Stengel's Photographische Wiedergabe der Hs. Digby 23 (Heilbronn, 1878), or in his Altfranz. Rolandslied, cited above. I have followed Jenkins' numbering of the laisses, occasionally adding Bédier's in brackets where it differs. (Bédier divides into two laisses, which he numbers cxxiv and cxxvi, a group of lines that the MS. regards as a single laisse; this laisse is numbered cxxiv by Jenkins who in this instance follows the MS. more closely than Bédier.) Unfortunately, in the various editions of Bédier and Jenkins that I have been able to consult several errors occur in reporting the instances of AOI; these errors may account for the unverifiable statistics quoted by them (Bédier, Commentaires, p. 334; Jenkins, p. 4, note 9). Storost's figures, op. cit., p. 44, n. 1, are also unreliable.

6 Or 122 times, if one accepts Bédier's numbering of the laisses.

7 Lines 296, 310, 319, 751, 792, 1691, 1830, 2115, 3543, 3858, 3883.

8 Lines 329, 2997.

9 Lines 806, 1403, 2839, 2981, 3223, 3231, 3493, 3785.

10 The sum of these numbers is 302 (or, calculating according to Bédier's edition, 303), from which, in order to obtain the total number of laisses (290, according to Jenkins; 291, according to Bédier), one must of course deduct 12, i.e., the number of laisses which present two examples of AOI. These 12 laisses are, adopting Jenkins' numbering: xxi, xxiv, lix lxiv, cix, cxxvii, cxxxvii, clvi, cci, ccxiii, ccxxxi, cclvi.

11 In the case of two laisses, ccxxxix and cclxxxi, shifting the AOI of their first lines to the last lines of the preceding laisses, leaves these two laisses (cclxxix, cclxxxi) without AOI at the end, and therefore adds 2 to the total number of laisses having AOI at the end without affecting the number having no AOI at the end. The total number of laisses, 290, would consist by this reckoning of 173 plus 110 plus 7 (i.e., the seven laisses which account for the 8 examples of AOI occurring in the middle of a laisse).

13 The ratio is 55+ to 41+ if groups iii–v are excluded.

13 The visions end in laisse clxxxv (2569) and one might expect an AOI here, especially since in the next laisse the tale turns to Marsile. It may be, however, that it was desired to juxtapose without pause the prophetic dreams of Charles, the sufferings of Marsile and the approach of Baligant—to bring the so-called Baligant episode into as intimate relation as possible with the preceding story.

14 No initial appears after 806 or 3493. A change of speaker or of subject, a pause or interruption, is clearly indicated after lines 806, 1403, 2839, 2981, 3223, 3231, 3785. In the case of 3493, it is universally admitted that a line, 3494, is wanting in the MS. The AOI after 3493 may therefore have been intended for the omitted line, since 3495 introduces a distinct change of subject, but the corruption of the text here must make any hypothesis uncertain.

15 Friedrich Gennrich, Der musikalische Vortrag der altfranzösischen Chansons de geste (Halle, 1923), p. 26 f.

16 Storost, op. cit., p. 45, thinks that the “kreuzung” may have occurred “unter dem einfluss anderer refrainartiger kadenzen” or even that AOI may be “eine freie analogische nachbildung.” Unlike Gennrich, Storost regards this refrain as conceivably of any length, even of only three notes.

17 Adalbert Hämel, “AOI im Rolandslied,” Zeitschrift für franz. Sprache und Litteratur, xlviii (1926), 382 f. Storost's objections to Hämel's proposals are not entirely convincing.

18 H. Spanke, “Klangspielereien im mittelalterlichen Liede,” Studien zur lateinischen Dichtung des Mittelalters, i (Dresden, 1931), 175, 183.

19 The absence of AOI at the end of the Chanson de Roland has seemed to call for some explanation (cf. Hämel, op. cit., p. 385). Otherwise it would be superfluous to suggest that at the conclusion of the poem, anyone concerned with its presentation would know what to do without any special indication at this point.