International Medieval Society, Paris
Société Internationale des Médiévistes, Paris

Symposium 2006 Abstracts

“Indulgence in the sweet nectar” of reading literature (Hieronymus) was generally frowned upon by 12th century religious writers. The School of Chartres, however, in accordance with Macrobius, permitted the allegorical interpretation of fictional texts which were regarded as integumentum. In his first romance, “Erec et Enide”, which was completed by 1160, Chrétien de Troyes introduces his description of Erec’s coronation cloak with the remark that Macrobius taught him to tell the truth. This cloak is a tapestry of the Quadrivium lined with the fur of monstrous berbioletes from India. Although medievalists have recognised the garment as a representation of Chrétien’s romance, not all details of the cloak – for example the berbioletes – have been explored as features of Chrétien’s text. Concerning this problem, I will examine the following questions: If the cloak can indeed be viewed as a representation of the integumentum-model, what is the significance of the monsters, situated as they are underneath the outer layer of the cloak, i.e. exactly where classical theory locates the truth? If the cloak simply illustrates the “bele conjointure”, Chrétien’s definition of his text, what textual elements are represented by the monsters? Could the tailored fur indicate the “civilisation” of monsters for courtly purposes, since by dying they provide material for a courtly garment? Do the monsters stand for “civilised” literary techniques and subject matter? If this is the case, what exactly did Chrétien “civilise” and how? Or do the berbioletes hint at different, exotic subject matter or poetics in a story whose place in tradition is legitimised by the reference to Macrobius? Does Chrétien create an illusion of normalcy by alluding to tradition, while in actual fact he artfully seeks to introduce a foreign body, perhaps a new aesthetic, into written culture? How did religious writers react to such a move?