Ainsi Joseph se demoura.

Li boens Pescherres s"en ala (Dont furent puis meintes paroles Contees, ki ne sunt pas foles) En la terre lau il fu nez, Et Joseph si est demourez. (3,455-60)

A puzzling pa.s.sage, as it is difficult to be sure whether line 3,459 refers to the Fisher or to Joseph, a point of obvious importance, as in the latter case it would indicate that Joseph in this version does not go West. On turning to the prose versions, some remarkable variations are found in the corresponding pa.s.sages; thus B II, Cange MS. (I, 265) after relating how Brons finds wives for his children, adds, "Mais ancor estoit la crestientez moult tenue et moult novele en ce pas que l"an apeloit la bloe Bretaigne que Joseph avoit novellement convertie a la creance de Jhesu-Christ," words which would seem to indicate that the writer imagined Joseph and his company _already_ in England. The corresponding pa.s.sage to v. 3,445-60 runs thus: Ensinc se departirent, si s"en ala li riches peschierres dont maintes paroles furent puis, en la grant Bretaigne et ensinc remest Joseph et fina en la terre et ou pas ou il fu envoiez de par Jhesu-Crist (275). B III, Didot MS, accentuates the punning reference to Avalon in the angel"s message to Joseph, "Come li monde ... va en avalant covient-il que toute ceste gent se retraie en occident" (p. 330).

The final pa.s.sage runs thus: "Eynsi se despartirent Joseph et Bron: et Joseph s"en ala en la terre et el pais ou il fust nez et ampris la terre"

(p. 332). Thus the testimony of these versions favours the application of v, 2,459 in Metr. Jos. to Joseph. From C, Didot-Perceval, we obtain an account similar in parts to that of the B versions, the most direct reference being in the speech of the hermit, Perceval"s uncle, "Biaus nies, saches que a la table la ou Joseph fist et je meismes omes la voiz de saint esperit qui nos comenda venir en loingteines terres en occident, et comenda le riche pecheor mon pere que il venist en cestes parties, la ou li soleil avaloit" (449-50), where the punning reference to Avalon is again prominent, and where, apparently, the pa.s.sage of Joseph himself to England is not indicated. An entirely different form of the legend is found in D and E. In the former (D II, 450) it is briefly stated, "And afterwards it happened to Joseph, and Joseph his father, and a number of his family with them, to set out from the city of Sarras, and they came as far as Great Britain"; again, p. 467, Perceval"s aunt relates how when Joseph of Arimathea came, and his son Joseph with him, to Great Britain, there came with them about 4,000 people, all of whom are fed by ten loaves, placed on the table, on the head of which is the Grail. E, Grand St. Graal, dwells specially upon Josephe; he is referred to in I, p. 22, as having pa.s.sed "le lignage ioseph son pere outre mer iusqu"en la bloie bertaigne qui ore a nom engleterre," and II, 123, etc., gives a full account of how the pa.s.sage is effected; how the Grail-bearers are sent first, and supported through the water by its power; how, when Josephe takes off his shirt, and his father Joseph puts his foot upon it, it swells until it holds 250 persons. These two accounts agree better with that of A IIA, Pseudo-Gautier, than with any of the others; indeed, a pa.s.sage in the latter (v. 125-29), which tells how Joseph committed the portrait of our Lord, made by Verrine, to the mercy of the sea, may have given the hint for the miraculous shirt story of the Grand St. Graal. In this version, too, as in D, Queste, we first hear of the pa.s.sage to England, and then the Grail appears at the miraculous feeding of the travellers. The versions thus fall into two clearly-defined groups, Joseph being the Grail-bearer in the one, Brons in the latter. The latter cla.s.s is represented by the Metrical Joseph and the Didot-Perceval alone, if we except the Berne MS. form of a portion of the Conte du Graal, which, in its finish, has obviously copied the Metrical Joseph. To the former cla.s.s belong all the other versions. Nay, more, one of the prose forms of Borron"s poems is interpolated, so as to countenance the Joseph-account of the bringing of the Grail to England. Moreover, Borron"s account of the whole transaction is ambiguous and obscure; at first Alain is the destined hero, long pa.s.sages being devoted to him, and the keeping of the mystic vessel being expressly reserved to him. Yet he leaves, quite quietly, nothing more being heard of him, and the same machinery of angelic messages is set in motion for Brons, to whom, henceforth, the chief _role_ is a.s.signed. Does not this show that there were from the outset two accounts of the evangelisation of Britain, one, attributing it to Joseph, of wider popularity, and followed solely by the majority of the romances, whilst Borron, who gave greater prominence to the other account, has maladroitly tried to fuse the two into one? In any case it would be remarkable were the legend of purely Christian origin, and were the Metrical Joseph its earliest form, and source of the other forms, that its testimony on such an important point should be contradicted by nearly every other version.

Do the foregoing facts throw any light upon the question whether the two sections of the romance are originally independent, and which is the earlier? It is the later forms of the Quest alone which mention Joseph.

But if he be really the older of the two personages to whom, in the Early History, the evangelisation of Britain is attributed, this would of itself go a long way to proving that the two portions of the romance only came into contact at a late stage of their development, and that the Quest is the older. It is otherwise if Brons be looked upon as the original Grail-bringer; the same causes which led to his exclusion from the other versions of the Early History might have kept him out of most versions of the Quest, and his presence in one Quest version could be claimed as a proof of the h.o.m.ogeneity of the romance. For the present, it is sufficient to mark the fact that what may be called the Brons form of the Early History is in a minority.

_The Grail-Keeper and his relationship to the Promised Knight._

In the A versions the Grail-keeper is the Fisher King, uncle to the hero of the Quest, Perceval. The relationship is first plainly put in Chrestien, where the hermit, speaking to Perceval of the Grail, says--

Cil qui l"en sert, il est mes frere Ma soeur et soie fu ta mere, Et del rice Pesceour croi Que il est fius a celui roi Qui del Graal servir se fait. (7,789-94)

The origin of his name is fully explained in the pa.s.sage (v. 4,685-98), which tells of his being wounded in battle by a lance-thrust through his two thighs, of his sufferings, and of his only solace being fishing from a boat. How the Grail came into his possession C does not say. Gautier has no occasion to mention these facts, but from Manessier we learn that Joseph, having converted the land, died therein; that the Fisher King is of his seed, and that if G.o.d wills the Grail will never have its dwelling elsewhere than with him (35,130-36); that he, the Fisher King, had a brother, Goon Desert, treacherously slain by Partinal, who broke his sword in the murderous act. Goon"s body and the fragments of the sword being brought by his niece to the Fisher King, he wounds himself with them, "parmi les gambes en traviers," and may not be healed until a knight should come to weld the fragments together and avenge his brother"s death.

Pseudo-Gautier tells how Joseph, dying, prays that the Grail may remain with his descendants--

Si fist il, c"est verite fine, Qu" apres sa mort n"en ot sesine Nus hom, tant fust de son lignage Se il ne fu del haut parage.

Li riches Pescheor, por voir, En fu estret et tuit si oir Et des suens fu Greloguevaus Ausi en refu Percevaus. (183-90)

Manessier disagrees, it will have been noticed, with Chrestien respecting the cause of the Fisher King"s wound, and neither he nor the other continuators of Chrestien make any mention of that enigmatic personage the Fisher King"s father, so casually alluded to by Chrestien (v. 7,791-99).

Perceval according to them is a direct descendant of Joseph, Brons being as entirely ignored here as in the transport of the Grail to England.

In the B versions the Grail-keeper is Brons, and the Promised Knight is his son or grandson, for a close examination again shows that two varying accounts have been embodied in one narrative. In the pa.s.sage where the Holy Ghost, speaking to Joseph, tells him of the empty place to be left at the table he is to make, the following lines occur:--

Cil lius estre empliz ne pourra Devant qu" Enygeus avera Un enfant de Bron sen mari, Que tu et ta suer amez si; Et quant li enfes sera nez, La sera ses lius a.s.senez; (2,531-37)

followed closely by the prose versions: B II, Cange MSS., "ne icil leux ne pourra estre ampliz tant que le filz Bron et Anysgeus ne l"accomplisse"

(I, 254); B III, Didot MS., "Cist leus ne porra mie estre ampliz devant ce que li fist Bron l"ampleisse" (I, 316). But afterwards a fresh account appears; in the second message of the Holy Ghost, Joseph is told:

Que cist luis empliz ne sera Devant que li tierz hons venra Qui descendra de ten lignage Et istera de ten parage, Et Hebruns le doit engenrer Et Enygeus ta sueur porter; Et cil qui de sen fil istra, Cest liu meismes emplira. (2,789-96)

In the corresponding pa.s.sages both B II and III have the following significant addition, "et I. autre (_i.e._, place) avoc cestui qui el nom de cestui sera fonde" (I, 261), "raemplira ce leu et I. autre qui en leu decestu isera fondez" (I, 322), which effectually disposes of M. Hucher"s attempt (I, 254, note) to harmonise the two accounts by the remark that in the first one "il ne s"agit pas de la Table ronde ou c"est Perceval qui remplit le lieu vide." Henceforth the legend follows the second account.

To Alain, son of Brons, is revealed that

... de lui doit oissir Un oir malle, qui doit venir. (3,091-92)

Petrus is to wait for "le fil Alein," Brons is to wait for "le fil sen fil," and when he is come to give him the vessel and Grail (3,363-67). B II, Cange MS., again makes a characteristic addition to the promise to Alain "et si li di que de lui doit issir un oirs masles, a cui la grace de mon veissel doit repairier" (I, 267).

C, Didot-Perceval, follows the second account of B. Perceval is son to Alain li Gros, grandson to Brons, the rich Fisher King, "et cil rois pecheors est en grant enfermetez, quar il est vieil home et plains de maladies" (I, 418), and nephew to the hermit, "un des fiz Bron et frere Alein" (I, 448), though curiously enough when he tells Brons that he knows him to be father of his father, the latter addresses him as "bieaux nies"

(I, 483). In any case whether B and C do or do not afford proof of a nearer relationship than that of grandson and grandfather between the Grail-keeper and the achiever of the Quest, the chronology which bridges over 400 years in two generations is equally fantastic.

In D, Queste, no less than three different accounts are to be distinguished, corresponding certainly to three stages in the development of this version due to the influence of other versions of the legend. The earliest is that preserved in D II, the Welsh translation of a now lost French original. The Promised Knight is Galahad, son of Lancelot, grandson, on the mother"s side, of King Pelles (ch. iv). The Grail is kept at the court of King Peleur (ch. lxvii), the name of which is apparently Corbenic (ch. lxiv). The Lame King is mentioned by Perceval"s sister (ch.

xlix), as a son of King Lambar, who fought with King Urlain and slew him, and in consequence of that blow the country was wasted; afterwards (ch.

l.) his lameness is set down to his folly in attempting to draw the magic sword, for which, though there was not in Christendom a better man than he, he was wounded with a spear through the thigh. She also speaks of him here as her uncle. The Grail quest is not connected in any way with the healing of this Lame King. In the text printed by Furnivall, Galahad is first introduced as Lancelot"s son and Pelles" grandson, but when he comes to Arthur"s court he bids his returning companion, "salues moi tous chiaus del saint hostel et mon _oncle le roi pelles_ et mon _aioul le riche pescheour_." Guinevere"s ladies, according to this version, prophesy that Galahad will heal the Lame King. A long account, missing in D I, is given by the hermit to Lancelot of his ancestry as follows (p. 120):--Celidoine, son of Nasciens, had nine descendants, Warpus, Crestiens, Alain li Gros, Helyas, Jonaans, Lancelot, Ban, Lancelot himself, Galahad, in whom Christ will bathe himself entirely. Perceval is son of a King Pellehem (p. 182).

The Lame King is Pelles, "que l"on apiele lo roi mehaignie" (p. 188); he is at Corbenic when Lancelot comes there. When Galahad and his companions arrive at his court a sick man wearing a crown is brought in, who blesses Galahad as his deliverer. After the appearance of the Grail, Galahad heals him by touching his wound with the spear. The third account, from the version of the Queste printed with the Lancelot and the Mort Artur in 1488, at Rouen, by Gaillard le Bourgeois,[51] makes Galahad send greetings to the Fisher King and to his _grandfather, King Pelles_; it adds to Perceval"s sister"s account of how Pelles was wounded, the words, "he was Galahad"s grandfather;"[52] it adds to the account of Lancelot"s visit to the Grail Castle, the words, "this was Castle Corbenic, where the Holy Grail was kept." Before discussing these differences it is advisable to see what the Grand St. Graal says on these points. Here Alain, the Fisher King, son of Brons, is a virgin, and when Josephe commits the Grail to his care he empowers him to leave it to whom he likes (II, 360--39.) In accordance with this Alain leaves the Grail to his brother Josue, with the t.i.tle of Fisher King. Josue"s descendants are Aminadap, Catheloys, Manaal, Lambor (who was wounded by Bruillans with Solomon"s sword, whence arose such a fierce war that the whole land was laid desert).[53] Pelleans, wounded in battle in the ankle, whence he had the name Lame King, Pelles, upon whose daughter Lancelot begets Galahad, who is thus, on the mother"s side, ninth in descent from Brons, brother to Joseph. Galahad"s descent is likewise given from Celidoine, son of Nasciens, as follows: Marpus, Nasciens, Alains li Gros, Ysaies, Jonans, Lancelot, Bans, Lancelot, Galahad, who in thus counting Celidoine is tenth in descent from Nasciens, Joseph"s companion, (vol. ii, ch. x.x.xix.) So far the story is fairly consistent, although there is a difference of one generation between father"s and mother"s genealogy. But ch. 17, in a very important pa.s.sage, introduces a different account. The angel is expounding to Josephe and Nasciens the marvels of the lance; to Josephe he says, "de cheste lance dont tu as este ferus; ne sera iamis ferus ke vns seus hom. Et chil sera rois, et descendra de ton lignaige, si serra li daerrains des boins. Chil en sera ferus parmi les cuisses ambedeus," and will not be healed till the Good Knight come, "et chil ... serra li daerrains hom del lignaige nascien. Et tout ausi com nasciens a este li premiers hom qui les meruelles du graal a veues; autresi sera chil li daerrains qui les verra.[54] Car che dist li urais crucefis. "Au premier home du precieus lignaige, et au daerrain, ai iou deuise a demonstrer mes meruelles." Et si dist ench.o.r.e apres. "Sour le premier et sour le daerrain de mes menistres nouuiaus qui sont enoint et sacre a mon plaisir, espanderai iou la venianche de la lanche auentureuse"" (I, 216-17), _i.e._, the last of Josephe"s line shall be the only man wounded by the lance, the last of Nasciens" line shall be the deliverer. But according to Galahad"s genealogy, given above, it is _not_ the last of Josephe"s line (represented by his cousin Josue) who is the Wounded King, for Galahad himself is as much the last in descent from Josephe as from Nasciens, and even if we take the words to apply only to the direct male descendants of Josue, there is still a discrepancy, as not Pelles, but Pelleant, his father, is the "roi mehaignies." If the Wounded King were really the last of Josephe"s line, _i.e._, Pelles, Galahad would be his grandson, as Percival is to Brons. Taking the two versions D. and E. together, some idea may be gathered from them of the way in which the legend has grown, and of the shifts to which the later harmonisers were put in their attempts to reconcile divergent accounts. In the first draft of the Queste, Galahad has nothing to do with the Lame King, the latter remains Perceval"s uncle, the very relationship obtaining in Chrestien. Galahad has supplanted Perceval, but has not stepped into the place entirely. The second draft of the Queste endeavours to remedy this by clumsily introducing the Lame King and his healing, missing in the first draft, into the great Grail scene at the end, an idea foreign to the original author of the Queste, who, having broken with Perceval as chief hero, also broke with the distinctive Quest incident as far as the chief hero is concerned. But a strange blunder is committed; the second draft, anxious to make Galahad"s grandfather both Fisher and Lame King, actually speaks of Pelles as Galahad"s uncle, in direct contradiction to its own indication. The third draft corrects this mistake, and tries by different explanatory interpolations to confirm the relationship of Galahad to the Lame King, and the ident.i.ty of his castle with the Grail Castle. The author of the Grand St. Graal now appears on the scene, appropriates the story about King Lambar, father to the Lame King, Percival"s uncle, makes him an ancestor of Galahad, and gives a name to his son, Pelleant (which name creeps back into the second draft of the Queste as that of Perceval"s father), and thus derives Galahad on the mother"s side from Brons, although it escapes him that he thus gives the lie to the prophecy which he puts in the angel"s mouth, that it is the last of Josephe"s seed who is to be lamed by the lance, and that he has not given his Lambor fict.i.tious ancestors enough to equalize the genealogies.

We are thus led back to the relationship of uncle and nephew as the earliest subsisting between the Grail King and the achiever of the Quest, and we find in those versions which supplant Perceval by Galahad a story told of the former"s great uncle, King Lambar, by no means unlike that told of his uncle in the A versions, and that there, as here, the cause of the woe brought upon the hero"s family is one of the magic talismans which the hero is in quest of and by means of which he is to achieve his quest.

We further notice that in so far as the Early History influences the Quest forms, it is the later versions in which its influence is apparent, and it is the Joseph, not the Brons form, which exercises this influence. Not until we come to the Grand St. Graal, an obvious and bold attempt to embody previous versions in one harmonious whole, does the Brons form make itself felt.

_Work of the Promised Knight._

In Chrestien we can only guess at what the results of the successful achievement of the Quest would have been by the reproaches addressed to the hero upon the failure of his first visits to the Grail Castle; he would have mended all things, and--

Le bon roi ki est mehaignies; Que tous eust regaengnies Ses membres, et tiere tenist, Et si grans bien en avenist; (4,763-67)

many evils will flow from his failure, and the cause of it is the sin he has committed in leaving his mother, who thereupon died of grief (4,768-71); again the Loathly Damsel reproaches him that the Rich King would have been healed of his wound, he would have kept in peace his land, which he never may again, for now

Dames en perdront lor maris Tieres en seront essilies, Et pucieles deconsellies; Orfenes, veves en remanront Et maint Chevalier en morront. (6,056-60)

Gautier de Doulens gives a vivid description of the effect of Gawain"s partially successful visit to the Grail King; the character of the landscape changes at once--

N"estoit pas plus que mienuis, Le soir devant, que Dex avoit Rendu issi com il devoit As aiges lor cors el pas; Et tout li bos, ce m"est avis, Refurent en verdor trove, Si tos com il ot demande Por coi si sainnoit en l"anstier La lance; si devoit puplier Li regnes; mais plus ne pupla Por tant que plus ne demanda. (20,344-55)

All the country folk both bless and curse Gawain.

Sire, mors nous as et garis, Tu dois estre lies et maris; Car grant aise nos as done, S"en devons tout mercier De; Et si te devons moult hair Pour con que nel vosis oir Le Greail, por coi il servoit, Ne de la joie ki devoit La venir ne poroit nus dire, Si en doit avoir duel et ire. (20,357-66)

In Manessier, when Perceval has finally accomplished the Quest by the slaying of Partinal, and has come for the third time to the Grail Castle (though even then he only reaches it after long wanderings and lights upon it by chance), news whereof is brought to the King;--

Li rois, a grant joie et grant feste Est maintenant salis en pies Et se senti sain et haities. (44,622-24)

Perceval is crowned King after his uncle"s death, and reigns for seven years.

Thus, in the A versions, the healing of the Maimed King, and the consequent restoration to fertility and prosperity of his land, such are the tasks to be achieved by the hero of the Quest. In the B versions an entirely different series of conceptions is met with. Brons, the Fisher King, is to wait for his grandson, and to hand him the vessel which he received from Joseph. When this is done the meaning of the Trinity is to be known--[55]

Lors sera la senefiance Accomplie et la demonstrance De la benoite Trinite, Qu"avons en trois parz devisee. (3,371-74)

Besides this, the Promised Knight is to visit Petrus, who may not pa.s.s away till he comes, and from whom he is to learn the power of the vessel, and the fate of Moys (v. 3,127-36). Finally, when he comes he is to fill the empty seat, and to find Moys, of whom it is said--

De lui plus ne pallera-on Ne en fable ne en chancon, Devant que cil revenra Qui li liu vuit raemplira: Cil-meismes le doit trouver. (2,815-19)

Here the only indication which can possibly be tortured into a hint of the waiting of a sick king for his deliverer is the reference to Petrus. It is not a little remarkable that when the latter is leaving for England, he asks for the prayers of the company that he may not fall into sin, and lose the love of G.o.d (v. 3320-35) Does this presuppose a version in which he _does_ sin, and is consequently punished by disease, from which only the Promised Knight may heal him?

On turning to C, a totally distinct account of what the Quest achiever is to do presents itself. He seats himself, it is true, in the empty seat, but it goes nigh with him that he suffers the fate of Moys, from which he is only preserved by the great goodness of his father, Alain (p. 427). He does not find Moys; Petrus is not once mentioned by name, nor does Perceval visit anyone who may not die till he come, and from whom he learns the power of the vessel, saving always the Fisher King, for the references to whom see _supra_, p. 83. This Fisher King is "veil home et plains de maladies, ne il n"aura james sante devant un chevalier que ya a la Table ronde aserra, sera prodons vers Deu et vers sainte eglise et ait fait tant d"armes que il soit le plus alosez del monde. Et lors vendra a la maison au riche roi pecheor et quant il aura demande de quoi li Graus sert, tantost sera li roi gariz de de sa"nfermete et cherront li enchentement de Bretaigne et sera la prophetic accomplie" (p. 419). Again, p. 427 "li riches rois pecheors est cheuz en grant maladie et en grant enfermete, ne il peust morir devant que uns de x.x.x chevalier, qui ci sunt asis, ait tant fait d"armes et de chevalerie qu"il soit li mieudres chevalier del monde." Again, p. 427, "Et quant il (_i.e._, the Fisher King) sera gariz, si ira, dedanz li III jorz, de vie a mort, et baillera a celui chevalier, le vesseau et li aprendra le segroites paroles qui li aprist Joseph; et lors ampliz de la grace du Sainct Esprit et cherront li enchentement de la Bretaigne et les afaires." Again, when Perceval has come for the second time to the Fisher King"s, and has asked the question and learnt the secret words, he remained there "et moult fust prodons et cheirent les enchentement de la terre de Bretaigne et par tout le monde."

Here, then, are the Sick King, the mysterious question, the healing, and the effect upon the land (note how the enchantments of Britain are insisted upon), as in the A versions. The only points of contact with B are that Brons is like Petrus in not being able to die till Perceval come, and that his infirmity seems to be ascribed mainly to his age, and not to a wound, which at first sight seems to agree better with the vague indications of B than with the positive statement of A.

Two accounts, each fairly definite and consistent, are thus forthcoming respecting the object of the Quest, the one represented by A and C, the other by B. What light is thrown upon the matter by the remaining versions, and which of these two accounts do they support? Neither from the Queste, D, nor from the Grand St. Graal, E, can any clear conception of the Quest be gathered. Both have a great deal to say about the adventures and the wonders of the Grail, but absolutely nothing comes of the achievement so far as the Grail itself, or as Galahad and his two companions are concerned. It goes to the East, they with it, they become hermits and die. But in proportion as the main object of the Quest becomes less definite, the number of secondary objects increases. In D, Queste, Galahad is to achieve the adventure of the Seat Perillous (ch. iii, iv); he is to wear the shield left by Joseph to Mordrains (ch. x); he is to release from life Mordrains himself, struck with blindness for approaching too near the Grail (ch. xxiii); he (according to the second draft of the Queste), is to release King Pelles (his grandfather, according to draft 3), wounded through both ankles for trying to draw the sword; he is to release Simei, burning in a fiery grave for that he once sinned against Joseph of Arimathea (ch. lxvi). To this sufficiently long list the Grand St. Graal adds the resoldering of the sword broken by Joseph--"Ha espee, iamais ne sera resaudee deuant ke chil te tenra qui les hautes auentures del Saint Graal devra asoumir" (II, 264); the delivery of Moys from out the furnace where he burns, not for always "ains trouuera ench.o.r.e merchi et pardon. Mais che qu"il a mesfait, espanira il en tel maniere qu"il en sera en fu iusc" a tant ke li boines chiualiers uenra" (II, 277). Moys likewise speaks of Galahad as one who "achieura les auentures de la grant bertaigne" (II, 279-80). Finally, Pelleur wounded (mehaignies de ii cuisses) "en vne bataille de rome" is to be released, "il ne peut garir de la plaie deuant ke galaad, li tres boins chiualers, le vint visiter. Mais lors sans faille gari il" (II, p. 373).

The Queste knows nothing of Petrus, but in the Grand St. Graal he turns up at the end in the same casual way as Brons, and converts King Luces (II, 3356-3), _i.e._ is thus brought into connection with Geoffrey of Monmouth"s form of the conversion of Britain legend.

The foregoing statement confirms all that has previously been urged as to the lateness of both Queste and Grand St. Graal. The author of the former again shows himself a daring, but not over skilful, adapter of older legends, the author of the latter an unintelligent compiler, whose sole aim it is to lengthen out his story by the introduction of every incident he can lay his hands upon. But although late, they may nevertheless throw light upon the question which, of the two strongly differentiated accounts of the object of the Grail quest which have been noted, has the better claim to be looked upon as the older one. The Conte du Graal and the Didot-Perceval agree, as has been seen, against the Metrical Joseph, in making the main object of the Grail-seeker the healing of a maimed or the release from life of a supernaturally old King. This _motif_, it is not too much to say, is the pivot upon which in the Conte du Graal all turns; in the Metrical Joseph it is barely hinted at.

The Queste, if looked at closely, is found to bear witness to the Conte du Graal form. As is seen from the summary (_supra_, p. 41, Inc. 12) it has the very incident upon which so much stress is laid in Chrestien"s poem, the visit to the Sick King, the omitted question, the consequent misfortune. True, all this has been transferred from the original hero, Perceval, to the father of the new hero Galahad, and, true, the final object which the Queste proposes, in so far as it proposes any definite object, to its Grail-seeker is of a different character. But the fact that this object is not stated in the same way as in the Metrical Joseph, whilst that found in the Conte du Graal _is_ embodied though in a different connexion, points unmistakably to what may be called the healing _motif_ as the older one. Here, again, the Metrical Joseph is in a minority, and it is not even followed by that very version, the Didot-Perceval, which has been ascribed to the same author, and claimed as an integral portion of the same trilogy.[56]