Analysis of manuscripts: C 248r (aissi comesa G(uillems) figueira), Da 178v, M 133v (En gui figera), O 56r (a continuation of BdT 194.3), R 32r (G. figuieyra; blank staves above stanza I), T 184r (Asimar lonegre), a1 505 (en Guilliem figuiera), f 17r (en cadenet), κ Gui Figera. − Levy, who did not know of a1, sees the main division of the mss. as M ~ CDaORTf. He finds the relationship between those of the large group hard to determine but comes to tentative conclusions on the basis of common inflexions (revealing, he considers, some errors) and by common variants, so grouping CDa ~ RTOf, then RT ~ Of. He follows C’s graphy though regularises spellings. – Inflexions are hardly conclusive. Although there are many minor individual variants and errors there is little to assist in further classification, auem (21) in Cf(Da) being very possibly coincidental, though the missing syllables in Cf 15-16 suggest illegibility in a common source. Despite these missing syllables I have chosen C as base, since they are easy to supply from elsewhere and the ms. needs only two other corrections (21 and 49). Other mss. have more errors: Da 3, 10 (−1), 16 (−1), 22, 27 (−3), 28 (−6), 37, 42, 51; R 15, 18, 43, 44, 45 (−1), 47, re-writing 27-29 (also individual in 12, 17); T 1, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18 (−1) and a great many others; f 11, 18 (+1), 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 37 (amo) with 41-52 missing; a1 11, 13 (+1), 14 (+2), 18 (−1), 20, 25 and so on, together with a number of isolated readings (6, 24, 26). M is virtually error-free (17?, 21?) but has many isolated readings (6, 7, 11, 12, 15, 18, 20, 23, 33, 36 and so on), while O, with many errors, in 2, 4, 6, 7, 13, 16, 21, 22 (+1), 25 (−1) and so on, lacks the last 10 lines. My edition differs little from Levy’s.

Critical apparatus:

I.  1 tot f; qe (qi a1) bem Daa1, que b. RT; comensa b. T    2 blasme crete O, blasme e ten f    3 dieu Ta1; donna T; bona c. Da    4 bonna T; qel O; la] sa Daa1f; cebones lafins T; b. f. qant bona es li f. M    5 ni] et R; qe a. nulls temps fin ses c. M    6 uiu O, ui T, uitz a1; fruchar] portar M; frucic or frueic T; line underlined with Di bon seme mal frutto melo written in the upper margin, the last word uncertain M    7 qu’en] qe M, qi O, qem a1; Dieu f.] ben f. M, dieus f. f; ben e c. DaR, ben c. a1, en dieu c. f    8 ten Ta1.

II.  9 aicest T; bon (bo R) ORTa1f; fruich DaORTa1f; primiers MR, permier    10 de] en R; q. en f. Da,  q. e enfror T    11 noirison DaR, noirissol noirissol f, noris T; ab sa d. M, al d. a1    12 censenais T; et] y f; ab lobrais DaOT, ab las obras f; qar ab fe nais cobra lo n. M; car ab la fe e obran se n. R    13 des O, daqest a1; e q. d’e. f.] cidades frucc T; ma(n)gera DaMTa1    14 e nom de uera p. a1    15 dossa mortz er R, donc est samort with something before donc that could be an a, apparently rubbed out (Levy adonc), and the e of est actually a Tironian sign for et T; ueira iusta M, iusta eueira O, uista u. a1, anoi u. T    16  qem mor O, que mor R, comor T; p. d. n.] per n. Da, hom crey n. R    15-16 don | er sa mortz iustab d. iustamen C, don er | samor iusta per dieu nais iustamen f.

III.  17 es] ex O; celle M; qui] ca R, que f; nais aisel qedic (or possibly qedie) g. T    18 pus] e MR, missing a1; ha uiscut M, vieu or vien t. t. R, sera T; ses] sene f; dolors T    19 q. doussamen M; ni a.] e a. MR, nia a1, uiu ni a. f; tan de s. T    20 ha f. MT; manjat] man with titulus above T, mamar a1, maniar f    21 docs O, dunc T, donc a1; auem Cf, anem or auem Da, anam T; strestot O, trastotz R; e dons tratut deuon c. M    22 maniat Da; del MRT, daqest O; ce Tf, quest Da, que f; la] li M    23 qe trobarem M, atrobar lem T, e troba lon a1    24 o. dieu R, odieu or adieu T; fo] es a1; m. e. v.] uius e mortz Mf, m. e uieu R, mort euiu T.

IV.  25 lj seua with i written above the e M, lasoi O; fol DaO, fonl a1; dreiturer DaT, dreiturietz f    26 per on] per ço i M, perso T; d. amar O, deuen amar a1; tutç T    27 e] qe M; lo creator  missing Da; quel | la sufri ab pene ab suzor R    28 u. t. t. i. missing Da; per nos leuar e metren p. R, u. t. tep giauseç eparadis T    29 aitals Ma1; turmentç T; mortz nos fo vida senes turmen (–1) R    30 veray RT; fruc MORT    31 cascun T    32 daquesta mort M.

V.  33 somost] trames M; fruitz f; qi a1    34 lo v.] al u. O, louan T; federic O; seinhor with a titulus above the o f    35 tot OT; aquels R, aisell T; que] qi Ma1f; lo sieu amor T    36 voldra O, uoran T; mourir correcting something else a1; e] o MT, en with n unsure a1; somonis] so mes uis M    37 qu’anon] qua no Da, anem M, canen T, amo f, qanem a1; maiar Da, mangar f    38 que] qi M; descrezon underlined with discrede written beside it in the central space, the last letter unsure M    39 et en la crotz vera n. a. c. R, e. l. u. c. onon c. T.

VI.  40 el with e represented as the Tironian sign for et T; seplulcre f    41 c. sui Ma1, c. soy R, cusui with an i perhaps overlapping the vertical stroke of s T    42 loms O, lux T; dreturiera T; resplandors DaR    43 saluaire underlined with salvator written beside in the margin, last letters unclear M; donas M, donam R, dona T, donanz a1    44 conseilhs M; a. nostres M, auostre T; e. b. cosselham n. p. R    45 els defen R, el d. T; uentç T    46 q. y.] si que R; puscam Ra1; sança t. T    47 lais (lay R) recobrar DaR, e lai c. M, l. acobrar Ta1; a la mia u. R, la u. ualentç T, a l. u. u. a1    48 lo sepulcre e lo san m. with munimen underlined and munimento written in the lower margin M.

VII.  49 frederic T, federics a1; frug RT; de] e C; iouens CDa; beside iouen in the margin is apparently written di meza stanza | il combiato M    50 fruiz DaMa1; efruitz DaMa1; coniscenza a1    51 maiaz Da; del] lo M, de    52 fineres or feneres T.


Dating and historical circumstances:

Since Frederick is referred to as king but not emperor the piece must postdate 25 July 1215, when he received the crown of king of the Romans in Aachen and took the cross for the first time (see stanza V and Levy, p. 2; Kurt Lewent, «Das altprovenzalische Kreuzlied», Romanische Forschungen, 21, 1905, pp. 321-448, on p. 33; also David Abulafia, Frederick II: a Medieval Emperor, London 1988, pp. 120-122), and must surely precede his coronation as emperor on 22 November 1220. De Bartholomaeis (p. 209) may be right to date the piece to shortly after the first of these dates. The troubadour’s repeated emphasis on beginnings is concordant with this initial crusading commitment, subsequently subject to postponement, though a later date cannot be ruled out. However, De Bartholomaeis’s declaration (Poesie, II, p. 98) that Guillem was in Toulouse, which he did not leave until April 1229, is questionable. Why does the troubadour refer to Frederick as ‘my lord’ (34)? Does the tornada imply that he was sending the song in c. 1215 to this powerful figure who was only to become his patron after 1229? Levy (p. 1, n. 2) had already expressed his adherence to the view advanced by the HLF, XVIII, 652 that quan li Frances agron Tolosa of Guillem’s Vida refers to the capture of Toulouse after the battle of Muret and that the troubadour left home at the beginning of 1215, when Bishop Folquet held power there. He reported that Pio Rajna (Giornale di filologia romanza, 2, 1879, p. 88) concluded the reference was to 12 April 1229 when Louis IX concluded peace with Raimon VII of Toulouse, under whose terms the town lost most of its possessions and the walls were sleighted. Levy’s preference rests on the fact that after 1229 Toulouse itself remained in Raimon’s possession, whereas in 1215 the town had to pay homage to Simon de Montfort and Raimon VI had to take refuge in Marseille. «Es scheint mir auch, dass die Herschaft des verhassten Feindes für den Dichter eher ein Grund sein konte seine Heimat zu verlassen als die Verminderung des tolosanischen Gebietes und die Schleifung der Mauern.» De Bartholomaeis’s note (Poesie, II, p. 98) does not take account of Levy’s argument. He says that vv. 89-96 of D’un sirventes far (BdT 217.2) shows that he was writing while Raimon VII was defending Toulouse against the French, which is right; but he continues simply with «G.F. si trovava in Tolosa, che non abbandonò se non dopo la resa. Scrive infatti la biografia provenzale del trovadore: “G. F. si fo de Tolosa...e quant il Frances agron Tolosa, el s’en venc en Lombardia” (Chabaneau, Biogr., 283)». But there seems no reason to presume that Guillem was composing his powerfully Ghibelline invective in Toulouse rather than in Lombardy. It makes much better sense to see him already in Frederick’s entourage. And it also makes more sense to see Guillem composing the present piece in Italy, at Frederick’s request or at least in the hope of his favour.


Textual notes:

15-16. C is the only ms. to spell out ab = ‘with’, though DaMR(a1) can, and no doubt should, be interpreted in the same way (just’a); O is individual with iusta eueira, T garbled, and f incomplete. The missing syllables in C have been suppleted using a1. For just’ as a preposition / adverb, see SW, IV, 275,2 ‘entsprechend, gemäss’, though Guillem is also playing with ideas of justice / righteousness introduced in the following lines (justamen). Levy cites Conon de Béthune, Que celle mors est douce et saveurouse, / Dont on conquiert le regne precious; / Ne ja de mort nen i morra .I. sous, / Ains naisteront en vie gloriouse.

23. Split future.

33. All previous editors accept Tobler’s conjectural emendation of tal to al, but this seems unnecessary.

37. Levy (et al) qu’anon; for ano.n I follow a private suggestion of Stefano Asperti. For the translation of sobre here, compare SW, VII, 698, 12 ‘auf Kosten von’ (or perhaps understand ‘overcoming the opposition of’?). De Bartholomaeis translates as «mangiare di sopra», Guida «schiacciare».

38. For my interpretation of sa conoyssensa compare Frede Jensen, Syntaxe de l’ancien occitan, Tübingen 1994, § 286: «Le génitif que sert à exprimer le possessif peut être subjectif ou objectif: la nostr’amor vai enaissi (Guillaume IX 10.13), c’est-à-dire l’amour que nous éprouvons pour quelqu’un, lo sant paes on venc per nostr’ amor morir (P. Vidal 42.4), c’est-à-dire l’amour que quelqu’un éprouve pour nous».

40. While it may make sense to see failure to ‘believe in’ the Holy Sepulchre and hence the truth of the Resurrection as something wicked, it is tempting to wonder whether descrezon in this line is a form of descreisser, ‘to abase, diminish’. Compare PD descreisemen, descreiser v. dec-, decreiser, des- ‘diminuer, abaisser’.

[LP, lb]

BdT    Guillem Figueira

Songs referring to the crusades