Text: Paterson, Rialto 3.xii.2011. Mss.: C 395r, E 216-17, G 100r, I 162r, K 148r, L 4r-v, N 279r, S 237-38, a1 567, d 314. Critical editions: Giovanni Galvani, Fiore di storia latteraria e cavalleresca della Occitania, Milan 1845, p. 9 (based on d, with arbitrary alterations); Hermann Suchier, Denkmäler der provenzalischen Literatur und Sprache, Halle 1883, p. 328 (based on N alone); Salvatore Santangelo, Poesie di Gui d’Uisel, Catania 1909, p. 56 (provisional edition, without K, based on E); Henry Carstens, Die Tenzonen dem Kreise der Trobadors Gui, Eble, Elias und Peire d’Uisel, Königsberg 1914, p. 69 (based on C); Linda Paterson, Rialto 3.xii.2011. Other editions: Carl August Friedrich Mahn, Gedichte der Troubadours in provenzalischer Sprache, 4 vols., Berlin 1856-1873, n. 179 (on Galvani); Jean Audiau, Les Poésies des quatre troubadours d’Ussel, Paris 1922, p. 79 (on Carstens); Léon Billet, Généalogie de la famille d’Ussel. Les quatre troubadours d’Ussel, leur biographie et celle de la maison d’Ussel, Egletons 1982, p. 225 (on Audiau). Versification: a6 a6 b6’ a6 a6 b6’ b6’ b6’ a6 a6 b6’ b6’ b6’ a6 a6 b6’ b6’ b6’ a6 a6 b6’ (Frank, 101:2); two coblas unissonans. The versification is identical in all respects with that of BdT 159.1. Marshall sees these as two of a number of modified contrafacta of the Franco-Occitan pastourelle BdT 461.148 (= RS 935): for more details see John H. Marshall, «Imitation of Metrical Form in Peire Cardenal», Romance Philology, 32, 1978-79, pp. 18-48, pp. 36-38, and Id., «Pour l’étude des contrafacta dans la poésie des troubadours», Romania, 101, 1980, pp. 289-335, pp. 304-9; see also Stefano Asperti, Bibliografia Elettronica dei Trovatori, n. 194.16, who is inclined to see their more immediate model as the Latin conductus ‘Homo considera’. Note: Galvani’s identification of the two interlocutors with Eble de Ventadorn and Guillem de Peitieus was accepted by Karl Bartsch, Grundriß zur Geschichte der provenzalischen Literatur, Elberfeld 1872, n. 183.9 = 130.1, but corrected by Hermann Suchier, «Der Troubadour Marcabru», Jahrbuch für romanischen und englischen Sprache und Literatur, 14, 1875, pp. 119-60 and 273-310, pp. 120-21. The rubrics of C and S offer support to the now universal acceptance of the hypothesis that Gui and Eble d’Uisel were the interlocutors: this piece is one of a number of references to Eble’s impecunious state. One cannot help wondering, however, about the provenance of the IKa1 reading Segnor or Segner in line 22: if it were some unknown lord who had twitted Eble about his indebtedness, would not En Gui be an obvious correction? But why should anyone make the opposite change? The argument in favour of IKa1’s reading would be difficult to refute, were it not for the unambiguous testimony of S. If the authors are indeed Eble and Gui d’Uisel, the piece is likely to have been composed c. 1200: see the General note to BdT 129.3, in Ruth Harvey and Linda Paterson, The Troubadour Tensos and Partimens: A Critical Edition, Cambridge 2010. [LP]
|
