Walters 143 Roman de la Rose Manuscript Study

 

 

Study of Walters 143 Manuscript of the Roman de la Rose 

Garrett Shields 

San Jose State University

Prof. Elizabeth Wrenn-Estes

LIBR 280-12

March 5, 2012

 

 Table of Contents

Introduction

Context

Authors

Incipit

Explicit

Colophon

Size

Binding

Writing Support

Collation and Layout

Scripts, Scribes, and Ink

Rubrication

Decoration and Painting

Illumination

Summary

References

Introduction

The Roman de la Rose, or translated from the French, the Romance of the Rose is an important work of medieval literature as well as rich source for those involved in manuscript studies. Depending on sources, there are between 200 and 300 different manuscripts available of Roman de la Rose ranging from the 13^th to 15^th centuries, including one with critical essays, “possibly the first truly ''critical edition" of a medieval vernacular text ever produced (Brownlee, 1992, p. 1). Originally a French work, it quickly spread to influence other works of the time. It was a secular work that found its way into monasteries. (That heritage will be seen below in some additional illustrations made to this particular manuscript.)

Roman de la Rose can be controversial and divisive, which may account for its popularity. This comes from the fact that it was written by two authors, working independently from one another with different motivations at different times. The first 4058 lines were written by Guillaume de Lorris around 1230, and Jean de Meun constructed a second part consisting of 17,724 lines that was finished around 1275.

Walters (2012) describes Guillaume de Lorris's part of Roman de la Rose is an “idealized conception of the love quest.” It is a poem in which a young man, stricken by an arrow from the God of Love, pursues his love Rose who is walled off. After stealing a kiss, his Rose is placed under further protection and de Lorris' part of the Roman concludes. In this part, Rose is clearly an allegory for sexuality, purity, and fragility, something that McCaffrey describes as an “ idealized version of the love object.”

This idealization is central to de Lorris's contribution to the Roman. The controversy and much interest in this work is created by the juxtaposition of Jean de Meun's additional lines in which our protagonist is “more courtly, more extreme, and more foolish” and characters are far less idealized (McCaffrey). The story concludes with “a bawdy account of the plucking of the Rose, achieved through deception” (Walters).

The Roman de la Rose, existing prolifically in manuscripts, is an important subject for manuscript studies. Walters 143 Roman de la Rose, examined here, is one of perhaps 20 Roman manuscripts believed to be illustrated by Richard and Jeanne de Montbaston. Those illustrations, along with the work of the unknown scribe will be examined more fully below. Hopefully, part of what makes the Roman de la Rose so long-lasting and complex will be conveyed through this examination.

Context

In the period of about fifty years that the Roman de la Rose was written France was in the midst of the Crusades, but it was otherwise, under the rule of Louis IX the political climate was calm if not liturgical; after all Louis IX becomes Saint Louis. Guillaume de Lorris wrote in this time, and perhaps his romantic and chaste love story is a reflection of the time in which he lived.

After Louis IX, Phillip III came into power, was quickly killed in the Crusades, and was succeeded by Phillip IV. Around this time, Jean de Meun was authoring his bawdier continuation to Roman de la Rose. This could be seen as a reaction to the religious overtones permeating much of the country's affairs. That de Meun introduces a satirical element into this story, and that he undermines some of the romantic aspects of de Lorris's previous work could indicate that there was room for a different way of thinking in France.

This sentiment may be evidenced in the manuscript itself, by a few alterations and additions that made their way in over the centuries. On 69v, shown below on the left, a painting has been altered to show what appears to be a Dominican friar embracing a woman in a romantic way. Further, on 72v, a dog dressed as a Dominican friar leading a pack of dogs. 

 This anti-religious sentiment may have been added by some satirical spirit similar to de Meun, but it assuredly shows that this manuscript was read by several kinds of people. Perhaps that lends credibility to fact that this manuscript is one of hundreds that still exist of this text, that it has retained its popularity throughout the centuries.

Authors

Not much is known about about Guillaume de Lorris, but an inscription on the opening flyleaf gives about as much information as anybody knows.

This translates, roughly, to “The Romance of the Rose by Guillaume de Lorris started and completed by Jean de Meun. Guillaume de Lorris died in 1260 and Jean de Meun completed after 40 years. Guillaume de Lorris lived during the reign of St. Louis and Jean de Meun under Philip the Fair.”

Essentially, the timeframe de Lorris wrote this in was known, but even his death in 1260 is disputable. (Guillaume, 2011). The Roman de la Rose provides little temporal context as well. The story is essentially archetypal, a Genesis-type story that takes place in a dream, further making a date of authorship complicated.

More is known about Jean de Meun in comparison. He was believed to have lived from around 1240 – 1305, and his writing of his part of the Roman, with its vernacular context, vulgarities, and satirical qualities suggest that it was written in the latter part of the 13^th century.

Incipit

There appears to be no Incipit, or text marking by the scribe “here begins” as Alvin (1991) remarks is commonplace amongst manuscripts in this period (p. 221). The first page can be seen here, ornately illustrated. Perhaps that is one reason for the lack of incipit; with a work so popular and well known, it was perhaps deemed unnecessary. 

 

Explicit

Similarly, there is no Explicit or Finit, presumably for the same reasons.

Colophon

After examining the manuscript, it appears there is no colophon present in this work either. Clemens and Graham (2007) note that “only a relatively small proportion of medieval manuscripts include such colophons,” and were “more popular at certain times and places: for example, among early medieval Irish and Spanish scribes and among Italian humanist scribes” (p.117). Since this manuscript of Roman de la Rose is neither, it is not unusual for it to be lacking a colophon.

Size

The manuscript measures 300mm, or almost one foot in height, and measuring from the center of the spine to the edge is 235mm, or about 9.25 inches. The parchment itself measures slightly smaller, of course, being 289mm tall and 205mm wide.


Binding

Unfortunately, I was not able to handle this manuscript in person.  There do not appear to exist any images of the binding or anything other than scanned pages.  Because of this, I am forced to rely on the description as listed from Roman de la Rose (romandelarose.org), which follows:

 

Brown leather, probably sheepskin, rectangular boards, five raised bands on spine (partially recessed), headband and tailband of white thread. Front and back covers have simple frame consisting of single blind-tooled fillet. Spine features gold-tooled designs, now badly faded/deteriorated and hard to make out, in the first and third through sixth compartments. At both top and bottom of spine, two simple blind-stamped lines. In second compartment, red leather title label with two gold-tooled lines each at top and bottom of compartment, and the following title: LE ROMAN / DE / LA ROSE. Fore, top, and bottom edges marbled in red, now quite faded. One paper flyleaf each, front and back; other half of each bifolium used as pastedown in front and back.

Writing Support

This manuscript of Roman is written on parchment, which is common for the time it was written. The parchment is in good condition, given its age, but it is browning and has a few signs of wear. On the first page, there are wormholes that have been repaired, but there are also small tears in the paste down, exhibited below.

The other large compromise to the structural integrity of this manuscript is the rip that runs the length in folio 143 that has been lost, and replaced by a later scribe, the only evidence of a different scribe in the manuscript.

Collation and Layout

The Walters 143 manuscript is collated into eight quires, each consisting of eight leaves. The layout is consistent, in a light brown ink. There are 8 vertical lines—shown below, on a particularly prominent page—that divide the page into two columns of text. 

Within each of the columns, there are two more lines that separate the first letter of each word with the rest of the line. There is also horizontal line in brown ink to delineate a header, but there is no distinction for a bottom border. Horizontal lines are also used for each line of the poem, but do not extend beyond.

Scripts, Scribes, and Ink

Textualis, which was the most common script in France at this time for manuscripts, is used throughout Roman de la Rose. One scribe is believed to have created this manuscript originally, due to the consistency in lettering a color. A brown ink was used by this scribe, and the few irregularities are marked in a black ink, added by a different scribe. There are a few instances of this, most notably on folio 143—pictured previously--where the page tore away vertically and parchment was reattached with writing by a different scribe. Another instance of this is seen on 50r, pictured above, where corrections were made with black ink at a later time by a different scribe.

 

In addition, there are strikethoughs across entire columns on 30v and 31r, but it does not seem clear why the original scribe did this, or if he were the one to do it.

 

Rubrication

The rubricator of this manuscript appears to be the same scribe to worked on the rest of the manuscript, and in tradition, red ink has been used to mark changes in the speaker or textual divisions as seen below. The ink has maintained its color pretty well throughout time, compared to others that seem to fade and become indistinguishable from the main script (Clemens & Graham, 2007, p. 25).

Decoration

There is much ornamentation throughout the Roman de la Rose, but not more so than on folio 1r, shown here.

Several different color inks are used including red, blue, black, white, green, purple, and orange. This piece contains ornate work, representations of scenes in the story, portraits of characters bordering the script and wrapped in vines. It is very decorative, and these flourishes are present throughout the text as well. There are 41 more illustrations like this throughout the manuscript, but they are smaller pieces, like the one pictured below.

Illumination

After checking all of the painting, decoration, and script, it is determined that this manuscript contains no illumination as it would surely be evident in some of the ornate painting like on folio 1r if it were there.

Summary

The Walters 143 Roman de la Rose is an impressively complete manuscript from the 13^th century. It is a very helpful study for one beginning to examine manuscripts because it was created in such a singular fashion, in scribe, script, and format. This uniformity is enlivened by the disparities that occur, like the odd strikethroughs, the torn parchment and amended page, and the corrections made by another scribe in a different ink. The damage done to the manuscript is light, considering its age, with several of the paintings and details retaining much of their luster. This manuscript is not only helpful to the student, but the appreciator of history and fine art.

References

Arvin, L. (1991). Scribes, script and books:The book arts from antiquity to the renaissance. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

Brownlee, K. (1992). Rethinking The Romance of the Rose :Text, image, reception [eBook version]. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

Clemens, R., & Graham, T. (2007). Introduction to manuscript studies. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

Guillaume de Lorris. (2011). Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th Edition, 1. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

McCaffrey, P. (1999). Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Muen: Narcissus and Pygmalion. Romanic Review, 90(4), 435. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

Walters, L. (2012). History and summary of the text. Roman de la Rose. Retrieved from http://romandelarose.org/#rose