THE HIGH HISTORY OF THE HOLY GRAAL - by Douglas B. Killings, October 1996.

Originally written in Old French, sometime in the early half of the 13th Century A.D., as a continuation of Chretien DeTroyes'
unfinished work "Perceval, or the Knight of the Grail". Author unknown. Translation by Sebastian Evans, 1898.
This book is translated from the first volume of "Perceval le Gallois ou le conte du Graal"; edited by M. Ch.
Potvin for `La Societe des Bibliophiles Belges' in 1866, (1) from the MS. numbered 11,145 in the library of
the Dukes of Burgundy at Brussels.

This MS. I find thus described in M. F. J. Marchal's catalogue of that priceless collection: `"Le Roman de
Saint Graal", beginning "Ores lestoires", in the French language; date, first third of the sixteenth century;
with ornamental capitals.' (2)

Written three centuries later than the original romance, and full as it is of faults of the scribe, this manuscript
is by far the most complete known copy of the "Book of the Graal" in existence, being defective only in
Branch XXI. Titles 8 and 9, the substance of which is fortunately preserved elsewhere. Large fragments,
however, amounting in all to nearly one-seventh of the whole, of a copy in handwriting of the thirteenth
century, are preserved in six consecutive leaves and one detached leaf bound up with a number of other
works in a MS. numbered 113 in the City Library at Berne.

The volume is in folio on vellum closely written in three columns to the page, and the seven leaves follow
the last poem contained in it, entitled "Duremart le Gallois". The manuscript is well known, having been lent
to M. de Sainte Palaye for use in the Monuments of French History issued by the Benedictines of the
Congregation of St Maur. Selections from the poems it contains are given in Sinner's "Extraits de Poesie du
XIII. Siecle", (3) and it is described, unfortunately without any reference to these particular leaves, by the
same learned librarian in the "Catalogus Codicum MSS. Bibl. Bernensis", J.R. Sinner. (4)

M. Potvin has carefully collated for his edition all that is preserved of the Romance in this manuscript,
comprising all the beginning of the work as far as Branch III. Title 8, about the middle, and from Branch
XIX. Title 23, near the beginning, to Branch XXX. Title 5, in the middle. Making allowance for variations
of spelling and sundry minor differences of reading, by no means always in favour of the earlier scribe, the
Berne fragments are identical with the corresponding portions of the Brussel s manuscript, and it is therefore
safe to assume that the latter is on the whole an accurate transcript of the entire original Romance.

The only note of time in the book itself is contained in the declaration at the end. From this it appears that it
was written by order of the Seingnor of Cambrein for Messire Jehan the Seingnor of Neele.

M. Potvin, without giving any reason for so doing, assumes that this Lord of Cambrein is none other than
the Bishop of Cambrai. If this assumption be correct, the person referred to was probably either John of
Berhune, who held the see from 1200 till July 27, 1219, or his successor Godfrey of Fontaines (Conde), who held it till 1237. To me, however, it seems more likely that the personage intended was in reality the 'Seingnor' of Cambrin, the chef-lieu of a canton of the same name, on a small hill overlooking the peat -
marshes of Bethune, albeit I can find no other record of any such landed proprietor's existence.

Be this as it may, the Messire Jehan, Seingnor of Neele, can hardly be other than the John de Nesle who was
present at the battle of Bouvines in 1214, and who in 1225 sold the lordship of Bruges to Joan of Flanders.
(5) These dates therefore may be regarded as defining that of the original Romance within fairly narrow
limits.

This conclusion is confirmed by other evidence. An early Welsh translation of the story was published with
an English version and a glossary by the Rev. Robert Williams in the first volume of his "Selections from
the Hengwrt MSS". (6) The first volume of this work is entitled "Y Seint Greal, being the adventures of
King Arthur's knights of the Round Table, in the quest of the Holy Grail, and on other occasions. Originally
written about the year 1200".

The volume, following the manuscript now in the library of W.W.E. Wynne, Esq., at Peniarth, is divided
into two parts. The first, fol. 1-109 of the manuscript, represents the thirteenth to the seventeenth book of Sir
Thomas Malory's "Morte d'Arthur". Of the second, which represents the Romance here translated, Mr
Williams writes:

"The second portion of the Welsh Greal, folios 110-280, contains the adventures of Gwalchmei
Peredur and Lancelot, and of the knights of the Round Table; but these are not found in the "Morte
d'Arthur". The Peniarth MS. is beautifully written on vellum, and in perfect preservation, and its
date is that of Henry VI., the early part of the fifteenth century. The orthography and style of writing
agrees literally with that of the "Mabinogion of the Llyvr Coch Hergest", which is of that date. This,
of course, is a transcript of an earlier copy; but there is no certainty when it was first translated into
Welsh, though Aneurin Owen in his "Catalogue of the Hengwrt MSS." assigns it to the sixth year of
Henry I. It is mentioned by Davydd ab Gwilym, who died in 1368."

Whatever may be the date of the Welsh version, the translator had no great mastery of French, and is often
at fault as to the meaning both of words and sentences, and when in a difficulty is only too apt to cut the
knot by omitting the passage bodily.
The book itself, moreover, is not entire. On page 275, all between Branch IX. Title 16 and Branch XI. Title
2, twenty-two chapters in all, is missing.

Again, on page 355, Titles 10-16 in Branch XXI. are left out, whi le the whole of the last Branch, containing
28 Titles, is crumpled up into one little chapter, from which it would seem that the Welshman had read the
French, but thought it waste of pains to translate it.

In all, not to speak of other defects, there are fifty-six whole chapters in the present book, of which there is
not a word in the Welsh.

In one matter, however, Mr Williams' English translation has stood me in good stead. In Branch XXI., as I
have said, the French manuscript makes default of two Title s, but almost the whole of their substance is
supplied by the Welsh version. By an unlucky accident, before the hiatus in the French is fully filled up, the
Welsh version itself becomes defective, though the gap thus left open can hardly extend beyond a very few
words. Without this supplement, incomplete as it is, it would have been impossible to give the full drift of
one of the Romancer's best stories, which is equally unintelligible in both the French and Welsh texts in
their present state.