SOURCE: Baker, M. J. “France's First Sentimental Novel and Novels of Chivalry.” Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance 36, no. 1 (January 1974): 33-45.

[In the following essay, Baker argues that Book 2 of Les Angoysses douloureuses is more clearly linked to Book 1 than most critics have assumed, and claims further that the work differs significantly from the novels of chivalry with which it has been categorized because of its focus on love and emphasis on character determining the outcome of events.]

France's first sentimental novel, Les Angoysses douloureuses qui procedent damours (1538), and its author, best known as Hélisenne de Crenne, have received new critical attention in recent years.¹ Jérôme Vercruysse has convincingly documented the identity of Hélisenne de Crenne as Marguerite de Briet, and has discovered a portrait of Hélisenne in the Bibliothèque royale de Bruxelles.² And two editions of Book I of the Angoisses³ have appeared.⁴ But despite the renewed attention given to this early French novel, many of the older conclusions about it have been uncritically accepted, and have remained essentially unchanged since Gustave Reynier wrote his chapter on the Angoisses in Le Roman sentimental avant l'Astrée.⁵

One of these conclusions originating with Reynier is that in Book II of the Angoisses (the novel contains three books and an “Ample narration”) we are “en pleine chevalerie.”⁶ Writing a year later, Jean Plattard states:

ce ne sont que pérégrinations de chevaliers errants, tournois, rencontres de brigands, rites de chevalerie minutieusement rapportés—bref, tous les épisodes ordinaires de la littérature romanesque de chevalerie.⁷

In 1968, Jérôme Vercruysse writes in the introduction to his edition of Book I that in Books II and III

l'élément sentimental est combattu par les éléments chevaleresques et didactiques. Ce sont aussi les romans de chevalerie dont le succès est encore très vif au début du XVI^e siècle qu'il faudrait mettre à contribution pour trouver des sources d'inspiration.⁸

Finally, Paule Demats agrees that Book II is “dans une bonne mesure un roman chevaleresque.”⁹ She correctly observes, however, that Quézinstra rather than Guénélic, Hélisenne's lover, is the chivalric hero of this book, but she neglects to consider the significance of this fact, implicitly accepting the traditional view.

In all the cases mentioned above, the superiority of Book I over II and III is either claimed or implied, with the chivalric aspects of II being suggested as one of the major defects of these later books. This point of view is succinctly expressed by Reynier, who judges the novel as a whole in this way:

Il a plu longtemps, et sans doute il aurait été lu plus longtemps encore si dans la suite quelque éditeur intelligent en avait détaché la partie sentimentale des développements chevaleresques et didactiques qui en avaient été d'abord les compléments peut-être utiles, mais qui plus tard parurent alourdir le roman, jetèrent sur toute l'œuvre une couleur d'ancienneté et dissimulèrent ce qu'elle contenait de sincère, de passionné, de vraiment moderne.

(p. 122)

The fact that only Book I has been published in modern editions betrays a fundamental prejudice against the rest of the novel, and reflects the view that Books II and III are essentially independent of Book I.

It is not my intention here to judge the superiority of one book over another, or to follow those students described by Eugène Vinaver who seek to rehabilitate a forgotten text by finding in it “something resembling their own artistic ideal.”¹⁰ If it can be shown that Book II differs significantly from novels of chivalry, as I think it can be, and that it is more closely linked to Book I than has been generally supposed, this may give us greater insight into the direction the early French novel is taking.

It will be helpful at this point to summarize briefly all three books of the Angoisses and the “Ample narration,” even though I shall concern myself primarily with Book II. In Book I, Hélisenne, the narrator, recounts the story of her woes. Married too young to a man she hardly knew, she falls in love with a youth she sees out a window. This youth—Guénélic—is indiscreet, and gossips about his affair with her. She describes a series of encounters, an exchange of letters, and finally her husband's discovery of their love. Hélisenne's husband first threatens his wife with punishment, then actually strikes her, and as a last resort confines her in the remote chàteau de Cabasus. It is there that Hélisenne decides to write the story of her life, in the hope of encouraging other women to avoid sensual love. The influence of Boccaccio's Fiammetta on this first book has been noted.¹¹

In Book II, Guénélic sets out with his faithful friend Quézinstra to find Hélisenne. This book also is narrated in the first person, but here it is Guénélic who speaks (Hélisenne reveals that she is writing his story for him). It is this book that provokes the comparison to novels of chivalry, for the two young men encounter villainous brigands, engage in tournaments, and become involved in other adventures reminiscent of novels of chivalry.

In the third book, Guénélic falls ill, discusses love with a learned man, then finally reaches the village near which Hélisenne is imprisoned. Guénélic and Quézinstra rescue Hélisenne, but soon after they overcome a band of attackers, Hélisenne dies of remorse for having allowed herself to entertain the thought of submitting to sensual love (she has never actually consummated her love). Guénélic dies of sympathic grief shortly thereafter.

The “Ample Narration” is an epilogue narrated by Quézinstra, who describes his trip to the underworld where he observes Minos' judgment of the lovers, and then their final reunion in the Elysian fields.¹²

Critics viewing Book II as a novel of chivalry have not indicated and discussed specific novels of chivalry which may fit the convention to which they refer. In order to evaluate the claim of influence, it is imperative to begin by describing relevant novels.

It is not unreasonable to suggest that Marguerite de Briet¹³ could have read some of those prose romances of chivalry so popular in the early sixteenth century in France. Jean Frappier has recently noted the special popularity of these novels at Lyon and Paris,¹⁴ and it is now generally believed that Marguerite de Briet spent a period of time in Paris with her husband.¹⁵ The Arthurian romances¹⁶ are of particular interest for the study of the Angoisses in that they as well as the Angoisses appealed to a feminine audience, and combined the description of knightly deeds with love stories. I shall limit my references to three of these novels, editions of which appeared close in time to the publication of the Angoisses, and which seem representative of the genre.¹⁷ These are Ysaie le Triste,¹⁸Meliadus de Leonnoys,¹⁹ and Perceforest.²⁰

On reading these three sixteenth-century novels of chivalry, one is first struck by the lack of high ideal motivating the majority of the actions of the knights. A similar lack of high ideal has been observed by Cedric E. Pickford²¹ in fifteenth-century novels. In the following passage he contrasts chivalry as depicted in Arthurian prose novels to the actual state of chivalry at the time:

Le chevalier de la Table Ronde et le chevalier réel partent de nobles principes, défense des faibles, exaltation de la foi chrétienne, pour aboutir à un idéal égoïste de gloire militaire. La vie du chevalier devient une vie d'aventures, de ‘belles aventures,’ une série de luttes dont le seul avantage est pour le vainqueur la renommée de ses exploits. … La chevalerie du XV^e siècle, chevalerie décadente, n'avait pas une conscience bien claire de son véritable idéal.

(p. 236-237)

But in the novels under consideration here, it is not only the egotistical aim of personal reknown to which a knight may aspire, but also the more private satisfaction of obtaining what he thinks is his due—even if that due is another man's wife! A prime example is furnished by Meladius in the novel by that name.

Meliadus courts the Queen of Scotland during her husband's absence. On his return, the suspicious King sequesters his wife in another castle. Meliadus decides to abduct the Queen, but he is not encouraged in this move by the Queen, who accepts the abduction only because “elle voyt bien appertement que priere ny vauldroit riens” (f. V3^v). Meliadus undertakes the abduction primarily because he feels that since he loves the Queen, he must have her: “… si elle me hayt je l'ayme si cherement comme chevalier pourroit aymer, je ne voys mie si Dieu me ayde comment je m'en peusse souffrir, pourquoy je dis qu'il est mestier que je me mette en adventure pour la gaigner par force d'armes …” (f. V1^r).

In their quest for personal reknown, these knights are often aided by powers outside themselves. In Ysaie le Triste, Ysaie is visited in his cradle by fairies who bring him a shield and a horse (f. vii.^r), thus ensuring his success as a knight. Harban in Perceforest uses magical powers to steal a giant's head from another knight (Book II, f. lxxxiii^r). In many cases, because of the aid of magic and enchantment, there is never any doubt that the knights in question will succeed.

Indeed, for the most part, the knights with whom we are to sympathize are able to cope successfully with any situation in which they find themselves. They can rescue damsels in distress, defeat scheming knights, all with apparent ease. They are rarely intimidated by their opponents.²² In this world in which men are destined to be heroes, even babyhood is no obstacle to heroism. Passelion, a two-year old child in Perceforest, neatly does away with a knight named Bruyant sans foy: “lors descoche sa sagette & fiert Bruyant parmy le gros du cueur de tel randon que la pointe apparut à l'autre costé” (Book IV, f. xl^r). The many adventures in which these knights successfully engage themselves bear a similarity to each other, but rarely do they have an intrinsic relationship to each other within the separate novels. It would be difficult to argue that the principle of “entrelacement” was at work here.²³

In all three novels there are love stories, but love seldom assumes much importance in the lives of the knights. The knights tend to view women as a prize. The story referred to above of Meliadus' abduction of the Queen of Scotland is one example. After Meliadus has triumphantly carried off the Queen, his first words to her are these: “Madame, je vous ay conquise, ce m'est advis venir vous convient se il vous plaist au royaume de leonnois” (f. V3^v). Later in the story, the fact that the abduction took place on Arthur's land assumes more importance than any love on Meliadus' part that may have provoked the abduction. Never during the recitals of the many battles that ensue do we hear that they have been engaged in for the sake of the love between the Queen and Meliadus. The central problem is a political one.

Above all, these knights are knights first, lovers, second. Love is an encounter that seems to have little permanent effect on the knight. It is one more adventure that is part of the male experience. The love story of Alexandre and Sebille in Perceforest illustrates the secondary role assigned to love in the lives of the knights. Alexandre sleeps with Sebille and departs (Book I, f. xxxv^v). When Alexandre is later informed that Sebille is pregnant, he does not wax sentimental, or express a desire to see her again. He does eventually rejoin her, but the reunion is brief, and Alexandre is eager to depart to meet new obligations he has incurred as a knight. The love that Alexandre bears Sebille, or that any other knight in these novels bears for a woman, does not get in the way of the exercise of knighthood.

Because love does not play a central role in the lives of the knights in these novels, long separations between lover and mistress are not generally viewed as a source of unhappiness. When Ysaie and his wife Marthe are reunited after about eighteen years, neither one thinks of this reunion as a release from tortures of absence. Love may be complicated at times, but it is never tragic. In Perceforest, the knight Gallafar searches diligently for a certain “pucelle aux deux dragons” whom he wishes to marry. He has one major setback when he is married to the wrong woman, through enchantment (Book V, f. liii^v). But what may start out as a tragedy does not end as one. Gallafar finds his true love despite his unfortunate marriage (Book VI, f. lii^r), and his wife is conveniently disposed of so that he can marry the woman of his choice.

Finally, illegitimate love in these novels is common and quite acceptable. Often, the woman is more aggressive than the man. In Ysaie le Triste, Marthe goes directly to the residence where Ysaie is staying, to say peremptorily: “Je vous prie faictes estaindre ceste torche” (f. xiii^v). Marc is engendered that night. After the birth of Marc, Marthe's father inquires about the paternity of the child. Marthe replies that Ysaie is the father, and the reaction to this piece of news is a joyful one:

Par saincte croix, fait le roy, se c'est du chevalier je ne fus oncques si joieulx … & Dieu me doint tant vivre que je le voye bon chevalier. Car s'il resemble son pere, ce sera la meilleur du monde.

(f. liv^v)

Correspondingly, when chastity is treated in these novels, which is rare, it is generally treated lightly. An excellent example occurs in Perceforest. A certain Morgon, who has spent two years at the court of Perceforest, asks permission to return home for a brief visit with his wife. He fears that two lustful knights may have seduced his wife and dishonored him. He need not have worried. During his absence, his wife has lured the knights into a tower and locked them up in it, condemning them to earn their keep, “l'ung filant et l'autre desvuydant bien & appertement” (Book IV, f. 1^r). When the wondering husband goes to the tower to have a look at them, they think the chambermaid has come to collect their handiwork: “si dist l'ung d'eux, Damoiselle recevez nostre ouvrage & nous donner à manger” (ibid.). Their humiliation is complete. This anecdote, with its clever reversal, is in the spirit of the fabliau and tales in the Cent Nouvelles nouvelles. What is most important is the trick played, not the chastity of the wife.

Turning now to Book II of the Angoisses,²⁴ we first note the statement of purpose for this second book announced by Hélisenne at the beginning of the “Epistre” preceding chapter one²⁵:

Apres vous avoir exhibé (mes Dames benevoles) les vehementes passions que Amour venerienne peult es tendres & delicieux cueurs des amoureuses dames causer, il m'est prinse vouloir de vous narrer et reciter les calamités & extremes miseres, que par indiscretement aymer les jeunes hommes peuvent souffrir.

(f. AAl^v)

This contrasts with introductory remarks in novels of chivalry.²⁶ The author of Ysaie le Triste writes that his book will serve

tous jeunes princes desirans & ayans le cueur instigué à veoir choses nouvelles, touchant le noble faict des armes, par lequel on parvient à tout honneur et gloyre qui ne peult fuyr aulcunement, car ce sont les loyers et remunerations de vertu. … Ainsi montrera evidamment le chemin et sentier pour trouver la voye de vertu, sans laquelle jamais homme vivant et mortel ne peult parvenir à la perfection de bon, bruyt, et memoire d'estre renommé, prisé & exalté, et trouver place d'honneur mondain en ce monde present et eternelle gloire & immobile repos en l'aultre.

(f. a2^r)

Reading of the achievements of the knights of yore, writes the author of Meliadius, will inspire young men to improve themselves (f. *ii^r). In Perceforest, the ideal is no different, The reader is told: “Suyvez les vestiges des nobles chevaliers qui par memoire de leurs glorieux gestes donnent l'esperon aux cueurs adspirans à honneur (Book I, f. *iii^v).

While it might be argued that all the adventures in the novels of chivalry do not point to virtue, honor, and reknown,²⁷ it is soon clear that in the case of Guénélic we are indeed dealing with “calamités & extremes miseres.” And furthermore, among these “calamitéz” and “miseres” are the adventures that Guénélic must endure as a reluctant knight—precisely those kinds of adventures that knights in novels of chivalry seek out and thrive on.

The major events in Book II in which we see Guénélic's conduct as a knight are the encounter with the brigands in the woods, the tournament in Goranflos, and the episode of the besieged lady in Eliveba. During the course of these events, some curious differences between Guénélic and his companion Quézinstra come to light.

When Guénélic catches sight of the brigands in the woods, he reacts in this way: “Et ce voyant telle maniere de gens, je fuz commeu de quelque timeur” (f. BB3^r). But Quézinstra is not intimidated: “Mon compagnon … par ung magnanime couraige, me commenca à exhorter, me disant que virillement nous convenoit deffendre” (f. BB3^r-^v). Guénélic does not take the initiative. For a time, he watches Quézinstra without joining in. Finally, he does acquit himself respectably, but he does not distinguish himself. It is Quézinstra's valor that is described in detail.

The difference between the two men is brought to the fore at some length in the Goranflos adventure. An impending three-day tournament is announced. The Duke of Goranflos decides to knight Quézinstra, and on second thought decides to knight Guénélic also—but mainly in the hope of cheering up his son, who has been wounded (f. DD6^r). Quézinstra is joyful at the prospect of being knighted; Guénélic is not (ff. DD6^r-DD7^r).

In the actual tournament, it is Quézinstra's valor that draws cries of praise. The ladies in the audience wonder who he is, and admire his prowess (f. EE1^v). No one wonders who Guénélic is. On the third day of the tournament, a lord wants to joust with Guénélic. A worried Quézinstra hurries to separate them, thereby suggesting that Guénélic is not sufficiently hardy to defend himself (f. EE5^r).

Final illustration of Guénélic's unmartial behavior is found in the adventures encountered in Eliveba, where a noble lady is besieged by her rejected suitor. Quézinstra performs “incredibles prouesses” (f. GG5^r) in defending the lady. But Guénélic, captured by the enemy, is hardly stoical. He groans and complains vociferously about the ruination of his love due to this imprisonment; in fact, so loudly does he complain that he is heard at some distance from his cell (f. GG6^r). His capacity to withstand even the suggestion of torture is so slight that he faints dead away at the mere mention of it:

Tristes nouvelles me furent annoncées: car le gardyen de la prison en fureur cryant devers moy vint, & me dist: sors hors de ce lieu miserable creature, & viens recepvoir ton dernier supplice, auquel tu es condamné: car des la journée precedente par l'admiral & ses gens, fut consulté & deliberé d'imposer fin à ta vie … Ces parolles en si grand vehemence, mentrerent au cueur, pour l'apprehension de la mort, que en ma faculté ne fut de plus soubstenire mes debiles membres. Mais ainsy comme mort, en terre tombay.

(f. GG6^rv)

But Guénélic does not die. He returns to the noble lady to present the enemy Admiral's proposal to decide the outcome of the war by single combat. The arrangement is approved, but the noble lady asks Quézinstra, not Guénélic, to represent her, even though the Admiral and his aides had assumed that Guénélic would be the combattant. In the eyes of those who know the two knights, Quézinstra is clearly the more valorous. Guénélic is not viewed as a knight of the first water.

Guénélic's conduct as a knight is far different from that conduct extolled in the novels of chivalry. If Quézinstra seems to resemble knights in the novels of chivalry,²⁸ he is nevertheless always a minor character, one who is principally a foil, or contrast to Guénélic. Book II fails to be a conventional novel of chivalry on one count because the main focus of attention is not the incredible valor and prowess of Quézinstra, but rather the lack of these qualities in Guénélic.

To what do we owe Guénélic's relative lack of heroism? In Book II, we find an early clue in Quézinstra's admonishment of Guénélic for lamenting his separation from Hélisenne and wishing for death:

Car cest appetit sensual, est une infirmité incurable, de laquelle nayssent oblivion de Dieu & de soymesmes, perdition de temps, diminution d'honneur, discordables contentions, emulations, envies, detractions, exilz, homicides, destruction de corps, & damnation de l'ame, & en la fin nul fruict n'en vient, comme presentement le povez congnoistre.

(f. AA8^r)

During the stay at Goranflos, Quézinstra specifically links sensuality to pusillanimity, thereby providing an explanation for Guénélic's failure to perform as an outstanding knight. He critizes his friend's unenthusiastic reaction to the prospect of being knighted: “Cest amour sensuel aulcunes foys rend l'homme pusillanime” (f. DD5^v). In the final chapter of Book II, we end on this theme, with a prince admonishing Guénélic:

Car vous debvez croyre que estant en ceste volupté jamais ne vous pourrez adjoindre à choses aulcunes vertueuses ne prouffitables: car pour le continuel soucy que vous avez de avoyr le fruition & joiyssance de la chose aymée, de vous sont expulsées toutes aultres cures & sollicitudes.

(f. 116^r)

It is appropriate to mention here that this condemnation of sensual love provides an important thematic link between Book I and Book II.²⁹ At the beginning of Book I, Hélisenne expresses the hope that other ladies will learn from her tale to avoid “les dangereux laqs d'amour” (f. Aii^v). This love is soon narrowed in definition to mean sensual love: Hélisenne describes sensuality's triumph over reason (f. A6^v), her husband's condemnation of her “ardeur libidineuse” (f. B2^r), her “appetit desordoné” (f. E8^r), and his reference to her as a “femmes lascive” (f. B8^v). In a long statement, of which I quote only a small portion, a monk disparages the sensual passion which blinds her to her duty to God and her husband:

Vous comme plus voluntaire que sage, voulez suyvre vostre sensualité, & plus tost de vous priver de vie, que de faillir à l'accomplissement de vostre voluptueux plaisir, & appetit desordonné, sans avoir regard à l'offense que vous faictes à Dieu, & à vostre mary, la crainte duquel debveroit estre suflisante pour retirer vostre cueur inveteré, & endurcy.

(f. D8^r)

Thus, a main character who might seem extremely peculiar by the standards of the sixteenth century novels of chivalry is seen to be a natural choice when consideration is given to the general theme that is developed initially in Book I. Quézinstra, the knight who seems more traditional by the standards of sixteenth-century novels of chivalry, still does not conform to the image of the knight as we have found it in the three novels under consideration, principally because high ideal has motivated his conduct. Quézinstra is not inspired by a desire for personal glory or self-aggrandizement. The purity of his aim—service to the cause of virtue coupled with gratitude to God (f. EE7^r) is made possible because his character has not been tainted by a sensual passion. Quézinstra's lack of interest in amorous diversions, a major trait distinguishing him from knights in the novels of chivalry, comes as no surprise; it is virtually dictated by the author's intention to decry the ill effects of love with respect to Guénélic.

At the beginning of this paper, I suggested that if significant differences between Book II of the Angoisses and novels of chivalry were to be found, we might gain greater insight into the direction the early French novel is taking. In reality, novels of chivalry have been left far behind. Reviewing the major differences pointed out between Book II of the Angoisses and novels of chivalry, one is inclined to share the suspicion expressed by Rosemund Tuve (who was writing with reference to Spenser's Faerie Queene) that the reputation of novels of chivalry for great influence is probably due to the fact that their forbidding length has discouraged people from actually reading them.³⁰

In the novels of chivalry we have discussed, the exercise of knighthood is the central concern; love stories occasionally enter the narrative, momentarily diverting us. The subject of love, when it arises, is treated lightly. In contrast, Marguerite de Briet treats the subject of love seriously. There is no trace in the Angoisses of the casual attitude towards love such as that we find in the Cent Nouvelles nouvelles, or even in some of the tales of the Heptaméron. An important contribution of Marguerite de Briet is to give to sentimental fiction a consistently serious tone.

The society of the knights in the novels of chivalry, men for whom love is always of minor importance, is an entirely stable one. The protagonists are ever ready to serve and conquer. They are practically always equal to the task demanded of them. They know exactly what to do. They are not unhinged by love; if there is a villain to be killed, he is killed. The world in which these knights live and move is, for the most part, one in which the individual can be master of his fate.

But in Book II of the Angoisses, love is the central theme, and love results in the destruction of the orderly world of knighthood. We have as a main character Guénélic, who is a lover first, and a knight second. Guénélic can scarcely control his emotions, and he has trouble coping with the world in which knights normally move. Love has provided a source of conflict, heretowith missing in the novels of chivalry.³¹ Guénélic cannot quite live up to what is expected of him as a knight because he has fallen in love—and because his love is not that virtuous sort defined by Hélisenne as the ideal to which he should have aspired.³² The Angoisses anticipates the complications of later novels—La Princesse de Clèves furnishes a fine example—in which, because of conflict experienced by characters (I have Madame de Clèves in mind), the “right” conduct is not always obvious, or executed with ease.

The most important consequence of the new emphasis on and treatment of love, however, from the point of view of later evolution of technique, is the subordination of plot to characterization. References to sensual love in Book II are not simply decorative, as they sometimes are in other works of the period.³³ The absence or presence of sensual love determines the success or failure of a relationship and of a man's conduct as a knight. A man's moral character—here defined in relation to his commitment to sensual love—now plays a significant role in the outcome of events. As a rule in the novels of chivalry, what the knights are like as moral individuals does not move them in any particular direction, or determine the point of the episodes in which they take part.

This new tendency in the Angoisses, in which character, to a great extent, determines the outcome of events,³⁴ foreshadows later novels—La Princesse de Clèves is again a good example—in which the situation in which the characters find themselves, and the significance of it, depend on the characters themselves and what they are like as individuals. In the earlier novels, the “situation” generally exists before the characters arrive on the scene.

Given this subordination of plot to character, it is not surprising to find that Marguerite eschews reliance on magic and enchantment, so prevalent in the novels of chivalry. In addition, this attention to character is enhanced by the choice of first-person narrative for Book II as well as Book I. Not only does the action gain in immediacy with this point of view, but first person narration also enables the author to suggest motive with a greater appearance of authenticity. If Hélisenne were to have told Guénélic's story in the third person, after finishing her own story in the first person, the reader would have been skeptical of any attempt on her part to enter Guénélic's mind—and a passage such as that quoted in footnote 34 simply would not have been plausible.

In closing, I should like to stress that Book II is of interest to the study of the early development of the novel in France precisely because of its significant departures from novels of chivalry. Furthermore, because of its serious treatment of the nature and consequences of sensual love, Book II as well as Book I deserves to be included in the definition of the Angoisses as France's first sentimental novel.³⁵

Notes

1. For a detailed bibliography prior to 1968, consult Jérôme Vercruysse, “Hélisenne de Crenne; notes biographiques,” Studi Francesi (1967), xl, 77-81.

2. Vercruysse, supra.

3. I have modified the spelling to conform with current practice.

4. Hélisenne de Crenne, Les Angoisses douloureuses qui procèdent d'amours (Première partie), présentation par Jérôme Vercruysse (Paris, Minard, 1968), and Hélisenne de Crenne, Les Angoysses douloureuses qui procedent d'amours (1538) (Première partie), Paule Demats, editor (Paris, Les Belles-Lettres, 1968).

5. Gustave Reynier, “Les Œuvres françaises: Les Angoisses douloureuses d'Hélisenne de Crenne,” Le Roman sentimental avant l'Astrée (Paris, Armand Colin, 1908), p. 99-122.

6. Reynier, p. 120.

7. Jean Plattard, L'Invention et la composition dans l'œuvre de Rabelais (Paris, Honoré Champion, 1908), p. 57.

8. Vercruysse, “Introduction: Hélisenne de Crenne,” Les Angoisses …, p. 15.

9. Demats, “Introduction,” Les Angoysses …, p. xxxi.

10. Eugène Vinaver, The Rise of Romance (New York, Oxford University Press, 1971), p. 70.

11. The extent of the influence is limited. See my article, “Fiammetta and the Angoysses douloureuses,” to appear, Symposium (1973).

12. It should be pointed out that a similarity in general organization exists between the Angoisses and Jacobo Caviceo's Il Peregrino, translated into French in 1527 as Dialogue tres elegant intitulé le Peregrin (Paris, Nicolas Couteau pour Galliot du Pré). For example, both are divided into three books, the adventures starting in the second book. Agathes plays the role of faithful friend and counselor, just as does Quézinstra. Both Genèvre and Hélisenne are banished to locations unknown to their suitors, who assume the task of finding them. In both novels, there is a visit to the Underworld. And all four lovers die, but are finally reunited in the Elysian fields. Careful comparison will reveal that the two authors have a different treatment of and a different attitude towards the events that they report.

13. For clarity, I shall refer to the author of the Angoisses as Marguerite de Briet, and to the narrator and character as Hélisenne de Crenne.

14. Jean Frappier, “Les Romans de la Table Ronde et les lettres en France au XVI^e siècle,” Romance Philology (1965), xix, 178-193.

15. See Demats, p. ix.

16. See the classification of Arthur Tilley, “The Prose Romances of Chivalry,” Studies in the Renaissance (Cambridge, England, The University Press, 1922), 12-15.

17. I exempt Perceval, whose special mystical orientation puts it in a class by itself, and with which the Angoisses has nothing in common.

18. Ysaie le Triste (Paris, Galliot du Pré, 1522).

19. Meliadus de Leonnoys (Paris, Denis Janot, 1532).

20. Perceforest (Paris, Galliot du Pré, 1528), 6 vols.

21. Cedric Edward Pickford, L'Evolution du roman Arthurien en prose vers la fin du moyen âge (Paris, A. G. Nizet, 1959).

22. In one instance, the author of Ysaie le Triste resolves the dilemma posed by the confrontation of two equally brave knights by having one of them (Marc, Ysaie's son) suddenly contract an illness. Marc yields to his opponent (his father), but he clarifies his submission: “Marc dist, sachez que je ne me rends point de cueur vaincu, mais maladie m'est sourprinse tel que ayder je ne me puis” (f. cxvii^v).

23. The principle of “entrelacement” operating in medieval romances was first suggested by Ferdinand Lot in his Etude sur le Lancelot en prose (Paris, Librairie ancienne Honoré Champion, 1918), chapter two. More recently this has been discussed by Eugène Vinaver in The Rise of Romance (New York, Oxford University Press, 1971), p. 68-98. Essentially, “entrelacement” occurs when the meaning of later episodes depends on what has happened in intervening episodes, even though the same characters may not be involved. What appear on the surface to be digressions are seen, in the final analysis, not to be digressions.

24. Hélisenne de Crenne, Les Angoysses douloureuses qui procedent damours: composees par ma dame Helisenne (N.p., 1538?).

25. Hélisenne writes the “Epistre”; Guénélic takes over the narrative in chapter one.

26. Later in the “Epistre,” Hélisenne seems momentarily to link her book to traditional justifications for novels of chivalry: “J'ay indubitablement foy que l'œuvre presente excitera (non seulement les gentilz hommes modernes) au marcial exercice: mais pour l'advenir stimulera la posterité future d'estre vrays imitateurs d'icelluy” (f. AA2^r). But it becomes clear as one reads into Book II that the proper exercise of knighthood is contingent on the proper attitude towards love—and this is not a factor in the exercise of knighthood in novels of chivalry.

27. Pickford (op. cit.) has observed that there is a disparity between stated purpose and actual content in the fifteenth-century Arthurian romances: “Il est notable que Caxton met en valeur le côté moral et didactique des romans qu'il imprime, sans que ceux-ci témoignent du même souci. Il en est de même dans les romans français. Les prologues qui leur sont ajoutés après coup suggèrent qu'un remaniement approfondi a eu lieu pour mieux faire ressortir l 'idéal chevaleresque” (p. 269).

28. In some respects, Quézinstra's conduct is similar to that of the “Bon Chevalier mondain” appearing in ms. 112 described by Pickford (op. cit.). This hero is entirely committed to knighthood, and does not fall in love (p. 217-218). This is a type of knight I did not find in the three novels I considered.

29. Book III also contains condemnations of sensual love—and this recurring theme unifies the novel as a whole. In the preamble to Book III, Hélisenne, who again briefly assumes the role of narrator, says: “A cesle heure plus fort suis provocquée à vous instiguer à la resistence contre vostre sensualité: qui est une bataille difficile à superer …” (f. AAA2^r). Near the end of the book, on the point of death, Hélisenne urges Guénélic: “Si jusqu'à present d'une amour sensuel tu m'as aymée, desirant l'accomplissement de tes inutiles desirs, à ceste heure de telles vaynes pensées il te faut desister. Et davant que tu as aymé le corps, sois doresnavant amateur de l'ame par charitable dilection. Et donne telle correction à ta vie, que le venin de la concupiscence ne te prive de la possession de ceste divine heritaige qui nous est promise” (f. DDD5^r).

30. Rosemund Tuve, Allegorical Imagery. Some Medieval Books and Their Posterity (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1966), p. 371.

31. It is perhaps of interest to remind the reader that a fine medieval example of the interference of love in the exercise of knightly duties is furnished by Chrétien de Troyes' Erec et Enide (Les Romans de Chrétien de Troyes … I, Erec et Enide, ed. Mario Roques, Paris, Champion, 1955). I quote below the famous description of Erec's defection:

    Mes tant l'ama Frec d'amors
    Que d'armes mes ne li chaloit,
    Ne a tornoiemant n'aloit,
    N'avoit mes soing de tornoiier;
    A sa fame aloit donoiier,
    De li fist s'amie et sa drue.
    Tot mist cuer et s'antandue
    An li acoler et beisier.

    (v. 2434-2441)

    The situation in Erec et Enide is different, however, from that in the Angoisses. Erec and Enide marry, and Erec's final goal is to be a good knight.

32. See the second quotation in footnote 29.

33. Wording for some of the attacks on sensual love comes from the French translation of Il Peregrino (supra). But in this Italian novel, sensual love is a decorative theme. The hero's success as a suitor and an adventurer in no way depends on a rejection of sensuality. And in no way does sensuality determine the outcome of events, or affect the significance of events. Neither Pérégrin or Genèvre is to blame for an ancient feud between the two families, or for false rumors spread about Pérégrin (which result in Genèvre's temporary rejection of Pérégrin. The theme of sensual love is also linked to a denunciation of women, becoming thereby more a criticism of the sex than of the sin. A canon by the name of Matthieu says to Pérégrin: “Tu ne dois croire que estant en ceste volupté jamais tu te puisses adjoindre à chose aucune vertueuse ne prouffitable … Toutes les passions en absence cesseront: mais en presence tant croistront qu'elles te conduyront à ceste extreme misere … laisses le cultivage de la concupiscence & entends à choses grandes & glorieuses … voys quelle vileté & scandale est de commettre & le corps, & l'ame à ung feminin empire: lequel est toujours de raison privé” (ff. II4^v-JJ1^r).

34. It would be an oversimplification to say that abandonment to sensual love is the only aspect of Guénélic's character that affects outcome of event. Guénélic's indiscretion has also been a contributing factor in Hélisenne's banishment. Guénélic describes his early relationship with Hélisenne: “Desja deux foys avoit Phebus le zodiaque enluminé, depuis que m'estoye laissé superer par le fils de Venus, & pour ce, comme fastidié de tant de vaines sollicitudes, par impatience: Je commencay à increper ma dame, luy attribuant le vice d'ingratitude. Non obstant je continoye ma poursuyte, en sorte que par mon inconstance, je donnay manifeste demonstrance à son mary de la chose où je pretendoye. Quoy voyant sans dilation il la feit absenter, comme il est bien amplement exhibé au premier livre de ses angoisses” (ff. AA5^v-AA6^r).

35. Gustave Reynier (op. cit.) dubbed the Angoisses France's first sentimental novel on the basis of Book I alone.