Scott 1 Matthew Scott Dr. Keyne Cheshire Humanities 151: Ancient World through the Middle Ages 22 April 2005 Window to a Culture: The Message Within the Song of Roland Texts from the past are sometimes the window to the values and ideals of Western cultures that would otherwise have been forgotten a long time ago, and the Song of Roland is such a text. In the scholarly pursuit to cover the entire spectrum of history, The Chanson de Roland is the window to the culture of 778 CE France, but this window is less clear than that of Virgil or Homer. Lines between the Warrior Code values of Ancient Greek and Germanic cultures, and the increasingly influential and political Christian Church values of Humility and Penitence were becoming blurred, and the lines are even harder to discern for present day scholars. The Poet Author of the Chanson de Roland was using the story (meant to be transmitted orally) for the purpose of conveying a message to his mediaeval audience; this much scholars can agree on. Contained within the poets message is a better insight into the values of Roland and Charlemagne’s times, and if this insight were obtained it would help scholars to better understand the progression of Western thought. There is, however, debate about what the unknown Poet Author’s message was, and the debate is making any conclusions about the mediaeval audience illusive. Alain Renoir and D. D. R. Owen are two scholars with different ideas about what the Poet Author had to say, and both ideas came about through insights into the character of Roland. What governed Roland’s actions? This is a legitimate question to ask of any leader that sacrifices his life as well as the lives of his twenty-thousand soldiers against impossible odds,

Scott 2 and with help just an olifant call away. Roland was established as a confusing character through his decision on the battlefield, but that decision was not the first glimpse of his psyche, and scholars analyzing the text to discover his motives find that the patterns in his behavior tell the story. Roland hastily accepted the command of the rear guard, and turned down the extra men Charlemagne offered (Roland 59. 753) (Roland 63. 787-791). Even when he denied Olivier’s plea to call for aid, Roland did not stray far from his pattern of earlier behavior (Roland 85. 1073-1075). He was lauded by his men, and he was a skilled warrior loyal to Charlemagne, both of which are traits worth noting, but these traits did not save him or his men. What could a poet author be trying to convey by using a character like Roland? Alain Renoir looks at the time period of Roland and Charlemagne as having been a kind of coming about for the Christian church. Charlemagne was, after all, the first Holy Roman Emperor. There was even the portable archbishop Turpin, who may as well have been the greatest of the French soldiers, able to bless as well as fight (Roland 155. 2083-2094). The Christian role of Count Roland, according to Renoir, was to serve as the symbol for redemption from the sin of pride and salvation through newfound humility (Renoir 582). Renoir proposes that Roland was possessed by a great pride that misguided his actions, blinded his judgment, and was ultimately the cause of his downfall. He looks to several PreRoncesvals textual examples to gain insight into the pride that plagued Roland, such as the count’s turning down of the extra men Charlemagne offered, and his mocking of Ganelon’s rage at the council (Renoir 576). He also maintains that the mote of pride over Roland’s eyes was the reason he sacrificed the lives of his men; he could not consider their welfare for thought of death rather than dishonor (578). Renoir follows the progression of events with the theory of Roland’s great pride, and he arrives at the redeeming point in the story. This critical climax was triggered

Scott 3 by Olivier in Laisse 131, when he vented his frustration with their inescapable doom on Roland (Roland 131. 1722-1736). Renoir points out that after this point there is a change in the progression of the story. He notes that after Olivier’s reprieve Roland only spoke once in the next 117 lines, and that was just to acknowledge the archbishop’s command to blow the oliphant (Renoir 579). The next time Roland spoke it seemed as if he was seeing the battlefield covered with the bodies of dead soldiers for the first time. He surveyed the landscape, wishing God’s mercy and a straight path to Paradise for the soldiers that died because of him (Roland 140. 1863). “Roland’s Lament” truly began when Roland realized that the death of his soldiers was his own fault. With Roland’s realization of the situation his pride got him into, Renoir’s picture of the Poet Author’s message is almost complete. Though Roland relinquished his command by admitting his failure, there was still hope that he might redeem himself with a death in the course of fighting alongside his fellow soldiers (Renoir 575). After Laisse 140 and Roland’s realization of error, he led 4 separate charges against the Saracens and killed over 50 before the trumpets of Charlemagne caused them to retreat (Roland 141-158). Once he was alone on the battlefield, there was nothing left for Roland to do but ask the forgiveness of God and enter Paradise (Roland 2383). Renoir concludes that the Poet Author made the character Roland to follow a steady and progressive path from sinful pride to humility and heaven, and as the progression of Roland’s situation brought him to a realization of his desmesure and the resulting cost to his men, his actions reflected the behavior of a man who realized he did something wrong and sought to make it right (Renoir 579). Following Renoir’s conclusions then, the message of the Poet Author was something within the realm of Christian repentance and remission of sins.

Scott 4 After reading the article in Speculum written by Alain Renoir, D. D. R. Owen began to write his own theorem regarding the message of the Poet Author in the Chanson de Roland, and when he finished it was published in Speculum as well. Owens' theory is this: Roland’s actions followed a logical and uniform progression in accordance with his feudal obligations. Owen believes the three main feudal obligations of Roland were devotion to king and country, support of the family unit, and maintenance of personal honor; more importantly, Owen sees Roland’s actions as having nothing to do with Christianity. Owen and Renoir are in agreement regarding the beginning of the Song of Roland. They both believe Roland’s actions at that point in the story were governed by “reckless and outrageous pride (Owen 390).” The divide between the theories of the two scholars comes from Renoir’s claim that Roland had redemption at some point; Owen counters that Roland displayed no Christian motive at any point in the story. In reference to Laisse 140, the basis for Renoir’s argument, Owen points out a passage in Laisse 91 where the words of Roland caused the French army to bond together against the Saracens. Owen believes that Laisse 91 shows both the respect Roland’s men had for him and the love he had for them, and that the mutual love is simply reemphasized in Laisse 140 when Roland saw the soldiers he loved, the men who served him, lying dead on the ground (Owen 393). Choosing to chart the progression of Roland’s actions in accordance with feudal ideals of personal and public honor instead of Christian redemption, Owen finds a more uniform explanation for the actions of Roland and the message of the Poet Author. In Laisse 79, for instance, Roland confirmed the Christian cause to be right, but summed that statement up by saying “I won’t be made into a bad example (Roland 79. 1015-1016).” In Laisse 84 he pleaded with God that his family not reprove him nor France be disgraced (84. 1062-1064). Roland

Scott 5 refused to sound the horn three separate times in Laisse 83-85, and all three are linked to feudal obligations by Owen (Owen 394). Only after enough of the Saracen blood stained Roland’s sword to maintain his own honor as well as that of his family and country (by not technically running away), did he sound the oliphant. As far as Roland’s death and entrance into Paradise, Owen notes that during Roland’s dying prayer, in which he asked for forgiveness of his sins, he made no reference to pride nor to having done anything wrong on the battlefield at all, except perhaps being struck down (Owen 397). His final words contained no reference to a holy cause against the pagans; he simply reflected on France, Charlemagne, and his own accomplishments (Roland 176. 2377-2380). Owen even goes so far as to recall the fact that the archbishop promised Paradise to all of the French soldiers on the battlefield that day (Owen 397). What of the message the Poet Author meant to convey through the Song of Roland? Of course Owen concludes that the message of the Poet Author is approximate to an encouraging of the feudal values. It would be helpful to know what values the Poet Author held in high regard himself; alas, that is a futile thought. Perhaps a merge of the old Warrior cultures and the new Christian cultures fostered a merge of values, and the Warrior-Christian may have become a character everyone could appreciate, from the Holy Roman Emperor to the peasant Poet Author. A Warrior of God as the man of the times; what times they must have been.

Scott 6 Works Cited Owen, D. D. R. “The Secular Inspiration of the Chanson de Roland.” Speculum. Vol. 37, No. 3 (July 1962), 390-400. http://www.jstor.org/ Renoir, Alan. “Roland’s Lament: It’s Meaning and Function in the Chanson de Roland.” Speculum. Vol. 35, No. 4 (Oct., 1960), 572-583. http://www.jstor.org/ The Song of Roland. Trans. and Introduction by Robert Harrison. New American Library: Signet Classic, September 2002.