Arthurian novel

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Arthurian novel is a literary genre that includes various works by the authors Chrétien de Troyes , Hartmann von Aue and Ulrich von Zatzikhoven . Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival is counted under the designation "Arthurian Grail novel " as well as the so-called post-classical Arthurian novels by the authors Wirnt von Grafenberg , Heinrich von dem Türlin , Der Stricker , Der Pleier and Konrad von Stoffeln . The numerous works of the various authors have in common the fact that the legendary King Arthur and his knights of the round table always form the central point of reference of the plot, which is also the reason for the name of the genre.

Origin and Distribution

The Frenchman Chrétien de Troyes (1135–1188), who created the novels Erec et Enide , Cligès , Yvain , Lancelot and Perceval , which can be described as the classic works of the genre, is considered to be the founder of the Arthurian novel . Chrétien made use of Celtic narrative material, which was first widely distributed around 1136 by Geoffrey von Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae , which was created as an ideal image and warning for the English state. The adaptation by Wace , who around 1155 with the Roman de Brut, dressed the historical material in a courtly context, contributed to the popularity. However, it is disputed whether Chrétien was able to draw from the oral traditions of Celtic stories in addition to Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae . However, there is no doubt that Chrétien knew the aforementioned work of Wace. As Kurt Ruh notes, some of Wace's conceptions were changed in Chrétien's work:

  • In Wace's work, King Arthur, conceived as a military leader and conqueror, is transformed into a passive ruler who is concerned with balancing interests and serves the heroes of the plot more as an inspiration than as the actual protagonist of the plot.
  • National references have been given up at Chrétien in favor of a fairytale ideal society. This is also reflected in the image of King Arthur, who, in contrast to the classic role of king in Wace, surrounds himself with a group of equal knights (round table).
  • Even the army battles relevant for a historical-national conception have given way to the representation of the adventures of individual knights in Chrétien

Historical context

More recent research assumes that the propagation of the Arthurian tradition can be traced back to interests in rule and power (Gottzmann, Carola: 1989, p. 7). Henry I of England (1068–1135) spread the material to curb the glorification of Charlemagne in France. Even Henry II. Of England took this approach to, made sure that emerged at his court significant Arthurian seals, and had even looking for the bones of King Arthur.

Distribution in Europe

The translation of Chrétiens Erec by Hartmann von Aue around 1180 and of Yvain around 1200, which heralded the creation of the German Arthurian novel, paved the way for the European distribution of the Arthurian novel. Hartmann's motives for adapting the material are just as little known as the identity of his client. It is believed, however, that a high aristocratic family is responsible for this; here the houses of the Zähringer and the Guelphs come into consideration. Although Hartmann was strongly based on Chrétien's guidelines, great variations can be seen in the translation of the classical novels: “While Chrétien's novel has 6,958 verses, Hartmann's Erec has 10,135 verses (plus 46 percent); Chrétiens Yvain has 6,818 verses compared to 8,166 verses in Iwein Hartmanns (plus 20 percent). ”Taking into account a less literary audience in Germany, Hartmann reduced the direct speech of the characters in favor of an expanded narrative role. The clearer accentuation of contrasts at Hartmann can be cited as a further facilitation of reception. This can be seen, for example, in the translation of Erec : The Enite family is represented much poorer than in Chrétien's original, "the house a ruin, the girl dressed worse, the father's weapons old and unfashionable."

Overall, the history of the German Arthurian novel can be divided into three phases, which are based on the textual traditions: The first phase with 5 works extends from 1180 to 1215, the second phase with 11 works lasts the entire 13th century and extends into 14th century, the third phase finally ends in the 15th century.

Even if the greatest popularity of the genus is to be found in England, France and Germany, the Arthurian novel also extended to Italy, where Rusticiano da Pisa wrote Meliadus, the first Arthurian novel around 1275, which preceded the heyday of the genus in the country in the 14th century Century forms. Arthurian novels were also written in Holland in the 13th and 14th centuries, and a little later, in the 14th and 15th centuries, then also in Spain and Portugal. Even if the thematic and content-related basic conception is the same throughout Europe, Carola Gottzmann notes that the distribution can be divided into four different types of poetry, which were mainly represented in the various countries “1. Chronicle (England, France, Spain); 2. Versepik (common in all countries except Sweden and at all times); 3. Prose novels (popular books, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and the Nordic saga literature are subsumed here); 4. Ballads. (in Scandinavia, England, Spain) "

Generic specific

“An item can only be within or outside of a genre limit. Ambiguous assignments are not possible. The criterion for the assignment is the presence of certain features that are determined to be typical for the text genre. In a rigorous application of the principles, all the characteristics must be present; If one of the characteristics is missing, an assignment is no longer possible. At the same time, it applies that all copies of a genre that can be assigned in this way are the same, in the sense that they all have the set of characteristics that are typical for the text genre. "

In order to assign the works of different authors, as outlined by Doris Tophinke, to the genre of the Arthurian novel, it is necessary to examine some characteristics. In the following, therefore, the role conception of King Arthur and the essential genre-specific structural feature, the double path, will be dealt with.

Figure King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table

When Chrétien de Troyes wrote the classic Arthurian novel Erec et Enide , there were already oral accounts of the character King Arthur from which he could draw. One of the earliest written mentions can be found in the Historia Brittonum , which is said to have originated in Wales around 830. There it is reported that Arthur successfully led twelve battles against the Saxons in the 5th century . Overall, however, the image of the king in European literature is very diverse: Arthur is portrayed as a warrior, exemplary king and holy and as a pale ruler. His character is represented from cowardly to fearless, quick-tempered and angry on the one hand and balancing and amiable on the other. The kingdom of the king can be localized from Britain to Brittany, which is shown by the naming of the place names of his court castles: Carduel , Cardigan , Caerleon , Nantes and others. Arthur is not a ruler in the traditional sense, he is only "the first of the same in principle", which makes the conception of the round table clear, at which the noblest and bravest knights gather to decide together like "law, truth, faith and justice “Can be defended. (The concept was already used by Augustus , see primus inter pares .) Hilkert Weddige, however, does not want the round table to be understood as “anticipating democratic equality”, rather it is a meeting of an elite into which only those who are accepted are accepted I qualified for it through special merit and honor. The content of the Arthurian novel is characterized by the portrayal of the king: The “representative perfected courtly knighthood ” does not become active in the novel itself, but acts as a haven of calm that gives the actual protagonists of the respective works the opportunity to emigrate to foreign territories and thus the Opportunity to gain fame and honor. With this, Arthur “embodies the ideal of a static order in the courtly world.” The king is the model of the action and its “guarantor”, as Volker Mertens calls it, which can mean the genre-constituting function of Arthur.

Explanations using the example of Erec von Hartmann von Aue

Hartmanns von Aue Erec is considered one of the classics of German Arthurian literature, which is why this work is intended to serve as an explanatory basis for the representation of a genre specific, the double-path structure.

Synopsis Erec

The novel begins with the hunt for the white stag, which King Arthur traditionally holds at Easter. Since the protagonist of the novel, Erec fils du roi Lac [Erec the son of King Lac], has not yet had an adventure and is therefore not allowed to take part in the deer hunt, he accompanies King Arthur's wife on a ride. There Erec, the queen and a lady of the court meet a dwarf and a knight (vv. 1-40). The queen wishes to know the name of the knight and sends her lady-in-waiting to find out. The dwarf, however, blocks her way and beats her with a whip (v. 50-60). Thereupon Erec tries to find out the name of the knight, but is also defeated by the dwarf (vv. 90-100). Since Erec does not carry his weapons with him, he cannot avenge the insult by the dwarf and the knight in whose care the dwarf is, which causes him great shame. He then decides to ride after the knight and the dwarf in order to take revenge on them later (v. 135). Since his armor is out of reach, he rides unarmed (v. 150). The strange knight and his dwarf reach the Tulmein castle of Duke Imain, who is holding the traditional sparrow hawk fight there (v. 175-200).

Since the knight and the dwarf stop in the castle, Erec also looks for a place to stay in the area and reaches the poor dwelling of Koralus (v. 300), which Koralus lives with his wife Karsefine and his daughter Enite. Koralus' uncle is the Imain who organizes the castle festival (v.300-435). Erec learns from Koralus that the knight he was pursuing is called Ider and is held in high esteem throughout the country (v. 460). After Erec found out about the Sparrowhawk Fight competition, he decides to take part in it to avenge Ider for the disgrace inflicted on him. He asks Koralus daughter Enite, whose beauty overwhelms him, to accompany him (vv. 500-510). In addition, he borrows weapons and armor from Koralus and sets out for the castle the next day (v. 600-630). When Erec and Enite enter the scene of the Sperberkamp at the castle and see the bird, Erec asks his companion to take the sparrowhawk and thus challenges Ider's anger, who claims the sparrowhawk for himself (v. 680-725) . Thereupon there comes a fight between Erec and Ider, from which Erec emerges victorious (v. 765-950). Since Erec avenged the dwarf's lash by defeating Ider, he has mercy and gives Ider his life (v. 1010).

However, he obliges Ider, together with his dwarf, to travel to the court of King Arthur and there report of his defeat and to repent, which he does (vv. 1080-1245). Because Erec has accomplished so great, the society at Tulmein Castle decides to give him the highest praise and announces, "There is no doubt that he is the best who has ever come to the country" (v. 1285-1307). Then Erec and Enite set off for the Artus Court. On the journey the two fall in love (v. 1395–1680). On arrival at Artus Court, the beauty of Enite causes astonishment among the assembled knights (v. 1725–1785).

See also: → Sparrowhawk fight .

A little later, Erec and Enite marry at the Artus Court, after the extended wedding celebration a tournament is held in the course of which Erec emerges as the victor and gains great fame (v. 1885–2860). Erec now decides to travel with his wife to his homeland Destregales (capital: Karnant), where the two become king and queen (v. 2860-2920).

Erec and Enite settle down there, which is expressed by the fact that the two spend whole days in bed and as a result Erec no longer fulfills his duties as a knight (2928-3000). The court society begins to blaspheme about this situation, which Queen Enite hears. She is very sad about this and secretly begins to complain (v. 3030). Erec forces his wife to tell him what she is complaining about and then secretly decides to go on the Aventiure trip [adventure trip] in order to restore his good reputation (v. 3035-3090). Because Enite has secretly complained about the lost honor of Erecs, he orders her to accompany him on the Aventiure voyage and orders her to remain silent (v. 3094-3103). Shortly after the start of the journey, the two cross a forest in which robbers are ambushing them. Since Erec does not seem to notice the robbers, Enite warns him and thereby breaks her command of silence (v. 3120-3185). Erec defeats the robbers, but punishes Enite - only a little later the course of events repeats itself, robbers lurk again, Enite warns her husband for the second time and is punished again (v. 3220-3430).

In the further course of the journey, Erec and Enite arrive at a castle that is ruled by a powerful count (v. 3475). Erec declines an invitation from the count to spend the night at the castle, and the two spend the night in an inn. The count goes there and tries to force Enite behind Erecs' back to become his wife. Enite outwits the count and flees with Erec in the night (v. 3730-4025). The next day the two meet King Guivrez, and a fight ensues between him and Erec, from which Erec emerges victorious (v. 4320-4445). In the fight with Guivrez, Erec is badly wounded and visibly weakened. He meets Keie and Gawain, who want to persuade him to stop off at Artus Court. Erec refuses, but through a trick the two succeed in getting Erec to be received by the Arthurian Society, where he is healed from his injuries and recovers (vv. 4629-5250). Erec finds that his honor has still not been restored and therefore, as soon as his wounds have healed, he decides to leave Arthur's court again (v. 5275) and rides into the unknown with Enite (v. 5290).

A short time later, Erec hears the complaints of the wife of the knight Cardoc off the path. She tells him that her husband has been kidnapped by two giants and is now being tortured to death, whereupon Erec decides to come to Cardoc's aid (v. 5295-5371). When Erec found Cardoc and saw how much the giants torment him, "the knight's torment moved his heart so violently" that, although the giants looked very threatening, he could not let them get away with it (v. 5429-5433). In a difficult battle Erec defeats the giants and brings Cardoc back to his wife, whereupon the latter decides to ride to King Arthur to report on the heroic deeds Erec accomplished (v. 5435-5700).

The fight cost Erec so much strength that he passed out from his horse in front of Enite's eyes and she believed that he was dying. She decided to commit suicide (v. 5720-6113). She is prevented from doing this by Count Oringels, who rides up and snatches the sword into which she wants to throw herself (v. 6115). Since Oringels also assumes that Erec is dead, and he is overwhelmed by the beauty of Enite, he takes her to his castle to marry her. Since she refuses, he forces her to marry (v. 6195-6590). During the wedding supper, Enite begins to complain so loudly that Erec wakes up from his coma and escapes with Enite from Oringel's court, then the two reconcile and Erec, due to the great loyalty that Enite has shown him, revokes his vow of silence (v. 6595-6794). King Guivrez learns that Erecs and Enite have escaped from Oringels' court and rides out to protect them, fearing that Oringels will pursue them. When he meets Erec in the forest, they do not recognize each other and mistakenly fight each other. In this fight Erec is defeated by Guivrez (v. 6815-6945). When the misunderstanding clears up, they both apologize and Guivrez leads Erec and Enite to Penefrec Castle so that Erec can recover (v. 6995-7235).

After more than a fortnight, Guivrez and Erec and Enite decide to travel to King Arthur, but since Guivrez accidentally takes the wrong path, the tour company ends up in Brandigan (v. 7788-7825). Guivrez warns Erec that there is an Aventiure in the vicinity of the castle that is so difficult that a knight has never returned from there, and repeatedly asks Erec to turn back, but Erec decides to undertake the adventure finally to restore his reputation (v. 7912-8047). The so-called “Joie de la curt” event is explained to Erec at the castle: the knight Mabonagrin, whom a knight has never been able to defeat, lives with his wife in a tree garden near the castle (v. 8475-8480). Erec decides to take on the fight and is confident that if he wins, he will gain a higher reputation than ever before (v. 8527-8558). When he enters the tree garden the next day, he sees a circle of oak stakes on which are the heads of those who have failed the adventure before him. As he continues, he comes to a tent in which he sees Mabonagrin's wife (v. 8769-8930). Finally Erec and Mabonagrin meet, the fight begins, victory belongs to Erec (v. 9011-9340). After the fight, Erec lets Mabonagrin live (v. 9385) and goes up to the castle, where a lavish festival is celebrated in his honor (v. 9770). Finally, Erec goes back to Artus Court and takes the widows who previously lived in Brandigan Castle with him to look after them at Artus Court (v. 9875). At the Artus Court, the society agrees that Erec has received the greatest honor by defeating Mabonagrin (v. 9885-9898). The novel ends with Erec and Enite returning to their homeland, the kingdom of Karadigan (v. 9996).

Two-way structure

In classical Arthurian research, the so-called two-way structure is an essential, genus-specific, meaningful structural feature. The main founders of this approach are Wilhelm Kellermann, Hugo Kuhn , Erich Köhler, Walter Haug , Rainer Warning, Volker Mertens , Christoph Courmeau and Hans Fromm . The latter summarized the importance of the two-way structure for analysis and understanding of the Arthurian novels as follows:

“The structural sense of the novel is fulfilled in the thought of the double way. The hero, undressed to make a name for himself, conquers êre and the splendor of the world by gaining a woman and in a chivalrous act. Arthur receives him among his own; it fulfills the demands made by the institution. In a flash, guilt, knowledge of guilt or accusation break down on the raised, and on a second path - the longues tudes, meaningful aventiure and profound self-understanding, what has been lost - Frau Herrschaft und Heil - must be acquired again, now to permanent possession.

Considered more deeply, the purpose of this text structure is to make it clear that an error on the part of the acting subject leads to the previously achieved ideal state [of honor, wife and country] being lost and this can only be regained permanently through a changed self-image. This changed self-image of the subject is achieved through the confrontation with difficult challenges [aventiures], which are, however, more complex and take more time than on the first Aventiure voyage through which the previous ideal state was achieved. If the first Aventiure voyage was only about proving that the hero is personally brave and honorable enough to be accepted into the Artus Court, the second voyage is marked by the hero joining the third party and stands by those in need of help, acting out of altruistic motives, so to speak. "Tried and tested on all sides, consolidated and tested, the hero can return to Artus Court."

From an interpretative point of view, the double sequence of the aventiurs demonstrates the "mutual relationship between the individual and society [...] The service for the community also offers the possibility of individual advancement." so in the repetition. An “outstanding achievement of the classical Arthurian epic” consists in conceiving the external action in such a way that the inner, subject-related problems of the hero [misbehavior] become clear through the stations of the Aventiure paths.

Deviating from the terminology of the double path, Sieburg speaks in his introduction of an N-structure as the basic scheme of the plot, "because the form of the letter N very concisely illustrates the rise, fall and renewed rise of the protagonist." However, he also states in the course of his explanations that this scheme can by far not be found in all novels that are assigned to Arthurian epic.

Two-way structure in the Erec

As already indicated, the classic Arthurian novels can essentially be divided into two parts: The first part of the plot includes the ascent of the hero, followed by the crisis, which is then overcome in the second part of the plot, making the hero's reputation greater than ever before. It is no different in Hartmann von Aues Erec . The humiliation by the dwarf with the whip right at the beginning of the novel happens to him himself, he is personally humiliated and feels ashamed.

"As imder giselslac schach, with greater shame he rides against".
(Vv. 109-110)

"When the lash hit him , he rode back in great shame."

With his courage, Erec manages to avenge this very personal insult to his person very quickly, which brings him great fame.

"From these maeren dô vil herzelîchen vrô [...] and daz in sîn êrestiu became knighthood with praiseworthy healing power iedoch alsô even energy"
(v. 1260-1268)

" Arthur and the Queen were delighted with this story with all their hearts [...] And his first knightly adventure brought him such glorious and happy success ,"

At this point, the first part of the novel is completed according to the two-way structure, because the protagonist has mastered an adventure through personal commitment and comes to great fame. This would be a very simple act, if the fame that he had gained was not followed by the crisis that cost Erec all his reputation: He becomes lazy and spends the days in bed with Enite, which means that he can no longer fulfill his duties as a knight can.

“Erec wente sînen lîp grôzes done by sîn wîp. he minnete sô sêre daz er all êre through si a verphlac, unz that he sô even verlac that no one thought ûf in dignity ”
(vv. 2966–2973)

“Erec got used to great comfort because of his wife. He loved her so intensely that he gave up his entire position of honor for her sake, until he was just lazy in bed, so that no one showed him any more respect . "

and further

“Because one spoke in ê sô wol, daz stiffened ze shame against those who discovered in: in schalt diu werlt even. sîn hof were barbarous and stuont after shame ”
(vv. 2985–2990)

“However much he had been praised in the past, that had turned into contempt with those who knew him. Everyone spoke badly of him. His court was empty of all joys and fell into disrepute "

As a result of this loss of honor, Erec now feels compelled to embark on new adventures in order to prove that he is worthy of the knighthood. Without taking the double path into account, this course could also be described as linear: the adventure is followed by the wedding and after a while, the story continues with new adventures. The meaning of these first passed exams and the subsequent crisis, however, only emerge when considering the two-way structure. After all, the adventures that exist on this second path are of a completely different nature. In the episode of Help for Cardoc, there is a change in Erec's motivation to act. If he was injured and humiliated by the whip of the dwarf in the first part of the plot, which prompted him to act, he is now not affected himself and puts himself in danger to help others. “Erec breaks away from his self-sufficient, self-centered behavior and does social deeds; as an exemplary knight he protects the weak and the afflicted. "

“Vrouwe, through got says an, waz is daz ir weeping and how sît ir sus united in this forest? by got say soon whether I may come i uze "
(v. 5339-5344)

“Mistress, tell me by God why you are crying and why you are all alone in this forest? For God's sake, tell me quickly if I can help you. "

The behavior of the giants, against whom he must fight in the following, also reflects his negative, anti-court behavior in a different way, because the giants “brâchen vaste ritters reht” (v. 5412) “violated chivalrous rules” by making one defenseless Knights [Cardoc] beat bloodily without him having harmed them and without this being proportionate. Erec was not guilty of the same offenses, but he too behaved rudely by neglecting his knightly duties and lazing around. With the explicit mention of the unknightly behavior of the giants and Erec's fight against them, the impression is conveyed that the "new" Erec fights in the second part of the plot to a certain extent against his own offenses from the first part of the plot. Here, too, there is a meaning-constructing link between the first and second part of the novel, provided that the analysis is based on the two-way structure. It is noteworthy that the situation is similar later, during the battle of Erecs against Mabonagrin, because Mabonagrin "[...] gruozte in a part vaste gelîch an evil man." (V. 9025-9026) "[...] greeted him very roughly like a ignoble ” . Here, too, Erec not only fights against a physically powerful opponent, but also against rude behavior. The self-critical purification of Erec is even explicitly mentioned some time after the successful fight against the knights.

"Sît da I tumber man ie of dullness muot gewab sô grôzer unmâze"
(v. 7012-7014)

"Since I stupidly assumed such arrogance out of stupidity "

The change in self-image of the hero mentioned by Frank Roßnagel during the second Aventiure voyage is expressed here. Because, despite the purification and unselfish acts, Erec's honor has still not been restored, his joy is all the greater when he encounters the adventure with Mabonagrin. Because this test promises - if successfully passed - to compensate for his misconduct.

"Wan daz i seeks riding in great uncertainty, unzdaz me in nû vunden hân"
(v. 8524-8526)

"So I rode around searching in complete uncertainty until I found him."

"Guote sî lop, nû hân I ez vunden dâ I against tûsent phunden dare a phenninc"
(v. 8534-8536)

"Thank God, now I've found that where I bet a penny for a thousand pounds " [meaning the use of his low reputation against the possibility of achieving great fame in the event of victory]

"That I like to dare mac mîne sick êre, daz diu hie mêre daz I gar ze praise stê"
(v. 8555-8558)

"That is why I will gladly put my low reputation at risk so that it will grow here, so that I will be highly praised"

The conclusion of the second part of the plot then leads to the regaining of Erec's fame and honor, whereby the reputation now acquired exceeds its previous one.

"He daz ze the pinch waiting geseit daz of Grozer manheit nieman ze the werlde would tiurre or baz genaeme, wan never manne of the land sô Groz dinc would be purchased by Richer Aventiure"
(V. 9892-9898)

"By saying to his fame that no one has yet been born who possessed such great bravery, nobility and courtesy, because no one in the world has grown out of such a wonderful event."

Criticism of the two-way structure

In the more recent Arthurian research, criticism was expressed of the structural model of the double path according to Kurt Ruh and Hugo Kuhn and it was questioned whether the double path structure is the royal path of the Arthurian analysis. Matthias Meyer, for example, advocates not concentrating solely on the structuralist approach when looking at the material, but also keeping an eye on the protagonist's identity. He cites the different character conceptions in Erec and Iwein as an example : In contrast to the figure of Erec, Iwein gains a significantly sharper profile, especially in the second part of the plot, than ever was the case with Erec. He sees the reason for this in the fact that the structure of the double path alone was no longer sufficient to captivate the audience, which is why the protagonist's identity was honed in the Iwein , which appeared after the Erec . If only the two-way structure is used as a basis for the analysis and assessment of these two Arthurian novels, this detail is more or less neglected, since it would be possible at most to compare the structure of the two epics, while the conception of the protagonists is of secondary importance in this analysis would. In addition, the structuralist approach denies the characters a “psychological depth dimension”, since they are only integrated into the structure on which, according to the theory of the two-way structure, the actual focus is directed.

Elisabeth Schmid also criticizes the fact that the two-way structure has received “canonical validity” in Arthurian research. Her criticism focuses above all on the dogmatic application of the two-way scheme by Ruh and Kuhn, which she makes clear using the example of the Parzival novel. After the two-way structure, it is essential that the protagonist stops again at Artushof shortly before the end, or that the novel even ends there. Because this is not the case with Parzival , the strict supporters of the two-way structure concluded that the fragment should probably be twice as long and that the final scene did not take place at the Artus Court because the novel was not finished. Schmid criticizes the fact that the strict application of the two-way structure does not allow an author to deviate “from the construction plan once created”. In addition, according to the two-way structure, Erec's second fight against Guivrez must be classified in the second phase of action, in which the hero acts mainly for altruistic motives and, above all, fights to help others. However, this attitude cannot be seen in the second Guivrez fight, which suggests that the details of the two-way structure are imprecise and that some courses of action cannot be satisfactorily explained. Frank Ringeler correctly states: "Despite years of efforts by Medieval literature studies on the genre Arthurian novel, it does not seem to have succeeded in adequately describing the poetics of the genre [...]."

See also


  • Michael Baldzuhn: Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. Lecture notes. University of Hamburg; Hamburg 2009.
  • Barbara Frank, Thomas Haye, Doris Tophinke (eds.): Genres of medieval writing (= ScriptOralia, 99). Narr, Tübingen 1997, ISBN 3-8233-5409-4 .
  • Hans Fromm: Work on German literature of the Middle Ages. Niemeyer, Tübingen 1989, ISBN 3-484-10630-1 .
  • Carola L. Gottzmann: Arthurian poetry (= Metzler Collection, Vol. 249). Metzler, Stuttgart 1989, ISBN 3-476-10249-1 .
  • Volker Mertens (ed.), Hartmann von Aue: Erec. Middle High German / New High German (= Reclams Universal Library, 18530). Reclam, Stuttgart 2008, ISBN 978-3-15-018530-8 .
  • Matthias Meyer: Structure and person in the Arthurian novel. In: Friedrich Wolfschrift, Peter Ihring (ed.): Narrative structures of Arthurian literature. Research history and new approaches. Niemeyer, Tübingen 1999, ISBN 3-484-64010-3 , pp. 145-163.
  • Frank Ringeler: On the conception of the protagonist identity in the German Arthurian novel around 1200. Aspects of a genre poetics (= European university writings series 1, German language and literature, 1752). Lang, Frankfurt am Main 2000, ISBN 3-631-35379-0 (also: Dissertation University of Bonn, 1999).
  • Frank Roßnagel: The German Arthurian epic in transition. The development of Hartmann from Aue to Pleier (= Helfant studies, page 11). Helfant-Ed., Stuttgart 1996, ISBN 3-929030-41-1 (also: Dissertation University of Stuttgart).
  • Kurt Ruh: Courtly epic of the German Middle Ages. Part 1: From the beginnings to Hartmann von Aue (= basics of German studies, 7). 2., verb. Ed. E. Schmidt, Berlin 1977, ISBN 3-503-01252-4 .
  • Elisabeth Schmid: Away with the double way. Against a matter of course for Germanic Arthurian research. In: Friedrich Wolfschrift, Peter Ihring (ed.): Narrative structures of Arthurian literature. Research history and new approaches. Niemeyer, Tübingen 1999, ISBN 3-484-64010-3 , pp. 69-85.
  • Heinz Sieburg: Literature of the Middle Ages (= Academy Study Books Literary Studies ). Akademie Verlag, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-05-004414-9 .
  • Doris Tophinke: On the problem of the genre limit. Possibilities of a prototype theoretical solution. In: Barbara Frank, Thomas Haye, Doris Tophinke (eds.): Generations of medieval writing (= ScriptOralia, 99). Narr, Tübingen 1997, ISBN 3-8233-5409-4 .
  • Hilkert Weddige: Introduction to German Medieval Studies (= C.-H.-Beck degree ). 9th, through Beck, Munich 2017, ISBN 978-3-406-67072-5 .
  • Friedrich Wolficket: Doppelweg and biography. In: Friedrich Wolfschrift, Peter Ihring (ed.): Narrative structures of Arthurian literature. Research history and new approaches. Niemeyer, Tübingen 1999, ISBN 3-484-64010-3 , pp. 118-141.
  • Friedrich Wolfschrift, Peter Ihring (ed.): Narrative structures of the Arthurian literature. Research history and new approaches. Niemeyer, Tübingen 1999, ISBN 3-484-64010-3 .

Individual evidence

  1. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 5f.
  2. Gottzmann, Carola L .: 1989, p. 1.
  3. Weddige, Hilkert: 2008, p. 195.
  4. Ruh, Kurt: 1977, p. 99.
  5. Weddige, Hilkert: 2008, p. 192ff.
  6. Ruh, Kurt: 1977, p. 100ff.
  7. Gottzmann, Carola L .: 1989, p. 7.
  8. Weddige, Hilkert: 2008, pp. 194f.
  9. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 10.
  10. ^ Sieburg, Heinz: 2010, p. 124
  11. ^ Sieburg, Heinz: 2010, p. 126.
  12. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 53.
  13. Gottzmann, Carola L .: 1989, p. 8f.
  14. Gottzmann, Carola L .: 1989, p. 8f.
  15. Gottzmann, Carola L .: 1989, p. 3.
  16. Tophinke, Doris: 1997, p. 163f.
  17. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 9.
  18. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 19.
  19. Gottzmann, Carola L .: 1989, p. 2.
  20. Ruh, Kurt: 1977, p. 97.
  21. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 10.
  22. Hilkert, Weddige: 2008, pp. 204ff.
  23. Mertens, Volker: 1998, p. 14.
  24. Aue, Hartmann von; Mertens, Volker: 2008 - in the following all verses refer to this edition. Note d. A.
  25. Wolfzettel, Friedrich: 1999 S. 199th
  26. ^ Fromm, Hans: 1989, p. 122.
  27. ^ Roßnagel, Frank: 1996, p. 18.
  28. Ruh, Kurt: 1977, p. 96.
  29. Weddige, Hilkert: 2008, p. 197.
  30. ^ Roßnagel, Frank: 1996, p. 18.
  31. ^ Sieburg, Heinz: 2010, p. 129
  32. ^ Sieburg, Heinz: 2010, p. 130
  33. Weddige, Hilkert: 2008, p. 199.
  34. Meyer, Matthias: 1999, p. 156.
  35. Schmid, Elisabeth: 1999, p. 69.
  36. Schmid, Elisabeth: 1999, p. 76.
  37. ^ Schmid, Elisabeth: 1999, p. 78.
  38. Ringeler, Frank: 2000, p. 2.