MITTELLATEINISCHES
JAHRBUCH

Internationale Zeitschrift für Mediävistik und Humanismusforschung

Revue internationale des études du moyen âge et de l'humanisme

International Journal of Medieval and Humanistic Studies

Rivista internazionale di studi medievali e umanistici

Herausgegeben von

Walter Berschin · Brigitte Burrichter · Frank-Rutger Hausmann

Rainer Jakobi · Thomas Klein · Susanne Köbele

Udo Kühne und Clemens Zintzen

BAND 48

JAHRGANG 2013

Heft 1

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

ANTON HIERSEMANN · VERLAG

STUTTGART 2013
Das Mittellateinische Jahrbuch wurde im Jahre 1964 von dem Kölner Mediävisten Karl Langosch begründet und von 1980 bis 2009 von seinem Schüler Fritz Wagner (Freie Universität Berlin) fortgeführt. Seit 2010 liegt die federführende Herausgeberschaft bei Thomas Klein.

Manuskripte für den Aufsatzteil sowie Rezensionsexemplare und deren Besprechungen werden erbeten an eine der folgenden Redaktionen:

Prof. Dr. Thomas Klein, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Seminar für Klassische Altertumswissenschaften, Universitätsplatz 12, D-06108 Halle/Saale.
Email: thomas.klein@altertum.uni-halle.de

Prof. Dr. Udo Kühne, Universität Kiel, Institut für Klassische Altertumskunde, Leibnizstraße 8, D-24118 Kiel. Email: ukuehne@email.uni-kiel.de

Ausführliche Hinweise zur Einrichtung von Manuskripten für das «Mittellateinische Jahrbuch» sind bei den Herausgebern oder beim Verlag abrufbar.

## VORSCHAU AUF AUFSÄTZE IN DEN NÄCHSTEN HEFTEN:

Walther Ludwig, Einträge aus Tübingen, Straßburg, Marburg, Jena und Genf im Stammbuch der Brüder Riedesel zu Eisenbach (1593/98) – Guy Jarousseau, L'hymne «Gloria laus» de Théodulfes d'Orléans, un témoin de la réforme carolingienne – Marek Thue Kretschmer, Literary Appropriations of the Matter of Troy in Medieval Latin Poetry ca. 1070–1770 (Teil 2)

Printed in Germany © 2013 Anton Hiersemann KG, Stuttgart

Alle Rechte vorbehalten, insbesondere die des Nachdrucks und der Übersetzung. Ohne schriftliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es auch nicht gestattet, dieses urheberrechtlich geschützte Werk oder Teile daraus in einem photomechanischen, audiovisuellen oder sonstigen Verfahren zu vervielfältigen und zu verbreiten. Diese Genehmigungspflicht gilt ausdrücklich auch für die Speicherung, Verarbeitung, Wiedergabe oder Verbreitung mittels Datenverarbeitungsanlagen.

Fotosatz in Sabon-Antiqua; Reproduktion, Offsetdruck und Bindearbeiten von AZ Druck und Datentechnik GmbH, Kempten im Allgäu.

ISSN 0076-9762; VOL. 48: ISBN 978-3-7772-1312-5; VOL. 48/1: ISBN 978-3-7772-1313-2
# INHALT

## AUFSÄTZE

<table><tr><td>Peter Dinzelbacher, Die ostgotischen Könige, die Religionen und das Recht nach Cassiodors «Variae»</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Gernot R. Wieland, Bede und Anglo-Saxon «Indolence»</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Marek Thue Kretschmer, «Puer hic», ait, «equet Homerum ...» Literary Appropriations of the Matter of Troy in Medieval Latin Poetry ca. 1070–1170 (Part 1)</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Luisa Leesemann, Poetria nova oder: Die Poetik des Neuen. Originalität als Moment literarischer Kritik im lateinischen Hochmittelalter</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>Christina Sandquist Öberg, Verba picturas Alberti Immenhusen illustrantia. Über die Spruchbänder eines aus Deutschland stammenden Kirchenmalers im spätmittelalterlichen Schweden</td><td>89</td></tr></table>

## BESPRECHUNGEN

<table><tr><td>Magistri Iohannis Hus Polemica. Editionis anno 1966 perfectae impressio aucta et emendata, ed. Jaroslav Eršil, Turnhout 2010 – besprochen von Wilken Engelbrecht</td><td>131</td></tr><tr><td>James G. Clark/Frank T. Coulson/Kathryn L. McKinley (Hgg.), Ovid in the Middle Ages, Cambridge 2011 – besprochen von Wilken Engelbrecht</td><td>134</td></tr><tr><td>Konrad Witz, hg. vom Kunstmuseum Basel, mit Beiträgen von Bodo Brinkmann u. a., Ostfildern 2011 – besprochen von Gisela Probst</td><td>137</td></tr><tr><td>Susanne Knaeble, Höfisches Erzählen von Gott. Funktion und narrative Entfaltung des Religiösen in Wolframs «Parzival» (Trends in medieval philology, 23), Berlin/New York 2011 – besprochen von Katharina Mertens Fleury</td><td>142</td></tr><tr><td>Eckart Conrad Lutz, Arbeiten an der Identität. Zur Medialität der cura monialium im Kompendium des Rektors eines reformierten Chorfrauenstifts. Mit Edition und Abbildung einer Windesheimer «Forma investiendi sanctimonialium» und ihrer Notationen (Scrinium Friburgense, 27) Berlin/New York 2010 – besprochen von Stephen Mossman</td><td>145</td></tr><tr><td>Gelehrte zwischen Humanismus und Reformation. Kontexte und Universitätsgründung in Basel 1460 (Litterae et Theologia, 2), hg. von Martin Wallraff, Berlin/Boston 2011 – besprochen von Christoph Galle</td><td>148</td></tr></table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>Hieronymus de Praga, Quaestiones, Polemica, Epistulae, edd. František Šmahel/Gabriel Silagi (CCCM 222, Johannes Hus, Opera omnia, Bd. 27A Suppl. 1), Turnhout 2010 – besprochen von Mieczysław Mejor</td>
      <td>150</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Tanja Mattern, Literatur der Zisterzienserinnen. Edition und Untersuchung einer Wienhäuser Legendenhandschrift (Bibliotheca Germanica, 56), Tübingen/Basel 2011 – besprochen von Edith Feistner</td>
      <td>154</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Dorothee Ader, Prosaversionen höfischer Epen in Text und Bild. Zur Rezeption des ‹Tristrant› im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert (Beiträge zur älteren Literaturgeschichte), Heidelberg 2010 – besprochen von Hans-Jörg Künast</td>
      <td>158</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Frühe Neuzeit in Deutschland 1520–1620. Literaturwissenschaftliches Verfasserlexikon, hg. von Wilhelm Kühlmann, Jan-Dirk Müller, Michael Schilling, Johann Anselm Steiger und Friedrich Vollhardt, Bd. 1: Aal, Johannes – Chytraeus, Nathan, Berlin/Boston 2011 – besprochen von Udo Kühne</td>
      <td>163</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Dante, Commedia. In deutscher Prosa von Kurt Flasch/Ders., Einladung, Dante zu lesen, Frankfurt a. M. 2011 – besprochen von Udo Kühne</td>
      <td>164</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Peter Hochgürtel (Hg.), Alexandri Neckam Suppletio defectuum, Carmina minora (CCCM, 221), Turnhout 2008 – besprochen von Carsten Wollin</td>
      <td>165</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann, Nachruf auf Konrad B. Vollmann (1.8.1933 – 25.10.2012)</td>
      <td>177</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Verzeichnis der Mitarbeiter dieses Heftes</td>
      <td>179</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
MAREK THUE KRETSCHMER

«Puer hic», ait, «equet Homerum ...»

## Literary Appropriations of the Matter of Troy in Medieval Latin Poetry ca. 1070–1170 (Part 1)

> «Die wahre und grosse Bedeutung der mittellateinischen Literatur besteht nicht in dem, was sie der antiken Literatur nachgeamt hat, sondern in dem, was sie selbständig und neu geschaffen hat. Dies ist sehr Vieles und für uns sehr Werthvolles»<fnref n="1" />.

«The lot of the historian of Mediaeval Latin poetry is not a happy one». This was the British scholar Walter Bradbury Sedgwick's concluding remark of a 1933 note<fnref n="2" /> on the «Pergama flere volo», one of the most famous examples of Medieval Latin poems on Troy. Today, some eighty years later, Sedgwick's statement is still valid. We have no canon of Medieval Latin poetry, not even a comprehensive monograph on the medieval literature related to the matter of Troy (something that could match Ziolkowski and Putnam's recent book on the reception of Virgil)<fnref n="3" />. Such a volume would have to cover the epics from the anonymous «Historia Troiana» to the «Ylias» and the «Troilus» of Josephus Iscanus and Albertus Stadensis along with the historians from Fredegar to Geoffrey of Monmouth; and since the literature in Latin is closely related to vernacular works – Benoît de Sainte-Maure, for instance, based his «Roman de Troie» (ca. 1165) on Latin sources from Late Antiquity (Dictys Cretensis and Dares Phrygius), but his Old French romance was reworked back into Latin by Guido de Columnis towards the end of the thirteenth century – such a volume would also have to include everything from the «Trójumannasaga», to Christine de Pisan («Cent histoires de Troie»), Chaucer («Troilus and Criseyde») and Boccaccio («il Filostrato»). The list of authors and works is certainly a long one<fnref n="4" />.

<footnote n="1">¹ Wilhelm Meyer, Eine gereimte Umarbeitung der «Ilias Latina», in: Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, philologisch-historische Klasse (1907) 235–245, here 236.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Walter Bradbury Sedgwick, «Pergama flere volo», in: Speculum 8 (1933) 81–82.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Jan M. Ziolkowski/Michael C. J. Putnam (eds.), The Virgilian Tradition. The First Fifteen Hundred Years (New Haven 2008).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Cf. Werner Eisenhut, Spätantike Troja-Erzählungen, mit eienem Ausblick auf die mittelalterliche Troja-Literatur, in: Mlat. Jb. 18 (1983) 1–28; Arianna Punzi, La circolazione della materia troiana nell’Europa del ’200. Da Darete Frigio al «Roman de Troie en prose», in: Messana 6 (1991) 69–108; Margaret Roseman Scherer, The Legends of Troy in Art</footnote>
When it comes to the problem of fictionality and medieval literary uses of the matter of Troy – that is, the relationship between myth and history, and between invention and truth, in the medieval rewritings of the classical legend of Troy – scholars have been mainly concerned with the question of historical truth and the function of genealogical construction and dynastic legitimisation («Ursprungs-konstruktionen») in historiography, epics and romance<fnref n="5" />. The medieval men of letters themselves regarded Troy as the point of origin of European civilization, and they distinguished between authentic and fictional narratives of the Trojan matter<fnref n="6" />. Considerably less attention has been drawn to the different strategies of literary assimilation in the (especially elegiac) poems on Troy. When appropriating the Trojan matter the medieval poets manifested contrasting attitudes and approaches. Some poems are pure imitations; others involve quite elaborate allegorical, moral or ideological adaptations. This article explores the relatively short (usually between 50 and 500 lines) metrical poems in vogue during the Renaissance of the

and Literature (New York/London 1964); Jean-Yves Tilliette, Troiae ab oris. Aspects de la révolution poétique de la seconde moitié du XIe siècle, in: Latomus 58 (1999) 405-431; Kordula Wolf, Troja, Metamorphosen eines Mythos. Französische, englische und italienische Überlieferungen des 12. Jahrhunderts im Vergleich (Europa im Mittelalter 13), Berlin 2009. For the historical context, Haskins' classic is still a good read: Charles Homer Haskins, The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century (Cambridge Mass. 1927). A more recent alternative is Robert L. Benson/Giles Constable (eds.), Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century (Oxford 1982).

<footnote n="5">⁵ Cf. Andrea Giardina, Le origini troiane, dall'impero alla nazione, in: Morfologie sociali e culturali in Europa fra tarda Antichità e Alto Medioevo, Settimane (1998) 177-209; František Graus, Troja und trojanische Herkunftssage im Mittelalter, in: Willi Erzgräber (ed.), Kontinuität und Transformation der Antike im Mittelalter (Sigmaringen 1989) 25-43; Thomas Haye, Legitimationsstrategien mittellateinischer Troja-Epiker. Ein Beitrag zur Deutung antikisierender Dichtung, in: WS 116 (2003) 203-228; Helene Homeyer, Beobachtungen zum Weiterleben der Trojanischen Abstammungs- und Gründungssagen im Mittelalter, in: Res publica litterarum. Studies in the Classical Tradition 5 (1982) 93-124; Hildebrecht Hommel, Die trojanische Herkunft des Franken, in: RhM 99 (1956) 32-341; Francis Ingledew, The Book of Troy and the Genealogical Construction of History. The Case of Geoffrey of Monmouth's «Historia regum Britanniae», in: Speculum 69 (1994) 665-704; Bruno Luisielli, Il mito dell'origine troiana dei Galli, dei Franchi e degli scandinavi, in: Romanobarbarica 3 (1978) 89-121; Jean-Marc Pastre, l'Empire et Troie. Les enjeux politiques littéraires de la translatio regni, in: Bien dire et bien aprandre 10 (1992) 119-128.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ For instance, Henr. Hunt., Hist. 7, 38: ... *sicut plereque gentes Europe, ita Franci a Troia-nis duxerunt originem*; and Bernard. Silv., Virg. Aen., prol.: *Virgilius (...) intendit itaque casus Enee aliorumque Troianorum errantium labores evolvere atque hoc non usque secundum historie veritatem, quod Frigius describit; sed ubique ut Augusti Cesaris gratiam lucraretur, Enee facta fugamque ficmentis extollit*. Editions by Diana Greenway (ed.), Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon. «Historia Anglorum», The History of the English People (Oxford 1996), here 478; and Julian Ward Jones/Elizabeth Frances Jones (eds.), The Commentary on the First Six Books of the «Aeneid» of Vergil Commonly Attributed to Bernardus Silvestris (Lincoln/London 1977), here 1.</footnote>
twelfth century. It will be argued that we find, on the whole, two main tendencies: the epistolary poems, such as those written by Godfrey of Reims and Baudri of Bourgueil, implicitly or explicitly marked by the idea of «translatio studii» or the topos of superiority<fnref n="7" />; and the moralistic-rhetorical elegies and epyllia written by Hugh Primas, Pierre de Saintes, Peter Riga, Simon Chèvre d'Or and the anonymous author of the «Pergama flere volo».

In the twelfth-century Munich manuscript Clm 19488 from Tegernsee we find the following seventeen leonine hexameters<fnref n="8" />:

Ut puer etate, puer es mentis levitate.
Arguis, opponis, quod scripta lego Ciceronis,
Troiae fata, fugam ducis, huius bella, triumphos,
Et pecus et curam pecoris terramque colendam,
Mel et apes et apum congressus, prelia, reges.
Mantua quem genuit vir plenus Apolline dixit,
Qui duce venerunt Enea: nonne fuerunt
Hii fundatores urbis? si bella, labores
Discimus illorum, virtus, industria quorum
Urbem fundatam rexit gentemque togatam,
Numquid peccamus? si rursus scire probamus,
Quae bubus, armentis, gregibus sit cura, nocentis
Propulsare mali contagia, denique quali
Ordine plantandae sint vites sive putandae,
Cultus et agrorum qua sedulitate laborum
Vult exerceri, vel apum quae cura doceri,
Nil hic peccatur nec pro vicio reputatur.

Evidently, Cicero and Virgil were considered so unsuitable that the anonymous poet felt the need to excuse himself from reading them. One solution was to provide the reader with an explication, some sort of comment or interpretation that can unveil the «integumentum», that is, the allegory<fnref n="9" />. This is exactly what the author of

<footnote n="7">⁷ Cf. Alexandru N. Cizek, Imitatio et tractatio. Die literarisch-rhetorischen Grundlagen der Nachahmung in Antike und Mittelalter (Tübingen 1994) 28–29; Ernst Robert Curtius, Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter (Bern 21954) 477–478; Walter Haug, Vernacular Literary Theory in the Middle Ages. The German Tradition, 800–1300, in its European Context (Cambridge 1997) 116; and Marek Thue Kretschmer, Bourgueil, la nouvelle Athènes (ou Troie), et Reims, la nouvelle Rome. La notion de translatio studii chez Baudri de Bourgueil, in: Latomus 70 (2011) 1102–1116.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Edited in Wilhelm Wattenbach, Mittheilungen aus zwei Handschriften der k. Hof- und Staatsbibliothek, in: SB München 3 (1873) 685–747, here 703–704. The poem is part of a longer verse miscellany.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ Frank Bezner, Vela Veritatis. Hermeneutik. Wissen und Sprache in der Intellectual History des 12. Jahrhunderts (Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, 85), Leiden 2005; Cf. Hennig Brinkmann, Verhüllung (integumentum) als literarische Darstellungsform im Mittelalter, in: Alfred Zimmerman (ed.), Der Begriff der Repraesentatio im Mittelalter. Stellvertretung, Symbol, Zeichen, Bild (Miscellanea Mediaevalia 8), Berlin 1971, 314–339; Marie-Dominique Chenu, Involucrum. Le mythe selon les théologiens</footnote>
another Tegernsee poem does, the «Profuit ignaris»<fnref n="10" /> written in 191 leonine hexameters. These verses, addressed to a group of cloistered ladies, explain how to read the ancient fables about the illicit and promiscuous amours of the pagan gods. After a preamble (1–19) on his wanting to remain anonymous, the poet declares that pagan love poems are unwelcome within the convent walls (20–28):

Rursus ad hoc cavi, si delectatio pravi,
Mentibus humanis temptacio surgat inanis,
Lingua perita foris commercia pensat amoris
Et stilus hec vota describit imagine nota,
Vos insignate quasi canonica gravitate
Dicta refutatis, ob dicta reum reputatis
Carminis auctorem. Quis enim Venerem vel amorem
Aut Veneris puerum, quis tela Cupidinis, arcum
Nominet in vobis, ubi sunt scola castra pudoris?

The problem being with such descriptions is that (33–34):

Scripta poetarum divum proba sive dearum,
Et genus et mores, vitam reserunt et amores.

After a catalogue of Jove's amorous escapades (35–54) the poet proposes the solution; allegorically, the adventures of the pagan gods and goddesses correspond to the sacred acts of clerics and abbesses (55–69):

Nec qui gesserunt peccare dii potuerunt –
Aut monstravere nobis ea facta licere.
At si que nobis virtus dominatur amoris,
Igne sui teli superavit numina celi.
Quid culpare soles quod amat nunc carnea proles?

médiévaux, in: AHDL 22 (1955) 75–79; Paule Demats, Fabula. Trois études de mythographie antique et médiévale (Publications romanes et françaises 122), Genève 1973; Peter Dronke, Gli dei pagani nella poesia latina medievale, in: Claudio Leonardi (ed.), Gli umanesimi medievali (Atti del II Congresso dell' Internationales Mittellateinerkomitee, Firenze, Certosa del Galluzzo, 11–15 settembre 1993), Firenze 1998, 97–110; Ludwig Gompf, Figmenta poetarum, in: Alf Önnerfors/Johannes Rathofer/Fritz Wagner (eds.), Literatur und Sprache im europäischen Mittelalter. Festschrift für Karl Langosch (Darmstadt 1973) 53–62; Gertrud Grünkorn, Die Fiktionalität des höfischen Romans um 1200 (Berlin 1994); Édouard Jeauneau, l'Usage de la notion d'integumentum à travers les gloses de Guillaume de Conches, in: AHDL 24 (1957) 35–100; Daniel Poirion, Résurgences. Mythe et littérature à l'âge du symbole (XIIe siècle), Paris 1986. For the general context, see Birger Munk-Olsen, l'Esprit critique à l'égard de la littérature païenne au moyen âge, jusqu'au XIIe siècle, in: Mireille Chazan/Gilbert Dahan (eds.), La méthode critique au moyen âge (Bibliothèque d'histoire culturelle du moyen âge 3), Turnhout 2006, 27–45.

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Edited in Wattenbach (note 8) 695–701; and Peter Dronke, Medieval Latin and the Rise of European Love-Lyric, vol. 2 (Oxford 21968) 452–457. Dronke also offers an analysis (vol. 1, 232–238) and a translation (vol. 2, 457–461).</footnote>
Et mortale genus quid ob hoc culpare solemus?
Vos notat et clerum tam mystica fabula rerum
Abbatissarum genus, et grex omnis earum
Sunt Pallas plane, tria virginis ora Diane,
Iuno, Venus, Vesta, Thetis – observantia vestra
Est expressa satis cultu tante deitatis.
Vos notat istarum genus et gens sacra dearum,
Nos ratione pari divum deitate notari
Credimus, et cleri typus illa videtur haberi
Inclita magnorum series memorata deorum.

The poet elaborates on his interpretation (70–101), then goes on to philosophize on Ovid's «Metamorphoses» (102–177), and finally concludes with a rather self-congratulatory epilogue (178–191).

If we turn to another twelfth-century manuscript, the Berlin Phillipps 1694 produced at the St. Arnulph Monastery at Metz, the point of view vis-à-vis the classical literature is perfectly antithetical to that of the Tegernsee poems. The co-dex contains a most interesting collection of poems by authors whom we easily associate with the Renaissance of the 12th century, namely, Hildebert of Lavardin, Marbod of Rennes, Godfrey of Reims, Petrus Pictor, Peter Riga and others<fnref n="11" />. In the anonymous «Inclita progenies», a poem consisting of twenty-four leonine collateral hexameters (with a double rhyme, that is between the penthemimeral caesuras and the endlines: a-b-a-b), an aristocratic lady is praised precisely for, among other virtues, reading classical literature:

Inclita progenies, patrie flos et specialis,
Sis michi materies in carminibus generalis.
Te mea musa refert, mirabiliter modulando.
Te cunctis prefert, preconia tot numerando.
Si dea nobilitas aut dives gloria rerum,
Et si simplicitas, prudentia, dicere verum,
Possent fatata vitare pericula mortis,
Talibus ornata, quam posses vivere fortis!
Omnibus est notum, quantum sis dives avorum,
Non valeo totum genus enumerare virorum.
Pre cunctis apta rebus, si nata fuisses,
Coniuge pro capta scio Grecia non doluisset.
Sed quamvis alii te raptam Phrige dolerent,
Te tamen imperii regalia sceptrum decerent.
Diceris et merito regali digna corona,
Cuius dextra cito tribuit largissima dona.

<footnote n="11">¹¹ See, for instance, Christopher James McDonough, Hugh Metel and the «Floridus Aspectus» of Peter Riga (Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Phillipps 1694), in: MSt 67 (2005) 27–74.</footnote>
Lectio Nasonis non te latet o veneranda,
Sed neque Platonis sententia vera probanda.
Tu quoque barbarico nosti sermone profari:
Ordine mirifico didicisti versificari.
Sed michi da veniam, vacuantur sanguine vene.
Cum iam deficiam, non possum psallere plene:
Victa iacet mea mens, ingentes movimus actus,
Redditus est amens animus meus et stupefactus.

Not only is the noble lady complimented on her classical education, verses 11–12 elegantly express the idea that she outshines Helen. A medieval poet’s linking of his contemporaries, or of his fictional characters, with gods, heroes or historical figures of Antiquity is a topos to which we will return. The link is often rendered more explicit by insertion of a qualitative *alter* or *novus*.

We find an association of this kind in Peter Riga’s «Sponsus adversus sponsam» and «Responsio sponsae», respectively the charge and defence of a married couple’s dispute about the wife’s alleged unfaithfulness. The poems are written in thirty-six and twenty-eight distichs<fnref n="12" /> and appear in the same Metz miscellany. The husband, a merchant, comes home after a longer journey and finds his wife enriched with gold bequeathed to her by a neighbouring suitor who died following several attempts at gaining her favours. In verses 35–40 and 47–50 of the «Sponsus adversus sponsam», the accused adulterers are associated with the legendary affairs of Jove and Danaë (alluding to the neighbour’s seduction with gold) and Paris and Helen (alluding to the wife’s irresistible beauty):

O res mira! Dolo caret unda, fide caret uxor,
In pelago tutus, naufragus exsto domi.
Sponsa fidem laesit, nec prosunt ferrea pulchris
Claustra, nec esse potest tutus in arce decor.
In gremium Danaes pluit alter Jupiter aurum,
In terris alium pertulit illa Jovem.
(...)
Nec moveor, si moechus in hanc oculum vel amorem
Fixit, praedari lumina forma solet.
Quisve genis Helenae visis Paris esse recuset?
Gorgone quis visa tardet inesse lapis?

<footnote n="12">¹² Cf. Migne PL 171, 1453–1455. Wilhelm Wattenbach edited a longer (thirty-three distichs) and diverging version of the «Responsio sponsae», from which we quote: Wilhelm Wattenbach, Beschreibung einer Handschrift mittelalterlicher Gedichte, NA 17 (1892) 351–384. See also the comment in Barthélemy Hauréau, Les mélanges poètiques d’Hildebert de Lavardin (Paris 1882) 165–167. André Boutemy claimed that the poem is part of the «Floridus Aspectus» in MS Paris Bibl. Arsenal 1136: André Boutemy, Recherches sur le «Floridus Aspectus» de Pierre la Rigge I. Prolégomènes à une édition de cette anthologie, in: Le Moyen Âge 54 (1948) 89–112. These poems do not appear in the new edition of Cartsen Wollin, Der «Floridus Aspectus» D des Petrus Riga. Erstausgabe nach der Handschrift Douai 825, Mlat. Jb. 43 (2008) 355–391 and 44 (2009) 407–447.</footnote>
In the <Responsio sponsae> (35–52), the wife’s lawyer contends that although she has the beauty of Helen, she also has the faithfulness of Penelope:

Unda fremens illum procul abstulit, ecce reatus!
Sponsa precans isti profuit, ecce fides!
Obicit hic, mecho patuisse domumque thorumque:
Hec patuisse domum non negat, immo thorum.
Claustra domus patefecit ei, non claustra pudoris,
Esse studens alii grata, pudica sibi.
Grata, pudica simul fuit. Hospicium dedit, ecce
Gratia! Mechari noluit, ecce pudor!
Si decor absit, abest pudor, obicit iste. Repello!
Ista decore nitet, ista pudore viget.
Que virtus raro nitet hoc in tempore, vernat
Ista genis Helene, Penelopesque fide.
Casta decens rarum est, sed si rarum, preciosum:
Casta decens fuit hec, tunc preciosa magis.
Non dedit ergo locum donis, ut falleret, ista:
Non mentita fuit aurea gutta Iovem.
Qui deludate am, nec se Iovis alter inaurat,
Qui predetur eam, nec Paris alter amat.

So far our examples have been limited to occasional references and allusions to Trojan topics, but we have already observed two tendencies: an apologetic or exegetic approach in the Tegernsee manuscript versus a more emulative approach in the Metz manuscript. But are these examples typical? In order to obtain a clearer picture we will have to turn to the «real» Trojan poems of the period. Already in the late eleventh century, may be seen the rise of a poetry heavily influenced by Ovid<fnref n="13" />. Poems are written in elegiac distichs (or hexameters), often in the form of a poetical epistle, and the description of female beauty («descriptio puellae»)<fnref n="14" /> becomes a key topos. What is more, in some cases the fictional characters are Trojan heroes, in other cases the Trojan narratives are told as a story in the story (by ekphrasis or other literary techniques such as the report of a dream) or by association, for example as part of a «descriptio puellae». Thus, we find poems like the anonymous

<footnote n="13">¹³ Cf. Marek Thue Kretschmer, The Love Elegy in Medieval Latin Literature (Pseudo-Ovidiana and Ovidian Imitations), in: Thea Selliaas Thorsen (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Latin Love Elegy (Cambridge, in press); and Winfried Offermanns, Die Wirkung Ovids auf die literarische Sprache der lateinischen Liebesdichtung des 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts, Beihefte zum Mlat. Jb. 4 (1970).</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Cf. Gerald A. Bond, The Loving Subject. Desire, Eloquence, and Power in Romanesque France (Philadelphia 1995) 129–157; Hennig Brinkmann, Geschichte der lateinischen Liebesdichtung im Mittelalter (Darmstadt 1979) 88–93; Alexandru N. Cizek, Das Bild von der idealen Schönheit in der lateinischen Dichtung des Frühmittelalters, Mlat. Jb. 26 (1991) 5–35; Edmond Faral, Recherches sur les sources latines des contes et romans courtois du Moyen Age (Paris 1913) 99–109; Edgar De Bruyne, Études d’esthétique médiévale, 2 vols. (Bruges 1946), vol. 2, 173–194; Therese Latzke, Der Fürstinnenpreis, in: Mlat. Jb. 14 (1979) 22–65; and Offermanns (note 13) 129–56.</footnote>
«Deidamia Achilli»<fnref n="15" />, Baudri of Bourgueil’s poems 7–8¹⁶ (which in their entirety are pendants respectively to Ovid’s «Heroides» 3 and 16–17) and the «semi-Trojan» poems of Godfrey of Reims<fnref n="17" />, where the Trojan narratives depend on the main action, inserted as they are by various literary techniques.

What I find particularly interesting in this material is the play, relationship or tension (or absence thereof) between the poetical myth and the author’s contemporary world, and I wonder if some of Dennis Howard Green’s findings regarding fiction and history in medieval romance<fnref n="18" /> might be applied, «mutatis mutandis», to the Medieval Latin poetry on Troy. Green considers «cases where the distinction between fiction and history can be blurred in two directions, by the incorporation of historical details into fictional literature and conversely by the way in which historical writing can make use of rhetorical and poetic devices and embellishments»<fnref n="19" />. This is not that unlike the play of fiction we encounter when

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Edition with commentary by Jürgen Stohlmann, «Deidamia Achilli». Eine Ovid-Imitation aus dem 11. Jahrhundert, in: Önnerfors/Rathofer/Wagner (note 9) 195–231.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Cf. Gerald A. Bond, Composing Yourself. Ovid’s Heroides, Baudri of Bourgueil and the Problem of the Persona, in: Mediaevalia 13 (1987) 83–117; Christine Ratkowitsch, Die keusche Helena. Ovid’s Heroides 16/17 in der mittelalterlichen Neudichtung des Baudri von Bourgueil, in: WS 104 (1991) 209–236; Jean-Yves Tilliette, Savants et poètes du moyen âge face à Ovide. Les debuts de l’aetas Ovidiana, in: Michelangelo Picone/Bernhard Zimmermann (eds.), Ovidius redivivus. Von Ovid zu Dante (Stuttgart 1994) 63–104; and Michael Von Albrecht, La correspondance de Pâris et d’Hélène. Ovide et Baudri de Bourgueil, in: Raymond Chevallier (ed.), Colloque Présence d’Ovide (Paris 1982) 189–193. Edition by Jean-Yves Tilliette, Baudri de Bourgueil, Poèmes, vol. 1 (Paris 1998) 14–43.</footnote>

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ Edition with commentary by Elmar Broecker, Gottfried von Reims. Kritische Gesamtausgabe mit einer Untersuchung zur Verfasserfrage und Edition der ihm zugeschriebenen Carmina (Frankfurt a. M. 2002). For the chronology, see ib., 65–66. For general discussions of Godfrey’s œuvre, see Reto Raduolf Bezzola, Les origines et la formation de la littérature courtoise en occident, 500–1200 (Paris 1960) II.2 379–382; Bond (note 14); André Boutemy, Autour de Godefroid de Reims, in: Latomus 6 (1947) 231–255; Helena De Carlos, La materia de Troya en Godofredo de Reims, in: Michael W. Herren/Christopher James McDonough/Ross G. Arthur (eds.), Latin Culture in the Eleventh Century, 2 vols. (Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Medieval Latin Studies, Cambridge, September 9–12 1998), Turnhout 2002, vol. 1, 186–213; Thomas C. Moser, A Cosmos of Desire. The Medieval Latin Erotic Lyric in English Manuscripts (Ann Arbor 2004); Frederic James Edward Raby, A History of Secular Latin Poetry in the Middle Ages, vol. 1 (Oxford 1934) 313–316; Jean-Yves Tilliette, Le retour d’Orphée. Réflexions sur la place de Godefroid de Reims dans l’histoire littéraire du XIᵉ siècle, in: Herren/McDonough/Arthur (quoted above), vol. 2, 449–463; Wilhelm Wattenbach, Lateinische Gedichte aus Frankreich im elften Jahrhundert, in: SB Berlin (1891) 97–114; and John R. Williams, Godfrey of Reims. A Humanist of the Eleventh Century, in: Speculum 22 (1947) 29–45. For a review of Broecker’s edition, see Helena de Carlos Villamarín, On a New Edition of the Carmina by Godfrey of Rheims, in: Troianalexandrina 3 (2003) 9–22.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ Cf. Dennis Howard Green, The Beginnings of Medieval Romance. Fact and Fiction, 1150–1220 (Cambridge 2002) 134–201.</footnote>

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ Green (note 18) 142.</footnote>
Baudri and Godfrey associate Trojan heroes with their contemporaries (and even with themselves). Also, we must not forget that Troy had a key position in the ideology of «translatio imperii» (equally true for the medieval romance), and these poetical associations are often combined with the topos of superiority: *novus* (or *alter*) means «new and better». Even more interesting, perhaps, is the fact that the fictional play involves the use of Ovid, in particular the «Heroides». In this respect, it is interesting to observe that the Medieval Latin poets anticipate by a century the later phenomenon described by Green, namely, the widespread use of the «Heroides» in the medieval romance<fnref n="20" />. «Especially helpful here (i.e. for the vernacular romancers c. 1170)»<fnref n="21" />, says Green, «were the Roman poet's «Heroides» and their twelfth-century commentaries». And, Green concludes: «the antique romance was regarded as history, but with fictional insertions, whilst the Arthurian romance is fiction with possible additions of historical details»<fnref n="22" />.

Elsewhere I have discussed the Ovidian impact<fnref n="23" /> on the poetry of the twelfth century and the intricate and subtle combinations of literary techniques and ideologies in Baudri's poems<fnref n="24" />; in the remainder of this article I will therefore focus on Godfrey of Reims (in a future article I will discuss the aforementioned moralistic-rhetorical elegies and epyllia).

In the decade between 1075 and 1085, Baudri's ideal and fellow poet Godfrey of Reims wrote the four poems that constitute the so-called «Epistolarum Liber», in chronological order: «Ad Ingelrannum Archidiaconum de moribus eius» (78 distichs), «Sompnium Godefridi de Odone Aurelianensi» (133 distichs), «Satyra de quadam puella virgine» (50 distichs) and «Godefridus ad Lingonensem episcopum» (481 leonine hexameters)<fnref n="25" />. All of them contain lengthy «Trojan» sections, except the first, in which we find only a short association. The poem begins as a praise of the literary learning and poetical talent of Ingelrann (archdeacon of Soissons and bishop of Laon from 1098 to his death in 1104), but towards the end it takes an unexpected turn. Ingelrann had ventured to write verses to Adela, the daughter of William the Conqueror, but was not up to the task (139–156):

Quam licet ingenti tollas ad sidera nisu,
Altior officiis eminet illa tuis.
Dum cupis egregios calamo conscribere mores,
Magna quidem scribis non tamen equa sibi.
Dum, quam sit locuples, quam prodiga, dicere temptas,
Dicere temptanti lingua manusque cadit.
Dumque refers, quantum viget et decus et decor oris
Claraque quam vero lumina sole micant,

<footnote n="20">²⁰ Cf. Green (note 18) 156 ff.</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ Green (note 18) 161.</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Green (note 18) 200.</footnote>

<footnote n="23">²³ Cf. Kretschmer (note 13).</footnote>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ Cf. Kretschmer (note 7).</footnote>

<footnote n="25">²⁵ For bibliographic references, see note 17.</footnote>
Deficis haut aliter, quam si regina Pelasgum

Depingenda tibi virgo Lacena foret.

Nec sic implicitum Veneris te forma teneret,

Cum Phrigio Paridi nuda videnda fuit.

Tu spectanda quidem placituraque carmina mittis,

Sed te materie pondus honusque premit.

Carmina digna quidem tua sunt, sed carmine digna

Nobiliore satis regia virgo fuit.

Tam bona scriptores exposcit forma priores,

Ut species laudem possit habere parem.

It may be worth mentioning that other Loire poets like Baudri and Hildebert of Lavardin also wrote poems to Adela<fnref n="26" />, but no poem has ever been ascribed to Ingelrann. Yet, it has been suggested that he was the author of the above-mentioned «Inclita progenies» and that he wrote this poem to Adela<fnref n="27" />, and it certainly is possible to read it as the object of Godfrey’s criticism.

The matter of Troy is ingeniously inserted into the «Sompnium Godefridi de Odone Aurelianensi», a poem fittingly described by André Boutemy as an adaptation of Ovid’s «Epistulae ex Ponto» 3, 3 (which describes the apparition of Amor in Ovid’s dream and the subsequent dialogue between the two)<fnref n="28" />. In a similar but original fashion Godfrey tells how Odo of Orléans, identified as Odo de Meung or Odo de Cambrai<fnref n="29" />, appeared to him in a dream. After a long panegyrical description (29–144) of Odo’s physical and moral qualities, noble descent and skills as a poet and musician, the dialogue between Odo (147–190) and Godfrey (193–224) begins. Under the guidance of Apollo, Odo has flown through the air from Orléans to Reims. He has brought his poem on Troy and invites Godfrey to listen while he recites from it. Godfrey gladly accepts, and the poem ends with his résumé (235–262) which includes the episodes of Paris and Helen, the sacrifice of Iphige-

<footnote n="26">²⁶ Cf. Baudri’s poems 134–135 and Hildebert’s «carmina minora» 10 and 15. Editions by Jean-Yves Tilliette, Baudri de Bourgueil. Poèmes, vol. 2 (Paris 2002) 2–45; and Alexander Brian Scott, Hildebertus Cenomannensis episcopus. «Carmina minora», (Bibliotheca Teuberiana), Leipzig ²²001, 4–5.</footnote>

<footnote n="27">²⁷ Cf. Bond (note 14) 146–147.</footnote>

<footnote n="28">²⁸ Cf. André Boutemy, Trois œuvres inédites de Godefroid de Reims, in: RMA 3 (1947) 335–366, here 351. Broecker disagrees and suggests the apparition of Hector in the «Aeneid», 2, 268 ff. Cf. Broecker (note 17) 46–51.</footnote>

<footnote n="29">²⁹ Wattenbach (note 17) 100 first identified Odo Aurelianensis as Odo the abbot of Saint-Martin de Tournai and bishop of Cambrai († 1113), and Boutemy (note 17) 238 followed his identification. On the basis of Godfrey’s mention of Odo as the author of a medical work (141–142), Williams (note 17) 34–35 claimed that Odo had to be the author of the «De viribus herbarum», namely Odo de Meung. Broecker (note 17) agrees with Williams. On the basis of the description of Odo de Cambrai in Heriman’s «Liber de Restauratione Ecclesiae Tornacensis», De Carlos Villamarín (note 17) 11–14 opts for the original identification of Wattenbach, and also proposes an alternative, namely, Odo of Ostia, the future Pope Urban II, who had studied together with Godfrey under Bruno at the cathedral school of Reims.</footnote>
nia, the siege of Troy, the duel of Hector and Achilles, the Trojan Horse, the deceit of Sinon and the final ruin of the city. Strictly speaking, Godfrey's summary is the only Trojan part of the poem, but the lengthy section leading up to it contains an extended series of explicit associations of Odo with the heroes of the Greek myths. Like Baudri, Godfrey here expresses the superiority of his own culture over the ancient world – or rather, he quite blatantly states that Odo has renewed the classical tradition (109–112):

Postremo veteri sic sunt impressa monete,
Ut sit visa mihi vera poesis agi,
Ut rear antiquos nondum occubuisse poetas
Et superesse modo secula prisca putem.

In the praise of Odo as a musician, Godfrey's message is straightforward: Odo (iste, hunc, isti) is a new and better Amphion or Orpheus (127–140):

Te licet, Amphyon, rigidi montes sequerentur
Pararentque tue saxa vocata lire,
Arbitrio tamen i s t e meo tibi commodus esset
Auxilioque tibi voce manuque foret.
Nam dum concineret, scopuli rupesque venirent
Nec tardata diu menia cepta forent.
Orphea mirata est Rodopeia silva canentem
Totaque, dum preiit, pone secuta fuit.
Orphea crederet h u n c Rodopeia silva canentem
Totaque, dum preiret, pone secuta foret.
Euridicen princeps umbrarum reddidit illi,
Ante feras gentes cum lira questa fuit.
Euridicen princeps umbrarum redderet i s t i,
Ante feras gentes cum lira questa foret.

And Odo himself, recounting his flight, lets Godfrey know that Apollo was a better guide for him than Daedalus was for Icarus (151–156):

Aera per vacuum suspenso corpore pennis
A Genabo Remis me levis aura tulit.
Dum vagor ignarusque vie sub nubibus erro,
Previus ambiguas rexit Apollo vias;
Rexit commodius longe quam rexerit olim
Dedalus Icaream prevolitando fugam.

The implicit message is that Odo succeeds where Icarus fails, and Icarus, being the son of Daedalus, represents, archetypically, the product of Greek art. Hence, Odo's art is superior to Greek art. Further, Odo came to Godfrey without fear, and he likens his arrival to the arrivals of Leander, who came to Hero unafraid of the sea; Hercules, who came to Hades unafraid of Cerberus; and Pylades, who together with Orestes came to Tauris unafraid of King Thoas (165–172):
Tranat Abidenus freta plena timore Leander,
Nec mare quid possit, cecus amore videt.

Ingreditur manes raptum simulacra parentis
Alcides, Stigii nec pavet ora ducis.

At Pilades rabido iunctus comes hesit Oresti,
Cum petiit Scithicos barbaricosque deos.

Sic ego me ventis credens te propter, amice,
Non timui dubias pendulus ire vias.

Godfrey's third poem, the «Satyra de quadam puella virgine», should be read
against the background of his letter to Ingelrann. If Godfrey could criticize
Ingelrann's description of Adela's beauty, it was because he knew how to do it better himself. Godfrey embroiders his own «descriptio puellae» with colourful Trojan
details. Again, the Trojan matter is inserted as part of an unmistakable topos of
superiority. He begs an unnamed girl to keep away from cosmetics and ornaments
(1–32), as her natural beauty surpasses Nature herself (33–56). In the last part of
the poem Godfrey imagines the Trojan myth with the girl in the place of Helen and
even of Venus (57–100, of which we quote 57–58, 69–82 and 89–96.):

Non Helene mater nec par tibi filia Lede,
Quamvis hec Paridem moverit, illa Iovem.

(...)

Ast Helene facies et opima potentia forme
Dardanio Paridi per mare preda fuit.

Grecia coniurat, repetendam mille carinis.
Iurat et hanc ratibus Grecia mille petit.

Te tam conspicuam Phrygius si predo videret
Et te vel velo vel rapuisset equo,

Grecia iuraret populis te mille petendam,
Et merito populis mille petita fores.

Annis tracta decem sunt Troica bella, sed uno,
Si pro te fierent, mense peracta forent.

Virgine Ledea me iudice dignior esses,
Pro qua Troianas flamma cremaret opes.

Tu poteras Priamo validissima causa fuisse,
Nulla sit ut cura regna perisse sua.

(...)

De pretio forme cum tres certamen inissent
Electusque Paris arbiter esset eis,

Prefecit Venerem Paridis censura duabus
Deque tribus victe succubuere due.

Cum tribus ad Paridem si quarta probanda venires,
De tribus a Paride quarta probata fores:

Pomaque si forme potiori danda fuerunt,
Hec potius forme danda fuere tue.

Finally, the last and also most Trojan poem is «Godefridus ad Lingonensem
episcopum», Godfrey's letter to the bishop of Langres, first identified as Hugh of
Breteuil (1012–1049) by Wattenbach, later corrected to Hugh Rainard of Bar
(1065–1085) by Boutemy and Williams<fnref n="30" />. The poem is written as a dialogue between Godfrey and Calliope: Godfrey offers Calliope a special cloak (given to him by the Parcae) if she would only fly to Langres to honour the poet Hugh, whereupon Calliope asks Godfrey to explain the cloak and in particular its needlework (1–117). Godfrey describes the first motif, which represents the legend of Hercules and Cacus (118–167). Calliope believes that the cloak must have been the one worn by Jove during the battle against the giants and subsequently implores Godfrey to continue (168–179). Encouraged by Calliope’s impatient demand, Godfrey draws out the account with a digression on Orpheus (180–205). Calliope begs Godfrey to keep to the point (206–207), so Godfrey carries on with the next scene on the cloak, which depicts Ganymedes hunting on the slopes of Ida (208–249). Further prompted by Calliope (250–256), Godfrey explicates the third episode, the abduction of Helen (257–381). Calliope has never heard anything more gratifying (382–389). Godfrey concludes by describing the scenes from the ruin of Troy (390–481): Sinon’s fraud, the Trojan Horse, the nocturnal combat, the exploits of Hector and the wrath of Achilles. The poem is incomplete and ends with Achilles raging against the Trojans before the citywalls<fnref n="31" />.

Like the «Sompnium Godefridi», the «Godefridus ad Lingonensem episcopum» is also a dialogue poem that involves a flight by air to a fellow poet. Odo delivers a poem under the guidance of Apollo, while Godfrey engages Calliope as his messenger. Godfrey’s dream ends with his report on Odo’s Trojan poem, whereas his letter to Hugh transmits the Trojan matter by means of a clever ekphrasis.

But what I find most significant is, again, the topos of superiority that permeates the entire poem. In the «Sompnium» the message was that Odo’s poetry surpasses the poetry of old. Now, it is Hugh’s and especially Godfrey’s own poetry that beats the classical authors. To convince Calliope of Hugh’s extraordinary talents Godfrey claims that Aratus would marvel at Hugh’s learning and that his eloquence would put Virgil to shame: he outdoes Plato in knowledge and Cato in morals, and even Amphion and Arion would have to surrender (79–84):

Quem philosophantem radioque superna notantem
A Styge forte datus demiraretur Aratus.
Oris verba boni maculam fecere Maroni,
Artes Platonem, mores vicere Catonem.
Qui Thebana iocis animabat menia vocis,
Cederet Amphyon captusque sileret Arion.

But enough about Hugh – with his account of the Parcae, Godfrey declares that he is now himself the new Homer (105–108):

<footnote n="30">³⁰ Boutemy (note 17) 246–250; Cf. Wattenbach (note 17) 109; and Williams (note 17) 36–37.</footnote>

<footnote n="31">³¹ Boutemy (note 17) 251 and De Carlos Villamarín (note 17) 21–22 point out that the text most probably suffers from a lacuna in connection with a homoioteleuton at 439. Consequently, we may imagine a missing comment by Calliope before the scenes on Hector and Achilles, and that this final part forms a distinct scene.</footnote>
Me querulum, flentem, iam ventos ore bibentem
Corripuit Clotho fusoque coloque remoto
Dansque mihi nomen socias invitat ad omen
Meque tuens puerum. «Puer hic», ait, «equet Homerum...»

And Calliope, having listened to Godfrey's description of the cloak's first motif, concludes that Godfrey now possesses the cloak that Jove wore against the giants. In other words: Godfrey is the new Jove who fights the giants, that is, allegorically, the modern poet who has replaced the poets of old (169–175):

Hec clamis illa, puto, nec ut anceps credere nuto,
Pulvere squalentem que texit cuncta tuentem,
Prelia pro mundo cum gessit Marte secundo,
Cum male contuso, ter te, Briaree, refuso
Lassa Giganteis rediit Iovis ala tropheis,
Terraque cum mestum daret orba per aera questum,
Pressaque cum gemeret et cum prope tota lateret.

Finally, after the portrait of Helen's abduction, to remove any doubt, Godfrey has Calliope say that his account pleases her more than the poetry of Virgil (382–386):

Cum mihi mille modis placuisset lingua Maronis,
Dumque sonante lyra linces removentur ab ira,
Dum pice consuta scopulos animante cicuta
Personat et celeri motu facit arva moveri,
Nil mihi stillatum dedit auribus ut mage gratum.

In conclusion, the twelfth century is marked by a new interest in classical literature, and the matter of Troy became one of the favorite topics. Dennis Howard Green has shown that Ovid's «Heroides» became an important source for the vernacular romancers who around the year 1170 inserted Trojan love affairs into their stories, thus creating a variety of combinations of fiction and history. Our analysis shows that a similar play of fiction, often inspired by Ovid, is present already in the «Trojan» poems written in Latin by the Loire poets beginning with Godfrey of Reims in the 1070s. All of Godfrey's poems imply some sort of literary dialogue with the past. The poetical frame is always a contemporary situation (Godfrey's criticism of Ingelrann's poetry; Godfrey's dream and dialogue with Odo; Godfrey's appraisal of a girl's beauty; Godfrey's dialogue with Calliope), into which the Trojan matter is inserted by summary or by ekphrasis, or with which it is associated (Odo with Amphion/Orpheus/Leander/Hercules/Pylades; the *puella* with Leda/Helen/Venus; Hugh with Aratus/Virgil/Plato/Cato/Amphion/Arion; and Godfrey himself with the two greatest poets of Antiquity – Homer and Virgil, the fathers of the Trojan tradition<fnref n="32" />).

<footnote n="32">³² These associations remind us of the idea of «translatio studii» and the topos of superiority present in the poems 7–8 of Baudri of Bourgueil, according to whom Godfrey and himself were the Ovids and Homers of his time. Cf. Kretschmer (note 7) 1111–1115.</footnote>