contributor.author:

title.none: RESPONSE: Pfeffer on Claussen on Stone

identifier.other: baj9928.9407.004 94.07.04

identifier.issn: 1096-746X

description.statementofresponsibility:

publisher.none: .

date.issued: 1994

identifier.citation:

type.none: Review

relation.ispartof: Bryn Mawr Medieval Review

The Medieval Review 94.07.04

Reviewed by:

From: Prof. Wendy Pfeffer, Chair, Department of Classical and Modern Languages, University of Louisville, wepfef01@ulkyvm.louisville.edu

Subject: BMMR 94.7.2, Stone, The Death of the Troubadour

I appreciate Albrecht Claussen's recent review of Stone's The Death of the Troubadour. I have not yet read the book and cannot rise to its defense here. But I must correct Professor Claussen in his description of Stone's source material. These are Claussen's words:"Stone considers the following selection of Old-French texts: razos; vidas; troubadour poetry by Raimon Vidal, Peire Rogier, Raimbaut de Vaqueiras; the Lais d'Aristote; some fabliaux; Italian novellas; the lai Le Chaitivel by Marie de France; the anonymous text Des Deux Amans; the legend of the Eaten Heart in the vida of the troubadour Guillem de Cabestaing; the "lai d'Ignaure" by Renaus de Beaujeu; the tale "Le Sort des Dames;" the Old-French romance "Joufroi de Poitiers" and Chaucer's Book of the Duchess.As readers of the BMML well know, razos, vidas, troubadour poetry and the legend of Guillem de Cabestaing's eaten heart are not part of Old French literature, but of the Occitan literary tradition. Stone certainly understands this difference (I cite page 5 somewhat at random). Nor do Chaucer's Book of the Duchess nor the Italian novellas merit being lumped together in such a grouping.

I would hope that Dr. Claussen's misunderstanding of this rather significant point has not colored his review.