Guilleville + Renart le Contrefait ; theme -1377
Posted: 20 Mar 2017, 04:06
I think, that the research text of Vienna 1861 was accepted.
The Vienna part of the 3 texts was calculated as "from 15th century". Perhaps this had the consequence, that also the 3rd part was recognized as "from 15th century".
All three parts are thought to have been owned by one person, Jehan Duboys. Maybe this person organized, that the text was multiplied. Or: perhaps it was suspected in 19th century, that this person multiplied the text.
The handwritten text (3rd and last text) was made in the manner, that it had some free places for the addition of pictures. Perhaps the Vienna version and the 3rd text were written by the same hand (?). Perhaps the 3rd text is written by a hand, that could be globally recognized as "from 15th century".
****************
The chronological parts end in 1328 with the execution of Pierre de Remy.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_de_R%C3%A9mi
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_de_R%C3%A9my
I think: Possibly it was intended by the author to draw a connection between the already popular bad hero Renard and the contemporary treasurer (generally the text is considered to be satirical). The German wiki text tells the story, that Remy after being accused and already condemned to death, accused himself of much more criminal actions, which caused, that he was not executed in Montigny (a place for usual criminals), but in Gibet de Montfaucon (a place for criminals against king and state). Contemporary witnesses already assumed, that these later confessions had the aim to reach this honor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbet_of_Montfaucon
The texts contain autobiographical statements, which made it possible to have details about the development of the work (... .-) ... in the case, that these are true statements).
One shouldn't overlook, that there are many other works to the Renard topic.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_de_Renart
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_de_Renart
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reineke_Fuchs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynard
I think, there is no chance to prove, that the "cartes" expression in the 3rd text is from 14th century. But naturally there is ALSO no way to prove, that the "cartes" expression is NOT from 14th century.
....
btw: I have changed the title
The Vienna part of the 3 texts was calculated as "from 15th century". Perhaps this had the consequence, that also the 3rd part was recognized as "from 15th century".
All three parts are thought to have been owned by one person, Jehan Duboys. Maybe this person organized, that the text was multiplied. Or: perhaps it was suspected in 19th century, that this person multiplied the text.
The handwritten text (3rd and last text) was made in the manner, that it had some free places for the addition of pictures. Perhaps the Vienna version and the 3rd text were written by the same hand (?). Perhaps the 3rd text is written by a hand, that could be globally recognized as "from 15th century".
****************
The chronological parts end in 1328 with the execution of Pierre de Remy.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_de_R%C3%A9mi
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_de_R%C3%A9my
The King Charles le Bel had died at 1st of February 1328 (probably 1327 in that time ?). The author speaks of the start of his work of 1328, occasionally of 1327. I think, it has to be suspected, that the death of the king triggered the decision for the new work. The death of the was connected to the fall of the treasurer Pierre de Remy, which led about 3 months later to his execution (25th of April 1328).French version: "Procès et exécution[modifier | modifier le code]
La mort de Charles IV le 1er février 1328 marque la chute de Rémi. Le nouveau dirigeant du royaume, Philippe de Valois (qui n'est encore que régent avant de prendre la couronne quelques semaines plus tard), le fait arrêter pour concussion, en fait sans doute pour offrir un bouc-émissaire à l'opinion publique mécontente. Après enquête, il est convaincu d'avoir détourné d'importantes sommes d'argent et donc d'avoir volé le roi. Torturé, il avoue finalement sa culpabilité. Il comparaît devant le Parlement de Paris et est condamné à mort.
Malgré les supplications de la reine Jeanne d'Évreux, veuve de Charles IV, Philippe de Valois, devenu entre temps Philippe VI, refuse sa grâce. Rémi est pendu au gibet de Montfaucon le 25 avril 13284.
Ses biens meubles sont alors répartis entre les membres de l'entourage de Philippe VI. Ses immeubles et ses domaines servent à éponger les dettes du roi et à gratifier son entourage, comme le prince Jean. En revanche sa famille peut hériter de ses droits et de quelques-unes de ses propriétés."
***********
German version: "Nach dem Regierungsantritt Philipps VI. wurde Pierre de Rémy unter der Anklage, die Staatsfinanzen veruntreut zu haben, verhaftet. Ohne die Möglichkeit zu erhalten, sich zu verteidigen, wurde er am 25. April 1328 durch Beschluss des Parlements zum Tod durch Hängen verurteilt.
Als er zur Hinrichtung zum den einfachen Kriminellen vorbehaltenen „Gibet de Montigny“ geführt wurde, beschuldigte Pierre de Rémy sich selbst weiterer Taten, die ihm bislang niemand vorgehalten hatte, darunter Hochverrat gegen König und Staat. Die Schwere dieser Verbrechen machte es nun unmöglich, ihn in Montigny zu richten – man kehrte um und hängte ihn am nahegelegenen und den neu gestandenen Verbrechen vorbehaltenen Gibet de Montfaucon auf. Bereits Rémys Zeitgenossen gingen davon aus, dass diese Ehre das einzige Ziel seiner Geständnisse war."
I think: Possibly it was intended by the author to draw a connection between the already popular bad hero Renard and the contemporary treasurer (generally the text is considered to be satirical). The German wiki text tells the story, that Remy after being accused and already condemned to death, accused himself of much more criminal actions, which caused, that he was not executed in Montigny (a place for usual criminals), but in Gibet de Montfaucon (a place for criminals against king and state). Contemporary witnesses already assumed, that these later confessions had the aim to reach this honor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbet_of_Montfaucon
The texts contain autobiographical statements, which made it possible to have details about the development of the work (... .-) ... in the case, that these are true statements).
One shouldn't overlook, that there are many other works to the Renard topic.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_de_Renart
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_de_Renart
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reineke_Fuchs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynard
I think, there is no chance to prove, that the "cartes" expression in the 3rd text is from 14th century. But naturally there is ALSO no way to prove, that the "cartes" expression is NOT from 14th century.
....
btw: I have changed the title