He wished to
please the courts, whose ideal was not the paladins, but Arthur's
knights. The "peers" of the Charlemagne legend are thus transformed into
knights-errant, who fight for ladies and for honor. The result of this
interpenetration of the two cycles is a splendid world of love and
_cortesia_, whose constituent elements it defies the Arthurian scholar
to trace. Truly, as Dr. Sommer has said in his erudite edition of
Malory's 'La Morte d'Arthur.' "The origin and relationship to one
another of these branches of romance, whether in prose or in verse, are
involved in great obscurity." He adds that it would almost seem as
though several generations of scholars were required for the gigantic
task of finding a sure pathway through this intricate maze. And M.
Gaston Paris, one of the foremost of living Arthurian scholars, has
written in his 'Romania': "Some time ago I undertook a methodical
exploration in the grand poetical domain which is called the cycle of
the Round Table, the cycle of Arthur, or the Breton cycle. I advance,
groping along, and very often retracing my steps twenty times over, I
become aware that I am lost in a pathless maze."

There is a question, moreover, whether Geoffrey's book is based mainly
upon inherited poetical material, or is largely the product of
Geoffrey's individual imagination. The elder Paris, M. Paulin Paris,
inclined to the view that Nennius, with hints from local tales, supplied
all the bases that Geoffrey had. But his son, Professor Gaston Paris, in
his 'Litterature Francaise au Moyen Age,' emphasizes the importance of
the "Celtic" contribution, as does also Mr. Alfred Nutt in his 'Studies
in the Arthurian Legend.' The former view emphasizes the individual
importance of Geoffrey; the latter view places the emphasis on the
legendary heritage. Referring to this so-called national poetry, Ten
Brink says:--

"But herein lies the essential difference between that age
and our own: the result of poetical activity was not the
property and not the production of a single person, but of
the community. The work of the individual singer endured only
as long as its delivery lasted. He gained personal
distinction only as a virtuoso. The permanent elements of
what he presented, the material, the ideas, even the style
and metre, already existed. The work of the singer was only a
ripple in the stream of national poetry. Who can say how much
the in