Today’s universities often separate into departments based on geographic regions, as seen in the common designations of “English” and “French.” Yet scholars in both of these fields who specialize in medieval studies are aware that, in the time period they study, these two regions were not completely separate entities. Rather, they were deeply entwined, with culture, land, and even leadership frequently changing hands or uniting them together. It is often impossible, then, to strictly study one discipline without at least an acknowledgment of, if not full submersion in, the other. But the university structure asks us to do just that, and, as a result, there is a disconnect between work in the field conducted by scholars of English literature and those studying French. This disconnect could adversely affect our scholarship, leaving holes in our knowledge when we must try to focus on just one these regions and ignore the other in order to better fit within disciplinary categories. In 2018, the first “Channeling Relations in Medieval England and France” conference was held as an attempt to bridge this gap, putting academics in these two seemingly disparate fields in conversation with each other. However, that event was only the beginning; it is imperative to keep the discussion going continuously. This panel aims to do just that, bringing together a new group of scholars of English and French—as well as other disciplines— whose work is by its nature interdisciplinary, showing how that work necessarily crosses the boundaries between these two fields and why it enriches both fields to do so.

The three papers in this session illustrate how a specific branch of medieval literature lends itself particularly well to conversations across scholastic borders. Stories about King Arthur and his knights, as well as the larger history of Britain, ironically gained popularity in France, with some of the most important texts in the tradition being written both there and in Normandy by authors such as Wace and Chretien de Troyes in the 12th century. They then returned back to the British Isles where they were translated into English. The three speakers will examine how the works of Wace, Chretien, and others have multiple connections to what is now present-day England and France. These could be in language, with French being one of the native languages of England, and so legible by an English audience. Or it could be through content, all dealing in some way with the history of the British Isles and its connections to the wider world. There is also a myriad of other possibilities. As such, these scholars show how necessary it is for academics in both of these fields to cross disciplinary lines and could encourage others to do so or, at least, to critique these disciplinary boundaries themselves.

Cristian Bratu and Hannah Weaver both examine the works of Wace, who himself crossed the Channel on multiple occasions and was patronized by the British King Henry II. In her paper “The Channel as Highway, Medieval Texts and Modern Universities,” Hannah Weaver examines his better-known work, the Roman de Brut, a translation of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s History of the Kings of Britain, which was itself adapted in Middle English by Layamon. Weaver notes the neglect of this text, particularly its manuscripts, which spanned a large audience, because of the difficulty of categorizing it as just “French” or just “English.” This is not only due to the text’s relationships with both regions, but also the story’s presentation in other medieval vernaculars like Spanish and Norse. She calls for using this text to think of “ a more transnational medieval literary tradition,” bringing the two different literature departments, and more, together.

Cristian Bratu takes a different approach to Wace by examining one of his other works, the Roman de Rou, in his “Wace and the Complexity of Medieval Cross-Channel Relations.” He finds that there is a disconnect between Wace’s French-speaking background, as well as his French earned title, and his working relationship with Henry II, which may have led him to produce work with a very anti-French tone. This particular text tells the story of the Normans, not only their own history in Normandy, but also, at the request of the king, their conquest of England in 1066. Whereas Weaver considers Wace’s work as bringing two different cultures together, Bratu shows how his association divides them, pitting the French against the Normans--with whom he links the English--and showing that his loyalty is with the latter. This paper aims to put this text and the authors own career in the context of these complicated relationships.

Our third paper, Funda Hay’s “Cultural Hybridity of The Quest of the Holy Grail” takes the conversation to a different, though related, textual tradition. She focuses on The Grail Quest, which spawned a large number of different interpretations throughout medieval Europe. Though its first written version, Chretien de Troyes’ 12th-century Perceval ou le Conte du Graal, was contemporaneous with Wace’s work, Hay also considers the story’s other iterations. She aims to show how cross-channel literature can have an even broader origin than we realize, with the story having roots in other traditions as well. Linking this text to pagan mythologies like Greek and Celtic, she argues for this story’s role in breaking down both geographical boundaries and temporal ones.

Concluding with this paper thus shows us where we need to go from connecting beyond just French and English to an even greater interdisciplinary conversation. This may include those who study other European literatures, the classics, history, and much more. By putting these presenters from disparate backgrounds together, we can begin this conversation, which will hopefully continue both in the Q and A after the papers are presented and also even further beyond this session.