Metamorfosi e magia nel Roman de Renart. Traduzione e commento delle branches XXII e XXIII.

This work examines two branches of the Roman de Renart, of which it provides the first complete Italian translation and the related philological-textual analysis. The structure of the thesis is therefore two-fold: the first part, which comprises two chapters, deals with the manuscript tradition and the translation of the original text into Italian (also taking into account the interpolations found in MS M); the second part, also divided into two chapters, presents the necessary textual and critical analysis. Before approaching the translation and interpretation of the text, it was necessary to decide which text to translate. Thus, the first chapter focuses on the tradition – and, consequently, the rationale behind this edition – of the Roman de Renart. A fundamental characteristic of this medieval composition is the impossibility of identifying a stemma codicum that would usually lead to a standard reconstruction of the text according to the lachmanian method. For this reason, to choose one of the available editions in this case means to choose one of the extant codices. The same chapter also addresses the problem of how the branches should follow one another; it was impossible, in the end, to establish which order would best restore the original succession of events. In this case, the author had to accept that any choice would entail a certain degree of subjective interpretation. The work of translation, which constitutes the second chapter, is a fundamental part of the thesis, due to both the depth of the original text and the several 'technical' problems that any translator necessarily faces when dealing with the translation and interpretation of a medieval text. The translation is accompanied by an apparatus of notes that aim to clarify some of the choices of translation, especially in relation to the most complex verses, and to provide an additional tool towards the comprehension of the text. This is particularly necessary when dealing with a work that contains recurrent references to forms of knowledge no longer shared between the writer and the contemporary reader. The third chapter is entirely devoted to the 'independent' version (BLC) of the branche XXII; it highlights the characteristics that make this branche similar to the literary genre of the fabliaux, and it suggests some interpretations regarding those aspects that make this episode stand out from the rest of the cycle. It is also stressed that the use of terminology related to the sexual and corporeal sphere, and the use of explicit and obscene language, albeit not exclusive of this branche of the RdR, is here used in an unique narrative context. The last chapter focuses on the texts of the branche XXII and XXIII as transmitted by MS M. Firstly, the chapter deals with the various intertextual links that the branche XXIII makes with the other branches of RdR (especially with I, Va, VI, X) and analyses its specific dialogical and polyphonic narrative techniques. The first part of the chapter, which covers nearly half of the branche and tells of one of several of Renart's legal trails, follows the diegetic order of the episode due to the complexity of the legal procedures. Because of the great variety of narrative themes, which characterises this second part, it has been deemed appropriate to follow the diverse thematics instead of a chronological analysis. Therefore, this chapter will closely consider the unusual role of Hermeline as advisor, the Arthurian journey to Toledo in order to learn necromancy, the new skills acquired by Renart the magicien (which allows him to become the bridge between two worlds), and the fundamental role of the 'word' as a means to convey the power of the art d’enchantement. Consequently, the originality of this branche lays in the evolution undertaken by Renart, who ultimately appears transformed into a demiurge. The last chapter of the commentary moves back to the branche XXII as transmitted by MS M. Unfortunately, the text contained in MS M lacks an important part of the story (due to the loss of a bifolio) and it is therefore impossible to provide a thorough assessment of all the differences in the re-writing. Nevertheless, the chapter analyses the ways in which this text was interpolated, and presents some hypotheses that – taking into account the relation between MSs M and C – attempt to explain the reasons behind these interpolations.