MARGINAL ANNOTATION IN MEDIEVAL ROMANCE MANUSCRIPTS

instead that the numbering to stand on its own, new numbering for a new list: the
fulfillment becomes assimilated to the prophecy in form if not in content. Alternatively,
the annotator may indeed intend to replicate Lovelich’s system, but the Roman numerals
are simply applied erroneously. Confusion might spring either from the great distance
separating the two passages in the text, or from the lack of exact parallelism between the
trees themselves. The numbering systems diverge even further from one another after
Ionas, where the fulfillment passage inserts an additional name (Avme), and so an
additional generation. Also interesting is the discrepancy that occurs at the end of the
genealogies. In the prophecy, the importance of this family tree lies in the achievement
of Galath, the Galahad who will accomplish the Grail quest and “schal Enden alle
Aventure / In that lond” (XXXIX.263-64). Yet the fulfillment passage makes no
reference to Galath, culminating instead in Lancelot of the Lake, Galath’s father. He
stands, if one chooses to count from Narpus as in the earlier passage, in the ninth
generation, as Galath does in the prophecy.
The numeration of the fulfillment passage on f. 87r, then, reinforces an impulse
toward logical order and subordination that is similarly demonstrated by Lovelich himself
in the prophecy passage. At the same time, though, the instability of these systems of
ordering is paradoxically highlighted by the numbers, since they actually prevent a
straightforward identification of fulfillment with prophecy, by creating a rival system of
numeration and muddying the clarity of an orderly succession of numbered generations.
Finally, the scribe’s annotation of both these passages reinforces (and perhaps partly
motivates) the readers’ fascination with the passages, while likewise inviting a
comparison between the two. The f. 54r prophecy is emphasized in its significance both
344