Chinca, Mark. Gottfried von Strassburg: Tristan. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Dietz, Reiner. Der “Tristan” Gottfrieds von Strassburg. Probleme
der Forschung (1902–1970). Göppingen: Kümmerle, 1974.
Draesner, Ulrike. “Zeichen—Körper—Gesang. Das Lied in der
Isolde-Weiss-Hand Episode des “Tristans” Got-frits von
Strassburg,” in Wechselspiele: Kommunikations-formen und
Gattungsinterferenzen mittelhochdeutscher Lyrik, ed. Michael
Schilling and Peter Strohschneider. Heidelberg: Winter, 1996,
pp. 77–101.
Gottfried von Straßburg. Tristan, ed. Peter Ganz. Wiesbaden:
Brockhaus, 1978 [text of Reinhold Bechstein’s edition
1890–1891].
——. Tristan, ed. and trans. Rüdiger Krohn, 3 vols. Stuttgart:
Reclam, 1984–1995 [text of Friedrich Ranke’s edition 1930].
——. Tristan, ed. Karl Marold and Werner Schröder. Berlin: de
Gruyter, 1906, rpt. 1969.
——. “Tristan” with the “Tristan” of Thomas, trans. A. T. Hatto.
Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1967.
Haug, Walter. “Reinterpreting the Tristan Romances of Thomas
and Gotfrid: Implications of a Recent Discovery.” Arthuriana
7 (1997): 45–59.
Jackson, W. T. H. The Anatomy of Love: The “Tristan” of
Gottfried von Strassburg. New York: Columbia University
Press, 1971.
Jaeger, C. Stephen. Medieval Humanism in Gottfried von Strass-
burg’s “Tristan und Isolde.” Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1977.
Kucaba, Kelley. “Höfi sch inszenierte Wahrheiten. Zu Isolds
Gottesurteil bei Gottfried von Strassburg,” in Fremdes wah-
rnehmen—fremdes Wahrnehmen, ed. Wolfgang Harms and C.
Stephen Jaeger in connection with Alexandra Stein. Stuttgart:
Hirzel, 1997, pp. 73–93.
Picozzi, Rosemary. A History of Tristan Scholarship. Bern:
Lang, 1971.
Steinhoff, Hans-Hugo. Bibliographic zu Gottfriedvon Srassburg,
2 vols. Berlin: Schmidt, 1971–1986.
Stevens, Adrian, and Roy Wisbey, eds. Gottfried von Strassburg
and the Medieval Tristan Legend. Papers from an Anglo–North
American Symposium. Cambridge: Brewer, 1990.
Wenzel, Horst. “Öffentlichkeit und Heimlichkeit in Gottfrieds
Tristan” Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 107 (1988):
335–361.
Kelley Kucaba
GOTTSCHALK (ca. 803–ca. 867/69)
Saxon theologian and poet, author of works on predes-
tination that aroused controversy in 9th-century France.
Gottschalk was presented by his father, Berno, as an
oblate to the Benedictine monastery of Fulda. His boy-
hood was spent at Fulda, where Rabanus Maurus was
abbot, and at Reichenau. In 829, Gottschalk petitioned
a church synod at Mainz to be released from his mo-
nastic vows, claiming that his profession had not been
voluntary and was not binding since there had been
no Saxon witnesses present. The synod agreed that
Gottschalk could return to secular life but did not agree
to return the inheritance given by his father to Fulda.
Rabanus Maurus won a reversal of that decision at a
synod at Worms. Gottschalk spent the next ten years
at Orbais and Corbie, where he dedicated himself to a
study of the writings of Augustine. He was ordained a
priest in the late 830s, apparently without the approval
of the bishop of Soissons, in whose jurisdiction such
ordination rested.
During a pilgrimage to Rome in the 840s, Gottschalk
taught and preached about predestination in Italy and the
Balkans and made visits to Count Eberhard of Friuli and
Bishop Noting of Brescia. News of Gottschalk’s teach-
ings provoked Rabanus Maurus, who compelled him to
return to Francia. In 848, Gottschalk was condemned
twice, at synods at Mainz and Quierzy-sur-Oise. The
second synod ordered him whipped and imprisoned at
the monastery of Hautvillers. His writings were burned,
and his ordination to the priesthood was revoked. Gott-
schalk continued to write, principally on predestination,
until his death. A number of infl uential theologians,
including Florus of Lyon, Prudentius of Troyes, and
Ratramnus of Corbie wrote in support of Gottschalk’s
ideas on predestination, although these views were
condemned by such important ecclesiastical fi gures as
Amalarius of Metz, Hincmar of Reims, Johannes Scot-
tus Eriugena, and of course Rabanus Maurus. On an
offi cial level, Gottschalk’s teachings were repeatedly
condemned: at the synod of Quierzy-sur-Oise in 853
and at numerous other synods and national councils in
the 850s and 860s. An appeal to Rome on Gottschalk’s
behalf made by Guntbert of Hautvillers in 866 was cut
short by the death of Pope Nicholas I.
The theological position that led to this drama is dif-
fi cult to reconstruct because of the fragmentary nature
of Gottschalk’s extant writings. It seems to have been a
logical derivation from the late writings of Augustine,
stressing the point that God had, from eternity, not only
foreseen but also predestined either the salvation and
damnation of every human being. What was absolutely
unacceptable to his contemporaries was the conclusion
that Jesus therefore died only for the saved, and that the
sacraments, even baptism, were not effi cacious for all.
In spite of the condemnation of his contemporaries
and the increasingly harsh treatment he received,
Gottschalk never renounced his position but continued
to write, with increasing complexity, until his death.
His later works include speculation on the eucharist,
supporting the position of Ratramnus of Corbie over
that of Paschasius Radbertus; two works on the Trin-
ity, apparently aimed against Hincmar of Reims, and
lyrical poems that were especially innovative in their
use of rhyme.See also Eriugena, Johannes Scottus;
Rabanus MaurusFurther Reading
Gottschalk. Œuvres théologiques et grammaticales de Godescalc
d’Orbais, ed. Cyril Lambot. Louvain: Spicilegium Sacrum
Lovaniense, 1945.GOTTFRIED VON STRASSBURG