In the essay below, Ditmas outlines the evidence for Béroul's knowledge of contemporary Cornwall, citing details of Cornish history and topography interwoven into the romance.

In the following essay, Bruce maintains that most modern critics agree that a “single primitive Tristan romance” is the source of all extant versions. Bruce then surveys those versions, and discusses the plot of the Tristan legend and its similarity to the Irish Diarmaid and Grainne legend.

In the following excerpt from his Beroul's Romance of Tristran, originally published in Italian in 1963, Varvaro examines the episodic structure of Tristran, noting that individual episodes are often preceded and followed by narrative pauses that serve to emphasize Béroul's theme in that section.

In the following essay, Bédier examines the origin and development of the Tristan and Isolde legend and maintains that there was one single source poem from which the extant versions proceeded.

In the following essay, Newstead traces the literary history of the “tryst episode” of the Tristan legend, finding that it originated in three Celtic stories before it developed in various forms in Welsh, Breton, and French tales.

In the following essay, Newstead evaluates the significance of the role of King Mark of Cornwall in the Tristan romances, observing that the character figures prominently in the stories, as does the setting of many incidents in the King's castle at Tintagel.

In the following essay, Loomis examines several areas of critical disagreement regarding the Tristan legend: the influence of the Welshman Bleheris on the development of the legend, the relation of the legend to the Irish tale of Diarmaide and Grainne, and the dating of Thomas's poem.

In the following essay, Leach examines the characteristics of the Scandinavian version of the Tristan legend, which was derived from Thomas's Anglo-Norman version of the late twelfth century.

In the following essay, van Hamel studies the details of the dragon-slaying episode in the Tristan legend and compares these elements as they appear in different versions of the legend.

In the following excerpt, Noble discusses the characterization of Iseut and Tristran respectively, emphasizing their wit and resourcefulness in difficult situations.

In the following essay, Loomis comments on the critical reception Gertrude Schoepperle's 1913 study of the Tristan legend received, and discusses the origin, development, and transmission of the legend.

In the essay below, Bromiley focuses on instances of narrative repetition in Tristran, concluding that Béroul often repeats older material just before introducing an original passage.

In the following excerpt, Schofield compares the versions of the Tristan legend written by the Anglo-Norman poet Thomas and the Norman Béroul and offers a discussion of Thomas's version, including commentary on the poet's form and style.

In the following essay, Hyatte examines Béroul's use of weapons imagery in Tristran, noting that its main function is to delineate levels of knightly worth, to accent the theme of retribution, and to link narrative.

In the following excerpt, Schoepperle examines the treatment of love in the estoire (the French source believed by some critics to be the source of extant versions, including the Germanic and English versions), and argues that the appearance of courtly and immoral elements in some portions of the legend indicate that these episodes were composed during the second half of the twelfth century, when the “cult of unlawful love” was in vogue.

In the essay below, Curtis discusses Béroul's handling of the love potion in Tristran, asserting that the author does not use it merely as a stock device to advance the story, but rather carefully develops characterization and theme in order to incorporate the potion into the narrative.

In the following essay, Vinaver reviews the critical debate surrounding the nature of the origin of the extant versions of the Tristan legend. He also examines the treatment of the love potion motif found in the various versions of the legend.

In the following essay, Frank maintains that the Chievrefueil, a lay by Marie de France, was derived from longer versions of the Tristram (Tristan) legend.

In the following introduction to Spector's translation of the later prose Tristan and Isolt, Vinaver briefly touches on the origin and central themes of the legend, as well on differences from Béroul's version.

The following is an excerpt from an 1882 edition of the prelude to Tristram of Lyonesse.