In the Bleheris version,[1] the lord of the castle is suffering under no disability whatever; he is described as “tall, and strong of limb, of no great age, but somewhat bald.”  Besides the King there is a Dead Knight upon a bier, over whose body Vespers for the Dead are solemnly sung.  The wasting of the land, partially restored by Gawain’s question concerning the Lance, has been caused by the ‘Dolorous Stroke,’ i.e., the stroke which brought about the death of the Knight, whose identity is here never revealed.  Certain versions which interpolate the account of Joseph of Arimathea and the Grail, allude to ‘Le riche Pescheur’ and his heirs as Joseph’s descendants, and, presumably, for it is not directly stated, guardians of the Grail,[2] but the King himself is here never called by that title.  From his connection with the Waste Land it seems more probable that it was the Dead Knight who filled that rôle.

In the second version of which Gawain is the hero, that of Diû Crône,[3] the Host is an old and infirm man.  After Gawain has asked the question we learn that he is really dead, and only compelled to retain the semblance of life till the task of the Quester be achieved.  Here, again, he is not called the Fisher King.

In the Perceval versions, on the contrary, we find the name invariably associated with him, but he is not always directly connected with the misfortunes which have fallen upon his land.  Thus, while the Wauchier texts are incomplete, breaking off at the critical moment of asking the question, Manessier who continues, and ostensibly completes, Wauchier, introduces the Dead Knight, here Goondesert, or Gondefer (which I suspect is the more correct form), brother of the King, whose death by treachery has plunged the land in misery, and been the direct cause of the self-wounding of the King.[4] The healing of the King and the restoration of the land depend upon Perceval’s slaying the murderer Partinal.  These two versions show a combination of Perceval and Gawain themes, such as their respective dates might lead us to expect.

Robert de Borron is the only writer who gives a clear, and tolerably reasonable, account of why the guardian of the Grail bears the title of Fisher King; in other cases, such as the poems of Chrétien and Wolfram, the name is connected with his partiality for fishing, an obviously post hoc addition.

The story in question is found in Borron’s Joseph of Arimathea.[5] Here we are told how, during the wanderings of that holy man and his companions in the wilderness, certain of the company fell into sin.  By the command of God, Brons, Joseph’s brother-in-law, caught a Fish, which, with the Grail, provided a mystic meal of which the unworthy cannot partake; thus the sinners were separated from the righteous.  Henceforward Brons was known as ‘The Rich Fisher.’  It is noteworthy, however, that in the Perceval romance, ascribed to Borron, the title is as a rule, Roi Pescheur, not Riche Pescheur.[6]