University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Proteges Of Lancelot: A Study Of Malory'S Characterization Of Lancelot In The 'Morte Darthur'

(USC Thesis Other)

The Proteges Of Lancelot: A Study Of Malory'S Characterization Of Lancelot In The 'Morte Darthur'

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content 70 - 26,534
STEWART, Marilynn Zarwell, 1942-
THE PROTEGES OF LANCELOT: A STUDY OF MALORY’S
CHARACTERIZATION OF LANCELOT IN THE MORTE
DARTHUR. [Portions of Text in Middle EnglishJ.
University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1970
Language and Literature, general
University Microfilms, A X E R O X Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
® Copyright by
MARILYNN ZARWELL STEWART
! 1971
THE PROTl5Gl2s OF LANCELOT: A STUDY OF MALORY’S
CHARACTERIZATION OF LANCELOT IN THE
MORTE DARTHUR
by
Marilynn Zarwell Stewart
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Comparative Literature)
June 1970
UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N CALIFORNIA
TH E GRADUATE SC H O O L
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. CA LIFO RN IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
Marilynn Zarwell Stewart
under the direction of hex.... Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Gradu
ate School, in partial fulfillment of require
ments of the degree of
D O C T O R OF P H IL O S O P H Y
\ J Dean
Date June.~l.9L70.
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
Chairman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................... 1
II. THE PATTERN OF THE PROTEGE............................ 10
III. G A RETH ............................................ 26
The Sources .................................................... 28
Part 1: Gareth in Malory’s Book I V .............. 28
Part 2: Gareth in Malory’s Book V .............. 40
Part 3: Gareth in Malory’s Books VII and VIII. 50
The Protege Pattern.................................................. 65
IV. GALAHAD........................................................................ 92
The Sources............................................................... 96
Part 1: Galahad in Malory’s Books I-V . . . . 96
Part 2: Galahad in Malory’s Books VI-VIII . 105
The Protege Pattern.................................................. 122
V; LAVAYNE........................................................................ 145
The Sources............................................................... 145
The Protege Pattern................ 169
VI. U R R Y ................................................................................ 183
The Sources............................................................... 183
The Protege Pattern.................................................. 197
VII. CONCLUSION.................................................................. 213
BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................... 225
ii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this dissertation is to study the characteriza
tion of Lancelot in Sir Thomas Malory’s Morte Darthur. It is through
Malory and not through the unnamed writers of the Old French prose
romances of the thirteenth century that the story of Arthur and his knights i
has descended to our times in its most popular form, bringing an inheri
tance of legend not only to the English but to all whose imagination has i
been captured by the heroes and exploits of Camelot; and this popularity >
is due in great measure to Malory’ s portrayal of Lancelot, at once the
most heroic and human of Arthur’ s knights. Despite recent critical theory
challenging the unity of Malory’s work, I believe that his characteriza- ■
tion is both original and consistent and that it plays a major role in unify
ing the Morte Darthur. Malory’ s sources contain conflicting conceptions
of Lancelot’s character, depending upon their focus on the wars with
Arthur, the liaison with Guenevere, or the Grail Quest. Malory alone
attempts to resolve the conflict and to interpret positively Lancelot’s
relationship to his lord, his lady, and his God. In this dissertation I dis
cuss one of Malory’s most original and effective devices for characterizing
2 !
t
Lancelot consistently and favorably. This is a cast of supporting charac
ters, the proteges of Lancelot; Gareth, Galahad, Lavayne, and Urry,
who function as mirrors of Lancelot’ s nobility and who, by their presence
in the action, serve as constant reminders of Lancelot’s position as the
ideal of Arthurian knighthood.
Despite the popularity of the Morte Darthur, Malory scholar
ship has been neglected, chiefly because of the number of problems it
presents for the critic. The most difficult critical problem is that of
Malory’ s sources. Not until nineteenth-century interest in things medi
eval brought to light some of the Old French prose romances upon which
Malory based his work was it possible to begin a critical evaluation of
the Morte Darthur, and not until the last decade of the nineteenth cen
tury did any scholar attempt a complete comparison of Malory with his
sources. Published in 1891, Volume III of Heinrich Oskar Sommer’s Le
Morte Darthur by Sir Thomas Malory, although largely superseded by
later criticism, represents the beginning of full-scale source study of
1
Malory. The number of romances from which Malory borrowed, the
number of manuscript versions of each of these romances, and the general
uncertainty of critics regarding whether to attribute Malory’s deviations
to his originality or to some lost source has severely limited Malory criti
cism. As a result, critics have been forced to choose between large-
scale appreciations of Malory which neglect or ignore the matter of source
3 i
1
I
and necessarily limited studies of Malory’s use of a particular source or j
l
i
manuscript. I
Another hindrance to Malory scholars has been the text itself.;
Until the twentieth century, William Caxton’ s 1485 edition of the Morte ;
Darthur was the only extant text, and it was difficult to determine the
extent of Caxton’ s editorial alterations. In 1934, Walter Fraser Oake-
shott discovered, in the Fellows’ Library of Winchester College, a manu
script of the Morte Darthur which had not been altered by Caxton and
which made it possible for critics to separate author from editor. Eugene
Vinaver, scholar and critic of medieval romance, prepared a critical
edition of the Winchester manuscript which dramatically altered the
direction of Malory criticism. Vinaver concluded from his studies that
“whoever produced the work contained in the manuscript never thought ;
2
of it as a single work, but as a series of eight separate romances.” For
this reason, Vinaver entitled his three-volume 1947 edition not the
3
Morte Darthur but The Works of Sir Thomas Malory. Although Vinaverfe'
division of the Works into eight separate “Tales” was far more appropri
ate than Caxton’s arbitrary and often senseless division into twenty-one
books, and despite the fact that this new edition with its brilliant com- !
mentary and notes was a great boon to Malory scholars, the foremost
effect of Vinaver’s edition upon criticism was negative. Scholars entered!
upon a lengthy and fruitless debate over the “unity” of the Morte Darthur,;
a question complicated by the innumerable definitions of literary unity, j
In his second edition of the Works, Vinaver himself clarifies his position j
|
and to a large extent frees the critic for involvement in other more |
important aspects of Malory scholarship:
The view that Malory wrote eight separate romances does not imply
that there are any serious discrepancies in their portrayal of charac
ters or that there are no links or similarities between them. All it ;
means is that the eight romances are not structurally unified,
either in the way in which a thirteenth-century cycle normally was,
by its “tapestry” technique or in the manner of a play or a novel
built on the Horatian principle of simplex et unus.4
This amounts to a partial recantation, unless one assumes that there are
no other types of structural unity than the “tapestry” or the classical.
The tapestry technique was alien to Malory’s method of reducing and
i
disentangling the complex narrative in order to present a simple linear
action; nor need it be expected that he would look to the Ars Poetica for
his rules of order.
Although not primarily intended as a defense of unity, struc
tural or otherwise, but rather as an analysis of Malory’s technique of
characterization, the present work presupposes a kind of unity in that it
deals not with a single “Tale” but with the entire Morte Darthur. There I
is in Malory a kind of unity created not necessarily by the author’s inten
tion of writing a “hoole book,” but by his devotion to a single hero. The
Morte Darthur belongs not to Arthur but to Lancelot. In none of Vinaver’s
eight “Tales,” which henceforth will be called Books, is the name of
1 ................................................................. 5 ..........
i
Lancelot unmentioned: in four he plays a vital role in the action, in j
* ■ !
three he is the protagonist, and in all he is the foremost of Arthur’s !
knights.
Malory’s originality in his consistent and positive portrayal
of Lancelot has not been fully appreciated, due in part to the problem of
multiple sources and to critics’ preoccupation with the question of unity. :
Still another reason is that critical attempts to see the Morte Darthur as !
i
a thematic whole have tended to concentrate upon the tragic aspects
within the character of Lancelot and within the Arthurian legend. For 1
example, Charles Moorman, in his study of the thematic center of the
Morte Darthur, The Book of Kyng Arthur, entitles his chapters “The
Failure in Love,” “The Failure in Loyalty,” and “The Failure in Reli- ;
5
gion.”
What has, I believe, been ignored is the fact that the con
flicts in love, loyalty, and religion are implicit in Malory’s sources and
that Malory alone has attempted to resolve them in such a way as to
emphasize not Lancelot’s failure but his success. The prose Lancelot
creates but does not resolve the central conflicts of the Lancelot legend;
Lancelot lives a successful dual existence as Guenevere’s knight and
Arthur’s man. However, the writer of the Queste del Saint Graalexposes i
the conflict between love and religion; Lancelot the lover cannot be the
best of Christian knights, and the Lancelot of the Queste is a sinner,
guilty of pride and lust. The Mort Artu, although not, like the Queste,
6
a harsh condemnation of Lancelot, nevertheless exposes another conflict,
the conflict of love and loyalty; the liaison of Lancelot and Guenevere is
made public, and the enmity between Arthur and his greatest knight j
!
shakes the foundations of Camelot. Malory alone attempts to resolve the
conflicts of love, loyalty, and religion, not by major alteration of the j
action, for the recorder of a legend is not free to omit whatever he finds j
unsuitable, but by a subtle and consistent redefinition of the character of j
Lancelot. |
An original device which allows Malory to reinterpret Lance
lot’s character and which has not hitherto been studied is Malory’s crea- :
tion of a cast of supporting characters, the proteges of Lancelot: Gareth, j
Galahad, Lavayne, and Urry. These youthful admirers and followers of
the hero model their character on that of Lancelot; hence, wherever they:
take part in the action of the Morte Darthur, their prowess and nobility
reflect that of Lancelot himself. In depicting Lancelot’s concern for
these younger knights, Malory is able to portray Lancelot at his best, as
the ideal of Arthurian knighthood, conscious of a responsibility to inspire
and advise the next generation.
Malory’s originality is most readily apparent in the case of
Gareth and Urry, whose names and tales appear in no extant text.
Malory’s Book IV, “Sir Gareth of Orkney,” although likely to have a
source in some lost French romance, has no apparent relation to either
the Arthurian or Lancelot cycle or the Tristan cycle of the prose
7
romances. Although a fourth brother of Gawain appears in both the Brose
Lancelot and the Prose Tristan, he is older than Lancelot and bears no
resemblance to the youthful hero of Malory’s Book IV. The episode of
the Healing of Sir Urry, from Malory’s Book VII, is likewise without j
source authority in any extant manuscript and has no apparent connection!
to the Arthurian legend. Yet, although all evidence indicates that neithac
Gareth nor Urry has any original relationship to the Lancelot legend, in !
the Morte Darthur both play important parallel roles as proteges of
Lancelot.
Further study of the Morte Darthur reveals that this protege
pattern also appears where Malory is using known sources and reinterpret
ing them. Malory develops the character of Lavayne, a nameless minor
character in his sources, and extends Lavayne’s role as Lancelot’s faithful
|
companion far beyond the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat, to which :
Malory’s sources confine him. However, perhaps Malory’s most daring
innovation is his portrayal of Galahad, in the Queste the saintly son of |
the sinful Lancelot, as the noble, but human son of a nobler, and.more I
human father.
This dissertation, then, is an analysis of Malory’s invention
or modification of this cast of supporting characters and a study of their
specific effect upon the characterization of Malory’s central hero, Lan- !
celot. Following a discussion of the protdgd pattern itself, as Malory
develops it, I will analyze individually, in order of their appearance in •
the Morte Darthur, the four chief proteges of Lancelot: Gareth, Galahadi
Lavayne, and Urry. My study of each protdgd will begin with a com
parison of his character and action in the Morte Darthur and in Malory’s j
sources in order to determine the extent of Malory’s originality. I will I
!
then examine the development of each character according to Malory’s I
protege pattern and weigh the protege’ s effect upon the characterization j
of Lancelot.
I hope to prove that through the interaction of his hero with
these lesser heroes Malory recreates the character of Lancelot, no longer •
the blandly superior lover and observer of courtly etiquette of the Prose
Lancelot, no longer the wretched sinner of the Queste who is replaced by
his perfect son, but a man both entirely heroic and entirely human, in j
whom the Quest creates not a sense of man’s fallen nature but a deepenedj
conviction of man’s potential for both worldly success and religious !
service. However, with this conviction comes the knowledge that in man
i
and in man’s world is an element of uncertainty, an instability that marks
the boundaries of the performance of man and his civilization, boundaries
which may be crossed only when both have run their course and when the !
i
mortal hero takes himself to perfection and prepares to enter the other, •
more nearly perfect world.
NOTES TO CHAPTER I
1. Studies of the Sources (London: D. Nutt).
2. The Works of Sir Thomas Malory^ ed. by Eugene Vinaver (3 vols.,
2nd e d .; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967), p. xxxix. Hereinafter
referred to as Works.
3. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1947.
4. Works (2nded.), pp. xlii, xliii. Unless otherwise noted, all
future references to Vinaver’s text, commentary, and notes will bej
from this edition. Page numbers will follow quotations from ;
Malory in the body of this dissertation. ;
5. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1965. !
9
CHAPTER II
j
THE PATTERN OF THE PROTEGES
Before examining Malory’ s characterization of each individ
ual protdge, we should consider some larger questions relating to their :
place in the entire Morte Darthur. First, how important is the role
played by Lancelot and his proteges? Then, why does Malory use these j
younger or novice knights as a means of characterizing his hero? Finally,!
i
according to what pattern does Malory develop the relationship of Lan
celot to each protege? i
In order to comprehend the importance of Lancelot and his j
j
proteges, we must look at the levels of organization in the Morte
Darthur. At its simplest there is in the work that unity provided by a
single ruler and his heroic fellowship. Clives Staples Lewis focuses on j
this central organization in disclaiming the relevance of any arguments ‘
for or against unity:
I do not for a moment believe that Malory had any intention either
of writing a single “work” or of writing many “works” as we should
understand the expressions. He was telling us about Arthur and the
knights. Of course his matter was one— the same king, the same
court. Of course his matter was many. They had many
adventures.1
10
11
However, this framework of Arthur is somewhat tighter than Lewis
implies, for Malory constructs his entire work according to this pattern of
Arthur’ s life. The birth and death of the king, the rise and fall of his
kingdom, his drawing the sword from the stone symbolizing acceptance
i
of a monarch’ s responsibility and his final command to Bedivere to hurl
it into the water because “ ‘in me ys no truste for to truste in’ ”(1240), !
these twin themes have caused centuries of readers to understand the
Morte Darthur as a single work, whatever the intention of its author.
However, as we noted earlier, there is another kind of unity
j
in Malory’s work— the unity created by a single central hero whose for
tunes are closely bound up with those of Arthur and his kingdom. Lance-
|
lot becomes the representative of Camelot, Malory’ s ideal civilization; j
|
he is the emblem of its success as well as of its failure. Malory, by his j
interpretation of some sources, by his choice to include others, and by !
his modification, and perhaps even creation of still others, reinforces
Lancelot’s domination of the work. In Book I the primary focus is on the!
story of Arthur and the rise of his kingdom, underscored by a series of
knightly adventures perhaps illustrative of admirable (Torre and Marhalt)
and not so admirable (Gawain) knightly behavior. Book I is, nevertheless,
broader than this simple duality, as complex as human life, incorporat
ing the Balin story of man’ s struggle with Fate, including the stern pres
ence of Merlin and the curiously human inhumanity of Morgan le Fe. If,!
in all this action, there emerges a hint of a single heroic center, it is in j
Malory’ s enlargement of the roles of Ban and Bors, Lancelot’ s father and
uncle, who play strong parts as Arthur’ s chief supporters and who, through
dialogue invented by Malory, emerge from the chaos of battle asbeliev-
able and sympathetic characters. ;
I
In Book II Lancelot first appears in action. Apparently
i
Malory has already chosen him as his favorite, for, although he is an '
exceedingly minor character in Malory’ s source, the Middle English
Alliterative Morte Arthure, in Malory’ s version he is a hero-warrior,
advisor, doer of deeds and speaker of bold words assigned in the source to
i
other characters. Book III, “Sir Launcelot du Lake,” is, of course, Lan-j
|
celot’ s own; and he is the first of the Arthurian knights assigned a separate
I
tale, if we accept Vinaver’ s designation and the apparent divisions of
the Winchester manuscript. j
i
Book IV belongs to Gareth; but as Malory develops the youth-I
ful hero, Gareth emerges as the first of the proteges of Lancelot, and, as i
such, “Sir Gareth of Orkney” becomes subordinate to “Sir Launcelot du i
Lake.” It is Lancelot who is Gareth’ s model, Lancelot, not Gareth’ s !
brother Gawain or his king Arthur, who gives him the “Hyghe Ordir of
Knyghthode.” The friendship of Lancelot and Gareth, developed in Book I
IV and underscored by major episodes in Book VII which are of Malory’ s
own invention, notably the tourney at Allhallowmas in which Gareth
affirms his friendship with Lancelot as his highest duty and chief motiva- ;
tion for chivalric action, deepens the pathos of the tragic chance by j
13
which Lancelot slays this noble young companion. Following Gareth’ s
introduction in Book IV, he appears in every subsequent Book of the Morte
Darthur. In his relationship to Lancelot he reinforces the unity of the ;
hero that binds the book together. Since the source of “Sir Gareth of
Orkney” is unknown and does not appear to have been appended to any
known cycle (Vinaver’ s contention that it is part of the Prose Tristan
cycle will be discussed in Chapter III), we may assume that Malory, by
choosing to include it and by linking it to the life and fortunes of Lance-
t
lot in the remaining Books, has gone beyond the “one king, many j
i
knights” level of unity.
Book V, “Sir Tristram de Lyones,” is perhaps the most frag
mented and least unified of all Malory’ s Books, and its bonds with the !
|
remaining Books are most tenuous. However, even a cursory comparison j
of Malory and the extant Prose Tristan manuscripts will reveal that I
wherever possible Malory reminds the reader of Lancelot’ s preeminence, ;
not to negate the worth of Tristan, for Malory’s hero-worship does not
demand that he lessen the virtues of the one in order to praise the other. !
In the episode of La Cote Male Tayle, Malory reinforces his pattern of
older hero and younger hero established in the Gareth story; for although j
the episode is substantially the same as in the Prose Tristan, Malory j
chooses to include it and strengthens the relationship of Lancelot and the
youthful protagonist. That Malory was aware of a similarity in the Gareth
story and the episode of La Cote Male Tayle is evidenced by his inclusion!
14
in Book IV of Lancelot’ s warning to Kay, who has scornfully named
i
Gareth Beaumains: “ ‘Yett beware,’ seyde sir Launcelot, ‘ so ye gaff the ;
i
good kynght Brunor, sir Dinadan’ s brothir, a name, and ye called hym j
La Cote Male Tayle, and that turned you to anger aftirwarde’” (295). j
A similar episode in Book V, which Malory likewise translates without
much deviation from the original, is that of Alexander the Orphan,
Tristan’ s cousin, who sets out to avenge his father’ s death at the hand of
King Mark, and whom Tristan sends to Lancelot, whom he knows is a
noble friend to young knights. However, Alexander, although he wins
worship and his lady, has a tragic end, for he is slain by the villain Mark j
i
before he can put himself in Lancelot’ s protection. In a conclusion not |
in any extant manuscripts, Malory tells us that j
i
hit happed so that sir Alysaundir had never grace ne fortune to com I
to kynge Arthur’s courte; for and he had com to sir Launcelot, all !
knyghtes seyde that knew hym that he was one of the strengyste .
knyghtes that was in kynge Arthurs dayes. And grete dole was made
for hym. (648) i
j
Malory does not create these episodes, but he is aware of their relevance,;
|
of their parallels to the pattern established in “Sir Gareth of Orkney.” i
I
In Book VI, “The Quest of the Sankgreall,” Malory finds that I
his source provides him with a natural recurrence of the motif of the pro
tege; for Galahad, the good knight, is the true son of Lancelot. In the ;
Old French Queste Galahad must fulfill the holy adventure because Lan-
celot may not on account of his sin. Most critics agree that in Book VII j
15
Malory shows little originality, only omitting long theological exposi- I
i
i
tions and allegorical encounters, which he does out of discomfort pro-
i
duced by translating the unfamiliar and the complex, rather than out of !
conscious choice and selection. However, what Malory does is subtly to !
alter the Lancelot-Galahad relationship so that the emphasis is less on
the sins of the father and more on Galahad as Lancelot’ s true son, whose
achievement becomes, vicariously, Lancelot’s own. Malory does not |
make' Lancelot completely without spot; he has too much respect for his |
source. However, he does place more emphasis on the relationship of
the older hero to the younger, and, in so doing, recreates the pattern of
the proteges, of Lancelot which gives thematic and structural focus to the j
i
!
Morte Darthur. !
|
In Book VII Malory’s originality reaches its peak, for here j
i
the writer not only alternates between two source accounts of the love of I
I
Lancelot and Guenevere and its tragic aftermath, but also introduces j
several episodes which are without source and apparently of his own .y
invention. In the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat, Malory selects a !
character, nameless in both the Stanzaic Morte Arthur and in the Mort
Artu, who plays a small but appealing role, and enlarges his participa
tion in the action. Thus, given a name and a personality, Lavayne,
brother of the fair Elaine, rises to the stature of a major protege of Lan- ■
celot. For Malory the attraction of Lavayne to Lancelot is as deep as
i
that which draws Elaine to Lancelot, but the bond of friendship is j
16
allowed to grow and deepen mutually, while the one-sided romantic
attachment of Elaine cannot continue. Thus, against the destructive
passion of Elaine Malory sets a constructive friendship which outlasts |
even the final debacle, for Lavayne lives on upon the lands given him j
by Lancelot even after Lancelot has done his moniage and been laid
to rest at Joyous Garde.
Also in Book VII is the sourceless episode of The Healing of
Sir Urry, a unique version of the protege pattern; for here the initiation
i
rite over which Lancelot presides is a physical as well as a spiritual j
regeneration. The young knight who can only be healed by the best |
. I
knight in the world receives the gift of life itself from Lancelot and from
that time is the most faithful of followers, until at last Urry, like J
j
Lavayne, goes to France in the company of knights of the house of Lan- j
i
celot and claims the lands given him by his benefactor. It seems as j
though Malory, feeling that Lancelot’ s purity and divine acceptability
i
have not been shown to be perfect in his Grail Quest performance, needs
to create a situation in which Lancelot can reveal before the entire court
that the divine grace is his, that the healing power possessed only by the
best of men, as it had been possessed by Christ himself, is present in the
secular hero. !
‘ j
In Book VIII all the followers of Lancelot drift away until h e '
is left in the center of the stage; none of his enemies and few of his friends
remain to comfort him. The proteges have done their part in reflecting ;
all that is noblest in the hero, and we may forget them. The last chap
ters of the Morte Darthur belong to Lancelot alone.
It appears, then, that the recurring pattern of relationships
of younger knights with the mature Lancelot is a device both to charac
terize Lancelot and to unify, structurally and thematically, the Morte
Darthur. It might be argued that this is a commonplace, that it is no
more unique than a series of distressed damsel adventures or a series of
quests after mysterious harts and hounds in which Arthurian literature
abounds. It is true that much of the unity of Arthurian tales rests on the |
j
recurrence of such similar adventures; it is part of the quality of the
j
dream that we find in the tales— the deed that is performed over and
I
over, endlessly, seeming without beginning and without end. Cer- j
tainly the idea of a friendship between an older and a younger knight is
i
not unique to Malory; indeed, the very feudal relation between lord and I
vassal presupposes some greater wisdom and maturity on the part of the
social superior. There is something here, too, of the familiar com-
i
panionage of the classical and medieval epic, which found its way into
2
romance as well. However, the point here is that Malory utilizes this (
relationship far beyond the degree of its presence in his sources. He
chooses to include romances not strictly a part of the cyclic matter of his
sources in order to develop this motif, and he invents episodes which he
develops according to this basic pattern. !
What, then, are Malory’s reasons for selecting this particu
lar type of relationship to characterize his hero ? Part of the answer lies !
in the fact that Malory is using a familiar medieval theme in a new wayi
The enfances, or boyhood adventures of the hero, are among the com-
I
3
monplaces of romance. Malory’ s source material contains many exam- 1
i
pies of these youthful exploits, and he includes several in the Morte j
Darthur. There is, however, one notable exception: Malory omits j
entirely the enfances of Lancelot. Edmund Kerchever Chambers objects j
I
to Malory’ s omission and complains that j
i
he robs us of the beginning of Lancelot.' There is nothing of the j
changeling boyhood,, nothing of the coming to court and of Lance-j
lot’ s trembling at the sight of Guenevere; not even that episode of j
the first kiss. !
i
Why does Malory omit the enfances of Lancelot, his favorite hero, when |
he includes those of his other main characters?
In the early medieval romance the enfances are of genuine
importance. They are not mere tales of childhood pranks but represent I
an initiation rite, a passage of the youthful hero through formative
events or experiences to manhood. However, with the prose romances j
i
of the thirteenth century and the rise of cyclical romances, the enfances j
lost some of their integrity. In these romances they often exist in and j
for themselves and are related to the central matter of the story only as
interesting sidelights on the life of the hero. This did not occur because I
i
writers suddenly lost their taste for unity. Rather, so many episodes in j
19
the life of the hero had accumulated over the centuries of storytelling
that, in order to include them all, the writer was forced to sacrifice
some links in the narrative. Cosman, writing about the decline of the
enfances, says j
such seriatim narratives, in which a story begins with its hero’s '
birth and concludes with his death, are guided by few dramatic
principles, or none at all. The education of the hero merely spans!
the time between infancy and knighthood.5 , |
I
By Malory’ s time the heroic adventures had expanded to the j
point where further addition would have been not only unnecessary but !
ridiculous. It was time not to expand but to “reduce,” as Caxton
i
explained in his preface to the 1485 edition of the Morte Darthur. The
texts which served as Malory’s sources are filled with heroic enfances of i
Arthur, Lancelot, Tristan, and a multitude of others. Malory, then,
I
could choose which enfances were essential to his story and which were
not. His choices may have been in part accidents of the reduction, but
as we read the Morte Darthur as a single work we find that the selection !
of enfances has an effect, if not a purpose. |
Arthur’ s boyhood in the Merlin romances is recorded in much!
greater detail than in Malory, which is an inevitable result of compres- !
j
sion. However, the central event or initiation rite, the episode of the j
sword in the stone, is related as befits its importance. Yet, as we have j
J
seen, Arthur is not the central hero of the Morte Darthur. His birth and j
|
death, spanning the rise and fall of Camelot, the greatest chivalric j
20
society in literature, create a framework within which the heroic fellow
ship of the Round Table may develop. Therefore, the enfances of Arthur
do not really function as the initiation of the heroic individual but as the
initiation of the heroic society. Book V, “Sir Tristram de Lyones,” con
tains a shortened version of the enfances recorded in the Prose Tristan;
and Malory himself, in an apparently original addition, describes the
education of the hero:
And so in harpynge and in instrumentys of musyke in his youthe he
applyed hym for to lerne. And aftir, as he growed in myght and
strength, he laboured in huntynge and in hawkynge— never jantyl-
man more that ever we herde rede of. (375)
i
Thus, Malory does not systematically eliminate the enfances of his
characters.
However, the question of enfances becomes most important j
j
in regard to Malory’s favorite hero, Lancelot, whose role Malory con- j
i
sistently broadens and deepens and whose life, therefore, Malory would j
j
have good reason to record from beginning to end, eliminating nothing j
of importance. Yet, as Chambers notes, Malory “robs us of the begin-
i
ning of Lancelot.” Certainly if Malory chose to exclude the Lancelot j
enfances, while retaining those of Arthur and Tristan, he must have had
good reason.
In the earliest known source of the Lancelot story, the Lan- !
i
zelet of Ulrich von Zatzikhoven, and in Malory’ s immediate source, the I
Prose Lancelot, upon which his “Sir Launcelot du Lake” is based, the !
21
enfances of the hero are recorded in great detail. The Lanzelet is vir- i
tually all enfances. The writer of the Lanzelet tells us how the child
Lancelot was abducted by the enchantress Lady of the Lake and de
scribes Lancelot’ s early liaison with Guenevere; the weight of the action
is on the youth of the hero. In the Prose Lancelot many of the romantic
early adventures are eliminated; however, Lancelot remains the adopted
son of the water fairy, who performs the role of mother and teacher.
The boy grows in knightly skills and is taught the duties of a knight by
the enchantress. There is the account of his arrival at Arthur’s court and
the awakening of his love for Guenevere. This early preparation for j
knighthood and for love is also present in the Prose Tristan; why does
Malory include them in his account of the early life of Tristan but omit
them in his portrayal of Lancelot?
A number of things may account for this omission. It may i
be considered an argument for the unity of the Morte Darthur that Malory,I
|
having added the heroic exploits of a mature Lancelot to Book II, |
j
“Arthur and Lucius,” did not wish to regress in Book III and depict the
childhood of his hero. Still another possible explanation may be derived !
from elements of the Lancelot enfances which conflict with Malory’s j
i
own view of his hero and of the matiere of Arthur. For example, it is j
i
: |
well known that Malory reduces the element of the supernatural in his j
narrative and that he is not quite comfortable with the Celtic merveilles.1
Unwilling to subordinate his hero to an enchantress or to hint that
Lancelot, the best of earthly knights, is possessed of virtues belonging '
to the Celtic Other-world, Malory may have wished to suppress the
“changeling boyhood” under the tutelage of the water fairy. It is also
likely that the early liaison of Lancelot and Guenevere was not to
Malory’s taste. Whenever possible, Malory suppresses the relations of
the lovers; and when the plot line of his source romances forces him to
j
record the final meetings of the lovers and the sordid encounter with
i
Aggravain, he can only comment that “whether they were abed other at
other maner of disportis, me lyste nat thereof make no mencion, for
love that tyme was nat as love ys nowadayes” (1165). This curious j
duality of theme and action creates many ambiguities and paradoxes in
the Morte Darthur. Although Malory records the love of Tristan and j
Iseult from its inception, with Lancelot he represses the adultery, while
emphasizing the noble devotion of the hero and the queen. !
However, although Malory may have had several reasons for ;
omitting the Lancelot enfances, it is a fact that the central character j
j
of the Morte Darthur enters the action a mature hero, already renowned, i
I
with a sense that on his performance depends not the achievement of !
glory but its preservation. Yet, paradoxically, in depriving Lancelot of j
i
his childhood, Malory has freed his hero for a role in other enfances, the ;
enfances of his protegds. In the Morte Darthur Lancelot becomes 1
teacher rather than pupil, parent rather than child; for Malory develops j
for him a series of youthful companions over whose development he
23 1
presides, and who offer him a kind of vicarious youth. In his portrayal
of these protdges, Malory approaches the technique of the writers of
early medieval romances, for whom the enfances were organically
related to the characterization of the hero. In Malory the growth and
i
development of the protdgg is not merely a narrative interlude designed j
I
s
to fill the gap between birth and maturity but the central formative I
experience in the life of Gareth, Galahad, Lavayne, and Urry. The
successful performance and noble character of each depends upon this
j
early relationship with Lancelot, this early training under the guidance j
of the best of earthly knights. Even more important, however, is the '
effect of these relationships upon the character of Lancelot. By portray-j
ing Lancelot as guide and guardian of younger knights, Malory expresses j
i
his primary understanding of Lancelot’s character. For Malory Lancelot j
i
is not man questing after a behavioral ideal; he has achieved the ideal
and is in a position to interpret it to others.
We have spoken of a pattern that Malory develops in his
1
portrayal of each of the proteges of Lancelot. While each relationship
is unique and differs in the degree to which the writer deviates from his j
source, nearly all of the following characteristics are to be found in his i
portrayal of each character . In the beginning of each adventure, the
youth is drawn to Lancelot in some way, by his renown, by a natural
i
bond, or by that charismatic quality which inevitably causes those who 1
do not recognize Lancelot to become aware of his nobility of character.
24
Lancelot responds to this expression of admiration or affection with kind
ness, parental pride in the achievements of the youth, and great gener- j
osity. Lancelot then presides over the rite of initiation or advises and
observes during the initial trial and testing of the youth. Once this is
achieved, Lancelot becomes a behavioral ideal to the young man, and j
l
from the hero worship grows loyalty, which culminates in genuine friend-
7
ship, as the youth offers his aid to his benefactor. The independent
actions of the youth, from this time on, reflect the noble qualities of j
Lancelot; and his deeds become by extension the deeds of Lancelot him-j
self. Finally, the mutual encounter of the younger and older hero is so j
linked to a major plot thread that the friendship becomes a commentary
|
on Lancelot and emphasizes his successes over his failures in love, in !
loyalty, and in religion. Thus, by introducing Gareth and Urry, expand--
ing the role of Lavayne, and redefining the character of Galahad,
Malory dramatically alters the character of Lancelot and portrays him
not as a passive victim of change but as an active instrument of growth. ;
NOTES TO CHAPTER II
“The English Prose Morte,” Essays on Malory, ed. by Jack Arthur
Walter Bennett (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963), p. 22. |
i
The literary motif of the companionship of the hero and his trusted
friend is of ancient date, and familiar examples are Achilles and j
Patroclus and Aeneas and Achates in the classicalnepic, Roland
and Oliver in the medieval epic. In medieval times the pattern
was reinforced by the feudal custom of vassals who sent their sons
to be brought up in the household of the overlord. i
See Madeleine Cosman, The Education of the Hero in Arthurian
Romance (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1965). |
Sir Thomas Malory, English Association Pamphlet, no. 51
(January, 1922), p. 5.
The Education of the Hero, p. 47.
|
In medieval literature the merveilles are episodes depicting magi-j
cal or supernatural events, probably having their source in Celtic -
folklore and myth.
In its emphasis on loyalty, the primary feudal virtue, Malory’s
protdge pattern reflects the relationship of lord and vassal as well
as that of companions.
CHAPTER III |
I
GARETH I
|
The first of Lancelot’ s protdg^s to appear in the Morte :
i
Darthur is the youngest brother of Gawain, Sir Gareth of Orkney. Of the;
‘i
four proteges, Gareth plays the most extensive role in Malory’s work; he !
is twice mentioned as a brother of Gawain in Book I, appears briefly in ;
i
Book VI, is an important minor character in Books V, VII, and VIII, and ■ '
is the protagonist of Book IV. The relationship between Gareth and Lan-I
celot, established in Book IV with the dubbing of the youth by the proven!
i
i
knight, is a major device in Malory’s characterization of Lancelot; the j
protdge reflects and amplifies the noblest qualities of the hero, and the I
hero is at his best when expressing concern for the physical and moral
welfare of the protdge. Wilfred Louis Guerin, in his essay on “ ‘ The
Tale of Gareth’: The Chivalric Flowering,” discusses Gareth’s relation- :
i
ships with Gawain and Tristan but emphasizes that I
of greater significance, . . . both for characterization and for the
increased artistry of Malory’s plot, is the stress in the “Tale of
Gareth” and elsewhere on Gareth’s relationship with L ancelot.1
Although he considers that Gareth functions partially as a chaste contrast |
2!
to the adulterous Lancelot, a contention which will be considered later, !
26
; 27
i
Guerin is also sensitive to the complementary nature of the
relationship:
Unlike the Gareth-Gawain affiliation . . . the friendship between
Gareth and Lancelot consistently shows similarities. Mutual love, j
not kinship, is the essence of this relationship. Lancelot’ s worth, |
necessary for Malory’s general purpose, is made clearer by his
friendship for and fostering of the young Beaumains.3
Before a complete discussion of Gareth’s role as protegg is
possible, it is necessary for us to compare Malory with his sources in
order to determine the extent of his originality in depicting the action
and character of Gareth. Since such a comparison involves the consid
eration not only of much of the Morte Darthur and several source
romances but also of numerous critical problems attendant upon the
source study, the discussion of sources will be divided into three parts.
The first part will treat Malory’s Book IV, “Sir Gareth of Orkney,” for
V
which there is no extant source. The second part will consider the role
of Gareth in Book V, “Sir Tristram de Lyones,” as compared to the Old
4
French Prose Tristan. Part three will compare the Gareth of Malory’s
Book VII, “Sir Launcelot and Queen Guenevere,” and Book VIII, “The
Death of Arthur,” with Malory’s sources, the English Stanzaic Morte
5
Arthur and the Old French Mort Artu.
28
The Sources
i
!
Part 1: Gareth in Malory’s Book IV
Malory’s source for his Book IV, “Sir Gareth of Orkney,”
|
remains a mystery, and critics have found it necessary to satisfy them- ;
selves with discovering scores of analogues. Robert Henry Wilson has j
pointed out parallels between Malory’s Book IV and the bel inconnu tales, i
a number of romances in which a beautiful youth comes to court in dis- |
guise, and, after a period of trial and testing, is revealed to be of noble!
6
blood. A detailed summary of previous analogue criticism may be ;
found in the first chapter of Cornelia Catharina Dieudonee Schmidz’s Sir;
7 ' !
Gareth of Orkeney. In the remaining chapters Schmidz compares
Malory’s Book IV to the romances of the bel inconnu type, the Joie de
la cort episode in Cretien de Troyes’ Erec, and Chretien’s Yvain. How-!
ever, although each of these analogues contains parallels to Malory’s
story, each is lacking in some important respect.
Nor are all analogues purely literary. George Lyman Kit-
tredge suggests that Malory’s mentor, Richard Beauchamp, Earl of War-
i
wick (1382-1439), was the prototype for Gareth. Kittredge cites histori
cal accounts of Warwick’s feats, among which is an episode there he,
like Gareth, appears at a tournament disguised and wearing different
8
armor on each of three successive days.
29
Guerin, however, suggests that Gareth is primarily Malory’s
own creation: “My own view is that Malory borrowed hints for this ‘ Tale’
from French romances, but that he is to be credited with great original”
9
ity for its creation.” Guerin, following a suggestion made by Thomas
L. Wright in his unpublished dissertation, “Originality and Purpose in j
|
Malory’ s ‘ Tale of King Arthur,’” finds these “hints” in a portion of the j
10- ,
Suite du Merlin in an episode involving Gawain, Yvain, and Marhalt.
In this episode, Gaheriet, Guerrehet, and Aggravain, brothers of Gawain,|
are knighted at the court of Arthur; a wounded knight appeals to Arthur j
for aid against a Red Knight who has imprisoned his brother. Gaheriet
goes on the quest and, in fulfilling it, frees Gawain and Marhalt. |
According to Guerin, Malory purposely omitted this episode in his own !
version of the Merlin in order that he might use it later in “Sir Gareth of j
I
Orkney.”
The major missing ingredient in this story is, of course, the
love story central to Malory’s tale. However, there are other problems
in attributing so much invention to Malory. Certain internal motifs in I
Malory’s tale suggest a missing source. Malory’s additions are generally :
elaborations on theme and characterization; he rarely adds to the already
complex plot lines of his sources. When Sir Persaunt, in “Sir Gareth of
Orkney,” sends his daughter to bring “good chere” to Gareth’s bed,
Malory treats it as a courtly gesture and an opportunity for Gareth to dis
play his nobility of character. However, there is little doubt that this is
30
a version of the chastity test familiar to readers of Gawayne and the
Grene Knyght. Another motif from this Middle English alliterative
romance is the beheading and miraculous healing of Gareth’s unknown
assailant. It seems unlikely that Malory, who tends to reduce the mer-
veilles in his sources, would create such episodes, although he freely
interprets them to complement his own ideas. J
The traces of Celtic myth in “Sir Gareth of Orkney” are
sufficient to have encouraged ardent proponents of the Celtic origins of j
!
everything Arthurian to seek out the ultimate source for the tale in Irish j
j
and Welsh folklore. Although convinced that Malory’s source was an !
Anglo-Norman romance, Roger Sherman Loomis finds sufficient ana
logues to the tale of Gareth in an Irish saga of the Ulster cycle, the Sick- j
11
bed of Cuchulainn, to postulate it as the ultimate source. In the saga I
Cuchulainn is summoned by a fairy to aid her sister in defending her I
lands. Cuchulainn succeeds in doing so; after he enjoys the love of the
lady for a month, they separate, and the hero, grieved by the parting, |
runs mad until a potion restores his senses. Loomis links the saga to the I
romances of the bel inconnu type; according to him, the bel inconnu
4 i
12
heroes, Giglain and Guinglainn, are forms of the Irish Cuchulainn. i
Loomis goes on to present Celtic analogues for nearly every incident in
the tale and concludes that “all except the tournament betray their ori- !
13 I
gin in the saga tradition of Ireland and Wales.” It is beyond the scope j
|
of the present study to discuss in detail the roots of Gareth in Celtic I
: 3i
folklore; suffice it to say that there is enough evidence of Celtic materi
al in the story to discredit Guerin's theory that Malory built the tale
solely upon an incident in which Gareth saves Gawain and Marhalt from j
a Red Knight.
Vinaver’s theory is somewhat similar to that of Guerin in j
i
t
that he, too, postulates a romance of Gaheriet as the missing source.
|
In “A Romance of Gaheret,” he calls attention to parallels between |
Gaheret (a variant of Gaheriet) of the Prose Lancelot and Malory’s !
i
Gareth: “It is evident from . . . parallel passages that the French Prose !
Lancelot contained some elements of Malory’s original. But it is also
14
evident that it was not his actual source.” According to Vinaver, the j
i
prototype of Malory’s tale was a romance of Gaheriet; the hero was the j
same Gaheriet, brother of Gawain, who appears as a minor character in |
the Prose Lancelot. Vinaver further asserts that this lost romance was
one of the Tristan romances, since Malory’s tale “seldom introduces
purely Arthurian characters, and never refers to any event in the history
15
of Arthur’s own fellowship.” Moreover, “apart from the protagonist,
16
the characters of the story belong to the Prose Tristan.” These charac
ters Vinaver enumerates as Tristan, Dinadan, Dinas, Epinogris, Lamorak,
Palomides, Sadok, and Safir. However, the lack of “purely Arthurian
characters” is difficult to support. “Sir Gareth of Orkney” has its focus
at the court of Arthur, and its initial motivation is Arthur’s tradition of
awaiting an adventure before dining at the feast of Pentecost. The
32
members of the house of Lot, Margawse, Gawain, Gaheris, and Aggra-
vain, play a prominent role; Kay performs the traditional role of demi-1
j
villain; and Lancelot is Gareth’s chief friend and mentor. j
Despite Vinaver’s theory, the Tristan characters in the tale, j
far from playing a central role, appear in a series of secondary episodes I
at the end of the story. In the first fifty of the story’s seventy pages,
I
Gareth has been knighted, has proved himself in a number of conquests, |
and has saved the lady Lyonesse and won her heart. Arthur and Gawain !
know his identity, and all that remains is for the hero to return to court !
and wed the lady. At this point, the plot begins to wander. Arthur sends
i
to Lyonesse for news of Gareth, and she suggests a tournament for her j
i
hand as a means of finding the hero; however, she does this on the
advice of Gareth himself. The tournament, then, is a means for Gareth
* * i
to return to court in heroic fashion. It is at this tournament that the
Tristan characters congregate; however, sharing the jousts are a number
of familiar Arthurian knights: Bors, Hector, Lionel, Bleoberis, Blamor, !
Galihud, Galyhodyn, and a number of others. Tarquin, whom Lancelot j
overcomes in Malory’s Book III, makes his only other appearance here.
Moreover, the presence of Tristan characters is not necessarily proof that
the source of “Sir Gareth of Orkney” is part of the Prose Tristan. Malory
himself, in the sourceless Great Tournament episode of Book VII, includes
several heroes from the Tristan cycle, among whom are Palomides and
|
Safir, as well as King Anguish of Ireland, father of Iseult. Whether or
not the tournament in “Sir Gareth of Orkney” appeared in Malory’s
source, the presence of certain groups of names from a particular cycle
of romances, Tristan or otherwise, cannot be considered evidence for an j
ultimate source of the tale. Malory would have been as familiar with j
the Tristan knights as with those more traditionally Arthurian; and he j
was free to use either, whether borrowing from a source or relying upon I
j
his own memory. j
There is stronger evidence of a Tristan source in the episode j
following this tournament, Gareth’s encounter with the Brown Knight j
without Pity, an apparent anglicizing of the familiar felon of the Prose i
i
Tristan, Sir Le Breuse sans Pite. The resemblance of the two characters, j
remarks Wilson, is such that the Brown Knight is “obviously a variant. . .!
17
but with no details to mark him as the same person.” Guerin, in his i
i
unpublished Master’s thesis on “The Function of Gareth in Malory’s
Morte Darthur,” notes Malory’s habitual creation of names for minor
characters and also his penchant for naming knights by color, and he sug
gests that “Malory possibly took the suggestion of a Brown Knight from the
i
name which was suggestive of color (Breunis) and really created another
1 8 !
knight to fill a transient purpose.” Thus, the presence of the Brown ;
Knight in Book IV is evidence of Malory’s familiarity with the Prose
Tristan, but it is not a sound argument for a Tristan source.
Another tournament concludes “Sir Gareth of Orkney.” After
the knights whom Gareth has overcome offer him homage and Gareth
34
weds Lyonesse, there are three days of jousting, described in three brief
paragraphs. The only combatants mentioned are Lamorak, Tristan, and
Lancelot (Gareth being excluded according to the wish of Lyonesse); and
and the presence of these familiar figures, whom Malory often praises as j
the three best knights in the world, is insufficient evidence of a Tristan :
i
source. They are Malory’s own favorites, and the number of conquests j
in this particular tournament is carefully allotted to give precedence to j
i
Lancelot. This conclusion is likely Malory’s own, for Malory frequently j
adds tournaments and weddings to his episodes in order to achieve a j
happy ending. In the Gawain, Yvain, and Marhalt episode of Book I,
Malory invents a concluding tournament to celebrate the entry of Pelleas j
and Marhalt into the fellowship of the Round Table. In the La Cote !
Mai Tayle story in Malory’s Book V, Malory has Lancelot disinherit a j
villain and offer his lands to the hero, who, at Pentecost, is knighted at
the court of Arthur and wed to his beloved. For Malory, a dramatic and
satisfying conclusion is always desirable; if it does not exist in the source;
he may compose one.
It remains for us to consider one further proof which Vinaver
offers in support of his theory that the source for “Sir Gareth of Orkney” 1
is a Tristan romance. Vinaver contends that “a striking point of similar-;
ity between Malory’s Gareth and the Prose Tristan is the treatment of the
19
character of Gawain.” Vinaver theorizes that Malory’s portrayal of
Gawain as a villain is dictated by his source:
35
While in the M erlin, the Lancelot, and the Mort Artu Gawain is
a noble, generous, and valiant knight . . . in the French Prose
Tristan he appears as a vindictive criminal, guilty of several
offenses and noted for his cruelty.20
i
However, the only evidence presented by Vinaver is the single passage !
|
near the end of the romance in which Malory tells us that Gareth with- j
I
drew from Gawain’s presence because he was “evir vengeable” (360). I
I
Victor Anglescu, in “The Relationship of Gareth and Gawairi
i
in Malory’s ‘ Morte Darthur,” ’ points out that the passage is not justified |
if the tale is viewed as a self-contained work, since Gawain’s behavior
21 !
in “Sir Gareth of Orkney” is admirable. Nowhere, by word or deed,
does Gawain disgrace himself in Book IV; and he and Lancelot are in j
j
entire agreement regarding the character and worth of the young Gareth, j
Several passages contain favorable comments about the sons of Margawse,
I
l
with the significant omission of Mordred, the traitor. It is with an air of I
pride that Gareth confesses his lineage to Sir Persaunt: “ ‘Sir Gawayne is
my brothir, and sir Aggravayne and sir Gaherys, and I am yongest of
hem all: ” (317). At the arrival of Margawse at court, Gawain, Aggra- j
vain, and Gaheris show her great respect; when she asks about Gareth,
Gawain expresses deep regret over his failure to recognize his brother:
“ ‘A, dere Modir . . . I knew hym nat’” (338). From this moment
Gawain begins an earnest search for his brother; and when at last he finds j
him, his praise is lavish: “ ‘Alas! my fayre brother, . . . I ought of ;
36
ryght to worshyp you, and ye were nat my brother, for ye have worshipt
king Arthure and all his courte,,, (357).
What is truly notable about the role of Gawain in Book IV is j
i
its importance. Although Lancelot emerges as the central guardian and j
j
model of Gareth, there is much evidence to suggest that in the original j
romance it was Gawain who performed this role. In the initial scene at j
Arthur’s court it is Gawain who sees Gareth approach and who, mindful !
j
of the king’s custom, says “ ‘sir, go you to your mete, for here at hande
commyth strange adventures’” (293). Save for the two tournaments and |
the knighting of Gareth, Lancelot’s only part in the story is in the com- i
I
pany of Gawain. If, as seems probable, it was Malory who enlarged the j
role of Lancelot and added the motif of the dubbing of Gareth, it would ;
appear that, rather than eliminate Gawain, the usual companion and
confidant of Arthur, and the obvious concerned party in the enfances of
his youngest brother, Malory simply adds Lancelot to each important
scene, causing the two chief heroes of romance, seldom simultaneously
in prime position of favor at court, to echo one another’s sentiments with
surprising accord.
When Kay mocks the young Gareth, Malory notes that “there
at was sir Gawayne wroth. And in especiall sir Launcelot bade sir Kay
leve his mocking, ‘for I dare ley my hede he shall preve a man ofgrete
worshyp’” (295). Malory’s usual pattern is for Lancelot to instigate an
action and Gawain to follow suit. Commiserating with the noble-
37
seeming kitchen knave, “sir Launcelot would gyff hym golde tospende
■ . |
and clothis, and so ded sir Gawayne” (296). Again, “sir Launcelot aftir j
mete bade hym com to his chambir, and there he sholde have mete and j
drynke inowe, and so ded sir Gawayne” (295). However, Malory cannot!
allow this curious union to go unexplained:
But as towchyng sir Gawayne, he had reson to proffer hym lodgyng, j
mete, and drynke, for that proffer com of his bloode, for he was j
nere kyn to hym than he wyste off; but that sir Launcelot ded was j
of his grete jantylnesse and curtesy. (295)
|
Further evidence that this is Malory’s own addition is the repetition, the !
use of “mete and drynke” in two successive lines and the recurrence of
the word “proffer,” which Malory frequently incorporates into his own
additions, and of which the most beautiful example is Hector’s eulogy
for Lancelot in the final scene of the Morte Darthur.
The curious togetherness of the two heroes is further illus
trated when Gareth, departing on his quest, takes leave of “kyng Arthure,
and sir Gawayne and of sir Launcelot” ; and when the incorrigible Kay
purposes to ride after Gareth, “ ‘Yet,’ seyde sir Launcelot and sir
Gawayne, ‘abyde at home’” (297,298). When Kay returns worsted,
Lancelot, who had ample opportunity to deride him earlier, when,
returning from dubbing Gareth, he unhorsed the unhappy Kay, appears
at court to rebuke him jointly with Gawain:
And all men scorned sir Kay, and in especiall sir Gawayne. And
sir Launcelot seyde that hit was nat his part to rebuke no yonge
38 j
|
man: “for full lytyll knowe ye of what byrthe he is com of, and ]
for what cause he cam to the courte .” (299, 300) j
Malory has the Red Knight seek revenge on “sir Launcelot du Lake othir :
l
ellys sir Gawayne” (325). When the Red Knight yields to Gareth and
goes to Arthur’s court to beg pardon of Lancelot and Gawain, “than
goodly they seyde all at onys, ‘God forgyff you and we do!’” (337).
!
Malory would have no reason to create such a part for
Gawain if it did not exist in the source romance. It is Lancelot whose
part he regularly enlarges, Lancelot whom he would wish to include as
the mentor of Gareth, both to underscore Lancelot’s function as teacher
and example to the younger generation of Arthurian knights, and to
strengthen the roles of these younger proteges as reflections of the superi
ority of Lancelot over all other knights.
Still another hint that Lancelot is performing a role belong
ing to another is Sir Persaunt’s offer to knight Gareth. The presence of
another potential mentor suggests that Lancelot may not have been the
original guardian of Gareth. As it stands, the offer gives Gareth the
opportunity to tell Persaunt, not too kindly, that he is “ ‘bettir spedde,
for sertaynly the noble knyghte sir Launcelot made me knyght’” (316).
It is of great importance to the general scheme of the Morte Darthur that
Gareth-be knighted by Lancelot. Guerin calls attention to “Lancelot’s
dubbing of Gareth, an episode unique with Malory,” which he compares
with the Prose Lancelot version in which “an apparently older Gaheriet
39
22
stands guard over the young Lancelot before the latter is knighted.”
Guerin lists six passages in which Malory, without source authority,
23
makes reference to the knighting. These additions contribute strongly
to the theory that the dubbing of Gareth by Lancelot is Malory’s own !
i
creation. j
j
The larger part of the evidence, then, suggests that in the |
i
source of “Sir Gareth of Orkney” Gawain rather than Lancelot played
the parental role. It is not Lancelot but Gawain who goes in search of
t
the young hero, and the battle of the brothers and the subsequent m utual!
|
recognition and repentance, a literary commonplace particularly popular;
in Arthurian romance (for example, Balan and Balin), is a likely denoue-j
ment to the story. There is no reason to believe that Malory himself
provides this episode, for his chief concern is with the friendship of j
j
Gareth and Lancelot. The plot of the original romance was likely some 4
thing of this sort: Gareth, whom Gawain has not seen since childhood,
arrives unrecognized at court; the youth proves himself through adven- I
!
tures, wins renown, and the news of his identity reaches Gawain through j
j
their mother; Gawain then goes in search of his brother, unwittingly
encounters him in a battle that allows both knights to reveal skill and
!
endurance, and brings him back to court to receive his deserved place. ;
Lancelot’s role in the story is not a necessary link to the plot of “Sir
Gareth of Orkney,” however vital the relationship may be in the total I
(
Morte Darthur.
I Part 2; Gareth in Malory’s Book V
In order to understand Malory's conception of Gareth in j
Book V, “Sir Tristram de Lyones,” we must first discover Gareth’s coun- j
l
terpart in the Prose Tristan . Vinaver’s theory that Malory’s source for j
Book IV is a lost romance of Gaheriet is based partly on his belief that j
Malory translates the Old French Gaheriet as Gareth in Book V; yet there
i
is evidence that Malory deviates from this identification, not only in j
I
Book V, but in Books I and III as well. In the Old French proseromances,
I
Gawain’s brothers are Aggravain, Mordred, Gaheriet, and Guerrehet. j
Although the spellings vary from one manuscript to another (Gaheriet,
|
Gaheries, Gaheret; Guerrehes, Guerrehet, Guerret), the characters
emerge in romance as separate and distinct. Vinaver, in his Index of
Proper Names appended to the Works, lists Malory’s characters and their j
Old French equivalents; according to this, Malory translates Guerrehet asi
Gaheris and Gaheriet as Gareth. However, Ernst Brugger has noted what
appears to be an abrupt change in Malory’s translation.2 4 According to |
Brugger, Malory translates Gaheriet as Gaheris and Guerrehet as Gareth
until midway in the Second Book of the Prose Tristan, whereupon he
reverses his identifications. From this point on, Gaheriet becomes
Gareth and Guerrehet, Gaheris.
Let us examine the evidence. In Books I and III of Malory, !
Gareth is virtually nonexistent. His name appears twice, together with
that of Gaheris, in lists of the sons of Lot; since the names occur together!
in the source, it is impossible to distinguish between them (41, 77). In
the Torre and Pellinor section of Book I, Gaheriet, whom Malory calls j
G&heris, plays a somewhat significant role as advisor to the headstrong j
Gawain. In Book III, “Sir Launcelot du Lake,” Malory again translates j
I
Gaheriet as Gaheris; Lancelot saves Gaheris from Tarquin and thus wins '
his gratitude and admiration. Therefore, whether or not it was Malory’s j
intention, he does prevent confusion by excluding Gareth from the action!
!
prior to his entrance in Book IV. However, even after Book IV, when, if
Malory were writing a “hoole book,” he might allow Gareth a role, he |
does not include him until midway in Book V, when he, rather than
Gaheris, begins to perform the role of the French Gaheriet. j
Wilson summarizes the role of the two brothers in the Prose I
Tristan:
Now in the Tristan, Gaheriet is the most prominent and honorable
of the brothers; he refuses to join the others in plotting against
Lamorak and when he finds his mother in bed with Lamorak and
kills her, he chivalrously lets the unarmed knight escape. Guerre
het is much less important; he participates in the plan to murder
Lamorak, but not . . . in the actual killing.2 5
Malory translates Gaheriet as Gaheris through the slaying of Margawse.
Gareth does not appear in the action, although references to Gawain’s
brothers may be thought to include him, since Malory does not make a
point of excluding him . Then, after the death of Lamorak, an important
theme in Malory, but never depicted as an action in the Morte Darthur,
there is a scene in which Tristan meets Aggravain and Gaheris, who have
just slain a knight who praised Lancelot above their brother Gawain. j
Tristan rebukes them for this deed. The first lines Malory translates
from the Old French: “ ‘But hit is shame . . . that sir Gawayne and ye ;
be commyn of so grete blood, that ye four bretherne be so named as ye j
i
be’” (691). However, to this Malory appends a still stronger rebuke:
“For ye be called the grettyste distroyers and murtherars of good
knyghtes that is now in the realme of Ingelonde. And as I have
harde say, sir Gawayne and ye, his brethirne, amonge you slew a !
bettir knyght than ever any of you was, whyche was called the
noble knyght sir Lamorak de Galys.” (691)
The Prose Tristan indicts the pair only for the one murder; Malory takes :
this opportunity to extend the condemnation to the slaying of Lamorak.
i
Here, as Wilson notes, the manuscript of the Prose Tristan which is
generally closest to Malory’s source has Guerrehet, although two other
26
manuscripts contain the name of Gaheriet. It appears that the incident
forced Malory into a choice; as he did not wish to make Gareth a mur
derer, he reversed his previous identification of Gaheris and Gaheriet.
In the remainder of Book V and in Books VI through VIII, Malory trans
lates Gaheriet as Gareth. However, one question remains. If Malory
made a discovery sufficiently dramatic to warrant a total reversal of
characters midway in the Tristan, why did he fail to change his previous
identification of Gaheriet as Gaheris, at least in the first half of “Sir
Tristram de Lyones” ?
43
i
i
Wilson suggests one solution. According to him, Malory was
not at first concerned with Gareth’s nobility in Book V, since Books IV j
i
I
and V were initially intended as separate works: !
The indefinite references to the brothers as murderers, and the long'
stretch of narrative without any word of Gareth, suggest that for a j
while Malory did think he was writing a separate tale about Tristan
. . . Hence he would not have needed to work out the problem of j
how Gareth fitted in. For the sudden decision then to introduce
Gareth, at the cost of reversing the source, the most weighty
motive would have been the reaching of another decision: that the j
Books of Tristram and the Tale of Gareth were to be “published”
together.2 7 1
Thus, midway through “Sir Tristram de Lyones,” Malory makes a deci- :
sion to unify his writings into a single work. Suddently stricken by a
i
desire for consistency of character, a matter which has not hitherto con- ;
cerned him, he reverses the characters of Gaheris and Gareth to preserve i
the noble Gareth of the source of “Sir Gareth of Ork&ey.” Wilson im plies'
that Malory would not be concerned with creating a hero in one Book and
a villain in the other so long as the works were separate. This is to
attribute to Malory a very modern view of artistic creation: that the
author is a puppeteer, free to construct from his imagination characters
who perform one role in one play, another in another. However, the
writer who deals with a legend is not so free. Whether or not he actually
believes in the historical accuracy of his material, he must recognize j
that his heroes have an existence beyond his particular treatment of them j
in the imagination and writings of a society.
44
It is the murder of Lamorak by Gawain and his brothers, an
event strongly emphasized by Malory, but given little mention in his : ,
source manuscripts, that accounts most fully for Malory’s reversal of
i
Gareth and Gaheris midway in Book V. It appears that Malory was, fromj
|
the beginning of the Morte Darthur, attracted to Lamorak, who, with
Tristan and Lancelot, is said to be one of the three best knights in the
world. As early as Book I, Malory introduces a reference to Lamorak
which is without source authority. Merlin predicts that Pellinore shall
have two sons, Perceval and Lamorak, and that “ ‘ save one in thys
worlde they shall have no felowis of prouess and of good lyvynge’” (51).
“Sir Gareth of Orkney,” too, presupposes the excellence of Lamorak.
The bitter-tongued Lyonet berates Gareth by telling him that he cannot ;
i
succeed “ ‘and thou were as wyght as sir Launcelot, sir Trystrams, or the ;
good knyght sir Lamorak’” (308). Sir Persaunt makes a similar remark
to Gareth in response to Gareth’s revelation of his dubbing by Lancelot:
“ ‘All the worlde seythe that betwyxte three knyghtes is departed clerely
knyghthode, that is sir Launcelot du Lake, sir Trystrams de Lyones and
sir Lamerok de Galys’” (316). In Book V Lamorak, an important char- :
acter in the Prose Tristan, is an even larger figure. Malory increases
the importance of Lamorak, not only in life, but also in death. Twice,
in lengthy passages, Malory describes the murder of Lamorak at the
hands of Gawain and his brothers. Vinaver, commenting on these pas
sages, notes that “une des particularity du Tristan de Malory, c ’est la
28 i
description ddtailee de la mort de Lamorac.” Vinaver finds only one
: manuscript, Paris, Bibl. Nat. fr. 103, containing an account of the mur-j
I
I
der of Lamorak; and in this account the murderers are Gawain, Mordred, i
and Aggravain. However, according to Vinaver, this manuscript is not j
j
Malory’s source. Instead, Vinaver postulates a lost version which emphar
sized the death of Lamorak and which was the common source of Malory!
29 !
and MS. 103. Malory’s first description of the murder occurs before the
i
i
reversal of Gaheriet and Guerrehet. In it Malory attributes the murder to!
“.Sir Gawayne and his bretherne” (688). In the second account, which |
occurs after the reversal, Malory is more specific and names Gawain,
Aggravain, Mordred, and Gaheris (699). In Book VII, without source i
authority, Malory makes Lamorak’s death the motivation for SirPinell’s ;
attempt to poison Gawain in the episode of the Poisoned Apple; and in
the episode of the Healing of Sir Urry, Malory compares the deaths of
Tristan and Lamorak, similar in that both were “with treson slaynd’ (1149).
It is the relationship of Gawain and his brothers to this act
that causes Malory to reverse his identification of Gaheris and Gareth.
Although in the early part of the Prose Tristan Gaheriet performs no igno
ble action, it is questionable whether Malory considers the slaying of
Margawse an honorable act, despite Wilson’s comment that Gaheriet
“chivalrously lets the unarmed knight escape.” Lamorak himself calls
the act “ ‘fowle and evyll,’” telling Gaheris that the offense of slaying
“ ‘youre modir that bare you’ ” is far greater than that of slaying Lam orak;
himself: “ ‘For with more ryght ye shulde have slayne me!’” (612).
Arthur is furious and Lancelot comments that “ ‘here is a grete myscheff
fallyn by fellony and by forecaste treason, that your syster is thus sham-
fully islayne’” (613). Surely, then, Malory would not allow Gareth to
play the role of matricide.
Malory’s first reference to the murder names only Gawain as
the murderer. However, Tristan’s rebuke of Guerrehet and Aggravain
for a similar murder, the murder of a knight who praised Lancelot over
Gawain, may have caused him to question his translation. It is at this
point that Malory makes the reversal of characters. Either Malory was
sufficiently impressed at the condemnation of Guerrehet and Aggravain
to add to it the further accusation of Lamorak’s murder,. or Malory’s
source attributed the murder to Guerrehet as well as to Aggravain, Mor- j
dred, and Gawain. When, in a subsequent passage of the Prose Tristan,
Tristan and Dinadan, Lamorak’s friends and supporters, greet Gaheriet
in a friendly manner, Malory must have become convinced of the neces
sity of translating Gaheriet as Gareth rather than as Gaheris. In the Prose
Tristan manuscripts, although Gaheriet kills Margawse when he discovers
that she has compromised herself, he is not responsible for Lamorak’s
death and is not present when his brothers plot to surprise Lamorak with
Margawse. Therefore, there is no contradiction in the welcome he
receives from Tristan and Dinadan. Immediately after Tristan welcomes
Gareth in the Morte Darthur, Malory introduces a long passage in which
47
Tristan and Dinadan discuss the tragedy of Lamorak’s murder. At this !
point Malory has Gareth clear himself of guilt in a speech that appears ;
in none of the Tristan manuscripts: ;
“Well I undirstonde the vengeaunce of my brethirne, sir Gawayne,
sir Aggravayne, sir Gaherys, and sir Mordred. But as for me . . . ;
I medyll nat of their maters, and therefore there is none that
lovyth me of them. And for cause that I undirstonde they be mur-j
therars of good knyghtes I lefte there company,. and wolde God I
had bene besyde sir Gawayne whan that moste noble knyght sir
Lamorake was slayne (699)
This is Malory’s Gareth, Lancelot’s protdge, who chooses to affirm I
friendship over kinship and who cannot condone a vengeful act. This
dramatic reversal of characters is a major deviation from Malory’s
source. Nor does-it create any serious inconsistencies; Gaheris, like
Gawain, remains an ambiguous character, capable of nobility, but
caught in the web of clan justice and revenge.
Malory’s source may well have placed more emphasis on
Lamorak’s death than do any of the extant manuscripts, but Malory’s
treatment of the murder in subsequent Books indicates that the treasonous
murder is an important action, an action that defines by contrast Malory’s
conception of ideal knighthood. When the Round Table is founded,
Malory puts in the mouth of Arthur the code of the “hyghe Order of
Knyghthode” : “The kynge . . . charged them never to do outerage
nothir morthir, and allwayes to fie treson, and to gyff mercy unto hym
that askith mercy, uppon payne of forfiture of their worship” (120).
48 '
!
Clearly, any of the Arthurian knights who are guilty of murder or treason j
I
cannot be examples of ideal knighthood, and the murder of Lamorak is j
both. Throughout the Morte Darthur Lamorak’s murder, even more than
the death of Tristan at the hands of Mark, is an example of the type of
action that may destroy knighthood, whose vitality lies not so much in |
i
a code as in the person of the heroic individual, the Lamorak, Lancelot,;
or Tristan who embodies that code and whose death lessens the effective |
|
power of the Order. j
i
With respect to his depiction of Gareth as a prot£g£ of Lan- j
i
celot, Malory’s emphasis on Lamorak’s murder and on Gareth’s strong
denunciation of the act are his most notable alterations of his source in i
“Sir Tristram de Lyones.” The effect of these changes is to emphasize
the nobility of Gareth’s character and to place his loyalty to Lancelot,
the voluntary loyalty based on friendship and respect, above his loyalty
to Gawain, which is rooted in the ties of family and clan. Malory’s
interpretation of the murder also accounts for the lone passage in Book IV
in which Gawain is depicted negatively. Immediately following a pas
sage in which Malory describes Gareth’s great love for Lancelot, Malory
comments that
for evir aftir sir Gareth had aspyed sir Gawaynes conductions, he
wythdrewe hymself fro his brother sir Gawaynes felyship, for he
was evir vengeable, and where he hated he wolde be avenged with
murther: and that hated sir Gareth. (360)
49
Ironically, it is a desire to avenge the death of Gareth that drives Gawain
in Book VIII, to pursue Lancelot over land and sea, waging the war that j
destroys Camelot. In Books IV and V Malory foreshadows these events
and provides the foundation for his defense of Lancelot.
Aside from this, however, Malory’s portrayal of Gareth in
Book V is not strong evidence of Malory’s development of Gareth as a
protdgd of Lancelot. Most critical attempts to defend the Morte Darthur j
as a single work falter at Book V; therefore, in discussing it, we must I
remind ourselves of Malory’s dual role as translator and creator. He does;
i
make important alterations in the Prose Tristan in order to bring it into
line with the central matter of the Morte Darthur. Throughout the tale '
he reminds us of the superiority of Lancelot and emphasizes his friend
ship with Tristan. He makes a sharp new distinction between Gareth and;
Gaheris so that the actions of the former do not conflict with anything we
know of his character in Book IV. However, the material of the Prose
Tristan is too complex for Malory to pull out individual threads and
re-weave them into the fabric of the romance. In the Prose Tristan
Gareth (Gaheriet) accompanies Tristan, Djnadan, and Palomides, not
Lancelot; and Malory does not alter this. Yet this does not result in a
serious inconsistency, for Gareth, unlike Lavayne and Urry, is not a
constant companion of Lancelot. The admiration and respect of the
younger hero for the older remains; but Malory portrays Gareth as more
highly individual than Lavayne and Urry, and Gareth’s relation to
i Lancelot is not so much that of one who cannot choose but follow as it
is of one who consciously chooses to ally himself with all that is noble in
Lancelot. It matters little that in Book V Gareth functions as the com- j
panion of Tristan; what does matter is that Gareth’s companions are
always the best of Arthur’s knights.
Part 3; Gareth in Malory’s Books
VII and VIII !
Gareth’s role in the “Quest of the Sankgreall” is limited to
Malory’s one-line reproduction of his source, in which Gareth, the Old i
I
French Gaheriet, greets his brother Gawain and the two ride off together.
Not until Book VII does Malory turn from the complexities of the Tristan j
adventures and the spiritual difficulties of the Quest and renew his empha
sis on the character of Gareth.
It has long been recognized that the Vulgate Mort Artu,
which contains the episodes of the Poisoned Apple and the Fair Maid of
Astolat, as well as the tragic conclusion of the story of Arthur, is Malory’s
ultimate source for Books VII and VIII of the Morte Darthur. However,
Malory deviates so from this source that many critics have been unwill
ing to attribute this to his own originality. Another factor compounding
the problem is that of the English version of the romance, the Stanzaic
Morte Arthur, which follows the Mort Artu rather closely, and which
Malory might have utilized as a source for his last two Books. Sommer,
in his edition of the Morte Darthur, first suggested the possibility that
51
30
Malory may have used both English and French versions of the romance.
However, Sommer suggested also that Malory’s deviations could only j
be accounted for by a hypothetical lost French version of the Mort Artu. j
Sommer’s wavering between these two theories elicited an attack by i
James Douglas Bruce, who concluded that both Malory and the author of I
the Stanzaic Morte had as their source a lost French romance, descend- i
ing from the Old French Mort Artu, but modified to account for Malory’s j
31 I
deviations. !
The theory of a hypothetical lost source was generally
accepted until Wilson challenged it in an essay entitled “Malory, the
32
Stanzaic Morte Arthur and the Mort Artu.” Wilson begins by denying i
the basic premise of the proponents of a lost source, that Malory was !
incapable of the originality necessary to combine two sources and add his:
own interpretation. Wilson then presents an impressive array of evidence
supporting Malory’s use of the Stanzaic Morte. Wilson lists both parallels
in incident, where Malory and the Middle English poet agree but where
the Old French writer differs, and parallels in language. He concludes
that
the only explanation remaining is, then, that Malory drew upon
MH [Stanzaic Morte] itself as one of his sources, and that it in
turn represents an original treatment by the English poet of MA
[Mort Artu] substantially as we know it.3 3
Wilson’s arguments appear to have been convincing; for
Vinaver, in his 1947 edition of the Works, accepts the theory of Malory’s :
two sources, although he admits influence only in Malory's Book VIII j
1 1
j
and continues to accept the Old French Mort as the sole source for the j
episodes of the Poisoned Apple and the Fair Maid of Astolat in Malory's j
i
Book VII. However, the theory of a hypothetical lost source was aban- j
doned, and in discussing Malory's characterization of Gareth in the final j
i
Book, we need be familiar only with the Stanzaic Morte Arthur and the j
34
Old French Mort Artu.
In Book VII, in the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat,
Malory's first concern is to develop the character of Lavayne. However, j
Malory emphasizes Lancelot's role as the benefactor of younger knights
by including in the Lavayne episode a tournament in which Gareth is the
victor. This tournament appears in both source romances, but in neither!
j
does a brother of Gawain win honor. In the sources and in Malory a
tournament is announced while Lancelot is recovering from wounds. In
the Stanzaic Morte the tournament is called off when Arthur discovers
that Lancelot will not be able to attend. In the Mort Artu the tourna
ment is held and “seur toz ceus qui la furent enporta le pris li lignages
le roi Ban, et messire Gauvains et Boorz” (39). In Malory the tourna
ment is described in some detail and becomes a glorification of the
prowess of Gareth.
On the first day of the tournament, Gawain and Bors each
overcome twenty knights, and they share the prize. However, Malory
remarks that Palomides also overcomes twenty, and Gareth does better
53 I
i
j
still, unhorsing some thirty knights. The latter pair are not rewarded, j
for they ride off before the end, / ‘and men demed that he [Palom ides].
and sir Gareth rode togydirs to some maner adventures” (1088). Malory
has Bors return to Lancelot and relate the outcome of the jousts, which j
gives Lancelot an opportunity to praise his protege. In this episode
i
Malory shows Gareth competing successfully, not against “yonge” knight^
as in the tournament of Lonazep in Book V, but against seasoned veter- ;
ans; while Lancelot may admire his protdgS’s prowess without entering
the lists against him. Lancelot’s praise of Gareth is “generous and
35
ample language befitting the praiser and the praised” :
“Be my hede . . . he ys a noble knyght and a myghty man and !
well-brethed; and yf he were well assayed, . . . I wolde deme j
he were good inow for ony knyght that beryth the lyff. And he
ys jantill, curteyse and ryght bownteuous, meke and mylde, and i
in hym is no maner of male engynne, but playne, faythfull an
trew.” (1088, 89)
In Book VII Gareth plays his most vital part as Lancelot’s
friend and companion in the episode of the Great Tournament, for which |
there is no known source, and which is generally conceded to be Malory’s
own. The Great Tournament presents a portrait of Arthurian knighthood
at its height. Its primary purpose is to glorify Lancelot and his proteges,I
Lavayne and Gareth, and to emphasize Gareth’s voluntary loyalty to
Lancelot over his compulsory loyalty to Arthur, his uncle, and Gawain,
his brother. Warned by Bors that the disguised knight performing such
mighty deeds against Arthur’s house is Lancelot, and seeing that Lancelot
54
is hard beset, Gareth disguises himself and goes to his aid. Lancelot,
Gareth, and Lavayne are victorious; and later, when Arthur rebukes
Gareth “because he leffte hys felyshyp and hylde with sir Launcelot,”
Gareth replies in defense of a higher loyalty than kin and Arthur con- |
i
cedes that “ ‘ye say well, and worshipfully have ye done,,, (1114). !
The great catalogue of knights in the Healing of Sir Urry, j
the last episode in Book VII, is, according to Wilson, Malory’s own:
There are over a hundred names, representing stories from all parts
of the Morte Darthur and frequently falling into little groups j
according to these stories— a circumstance practically conclusive j
that this list is of Malory’s invention and not derived from his j
source ,36
i
References to Gareth are found in two of these groups. He first appears
1
with his brothers, Gaheris, Gawain, Aggravain, and Mordred; however,
Malory takes pains to set him apart from his kin, for he adds “the good |
knight sir Gareth that was of verry knyghthod worth all the brethern”
(1148). The second group in which Gareth’s name is mentioned is one
in which Malory names characters “that sir Gareth wanne whan he was
called Bewmaynes,” of whom Malory emphasizes “Sir Ironsyde that was
called the noble knyght of the Red Laundis, that sir Gareth wan for the
love of Dame Lyones” (1150). Thus, on the eve of the great catastrophe,
Malory introduces biographical detail on Gareth, reminding his readers
i
of the young hero’s personal worth and noble achievements. !
55
A full understanding of Malory’s originality in developing j
the character of Gareth in the final Book of the Morte Darthur requires
that we consider not only his use of the Mort Artu and the Stanzaic
Morte, but also his exercise of judgment in prefering one account over
the other. In this last Book the friendship between Lancelot and Gareth,’
so carefully developed by Malory in the earlier Books, brings into sharp ■
relief the internal conflicts of the final days of the Round Table. In j
neither of the sources is this background possible; in the Mort Artu
I
Gaheriet is older than Lancelot, as he is in the Prose Lancelot, and in
i
neither the Mort Artu nor the Stanzaic Morte does Lancelot dub a brother
i
of Gawain. |
What Malory alters in his version of the Death of Arthur is
not so much the role of Gareth, for the part he plays while living is j
small, but the response of the key figures to his death. In the sources
Lancelot regrets the death of Gaheriet not so much because he loves him
as because it is this that has caused the strife between himself and
Gawain. The Stanzaic Morte, in which the verse runs swiftly over pas
sages of pathos and meaning, and in which motivations are sketched
briefly but unambiguously, does not allow the expression of subtleties of
feeling and emotion. In it, Gawain swiftly makes the transition from
love to hate, and Lancelot does not dwell upon his feelings for Gaheriet.
However, in the Mort Artu and in Malory, where emotions and responses
are painted in greater detail and complexity, there are striking differences
A full understanding of Malory’s originality in developing !
|
the character of Gareth in the final Book of the Morte Darthur requires
that we consider not only his use of the Mort Artu and the Stanzaic
Morte, but also his exercise of judgment in prefering one account over
the other. In this last Book the friendship between Lancelot and Gareth,|
so carefully developed by Malory in the earlier Books, brings into sharp
relief the internal conflicts of the final days of the Round Table. In
neither of the sources is this background possible; in the Mort Artu
Gaheriet is older than Lancelot, as he is in the Prose Lancelot, and in
neither the Mort Artu nor the Stanzaic Morte does Lancelot dub a brother:
of Gawain.
What Malory alters in his version of the Death of Arthur is
not so much the role of Gareth, for the part he plays while living is
small, but the response of the key figures to his death. In the sources
Lancelot regrets the death of Gaheriet not so much because he loves him j
as because it is this that has caused the strife between himself and
Gawain. The Stanzaic Morte, in which the verse runs swiftly over pas
sages of pathos and meaning, and in which motivations are sketched
briefly but unambiguously, does not allow the expression of subtleties of I
feeling and emotion. In it, Gawain swiftly makes the transition from
love to hate, and Lancelot does not dwell upon his feelings for Gaheriet.
However, in the Mort Artu and in Malory, where emotions and responses
are painted in greater detail and complexity, there are striking differences
.............. 56 1
}
in Gawain’s reaction to the death of his brothers. In both versions j
Gawain grieves deeply and seriously, although, as might be expected,
the French account describes this grief at greater length, complete with ;
several fainting spells. However, the French gives a subtle psychologi
cal account of Gawain’s response that is not to be found in Malory. The
vengeance motive is there, but the French writer stresses another,
stronger reason behind Gawain’s headlong rush into war; now that
Gaheriet is dead, there is no reason for Gawain to remain alive.
Gawain’s wish for death is expressed in a number of ways
throughout the romance, in his own words and in the comments of others.
Gawain, when first he finds Gaheriet dead, complains that Fortune has ;
caused this to happen in order to kill him with grief: “ ‘Puis que ge voi
vostre mort avenir, je sui cil qui plus ne quier vivre, fors tant sanz plus ;
que ge vos aie vengie del desloial qui ce vos fist” ’ (107). Thus, in the
French romance Gawain’s persistence is that of one bent on death. The
damsel who brings Lancelot’s message reminds Gawain of the dream
which he had at the castle of the Fisher King, a dream that boded his
death in battle; she warns him that by refusing the offer of peace “ ‘vos
pourchaciez vostre mort’” (118). When Gawain announces his intention
of fighting Lancelot, the young messenger is appalled: “ ‘Aves vos si
grant talent de vous honir et de vous mener a mort?’” (159). It is Lionel
who, hearing of Gawain’s intent, most clearly describes his motivation:
“ ‘Je vos dirai . . . porquoi il le fet en tel maniere; il a si grant duel de
..................................................................................................... ' ...................... 57
ses freres qui sont ocis qu’il voudroit mielz morir que vivre’” (161).
Yvain, too, recognizes the motive: “ ‘Haes vous si durement vostre vie |
I
qui avez emprise bataille encontre le meillour chevalier del monde ?’ ” \
(167). Thus, in the Mort Artu Gawain’s mad sorrow for Gaheriet, whom
|
he loves best of all the world, and without whom he wishes to die, makes
him in these powerful scenes with Lancelot a much more sympathetic
character. j
i
Malory ignores this wish for death which motivates Gawain
in the Old French. Instead he draws upon what for him is Gawain’s
most ignoble trait, his thirst to avenge his kin at all costs, which Malory,
contrasts with Lancelot’s forbearance and his grief over the loss of j
i
i
Gareth. Although we sympathize with Gawain in his sorrow, he comes j
off much the worse character in his encounters with Lancelot. In the
Mort Artu, in the initial encounter of the parties to the strife before the
siege of Joyous Garde, Lancelot sends a maiden to convey his message,
which passes over Gareth’s death rather impersonally and focuses instead !
on the necessity of a peaceful settlement and on Lancelot’s own infinite j
sense of the justice of his actions. Of Arthur’s loss he says:
“Se la guerre est commenciee por la mort de ses neveuz, dites il
que de cele mort ne sui je pas si encorpez que il deust avoir vers
moi si mortel haine, car cil meismes qui furent ocis furent achoi- j
son de leur mort.” '(116)
Malory’s Lancelot would never be callous enough to declare that it was j
!
Gareth’s own fault that he was slain. Gawain’s reply in the French j
| 58
focuses on the shame done to Arthur and on the lowliness of a settlement
that does not avenge the wrong done the king; his words are angry but
I i
measured. In Malory, however, Lancelot makes his excuses in person, j
and his words reveal much deeper concern for Gareth. In answer to
Gawain’s accusation, Lancelot expresses his understanding of the lame- !
ness of self-justification: “ ‘For to excuse me . . . hit boteneth not.’” :
(1189). Instead, he emphasizes his love for Gareth and his sorrow over j
his slaying:
“By Jesu, and by the feyth that I owghe unto the hyghe Order of
Knyghthode, I wolde with as good a wyll.'have slayne my nevew,
sir Bors . . . and alas, that ever I was so unhappy, that I had nat ;
seyne sir Gareth and sir Gaheris.” (1189) '
Gawain, in contrast, is irrational from start to finish, from his initial
outburst of “ ‘fy on the, false recreayed knyght!’” to his childish accusa
tion that “ ‘thou slewyste hem in the despite of m e’” (1189). When
j
Gawain charges Lancelot with being a destroyer of knights, Malory rein
troduces the motif of the slaying of Lamorak and reminds the reader of
Gawain’s part in it. Thus, Malory makes explicit the comparison of
Gawain’s vicious slaying of Lamorak and his unstinting anger at Lancelot,
Throughout the conflict, the focus in Malory is on Lancelot’s love and
sorrow over Gareth and on Gawain’s thirst for vengeance.
The second encounter of Gawain with Lancelot, which occurs
when Lancelot, at the Pope’s request, restores Guenevere to Arthur,
Malory alters similarly. The scene in the Stanzaic Morte is simple.
Gawain accuses Lancelot of slaying his “brethrene thre” and Lancelot’s |
excuse is obvious, for here, unlike in Malory and the French version, ;
Lancelot does not himself slay the brothers: “ ‘Myself thy brethren slow
I noght’” (1. 2415). In the Mort Artu Lancelot defends himself against
charges of adultery, and the deaths are never mentioned. Malory, how
ever, borrows a theme from the Mort Artu’s narration of the third encoun
ter of Lancelot and Gawain before the single combat at Benwick. Here,
when Gawain charges Lancelot with his brother’s death, Lancelot
responds with two offers: he will become Gawain’s man and pay him ;
homage, and he will wander barefoot and unclad for ten years. However,;
the purpose of these offerings is not to do penance for Gaheriet’s death ;
but to make a peace offering to Gawain. Malory’s account of the third i
encounter of Gawain and Lancelot before the battle at Benwick is brief;
he senses that the second encounter, with its grand procession and cere
monial restoration of Guenevere to Arthur, is the psychological moment
for Lancelot’s noblest attempt at reparation. In this scene Malory has
Lancelot answer Gawain’s charge of murder with a poignant speech in
which he describes his love for Gareth, his sorrow over his death, and his
deep admiration for the nobility and gentleness of the slain youth.
In this speech Lancelot’s love for Gareth takes precedence
over his desire to make peace; for of the four reasons Lancelot gives for
mourning the death of Gareth, the first three concern Gareth himself and
his relationship to Lancelot, while the breech with Gawain is< only
60
mentioned fourth. Then, borrowing from the third encounter of Lance-
j
lot and Gawain in the Mort Artu, Malory has Lancelot offer to make a
' ' i
i
pilgrimage on foot, from Sandwich to Carlyle, founding every ten miles!
a “house of relygion” (1199). The religious note, absent from the Mort !
Artu, may have been suggested by the parallel scene in the Stanzaic
Morte, in which Lancelot vows to spend his remaining years in the Holy '
Land. However, the purpose of the pilgrimage is unique to Malory: the |
abbeys and monasteries shall be for religious men “ fro synge and rede
day and nyght in especiall for sir Gareth sake and sir Gaherys’ ” (1199,
1200). Thus, the offer becomes Lancelot’s penance for his unintentional
murder. In Malory Lancelot’s concern is for the welfare of Gareth in
death as in life, and he proposes this penance because “ frhys were fayrar
and more holyar and more perfyte to their soules than ye, my moste
noble kynge, and you sir Gawayne, to warre uppon me, for thereby shall
ye gete none avail’” (1200). To refuse such an offer can only make
Gawain appear to be more interested in harboring ill-will than in procur
ing the welfare of his brothers’ souls; yet he replies “ ‘I will never for-
gyff the my brothir’s dethe, and in especiall the deth of my brothir sir
Gareth’” (1200).
If Malory motivates Gawain by a vengeful heart and uncon
trolled passion, he nevertheless causes this powerful emotion and this
passionate nature to rise to heights of greater nobility in the end; for,
although in the Mort Artu Gawain, on his deathbed, expresses his desire
for a reconciliation with Lancelot, in Malory he actually writes to Lan-
i
celot letter full of honest humility, concluding with the plea, “ ‘I j
requyre the, most famous knyght of the worlde, that thou wolte se my
tumbe’” (1232). This request is answered in the Morte Darthur, for upon
receiving it, Lancelot dutifully visits the tomb, offering both his tears
i
and his substance in honor of the slain. Yet Malory’s total treatment of
the Lancelot-Gawain strife is structured so as to make Lancelot the j
object of sympathy; and this Malory achieves by interpreting Gareth’s
death as a matter of family honor for Gawain but a personal loss for
Lancelot.
In Book VIII the effect of Gareth’s death on the central
characters is more important than Gareth himself. However, Malory
does make several alterations in the character of Gareth (Gaheriet) as it
is sketched in the source romances. In the Morte Darthur Gareth’s role
in Aggravain’s plot against Lancelot differs from that of Malory’s sources
a difference partly accounted for by Malory’s insistence on the youth of
Gareth. In the Stanzaic Morte, Gaheriet is present at the debate
between Aggravain and Gawain over whether Arthur should be told of the
infidelity of Lancelot and Guenevere; but he offers no objection,
although he follows Gawain when he leaves the room, refusing to take
part in the slander. In the Mort Artu Gaheriet says nothing until the
king enters and demands to know what was said. Gaheriet answers boldly
that it is a lie that the king should not listen to: “ ‘ Avoi, sire . . . ce ne ;
62
porroit estre en nule maniere’” (85, 86). Malory’s Gareth is more an
echo of his older brother’s attempts to silence Aggravain; when Gawain
declares he will not be of Aggravain’s council, “ ‘so God me helpe,’
i
seyde sir Gaherys and sir Gareth, ‘we woll nat be knowyn of your dedis’ ” j
|
(1161). After Gawain’s long defense of Lancelot, he reiterates his refu-j
sal to join the plot against him. “ ‘No more woll I, ’ seyde Gaherys,
‘Nother I,’ seyde sir Gareth” (1162).
In Book VIII Malory borrows from the Stanzaic Morte in
making Gaheris one of those allied with Gawain and Gareth; in the
French,Guerrehet is one of Aggravain’s partners in crime. It is note
worthy, too, that here Malory chooses to group the two brothers, blur
ring the distinction between them, in order to create a chorus of support;
for Lancelot. Malory uses this same technique with Lavayne and Urry; i
in Book VIII they no longer appear as individuals but are always paired
in their expressions of encouragement for Lancelot. However, Malory
does not completely mingle the two brothers, for he places Gareth’s
response in sharper relief by making him add “ ‘for I shall never say
evyll of that man that made me knyght” ’ (1162). The relationship
between the two performers in the ritual of knighthood is sacred, and
never more so than in Malory.
Malory, following the Stanzaic Morte, allows neither
Gaheris nor Gareth to know of the plan to surprise Lancelot with Guene-
vere. In the Mort Artu Gawain is present when the plot is conceived
63 i
I
and tells Gaheriet, who is in the next room, that Aggravain has reported!
i
the liaison to the king. The French writer does not state explicitly that j
Gawain reveals to Gaheriet that Aggravain intends to trap Lancelot with
the queen, although it is implied by Gaheriet’s response, which is rather;
astonishing in its casuistry: “ ‘Or lessons Agravain fere ce que il a
empris, et se biens Fen vient, si li praigne; et se maus Fen vient, il ne
porra pas dire que ce soit par nos’ ” (89). Apparently it is Gaheriet’s
first concern that he not become involved. He does make a point of
aligning himself publicly with Lancelot, for he immediately invites
Lancelot to lodge with him that night, thus proving to all the court that
their friendship is unaltered. However, Gaheriet never reveals the plot
to Lancelot. On the morning of the king’s mock hunting party,
designed to trick Lancelot into a rendezvous with the queen, Gawain
and Gaheriet ask Lancelot to join them, but they give him no hint of
the reason. This bit of ambiguous motivation Malory avoids by keeping
Gawain, Gaheris, and Gareth in ignorance of the plan.
Instead of following the French account of the ambush in
which Lancelot rescues the queen, Malory takes his narrative suggestion
from the Stanzaic Morte. In all three accounts Gawain refuses to see
the queen burned and goes into his chamber. In the Mort Artu, however,
the king commands Aggravain, who in both English versions dies in the
first attack on Lancelot in the queen’s chamber, to recruit some forty
knights in order to prevent a possible assault by Lancelot. Arthur, at
64
Aggravain’s request, orders Gaheriet to act as one of the guards.
Gaheriet acquiesces unwillingly, although he tells Aggravain he would
rather Lancelot abduct the queen than that she be burned. However, j
once the attack begins and Gaheriet sees his brothers fall, he becomes !
angry and enters the battle, slaying three of Lancelot’s men. Hector j
unhelms him knowing his identity, but Lancelot does not recognize him !
when he slays him. In the Stanzaic Morte as in Malory the pathos is
increased by the brothers being unarmed:
The kynge Arthure that ylke tyde
Gawayne and gaherys for sent
here Answeres were no3t for to hyde,
They ne wolde no3t be of hys assente
Gawayne wolde nevyr be by-syde
There Any woman shulde be brente;
Gaheriet and gaheries with lytelle pryde
All un-Armyd thedyr they wente. (11. 1934-1941)
In Malory Arthur orders Gawain to come armed, with Gareth and Gaheris,
to bring the queen to the fire. Gawain refuses, but Malory introduces a
curious new excuse for the acquiescence of Gaheris and Gareth. Gawain
explains that “ ‘they ar yonge and full unable to say you nay’” (1176).
As in the Stanzaic Morte, they wear no armor, but in Malory’s account
this is a symbolic gesture: “ ‘We woll be there in pesyble wyse, and
beare none harneyse of warre upon us’” (1177). Thus, by shifting his
focus from one source romance to the other and adding his own inter
pretation of motive and event, Malory utilizes the Gareth-Lancelot
65
relationship to deepen the pathos of the tale and to emphasize the
noble character of his protagonist.
The Pcotegg Pattern
!
Malory provides the foundations for the relationship between
Lancelot and Gareth by insisting upon Gareth’s youth. It is not certain
whether this conception was part of Malory’s source romance for Book IV;
however, Malory makes no attempt to eliminate it if it did exist, and j
in the first two pages alone “yonge” is used three times to describe j
Gareth. Guerin comments on the consistency with which Malory main- !
i
i
tains this pattern:
Possibly for better dramatic effect and for smoother integration of |
the “Tale of Gareth,” . . . Malory caused Gareth to be consider- j
ably younger than his brothers and to enter the story after it was
well under way. . . . Malory maintained this pattern throughout !
his bulky work.3 7
!
At the tournament of Lonazep, in Book V, Malory has Gareth fight
among the young, unproved knights; and in Book VIII Gareth acquiesces !
to Arthur’s demand that he be present at Guenevere’s pyre because he is !
“ ‘yonge and full unable to sey . . . nay’” (1176). However, although i
we may agree with Guerin that Malory emphasizes Gareth’s youth for
“better dramatic effect,” and also with Wilson that Gareth’s youth “is j
38
appropriate to his charm and makes his death more pathetic,” its chief j
i
function is to allow Gareth to perform the role of protege of Lancelot.
Before we discuss Malory’s development of the protege pat- j
j
tern, we might notice how Malory uses a structural device, the juxtapo-j
sition of similar characters, to establish Gareth in the role of protegd. It!
is in the last two Books, with their emphasis on the personal relations and
i
conflicts of Lancelot, that Malory concentrates his proteges.. In BookVli
i
the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat is devoted primarily to Lavayne; j
i
Malory, however, introduces the tournament at Allhallowmas, where j
Gareth wins both the prize and Lancelot’s high praise. In the episode of j
|
the Great Tournament, Lavayne is Lancelot’s companion, but it is
Gareth who deserts his own party in order to offer his aid to his mentor.
In the catalogue of knights at the Healing of Urry, the last episode in j
Book VII, Gareth is brought before the reader not only by his inclusion !
among the would-be healers but also by the presence of knights “that sir ;
Gareth wanne whan he was called Bewmaynes” (1150). In Book VIII
Gareth, Lavayne, and Urry play similar roles: Gareth defends Lancelot ‘
before Aggravain’s plot exiles him, and Urry and Lavayne are chief
among those who choose to follow Lancelot into exile. Thus, Lancelot,!
i
in his final days as the “best erthly knyght,” is surrounded by the young j
knights whom he has encouraged and guided and who now return the favor!
with loyalty and love.
Malory’s protege pattern is generally initiated by the youth, j
who is attracted to the hero by his renown, his prowess, or his personal j
charm, his charisma. Gareth, however, although depicted as youthful, j
67
reveals throughout his appearances in the Morte Darthur a subtle, mature J
sense of purpose which extends even to his relationship with Lancelot, j
He is no Perceval, to whom all experience is miraculous; Gareth directs j
his fate in all his performances, save for the last act, when he becomes, j
ironically, tragically passive. Gareth is not helplessly drawn to Lance-'
|
lot as by a magnet. Rather, respectful of Lancelot’s renown, he selects1
Lancelot as the man who shall make him knight; as he tells Arthur, j
“ ‘of hym I woll be made knyght and ellys of none5” (297). Later,
another reason appears for Gareth’s attachment to Lancelot: the older
hero’s kindness to and faith in the potential of Gareth when he was a
mere kitchen knave. As Gareth later confesses, he endured this year of |
menial service “ ‘for to preve my frendys’” (313). This desire for self-
determination gives Gareth’s choice of Lancelot as a model greater
importance. His voluntary choice is both a high tribute to Lancelot’s
worth and an affirmation of loyalty based on freely offered friendship.
Malory has Lancelot himself express this very idea when he reminds
Guenevere that “ ‘I love nat to be constrayned to love, for love muste
only aryse of the harte selff, and nat by none constraynte’” (1097).
The initial battle with Lancelot, which Gareth undertakes
with a kind of youthful bravado, is a means by which Gareth may earn ;
the respect of the man he most admires; his eagerness for approval is
apparent when, after the encounter, he hopefully asks Lancelot whether I
he thinks he may become a “preved knyght” (299). To Lancelot alone j
68
he confides the secret of his identity, and the pride he takes in his dub
bing by the hero becomes a refrain which echoes throughout the Morte j
Darthur. After Gareth’s first exploit as a knight, in which he rescues a ;
man from six thieves, he refuses the offer of his debtor in a speech that ;
I
makes it obvious that for Gareth the dubbing is the most important '
moment in his life: “ ‘I woll no rewarde have, sir, this day I was made j
knight of noble sir Launcelot, and therefore I woll no rewarde have but ;
i
God rewarde m e.’” (310). He responds similarly to sir Persaunt’s offer
to knight him: “ ‘I thank you for your good will, for I am better spedde, j
for sertaynly the noble knyghte sir Launcelot made me knyght/” (316). |
To this admiration, Lancelot responds in kind. From the
first time that he sees Gareth, he senses, as do many others of the court, |
the nobility of the unnamed youth: “ ‘For I dare ley my hede he shall
preve a man of grete worshyp.’” (295). Later, when Lancelot discovers1
Gareth’s identity, he rejoices that his feelings were justified: “ ‘Ah, sir,
I am more gladder of you than I was, for evir me thought ye sholde be
of grete bloode, and that ye cam nat to the courte nother for mete
nother drynke’” (299). Lancelot offers the youth freely of his substance,!
as does Gawain. However, as we have seen, Malory is careful to dis
tinguish between the motives of Lancelot and Gawain. Gawain’s
response, says Malory, is born of kinship, which apparently makes itself |
felt intuitively; Lancelot’s feeling, inspired by “his grete jantylnesse and
curtesy,” has a higher motivation (295). This passage is probably j
69
Malory’s own; in any case, it serves as a foreshadowing of the family-
fixation of Gawain, here admirably loyal, but too often perverted into
an unconsidered thirst for vengeance. This same distinction between
Lancelot’s genuine affection and Gawain’s love turned to hate is that
which motivates the final chapters of the Morte Darthur.
In the joust which precedes Gareth’s dubbing, Lancelot
reveals one of his most attractive traits, his enthusiastic support and
encouragement of younger knights, even at the risk of losing his own
self-esteem. When in the initial encounter both Lancelot and Gareth !
are unhorsed, Lancelot immediately rises to help his fallen comrade.
He is unsparing of his praise for Gareth’s skill in battle, even though to
I
praise him is to suggest his own weakness: “ ‘I promyse you be the fayth
of my body I had as muche to do as I myght have to save myself fro you
unshamed, and therefore have ye no dought of none erthely knyght’”
(299). From this time on, Lancelot will forego battle when Gareth
fights in tournaments, that his protege may win the honors. Throughout
the Morte Darthur, Lancelot is lavish in his praise of Gareth. To Arthur
and Gawain he comments that “ ‘as for hys myght and hardynesse, there
bene but full few now lyvynge that is so myghty as he is, and of so noble
prouesse’” (326). His praise of Gareth’s performance at the tourney of
Allhallowmas is a lavish list of Gareth’s qualities physical and spiritual.
Not only is he “noble,” “mighty,” and “well-brethed,” and also “jantill,
70
curteyse and ryght bownteuous, meke and mylde, and in hym ys no
maner of male engynne, but playne, faythful an trew” (1088, 1089).
j
In our discussion of Malory’s use of the Mort Artu and the j
i
!
Stanzaic Morte, we noted that Malory deepens the grief of Lancelot overj
Gareth’s death. Even before the fateful day, Lancelot has forebodings I
|
of loss. In a scene not in the sources, when Lancelot’s followers coun- |
j
sel him to rescue the queen, he hesitates: “ ‘But and hit be so that ye
woll counceyle me to rescow her, I must do muche harme and peradven--
I
ture I shall there destroy som of my beste fryndis’” (1172). When Lan
celot encounters the angry Gawain, he makes no excuses, but his regret j
is genuine: “ ‘Alas, that ever I was so unhappy . . . that I had nat seyne
sir Gareth and sir Gaherys” ’ (1189). In his lengthy apologetic upon
restoring Guenevere to Arthur, Lancelot denies his relations with Guene-i
vere and affirms his own personal worth in a proud speech of avaunt; but ;
when he speaks of Gareth, it is only to express his love and sorrow. He ;
begins by declaring that “ ‘I loved no kynnesman I had more than I
loved hym,” ’ echoing a previous declaration that he would as soon have j
slain Bors as Gareth, and again we are reminded that friendship is to
Lancelot what only family can be to Gawain (1199). “ ‘Ever whyle I j
lyve,” ’ continues Lancelot, “ ‘I woll bewayle sir Gareth hys dethe . . .
for many causys whych causyth me to be sorrowful’” (1199). The cata
logue of sorrows that follows is not unlike the eulogy which Hector
delivers over Lancelot’s grave in the final chapter of the Morte Darthur. ;
Lancelot begins by naming the bond created by his dubbing of Gareth, j
continues with a rueful admission of how deeply he was loved by Gareth,!
“ ‘ and the third ys, he was passyng noble and trew, curteyse and jantill ;
and well-condicionde’” (1199). Lancelot concludes with his offer of a j
pilgrimage, his concern for Gareth as strong in death as in life. Lance- i
i
lot’s last mention of Gareth comes when he has received the news of
Gawain’s death; his grief for the whole family is renewed by this letter, |
but in especial Lancelot laments “ ‘myne owne frynde sir Gareth’” j
(1249). !
It is Lancelot who presides as elder over Gareth’s ritual ini
tiation into manhood. Save for Lancelots role, much of this ritual is j
l
probably derived from Malory’s source for his Book IV, and much of it !
belongs to some mythic archetype; Malory need not have created it nor !
have comprehended its symbolic significance. Nevertheless, it is present:
in “Sir Gareth of Orkney.” Gareth’s feigned weakness upon his arrival at
court (“but he fared as he myght nat go . . . but yf he lened uppon their j
shuldyre” [293] ) symbolizes the weakness of childhood, while its depen- ■
dence is expressed through Gareth’s year as a kitchen knave, where he
“sette hym downe amonge boyes and laddys” (295). He endures the men
tal trials of mockery and humiliation from the sharp tongues of Kay and ;
Lyonet; but when he finally puts on the garb of a knight, the new and
splendid clothing symbolic of his rebirth into manhood, the entire court
is amazed: “So when he was armed there was none but fewe so goodly a |
72
man as he was” (297). Gareth avenges himself of his first humiliation
i
by overcoming Kay, but before he can win over the sarcastic Lyonet, he
' i
must perform the central ritual of his maturity and be knighted.
Lancelot and Lyonet have witnessed the battle with Kay,
i
but Gareth has yet to prove his worth by pitting himself against his men- j
tor. The encounter with Lancelot is the struggle of son with father, the !
j
battle to become an independent self. That Gareth is aware of being j
i
tested is evidenced by his question to Lancelot: “ ‘ Hope ye so that I i
may ony whyle stonde a preved knyght?’ ” (299). The answer is an
I
affirmation of the novice’s success: “ ‘Do as ye have done to me . . .
i
i
and I shall be your warraunte’” (299). At this point the nameless youth j
is prepared to affirm his new identity. Lancelot asks his name, and I
Gareth replies proudly; henceforth he will be called not by the mocking j
nickname Beaumains but by the noble name of a scion of King Lot.
There follows what proves to be the most important event in Gareth’s
life, if we are to judge by the number of references to the dubbing in
Book IV and in the later Books: “Than sir Launcelot gaff hym the Order j
of Knyghthode” (299).
In the remainder of Book IV, Gareth himself refers twice to j
his dubbing by Lancelot (301, 316), and Tristan, Persaunt, and Gareth’s
dwarf all make reference to it as proof of Gareth’s worthiness (316, 350, !
330). In the remaining Books Gareth speaks of Lancelot three times as
j
the man who made him knight (1110, 1114, 1162), Gawain mentions the!
73
fact twice (1113, 1189), and Lancelot himself mentions it once (1199).
There is little doubt that the dubbing represents the high point in Garethk
life, his initiation into manhood, and the establishment of his loyal
friendship with Lancelot. Gareth's subsequent winning of the lady and
his success in the tournament are the final steps in his path to maturity
I
and acceptance into the intimate circle of Round Table knights; but the j
i
ritual of knighthood is the central experience. |
After Gareth has proven himself, he may follow Lancelot's
footsteps in placing friendship above glory. In the tourney for the hand j
of Lyonesse, “no stroke would he smyte sir Launcelot" (349). For Lan- ;
!
i
celot he is willing to oppose his own kin. Malory precedes the descrip- j
i
tion of Gareth's rejection of his “vengeable” brother with a parallel
i
description of Gareth's alliance with Lancelot: “For there was no knyght
that sir Gareth loved so well as he dud sir Launcelot; and ever for the !
moste party he wolde be in sir Launcelottis company” (360). Gawain
9 i
himself acknowledges Gareth's devotion to Lancelot:
i
i
“ For I dare say my brother loved hym better than me and all hys'
brethirn and the king bothe. Also I dare say, an sir Launcelot had;
desyred my brother sir Gareth with hym, he wolde have been with •
hym ayenste the kynge and us all.” (1184)
The central incident in which Malory illustrates Gareth's
mature loyalty to Lancelot is the episode of the Great Tournament in
Book VII. Gareth, who is with the “knyghtes of sir Launcelottys blood”
rather than with his own clan, is told by Bors that the disguised knight
74 j
i
fighting so powerfully against Arthur’s party is Lancelot; and Gareth
immediately goes to his aid (1109). As he explains to Lancelot, “ ‘I am
com to beare you felyshyp for the olde love ye have shewed unto m e '”
i
(1111). For this act of loyalty Gareth is rebuked by Arthur. Gareth j
defends himself by giving two reasons for his aid of Lancelot: the per- j
i
sonal bond between Gareth and his mentor, and the obligation of a i
j
knight to defend anyone who performs “muche dedis of armys, and so j
|
many noble knyghtes ayenste hym” (1114). Thus, Gareth makes public I
i
before the entire court of Arthur his lofty conception of loyalty, rooted j
equally in friendship and in respect.
i
!
This deep devotion of Gareth for Lancelot increases the j
pathos of his death at the hands of the man he loves best. Scudder aptly j
i
describes the irony: j
1
Lancelot, who so rejoices in giving the advantage to younger and j
weaker knights, Lancelot, who is so perfect in courtesy and gentle j
self-control, Lancelot the loyal and tender hearted, is the murder
er of this splendid younger comrade .39 j
i
Gawain, Arthur, and Lancelot himself ruefully remind one another of
i
Gareth’s love for Lancelot in the bitter days after his death, the former j
I
I
pair in shocked disbelief at the murder, the latter with deepest personal j
regret (1184, 1183, 1189). For Lancelot it will be a perpetual source of!
sorrow, this memory of Gareth, who “ ‘loved me aboven all othir j
knyghtes’” (1199).
75 I
One important result of the bond between Lancelot and
Gareth is that Gareth’s admirable qualities become, by extension, those
i
of Lancelot himself. Lancelot has fostered Gareth, and Gareth’s virtues;
reflect his model. Malory emphasizes the physical attributes of Gareth,
1
who is taller than his companions “by a foote and an half’ and is “large j
and longe and brode in the shuldyrs” (293). His most notable character
trait is forbearance, a virtue which is also Lancelot’s, and which Lance--
j
lot displays most fully in his relationship with Arthur and Gawain in the !
destructive war of the final chapters of the Morte Darthur. Yet, although
Gareth “never dyspleased man nother chylde, but alwayes he was meke
and mylde,” he has a lively spirit and a healthy sense of his own worth
(296). While yet a kitchen knave, he engages in sports and eagerly
watches jousts. He undertakes to fight Lancelot with youthful enthusi
asm and remarks with some bravado “ ‘ hit doth me good to fele your
myght’” (299). He possesses a grim humor in the face of insults. To
the Black Knight, who, in anticipation of Gareth’s defeat at his hands,
discusses with Lyonet the division of Gareth’s trappings, he replies wryly, I
“thou art full large of my horse and harneyse! I lat the wete hit
cost the nought . . . and horse ne harneyse gettyst thou none of
myne but yf thou wynne hem with thy hondys.” (304)
To Lyonet’s repeated insults Gareth comments that “ ‘ever ye sey that
they woll sle me othir bete me, but howsomever hit happenyth I escape
76
and they lye on the grounde’” (304). There is real humor in Gareth’s
ironic reply to Lyonet’s grudging plea for the life of the Green Knight:
“Lat be,” seyde the dameselle,“thou bawdy kychyn knave! j
Sle hym nat, for and thou do, thou shalt repente hit.” j
“ Damesell,” seyde Bewmaynes, “your charge is to me a
pleasure.” (306)
Malory emphasizes Gareth’s prowess not only through
Gareth’s own actions and words but also through the direct praise offered j
j
by the narrator and by the other characters in the Morte Darthur. One of |
Malory’s most characteristic additions is the epic simile describing a |
hero in battle, and these he uses freely in depicting Gareth’s fighting j
style. Gareth and the Black Knight are “lyke two myghty kempys,” and |
i
in the battle with the Green Knight, Gareth and his opponent are “rasyng j
and hurlyng lyke two Borys.” (306, 309). In the epic battle with Iron- j
sides, the heroes are “fers lyons,” “borys,” and “rammys” (323). In “Sir
Tristram de Lyones” Dinadan and Gareth are likened to “egir wolves”
(734). During the tournament for the hand of Lyonesse, Tristan praises j
Gareth as “ ‘a good knyght and a bygge man of armys’” (350). After
Gareth’s victory at the tourney at Allhallowmas, Bors tells Lancelot that i
“ ‘but if it were you, other the noble knyght sir Trystram, other the good I
knyght sir Lamorake de Galis, I saw never knyght bere so many knyghtes j
and smyte down in so litill a whyle as ded sir Gareth’” (1098). Bors takes
a particular interest in all Lancelot’s protegds, and he demonstrates his
concern not only in praise but in the care he takes to warn Gareth that
77
the disguised knight at the Great Tournament is Lancelot, lest Gareth
I
engage him in battle and be hurt.
Another respect in which Gareth is like Lancelot is his i
charismatic personality. Most of the characters who know him only as j
a kitchen knave sense his nobility. Arthur is the first to express this
I
feeling: “ ‘For myne herte gyvyth me to the gretly, that thou art com
of men of worshyp,’” an opinion echoed by Gawain and Lancelot (294). j
i
Even Gareth’s opponents sense his nobility. To Lyonet’s scornful refer- !
i
ence to the kitchen knave, the Black Knight replies that “ ‘howbehit as j
ye say that he is no man of worshyp borne, he is a full lykly person’”
(303). The Green Knight reveals deeper intuition: “ ‘Whatsomever he i
makyth hymself he shall preve at the ende that he is com of full noble
blood and of kinges lynage’” (307). When Lyonet finally acquiesces,
she too acknowledges this power: “ ‘I mervayle what thou art and of
what kyn thou haste com; for boldely thou spekyst and boldely thou
haste done, that have I sene” ’ (312).
More important than his role as an individual character is
the impact of Gareth’s characterization upon the major themes of the
Morte Darthur; for the most vital function of Lancelot’s proteges is that, <
by their presence in the action and their symbolic representation of the
hero, they make Lancelot’s behavior more consistently admirable, par
ticularly in the ambiguous episodes regarding his love, his loyalty, and
his religion.
To understand Gareth’s relation to the theme of loyalty is to
see his story as a portrait, on a smaller scale, of the rise and fall of j
i
j
Arthurian chivalry. “Sir Gareth of Orkney,” with its themes of youthful ;
i
heroism and successful love, is chivalry in the morning of its heyday, j
before love is stained with adultery and the pursuit of glory is over- !
j
shadowed by the higher Quest. The charm and color of Malory’s BookIV;
i
l
have caused some critics to postulate as its source an early French j
i
romance. One such critic is William Henry Schofield, who considers
that “it is improbable that this story ever passed through the hydraulic j
40 I
press of late French prose for it is not sapped of delightful freshness.
With this assessment Scudder agrees: I
|
i
The whole book differs so widely from Malory’s usual manner th a t!
conjecture may be hazarded that his source, if discovered, would j
prove to be some genuine twelfth-century poem. . . . It suggests I
the early poetry, in its uncomplicated narrative, its analysis of
sentiment, its tone so glad and light.4 1
Earlier Scudder speaks of the “Pageant of Sir Gareth, the one picture in j
the Morte Darthur of a chivalry untouched by inward conflict or contri- |
42 \
tion, victorious, unshadowed, young.”
i
Only Malory sets this joyous beginning against the tragic con-:
i
elusion of the story of Arthur. Malory alone relates Gareth to both the ;
rise and fall of Arthurian chivalry and makes Gareth’s death doubly
I
poignant since it is at the hand of the very man who made him knight.
79
From its first lines “Sir Gareth of Orkney” suggests this theme of Arthur
ian chivalry at its height. The story takes place when Arthur “helde the
Rounde Table moste plenoure” (293). Moreover, this Pentecost is the
I
time when “at the hyghe feste evermore they sholde be fulfylled the hole!
j
number of an hondred and fyffty, for than was the Rounde Table fully j
complysshed” (293). Malory sharpens the contrast of this joyful time j
with the tragic last days of Arthur’s kingdom by making Gareth himself j
sound the knell for Camelot. In the Stanzaic Morte Gawain’s response j
to Aggravain’s betrayal of Lancelot is grimly foreboding:
“Here now is made a comsemente
That beth not fynysshe many a yere.” (11. 1726,17,27) j
i
In Malory, however, Gareth joins with Gawain in pronouncing doom, and
the prediction is both more dire and more true: “ ‘Alas! . . . now ys thys
i
realme holy destroyed and myscheved, and the noble felyshyp of the
Rounde Table shall be disparbeled’” (1162). This speech is echoed by !
two other proteges of Lancelot, Urry and Lavayne, in their lament over j
Lancelot’s exile: “ ‘Now the felyshyp of the Rounde Table ys brokyn’” ;
(1203).
Malory develops Gareth as a symbol of the rise and fall of
Arthurian chivalry and, therefore, of the rise and fall of Lancelot, who
is the representative of that chivalry. It is fitting that Lancelot should
kill Gareth, his protdgd, symbolically shattering the image of ideal
knighthood which Lancelot himself helped to create. However, by
80
making Lancelot Gareth’s benefactor, Malory directs the blame for the
tragedy not to the grief-stricken Lancelot but to those who have betrayed
him:
Malory seems to have felt the tragedy of the destruction of Arthur’s
life work in the alienation of his greatest knight, with the conse
quent division of the Round Table. But he seems to have had no j
blame for Launcelot, whose sin against Arthur’s friendship was the j
cause of this, but only for Mordred and Aggravain who stirred up j
the strife between them .4 3
By focusing on the villains, Malory de-emphasizes the liaison of Lance- j
I
i
lot and Guenevere; by concentrating on Gawain’s mad thirst for ven- |
i
I
geance and on Lancelot’s grief over Gareth, Malory relieves Lancelot j
i
of the charges of disloyalty to Arthur and to Gareth. From Lancelot’s
betrayal by Aggravain to the return of the exiled hero in a futile attempt
to save Arthur, Lancelot displays forbearance and deep sorrow. P. E. |
i
Tucker declares that Gareth’s loyalty is the greatest condemnation of
Lancelot and that “this is the fellowship that Lancelot betrays and
44
destroys.” However, to speak of Lancelot’s betrayal of friendship is to j
ignore his total reverence for the fellowship of chivalry and his genuine I
i
love for Gareth. Vinaver more wisely describes the focus of the death of j
Gareth: i
i
i
The essential quality which gives such action its tragic power is j
that at no point does it appear fortuitous; it arises, not from the
accidents of human life, nor from the momentary weaknesses of
the protagonists, but from the depths of their noblest passions, from'
the uncompromising sincerity of their devotion to a chosen aim ,45 |
81
Seen in this perspective, Lancelot is a victim of his love— for Gareth,
for Guenevere, for Gawain, for Arthur. Gareth’s loyalty to Lancelot is
not a condemnation of Lancelot but a high tribute to a nature that could I
inspire such loyalty and return it in kind. j
i
That Malory develops Gareth to underscore Lancelot’s I
loyalty is evidenced by Malory’s creation of the pageant of the Great !
Tournament, the final victorious gathering of the Round Table knights |
j
to battle one another untroubled by shadows of impending doom. The j
episode is brought to its conclusion by Gareth’s speech in defense of his j
i
friendship with Lancelot. Its effect is to turn Arthur’s rebuke to high j
i
j
praise of such loyalty: M ,Ve say well, and worshypfully have ye done, j
j
and to youreselff grete worshyp’” (1114). The final paragraph of the |
episode is a paean to this friendship and to the morality of chivalry at
its height: I
So than there were made grete festis unto kyngis and deukes,;
and revell, game, and play, and all maner of nobeles was used, j
And he that was curteyse, trew, and faythefull to hys frynde was j
that tyme cherysshed. (1114)
In Malory’s interpretation it is not the disloyalty of Lancelot but the
|
blind hatred of Aggravain, the guile of Mordred, and the vengeful spirit I
of Gawain that betray the fellowship of Arthur. Lancelot, whose loyalty
is rooted in love, is a sympathetic and noble figure in the final Book, j
deeply grieved by the loss of his young friend and by his alienation from |
Gawain and Arthur. 1
82 ;
Concerning the love theme of the Morte Darthur, more than
one critic has suggested that a function of Gareth is to provide a contrast
to Lancelot. Moorman asserts that j
i
(
i
coming as it does between the first, deceptively innocent signs of
courtly love in Lancelot and the actual adultery of the “Tale of
Tristram” the “Tale of Gareth” sheds light forward and backward.4 6
“If read in context,” says Moorman, “Gareth is clearly a commentary on
|
1’amour courtois and is so placed as to contrast with the adulterous affairs|
47 ■ j
of Lancelot and Tristan.” Guerin is in agreement with this theory, j
and his Master’s thesis contains a strong defense of the chastity of Garethi
48
which he feels is in direct opposition to the adultery of Lancelot. In j
|
his essay on “ ‘The Tale of Gareth’” he describes the nature of Gareth’s j
I
!
love: '
As with the married love of Pelleas and Nineve in the first “Tale,”;
Gareth’s is an index to the noblest elements of the chivalric ideal—
and an effective contrast to the loves that will later wither the
flower of chivalry.4 9
However, we have already seen how Malory minimizes the effect of I
Lancelot’s adultery on the final catastrophe, how he shifts the blame to :
Mordred, Aggravain, and Gawain. Malory has Gareth turn away from
his older brother because he possesses the trait of vengeance that Gareth j
so dislikes. Surely, if Malory meant Gareth as a symbolic representation
of chastity in an adulterous court, he would have caused him to turn
away from Lancelot as well.
The loves of Gareth and Lyonesse are fresh, young, and
tremendously appealing, but their purpose is to praise love, not to pre
sent a moral ideal. Although his source romance seems to have abounded
in tests of chastity, Malory appears to have altered their moral purpose
and reinterpreted their results. When Sir Persaunt sends his daughter to j
|
Gareth's bedside, the test appears to be of courtesy rather than of chas- j
tity; and Gareth's concern is not so much for his own purity, or of the
maiden’s, as for her father's honor. When Gareth discovers she is a
maid, his response is “ ‘ God deffende me . . . than that ever I sholde
I
defoyle you to do sir Persaunte suche a shame"’ (315). When Gareth :
discovers that it was her father who sent her on this errand, he does not
question his host's motive, but rather considers his own dilemma, which j
is to avoid dishonoring him . Since his host has sent the girl, he will be j
guilty whether he violates her or rejects her: “ ‘Alas! . . . I were a
shameful knyght and I wolde do youre fadir ony disworshyp'” (315). The|
1
solution is for Gareth to show his gratitude and respect without taking j
j
advantage of the damsel, and Gareth does the proper thing by kissing her j
i
i
and then sending her off to her father. Sir Persaunt's response is not
admiration for Gareth's continence but respect for his breeding; Obvi- !
ously Gareth has performed correctly: “ ‘Truly, . . . whatsomever he
j
be he is com of full noble blood'” (315). Far from pointing up a contrast
between Gareth and Lancelot, this episode establishes their similarity.
It will be remembered that Lancelot never succumbs to the women who j
84
, try to seduce him. Gentle and courteous to the maids, if harsh to the
sorceresses and witches, Lancelot never engages in casual amours. Like
Gareth he has a single object of devotion to whom he is absolutely
faithful. ■
Although Gareth apparently remains chaste until his mar
riage, it is through no fault of his own; for in the second chastity test he
does not win such high praise. The eagerness of Lyonesse and Gareth to
consummate their union shows little regard for chastity. It is doubtful
i
whether Malory himself regards chastity as such a great virtue, at least
for “erthly” knights. Guerin suggests that since the pair were betrothed
50
they were legally entitled to the full joys of marriage. However,
i
Lyonet’s view of the situation suggests that such behavior was socially }
j
unacceptable, although it might be wholly understandable. Again, the j
|
test of the lovers concerns their purity less than their propriety. Lyonet’s
initial purpose in preventing the premature liaison is "for savyng of hir !
worshyp,” which here means their reputation or their good name (333).
After each of the beheading episodes by which she prevents the union,
i
she explains her motive in the same way; “ ‘AH shall be for your wor- |
shyp and us a ll,’” “ ‘all that I have done shall be to your worshyp and to I
us alT ” (334, 336).
Malory’s attitude toward love is far too complex to treat !
i
fully here. That he values wedded love is evident in his treatment of j
the Pelleas-Ettard story; that he values any love that is genuine and j
i faithful is reflected in his praise of Guenevere, of whom he says“whyle
she lyved she was a true lover, and therefor she had a good ende” (1120).|
He certainly has no condemnation for Gareth and Lyonesse; they may be j
i
“a lytyll overhasty,” but, after all, “they were but yonge and tendir of
ayge and had nat used suche craufftis toforne” (333). Malory does not
approve of courtly reveling in adultery, and he avoids any direct refer- j
ences to the physical love of Lancelot and Guenevere that appears in
the Old French.
One means of avoiding the conflict between Lancelot’s per
fection and his adulterous liaison is this very matter of reputation, of j
|
“worshyp,” since one’s personal value or worth is intimately connected !
with the value placed on one’s performance by others. Like Gareth,
i
Lancelot wishes to avoid notoriety at all costs. In an original passage j
i
at the beginning of Book VII, Malory tells us that Lancelot “withdrew j
hym fro the company of quene Guenyvere for to eschew the sclawndir
and noyse” (1045). In the pages immediately following, Malory has j
i
Lancelot deliver a long sermon to the queen on the advisability of dis- '
i
• ]
cretion, ending “ ‘and wyte you well, madam, the boldenesse of you !
and me woll brynge us to shame and sclaundir, and that were me lothe j
to se you dishonoured’” (1046). ■ In the episode of the Fair Maid of Asto-;
lat, Malory introduces an exchange between the lovers in which Guene- j
vere counsels Lancelot to attend a tournament rather than remain with
her, for if they are together, “ Svhat woll youre enemyes and myne sey j
8 6
and deme ?’” (1065). Lancelot fully agrees, although he comments
rather sarcastically that “ ‘ hit ys of late com syn ye were woxen so
wyse!’” (1066). The primary value which Malory places upon reputation
|
accounts for the curious medieval sophistry of the lovers’ complete i
i
j
denial of their relationship, despite the fact that it is known to everyone ,i
I
Gareth is more fortunate than Lancelot; he is free to marry J
l
i
his lady. Yet, neither he nor his mentor places chastity above love.
So long as they preserve their reputations, they may love as they choose.
Far from condemning Lancelot, Gareth takes Lancelot’s part and does j
i
his best to preserve him from “shame and sclaundir” when Lancelot’s
i
i
good name is threatened by the evil tongue of Aggravain. However, to j
say that the motives and actions of Gareth and Lancelot are similar is |
not to say that the love stories are alike. Malory does not devise the j
i
loves of Gareth and Lyonesse to compare Gareth’s virtue with Lancelot’s:
vice; but it is inevitable that this young, happy love should contrast
rather strongly with the mature and sometimes bitter liaison of Lancelot !
and Guenevere. If anything, the relationship of Gareth and Lyonesse is I
a portrait of how happy love might be in ideal conditions. As such it is j
a complement to the love of Lancelot and Guenevere; it is certainly n o t;
a condemnation.
Gareth’s role as protege to Lancelot bears little relation to !
i
the religious theme of the Morte Darthur. However, Malory does give
Lancelot a concern for Gareth’s spiritual welfare that does not exist in I
87
the sources. Lancelot’s offer to make a pilgrimage, in the sources a
species of self-castigation designed to win over Arthur and Gawain,
becomes in Malory a positive gesture whose purpose is to provide for the
souls of Gareth and Gaheris. In Malory Lancelot proposes not to tear
down, to punish his body, but to build up, to found religious houses
whose purpose is “to synge and rede day and nyght in especiall for sir !
. j
Gareth sake and sir Gaherys” (1199, 1200). Lancelot’s first concern is
for the welfare of the slain brothers and for what will be “ ‘fayrar, and
more holyar and more perfyte to their soulis’” (1200).
Thus, Malory, through his development of the character of j
Gareth, Lancelot’s first and foremost protege, creates both an individual
personality and a mirror of his hero’s best self. In the words and actions !
of Gareth, both within and apart from his relationship to the hero,
Malory presents an interpretation of the major themes of the Morte
Darthur, an interpretation which strengthens Lancelot’s domination of
the entire work and which emphasizes his success in loyalty, in love,
and in religion.
NOTES TO CHAPTER III
Malory’s Originality, ed. by Robert M. Lumiansky (Baltimore: ;
Johns Hopkins Press, 1964), p. 114.
See pp. 82-86.
“ ‘ The Tale of Sir Gareth,’” p. 114.
There is no complete edition of the Prose Tristan; therefore,
references are based on the following editions containing portions
of text and commentary:
Eilart Loseth, Le Roman en prose de Tristan, le roman de Pala- j
m£de et la compilation de Rusticien de Pise (Paris: E. Bouillon, !
1891).
Eugfene Vinaver, Le Roman de Tristan et Iseut dans l’oeuvre de
Thomas Malory (Paris: Honore Champion, 1952). j
I
All references to the Stanzaic Morte Arthur are from j
i
Le Morte Arthur, ed. by James Douglas Bruce, Early English Text
Society, Extra Series, no. 88 (London: Kegan Paul, Trench,
Triibner & Co., L td., 1903).
All references to the Mort Artu are from j
Le Mort le Roi Artu, roman du XIII0 sifecle , ed. by Jean Frappier
(Paris: E. Droz, 1936 and 1954). ]
“The ‘Fair Unknown’ in Malory,” PMLA, LVIII (March, 1939),
1- 21.
Groningen: Wolters, 1963.
“Who Was Sir Thomas Malory?” Studies and Notes in Philology j
and Literature, V (1897), 85-106T
89
9. “ ‘The Tale of Sir Gareth,’” p. 100.
10. Tulane University, 1960. The MS. of the Suite du Merlin which
Wright cites as Paris, Bibl. N at., MS. fr. 112.
11. “The Structure of Malory’s ‘Gareth,’” Studies in Language and
Literature in Honour of Margaret Schlauch, ed. by Mieczyslaw
Brahmer, Stanislaw Helsztynski, and Julian Krzyzanowski (Warsaw:
Polish Scientific Publishers, 1966), pp. 219-225.
12. Ibid. , p. 221.
13. Ibid., p. 225.
14. Medium Aevum, I (December, 1932), 161. !
■ !
15. Ibid., p. 164. |
i
16. Ibid.
17. “Addenda on Malory’s Minor Characters,” Journal of English and i
Germanic Philology, LV (1956), 577. |
18. (Tulane University, 1959), p. 108. :
> !
19. Works, p. 1433.
20. Ibid.
21. Notes and Queries, New Series, VII (1961), 8, 9.
22. “ ‘The Tale of Sir Gareth,’” p. 115.
23. Works, pp. 1110, 1113, 1162, 1189, and 1198.
24. “ ‘Der Schone Feigling’ in Arthurischen Literatur,” Zeitschrift fur I
Romantische Philologie, LXV (1949), 349-366.
25. “How Many Books Did Malory Write?” Texas Studies in English,
XXX (1951), 15, 16.
26. Ibid., p. 17. |
27. Ibid., p. 18. |
28. Le Roman de Tristan et Iseut, p. 45.
90
29. Ibid., p. 48.
30. Studies of the Sources, pp. 10, 11; 220, 221;:249r272.
31. “The Middle English Romance ‘Le Morte Arthur,’ Its Sources and
Relation to Malory,” Anglia, XXIII (1901), 67-100.
32. Modern Philology, XXXVII (1939-40), 125-128.
33. Ibid., p. 136.
34. See my Chapter V, pp. 145-147, ior further discussion of Malory’s
use of the Stanzaic Morte in Book VII.
35. Vida Dutton Scudder, Le Morte Darthur of Sir Thomas Malory
(New York and London: E. P. Dutton, 1921), p. 323.
36. “Malory’ s Naming of Minor Characters,” journal of English and
Germanic Philology, XLII (July, 1943), p. 375.
37. “ ‘ The Tale of Sir Gareth,’” p. 107.
38. Characterization in Malory: A Comparison with his Sources.
Essential Portion of a 1932 University of Chicago dissertation
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934), p. 87.
39. Le Morte Darthur of Sir Thomas Malory, p. 342.
40. Chivalry in English Literature (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni
versity Press, 1912), p. 115.
41. Le Morte Darthur of Sir Thomas Malory, p. 222.
42. Ibid. , p. 187.
43. Constance Rummons, Ethnic Ideals of the British Isles, University
of Nebraska Studies in Language, Literature, and Criticism, no.
3 (1920), p. 42.
44. “Chivalry in the Morte,” Essays on Malory, p. 96.
45. Works, p. 1625.
46. The Book of Kyng Arthur, p. 19.
47. Ibid., p. 21.
48. See pp. 46-48.
49. “ 'The Tale of Sir Gareth,’” p. 111.
50. Master’s thesis, pp. 47, 48.
CHAPTER IV j
i
GALAHAD !
i
i
By making Lancelot’s son Galahad the Grail Winner, the !
i
i
writer of the Old French Queste del Saint Graal established the Quest as j
the greatest adventure undertaken by the knights of the Round Table.
Unlike the stories of Gareth, Urry, and Lavayne, Galahad’s tale had
become central to the entire Arthurian legend, so vital and, indeed, so ;
i
sacred that the translator would not have been free it alter it materially.
l
Yet to Malory, “to the end a hero-worshipper of worldly nights,” this
central Quest threatened his entire conception of Arthurian knighthood
|
and bade fair to replace his favorite hero Lancelot, in the Old French
Queste a sinful knight, with Galahad, “le Bon Chevalier,” his pure son. i
Malory could not eliminate the Grail Quest from his story; its thread runs
i
through the French prose romances, sometimes as anticipatory digression,
I
sometimes as entire episode, as in the tale of Balin from the Suite de |
Merlin and the story of the conception of Galahad recorded in the Prose j
Tristan and the Prose Lancelot. Nor, perhaps, would Malory, the man
I
of honest faith, have wished to erase the record of the holiest adventure !
i
of Arthurian chivalry. Malory’s dilemma, then, was twofold: he needed'
92 |
93
. i
to preserve the nobility of Lancelot and his place as the best earthly j
I
knight, while, at the same time, recording accurately the matifere of j
i
the Queste. j
His solution is to raise the status and success of Lancelot |
while simultaneously lowering that of Galahad, portraying him not as
less pure, but as more human than his French counterpart. The Quest j
remains a holy adventure, but Malory emphasizes equally its adven- !
turous and sacred aspects, and the Grail Quester is less a symbol of j
Christ on earth than an example of the chivalry of this world at its high- i
j
est. With these changes, the relationship between Galahad and Lance- ;
lot is subtly altered. The implied bond of sinner and savior, implicit in
the source, remains; but in Malory the two heroes are more nearly equal*
I
and the pattern of the protege asserts itself. There are inevitable con- j
tradictions as Malory grapples with his source. However, in the main, !
he has succeeded, as no author before him, in reconciling the holy
adventure and the life of earthly chivalry. For Malory Lancelot is
guilty of loving the queen “oute of mesure,” but sin is human, and he
remains the foremost of sinful men. Indeed, his sin serves as an excuse j
for his failure in the Quest; but for this one fault he would have achieved
the Grail. As it is, his son, his protege, may represent him, so that
Galahad’s fulfillment may reflect the glory of his illustrious, if more
human father.
94
Of all the adventures of the Morte Darthur, the “Quest of
the Sankgreall” has been most maligned, although the reasons for this
differ considerably. In spite of the fact that Malory has eliminated or
drastically reduced the interminable sermons and explications of visions, j
i
dreams, and symbols in which the Queste abounds, E. K. Chambers j
I
complains that !
t
I
the initial inspiration, whatever its worth, is insufficient to carry j
the writer through his long series of symbolic visions, with a her- |
mit waiting at every crossroads to expound the symbolism in its !
bitterest detail.2 !
|
Vinaver, on the other hand, complains that Malory’s theology is
i
!
insufficient: j
I
!
Malory’s Quest is indeed a confused and almost pointless story, a
beautiful parade of symbols and bright visions. It is deprived of its
spiritual foundation, of its doctrine, and its direct object.3 I
i
Vinaver recognizes the fact that Malory has shifted the focus of the Quest
from Galahad to Lancelot; however, since he believes Malory’s Book VI
to be a self-contained work, he considers the alteration either misguided;
or foolish:
Malory, since he has abolished the main purpose and the sole
reasonable justification of the Quest, has to be vague about its
object. The Quest thus assumes the guise of a pageant full of
strange adventures; and Galahad, from being its mystical leader
and inspirer, becomes but a good and valiant knight on whom his j
grandfather rests great hopes. Malory, in flat contradiction to his j
source, insists on Lancelot’s superiority to Galahad.
95
And so Malory is unable to explain, and perhaps to understand,
the fundamental motif of the story: the substitution of Galahad
the pure for Lancelot the sinner.4
Throughout the Morte Darthur Malory’s focus has been on
the heroes and the achievements of this world. That he so interprets the
Quest need reflect neither ignorance nor ineptness. The Grail Quest as
it appears in the Old French Queste is a contradiction to the rest of the
Arthurian cycle. It can only be resolved by denying the obvious direc
tion of the worldly Prose Lancelot, with its emphasis on chivalry and
amour courtois, or the otherworldly Queste, which regards the desire for
earthly glory and earthly love as pride and lust. Vinaver chooses the
former course by interpreting the entire Prose Lancelot as a religious
prelude to the Queste, as a subtle condemnation of the very themes it
5
appears to praise. Malory, however, resolves this conflict of human
and divine in favor of humanity. The Queste’s portrayal of the
Lancelot-Galahad relationship, in which Galahad’s birth appears to sap
Lancelot of all his virtues, which reappear more resplendently in his
holy son, Malory replaces with a more authentically human father-son
relationship in which the glory of each hero reflects upon the other. A
comparison of Malory with his sources verifies the originality of his con
ception of the Quest and of the character of Galahad. The study of
Malory’s use of his sources will be in two parts, the first considering
Books I-V of the Morte Darthur and the second treating Books VI-VIII.
96
The Sources
Part 1; Galahad in Malory’s
Books I-V |
Malory’s references to Galahad prior to his conception are
confined to the episode of Balin le Sauvage in Book I of the Morte
6 I
Darthur, which Malory borrows from the Old French Suite de Merlin. I
I
Malory links this episode to the Grail Quest, for in describing the Dolor- j
l
ous Stroke, the wounding of King Pellam by Balin, he adds that the j
j
unhappy king “myght never be hole tylle that Galaad the Hawte Prynce {
|
heled hym in the queste of the Sankgreall” (85). Even this early in the j
Morte Darthur there are indications that Malory has developed his own
interpretation of the nature of the Grail and of the heroes who are
i
i
destined to achieve it. Whether it be considered purposeful literary j
I
foreshadowing or simply an indication of his personal point of view,
Malory is consistent in portraying the Grail Quest as a human adventure .
I
touched with divinity and the Questers as human heroes in search of the j
i
divine.
t
t
Like Wolfram von Eschenbach, Malory chooses to interpret ‘
!
the key to the mysteries of the Grail Castle as human passion rather than j
as inexplicable incantations conceived by magic or miracle. For Wol- !
I
fram, the Quester’s question reveals not his grasp of the occult but his
concern for human suffering. Likewise, in Book I of the Morte Darthur, |
the offense of Balin is not that by his presence he has violated the j
9 7
mysteries of the Grail Sanctuary but that he is forever doomed to do
harm to those whose lives he touches, until finally he encounters his own
brother in battle and either slays other in the tragic climax. For Vina-
. i
ver, Malory, by this interpretation, has isolated the episode of Balin
and broken its connection with the Grail story in order to create a self
sustained tragic action, “and the sacrifice of the cyclic technique is j
i
perhaps not too high a price to pay for the discovery of a tragic theme !
7 I
hitherto imprisoned in the intricacies of cyclic fiction.” However, this)
i
is to ignore the fact that Malory’s interpretation of Balin is the same as |
his interpretation of the Grail Quest; in both the focus is on humantragr ,
edy at the expense of the divine ,'mystery. In the Old French Queste,
Lancelot, although once possessed of all natural virtues, has become
I
totally immersed in sin and can never be more than partly redeemed. I
i
j
Like the French Balin, he is doomed by his nature to violate the sacred :
sanctuary. In Malory, however, but for one failing Lancelot would have
been the hero of the Grail Quest; his relationship to Guenevere is sinful, j
as Balin’s wounding of Pellam is sinful, but Lancelot’s sin, like Balin’s, j
is unfortunate. It is a bit of unhappy chance, some universal inevitabil- j
ity that prevents the best knight of the world from fulfilling his potential.!
In Malory’s “Quest of the Sankgreall,” Lancelot is the hero whom fate ;
I
will deny complete fulfillment. However, he will be allowed vicarious |
success in that for Malory Galahad is less the son of God than the son of j
i
Lancelot, and Galahad’s achievement is also that of his father. This is j
98
i
i foreshadowed in the Balin episode in a passage in which Merlin describes
the fate of Balin’s sword. In the Old French romance there are two
j swords, one to be wielded by Galahad, the best knight in the world, and j
the other by Lancelot, with which he is doomed to slay Gawain, his
best friend. Malory unites the two swords and, in so doing, identifies j
the Grail heroes, father and son:
There shall never man handyll thys swerde but the beste knyght of
the worlde, and that shall be sir Launcelot other ellis Galahad,
hys sonne. And Launcelot with thys swerde shall sle the man in
the worlde that he lovith beste: that shall be sir Gawayne. (191)
|
Thus, Lancelot becomes the primary figure in the Quest, “the best !
knight of the worlde,” while Galahad functions as his understudy. So
also, in Book VI of the Morte Darthur,, the human struggle of Lancelot,
in whom success and failure, nobility and sinfulness blend in heroic pro- j
|
portions, will take precedence over the alloyed achievement of Galahad j
his son and protege.
At its best, Malory’s humanization of the Grail legend
reconciles the antithetical elements of pagan magic and Christian
mystery. This antithesis is most disturbingly present in the account of |
the conception of Galahad, which, although it belongs more authen
tically to the Prose Lancelot, appears in Malory borrowed from the
8
Prose Tristan. The birth of a hero is seldom depicted as a natural
\
event. Since he is generally of mixed parentage, half human, half . j
divine, the union by which he is conceived is outside the bounds of j
99
nature and must be described in symbolic terms. In classical myth the
uniqueness of the union of man and god is often expressed by the appear
ance of the divinity in another form, as a swan, a white bull, a shower j
of golden sunlight. If the mythology be Christian, however, there is a |
further complication, since the sexual act itself is marred by human sin.j
If the union is of man and God, the Christ may be conceived by the
i
passage of deity through the mortal as light through a window. However;
if the parents are to be mortal, no matter how heroic or saintly, the
problem of sin must be overcome in yet another way.
According to Helen Adolf, it is the passing of inherited sin
from the parents to the offspring that must be avoided: “How could, in j
i
the birth of a hero, the transmission of sin, the tradux peccati, be j
9 I
avoided?” This might be accomplished if the parents were past the age j
of desire or if they postponed the consummation of their marriage in a
show of continence; besides this, however, “still another possibility
seems to have been considered in Arthurian legend: perhaps the tradux ;
peccati could be prevented if there was an error as to the identity of the I
10
partner.” Thus, for reasons partly theological, partly practical,
Galahad is conceived by a ruse, by a case of mistaken identity. The
practical reason is obvious: Lancelot must sire the Grail hero upon the
virgin daughter of the Grail King, yet he loves only Guenevere. It is I
only with the aid of a bit of magic, a “poison douce & amoureuse” (64), I
that Lancelot is deceived into thinking that the chaste maiden is Guenevere. j
100
The result of this curious bit of sophistry is not totally satis
factory, theologically or otherwise. In spite of the fact that “la concep-
i
tion de Galaad nous est racontde avec mille precautions, destinees a |
attdnuer a nos yeux l’irregularite de sa naissance en ’avoutire,* en dehors
11
du sacrement du manage,” the conflict remains. There is in the story, j
as it appears in the Prose Tristan, a most curious combination of amour j
"
courtois and theoretical chastity in the union. The daughter of the Grail
King loves Lancelot, and the consummation is passionate: “Cele qui ne j
j
desiroit autant rien comme lui a avoir de cui terriene chevalerie est !
enluminee le recoit lie & ioieuse & li fist autel feste con la roine li
faisoit” (64). However, the union is pure because “ele ne le fait mie j
tant seulement pour la biaute de lui ne pour luxure ains le fait ele & si
ami pour le fruit rechevoir dont tous li biens devoit venir el pais” ; nor, !
|
by curious medieval reasoning, is Lancelot guilty of lust toward her, for
“cil la desiroit en autre maniere pour sa biaute nel couvoitoit il mie.
I
Mais il quidoit que che fust la dame la roine” (64). |
For one virginity lost, another greater is gained, according
to the writer of the Queste:
Si lor dona tel fruit engenrer & a concevoir par le flour de virgin- I
ite qui illeuc fu corrumpue & violee fu illuec conceve une autre
fleurs de qui bien & de qui doucour maintes teres furent peries &
rasasiies. (65) !
101
' Yet the chastity issue is completely ignored when later Elaine comes to
court and once again deceives Lancelot in the guise of Guenevere. The j
Christian and pagan elements are at odds, and the effect is jarring. j
In Malory, however, these theological niceties are lost. j
I
The relationship between Elaine and Lancelot is totally human, nor
does Malory need to excuse Elaine and her father for plotting to deceive
Lancelot in order that Galahad be conceived. There is no real dichot- j
omy between the behavior of the participants and their high aim, the j
conception of a hero whose advent is so earnestly desired. To begin
i
with, King Pelles is freer from deception in Malory; instead of calling
Dame Brisane to aid him in his plot, that worthy lady volunteers her !
services as an enchantress. After the union is consummated and Lance- !
lot confronts Elaine, Malory ignores her French prayer “ ‘pour icele j
pitie que diex ot de la virgene marie’ ”(66), and its suggestion that the '
immaculate conception has just been re-enacted, and focuses instead
on her goal, the conception of the hero: “ ‘As thou art renowned the
moste noble knyght of the worlde, sle me nat, for I have in my wombe j
bygetyn of the that shall be the moste nobelyste knyght of the worlde’” ;
(795,796). In the Old French romance Lancelot is unmoved by her plea I
and her revelation of-her identity ;it is her beauty revealed as she kneelsj
I
naked before him that convinces him to repent. In Malory, however, I
Lancelot is convinced more by her nobility and lineage than by her |
physical attributes. Indeed, the scene is reminiscent of the chastity test
in “Sir Gareth of Orkney,” the incident with Sir Patrides’daughter; for,
upon hearing that she is the daughter of Pelles, Lancelot forgives her j
and makes restitution with a courtly gesture, as he raises her from her j
knees and kisses her gently.
In Malory Elaine does not exchange her virginity for another,1
that of her pure son; rather, she offers the precious gift of her maiden
hood to Lancelot out of love for him and obedience to her father. As
Lancelot is about to depart, she pleads
“se me as sone as ye may, for I have obeyde me unto the prophe- :
sye that my fadir tolde m e. And by hys commaundemente to ful
fill this prophecie I have gyvyn the the grettyste ryches and the
fayryst floure that ever I had, and that is my maydynhode that I
shall never have agayne. And therefore, jantyll knyght, owghe j
me youre good wyll.” (796)
Thus, Elaine becomes a beautifully human figure, willing to sacrifice
all for her love for Lancelot and her hopes for her son. In the Old
French version, when Bors comes to Corbenic and sees the infant Gala-
had, the damsel is not present, and Bors speaks with her father. In
Malory, however, Elaine herself, with her son in her arms, greets him !
and tells him the child’s identity. The symbol of a dubious chastity is
replaced by an affectionate mother.
When Elaine comes to court, Malory emphasizes the honor
in which she is held:
And anone as kynge Arthur wyste that she was com he mette her ;
and salewed her, and so ded the moste party of all the knyghtes
103 :
A ' ♦ *
of the Rounde Table, both sir Trystram, sir Bleoberys and sir
Gawayne, and many mo that I woll nat reherse. (803)
More than the French author, Malory emphasizes her deep love for Lan- j
celot, which, since it is established on a purely human basis, freed from!
the paradox of the French, is much more fresh and believable. Elaine’s
response to Dame Brisane’s promise that Lancelot will come to her,
“ ‘than well were me . . . for all the worlde I love nat so muche as I do
i
sir Launcelot’” (804), is as honest as “ele li dist que ce li plaisoit mout,
car moult amoit Lancelot de grant amour” (79) is courtly and
conventional.
In the Queste Elaine comes off rather the worse in her
exchange with Guenevere after the second deception and Lancelot’s mad
leap from the chamber; for when Guenevere rebukes her sharply, all she |
can do is cry. In Malory, however, Elaine declares that she has a
greater cause to love Lancelot than has Guenevere, since by him she
has gotten a son: “ ‘And yf ye were nat, I myght have getyn the love of
my lorde sir Launcelot’” (806). It is Elaine who sorrows most over Lan
celot’s madness, while Guenevere can only futilely order her out of the
court.
After Lancelot is found and his senses restored by the Grail,
Malory replaces the courtly French agreement, by which Lancelot
requests the damsel’s company at the castle where he is exiled, with a
dialogue between Lancelot and Elaine, in which she offers to follow
him because she loves him: !
|
“Sir . . . I woll lyve and dye wyth you, only for youre sake; and |
yf my lyff myght nat avayle you and my dethe myght avayle you, j
wyte you well I wolde dye for youre sake. . . . And wher ye be, j
my lorde sir Launcelot, doute ye nat but I woll be wyth you, j
wyth all the servyse that I may do.” (825,826). |
Thus, in Malory the focus is on Elaine’s emotions, her love ;
j
for Lancelot and her pride in her son. In the French romance Elaine >
j
exists apart from Galahad; and after she conceives, she is seldom men- i
tioned in connection with him. Malory, however, has her refer con
stantly to her son and to his heroic future. Her first speech to Lancelot
is a reminder that by him she has conceived “ ‘the moste nobelyste
knyght of the worlde’” (796); and she proudly shows Galahad to Bors,
saying “‘ ‘ truly . . . wyte you well, this chylde he begate upon me’”
(798). Equally proud is her defense before Guenevere that she has the
prior claim to Lancelot, for “ ‘by hym I have borne a fayre sonne whose ;
name ys Galahad. And he shall be in hys tyme the beste knyght of the
worlde’” (806). This emphasis on the human parentage of Galahad
effectively minimizes his curious otherworldly quality and replaces it
with his father’s humanity. This is underscored by two original passages j
I
in which Lancelot speaks of Galahad to Elaine. After he has been healed
|
of his madness, Lancelot reminds her of the time when “ ‘as ye sey, sir
Galahad, your sonne, was begotyn” ’ (825). Again, in the final farewell!
105
between Elaine and Lancelot, a scene not in the French, Galahad and
his future heroism is the chief subject of conversation. Elaine empha
sizes their mutual parenthood by calling Galahad “ ‘youre sonne and
myne,” ’ and Lancelot expresses his parental concern in the hope that
“ ‘ God gyff hym grace to preve a good knyght’” (832). Then, with
Elaine’s final words, Malory makes explicit his characterization of
Galahad as the heroic son and protdgd of an even more heroic father:
“ ‘ As for that,’ seyde dame Elayne, ‘I doute nat he shall preve the beste
man of hys kynne excepte one’” (832). By placing Galahad second to
his father and by portraying Elaine as a loving and human mother,
Malory establishes the two elements central to his interpretation of the
Quest: the primacy of Lancelot’s fatherhood and the humanity of his
son.
Part 2: Galahad in Malory’s
Books VI-VIII
“Malory’s Tale of the Sankgreall is the least original of his
12
works.” With these words, Vinaver opens his commentary on Book VI
of the Morte Darthur. Yet, although Malory follows the text of the Old
French Queste rather closely, neither omitting nor rearranging incidents
as he does in other Books, he succeeds in altering the entire spirit of the
1 3
work. The transformation begun in the episode of Lancelot and Elaine
in Book V is completed in Book VI, “The Quest of the Sankgreall,” with
the resultant humanization of Galahad and the elevation of Lancelot,
106 !
I
characterization more consistent with the remainder of the Morte i
' i
i
j
Darthur. Although Lancelot does not replace his son as the Grail Winner,'
the distance between the two diminishes, so that Lancelot emerges as :
the hero in Malory’s version of the Quest for the Holy Grail.
This transformation begins with the knighting of Galahad, j
The mysterious damsel’s message to Lancelot bidding him to follow her,;
“ ‘Sir Launcelot, I salew you on kynge Pelles behalff, and I also requyre
you to com with me hereby into a forest” ’ (853), with its emphasis on i
the greeting, is more courteous and less peremptory than the French
command, “ ‘Lancelot, je vos di de par le roi Pelles que vos avec moi j
venez jusq’en cele forest’” (1). In Malory’s dubbing scene, although it i
is briefer than that of the Queste, Lancelot is a far more dominant figr;
ure. In the French romance the nuns play the prominent role, setting
the time for the knighting and responding negatively to Lancelot’s plea
that Galahad come with him to Arthur’s court. In Malory the scene
belongs to Lancelot and Galahad alone, after the nun introduces the
youth to his father. It is Lancelot who inquires about Galahad’s desire
to become a knight, Lancelot who sets the day and time of the dubbing;
nor does he stoop to plead fruitlessly with the abbess.
In the episode in which Galahad draws the sword from the
stone before Arthur’s court at Pentecost, Lancelot acquits himself much j
more nobly in Malory. In the Queste this episode symbolizes Galahad’s
i
superiority over his father; Lancelot is “corouciez,” angered over his !
j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j
i
i failure to achieve the sword, and he announces to all that he is unworthy
: of it: “ ‘ Je ne suiz mie dignes ne soffisanz que je la doie prendre*” (5).
; In Malory he answers “full sobirly,” and of the sword he says simply
I “ ‘ hit longith nat to hange be my syde’” (856). That the adventure is
not meant for him need not reflect on his worth as a knight.
In the Queste the white-garbed old man announces the arri
val of “le Chevalier Desirre” to Arthur’s court in elaborate language (7). |
In Malory the declaration is much less pretentious, and he says simply,
“ ‘ sir, I brynge you here a yonge knyght’” (859). Thus, Galahad arrives
not as the savior of mankind but as a newly made knight to whom a
great adventure is destined. It is for this same reason that Malory omits j
Arthur’s lavish welcoming speech, beginning “ ‘bien soit li chevaliers
venus!’” (7). In the Queste Lancelot does not recognize the youth as
his son, although the rest of the court is aware of the resemblance. In
Malory, however, the father-son emphasis exists from the beginning in
order to humanize the protagonists, for Lancelot “behylde hys sonne and •
had grete joy of hym” (861).
In Malory, as in the Queste, a damsel arrives to predict the ;
decline of Lancelot as the best knight of the world. However, Malory’s :
Lancelot counters her effectively with genuine humility: “ ‘I know well I
I was never none of the best’” (863). This elicits from the damsel a
response that is a definition of the relative positions of Galahad and his
father: “ ‘Yes,’ seyde the damesell, ‘ that were ye, and ar yet, of ony
108 |
t
synfull man of the worlde” ' (863). Thus, in Malory’s version Lancelot |
i
is sinful, but sin is the condition of mankind, save perhaps for those !
whose skill it is to excel in “holy dedis," Perceval and Galahad and, to |
a lesser extent, Bors. Lancelot, however, although he has sinned, is i
j
not the archetypal sinner of the Queste. For Malory it is no small thing .
to be the best “of ony synfull man of the worlde." Despite his failings,
Lancelot .achieves the glory which comes from holy deeds, partially in j
the “Quest of the Sankgreall," and fully in the episode of the Healing of
Sir Urry, until, after the noise of battle and the heat of passion fall awayl
he dies in an odor of sanctity, borne aloft, like his son before him, to a
heavenly reward. >
Women in general and Guenevere in particular appear to a
much greater advantage in Malory’s version of the Quest. In the Old
French romance they are the source of sin, and Eve, Solomon’s wife,
and Guenevere are the instruments through which the devil may corrupt ;
the virtuous man. In Malory, as in the Queste, women are forbidden to !
go with their lords on the great adventure, but Malory omits the sugges- :
14
tion that this is because they are the source of mortal sin. Malory’s
Guenevere is less the suspicious woman, jealously watching the offspring !
of her rival; and her interest in Galahad is genuine and almost motherly. !
The Queste’s long description of Guenevere as the tool used by the devil
to confound Lancelot has no place in Malory (125). The result of all this
is to remove the emphasis on lust as the greatest of sins and chastity as
109 !
the greatest of virtues. Thus, in Malory Lancelots relationship with
Guenevere is a failing but not the ultimate and most despicable of sins.
From the beginning of his Quest, Galahad is in Malory a
much more worldly knight. The Old French Queste, although it couches
i
the Christian’s progress toward God in military terms, denies the ordi- j
nary pursuits of “terriene chevalerie,” and Galahad’s refusal to harm
j
physically or even to pursue those whom he encounters is morally signi
ficant as an expression of the author’s humane view of the treatment of
i
i
sinners: !
!
I
i
i
La Queste preche, a l’dgard des ennemis de la foi, la patience et
la^correction moderee, hormis certains cas exceptionnels dont
l ’%lise doit etre seule a juger. N’outrons pas le chatiment des
impies, de peur de leur oter, avec la vie, la possibility du j
repentir.1 5 I
Malory, however, does not extend thus far his interpretation of the signi-
|
ficance of Galahad’s actions. Galahad is not an example of divine for- j
i
giveness, although he possesses the trait of mercy which Malory admires j
I
and includes among the virtues belonging to the ideal knight. However, j
i
for Malory there is no reason for Galahad to refrain from pursuing a j
i
i
villain Until he submits; and where the Queste states that Galahad “ne ;
l ’enchauce plus” Malory will alter the text to read “and sir Galahad
16
sewed faste aftir hym.”
j
The suggestion that Galahad is a “Christ in armor”is alien j
■ I
to Malory’s conception of him as a human being. In the episode of the j
I 110
| burning tomb, the Queste makes explicit this comparison of Galahad with
Christ; the hermit comments that in his supremacy over all men and in
: his ability to rescue tortured souls from the flames and to do battle with \
the Enemy, “ ‘por quoi Pen doit vostre venue comparer pres a la venue
Jhesucrist, de semblance ne mie a hautece’” (38). Malory omits both
I
! |
this passage and the later one in which Galahad’s appearance at Pente- j
i
I
i
cost is com pared , to the appearance of the flame of the holy spirit as it
appeared to the apostles on the first Pentecost (78). In Malory, “li Bons j
Chevaliers” is only Galahad, and he omits many passages of extravagant j
praise that suggest in Galahad a greater than human power. In the
■ Queste Yvain pleads to be allowed to hang the marvelous shield upon
the neck of Galahad; in Malory, Galahad performs this function for him-
self. in the battle with the knights of the Castle of Maidens, Malory’s
l
Galahad fights powerfully, but not “de tele vistece que il ne cuident mie
que il soit horns terriens” (48). In the Morte Darthur Galahad remains a
man among men, however superior in virtue and prowess. His relation
i
to Christ insures not his divinity but his nobility. In a passage original j
with Malory, Guenevere comments that j
“Sir Launcelot ys com but of the eyghth degre from oure Lorde
Jesu Cryst, and thys sir Galahad ys the nyneth degre from oure |
Lorde Jesu Cryst. Therefore, I dare sey they be the grettist jan- j
tillmen of the world.” (865) |
Although the detail about the lineage of Galahad probably belongs to I
!
some source, its relationship to the question of nobility and “jantilnesse” j
j is likely Malory’s own. For him, noble birth is a prerequisite to noble j
action, and from what more noble family might one be descended than j
from that of Christ himself?
Malory’s Galahad is more warlike than his counterpart in the
Queste. In the Old French romance, after the wounding of Melyas,
Galahad’s first concern is for Melyas and his wound; only secondarily
does he think of avenging him (42). In Malory, however, Galahad is j
preoccupied with the villain, and he responds to Melyas’ pleas almost j
; peremptorily:
“Sir Melyas, who hath wounded you? Therefore hit had
bene better to have ryddyn the other way.” |
And whan sir Melyas herde hym speke, “Sir,” he seyde, j
“for Goddys love, lat me nat dye in thys foreyst, but brynge me
to the abbey here besyde, that I may be confessed and have my
ryghtes.” j
“Hit shall be done,” seyde sir Galahad. “But where ys he ■
that hath wounded you?” (887)'
Malory’s conception of virtuous action also differs from that
of the Queste. In the Queste the central portion of the hermit’s speech
i
to Melyas is a warning that the devil lies in wait to tempt all who strug-
/ .
gle for virtue. This Malory replaces with a new definition of virtuous
action, which is “knyghtly dedys in Goddys workys, and no knyghtes
dedys in worldly workis” (886). The Queste distinguishes between heaver,
enly chivalry, which is service to God and the Church, and earthly chiv--
airy, which consists of all that the romances of chivalry praise: fame or
glory, prowess in battle, love for and service to women. All these the
112
I Queste negates. However, for Malory the “hyghe ordir of Knyghthode”
! implies a standard of virtuous action which is achievable by human
beings and which is a worthy way to serve God, through the strong arm, |
the adventurous spirit, and adherence to the code set forth by Arthur in j
: i
Book I of the Morte Darthur. In Malory the hermit admonishes Gawain I
i
not to “servissiez a nostre criator et defendissiez Sainte Eglise” (54), but
rather to perform “knyghtly dedis and vertuous lyvyng” (891). j
By this standard, Lancelot is much more successful, and in j
I
Malory he acquits himself more admirably in the Grail Quest, even in !
|
his period of humiliation and repentance. This period begins when he
i
I
and Perceval encounter Galahad for the first time; not recognizing him, !
they attack him and are unhorsed. In the Queste Lancelot and Perceval j
are puzzled and angry: “Et quant il voient que il ne le porront aconsivre;
si retornent tant dolent et tant corrocie que il voldroient morir sans
demorance, car or heent il trop lor vies” (56). To Malory such despair
!
is inexplicable, since the pair have not lost the hope of heaven, but j
merely the knight whom they seek; only somewhat unhappy, they begin I
their search anew “wyth hevy chere” (893). In the Queste Lancelot does
not recognize his son at all in this encounter; but in Malory the damsel
who announces to Galahad that the knights would not have attacked him :
had they known his identity does so “all alowde, that sir Launcelot and
sir Percy vail myght hyre” (893).
113
Lancelot, in the following episode, is unable to rouse him
self in the presence of the Grail; and for both Malory and the author of
the Queste his failure is a cause for shame. Malory, however, suggests
that Lancelot’s sinful state is temporary, for “he toke repentaunce aftir
that” (895). Malory also omits the knight’s description of the sleeping
Lancelot as “cest mauves chevalier qui ci gist” (60). In both versions a
voice orders Lancelot to leave the sacred spot, but only the French sug
gests that he has defiled the place by his presence: “Car li leux est ja
toz empulentez de ton repere” (60). When a mysterious voice calls
i
Lancelot harder than stone, more rotten than wood, and more barren j
than a fig tree, “tho wordis wente to hys herte” (895), but he does not
begin a lengthy self-chastisement over “ ‘mes pechiez et ma mauvese
vie’” nor his present state “ ‘ coverz de teniebres de pechie mortel,’”
where he dwells “ ‘en luxure et en la vilte de cest monde’” (61). In the i
Queste the new day and the birdsong following the night of self- I
recrimination only serve to remind Lancelot anew that God is displeased j
j
with him. In Malory, however, the beauty of the natural world revives j
his spirits, and “somwhat he was comforted” (896). The hermit’s rebuke j
is much more positive in Malory; in both versions the emphasis is on j
Lancelot’s good gifts, but Malory eliminates the Queste’s obsession with j
the devil, who lies in wait to deprive man of all he possesses. I
j
In the Queste Lancelot’s chief sin is luxure; his sin is in i
i
loving Guenevere and in owing all he has to her. Malory, however,
alters the center of guilt; it lies not in loving, but in loving “unmesur-
abely and out of mesure longe,” so that for the queen he would do battle
“were hit ryght other wrong” (897). In Malory Lancelot has erred in
reversing the proper order of man’s allegiances: “But first reserve the
honoure to God, and secundely thy quarell muste com of thy lady”
(1119). In neither version is the focus on adultery or on Lancelot’s dis
loyalty to Arthur; this is a rather modern interpretation of the central
conflict of the Arthurian legend. In the Queste the ideal is ascetic;
purity of body is the beginning of purity of soul. Malory, too, ignores
the adultery and concentrates instead on the evils of excessive passion.
It is noteworthy, too, that in the Qieste Lancelot names Guenevere as
1
the source of his sin; while Malory’s hero chivalrously preserves her honor
by referring merely to “a quene.” In the Queste Lancelot promises to
i
abjure the company of Guenevere and to seek a new purity of body and
spirit: “ ‘Ainz tendrai chastee et garderai mon cors au plus netement
que je porrai’” (70). In Malory he promises to return instead to the j
j
true course of chivalry, “to sew knyghthode and to do fetys of armys” j
(899). Malory also omits a passage of the Queste in which the recluse
warns Perceval to beware lest he fail in the Quest “ ‘ausi come a fet LanJ
j
celot del Lac qui, par eschaufement de char et par sa mauvese luxure a
perdu a mener a fin, grant tens a, ce dont tuit li autre sont ores en
peine’” (80). Malory also omits the long sermon that the second hermit
reads to Lancelot on the subject of his sins; and the episode designed to
115
test Lancelot’s new humility, in which a strange youth reviles him as
“desloiaux et mescreanz” and Lancelot submits meekly to the chastise- j
18
ment, Malory omits as unworthy of the stature of his hero. Throughout
Malory’s version runs the suggestion that but for his sin Lancelot would j
f
be “more abeler than ony man lyvynge” to achieve the Grail. j
In the Queste all the digressions on the noble qualities of
Lancelot function to create contrast between what God has given him j
i
and what he has allowed the devil to ravage and destroy. In Malory j
Lancelot’s failure is primarily in putting glory and the love of a woman
i
before God; in Lancelot’s vision the Deity declares “ ‘ thou hast ruled the j
ayenste me as a warryoure and used wronge warris with vaynglory for the
i
pleasure of the world more than to please m e’” (928,929). In the
Queste Lancelot is accused of actually warring against God: “ ‘Tu ne j
|
m ’as pas este amis, mes guerriers’” (31). Malory omits the elaborate
praise of Galahad that follows, in which he appears as a young lion tak- ;
ing flight toward the heavens, which open in glory to receive him; and i
in its place Malory puts praise of Lancelot: “ ‘For of a synner erthely ;
thou hast no pere as in knyghthode nother never shall have’” (930). !
Malory also puts virtually the same words in the mouth of Gawain: ! j
“ ‘And if one thynge were nat in sir Launcelot he had none felow of an i
erthely man’” (941). Malory summarizes this failure of Lancelot in one!
word: instability, which Malory interprets as the inability of Lancelot
i
to hold to his vow to put God before love of woman and worldly glory, j
In a passage original with Malory, the hermit explains to Hector the
nature of this flaw:
“For I dare sey, as synfull as ever sir Launcelot hath byn, j
sith that he wente into the queste of the Sankgreall he slew never j
man nother nought shall, tyll that he com to Camelot agayne; for j
he hath takyn upon hym to forsake synne. And nere were that he j
ys nat stable, but by hys thoughte he ys lyckly to turne agayne, !
he sholde be nexte to encheve hit sauff sir Galahad, hys sonne; j
but God knowith hys thought and hys unstablenesse. And yett shall!
he dye ryght an holy man, and no doute he hath no felow of none I
erthely synfull man lyvyng.” (948) j
i
j
Although Malory considers the Grail a divine object, whose |
i
Winner must have God’s sanction, he is conscious that in the achieve- j
ment of the Grail there is a secular worth. Vinaver’s summation of
Malory’s attitude toward the Quest is excellent:
i
i
t
His attitude may be described without much risk of oversimplifica-;
tion as that of a man to whom the quest of the Grail was primarily j
an Arthurian adventure and who regarded the intrusion of the Grail j
upon Arthur’s kingdom not as a means of contrasting earthly and
divine chivalry and condemning the former, but as an opportunity
offered to the knights of the Round Table to achieve still greater
glory in this world.1 9
In the text of the Morte Darthur, this idea is perhaps best expressed by
Bors, who, before he reveals his pure spiritual life in confession to the
hermit, describes the goal of the Quest in oddly secular terms that could !
have no place in the Old French romance: “ 'For he shall have much
erthly worship that may bring it to an end’” (955). The author of the
! Queste is not at all concerned with the matter of earthly worship;
Malory, however, makes a distinction between worship, the honestly I
I deserved renown of a man among his fellows, and the empty and unde
served sort that he calls “vayneglory.”
In the Queste, but not in Malory, Lancelot's sojourn alone
j
on the ship with the corpse of Perceval's saintly sister transforms him
spiritually. However, Malory's Lancelot is an earthly knight, and even j
I
I
on the holy ship where he is fed by manna he feels the need for exercise j
j
and variety: “And so on a nyght he wente to play hym by the watirs j
syde, for he was somwhat wery of the shippe" (1011, 1012).Malory i
i
i
implies no condemnation of Lancelot in these words, nor does he suggest!
I
that this illustrates Lancelot's “instability.” It is a normal human
response to feel the need for change, and such a sedentary existence
would be indeed difficult for a person accustomed, as a knight would be,
. I
to rigorous physical exercise. j
I
Malory describes the meeting of Galahad and Lancelot upon !
the holy vessel in an enthusiastic dialogue which adds excitement and
meaning to the recognition scene between father and son. What follows I
is, in the Queste, a rather pedantic session in which Galahad shows his
father the sword of the Strange Rings and describes in some detail the j
ship of Solomon. Lancelot replies that “ ‘ onques si haute aventure
n'avint a chevalier com il li est avenue"' (250). The scene is much
!
briefer in Malory, and Galahad tells “how the mervayles swerde was i
gotyn and who made hit and all the mervayles rehersed afore,” but does j
; not recite them in detail (1012). Galahad does not mention the ship of
: Solomon, and Malory emphasizes not the significance of the adventures
but their marvelous quality. Lancelot’s reply is here full of wonder over
the adventures rather than over horn who has accomplished them: “ ‘Truly!
|
. . . never arste knew I of so hyghe adventures done, and so mervalousj
!
stronge” ’ (1013).
At their parting, Galahad tells his father that he shall not see
I
him again until he has looked upon the body of Christ. The exchange
between father and son that follows in the Queste is designed to explicate
a particular view of the purpose of prayer: that the direct prayer of the
, individual is more powerful than that of an intercessor. Pauphilet, in |
his comment on this passage, summarizes the view of the Queste:
i
|
Sans doute les priSres des saints peuvent incliner Dieu a lam iseri- j
corde, mais elles ne tiennent pas lieu de l’appel direct dupecheurj
et elles n’ajoutent point a son merite. Tout homme est Partisan |
de son propre salut.20
In the Queste Galahad commends his father to Christ, “ ‘qui vos main-
teigne en son servise’” ; and Lancelot responds with a plea that Galahad j
pray for him, “ ‘qu’il ne me lest partir de son servise, mes en tel manieie
i
me gart que je soie ses serjanz terriens et esperiteux’ ” (252). Galahad’s
reply is something of a rebuke, a reminder to Lancelot that the true
value is in one’s own personal prayer: “ ‘Sire, nule proiere n’i vaut
autant com la vostre. Et por ce vos soviegne de vos’” (252). In Malory,
however, Galahad refrains from theorizing on the nature of prayer. Lan-!
celot performs both types of devotion, requesting his son’s prayers on his
own behalf and praying for his own welfare and Galahad’s. He asks
Galahad that he ‘“ pray to the Fadir that he holde me sty lie in his
servyse,’” but he also offers up his own prayer: ‘“ I pray to the Hyghe j
i
Fadir, conserve me and you both’” (1013). Galahad replies as in the)
French version, but in this context, following Lancelot’s prayer, it is
not a rebuke but a compliment to Lancelot’s efficacy in prayer: ‘“ Sir,’
seyde sir Galahad, ‘no prayer avaylith so much asyoures’” (1013, 1014).
Following Lancelot’ s limited vision of the Grail, he learns
in the Queste that he need not put on the hair shirt again, for he has seen!
1 i
all that he will be allowed to see:
“Gar vostre queste est acheves; por noient vos travailleroiz plus
por quierre le Saint Graal; car bien sachiez que vos n’en verroiz
plus que veu en avez. Or nos amient Diex cax qui plus en doivent
veoir.” (259) j
Malory shifts the emphasis from the limitations of Lancelot’s Quest to :
his success: ;
j
“Sir,” seyde they, “the queste of the Sankgreall ys encheved |
now ryght in you, and never shall ye se of Sankgreall more than j
ye have sene.”
“Now I thinke God,” seyde sir Launcelot, “for Hys grete j
mercy of that I have sene, for hit suffisith me. For, as I suppose, j
no man in thys worlde have lyved bettir than I have done to |
enchyeve that I have done.” (1017, 1018)
Malory adds a conclusion to the episode of Lancelot’s Grail I
vision which emphasizes further this focus on his success. Lancelot j
i
returns to the court of Arthur to the great rejoicing of all; he responds to j
j 120
their questions about his great adventure by relating his part in it and
i
; describing the exploits of the other Questers as he has heard them from
Galahad and read them in the letter held by the corpse of Perceval’s
I sister. Next, Malory follows the Queste in describing Galahad’s success
in bringing to an end the adventures of the Sankgreall. However, :
j
instead of concluding, like the Queste, with a brief epilogue by Bors !
i
which reinforces the central importance of Galahad, Malory shifts the j
focus again to Lancelot. In the Old French romance Bors returns to |
court in order that the Quest may be recorded by clerks who learn the j
details from an authoritative eyewitness. In Malory, however, Lancelot;
|
adds his version to that of Bors: “Than sir Launcelot tolde the adventures
of the Sangreall that he had sene” (1086). The emphasis on Lancelot is i
! j
further heightened by Malory’s invention of a scene in which Bors delivers j
i
to Lancelot the message which Galahad has sent him and which, in both
Malory and the Queste, is Galahad’s last speech before his ascent into
i
heaven. Indeed, Malory even adds a similar message to Lancelot from j
Perceval, also delivered by Bors. In Malory the “Quest of the Sank- |
greall” ends with Lancelot and Bors, the only living Grail Questers,
promising their faith to one another:
“And wete ye well, gentyll cousyn sir Bors, ye and I shall
never departe in sunder whylis oure lyvys may laste.”
“Sir,” seyde he, “as ye woll, so woll IV (1030) '
Thus, at the end of Malory’s Book VI, we are reminded not of the ecstat-;
ic vision of Galahad at Sarras, but of the earthly companionage of thej
| 121
| two survivors, bound forever by the memory of the high service they
- have shared.
Nor does Malory’s Lancelot ever forget this service.
Although Malory appears to believe in the possibility of his hero serving j
!
the ideals of the Grail in a secular world, he anticipates, from the |
beginning of Book VII, Lancelot’s inability to do so:
l
: . |
For, as the booke seyth, had nat sir Launcelot bene in his prevy I
thoughtes and in his myndis so sette inwardly to the quene as he j
was in semynge outewarde to God, there had no knyght passed j
hym in the queste of the Sankgreall. (1045) j
|
In the Mort Artu and the Stanzaic Morte Arthur, Malory’s sources for his
Books VII and VIII, there is no mention of the Grail save for the introduc
tion of each romance, which notes that the events to be narrated took
j
place after the Quest of the Grail i In Malory, however, Lancelot makes j
i
a strong attempt to follow the ideals of the Grail by performing noble
deeds on behalf of “ladyes and damesels.” The. importance of these
actions is that they are both righteous and performed on God’s behalf:
“In all such maters of ryght sir Launcelot applyed hym dayly to do for j
the plesure of oure Lorde Jesu Cryst” (1045). When Guenevere rebukes
Lancelot for avoiding her company, he reminds her of his recent holy
adventure and suggests that but for their love he would have achieved the
ultimate vision. Lancelot, however, blames not Guenevere but himself; j
it is his “prevy thoughtes” that are to blame for his failure.
i 122
In Malory’s Book VIII Lancelot recalls the Grail adventure
once again in a similar situation, as he replies to Guenevere’s suggestion
that his vow of perfection is not genuine: j
i
“Well, Madame . . . ye say as hit pleasith you, for yet wyste ye j
me never false of my promyse. And God deffende but that I j
shoulde forsake the worlde as ye have done. For in the queste of j
the Sankgreall I had that tyme forsakyn the vanytees of the worldej
had nat youre love bene. And if I had done so at that tyme with j
my harte, wylle, and thought, I had passed all the knyghts that j
ever were in the Sankgreall excepte syr Galahad, my sone.” (1253)
Thus, in Malory the Grail is an earthly adventure for an earthly hero,
j
until the collapse of the “worlde unstable” renders it impossible for Lan- j
celot to continue his struggle, and the monastic ideal upon which the
French Queste is based takes possession of the Morte Darthur.
The Protege Pattern |
The protege pattern of Galahad, unlike that of Gareth, Urry,
and, to a large extent, Lavayne, arises from the matiere of Malory’s I
I
source. Here Lancelot does not merely perform a parental role for the
young hero, he becomes in fact that very parent. Yet, although the j
invention of Galahad as Grail hero has its roots in its author’s desire to j
link intimately the greatest hero of the Arthurian legend and the hero of i
the spiritual Quest, the story in the Old French Queste emphasizes not
the rebirth of the father’s virtues in the son but the reincarnation of fallenj
man, Lancelot, in the guise of his perfect offspring, Galahad. In the j
Queste the relationship of Lancelot and Galahad is akin to that of Adam
and Christ. According to Frederick W. Locke,
Galahad is intermittently an analogy of Christ; it follows, there- !
fore, that the real relationship existing between the two, the sig
nificant relationship for the structure of the Queste, will be the
one between Adam and Christ.2 1
Locke goes on to describe the Pauline tradition of Christ as the second
Adam, the new man, sinless and perfect to replace the old father of
mankind, sinful and fallen. This theological relationship is based on j
the identity of the two individuals, Adam and Christ, Lancelot and j
Galahad; the perfect being is spiritually implicit within the imperfect. I
Yet, in this very identity is the antithesis of new and old, good and evil.
In Malory the relationship, neither so close nor so distant,
I
i
is that of human father to human son, where the son exists primarily to j
glorify the father. Sister Mary Louis Morgan summarizes Malory’s pur
pose in developing the character of Galahad:
i
For Malory, Galahad’s coming was not an act of redemption and :
purification through sin and repentance, but more than anything j
else an artistic device designed to bring into bolder relief the fig- I
ure of his hero, Lancelot. What Malory saw in the Grail theme j
was not the apotheosis of a divine ideal in the sinless Galahad, but!
rather the personification of a human ideal in the sinful Lancelot, j
He lost no chance of increasing the desirability of making Lance- !
lot as nearly as possible the hero of this quest, and since he real- I
ized that Lancelot’s sinful love for Guenevere deprived him of the
right to become the hero of a spiritual quest, he heartily agreed !
with the medieval mystic that the best solution was to give him a |
son, equal to him in worldly prowess but without his taint of sin, !
who could win the quest. Thus Malory gloried in the fact that th e !
Grail winner could start on his quest with the matchless reputation j
of his father thrown as a resplendent mantle upon his shoulders, and
the father, in turn, could become the protagonist of the romance
by reaping vicariously the spiritual success of his son.2 2
In fulfilling this intention Malory emphasizes the human bond of father
and son, which is the model for all his protegg patterns, in order that
Lancelot might emerge in the more powerful and authoritative role.
We have already seen how Malory has altered the basic
purity-impurity dichotomy of the Lancelot and Elaine story in order to
develop a genuine human relationship. An important effect of this
change is that Lancelot and Elaine emerge as sympathetic parents of a
human offspring rather than as helpless actors in a divinely ordained
drama. Malory’s text is filled with references to the parenthood of Lan
celot, which emphasizes the superior authority of the father and the
dependence of the son. In Merlin’s prediction regarding the sword of
Balin, it is not, as in the source, Galahad alone who will wield it, but
“sir Launcelot other ellis Galahad, hys sonne” (91). In Malory Lancelot
and Elaine speak freely of their son, and when Galahad comes to court
Malory’s Lancelot recognizes him not merely as a youth he has knighted
but as his offspring. Arthur’s court also recognizes the relationship.
When Lancelot returns to court after the Quest, “the kynge asked hym
many tydyngis of hys sonne sir Galahad” (1020). Even Guenevere gives
positive emphasis to the bond, as she assures the court that Galahad is
noble, “ ‘for so hys fadir ys that hym begate’” (862). Malory is careful
to emphasize the bond between Lancelot and Galahad during the Quest;
125
for example, in the encounter of Lancelot and Perceval with Galahad,
Malory links Galahad to Lancelot, calling the latter “hys fadir, sir
i
Launcelot” (892), and of the Holy Grail the hermit tells Gawain that j
I
i
were Lancelot not unstable, “ ‘ he sholde be nexte to encheve hit sauff
Galahad, hys sonne’” (948). Even after Galahad’s death, Lancelot’s
I
memory dwells on his offspring. In the original scene at the beginning
of Book VII in which Lancelot explains to Guenevere his new devotion
to chivalric ideals, he refers to the success of “ ‘my sonne, sir Galahad’ ”
(1046); and in his farewell to Guenevere in Book VIII, Lancelot again
speaks of “ ‘ syr Galahad, my sone’” (1253). :
That Malory regards the father as the superior in this rela
tionship is further evidenced by his translation of a relevant passage from |
the Queste. The Old French ironic comment on the evils of war and
family feuds, “mes quant il avenoit que li filz ocioit le pere, ou li peres;
le filz, et toz li parentez moroit d’armes, lors disoient cil del pais
qu’il estoent de haut lignage” (95), Malory turns to a moral remark on
the failure of sons to show proper respect for their fathers: “For in tho
dayes the sonne spared nat the fadir no more than a stranger” (913). In j
Malory the primary duty of a son is loyalty and love for his father; thus, :
Malory suggests that as the son is subordinate to his father, so Galahad !
must be subordinate to Lancelot. j
Malory emphasizes the protege relation of Lancelot and
i
Galahad not only by focusing on the fatherhood of Lancelot but also by i
126 |
stressing the youth, and, therefore, implying the inexperience of Gala-
had. The best example of this technique appears in the episode of |
i
i
Galahad’s arrival at court. In place of the white-robed sage’ s dramatic I
i
announcement, “ ‘ rois Artus, je t ’ameign le Chevalier Desirre,’” and |
i
I
Arthur’s equally dramatic reply, “ ‘ sire, bien soiez vos venuz se cest j
j
parole est veraie, et bien soit li chevaliers venus!’” (7), Malory inserts
a simple, curiously understated exchange: “ ‘Sir, I bring you here a
yonge knyght. . . . ’ ‘Sir, ye be ryght wellcom, and the yonge knyght
with you’” (859,860). Malory adds still another reference to the hero’s
youth in this passage; as the old man leads Galahad to the Siege Perilous,
he “seyde unto the yonge knyght, ‘Sir, swith m e.’” (860). Clearly,
Malory wishes Galahad to appear not as a replacement for Lancelot but I
i
!
as another of his proteges, a Gareth destined for a high adventure. j
The initial response of son to father is implied rather than |
stated. Like Lavayne’s father, the initial guardians of the youth, here ;
the nuns of the Abbey, express their confidence in the man who is to
take their place: “ ‘For of a more worthyer mannes honde may he nat !
resceyve the Order of Knyghthode’” (854). Unlike the French author,
However, Malory has Galahad himself, together with the nuns, respond |
positively to Lancelot’s question as to whether Galahad desires to be
made knight. Thus, here Galahad voluntarily chooses to relate himself s
to his father by directly addressing him.
i
127
The scene in which Guenevere questions Galahad regarding
his parentage is an important reflection of Galahad’s feeling for his j
t
father. Here Malory largely follows the Old French text; however, by j
!
subtle alterations and compression he changes the tone of the discussion j
' ' I
entirely. In the Queste Guenevere is the villainess, the corruptor of
|
Lancelot; and her conversation with Galahad reflects not so much interest
in him as a morbid concern with the manner of his begetting. Her wily J
i
i
questions and Galahad’s evasions take on an aura of temptation; and the i
key question which she wishes Galahad to answer, whether Lancelot is j
his father, is of less importance than the insight offered by the dialogue
into her personality and that of Galahad. In Malory Guenevere’s interestj
i
is frank and friendly, and Galahad’s evasion seems only youthful shyness.1
In the French version Guenevere begins the questioning in roundabout
fashion by asking Galahad about his country and relatives; he replies
without mentioning Lancelot, but from his words she knows clearly whose
son he is. Frustrated, she finally confronts him with the question, “et il
li respont qu’il ne set pas tres bien cui filz il fu” (20). Guenevere
becomes angry, telling him he is wrong to act so, since his father is the
most noble of knights. At this point, Galahad himself takes the superior
position of interrogator, asking Guenevere to tell him who his father is
and adding that he will know from her words whether or not she speaks
the truth. Angrier than ever, she recites the name of Lancelot; and
i
Galahad, now fully in command of the situation, replies loftily, “ ‘Damej
i 128 1
I j
. . . puis que vos le savez si bien, a que fere le vos deisse je? Assez le I
i
saura Ten a tens’” (20). Malory’s Guenevere is more straightforward.
I
After asking Galahad his name and country, “ ‘and sonne unto sir Laun- j
celot?’ she seyde” (869). To this Galahad does not respond, but “seyde j
nother yee nother nay” (869). The queen’s reply is less defensive, her !
S
praise of Lancelot less fraught with guilty association, and her rebuke to |
|
Galahad gentler. At its conclusion, Galahad is “a lityll ashamed” (870);|
“ashamed” here is probably to be taken in the sense of “embarrassed,” j
and Galahad’s silence and embarrassment reflect not upon his father but ;
upon his own youthful inexperience in conversing with queens. However,
as in the Queste, he recovers himself. His response resembles his final i
i
words in the Queste without the note of irony. Rather than hinting airily j
that before long all will be known, Galahad focuses upon the future rev- I
elation of the relation between himself and Lancelot, thus emphasizing
its importance: “ ‘For he that ys my fadir shall be knowyn opynly and
all betymys’” (870). Hence, in Malory there is a suggestion that the
relationship, barely touched upon at first, will develop into an important
bond reflecting mutual glory on father and son.
In developing this protege pattern, Malory has Lancelot
express his parental concern initially in a conversation with Elaine,
which takes place when Galahad is fifteen. “ ‘God gyff hym grace,” ’
says Lancelot, “ ‘to preve a good knyght’” (832). Lancelot’s concern for
Galahad, as for Gareth, is that he become a good knight, which for
j 129
Malory is a noble standard of conduct functioning totally within the
j
| bounds of Christian behavior. As in the Queste, Lancelot is drawn to
i
I and impressed with the young knight when first he meets him.. Unlike
; t
i
! the author of the Queste, however, Malory has Lancelot recognize Gala-j
i
had as his son when he sees him at court and again when he and Perceval j
i
encounter Galahad later in the forest. Beholding Galahad’s proud en- |
j
trance into Arthur’s presence, Lancelot feels “grete joy.” j
As with Gareth, the relationship between Lancelot and j
I !
Galahad is cemented by the dubbing, the initiation rite over which the
older hero presides and which marks the entrance of the younger into
manhood. Although the dubbing occurs in the source, Malory alters it
to give Lancelot a more dominant role and to give Galahad a certain
self- sufficiency, as one who controls his own destiny rather than being j
controlled by the divine hand that directs his every act. It is Lancelot,
not the abbess, who sets the time and date of the dubbing. In Malory
Lancelot’s question of whether it is Galahad’s own wish to become a !
knight subtly redefines the role of both major participants. It suggests
that the choice of whether or not to knight Galahad is Lancelot’s own
and that certain requisites must be met before Lancelot can acquiesce
to the desires of the nuns. It also suggests in Galahad the power of self- ,
determination and places more emphasis on the act through which the
Order of Knighthood is bestowed. Since Malory makes no distinction
between earthly and heavenly chivalry, the moment of Galahad’s j
130
dubbing at the hand of Lancelot is up to that time the youth’s ultimate
distinction and will be second only to his fulfillment of the Grail Quest.
From beginning to end the glory due the offspring of Lancelot is his.
In the Queste Lancelot futilely pleads with the abbess to allow Galahad
to go to court with him. In Malory Lancelot’s invitation is not a plea
but simply a question of Galahad’s intention, and it is Galahad himself
i
who replies directly to his father: .
|
“Now, fayre sir,” seyde sir Launcelot, “woll ye com with j
me unto the courte of king Arthur?” j
“Nay,” seyde he, “I woll nat go with you at thys tyme.” j
(854) :
i
In the Queste Bors plays a prominent role in the dubbing, as befits Gala- j
had’s companion in the Quest of the Grail. It is he who symbolizes j
i
Galahad’s knighting by putting the young knight’s spurs upon him. |
Malory, however, has Lancelot perform the entire ritual.
There is of necessity a greater distance between Lancelot
and Galahad than between the hero and his other proteges; the very
mati5re of the Grail Quest dictates this. However, the distance is
lessened by Malory, for whom the relationship is not that of Adam to
Christ but father to son. Yet it is not until the passages describing the
meeting of Lancelot and Galahad and their life together on the sacred
ship that the relation between father and son is at all developed.
Although the same scene appears in the Queste, in Malory Galahad is
the son rather than the guide and teacher, and Lancelot appears to a
I 131
' much greater advantage. In the Queste we are reminded from the be
ginning that Lancelot retains his old warlike habits, for when Lancelot
sees the strange knight approaching, it is only his recollection of the
i
hermit’s promise of Galahad’s coming that prevents him from arming I
himself against the stranger. In Malory Lancelot welcomes the knight j
i
courteously, although he does not know his identity. In the Queste j
i
Galahad does not anticipate finding anyone aboard ship, and it is not j
until he has asked the stranger’s name and recognized his father that he j
expresses any emotion and declares that he desires Lancelot’s compan-
i
ionship. The French author still delays full recognition, although it
appears that either character now recognizes other. They must disarm
and board the ship before Lancelot can ask “ *ha! Galaad, estes vos
ce?’” and Galahad reply, “ ‘sire, . . . oil, ce sui je voirement’” (250).!
In Malory the entire recognition scene is in dialogue and
there is no awkward double greeting. Unlike the Galahad of the Queste,
Malory’s Galahad senses a bond between himself and the strange knight
i
and acknowledges the older hero’s charisma in his response: I
“Sir, what ys youre name? For much my herte gevith unto
you.” ' : ,
“Truly, ” seyde he, “my name ys sir Launcelot du Lake.”
“Sir,” seyde he, “than be ye wellcom! For ye were the
begynner of me in thys worlde.”
“A, sir, are ye sir Galahad?”
“Ye forsothe.” (1012)
132
This brief and poignant recognition scene borrows much of its language
from the Queste, but the compression and the simplicity produce a much
greater emotional impact. Malory’s Galahad performs all the gestures
of respect and love a son owes a father. In both versions there is great
rejoicing and embracing following the recognition, but only in Malory
does the youth kneel and ask his father’s blessing, thus subtly acknowledg
ing Lancelot’ s superiority.
The French writer is careful to set the scene for Galahad’s
departure from the ship after Easter and to describe the beauty of nature
and the advent of spring; and since the greater part of Galahad’s adven
ture takes place after his sojourn with Lancelot, this spring symbolism
with its suggestion of rebirth and resurrection is full of meaning for him
I
who seeks Christ. Malory, however, omits these passages. It may be
that for him the final separation of father and son is not a joyous occa- i
sion but one of sorrow and loss. We have already discussed how the
French poet uses the farewell passage to expound a view of personal
prayer and how Malory makes it rather an opportunity for father and son |
to show affection for one another and for Lancelot to reveal the depth of :
his faith by his prayers for himself and his son. The last words of Gala-
had are in Malory not a homily but a praise of his father’s efficacy in
prayer.
In both the Queste and the Morte Darthur Galahad’s farewell |
i
to the eleven other Grail knights as Sarras is a request that they greet his |
| father for him when they come to court. Malory makes only one small
i I
i
; change, but one that focuses more sharply on Galahad’s concern for his !
father. In the French version the knights reply that they will not forget I
the charge; in Malory, however, it is Galahad who “prayde hem, and :
23
they com on that party, nat to forgete hit.” Again, in Galahad’s last ; *
I
words to Bors at Sarras, in Malory and in the Queste a greeting to “ 'sir
i
Launcelot, my fadir,’ ” Malory has him add the admonition “ ‘bydde hym
24
remembir of this worlde unstable.’” Unstable . . . likely to change.
Thus, Galahad’s last words reflect the world of Camelot fallen into ruin. !
For Moorman, who considers the underlying themes of the Morte Darthur i
“ j
j
to be “growth, decay and fall” concluding in “the ultimate failure of j
25 i
Arthur’s would-be ideal secular civilization,” this addition that Malory
j
makes to the “Quest of the Sankgreall” is proof that in his scheme Lan- I
celot’s failure in the Quest is more important than his limited success:
“The purpose of this final passage is, of course, to end the Grail quest
with a severely chastened Lancelot and not to make Lancelot the Grail
26
hero.” It is well to note, however, that Galahad focuses not on the
instability of Lancelot but on the instability of the world in which mortal
men cannot entirely avoid sin. It is interesting that Bors, in delivering
the message, refers not to the unstable world, but rather to “thys unsyker
worlde.” Life is uncertain in Malory’s universe, and noble natures may j
be threatened by it; nevertheless, man may be heroic within it. This is ;
! 134 !
: |
not to say that for Malory Lancelot is guiltless; he, too, partakes of the i
: i
uncertainty and instability of the world, but this is not unnatural. He is ;
ever an “erthly knyght,” until in the moniage of the final Book he over-!
comes the world and himself. By allowing Bors to repeat the words of
Galahad to his father before the whole court Malory heightens the impor-
j
tance of the relationship between the Grail hero and his father, and the
earthly glory of the one reflects the heavenly glory of the other. |
I
Thus, since the independent actions of Galahad belong also |
to his father, Malory transforms the polemic of the Queste, the success j
!
of Galahad and the failure of Lancelot, into the harmony of two com-
i
plementary successes. Through Galahad, Lancelot tastes the heavenly j
!
achievement he will know more fully in the Urry episode and in his |
moniage. Galahad, as portrayed in Malory, is like his father in word
and deed. We have seen how Malory secularizes Galahad’s chivalric
performance, making him merciful in battle but not Christlike, as he
pursues the guilty and avenges wrongs done to those he loves. Like
Gareth, Galahad refuses the fellowship of Gawain. In the Queste the
hermit tells Gawain that he is unworthy of such companionship, and
Galahad becomes a symbol of purity, a standard by which Gawain’s sin
ful nature may be compared: “ ‘La compaignie de vos deus ne seroit
mie covenable’ ” (52). In Malory Galahad chooses of his own will to
avoid Gawain, who represents not evil but vengeance and recourse to
tribal law; the hermit says instead “ ‘he woll nat of youre felyship,,,(890).
135
As young men have sought the companionship of Lancelot,
so also they seek Galahad. In the Queste Galahad’s holiness and his
!
sacred mission make him an idol; in Malory it is rather the echo of his j
father’s charisma. In knighting the youthful Melyas, he follows his
father’s footsteps as protector of the younger and less experienced.
t
Galahad accomplishes little that is not somewhere equalled by Lancelot.!
If Galahad can heal the Maimed King and the cripple at the gates of
Sarras, Lancelot has healed in the Chapel Perilous episode and will heal
again in that of Sir Urry. In Malory Galahad is less absolutely self- I
j
assured, more a man among men, a member of a chivalric fellowship
i
i
in which each member functions to aid the other. As Lancelot accepts j
i
great charges with humility, as when he demurs at healing Urry lest he j
be presumptuous, so Galahad, in proving his worth by grasping the Sword:
I
of the Strange Hangings, denies that he is the man destined to bear it.
In the Queste he carefully tests his strength by grasping the sword before
he pulls it out. In Malory, however, Galahad grasps it only to encour- j
age his fellows: “ ‘ But wete you well hit longith no more to me than hit
doth to you’” (995). Thus, Galahad, who is so like his father, becomes i
the forerunner in performing the holy deeds which will reflect upon his
father and encourage him to follow after.
I
In altering the character of Galahad in a direction more
human and filial, Malory develops the thematic centers of his work.
j
Inasmuch as Galahad is no longer the antithesis of Lancelot, but is rather!
Lancelot’s image recreated for a different mission, his loyalty to his j
: I
: . I
i ■ I
■ father may be stronger and deeper. However, his Quest takes him far j
; from the conflicts of Camelot, and, unlike the other protdg6s of Lance- j
i
lot, he cannot be present in the final act, to prove the worth of Lance- j
j
lot by a final gesture of loyalty and devotion which Malory may use to j
i
soften the charge of disloyalty against Lancelot himself. However,
i
although Malory does not alter the central mission of Galahad, he does j
allow Lancelot’s holy son to pass on his mission of filial devotion to a |
successor. In both the Queste and in the Morte Darthur, before Gala
had’s death at Sarras, he bids Bors remember him to his father. In ‘
i
Malory, however, Bors delivers this message, adding a reminder to Lan
celot of the time when he and Galahad were together on the ship. Lan
celot briefly eulogizes his son, declaring his trust that “ ‘ hys prayer shall j
avayle m e” ’ (1036). Lancelot then turns to Bors and, embracing him,
delivers a speech that establishes their friendship on a new ground, as of
those who have been in the Quest:
“Cousyn, ye ar ryght wellcom to mel For all that ever I
may do for you and for yours, ye shall fynde my poure body redy j
atte all tymes whyle the spyryte is in hit, and that I promyse you
feythfully, and never tO'fayle. And wete ye well, gentyl cousyn
sir Bors, ye and I shall never departe in sundir whylis oure lyvys ;
may laste.”
“Sir,” seyde he, “as ye woll, so woll I.” (1037)
With this mutual declaration of loyalty the “Queste of the Sankgreall”
ends. Thus, Malory allows Galahad to bestow upon Bors that trust which j
137
would have been Galahad’s had he lived; the powerful loyalty passes
from the son to the cousin. A discussion of the role of Bors in the final
i
i
Books is beyond the scope of this discussion, since Bors is more truly , peer!
2 7 !
than protege. Suffice it to say that the supportive and loyal presence ;
of Galahad continues through Bors into the last chapters of the Morte I
Darthur.
In the figure of Galahad as protege to Lancelot, the themes j
i
of love and religion m eet. The author of the Queste created in Galahadj
i
i
an antithesis to the courtly and amorous center of romantic literature, j
!
whose chief proponent and hero was Lancelot. Malory had either to
resolve the conflict or to allow Lancelot, his favorite, to become an j
anti-hero. This antithesis is chiefly that of an ascetic, monastic ideal j
against an amorous, courtly one. Pauphilet, in his study of the Queste, j
defines the moral center of the work and the relation of Galahad and
Lancelot to that center:
La pensee dominante de la Queste, qui a dicte le plan d’ensemble,i
inspire maint episode et qui est attestee par quelques phrases c a te -1
goriques, c ’est que la vie morale est tout entiere resumee par
l’antithese de la luxure et de la virginite.
La figure qui domine tout le tableau de la vie chretienne, en qui
s’incarne la perfection, Galaad, a pour premiere qualite d’etre
vierge ,2 8
Tout le role de Lancelot dans la Queste est une longue d£monstra-
tion de la gravitd exceptionelle de ce peche.2 9
138
Galahad is in Malory as in the Queste a virgin, but Malory emphasizes
his chivalric attributes over his chastity, while, at the same time, j
i
I
de-emphasizing Lancelot’s “luxure.” The awkward suggestion of im- j
maculate conception in Galahad’s birth is removed, and Elaine emerges
as a loving and motherly mortal woman. The adventurous aspect of the
i
i
Quest dominates the Morte Darthur prior to Corbenic; after it, the j
i
emphasis is on the rich symbolic aspects of the sacrament. Malory omits
most of the homilies on the virtue of Christian asceticism. That Lance
lot is denied the complete vision of the Grail is due not so much to his
I
sin as to his chosen role in the drama of earthly life. P. E. Tucker
suggests that Malory’s view of the Quest precluded Lancelot’s success,
at least at that point in time while Camelot remained unshaken:
“Malory had, I think, always understood the Quest literally, as an
30
injunction to enter the monastic life.” For Malory the moniage may
be a fitting or an inevitable conclusion to a virtuous earthly life, but
his own feeling for adventure and his sense of the essential righteousness
of knighthood preclude his postulating this state as the ideal human
service. D. S. Brewer comments on the essentially Christian nature of
chivalry in the Morte Darthur:
Malory does not agree with his source that the chivalric ideal is
anti-Christian. For Malory— and we shall never understand him if
we do not understand this— there is no essential incompatibility
between the values of Christianity and those of the High Order of
Knighthood, of ideal Arthurian chivalry.3 1
r 139
; Man may serve God and his fellow man through high chivalric perform-
: ance. However, there is in man and in the world a kind of original sin,
i not the stain of a guilty past, but an essential uncertainty, an “unsyker-
nesse,” an instability. When this finally lays claim to the life of man, j
I
he can only turn away from the life of the world to that life midway j
between the uncertainty of this world and the security of the next, the j
i
way of perfection, the way of the monastery. This is the way Lancelot
finally accepts. His sins, which Malory does not ignore, are, neverthe-j
i
less, venial, human. He has loved “oute of mesure,” putting Guene- j
vere before God; and he has the essential human instability that makes
! him “lyckly to turne agayne.” Nevertheless, in the eyes of Malory, he
is truly heroic, for the hero represents an ideal that is not divine but
human.
I
To this end, Malory alters the character of Guenevere in
her relation to Galahad and to Lancelot. In her conversations with Gala-
had she is not the jealous mistress of the Queste, probing subtly for the
dark secret of Galahad’s birth. In the Queste she first sees Galahad from;
afar, and in the seclusion of her tower hungrily watches the youth as he
rides in triumph through the streets of Camelot; in Malory the queen is
frank and open, and Arthur bids Galahad alight and remove his helm that
the queen may see him. Her praise of him and his father is open and
honest, her questions straightforward. The Queste passage in which the
hermit describes to Lancelot how the devil entered into Guenevere in
order to seduce Lancelot Malory omits, nor need this omission be i
regarded as an accidental result of “reducing.” It will be remembered |
that Malory also omits the early passages of the Prose Lancelot, includ- |
ing the hero’s arrival at court, his falling in love with Guenevere, and
that first kiss whose loss Chambers so laments.
Thus, through his reinterpretation of the role of Galahad [
according to this new pattern, as a protege of Lancelot, Malory resolves;
the central conflicts of the Arthurian and Grail cycles. In this he is the j
successor to Wolfram von Eschenbach; and if his blend is rather less even;
than Wolfram’s, it must be recalled that his was a more difficult task.
In Wolfram’s source for Parzival there probably existed already a blend j
of the pagan, the Christian, and the courtly, which is at once pagan j
and Christian. In Malory’s sources the courtly ritual is as crystalized,
and as motionless, as the Christian. Malory releases both and allows
them to flow freely again, although in so doing he inevitably muddies
some of the purity of his sources. Like Wolfram, Malory affirms the
potential union of love, loyalty, and the Christian life; although Mun-
salvasche still stands when Camelot has crumbled into ruin, there
remains in Hector’s eulogy to Lancelot an affirmation of a man both
heroic and sinful, who remains “hede of all Crysten knyghtes” :
“And now I dare say,” sayd syr Ector, “thou sir Launcelot, there ;
thou lyest, that thou were never matched of erthely knyghtes
hande. And thou were the curtest knyght that ever bare shelde!
141 i
I
I
I
And thou were the truest ftende to thy lovar that ever bestrade
hors, and thou were the trewest lover, of a synful man that ever
loved woman, and thou were the kyndest man that ever strake j
wyth swerde. And thou were the godelyest persone that ever cam j
amonge prees of knyghtes, and thou was the mekest man and the :
jentyllest that ever ete in halle emonge ladyes, and thou were the j
sternest knyght to thy mortal foo that ever put spere in the reeste
(1259)
NOTES TO CHAPTER IV
Louis Mac Niece, “Sir Thomas Malory,” in The English Novelists,
ed. by Derek Verschoyle (London: Chatto & Windus, .1936),
p. 25.
Sir Thomas Malory, p. 7.
Malory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1929), p. 84.
Ibid., pp. 83, 84. !
See Vinaver’s Malory, p. 75:
“Here . . . the author applies his method of antithesis. He
does not fear to display the fascinating world of earthly
chivalry, and at great length tells us of the secular beauty
of Arthurian knighthood. He knows how to subordinate the
secular to the divine, and how to develop the teachings of
the Grail romance a contrario.”
See Works, pp. 1282,, 1283 for a list of the texts of the Suite de
Merlin.
Works, p. 1278.
H. O. Sommer has published the only complete text, “Galahad
and Perceval,” Modern Philology, V, 55-84, 181-200, 291-341.
See also the commentary of
Loseth, Le Roman en prose de Tristan, pp. 276,277.
Vinaver, Roman de Tristan et Iseult, pp. 209-217.
Vinaver, Works, pp. 1523-^lbax.
“The Concept of Original Sin as Reflected in Arthurian Romance,” ;
Studies in Language and Literature in Honour of Margaret
Schlauch, p. 28.
143 |
i
11. Myrrha Lot-Borodine, Trois essais sur le Roman de Lancelot du I
Lac et la Quete du Saint Graal (Paris: Edouard Champion, 1919),!
p. 105. j
12. Works, p. 1534.
13. Although we do not possess the actual text of the Old French
Queste del Saint Graal used by Malory, the 39 extant MSS. are
quite similar to one another and to Malory. For a list of the texts
of the Queste, see Works, p. 1544. I
All quotations from the Old French Queste are from La Queste d e l!
Saint Graal, roman du XIIIe siecle, ed. by Albert Pauphilet
(Paris: Edouard Champion, 1923). i
See also the commentary of Vinaver in Works, pp. 1534-1584 and j
Malory, pp. 156-188.
14. Works, pp. 868,869; Queste, p. 19.
15. Pauphilet, Etudes sur La Queste del Sain Graal (Paris: Edouard
Champion, 1921), p. 35.
16. See Works, pp. 885 and 888; Queste, pp. 43 and 48.
17. Queste, p. 31.
18. Ibid., pp. 116-118.
1 .9 ;. Works, p. 1535.
20. Etudes sur La Queste, p. 31.
21. The Quest for the Holy Grail: A Literary Study of a Thirteenth-
Century Romance (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1960),
p. 78.
22. Galahad in English Literature (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Uni
versity of America, 1932), pp. 75, 76.
23. Queste, p. 273; Works, p. 1031.
24. Queste, p. 278; Works, p. 1035.
25. “ ‘The Tale of the Sankgreall’: Human Frailty,” ,in Malory’s
Originality, p. 187.
26. Ibid., p. 196.
27. See Robert M. Lumiansky, “Malory’ s Steadfast Bors,” Tulane
Studies in English, LVII (1957), 5-20.
28. Etudes sur La Queste, p. 37.
29. Ibid., p. 40.
30. “Chivalry in the Morte,” p. 99.
31. “ ‘The hoole book,’” in Essays on Malory, p. 56.
CHAPTER V j
I
LAVAYNE !
i
j
|
Another protdgd of Lancelot whom Malory develops far !
beyond the suggestion of his source is Lavayne, brother of Elaine, the
j
Fair Maid of Astolat. A nameless minor character in the Mort Artu, j
i
and of even less importance in the Stanzaic Morte Arthur, he becomes j
in Malory an attractive youth both utterly devoted to Lancelot, in whom:
t
he sees the ideal of knighthood, and himself a mirror of all the best j
qualities of Malory’s favorite hero. j
The Sources ;
In our discussion of Gareth we have dealt with the question
of Malory’s use of the Middle English and Old French versions of the
Death of Arthur. However, although we established that Malory knew
and made use of both, the degree to which he borrows from the Stanzaic !
Morte for Book VII, “Sir Launcelot and Queen Guenevere,” has not been ;
established. As previously mentioned, Vinaver, in his first edition of the
i
Works, rejects the idea that Malory uses the Middle English romance for ;
his Book VII. Wilson, however, in his discussion of Malory’s sources,
j
145
146
includes a list of incidents in which Malory and the Middle English poet
l
agree, but where the French version gives a different reading. E. Tal
bot Donaldson, aware of Vinaver’ s reservations, attempts to grapple with:
2
the problem in an essay on “Malory and the Stanzaic Le Morte Arthur.”
Although he agrees with Vinaver that purely verbal borrowings are vir
tually nonexistent, he points to certain minor agreements in incident
between Malory and the Stanzaic Morte as against the Mort Artu. One
of his strongest arguments is the way in which the three writers treat the ;
question of Gawain’s seduction of Elaine. In the Mort Artu Gawain
tries to seduce Elaine, while in the Stanzaic Morte he does not.
Apparently the English poet deleted this episode, although in the inci
dent of the funeral barge he inconsistently reports that Gawain recog
nizes the dead damsel as the one whom he asked to be his mistress.
Majory takes the hint from the English version and omits the seduction
entirely. However, Donaldson’s evidence is not overwhelming, as much
of it may be attributed to chance or to Malory’s own decision to deviate |
from the French version.
In the 1967 edition of the Works, Vinaver admits the pos
sibility that the Stanzaic Morte may have had some slight influence on
Malory, but he sees little evidence of it. Central to his discussion of
Malory’s use of sources in Book VII is the idea that Malory’s originality
lies in the unravelling of the interwoven episodes of the French and in
the composition of connecting passages between the episodes. According!
147
to Vinaver, the two main features which distinguish Malory’s version
!
from the French are “ (a) a rearrangement of episodes consistent with ;
Malory’s own narrative technique, and (b) a series of connecting pas-
3
sages designed to link together the episodes so rearranged.” On this
basis he concludes that Malory’s primary source is the French romance, j
for reasons that he summarizes in a footnote:
A tendency to “straighten out” the narrative pattern is, of course, ;
noticeable in the stanzaic Le Morte Arthur which may well have :
exerted a contributory influence on Malory. But the best proof i
that his main source in this section was the French Mort Artu lies ;
in the nature of the connecting passages which he added of his own;
accord; they all fit in exactly where the French romance seems to
leave a gap between two fragments of each theme.4
At any rate, we know that Malory possessed a version of the Old French j
romance as well as one of the Middle English poem and that he was
likely free to borrow from either, whether he chose to translate closely
or to rely on his memory for incident and character.
In both the Mort Artu and the Stanzaic Morte, Lavayne is a ;
minor character; however, he is of even less importance in the English
version. Malory, however, develops the suggestion of his sources into a ;
character of such importance that his role extends beyond the episode of j
the Fair Maid of Astolat; Lavayne becomes Lancelot’s companion in the i
three remaining episodes of. Book VII and is prominently mentioned in \
Book VIII as one of the select group of knights who choose to cast their
lot with Lancelot and follow him into battle or into exile. Curiously
j 148
1
I
l
I enough, Malory does not focus on the situations in his sources which offerj
! opportunity for the character development of Lavayne. Rather, he dis- |
cards these and creates his own situations in which Lavayne acquits him-!
self as becomes a protege of Lancelot.
i
To begin with, Malory names not only Lavayne but his
!
brother Sir Tirry, his father Sir Bernard, and his sister Elaine. Malory's |
habit of naming characters nameless in his source and of creating new j
I
characters whom he includes in lists of participants at tournaments has
5 I
been well documented by Robert H. Wilson. I
The mystique by which man gives another some power over
him by allowing him to possess his name is ancient, and it is important
that we realize the significance of the name in medieval literature. In i
Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival, the naming of the hero is a signifi- j
cant event which marks the beginning of his self-awareness. Although
this same mystique does not exist to this degree in Malory, in the Morte
Darthur a well-bred knight does not withhold his name from another
unless he has a specific reason for concealing it (as does Lancelot, who, j
because of his fame and his name's renown, must continually test his
existence beyond his name by appearing at tournaments and wandering
in disguise). In the French prose romances, however, characters are so
numerous that the writer frequently omits names altogether; Wilson notes:
that “a notable feature of the romances providing the source of Malory's
Morte Darthur is their almost complete indifference to the value of |
149
proper names.” 6 Malory, by naming not only Lavayne but his brother,
sister, and father as well, has given them all stature and importance.
; j
He has created for them an identity which he will strengthen with the j
tools of characterization. s
i
In the initial events of the episode of the Fair Maid of Asto-j
|
lat, Malory follows his sources and even reduces the role of Lavayne. j
i
In the Stanzaic Morte, when Lancelot greets his host, his first request J
t
concerns the youth: “ ‘Sir, ys here any Bachelere/That to the turnament
!
wolle fare?’” (11. 155, 156). Malory, however, follows the French in j
making Lancelot’s first concern not his companion but his disguise; for
his first request in the French is that he might borrow the shield belong- !
ing to the older son of the Lord of Astolat. In the Stanzaic Morte the j
old lord replies that one of his sons is able to accompany Lancelot, and j
Lancelot reassures him:
“Sir, and thy sonne wille thedir Right,
The lenger I solle hym abyde,
And helpe hym there with all my myght
That hym none harme shall be-tyde.” (11. 161-164)
The pair then set off “togedyr as they bretherne were” (1. 220).
In the Mort Artu Lancelot’s request for the armor is followed
by the vavasor’s volunteering that his son wishes to attend the tournament.
The youth then appears and is much taken by Lancelot’s appearance: |
“ Etquant il vit Lancelot, si li fist moult bel semblant, por ce que
preudons li sembloit” (9). When the youth discovers that Lancelot j
purposes to attend the tourney, he expresses the desire to accompany
him: “ ‘Or mouvrons ensenble, si fera li uns a l’autre compaignie’” (9).
i
In Malory it is Sir Bernard who responds to the charm of Lancelot and
offers the company of his son: “ ‘And if hit please you, he shall ryde j
with you unto that justis, for he ys of hys ayge stronge and wyght. For j
i
much my herte gyvith unto you, that ye sholde be a noble knyght’”
!
(1067). In Malory the youth has nothing to say about the proposed com-
panionage; Malory simply tells us that “sir Launcelot and sir Lavayne |
made them redy to ryde” (1068). I
In both the Stanzaic Morte and the Mort Artu the pair are
i
lodged at the home of the youth’s aunt; Malory does not pause to include'
}
i
this detail but goes straight to his chief concern— the tournament at
Winchester. At this point, where both the Middle English poem and the!
French prose romance leave Lavayne out of the action or give him the 1
part of the vanquished, Malory begins to enlarge his character. In both
the source versions the two knights are told by a squire which side is the
stronger. This becomes an opportunity for both writers to show Lance- ;
lot’s superior courage. In the English version, the youth, hearing that
Arthur’s party is stronger, suggests that they fight on his side, to which
Lancelot responds:
“Helpe we them that hath most nede; j
Ageyne the beste we shall welle dore; j
And we might there do any dede,
It wolde us tome to more honour.” (11. 237-240) ;
1 5 1
In the French romance Lancelot is less superior, although somewhat
pedantically Socratic. To the youth’s query as to which side they should
i
aid he replies by asking which is more powerful. When the youth j
responds that it is those within the castle, Lancelot replies: “ ‘Qrsoions j
j
done . . . de ceus dehors; car ce ne seroit pas nostre enneur, se nos j
aidions a ceus qui en ont le plus bel’” (13). The youth, impressed, says!
i
i
i
he is ready to do whatever Lancelot wishes. In Malory Lancelot is less j
j
parochial and more companionable: “ ‘now,’ seyde sir Launcelot, ‘and j
j
ye woll helpe a lityll, ye shall se the yonder felyship that chacith now j
thes men on oure syde, that they shall go as faste backwarde as they
wente forewarde’” (1070). Thus, the decision to fight on the lesser side
is understood, and Lancelot speaks to Lavayne as to a comrade in arms. !
Lavayne’s response is respectful, but it has the enthusiasm of an equally i
i
I
courageous companion: “ ‘Sir, spare ye nat for my parte, for I shall do j
what I may’” (1070). His answer has something of Lancelot’s character-:
istic understatement.
In the tournament Malory has Lavayne play an active role. !
In the first encounter he unhorses Arthur’s final companions, Lucan and ;
i
Bedivere, as well as Ozanna le Cure Hardy. Arthur’s knights do not seek!
Lancelot alone but try to avenge themselves on Lavayne as well: “They |
. . . thought to rebuke sir Launcelot and sir Lavayne, for they knew
hem nat” (1071). While in the Mort Artu it is the youth who, over
thrown, is horsed by Lancelot, Malory reverses the roles; and when Bors |
| wounds Lancelot, Lavayne overcomes the King of Scotland, takes his
i horse to Lancelot, “and magre them all he made hym to mownte uppon
that horse” (1072). Lavayne then unhorses Blamor and Bellangere. He j
follows Lancelot into the “thickest prees,” and at the tournament’s end
Malory comments that “there sir Lavayne dud full well that day, for he
!
smote downe ten knyghtes of the Table Rounde” (1073). j
j
In both the source accounts the youth is concerned over Lan-j
i
celot’s wound, but in Malory’s hands the incident becomes a poignant j
|
display of the mutual love of comrades. In the French version and in j
the English poem the youth takes Lancelot back to his aunt, where a
doctor heals him. In the Stanzaic Morte the youth expresses his con
cern for Lancelot as they leave the tournament: “ ‘Sir,’ he sayd, ‘me is
full woo,/I drede that ye be hurte full sore’” ( 11. 317, 318), and he
i
declares that “ ‘I my-self wille with you abyde/And be youre servante
and youre knight’” ( 11. 327, 328). In the Mort Artu it is Lancelot who
complains to the youth that he is badly wounded, and not until they
arrive at the aunt’s hostel and Lancelot’s wound bursts out bleeding does j
the young knight realize the seriousness of the wound: “Et quant li
chevaliers voit la plaie, si en est moult esmaiez” (16); and he calls the j
doctor, who heals Lancelot. In Malory the pathos and excitement are
increased when Lancelot remains at the tournament only to refuse the j
prize: “ ‘For I had levir repose me than to be lorde of all the worlde’” j
i
(1073). Out of sight of the company, Lancelot pleads with Lavayne to j
153
draw the spear from his side. The exchange that follows has some of the
suspenseful drama of Arthur’s command to Bedivere to hurl Excaliber
into the waters; but here there is no test of loyalty, for Lavayne’s con- j
cern is only for Lancelot:
“A, myne owne lorde,” seyde sir Lavayne, “I wolde fayne do that
myght please you, but I drede me sore, and I pulle oute the trun-
cheoune, that ye shall be in perelle of dethe.”
“I charge you,” seyde sir Launcelot,“as ye love me, draw
hit oute!” (1074) I
i
i
!
The drama is increased by Lancelot’s “grete shrycke” and “gresly grone ”
|
and the suspense deepened by his seeming death as Lavayne remains at !
his side a full half hour until he regains consciousness. Rather than
going to Lavayne’s aunt’s castle, as in the sources, the two companions,
at Lancelot’s suggestion, seek the aid of Baldwin of Britain, whom
Malory has transformed, in his old age, into a healer and holy hermit. !
Malory further underscores Lavayne’s youthful excitability and his deep ;
d l i
concern for Lancelot by portraying him hastily summoning the healer by;
beating upon his gate with his spear and shouting “ Tat: in, for Jesus
I
sake!” ’ (1074).
In all three versions suspense is heightened because Lavayne j
i
does not know who Lancelot is. In the Stanzaic Morte there is no expli-i
cit revelation of the hero’s identity to his hosts. When Bors, Hector,
and Lionel find him we are told that “therle hym-self, glad was he, /
j
That he had gotten siche a geste” ( 1 1 . 452, 453), which suggests some
154
i recognition but does not state it. From this point in the story the only
i
further mention of the youth is at the feast of Lancelot and his fellows, |
where “therlys sonnys pat bothe were wight/ to serve them were nevir i
i
sadde” ( 11. 460, 461). In the Mort Artu the recognition occurs by means|
of Elaine, who has learned Lancelot’s name from Gawain; it is she who,
coming in search of Lancelot, tells her brother his name. The focus is I
i
!
not on the youth but on Elaine and her great fortune to love such a man.j
The youth replies that he is not surprised that the hero is Lancelot, for
|
he never saw man perform such deeds, “ ‘ne onques manche a dame, ne j
i
a damoisele ne fu mieuz emploiee ne tant regardee comme la vostre I
i
fu’” (33). !
Malory gives the recognition scene an entirely new direction-
by making the holy hermit the tool of the discovery. Lavayne describes!
i
to the healer the unknown knight who has done marvelously in “dedys of 1
armes.” Lancelot is brought in and Baldwin recognizes him by a wound
on his cheek, revealing by his words not only Lancelot’s name and repu-i
tation but also the hermit’s deep personal feeling for him: “ ‘Alas . . .
myne owne lorde! . . . Perdeus, I ought to know you of ryght, for ye a r ;
the most nobelyst knyght of the worlde. For well I knowe you for sir
Launcelot’” (1075, 1076). Thus, Lavayne has prior knowledge of his
i
master’s identity, and when Elaine arrives seeking Lancelot he takes
the position of defender of Lancelot’s anonymity: “ ‘Who tolde you,
syster, that my lordys name was sir Launcelot?’” (1081).
155
Unlike his sources, Malory constantly reminds us of !
Lavayne’s presence during Lancelot’s convalescence, not merely as a
nurse and accessory to the hero but as an individual. When Elaine finds
I
Lavayne, he is behaving like any healthy, active young knight, riding j
|
“to sporte hym to enchaff hys horse” (1081). It is Lavayne who brings |
j
Elaine to Lancelot, Lavayne who finds Bors and brings him to his mas- I
ter’s side. His role is not passive but active.
In the Mort Artu the only further role of the youth is as a
j
rather ruthless advisor to his sister, as he tells her that Lancelot is too j
i
good for her: “ ‘Si couvient il, se vos voulez amer, que vos metez vos- !
tre cuer plus bas, car de si haut arbre ne porriez vos pas le fruit
cueiller’” (34). In Malory Lavayne offers no such callous advice. He j
i
regrets his sister’s unhappy condition, but he, like Elaine, is so drawn |
i
to Lancelot that this loyalty to his master takes precedence. When I
Lancelot has refused Elaine as gently as possible, he asks Lavayne his
plans; and Lavayne replies, in a passage reminiscent of the Book of Ruth,1 ;
|
that he will follow Lancelot, “ ‘ but if ye dryve me frome you or com-
maunde me to go frome you’” (1098). Indeed, Lavayne even defends
Lancelot to his father, saying that he understands'.Elaine’s feelings and,
like her, wishes to follow Lancelot and “ ‘never departe from hym’”
I
(1098). When the funeral barge arrives, Lavayne is at Lancelot’s side ;
and Lancelot calls him to witness that he did not willingly cause Elaine’s ;
death (1097). Instead of concluding the episode of Elaine with her j
156
funeral, as the sources do, Malory introduces a Christmas tournament at
which Lavayne acquits himself admirably, “wherefore all maner of
knyghtes demed that sir Lavayn sholde be made knyght of the Table |
i
Rounde at the next feste of Pentecoste” (1098).
Malory redeems this promise in the episode of the Healing
of Sir Urry, linking the story of Elaine of Astolat to the Remainder of
Book VII. Nor is this the only link, for in the episode of the Great
i
Tournament at Westminster, the third episode of Book VII, Lancelot andj
i
Lavayne are still companions. In what seems a reenactment of his j
I
wounding at Winchester, Lancelot, on his way to the tourney, is shot by I
a huntress. The similarity of the two episodes, the wound, Lavayne’s J
i
anger and grief, and Lancelot’s healing by a holy hermit, suggests that j
I
j
Malory created the episode; however, the fact that the wound comes
from a huntress rather than from a hunter suggests a source other than !
Malory himself. Malory’s world is primarily masculine, and the huntress;
descended from classical and Celtic myth, is not uncommon in medieval
romance. In any case, the apparent purpose of the episode in Malory is !
j
to lend suspense to the tournament by giving Lancelot a handicap in the i
coming fray. However, Lancelot shows no effects of his wound, for “he !
cam into the fylde wyth sir Lavayne with hym, as hit had bene thunder” j
(1109).
Malory emphasizes Lavayne’s worth by causing his fellow
combatants to praise him. When Gareth discovers from Bors the identity j
of Lancelot, he also asks after his companion, whom Bors characterizes
I
as “ ‘ the good and jantyll knyght sir Lavayne’” (1110). Later Malory !
I
has Gawain follow the familiar pattern of recognizing Lancelot by his !
skill in battle; however, he recognizes Lavayne as well and character- |
j
izes him twice in a single passage as “ ‘the good yonge knyght sir ;
Lavayne’” (1113).
i
There is no known source for Malory’s episode of the Great |
l
Tournament at Westminster, and the fact that this tournament in the
i
third episode of Book VII is parallel in theme and structure to the tourna-j
ment of Winchester in the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat is
evidence of Malory’s originality. We have seen how Malory has trans- j
i
j
formed the Winchester tournament from a display of the prowess of !
Lancelot alone to a portrait of the relationship of Lavayne and Lancelot;
in which the prowess and loyalty of one reflects upon that of another.
Likewise, he develops the Westminster tournament in order to define
the relationship of Lancelot to two of his proteges, Lavayne and Gareth.;
By placing these two youths side by side, both bound by ties of affection
and respect to the hero, Malory suggests an identity in their roles. The
general similarity of the two tournaments suggests that Malory is devel
oping the second tournament from the pattern of the first, utilizing as
well formulas borrowed from the unnumbered tournaments in which the i
Morte Darthur abounds. As at Winchester, Lancelot and Lavayne come j
to the Westminster tournament disguised. In both Lancelot wears a ;
; 158
token of the lady— at Winchester die “rede slyve” of Elaine, at West
minster the “rede slyve of golde,” given Lancelot by Gueneverein order
that his kin may know him. In both tourneys Lancelot and Lavayne
decide to fight on the side which opposes Arthur, and in both Gawain
recognizes Lancelot by his skill, although in the first episode the red
sleeve causes him to doubt the identification, while at Westminster he
comments that “ ‘that same knyght with the rede slyve of golde ys him
self sir Launcelot’” (1112). The grouping of kings and lords for and
against Arthur is virtually identical in both, and in both the list of par- j
|
ticipating knights is similar. In each tourney the success of Lancelot I
|
and his companion causes a leader to call a group of his men together j
[
in order to attack him jointly; at Winchester it is Bors and at Westmin- !
ster Arthur himself who organizes this party. A similar pattern of j
t
encounters appears in both: a list of the conquests of Lancelot is fol
lowed by a list of the victories of his protege. In both tournaments j
i
Lavayne strikes down Lucan and Bedivere together, and each tournament
i
is followed by a numbered list of the conquests of the proteges of
Lancelot.
i
The source of Malory’s episode of the Knight of the Cart,
the fourth episode of Book VII, is still in question, for his account differs
i
both from Chretien de Troyes’ Chevalier de la Charrette and from the
later version of the Prose Lancelot, although there is little doubt that he I
used some version of the latter, perhaps one closer to Chretien’s
romance than any extant text. What is important for our purpose, how
ever, is the fact that Malory retains Lavayne as the companion of Lan
celot, in some cases allowing him to perform a role originally assigned
to Gawain, in others creating a part for him where none previously
existed. Whether Malory used the Prose Lancelot episode and simpli
fied it or borrowed from an unknown source, it is evident that he altered
his source in order to create a role for Lavayne, who could have had no
7
part in any prior version.
In the Prose Lancelot Gawain functions as Lancelot’s chief
i
companion, accompanying him on his quest until, at a fork in the road,!
the two heroes separate, not to meet again until Guenevere is safely
returned to Arthur. After saving the queen, Lancelot goes in search of
i
Gawain but is imprisoned by the forces of Meleagant. Gawain never
appears at the castle of Meleagant but meets the queen on her return.
When he discovers that Lancelot has been led astray, Gawain offers to i
do battle with Meleagant in Lancelot’ s stead. Lancelot, of course, j
arrives in time to take his rightful place. i
In Malory’s version Gawain does not appear at all. In fact I
the entire story is so different as to cause critics to postulate a lost j
source. However, a close reading reveals that the alterations in the
i
story are such that Malory, following his pattern of eliminating extrane-1
ous incidents, might well have been solely responsible. English litera- j
ture abounds in Maying scenes, and Malory had good reason to alter the j
160
r
introduction found in the Prose Lancelot in which Arthur is forced to
allow Guenevere to fall into the hands of Meleagant with only Kay to
protect her. It is likely that Malory would wish to eliminate this scene
in which Arthur appears rather weak and helpless, and Malory may well
have designed the queen’s Maying party in the woods in order to do so.
The adventures of Lancelot before his arrival at the castle of Meleagant
Malory cuts to a minimum, and the episode of the bloodstained bed and
the subsequent charge against Guenevere becomes the motivation for the
final battle of Lancelot and Meleagant rather than a mere intermediate
encounter. Malory retains what he admires, Lancelot’s brave defense
of Guenevere; he may well have chosen to eliminate the explication of
the cart and its implication that love of the lady takes precedence over
personal honor.
i
I
Malory’s use of Lavayne in this episode may have been sug-1
gested by an incident in the Prose Lancelot which occurs as Lancelot is ■
seeking out the castle of Meleagant. Lancelot meets and dines with a j
vavasor who has three sons. Although they do not know their guest’s j
|
name, they have heard of and witnessed his exploits, and the older son, j
a knight, asks to accompany him, while the younger wishes to go as his ;
: squire. The pair acquit themselves admirably in battles on the way;
: j
Lancelot dubs the youthful squire, and “si le commence li noviaus
g
chevaliers si bien a faire comme s’il eustxansarmes portees.” How
ever, Lancelot chooses to face the bridge of swords alone, and the
161
youths are forgotten. The similarity of these young men to the sons of
the lord of Astolat may have influenced Malory to include Lavayne,
i
I
but there are no real parallels between these unnamed youths and j
Malory’s development of Lavayne in this episode of the Knight of the !
Cart. By including Lavayne, Malory follows a pattern which he him
self established in the two previous episodes of the Fair Maid of Astolat
and the Great Tournament.
In Malory’s version of the Knight of the Cart, Lancelot, j
hearing of Guenevere’s abduction from her messenger, bids him return
a message to Lavayne, informing him of his whereabouts: “ ‘And pray i
I
hym, as he lovyth me, that he woll hyghe hym aftir me, and that he j
|
stynte nat untyll he com to the castell where sir Melyagaunt abydyth’” |
i
(1125). This is not the hero of the French Prose Lancelot, who prefers j
i
to perform his mighty feats unaided; Malory’s Lancelot is willing to
share with his young companion both the danger and the glory of the
exploit.
Soon after Lancelot arrives at the castle and makes peace
i
with the cowardly Meleagant, Lavayne arrives, as usual all enthusiastic j
i
haste and concern for his master’s welfare: “ ‘A, my lorde! I founde j
t
i
howe ye were harde bestadde, for I have founde your hors that ys slayne j
with arowys’” (1130). Lancelot calms him and then confides in him
his intent to speak with Guenevere that night, a confidence which Vina-j
i
ver complains is superfluous: “Nor is it clear from M[ alory]’s context
| 162
I why Lancelot should disclose his secret to Lavayne.” 9 This passage is
less puzzling if we accept that Malory’s purpose is to reinforce the rela
tionship between Lancelot and his protege; for by giving Lavayne a part i
here Malory allows both characters to appear to advantage. Lancelot, |
; |
through his frankness, is relieved of some of the stigma attached to the |
i
surreptitious lover; it will be remembered that in Book VIII he will con
fide to Bors his plan to visit Guenevere on the fatal night of Aggravain’s j
ambush. Lavayne, like Bors, is admirable in his expression of concern j
for his master’s safety in the undertaking. Lavayne here is both confi- j
dant and nurse; for when Lancelot returns with his hands cut from the i
iron bars at Guenevere’s window, Lavayne dresses the wound. Thus,
the burden of guilt for disguising the wound passes from Lancelot to
I
Lavayne, who may be forgiven if, after dressing the hand, he protects
his master and “put uppon hit a glove that hit sholde nat be aspyed”
(1132).
Lavayne is never a passive follower, however, and his con- j
cern is for others as well as for his lord. When Meleagant entraps Lan- j
celot and deludes the company into believing that Lancelot has gone
adventuring in disguise, Lavayne gives enthusiastic aid to those wounded;
in defense of Guenevere: “And than sir Lavayne wolde nat stynte untyll;
that he had horse lytters for the wounded knyghtes, that they myght be j
caryed in them” (1135). j
163
In the Prose Lancelot both Bors and Gawain offer to do bat
tle with Meleagant for love of the absent Lancelot, although only the
latter offer is accepted. Malory, who has deepened the suspense by i
combining the battle for Guenevere’s honor with the final battle at j
j
Arthur’s court, gives Lavayne Gawain’s part in offering to fight in Lan- j
I
|
celot’s behalf. However, Lavayne is defending Guenevere as well as j
preserving Lancelot’s honor, which makes his role more important.
Moreover, Malory gives him a noble speech in which he offers his |
services to Arthur: |
j
“My lorde, kynge Arthur . . . ye may understonde that hit ys nat
well with my lorde sir Launcelot, for and he were on lyve, so he
be nat syke other in preson, wyte you well he wolde have bene
here. For never harde ye that ever he fay led yet hys parte for
whom he solde do batayle fore. And therefore, . . . my lorde j
kynge Arthur, I beseche you that ye will gyff me lycence to do j
batayle here thys day for my lorde and mayster, and for to save my
lady the quene.” (1137) j
By replacing Gawain, Lancelot’s peer in age although not, perhaps, in
i
prowess, with Lavayne, Malory does not degrade Gawain, but rather pre-!
i
serves the regal aloofness of a character capable of strong loves and hates j
|
but not, as Malory develops him, a friend or follower. This role is !
reserved for the proteges of Lancelot, who may act as apprentices to
chivalry under the guidance of the best knight of the world.
i
If Lavayne is not mentioned among the knights who attempt j
the Healing of Sir Urry, the fifth and last episode of Book VII, it is not !
i
because Malory has forgotten him. He does not appear until after !
| Lancelot has arrived and healed the wounded knight; perhaps we are to
j assume that Lavayne has been with Lancelot, as he has been in the pre-
; vious three episodes. Yet this assumption is not necessary to the argu
ment that Malory develops Lavayne as Lancelot’s protdge, for here his
i *
• chief concern is with Lancelot and with the event of the healing. How
ever, once this has been accomplished, Malory appends a leisurely
happy endingto the episode, a.tournament in which Malory can allow his
i
j
favorite characters to perform worshipful deeds. It is here that Malory j
j
reintroduces Lavayne, who, with Urry, wins the prize at the tournament j
j
of the Diamond. Malory tightens the link between the five episodes of !
i i
Book VII by fulfilling the promise made in the second, and Lavayne,
with Urry, is made knight of the Table Round “by assente of all the
kynges and lordis” (1153). Nor is Malory satisfied with this, for he links
the two proteges of Lancelot by even closer ties, and Lavayne weds j
Urry’s sister, Dame Fyleloly.
Throughout the final Book of the Morte Darthur, the names j
of Urry and Lavayne are always linked as proteges of Lancelot; and they,!
i
in turn, are bound to the House of Lancelot, a small loyal band of fol- j
lowers whose role is to advise their lord and to follow him faithfully.
When Aggravain and his band are howling like dogs without the door,
; ' |
Lancelot, in a speech that has no counterpart in the Mort Artu or the j
Stanzaic Morte, promises Guenevere that “ Veil I am assured that sir
iBors, my nevewe, and all the remenaunte of my kynne, with sir Lavayne
165
| and sir Urre, that they will nat fayle you to rescow you from the fyer’”
i
(1166). And as Lavayne offered to do battle in Guenevere’s behalf in
' i
the episode of the Knight of the Cart, so he does again on the fateful j
day of Gareth’s death.
After Lancelot has slain Aggravain and his band, Bors reas
sures Lancelot by listing the two and twenty knights “ Vho that woll j
holde with you’” (1170). Lavayne, again with Urry, is among them.
To this group are added some seven score more, unnamed, who follow
Lancelot for the sake of Tristan and Lamorak. In the Mort Artu Bors
and Hector consult with Lancelot and decide to help him escape. We
i are told that they meet in the forest with thirty-eight men, but none are
i named, nor do they give advice and verbal support to Lancelot. In the
Stanzaic Morte the number has risen to an hundred; however, Lancelot i
t
does not address them nor they him. Malory, however, gives the loyal j
followers of Lancelot a role of the utmost importance: to them Lancelot!
i
explains his plight and to them he defends himself and the queen. They I
S
i
serve as his support, his advisor, his sympathetic listener; and they |
become a foil for Lancelot, allowing him to deliver his noblest and most!
pathetic speeches.
Lavayne here has lost the individuality he possessed in Book ;
VII; he has become a symbol of friendship, of loyalty, of the powerful !
j
'influence Lancelot has over his men. Lavayne is but one of those who j
i
cry “with one voyce,” saying we woll do as ye woll do’” (1172). j
! 166
}
; However, Lavayne, always with Urry, is consistently named; Malory
i
: reminds his readers that the youth is not forgotten, not altogether anony-|
: I
mous. In the Stanzaic Morte, Malory’s source for the episode of the j
Siege of Joyous Garde, the company of Lancelot’s followers has a femi
nine source: the great ladies whom Lancelot has succored send him his j
i
troops. Here Bors alone encourages the battle by rebuking Lancelot for
his too-forbearing treatment of Gawain. In Malory the followers remain
with Lancelot from the beginning of the strife to its end, and those who
encourage Lancelot to do battle at Joyous Garde are Bors, Hector, j
l
Lionel,, Palomides, Lavayne, and Urry (1190). i
i
In both the French Prose Mort and the English Stanzaic
Morte, the battle between Bors and Gawain is followed immediately by j
i
the papal interdict; Malory, however, interpolates a scene in which j
i
I
Lavayne and Urry beg Lancelot not to hold back but to fight with his fullj
force, “ ‘for we se that ye forbeare and spare, and that doth us much
harme’” (1193). These words have more power to move Lancelot than j
I
those of his peers in age, and Malory adds that as a result of this encour- j
i
I
agement Lancelot “strayned hymselff more than he ded toforehonde” j
(1193). As before, Malory, by introducing the proteges of Lancelot at
a tense moment, adds to the admirable qualities of both lord and follower;
the reader sees more clearly both Lancelot’s great forbearance and the j
; j
eager support given him by his proteges, who wish him to act to his own j
; i
Advantage. I
167
After Arthur’s edict banishing Lancelot from England, in a
passage not in either of his sources, Malory has Lancelot call his fellow-
j
ship together and ask them what they would do; in a reprise of the earlier
scene, “they answerde all hole togydirs with one voyce they wold do as
he wolde do” (1202). In an exchange full of pathos, Lancelot describes
i
his fate and his sorrow, and the response of the “noble knyghtes, as sir j
I
[
Palomydes and sir Saffyr, hys brothir, and sir Bellynger le Bewse, and j
i
I
sir Urre with sir Lavayne, with many other,” is that they will gladly j
j
share his exile: !
i
“And sitthyn hit lyked us to take a parte with you in youre distres
in this realme, wyte you well hit shall lyke us as well to go in
othir contreyes with you and there to take suche parte as ye do.”
(1209) !
Lancelot, full of gratitude, promises to share all his possessions with
them. The followers of Lancelot then lament the fall of the Round
Table, whose greatness they attribute to Lancelot: ‘“ And a grete parte,’ !
they sayde all, ‘ was because of youre moste nobeles, sir Lancelot’” j
(1204). The last mention of Lavayne by name occurs at the end of this j
episode, when Malory, in an original passage, lists the followers of Lan-j
i
celot and the titles bestowed upon them by the hero, “and sir Lavayne, |
he made hym erle of Armynake” (1205). Malory may have borrowed a i
: i
hint from the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat in the Mort Artu in j
which Lancelot gives the vavasor’s sons “terres et heritages el roiaume i
ide Benuye ou el roiaume de Gaunes” (54). In the French, however,
168
Lancelot does not initiate the action. Rather, it is part of his somewhat
grudging response to the youths’ request that they may be his knights.
Lancelot agrees to accept their fealty but warns them that he is a wan
derer and that they will seldom see him.
However, if Lavayne is no longer named in the Morte
Darthur after his ennobling, Malory continues to refer to the knights
who have cast their lot with Lancelot. At the Siege of Benwick Lance
lot is ever seen “amonge all hys knyghtes,” and after the final battle of
Arthur and Mordred at Salisbury Plain Lancelot’s men accompany him
to Dover. When he discovers that he is too late to save Arthur, Lance
lot calls his men together and addresses them. In the Stanzaic Morte,
Malory’s source for this passage, Lancelot orders his knights to wait for
him:
!
“Lordyngis, I wyll wende to-forne,
And by these bankys ye shall abyde,
Unto fyftene dayes at the morne. I
Loke ye Rappe yow not up to Ryde.” ( 11. 3608-3610, 3613) j
i
In Malory Lancelot’s tone is quite different: he explains to his men that
|
he intends to seek out Guenevere, instead of leaving them in ignorance;!
i
and he asks them to wait fifteen days, and, if he does not arrive, to |
i
“ ‘ take youre shyppis and youre felyship and departe unto youre contrey’ * ’
(1251). Lancelot speaks as a friend, not as a general. For the rest of J
!
the story Malory follows the Stanzaic Morte; Bors sends the host home |
j 169 j
and he and a few others go in search of Lancelot. Lavayne is not among
the seven knights who join Lancelot at the hermitage; he has presumably j
returned with the great host to his lands in Arminac. He does no moniage
with his master; this is for those who have lived the life of earthly .
knights to the full and who, therefore, may “chaunge the lyf” in prepara
tion for eternity. As the focus is more on Lancelot in these final chap-
i
I
ters, Lavayne, the prot6g£ of Lancelot, recedes into the distance until j
i
he is left waiting on the shore while Lancelot, thrown into high relief, j
performs his final act. This is as it should be, for Lavayne’s role is as a |
complement to the best earthly knight; Lancelot must betake himself to
perfection alone. I
Thus, Malory has taken an anonymous character and created !
from the suggestion of his sources an appealing and believable youth, full j
i
of life and enthusiasm— a protege of Lancelot, but by no means a passive ^
echo. Malory combines source material with original interpretation to
develop him according to the pattern found in Gareth and Galahad, but
i
he has done this with an individual touch that allows the brother of Elaine j
i
of Astolat to emerge from the Morte Darthur an original creation.
j
The Protdgd Pattern j
i
j
j
In order to fulfill the role of Lancelot’s protege, Lavayne j
: I
. i
must be young; and, although he is a youth in both source versions, i
s . i
i
Malory is careful to reinforce this fact. In both the Stanzaic Morte and j
! 170
I
I the Mort Artu, Lavayne’s father, the lord of Astolat, is the guardian and
I
decision-maker for the youth until Lancelot assumes the parental role, i
Malory, however, is careful to make Lavayne the “yonger sonne,” j
; although there is no such distinction in the sources. Malory endows
t
; Lavayne with youthful emotions, as well; he is forever rushing about in |
i
his master's behalf, pounding on the door of the healing hermit, hasten-
; !
ing to aid Lancelot at the castle of Meleagant. The latter scene best !
: i
illustrates the distance between Lavayne’s young enthusiasm and Lance- j
lot’s mature control. When Lavayne comes “dryvynge to the gatis, j
seyyng, ‘Where ys my lorde sir Launcelot?’” and, finding him, bursts
i
out in an exclamation of concern over finding Lancelot’s horse slain, j
i
i
Lancelot answers him rather curtly, finding in Lavayne’s words a frus- j
trating reminder that, although Meleagant has wronged him, he cannot j
revenge himself, since Guenevere has forbidden it: “ ‘ As for that,’ seyde
Sir Launcelot, ‘I praye you, sir Lavayne, speke ye of othir maters and
lat thys passe, and ryght hit another tyme and we may’” (1130).
Since Malory wishes to allow his youthful heroes to perform :
to best advantage without outstripping their elders, Malory provides for
Lavayne two tournaments especially designed for the younger knights.
The tournament at Christmas which follows the episode of the Fair Maid
of Astolat is not attended by Lancelot because it is not one of the“grete !
Justes,” and at another tournament, following the Healing of Sir Urry,
: “none of the daungerous knyghtes” joust (1098, 1153). Thus, the |
younger heroes can perform mightily without conflicting with the tried
and proven skill of the older generation.
As we have seen, Malory, developing the proteges of Lance
lot, depicts the youth drawn to the hero by his renown, by his admirable
deeds, or by the charismatic charm of his personality. Both the Mort
Artu and the Stanzaic Morte contain descriptions of the immediate ini- j
i
tial attraction which the sons of the lord of Astolat feel for Lancelot. |
Malory, however, rejects as artificial this immediate expression of |
|
admiration and affection and allows the bond to be built up gradually,
revealed by Lavayne’s actions as well as by his words. Malory shifts the
initial compliment to the father, Bernard of Astolat, and places in his
mouth the phrase which was spoken by Galahad to his father and which |
i
will be repeated by Sir Urry when he describes his response to Lancelot: j
“ ‘For much my herte gyvith unto you’” (1067). It is essential that Lan- ;
celot have the father’s trust, for he is to take upon himself the role of
parent. Lavayne himself says nothing until the tournament, and then his;
words are not those of an awed admirer but of a loyal follower and com
rade in arms. His feeling for Lancelot is revealed indirectly in word and j
deed, in his expressions of deep concern for the welfare of his master and i
in the haste with which he procures aid for him. That he follows Lance
lot to the end is evidence enough of the degree of his affection. How- |
ever, Malory does not ignore the tradition of an immediate response to j
Lancelot by his young admirers. He is content neither with mere
suggestion nor with the artificial French convention in which the knight,
the moment he sees Lancelot, responds “ ‘Sire . . . vos me semblez si
; i
i
preudom qu g’en ferai quanque vos voudroiz’” (9). Malory wishes to !
make it clear to the reader that Lavayne was drawn to Lancelot from the[
|
first, but he chooses to wait until later in the episode for Lavayne’s
revelation of his feelings. Malory selects the moment when Elaine has j
made her declaration of love and Lancelot his gentle refusal; it is here j
that Lavayne makes his affirmation of Lancelot’s power of attraction, j
|
explaining to his father that he fully understands his sister’s emotion, |
“ ‘for sythen I saw first my lorde sir Launcelot I cowde never departe j
frome hyme, nother nought I woll, and I may follow hym’” (1091). j
' I
Lavayne’s declaration is thus more believable and effective here at this j
emotional climax in the action than it would have been in the initial
i
scene, for Lavayne has already demonstrated his affection for Lancelot. ■
And this refrain of loyalty will be repeated in the final chapter when
Lancelot’s fortunes are at their lowest ebb and his followers, among t
whom Lavayne is always prominent, declare with one voice, “have he !
shame that woll leve you! ’” (1203).
I
i
Lancelot’s response to this single-hearted devotion is neither i
lavish praise nor overbearing condescension. We have already noted his I
i
i
conversation with Lavayne before the tournament at Winchester; rather j
than dilating upon the honor of fighting on the weaker side, he is both j
kindly and gently humorous in his encouragement: “ ‘ And ye woll helpe
a lityll, ye shall se . . . that they shall go as faste backwarde as they
wente forwarde’” (1070). Unlike the hero of the sources, Lancelot is
i
i
always willing to ask Lavayne for help, whether it be to draw the trun- !
• |
cheon from his side after Winchester or to aid him in rescuing Guenevere;
from Meleagant. Lancelot does not lose stature by this, for the reader j
has already evidence of his self-sufficiency. Rather, by confiding in
i
Lavayne, and, like a wise and kindly parent, by allowing the youth to j
perform well and to accept responsibility, Lancelot guides him to
I
maturity, until, at the conclusion of the episode of the Knight of the
Cart, Lavayne stands before Arthur nobly defending Lancelot’s honor
and offering his services on behalf of the queen. j
Thus, for Lavayne the initiation rite is less an event than a |
process. However, if there is a single event at which Lavayne, guided j
by Lancelot, proves himself a worthy knight, it is the tournament at
Winchester, in the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat. We are not told
that this is Lavayne’s first tournament, but we know that he and his |
brother were “but late made knights” and that the older brother, Sir
Tirry, is still incapacitated on account of the wound he received on the
day he was knighted. Lavayne is given into Lancelot’s keeping by his
father, presumably that he may become experienced in knightly skills: !
“ ‘And if hit please you, he shall ryde with you unto that justis; for he ys j
of hys ayge stronge and wyght’” (1067). We have seen how Malory, |
i j
unlike his sources, allows the young knight to perform admirable feats of !
i arms, even once rescuing his master. The very pattern of the touma-
; ment encounters suggests that Lavayne is perfecting his skills by emulat
ing Lancelot, for Malory follows each list of Lancelot’s conquests with
j
those of Lavayne. Malory’s final count of the victories, thirty for Lan- j
celot and ten for Lavayne, is an expression of the young knight’s success
ful initiation as well as of Lancelot’s inevitable superiority. By placing j
upon Lavayne the chief responsibility for aiding the wounded Lancelot, j
j
Malory allows the protege to complete his initiation successfully. Later
in the same episode men will deem him worthy to be a knight of the
Round Table, and at the end of Book VII the promise is fulfilled.
i
Thus, as Lavayne’s attachment to Lancelot grows from hero
worship to true friendship, exemplified by his willingness to aid Lance-
i
lot in physical and emotional crises, to advise him, and finally to share j
with him the exile from the Round Table fellowship, membership in
which was his own crowning achievement, Lavayne develops character
and stature as an individual. Emulating his great lord, he becomes not |
an echo but a very real character, whose actions, in turn, reflect upon
i
Lancelot and increase his stature. When Lavayne defends Lancelot to
his father or to Arthur his words have the ring of truth, and he isbelieved
Because of his own nobility of character, as well as that of Lancelot, ;
the bond between the pair is ennobled. Lancelot is somehow greater j
because he has won and kept the friendship of such a knight.
j ’ 175
The independent actions of the youth also reflect upon
Malory’s hero, for when Lavayne proves his skill in battle or his facility
with words, he increases the renown of his teacher. Whether it be in the
)
I
tournaments of Winchester and Westminster, where, fighting at Lance- j
i
lot’s side, he achieves only a little less than he, or in the two lesser j
tournaments of the diamond in which he himself wins the prize, his !
achievements are Lancelot’s as well: “And ever in all placis sir Lavayn
gate grete worshyp, that he was nobely defamed amonge many knyghtes i
j
of the Table Rounde” (1098). Lancelot, by refusing to battle with his
protege, allows him the greater success:
i
i
But sir Launcelot wolde nat juste but if hit were a grete justes i
cryed; but sir Lavayne justed there all the Crystemasse passyngly j
well, and was beste praysed, for there were but feaw that ded so !
well. (1098) |
|
Yet, for all his skill in battle, it is Lavayne’s character that *
is most praised. He is as gracious when speaking to a servant child as
when speaking to Arthur: “ ‘Fayre sonne, . . . go and pray thy lorde the j
ermyte for Goddys sake to late in here a knyght that ys full sore , i .
wounded’” (1075). Malory, who is more inventive in dialogue and nar- ;
ration of action than in elaborate description, has Lavayne described by !
the major characters of the Morte Darthur as “good” and “jantyll,” mor-
I
ally upright and of the courteous behavior that befits high birth. Bors
jdescribes him as “the good and jantyll knyght sir Lavayne,” and Gawain j
! 176
twice calls him “ the good yonge knyght” ; Arthur himself addresses him
10
as “jantill sir Lavayne.” Thus, the best qualities of Lavayne, Chris
tian goodness and courtly gentilesse, are those of Lancelot, who, by j
healing Urry, proves himself the best knight of the world, and who is i
ever renowned for courtesy and gentle behavior. I
The most vital role of Lavayne lies in his functional relation!
j
to the major themes of the Morte Darthur, as they relate to Lancelot. j
i
The theme to which Lavayne is most directly related is the love theme 1
as it is developed in the episode of the Fair Maid of Astolat. One of j
Malory’s innovations is his development of Elaine and Lavayne as paral
lel characters. Besides giving them analogous names, he portrays them I
i
as similar personalities. Elaine is no longer the courtly maiden of the
Mort Artu who primps and preens and adorns herself in her most flatter- ;
ing robe before she visits her lover; in Malory she has her brother’s
straightforward energy, his enthusiasm. Scudder characterizes her as
a real medieval girl . . . not at all a diaphanous young person,
but red-blooded as she is innocent: a girl of vitality and spirit,
who dies for Lancelot with a kind of wholesome energy.1 1
Both brother and sister are admired by Bors for similar qualities. If
Lavayne is “good and jantyll,” and strong in the defense of Lancelot,
Elaine is so diligent in her service to the hero that “there was never
chylde nother wyff more mekar tyll fadir and husbande than was thys
Fayre Mayden of Astolat; wherefore sir Bors was gretly pleased with her’ - ’
. ..
177
(1085). Both brother and sister attend Lancelot when he is wounded, and
both are alike in their devotion to him. Malory is quite explicit about
this identity of emotions, for Lavayne explains his sister’s love for Lan
celot to his father by saying “ ‘ she doth as I do’” (1091). By identifying
these children of the lord of Astolat, Malory lightens somewhat Lance
lot’s responsibility for Elaine’s tragic death; for if his loyalty to Guene-
vere prevents him from fulfilling Elaine’s request to be wife or paramour,
no such vow prevents him from accepting Lavayne as companion and
friend. The one action does not cancel the other, but it softens its sting.
Malory uses Lavayne’s presence as a witness of Lancelot’s
good intentions. To Bernard of Astolat, Elaine’s grieving father, Lan
celot declares that ‘“ I reporte me to youre sonne, I never erly nor late
profirde her bounte nother fayre behestes’” (1091). When the funeral
barge? arrives and Arthur reads Elaine’s latter (not, as in the sources, a
condemnation of Lancelot’s behavior) Lavayne is at Lancelot’s side as
he swears that ‘“ God knowyth I was never causar of her deth be my
wyllynge, and that woll I reporte me unto her owne brothir that here ys,
sir Lavayne’” (1097). The episode ends, not, as in the sources, with
the funeral of Elaine, but with a description of Lavayne’s accomplish?-
ments at the Christmas tournament; and the concluding words draw the
reader, not to past tragedy, but to future hope: “Wherefore all maner
of knyghtes demed that sir Lavayn sholde be made knyght of the Table
Rounde at the nexte feste of Pentecoste* (1098).
Nor is the Lavayne-Lancelot friendship related to the love
theme only as it appears in the story of Elaine of Astolat. We have seen
how Lavayne functions as Lancelot’s confidant before his assignation with
Guenevere in the adventure of the Knight of the Cart; by allowing such j
characters as Bors and Lavayne to advise Lancelot in his affairs regard
ing Guenevere, Malory makes their love less clandestine and therefore
i
I
l
purer. Malory’s substitution of Lavayne for Gawain as defender of !
i
Guenevere’s honor is another instance where the presence of Lavayne j
!
makes the love of hero and queen more honest. By making Lavayne, j
|
whose chastity is never questioned and who never becomes involved with ;
a woman until he “keste hys love unto dame Fyleloly, sir Urre’s sister”
i
(1153), willing to do battle for Guenevere, Malory shifts the focus from j
1
the queen’s infidelity to the preservation of the honor of Arthur, Guene- I
vere, and Lancelot. Later Malory will use Lavayne for the same pur
pose when he, with the other followers of Lancelot, advises the hero to
go to the rescue of Guenevere:
“Sir, us thynkis beste that ye knyghtly rescow the quene . . . and,
sir, we say all that ye have rescowed her frome deth many tymes
for other mennes quarels; therefore us semyth hit ys more youre
worshyp that ye rescow the quene from thys quarell, insomuch that
she hath hit for your sake.” (1172)
Thus, Malory provides Lancelot with a rationale for the ill-fated mission |
and relieves him of total responsibility for the abduction of Arthur’s
• i
: queen and for the tragic death of Gareth.
179
Although Lavayne is not involved in the Grail Quest, and its
religious implications have no bearing on Malory’s development of his
I
character, Malory does associate Lavayne with Lancelot’s chief religiQus j
success by linking him to Sir Urry by marriage and by uniting the names
i
of Urry and Lavayne throughout Book VIII of the Morte Darthur.
More important, however, is the connection between Lavayne
and the theme of loyalty. The bonds between Lancelot and his protdges j
their consistent loyalty one to the other, partly erase the charge that j
Lancelot is disloyal to Arthur. Although in the sources Lancelot is
forbearing and loathe to do battle with Arthur or Gawain, Malory plays
-upon this reticence in several scenes in which Lancelot’s followers ;
i
encourage him to fight for his own survival and that of his men; thus, i
Malory lightens the burden of Lancelot’s disloyalty still further. j
Indeed, in the small, loyal band of men who remain with
Lancelot, among whom Lavayne is prominently mentioned, a remnant
of the Round Table survives the final debacle. There is a suggestion of
the resurrection of this Round Table fellowship in the final lines of the
episode of the Vengeance of Gawain. Before following Lancelot into
exile, the assembled fellowship, among whom Lavayne is named, speaks:
of the passing of the Round Table:
“For we all undirstonde, in thys realme woll be no quyett, but ever i
debate and stryff, now the felyshyp of the Rounde Table ys broken. |
For by the noble felyship of the Rounde Table was kynge Arthur
upborne, and by their nobeles the kynge and all the realme was j
ever in quyet and reste.” (1203, 1204)
j 180 I
i
However, this is not the end of the “Hyghe Ordir of Knyghthode,” for its
existence depends more on Lancelot than on Arthur, as Lancelot’s fel-
i
lows declare. The hundred knights who follow Lancelot to France are !
i
the flower of the remaining chivalry, and “sir Launcelott and hys nevea-|
i
wis was lorde of all Fraunce and of all the londis that longed unto j
Fraunce; he and hys kynrede rejoysed hit all thorow sir Launcelottis
noble proues” (1204). The passage ends with a catalogue, not in the j
sources, of all the newly made kings, princes, dukes, and earls,
Lavayne included; for a moment it is as if Camelot has come again.
After the last battles, the siege of Benwick and the battle
of Salisbury Plain, the fellowship returns to France and only a few j
remain with Lancelot. Indeed, Malory reduces the number from the j
j
fifty of the Stanzaic Morte to a mere fifteen. The host of the new Cam-;
j
elot is thus not utterly depleted; enough remain to rule France, although
many of Lancelot’s kin follow him to the holy life of the hermitage. It
i
would be false to say that Malory has any further concern for Lavayne or |
Urry or that there is any hope implied by their presence safe on French :
soil. Malory’s central concern is with Lancelot, and with his death the ;
highest moment of earthly chivalry passes also. The proteges and com- j
panions of the hero do appear for one brief moment as a reincarnation of |
i
the Table Round, but the light of day soon dims and only the votive
candle remains. The sunlit world of chivalry vanishes and is followed by I
i
. ithe twilight of the heaven-seeking soul.
181
In Lavayne, then, Malory creates for Lancelot a protegd,
both helper and admirer, who, in his relationship to the hero, deepens j
i
the hero’ s character and strengthens its admirable qualities. This most j
|
attractive bond of friendship is almost wholly Malory’s; from the sugges
tion of his sources he creates a fully developed minor character, believ-
i
able in his honest emotions and in his admirable actions and words. j
i
However, he remains a minor character, for Malory’s focus is always j
I
first on Lancelot; when the hero takes stage center Malory never makes j
the artistic error of confusing his words and deeds with extraneous charac
ters and actions. When Lancelot is at the peak of his renown there is a
place for the lesser characters, in order to vary the monotonous pattern
|
of too many successful encounters. When we follow Lavayne we see
Lancelot from a new angle, in Scudder’s words, “perfect in relation to j
!
the younger knights who lean on him, endowed with a deeper power to
12
attract than youth can know.” However, in the final chapters, when
every emotion, every word and deed of the hero takes on deeper meaning
as he endures with grace blow after fateful blow, the lesser heroes, the
proteges of Lancelot, may drop their individuality and become the col
lective voice and might of his defense, his listener, his supporter, will
ing to follow him to exile or to death.
NOTES TO CHAPTER V
1. “Malory, the Stanzaic Morte Arthur and the Mort Artu,” Modern
Philology, XXXVII (1939, 1940), 125-138.
2. • Studies in Philology, XLVII (1950), 460-472.
3. Works, p. 1588.
4. Ibid. , p. 1590. For further discussion of Malory’s original intro1
duction of transitional passages between episodes, see R. M.
Lumiansky, “Suspense in the Morte Darthur,” Medieval Studies,
XIX (1957), 108-122, reprinted as Chapter VII in Malory’s
Originality.
5. “Malory’s Naming of Minor Characters,” Journal of English and
Germanic Philology, XLII Quly, 1943), 364-385.
“Addenda on Malory’s Minor Characters,” Journal of English and
Germanic Philology, LV (1956), 567 - 587.
6. “Malory’s Naming of Minor Characters,” p. 364.
7. The Vulgate Version of the Arthurian Romances, ed. by H. O.
Sommer, V (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution, 1911),
155-226.
8. Ibid., p. 182.
9. Works, p. 1609.
10. Ibid., pp. 1110, 1113, 1137.
11. Le Morte Darther of Sir Thomas Malory, pp. 320, 321.
12. Ibid., p. 217.
182
CHAPTER VI |
i
URRY '
Lancelot’s fourth protege, developed by Malory in order to :
ennoble his hero further, is Sir Urry. By healing Urry Lancelot is able
to redeem his lack of success in the Quest and so to enter the conflict of
the last Books as the best knight of the world. According to Vinaver,
“it enabled him [Malory] to show his favourite hero, Lancelot, at the
l
height of his glory.”
The Sources
There is no known source for the episode of the Healing of
Sir Urry, nor have there been many suggestions of analogues. Recently,
hovvever, P. Tucker has suggested that Malory’s source is an episode
2
in the Agravain section of the Prose Lancelot. This tale of a wounded
knight healed by Lancelot is, in Tucker’s estimation, “an earlier ver-
3
sion, if not the immediate source of the Sir Urry episode.” Malory was
apparently familiar with this section of the Prose Lancelot, for he bor
rows extensively from it in his Book III, “Sir Launcelot du Lake.” It is
true that Malory’s Healing of Sir Urry and this Agravain episode have
183
! 184"
| much in common. In both stories the protagonist engages another knight
i
in battle and succeeds in overcoming his opponent, and each suffers a
wound which a lady, who has some interest in his opponent, causes to be j
unhealing. This wound can be healed only by the best knight in the j
world. The wounded knight, carried in a litter, begins a search for that
knight who can heal him. He goes to Arthur’s court where all the knights
present attempt to heal him, but fail. Arthur regrets that Lancelot is
away, since he is the only knight who can perform such a deed. At
length, Lancelot and the protagonist meet, and Lancelot heals the
grateful knight.
However, in spite of these obvious parallels, the two tales
i
differ in some very distinctive details. Urry does battle in a tournament j
and slays his opponent; the knight in the Agravain, who is nameless,
encounters his adversary in a forest, and the defeated knight flees. Urry
is wounded by his opponent in seven places, and it is the mother of his
victim, a sorceress, who causes his wound to be unhealing. The Agra
vain differs greatly at this point in the story, for it appears to contain
two motives for the wounding, perhaps an indication of the blending of
: two stories. As the protagonist chases his adversary, a huntress pierces
him with an arrow; thus, it seems that she has some interest in his oppo- :
jnent and wishes to aid his escape. However, in another aspect, the tale :
is reminiscent of the classical myth of Actaeon and Diana. Like
I Actaeon, the knight comes upon the lovely huntress while she is bathing, j
185
and the wounding is motivated by the wrath of the goddess whose sacred
mystery has been violated. The wound in the thigh suggests that in the
original form of the tale the punishment for lewd curiosity was castra
tion. None of this, however, appears in the Urry episode.
There are further differences in the two episodes. Urry’s
wound will fester until the best knight in the world has “serched” it; in |
j
the Agravain, the healer has only to pull out the arrow. Urry wanders J
|
seven years with his mother and sister; the Agravain knight is accom- j
panied by squires and his search, though interrupted structurally by Lan- j
!
celot’s adventures, is relatively brief. However, once Urry arrives at
Arthur’s court, the path to his healing is short; his mother explains his
predicament to Arthur, the knights all attempt the healing, and Lance
lot arrives soon afterward. However, the Agravain knight leaves Arthur &
court unhealed, and, on returning, meets Lancelot, who hears of his
plight and offers to heal him. The knight, not recognizing his compan
ion, rejects the offer. Only after Lancelot has left does the knight dis- i
cover his guest’s name, and the rest of the story is a narration of his |
search, as he twice arrives at a place Lancelot has just left. In the
Urry episode, Lancelot is unwilling to attempt where so many have
failed; in the Agravain, however, Lancelot boldly offers his services to
his host; and, later, when the knight at last finds him, he gladly per
forms the feat without either humility or bravado, as a matter of course. |
186
1
! Such strong differences make Tucker’s thesis difficult to
i accept. If this tale is indeed Malory’s source, why did he alter it so
radically? There would be no need to disguise the borrowing, no need
to replace huntress with sorceress or to add the curious details about the
seven wounds.
i
What other possible source is there for the episode? Medi- j
|
eval literature abounds in tales of healers and of unhealing wounds, nor {
!
need one go to Saint’s Lives to find them. Each of the major romance |
■ i
cycles has its tale of a mysterious wound and an equally mysterious I
j
healer. The healing of the Maimed King by the Quester is one of the j
!
earliest and most persistent themes in the Grail cycle, whether its hero
be Perceval or Galahad. Tristan’s unhealing wound dealt by the en
venomed blade of Morholt is the means by which he meets Iseult; she
and her mother, doubles in the early forms of the story, possess mysteri
ous healing powers whose connection with magic is evidenced by the
love potion concocted by the older Iseult. In the Arthurian cycle proper !
|
the Hope of Britain, the promised return of Arthur, rex quondam rexque i
futurus, is just such a healing legend; for Arthur, wounded by Mordred, |
is borne off in a mysterious vessel filled with black hooded sorceresses j
who will take him for healing to the Isle of Avalon. j
Perhaps, a clue to Malory’s source may be found in his own j
j
: treatment of the healing legends in the Morte Darthur. The healings in j
I Malory are achieved by medical skill, by sorcery, and by Christian
187
miracle. Malory’s preference is for a combination of two of these,
medical skill aided by the power of Christian faith, and he plays down
the element of sorcery. Magical healings abound in his sources, and it
is interesting to see how Malory interprets them.
The first instance of sorcery is the healing of Gawain and
the Saracen Priamus in Malory’s Book II, whose source is the Alliterative
Morte Arthure. The two knights wound one another in battle; and Pria
mus, in return for Gawain’ s promise to have him baptized, heals them
with a vial “full of the floure of the four good watyrs that passis from
Paradyse” (234). This curious combination of Christian and pagan may
have been further Christianized by Malory, who later adds the episode of
Priamus’ baptism, which appears in no extant text of the Alliterative
Morte Arthure, although it may have been in Malory’s source.
There is some evidence that Malory has de-emphasized the
element of magic in “Sir Gareth of Orkney/’ in which both Lyonet and
her brother Gringamor have magic healing power. There is no mention
of sorcery, and it is not particularly surprising that, after the battle of
Gareth and Ironsides, Lyonet “com to sir Bewmaynes and unarmed hym
and serched his woundes and staunched the blood” (326). In the episode
of the chastity test, however, it becomes evident that Lyonet is a sor
ceress when, in the sight of all, she twice repairs the beheaded adver
sary of Gareth by applying an “oynemente” (334, 335). Gringamor, too,
is a healer, for when Gareth awakes wounded, he “gaff hym a drynke
188
that releved him wondirly well” (335). We are less surprised at this
power later in the tale when we discover that the two sisters and the
brother dwell in the “ile of Avylon,” the Celtic Otherworld (342). j
Malory, however, makes no suggestion that the healing is magical. The j
restoration of the beheaded knight is less important than Lyonet’s sisterly^
i
concern about preserving the “worshyp” of Lyonesse and Gareth. How- '
ever, following this incident, Gareth suffers from a species of magic j
unhealing wound, although Malory seems not to comprehend this: ;
j
j
Than was sir Gareth staunched of his bledynge, but the lechis
seyde there was no man that bare the lyff sholde heal him thorowly |
of his wounde but yf they meled them that caused the stroke byj
enchauntemente. (336) |
|
This “enchauntemente” is not mentioned again, and Gareth and Lyonesse j
plan the tournament as if nothing were wrong. However, once the tour- j
i
nament is ready to begin, Gareth suddenly realizes he is not well, and
it is Lyonet who heals him. As Malory records the incident, there is
nothing of the supernatural in it:
“Alas!” seyde sir Gareth, “I have ben so sore wounded with 1
unhappynesse sitthyn I cam into this castell that I shall nat be j
able to do at the turnemente lyke a knyght; for I was never
thorowly hole syn I was hurte.”
“Be ye of good chere,” seyde the damesell Lyonett, “for I
undertake within this fyftene dayes to make you as hole and lusty
as ever ye were.”
And than she leyde an oynemente and salve to hym-as hit
pleased her, that he was never so freyshe nother so lusty as he was !
tho. (342)
However, Malory never suggests any relationship between Lyonet’s
surgical skill and the enchantment. It appears that what was once a tale
of merveilles has been altered by Malory to focus on human relation
ships and human skills.
By the time the Prose Tristan was written, Iseult had little
connection with magic; and in Malory she is merely a “noble surgeon.”
j
i
Morgan, of course, remains a sorceress; and in the episode of Alexander j
the Orphan, she heals the young knight who was wounded through her j
I
machinations, in return for his presence at her castle for a year. How- j
]
ever, about her part in the healing of Arthur Malory is dubious; and in |
an original passage he rejects the Hope of Britain and the supernatural
powers it implies: j
j
|
Yet som men say in many parts of Inglonde that kynge j
Arthure ys nat dede, but had by the wyll of oure Lorde Jesu into
another place; and men say he shall com agayne, and he shall
wynne the Holy Crosse. Yet I woll nat say that hit shall be so,
but rather I wolde sey: here in thys worlde he chaunged hys
lyff. (1242) |
i
Malory, however, has no such scruples about the miraculous j
healings performed by the Grail; and Hector, Perceval, and Lancelot j
are healed by the holy vessel, while the Maimed King is restored by the !
blood of the lance and the sick maiden made well by the blood of the
virgin sister of Perceval. Yet Malory’s preference is for the religious |
i
and practical combined; and this is perhaps best expressed in the charac-|
i
ter of the only healer invented by Malory himself, Baldwin of Britain, j
190 ]
administrator turned holy hermit, who is characterized by Lancelot as
“a full noble surgeon and a good leche” (1074).
Before it is possible to reach a conclusion regarding Malory’s
source for the Healing of Sir Urry, it is necessary to examine the episode
of the Chapel Perilous from Book III, “Sir Launcelot du Lake.” Here
Lancelot cures a knight with an unhealing wound by himself undergoing
a test. He must touch the wound with a sword and bit of altar cloth
which he is to obtain from the grim Chapel Perilous, which is surrounded
by black-garbed knights. The problem of the source of this episode, j
I
long a mystery, was solved by Wilson, who discovered the same episode ;
4 |
in the Old French Grail romance, Perlesvaus. The agreements between!
|
j
the two episodes, particularly that of the name of the wounded knight, !
Meliot de Logres, who “is a highly important personage in the Perles
vaus, but is otherwise unknown in Arthurian romance,” makes it almost
5
certain that this was Malory’s ultimate source. However, it is likely
that Malory used a version of the Prose Lancelot that incorporated this j
episode. Wilson notes that one manuscript of the Prose Lancelot, MS. j
fr. 120 in the Bibliotheque Nationale, contains an interpolation of the
early portion of the Perlesvaus. Although this portion does not include
the Chapel Perilous episode, it is proof that the two romances were in
contact with one another.
j
Thus, the healing power of Lancelot is not without precedent
in the early pages of Malory. However, although Lancelot here performs
: a deed that could only be accomplished by one of great skill, a deed
specifically designed for Gawain or Lancelot, it is lacking in a central
element of the Healing of Sir Urry: it is not a test of the best knight in
the world.
A true source must contain both of the central elements of
the Urry episode, must be both a miraculous healing and a test of the
best knight. Thus far we have examined only the healing episodes in
Malory. But it is this second element, the element of the test, that
may offer greater insight into the origin of the episode. For in the
Books that precede Book VII there arises a need for such a test, and
Malory must and does provide one. In the Galahad chapters of the Prose
Tristan, before the conception of Galahad, Lancelot performs a feat
which may be interpreted as a healing and which is certainly a test of
the best knight. Morgan has caused a lady to boil in water for some
years, “and never myght she be delyverde oute of her paynes unto the
tyme the beste knyght of the worlde had taken her by the honde” (792).
Malory, following his source closely, tells how Gawain tries to save her
and fails and how the people of the land greet the advent of Lancelot,
confident that he will succeed, which he does. Thus, on the eve of the
conception of Galahad, Lancelot offers proof that he is the best knight.
However, in the Grail Quest this position is threatened, and Lancelot
begins to give way to Galahad. The sword in the stone, to be drawn by
“the beste knyghte of the worlde,” is hot for Lancelot, and he refuses
i ............... 192 !
i I
even to attempt it. Shortly thereafter, the weeping damsel comes to
I
| j
s announce that Lancelot is no longer the best knight. Malory, however, j
cannot resist reaffirming the primacy of his hero, and he adds the fol- !
: I
lowing dialogue:
“As towchyng that,” seyde sir Launcelot, “I know well I was j
never none of the beste.”
“Yes,” seyde the damesell, “that were ye, and ar yet, of
ony synfull man of the worlde.” (863)
Thus, Malory’s need to support this new position of his hero,
who, although admittedly a sinner, is somehow still the best knight in
the world, motivates his inclusion of the episode of the Healing of Sir
Urry. In this way Lancelot is able to emerge from the Quest still the j
hero, but infinitely more human, humbly amazed at his own powers. |
Malory, then, possessed knowledge of numerous healing j
episodes as well as many tests to ascertain the best knight. Did he,
then, invent the entire episode? Vinaver suggests that if he was capable
of inventing the Great Tournament, as it appears he was, “even less
i
inventive power was needed for the last episode of the book, the healing |
. 6
of sir Urry.” Considering Vinaver’s belief that Malory wrote eight
separate tales, however, he cannot consider Urry to be of prime impor- ■
tance. Unless the episode is seen as a reaffirmation of Lancelot’s worth
: i
; I
after the Quest and as a preparation for the Death of Arthur, in which
I Lancelot’s nobility and primacy is necessary in order that he be not con-!
j 1
sidered an adulterer and manslaughterer, and in which Urry, as
193 |
Lancelot’s protdgg, will take part as one of Lancelot’s ardent supporters,:
j
the episode is only a curiosity. Vinaver is forced to account for it I
negatively, as a means by which Malory could “avoid 'the very mater
7
of Shevalere de Charyot’ with its innumerable complications.” How- ;
ever, this Malory had already done by introducing the Great Tournament;
episode. Vinaver does acknowledge the effect of the Healing of Urry as
a record of Lancelot’s achievements, and he goes so far as to suggest a ;
i
relation between Urry and Book VIII: “On the eve of the catastrophe
which is to put an end to Arthurian knighthood, Lancelot’s greatness is
8
thus emphasized the more.” This is virtually an admission that the
; i
impact of the Healing of Urry depends upon the matiere of more than j
one “Tale.” j
i
However, the question remains: is the work of Malory’s ownj
i
i
composition? Despite his need for just such an incident to reinforce his
hero at a critical point, and despite Malory’s familiarity with episodes
of healing and testing, there is too much evidence that the episode is
not totally original. True, there are some arguments for Malory’s
authorship. The plot of the episode is simple, Malory is accustomed to i
inventing names for characters nameless in his sources, and Malory intro-!
duces the story with the familiar citation of the “freynshe boke,” which
is generally an indication in Malory that he is introducing an original j
9
: passage for which he wishes to claim authority. However, a strong
i argument against Malory’s complete originality in inventing the episode j
194
is the supernatural element, which Malory, whose tendency is to reduce
such elements, would be unlikely to invent. The seven wounds of Urry
i
and his seven years of wandering suggest that the number has some magi-!
cal significance and probably belongs to the source. The whole structure
i
of the plot is reminiscent of those tales rooted in folklore and myth in
which the dominant theme is the period of enchantment, whether in the |
form of false death, sleep, or sickness, from which hero or heroine is
i
saved by love's first kiss, by the touch of the prince, or, perhaps, by the!
healing hands of the best knight in the world. They were not new when j
i
Chretien de Troyes and Marie de France wrote, and they are familiar
today to every child who has read “Sleeping Beauty” or “Snow White.”
It is likely that this central plot— wound, enchantment, heal-j
ing— existed in some story or lai, and that Malory was familiar with it, j
whether it was written or recited. He need not have had a text, only a
memory of such a story. It appears that Malory's source story was
exceedingly brief; for most of the elements necessary to the plot, the j
battle, the wound, the enchantment, the search for a healer, and the
arrival at court, are related in the first page of Vinaver's text. The
remainder of the episode is probably Malory's own, since it introduces no|
new plot elements, but merely elaborates on those suggested, perhaps,
i
i
by the original story. |
There is no reason to suppose that the tale was originally
; i
associated with Lancelot, although it is possible. The remaining j
195
elements of the story are of the sort that Malory has introduced, without
source authority, in earlier Books. The catalogue of knights who try and
fail to heal Urry is a device which Malory uses often. In tournament
episodes and in descriptions of gatherings at court Malory frequently adds!
lists of participants borrowed from other tales and from his own imagina
tion. Wilson considers that the catalogue of knights in Urry is original: ;
Similar to Malory’s practice elsewhere is the listing of the j
names of knights who make the attempt and fail. There are over j
a hundred names, representing the stories from all parts of the
Morte Darthur and frequently falling into little groups according
to these stories— a circumstance practically conclusive' that this
list is of Malory’s invention and not derived from a source.1 0
i
The debate between Arthur and Lancelot over whether the |
latter dare attempt the healing, Lancelot’s reticence, and his joy and j
humble amazement over his success appear to be Malory’s. If the epi- j
t
sode is considered as a self-contained story, there would be no reason
for Lancelot to demur, although he might humbly deny his superiority. ;
In a similar situation in the Prose Lancelot; the aforementioned healing j
of the unnamed knight in the Agravain, Lancelot even requests a chance!
to prove, , k himself. Nor does he fail to attempt the healing of Meliot de ;
Logres or the salvation of the lady whom Morgan caused to boil in water J
It is only the self-doubt engendered by the Quest that can account for
I
Lancelot’s behavior.
i
The remainder of the episode of Sir Urry, the tournament and the j
|
wedding of Lavayne and Urry’s sister, is clearly Malory’ s. Malory j
196
prefers to end his stories with weddings and tournaments; and Lavayne,
being Malory’s own creation, could not possibly appear in any source
tale. Nor is there any source authority for Urry’s appearance as a pro
tege of Lancelot in Book VIII, “The Death of Arthur.”
Still another element of the Healing of Urry that is likely to be j
i
original with Malory is the religious interpretation of the testing of Lan- j
celot. We have already seen that Malory prefers to suppress the Celtic j
|
supernatural while accepting religious miracles. The prayers of Lance- j
I
lot before and after the healing, his attribution of his success to God, |
and the subsequent religious celebration are indications that Lancelot’s j
!
success is essentially religious. It is unlikely that a tale unconnected j
with the Grail Quest, and whose purpose is to reveal by an unspelling i
j
act the best knight of the world, would contain a Christian interpretationj
of that revelation. Again, the phrasing of the thanksgiving of Arthur’s
court is similar to that which Malory has used before in a similar situa- j
tion. After Lancelot rescues the maiden from the chamber of boiling j
water, Malory’s source notes that the pair thank God; but Malory adds J
j
the maiden’s request: “ ‘Sir, if hit please you, woll ye go wyth me
hereby into a chapel, that we may gyff lovynge to God?” ’ (792). Like-I
|
wise, in the Healing of Sir Urry the court of Arthur gives “thankynges
j
and lovynge unto God and unto Hys Blyssed Modir” ; and Urry is brought I
to Carlyle in a religious procession, “with syngyng and lovyng to God’ . ’ !
(1152, 1153). ;
The Protege Pattern
Malory’s most obvious addition to the episode of the Healing!
i
of Sir Urry is his development of Urry as a protdge of Lancelot. Since
the Healing of Sir Urry is the last episode in Book VII, and since, as we !
have seen, it is Malory’s practice to focus primarily on Lancelot in
Book VIII and to relegate the protegds to a position not so much of per- ;
sonal relationship to Lancelot as of symbolic support of him, Malory has
' I
little space in which to develop Urry as a personality in a human rela
tionship with the hero. Therefore Malory must establish Urry as a pro- |
tege by recreating the protege pattern on a smaller scale, not developed!
j
as it is with Gareth, Galahad, and Lavayne, but hinted at and suggested.!
For example, it appears by the introduction to the episode that Urry is
no novice knight, and his youth is never mentioned. Indeed, W e are
told that his adventurous spirit has taken him to many lands, and, fol
lowing the tragic incident in Spain, he has traveled for seven years in
search of a cure, However, despite this initial information which
Malory probably borrowed from his source, he has Urry follow a pattern
which has been previously established for youthful knights. This is
accomplished partly through association; for Malory immediately makes
Urry a companion of the youthful Lavayne, Lavayne weds Urry’s sister,
and, as we have seen, the pair are never spoken of singly in the remain-!
der of the Morte Darthur. As he has done for other youthful protegds,
Malory provides for Urry a special tournament, where “justed none of
the daungerous knyghtes” (1153), and in which he and Lavayne can, j
therefore, win the prize. Malory virtually ignores the early suggestions !
of Urry’s experience; he prefers to put him on a par with Lavayne, j
foremost among the younger generation, but not in competition with
the old established knights of Arthur’s court.
Despite the brevity of the episode, Malory’s portrayal of :
Urry’s response to his healer is remarkably sensitive. As Urry submits
himself to Arthur, who has expressed willingness to try to help him,
there is resignation in his words, but little hope: ‘“My moste noble
crystyned kynge, do as ye lyste,’ seyde sir Urre, ‘for I am at the mercy !
of God and at youre commaundemente’” (1147). Urry apparently has !
no idea who the best knight in the world might be, and so his response
to Lancelot is based not on the hero’s renown but on his personal pres
ence, his charisma. To express this idea, Malory uses virtually the
same words which he has put into the mouths of Galahad and of the
father of Lavayne. Here they are spoken first by Urry’s sister, who is
so moved at the sight of the stranger knight that she runs to Urry and
tells him “ ‘ brothir, here ys com a knyght that my harte gyvith gretly
unto’” (1151), Urry’s reply is an elaboration upon this theme, an
i
example of incremental repetition, a technique which, as Vinaver has j
noted, is used elsewhere by Malory, and by which “the whole of the
ll
original phrase is both echoed and enlarged.” Urry’s reply echoes his |
sister’s response to Lancelot’s charisma and enlarges it by expressing
also the speaker’s joy engendered by the sight of the hero: “ ‘Fayre
syster,’ seyde sir Urre, ‘ so doth my harte lyghte gretly ayenste hym, and
my harte gyvith me more unto hym than to all thes that hath serched j
|
m e’” (1151). Urry’s tone of resignation turns to one that is bothimpor- !
j
tunate and full of hope, as he begs Lancelot to help him. His faith that;
i
he is in the presence of the one who will be able to cure him is expressed
in his plea, which is not that Lancelot attempt to heal him, but that he I
I
actually perform the deed: “ ‘I requyre the, for Goddis sake, heale my ;
|
woundis! ’” (1152). In explanation of his trust, he declares that his
wounds have pained him less since the appearance of Lancelot. Once
the deed is performed, its success belongs not so much to Lancelot and
Urry personally, as to the whole court, and in the general rejoicing j
}
Urry’s individual voice is not heard. However, after the excitement of
religious procession, tournament, and wedding, Malory cements the
bond between Lancelot and his protege by adding that “this sir Urre
wolde never go frome sir Launcelot, but he and sir Lavayne away ted
evermore uppon hym” (1153). The charisma of Lancelot has provided
him with a loyal follower, and the promise of Urry’s aid will be amply |
fulfilled in Book VIII, “The Death of Arthur.”
Lancelot’s parental response is evidenced by the effect of j
]
Urry’s plea upon his decision to attempt the healing. Arthur’s command!
i
leaves Lancelot torn between obedience and a fear of “presumpcion.” I
I 200
| Although Arthur’s words are reinforced by the joint plea of “all the kyngis
and knyghtes,” it is only after Urry himself pleads with Lancelot that the
hero, touched by the words and reminded of his duty by the title of I
“curteyse knight” which Urry bestows upon him, relents and turns his
|
attention from his own sense of personal unworthiness to his concern for j
a fellow human being in distress: “ ‘A, my fayre lorde,’ seyde sir Laun-
celot, ‘ Jesu wolde that I myght help you’” (1152). Thus, Lancelot’s j
concern for those knights who admire and depend upon him becomes, in I
this last episode before the catastrophe, a means by which Lancelot’s j
i
worth is given its highest vindication, at the very point where his self-
: doubt is strongest. i
|
The healing of Urry becomes, for both protege and mentor, !
an initiation rite. As Gareth undergoes a year of humiliation and child- j
like weakness, so Urry endures seven years in which he is prevented by
his wounds from performing the deeds of a man and a knight. From this
position of weakness and dependence Lancelot releases him; and by his
i
healing touch, not unlike the gesture of dubbing, Urry is made a whole j
man. As Gareth’s new condition was symbolically represented by his
new garments, so Urry’s symbolic rebirth is celebrated by the rich
clothes which the king gives him after the celebration of his healing at
Carlyle. The very words Malory uses to describe the transformation are ;
those in which he has previously described Gareth in his new armor:
when Gareth is armed, “there was none but fewe so goodly a man as he |
201
was” (297), and when Urry is richly dressed, “than was there but feaw
bettir made knyghtes in all the courte” (1153). Like Gareth, Urry cele-
i
brates his new condition by proving himself in feats of arms. j
Once initiated, he repays his debt to Lancelot with faithful i
service, taking Lancelot’s side against Arthur and Gawain, for which he
is rewarded with the title of Earl of Estrake. He is among those who
advise Lancelot to rescue Guenevere, and he helps him carry out the
plan. He is prominently named among those who encourage Lancelot to
do battle with Gawain, that the hero’s renown might not suffer. He and :
Lavayne make a personal plea to Lancelot to enter the battle, and
i
together they cast their lot with him in exile. In all, Urry’s name j
12
appears sourcelessly six times in “The Death of Arthur.” He is con- j
stantly present in the action, although more as symbol than as individual,;
as he supports the man he loves and admires, until at last Lancelot takes
himself to perfection, no longer in need of the aid of worldly nights nor
of their reflection of his glory.
However, Urry is truly a worthy mirror of Lancelot’s chival-l
ry, and in the days before Lancelot’ s moniage he is in appearance, in
word, and in deed worthy of the hero. Like Lancelot he is eager for
adventure and renown: “And he was an adventurys knyght, and in all
placis where he myght here ony adventures dedi's and of worshyp there ,
wold he be” (1145). In Malory’s description of Urry’s physical stature
there is much that is reminiscent of Gareth. Before Urry’s cure Arthur j
ponders that he must have been “a full lykly man whan he was hole”
(1147), and when he emerges healed and newly clothed, he is “passyngly
|
well made and bigly” (1153). The enthusiasm that Urry displays over j
the prospect of being healed by Lancelot is an expression of his character
as Malory conceives it. It is part of the charm of his personality that he \
i
possesses a youthful ability to revel in his good health and to anticipate j
eagerly the opportunity to test his new strength in battle. These traits
are revealed in a dialogue between Urry and Arthur immediately after
the healing:
Than kynge Arthur asked sir Urre how he felte hymselff.
“A, my good and gracious lorde, I felte myselffe never so j
lusty.” i
“Than woll ye juste and do ony armys?” seyd kynge Arthur, j
“Sir, and I had all that longed unto justis, I wolde be sone i
redy.” (1153) ;
This skill in battle proves to be no idle boast, and in the tournament that1
follows Urry overcomes some thirty knights. The conclusion of the epi
sode is similar to that of the Great Tournament, where Gareth, having
i
done mightily in battle and given proof in word and deed of his loyalty
to Lancelot, merits Arthur’s lavish praise, and where Malory affirms the j
chivalric society at its height, with its feasts and games, its celebration
of true and faithful friendship. Here, after Urry’s success in the tourna
ment, and following the description of his faithful friendship for Lance- i
lot, Malory describes the noble deeds of Urry and Lavayne and relates j
them to the peace and joy in the court of Arthur:
203
And many noble dedis they ded, for they wolde have no reste but
ever sought uppon their dedis. Thus they lyved in all that courte |
with grete nobeles and joy longe tymes. (1153) j
!
If Malory follows this idyllic portrait with an ominous note, j
it is not unintentional; for, as always, the chief function of the proteges j
of Lancelot is to illustrate the major themes of the Morte Darthur and to I
clarify Lancelot’s relationship to the often ambiguous experiences of |
loyalty, love, and religion. Thus, against the lyric “nobeles and j o / ’ ;
is set the prelude to disaster: “But every nyght and day sir Aggravayne,
sir Gawayne’s brother, awayted quene Gwenyver and sir Launcelot to
put hem bothe to a rebuke and a shame” (1153). By setting Urry’s
loyalty to Lancelot, who has well deserved such an attachment, against j
the disloyalty of Aggravain, Malory suggests that it is not Lancelot’s
disloyalty to Arthur but the evil deeds of Aggravain that will shatter the I
j
Round Table fellowship. It is important, too, that here Aggravain is
identified as “sir Gawayne’s brother” ; for throughout this episode Gawain
is presented in a negative light, foreshadowing his part in the coming
catastrophe. By setting Gareth, “that was of verry knyghthod worth all
the brethirn” (1148), apart from the rest of the house of Lot, Malory
tacitly allies Gawain with the traitorous members of the family, Aggra
vain and Mordred. Malory also has high praise for Gawain’s old enemy
Lamorak, “the most nobeleste knyght . . . that ever was in kynge .
Arthurs dayes as for a worldly knyght” (1149). In'the catalogue of
204
knights failing to heal Urry, Malory includes a digression on Lamorak’s
treasonous murder and attributes the deed to “sir Gawayne and hys
brethirn” (1149). In this same passage he comments on the slaying of
Tristan by Mark, “that traytoure kynge.” In this way, Malory brings |
before the eyes of the reader the tragic deaths of two of the best knights
of the Round Table, both of whom were condemned partly out of envy
and partly because their liaisons incurred the wrath of their slayers.
Malory’s focus, however, is not on the adulterous love affairs, but on i
the evil action of the slayers and the loss to knighthood that resulted from
the deaths of Lamorak and Tristan. Thus, the high crime is vengeance,
i
which Malory interprets as a species of “treson,” rather than the adultery j
i
that was its cause. So, too, will Malory present the case of Lancelot j
in the final tale, Lancelot whose value to the world of chivalry and the j
fellowship of the Round Table far outweighs his sin as Guenevere’s lover.
Malory is careful to present only the noblest aspects of love
in this episode. Following the digression on Tristan and Lamorak is a
list of knights who are praised primarily for being true and faithful lovers.
We are told that Gareth overcame Sir Ironsides “for the love of dame
Lyones” and that Sir Lamyell of Cardyff “was a grete lovear” ; Sir
Pelleas is elaborately described as a knight
that loved the lady Ettarde and he had dyed for her sake, had nat i
bene one of the ladyes of the lake whos name was dame Nynyve;
and she wedde sir Pelleas, and she saved hym ever aftir, that he
was never slayne by her dayes; and he was a full noble knight.
(1150) |
205 I
I
The wedding of Lavayne, who “keste hys love unto dame Fyleloly”
! (1153), completes this record of happy loves and leaves the episode free |
■ I
I
i of any suggestion of the destructive power of passion. I
; i
All that was said previously about the effect of Lavayne’s I
' . ■ i
presence in the last Book upon the themes of love and loyalty applies j
also to Urry, whose name never appears alone but is always linked to
: I
that of Lavayne. The support that Urry and Lavayne offer Lancelot in j
his decision to rescue Guenevere is both a defense of Lancelot’s relation-;
ship with the queen and an excuse for his part in the slaying of Gareth. |
: i
Most importantly, however, the Healing of Sir Urry is a
: j
religious achievement. Scudder’s estimate is particularly sensitive in. |
1 ' |
this regard:
The phrase “best knight” is evidently used here in a religious, not j
a worldly sense. If Lancelot is the destined healer, it is because ;
of the power of the faith that is in him. He, the cynosure of
Chivalry, is before long to stand exposed to the common gaze as
the betrayer of his king, the murderer of the innocent, the slave
to fleshly lusts. Nothing shall be spared him by the stern old story. I
But first, we are to see into his very soul, and to discern there
latent qualities of humility, of holiness, of prayerful tenderness,
that make him strong to heal and to restore. Never elsewhere does:
he appear to such advantage; never, perhaps, not even in the
Quest of the Grail, is his inward life so clearly revealed.1 3
i
For Scudder the purpose of the episode is to renew the themes of the
Quest: “The healing of Sir Urre . . . beautifully recalls the Grail-motif |
and the religious undertone just when they are in danger of being ffor-
1 4 j
Igotten.” Indeed, the episode as Malory relates it appears to. be a;.new ;
206
version of the Holy Adventure, but one in which Lancelot, whose success
!
; in the Grail Quest was limited, may play the role of the Chosen Knight.
Toward this end, Malory gives what might have been a simple, almost
|
obscure event a universal quality. As the Grail Quest was destined, not j
I
for Arthur’s court alone, but for all of Christendom, the final twelve at ;
i
table at Corbenic being composed of knights from Ireland, Denmark,
and Gaul, as well as England, so Urry, who is of Hungary and was
wounded in Spain, searches “thorow all londis crystened” for a savior.
Knights throughout Christendom try and fail to heal him, until he
reaches his last hope, the highest human civilization, the court of
Arthur which is to be the end of his journey, for “ ‘ gyff I fayle here in j
thys londe I woll never take more payne uppon m e’” (1146). The cata- j
logue of more than an hundred knights of the Round Table raises the
episode to the scale of the Quest, in which the entire fellowship of
Arthur participated.
Malory develops the religious aspects of the story with
remarkable insight for one who is often condemned for his failure to
understand the complex theology of the Queste . To begin with, this
search for the healer is essentially a Christian quest, made “thorow all
londis crystened,” and Malory emphasizes that the healer is to be a
“Crystyn man” (1145, 1146). Arthur, at whose court the miracle will j
take place, is referred to as “the moste man of worshyp crystynde” and j
i as the “moste noble crystynd kynge” (1147). We have seen that the I
207 I
healings in Malory are either medical, magical, or, as here, miracu
lous, in the Christian sense. Although he is by no means a Christ figure,
Lancelot’s ability to heal is reminiscent of the Gospels’ emphasis on
Christ as healer of the sick and exorcisor of demons. The healing of
Urry may also be compared to Galahad’s healing of the Maimed King,
who, like Urry, had languished many years while awaiting his cure.
Again, the Pentecostal setting, although commonplace in Arthurian
romance, recalls the appearance of Galahad at Arthur’s court on the
same holy day. Pentecost here is of more significance than as a mere
occasion for the beginning of some secular adventure. As the grace of
the Holy Spirit was upon the fellowship of the first Pentecost, so here
that grace is expressed in the miracle performed by Lancelot; and the
fellowship of the Round Table rejoice with a Christian celebration of j
the event.
The theological issues of sin and grace are central to the
Healing of Sir Urry. That Urry incurred his wound and Alpheaus was
slain whenthey “encountred togydirs for verry envy” (1145) suggests that
their fate was to some degree a punishment for their sin. However, it is
on account of the sin of the sorceress mother of Alpheus that Urry dis
covers the means to his restoration; for, because she cannot resist boast
ing of her achievement, “hys modir discoverde hit in her pryde [italics
mine] how she had worought by enchauntemente that he sholde never be
hole untyll the beste knyght of the worlde had serched hys woundis”(1146),
The knight who is to succeed, then, must be free of pride, free of the
desire to outstrip his fellows that precipitated Urry’s fall. Thus, Lance
lot is loathe “ ‘to towche that wounded knyght in that entent that Ishulde
pass over other knyghts’” (1151). However, the real beauty of Lance
lot’s humility is that only at this point in his story could such emotions
be so totally appropriate to his character. For Lancelot has been hum
bled by his experience in the Quest, and his sense of unworthiness is
genuine. It is his memoty of the blinding light of the Grail chamber
and his own inability to pass into the Holy of Holies that forces him to
confess to Urry,' “ ‘ I shame sore with myselff that I shulde be thus
requyred, for never was I able in worthynes to do so hyghe a thynge’”
(1152). Then suddenly, after he prays to become the instrument through
which the grace of God may pass “ ‘ of The, but, good Lorde, never of
myselff,’” he finds himself in possession of a power beyond his own com
prehension, and he weeps “as he had bene a chylde that had bene
beatyn” (1152).
To say, with Lumiansky, that the episode is a means by
which Arthur can test Lancelot, who, if he fails, will have proven him
self an adulterer, and who is therefore fearful of attempting the feat, is
' to deny the religious significance of the episode and to reduce it to the
level of those curious medieval sophistries by which guilty lovers are
15
made to swear to their purity before God and all the saints. Seen in
I this way, Lancelot’s tears are those of one who has narrowly escaped
209
i revealing his real guilt; he weeps “like a child with relief because his
unworthiness, stemming from adultery, has not been made apparent by
16
failure to heal Urry.” It seems more likely that Lancelot’s tears are
evoked by the conflicting emotions, the sorrowful sense of his own
unworthiness together with the joyful amazement that through him the
grace of God should be made manifest. P. E. Tucker assesses the situa
tion more sensitively when he says that “the Healing of Sir Urry is a
reminder that although he [Lancelot] is sinful, he is still the best knight
in the world, still in touch with grace when he prays, and the discovery
17
shames him.” Through this last of the proteges of Lancelot, Malory
is able to portray his hero at the pinnacle of his glory, with an achieve
ment that is somehow greater than Galahad’s; for Galahad remains a
symbol of unearthly perfection, while his father, although possessing
frailties, is able to reach beyond them to experience the power of the
Deity, an experience more poignant because it is infinitely human, com
pounded of the greatest ecstacy and the deepest sorrow, expressed not in
words, but in the honest tears of this most human of heroes. Nor is Lan
celot any the less truly heroic for this; after all, the hero is a symbolic
extension, not of God, but of man.
9 t
Thus, in the episode of the Healing of Sir Urry, all the great
themes of the Morte Darthur meet. It is fitting that the story should end
with three ceremonies symbolic of these highest aspects of human
210
experience: the procession at Carlyle, which is the ritual celebration of
the Christian faith; the tournament, which is the ritual celebration of
the chivalric fellowship; and the wedding of Lavayne, the ritual cele
bration of love.
NOTES TO CHAPTER VI
1. Works, p. 1591.
2. “A Source for the Healing of Sir Urry in the *Morte Darthur,’”
Modern Language Review, L (1955), 490-492.
The episode cited by Tucker appears in Sommer’s edition of The
Vulgate Version of the Arthurian Romances, V, 224-228, 231,
254, 268, 269, 275.
3. “A Source for the Healing of Sir Urry,” p. 490.
4. “Malory and the Perlesvaus,” Modern Philology, XXX (August,
1932), 13-22.
5. Ibid., p. 17.
6. Works, p. 1591.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Vinaver, in a note to “Sir Gareth of Orkney,” Works, p. 1441,
says of Malory’s citation of a “Freynshe boke” that “his reference
is probably as untruthful as most such references.”
10. “Malory’s Naming of Minor Characters,” p. 378.
11. See “Epic and Tragic Patterns in Malory,” Friendship’s Garland,
Essays presented to Mario Praz on his Seventieth Birthday, ed. by
Vittorio Gabrieli (Rome: Edizini di Storia e Letterature, 1966),
pp. 81-85, for Vinaver’s discussion of Malory’s use of this tech
nique in Book VIII of the Morte Darthur.
12. Works, pp. 1166, 1170, 1190, 1193, 1203, 1205.
211
212
13. The Morte Darthur of Sir Thomas Malory, pp. 328, 329.
14. Ibid., p. 377.
15. “Suspense in the Morte Darthur.”
16. Ibid. , p. 122.
17. “The Place of the Quest of the Holy Grail in the Morte Darthur,”
Modern Language Review, XLVIII (1953), 396.
CHAPTER VII
i i
I ■ 1
CONCLUSION
The Morte Darthur, despite the title given it not by Malory
but by Caxton, is best understood as the story of Lancelot. Malory’s
first three Books record simultaneously the rise of Arthur’s kingdom and .
the ascent of that kingdom’s hero, Lancelot du Lake; through this paral
lel development Malory assures Lancelot’s place as the chief representa
tive of the heroic civilization. In Book I Lancelot is only a name on
the lips of Merlin, a hope as yet unrealized. In Book II he is the warrior
fighting Arthur’s battles and laying the foundations of Camelot. In Book
III he comes into his own as an individual hero superior to all other
knights in beauty, in prowess, in courtesy. The remainder of the Morte
Darthur belongs chiefly to Lancelot through his actual presence in the
action and through Malory’s introduction of a cast of supporting players.
The protdgSs of Lancelot form a web of incidents which illuminate the
central character, a web that increases in density as the climax of the
.
; Morte Darthur approaches.
| Gareth and Galahad, the first protdges to appear in the Morte
I Darthur, Malory treats separately and at great length. The pattern of
213 I
j . 214
their development and the nature and effect of their relationship to Lan
celot emerges clearly and distinctly. Gareth is the first initiate into the
i
fellowship of Lancelot; Book IV belongs to him, and his sphere of influ- |
; ence extends into Book V, the interminable “Sir Tristram de Lyones.”
The closing chapters of Book V record the conception of Galahad, Lan
celot’s son and protege. Book VI, “The Quest of the Sankgreall,” with
its record of the struggles of the questers, both together and apart, ends
with the commission of the faithful Bors to take Galahad’s place as friend
and follower of Lancelot.
Having defined and developed his protdge pattern, Malory
multiplies the proteges, linking them to the action of the Morte Darthur
so that they create a chorus of support for Lancelot. Book VII belongs
to the proteges of Lancelot, for they dominate each of its five episodes.
In the first episode, the Poisoned Apple, the memory of Galahad drives
Lancelot to abjure the company of the queen and to occupy himself with
chivalric labors on behalf of ladies and damsels. The second episode,
the Fair Maid of Astolat, introduces Lavayne, who accompanies Lance
lot through the remainder of the hero’ s secular life. In this episode
i Gareth appears briefly but spectacularly to win the Tournament at Win-
i
! Chester; while Lancelot, hearing of Gareth’s exploits from Bors, is filled
i
| with pride over the prowess of his puofcggS. The third episode, the Great
I
Tournament, is the moment of triumph for Lancelot and his protegds,
j
the great affirmation of a personal loyalty deeper than the bond of family
215 i
■ j
or clan. When Lancelot, accompanied by Lavayne, attends a tourna- |
i
ment and is outnumbered and endangered by the entire host of Arthur,
Gareth goes to his aid; the three companions prove that against their
! loyalty to one another there is no defense. Gareth’s proud affirmation
| of this loyalty spoken before the entire court is one of the finest speeches
! '
i ;
! of the Morte Darthur. Lavayne accompanies Lancelot through the
adventures of the fourth episode, the Knight of the Cart. He comes to
the rescue of Lancelot when the hero is imprisoned by Meleagant, and
he alone is willing to defend the accused Guenevere in Lancelot’s
absence. In the fifth episode the role of savior belongs to Lancelot,-as .
he redeems his partial failure in the Quest by healing Urry and winning
for himself another faithful follower. In this episode Gareth is given
more than passing mention in the catalogue of knights attempting to
heal Urry; Malory comments twice upon Gareth’s conquests on behalf of
the lady Lyonesse. Lavayne, too, is prominent in this last episode of
Book VII: he and Urry provide a happy ending by jointly winning a
tourney for young knights, and Lavayne’s marriage to Urry’s sister
creates a bond between the two proteges that continues through the last
Book of the Morte Darthur. !
j In Book VIII Malory shifts the focus to Lancelot alone, as
one by one the proteges leave the stage. Gareth speaks his final defense
I of Lancelot and shortly thereafter dies by his hand. In the slaying of
i Gareth the fellowship of the Round Table is symbolically broken, for the
violent shattering of the relationship between Lancelot and his protSgS
shakes Camelot to its foundations. The remaining prot£g£s, Lavayne . ,
i
I
and Urry, are never mentioned separately in the final Book; thus, I
Malory deprives them of individuality, and they become symbolic
spokesmen for all the followers of Lancelot. Together they admonish
Lancelot to defend himself against Arthur, together they pledge eternal
loyalty to the hero, together they follow him to France where they
receive titles at his hand. With his followers established and their pros- j
perity assured, Lancelot’s final responsibility to life in this world ends. |
i
Thus, the proteges of Lancelot allow Malory to redefine the central ;
mati&re of the Arthurian legend and to underscore its heroic center in |
!
the character of Lancelot.
Malory’s use of the proteges to characterize his hero suggests
i
i
the basis for further study of his definition of heroic man; therefore, I
l
would like to discuss some possible directions of such a study. I believe
that Malory’s definition of the hero, as implied by his portrayal of Lan- I
celot, may be best understood as a synthesis of two conceptions of man
which we may call classical and medieval, because they are best repre
sented by, although by no means confined to, the classical epic and the
medieval romance. These two differ most dramatically in their concep
tion of man’s relation to his society and man’s relation to the gods.
The hero of the romance is the product of his society; the
hero of the epic is its representative. The epic hero is already formed
before he enters into conflict with his fellow man, and this conflict does
not alter him but allows him to express what he has been and is. As
such, the classical epic is a tremendous affirmation of man. Modern
critics, conditioned by the classical tragedy, the medieval romance,
and the modern novel, tend to overemphasize the tragic element of the
epic. They cannot resist reading pride and its fall into the wrath of
Achilles, ignoring the fact that self-esteem was for the Greek a positive
value, and that Achilles’ final choice of action is motivated by the same
desire for glory, the same wounded pride over the loss of a possession
(whether Briseis or Patroclus matters little), the same desire for self-
affirming vengeance that motivated his initial refusal to do battle for
2
the Greeks. Odysseus, whose self-serving cleverness and worldly wis
dom is mature at the beginning of the Odyssey, finds in the course of his
travels that the mental and physical qualities he already possesses are
his salvation. Even in the Aeneid, where trial and testing are important
themes, there is no initiation rite, no real change in character. The
same desire for homeland and family life expressed in the portrait of the
pious son in search of a new Troy and bearing his aged father on his back
binds Aeneas to Dido, the priestess-queen, and to her new Carthage;
these same needs are merely sublimated in Lavinia and the “altae
3
moenia Romae.” This same view of man is present also in the early
medieval epic, before it becomes socialized and romanticized. In the
Chanson de Roland the headstrong and courageous Roland who defies his
stepfather before Charles and his court is the same hero, braver than he
is wise, who refuses to sound the horn and beg for aid; if his mea culpa
is a renunciation of this pride, his subsequent list of personal conquests
and his desire to die a conqueror, his face to the enemy, are curious
expressions of humility.
If epic man is born full grown, the man of romance is man
in process. The hero of romance is, despite his wanterings, a social
being in a social universe, subordinate to his feudal lord and to his lady.
Chivalry and amour courtois are essentially ideals of social behavior
which the hero of romance strives to attain. The central action of the
romance is generally the proving of the hero; the moments that alter his
character, the events that allow him to fulfill his potential, these com
pose the matiere of romance. Knighthood is to be attained, the Grail
found, the magic words discovered, the kingship achieved. If the epic
hero is being, the hero of romance is becoming. Wolfram von Eschen-
bach’s Parzival is perhaps the best example of the hero of the romance
as man in process. From his ignorant boyhood and his discovery, almost
epiphanic, of the angelic beauty of knighthood, to his quest for love, for
religious faith, for temporal power, and his this worldly success in
achieving them, Parzival is the hero becoming: “Nor only can Wol
fram’s poem be read as a spiritual progress but also as a chivalric prog-
4
ress from destructive chivalry to chivalric nobility.” Progress, process,
growth: these are essential to the hero of romance.
219
The Old French Prose Lancelot, as we noted earlier, begins
with the enfances of the hero, his early education in chivalry and the
!
dawning of his love for Guenevere. By omitting these, Malory presents
his hero as a symbol, not of man’s potential, but of the fulfillment of
that potential. Although critics have occasionally attempted to trace
the development of Lancelot’s character in the Morte Darthur, what the
reader senses is not a change or growth due to the experiences of Lance
lot, but rather Malory’s own deepening insight into the characterization
of his hero. The only event that alters Lancelot’s character somewhat is
the Grail Quest, and here Malory is trying to reconcile his sources’
divergent views of Lancelot the sinner and Lancelot the courteous lover.
In the remainder of the story Lancelot is not so much developed as
revealed. It is not until the final act when the best earthly knight must
prepare to become the best heavenly knight, must “change the lyf’ in
his final days on earth by performing his moniage, that Lancelot under
goes a transformation, not, as Malory understands it, from sinner to
saint, but from the values of this life to the values of the next.
This is not to say that Lancelot is an epic hero; it is too late
for this, because the myth, the plot or action of Lancelot’s life, has
already been recorded, and Malory cannot entirely alter the character
whose performance is partly dictated by his feudal subordination to Arthur
and his love for Guenevere. However, whenever possible Malory at
tempts to place Lancelot in the superior position in each of these
220
relationships. In the final chapters of the Morte Darthur, Lancelot’s
j
i noble forbearance contrasts strongly with the irrational anger of Gawain I
and the futile nepotism of Arthur. Also, in portraying Lancelot as a
lover, Malory emphasizes not his slavish devotion but his free decision
to love. Malory has Lancelot remind Guenevere that “ ‘I love nat to be j
constrayned to love, for love muste only aryse of the harte selff, and
nat by none constraynte’” (1097).
The second major distinction between classical epic and
medieval romance lies in the view of each regarding the nature of man’s
relation to the gods. In the classical epic the hero exists in and for him
self, as the friend or the enemy of the divine powers but sufficient unto
himself, the equal of the gods save for his mortality, which he calls
fate. In his encounters with the deity he transforms as often as he is
transformed; and most often the result is that man and god alike affirm
an individual identity. The gods of the Iliad differ little from the men;
in battle they run the risk of being wounded just as men do. Achilles is
the equal of the gods in every respect save that he is not immortal, and
by choosing a glorious death in battle over a secure old age he achieves
at least an immortal name. B y his wits alone Odysseus manages to
evade the wrathful deity and make use of the benevolent one. However,
when man is replaced by God, when the divinity comes to represent the
superior power, moral and physical, the hero descends to the role of
disciple, or, lower still, to that of enemy. The Aeneid represents a
221 i
I
I
i
transition from the epic to the romance view of man’s relationship with j
i
j
the gods. In it man’s Fate becomes elevated to Destiny, and Destiny
5 ;
becomes a representation of the will of Jove. The imposition of Chris-,
tian values upon the man-centered mythologies of Europe created a
conflict vividly expressed in medieval literature. This is the conflict
between the heroic or man-centered universe and the God-centered,
Christian world whose values are asceticism, or denial of the flesh, and |
humility, or denial of man’s personal worthiness.
Much of the literature of the Middle Ages is the record of
attempts to find a solution to this conflict and to resolve the two concep
tions of man’s relationship to God. The earliest resolution is perhaps
the simplest. In the Chanson de Roland the hero’s vast confidence in
himself is not pride if he is acting in defense of the faith against the
infidel. Another solution is that found in Wolfram von Eschenbach’s
Parzival. The hero, though mortal and fallible, achieves the rewards of
the eternal world while yet in this world. Paradise descends to secular
life, and through guardianship of its symbol, the Grail, the quester may
possess mortal love and temporal power along with the heavenly reward.
Still another solution is that of the author of the Old “ French Queste. In
Galahad the humble ascetic is dressed in armor and the Christian struggle
becomes an allegorical war with the powers of darkness; chivalry, rede
fined as the dedication of the soul to personal purity and to the strong
defense of purity in the world, is transformed into otherworldly
222
perfection. Only symbolically, however, can the warrior saint subdue
the enemies of the faith without pursuit and without murder; only sym
bolically can the ascetic serve ladies and damsels and retain his purity.
The world of Galahad is purely literary, symbolic, allegorical.
Malory’s Lancelot, too, is an attempt at combining the
ideals of humanism and Christianity, although Malory is no consistent
theoretician and the solution arises more from his own dual allegiance
to this worldly chivalry and other worldly Christianity than from any
conscious philosophy. Lancelot is a hero of the epic mode in that he
represents the highest achievement attainable by earthly man. There is
in Malory a duality between the purely earthly hero, Lamorak, and
those who, like Perceval and Galahad, excel in heavenly deeds. Both
are of value, and man, given the ancient heroic attributes of vast
strength and great beauty, may, through the chivalric ideal, serve both
this world and the next, provided he preserve the priorities: “But firste
reserve the honoure to God, and secundely thy quarell muste com of thy
lady” (1119). Both ideals meet in Lancelot, Malory’s affirmation of
heroic man, possessed of all the human virtues, whose chief guerdon is
u that of the classical hero, glory and renown, but who yet achieves great
success in heavenly deeds, first in the Grail Quest, and again, more
fully, in the healing of Urry. Yet Malory is not naively optimistic
enough to affirm that man or this world is perfect or perfectible. The
world is, as Galahad calls it, “unstabyle,” “unsyker,” uncertain; and
223
human life even at its best is tinged with this same uncertainty. It is at
once a species of original sin and a kind of fate, and in it the Christian
and the classical m eet. It is an expression of a common human percep
tion that man and society alike must inevitably fall through the flaws
implicit in their very being.
Although there is in Malory as in Vergil the “lacrimae
rerum,” the tears for human events and human experience, there is also
the Christian hope. While man and society flourish, man may perform
earthly deeds in the service of God and man; however, with their fall
the values change. With the collapse of Camelot and the loss of human
love, heroic man is committed to make a new beginning, to eschew the
dead world and to turn away from the dead love, to do his moniage, to
accept the role of ascetic in preparation for a more nearly perfect and
stable world. Malory’s Lancelot is a man for both worlds, the earthly
and the heavenly. However, Malory’s allegiance is ever to the earthly
world; and so it is primarily as the human hero that we see Lancelot,
surrounded by those young protdges who are nourished by admiration of
him and who, by their loyalty, their love, and their faith lighten for a
moment the shadows that deepen over Camelot.
NOTES TO CHAPTER VII
1.. The following works offer interesting critical insight into the prob
lem of the hero in the epic and the romance:
W. Macneile Dixon, English Epic and Heroic Poetry (Lon-
don: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd.; New York: E. P. Dutton
& C o., 1912).
W. P. Ker, Epic and Romance (2nd e d .; London: Macmil
lan & Co., Ltd., 1908).
Maurice B. McNamee, S. J., Honor and the Epic Hero
(New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, In c., 1960).
H. V. Routh, God, Man, and Epic Poetry (2 vols.; Cam
bridge : Cambridge University Press, 1928).
2. MeNamee, Honor and the Epic Hero, p. 8.
3. See Viktor Poschl, The Art of Vergil, trans. by Gerda Seligson
(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1962), pp; 34-60.
c
4. Cosman, The Education of the Hero, p. 97.
5. See Poschl,' The Art of Vergil, pp. 17-24.
224
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Critical Works
Adolf, Helen. “The Concept of Original Sin as Reflected in Arthurian
Romance.” Studies in Language and Literature in Honour
of Margaret Schlauch. Edited by Mieczyslaw Brahmer,
Stanislaw Helsztynski, and Julian Krzyzanowski. Warsaw:
Polish Scientific Publishers, 1966.
Anglescu, Victor. “The Relationship of Gareth and Gawain in Malory’s
‘ Morte Darthur.’” Notes and Queries, N. S. VII (1961),
8, 9.
App, August J. Lancelot in English Literature. New York: Haskell
House, 1965.
Brewer, D. S. “ ‘The hoole book.’” Essays on Malory. Edited by Jack
Arthur Walter Bennett. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963.
Chambers, Edmund Kerchever. Sir Thomas Malory. English Associa
tion Pamphlet no. 5fl London, 1922.
Cosman, Madeleine Palmer. The Education of the Hero in Arthurian
Romance. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1965.
Donaldson, E. Talbot. “Malory and the Stanzaic Le Morte Arthur.”
Studies in Philology, XLVII (1950), 460-472.
Guerin, Wilfred Louis, Jr. “The Function of Gareth in Malory’s Morte
Darthur.” Unpublished Master’ s thesis, Tulane University,
1953-.
________ . “ ‘The Tale of Gareth’: The Chivalric Flowering.” Malory’s
Originality. Edited by Robert M. Lumiansky. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins Press, 1964.
225
226 |
i
j
Kittredge, George Lyman. “Who Was Sir Thomas Malory?” Studies j
and Notes in Philology and Literature, V (1897), 85-106.
Lewis, Clives Staples. “The English Prose Morte.” Essays on Malory. I
Edited by Jack Arthur Walter Bennett. Oxford: Clarendon I
Press, 1963.
Locke, Frederick W. The Quest for the Holy Grail: A Literary Study I
of a Thirteenth-Century Romance. Stanford: Stanford Uni-1
versity Press, 1960. |
Loseth, Eilart. Le Roman en prose de Tristan, le roman de Palamede
et la compilation de Rusticien de Pise. Paris: E. Bouillon,
1891.
Loomis, Robert Sherman. “The Structure of Malory’s ‘Gareth.’”
Studies in Language and Literature in Honour of Margaret
Schlauch. Edited by Mieczyslaw Brahmer, Stanislaw
Helsztynski, and Julian Krzyzanowski. Warsaw: Polish
Scientific Publishers, 1966.
Lot-Borodine, Myrrha. Trois essais sur le Roman de Lancelot du Lac
et la Quete du Saint Graal. Paris: Honore Champion, 1919.;
Lumiansky, Robert M. “ ‘The Tale of Lancelot and Guenevere’:
Suspense.” Malory’s Originality. Edited by Robert M.
Lumiansky. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1964.
MacNiece, Louis. “Sir Thomas M alory.” The English Novelists.
Edited by Derek Verschoyle. London: Chatto & Windus,
1936.
Moorman, Charles. The Book of Kyng Arthur. Lexington: University
of Kentucky Press, 1965.
________ . “ ‘The Tale of the Sankgreall’: Human Frailty.” Malory’s
Originality. Edited by Robert M. Lumiansky. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins Press, 1964.
Morgan, Mary Louis, Sister. Galahad in English Literature. Washing
ton, D .C .: Catholic University of America, 1932.
Pauphilet, Albert. Etudes sur La Queste del Saint Graal. Paris: Honors
Champion, 1921.
Rummons, Constance. Ethnic Ideals of the British Isles. University of j
Nebraska Studies in Language, Literature, and Criticism noj
3, 1920.
Schmidz, Cornelia Catharina Dieudonnde. Sir Gareth of Orkeney.
Groningen: Wolters, 1963.
Schofield, William Henry. Chivalry in English Literature. Cambridge::
Harvard University Press, 1952.
Scudder, Vida Dutton. Le Morte Darthur of Sir Thomas Malory. New
York and London: E. P. Dutton, 1921.
Sommer, Heinrich Oskar. Le Morte Darthur by Syr Thomas Malory.
Vol. Ill: Studies on the Sources. London: D. Nutt, 1891.
Tucker, P. E. “Chivalry in the Morte.” Essays on Malory. Edited by
Jack Arthur Walter Bennett. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963.
________ . “The Place of the Quest of the Holy Grail in the Morte
Darthur.” Modern Language Review, XLVIII (1953), 391-
397.
________. “A Source for ‘ The Healing of Sir Urry’ in the Morte Darthui”
Modern Literature, L (1955), 490-492.
Vinaver, Eugene. “Epic and Tragic Patterns in Malory.” Friendship’s
Garland, Essays Presented to Mario Praz on his seventieth
birthday. Edited by Vittorio Gabrieli. Rome: Edizini di
Storia e Letterature, 1966.
________. Malory. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1929.
. “A Romance of Gaheret.” Medium Aevum, I (December,
1932), 157-167.
________. Le Roman de Tristan et Iseut dans 1’oeuvre de Thomas
Malory. Paris: Honore Champion, 1925.
________. “Sir Thomas Malory.” Arthurian Literature in the Middle
Ages. Edited by Robert Sherman Loomis. Oxford: Claren
don Press, 1959.
Wilson, Robert Henry. “Addenda on Malory’s Minor Characters.” Journal
of English and Germanic Philology, LV (1956), 567-587.
228
Wilson, Robert Henry. Characterization in Malory: A Comparison with
his Sources. Essential Portion of a Ph.D. dissertation, Uni
versity of Chicago, 1932. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1934.
. “The ‘Fair Unknown’ in Malory.” PMLA, LVIII (March,
1943), 1-21.
. “How Many Books Did Malory Write?” Texas Studies in
English, XXX (1951), 1-23.
________ . “Malory and the Perlesvaus.” Modern Philology, XXX
(August, 1932), 13-22..
_______ _. “Malory’s Naming of Minor Characters.” Tournal of English
and Germanic Philology, XLII (July, 1943), 364-385
. “Malory, the Stanzaic Morte Arthur and the Mort Artu.”
Modern Philology, XXXVII (1939-40), 125-138.
Texts
“Galahad and Perceval.” Edited by Heinrich Oskar Sommer. Modern
Philology, V, 55-84, 181-200, 291-341.
Malory, Sir Thomas. The Works of Sir Thomas Malory. Edited by
Eugene Vinaver. 2nd e d .; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967.
Le Morte Arthur. Edited by James Douglas Bruce. Early English Soci
ety, Extra Series, no. 88; London: Kegan Paul, Trench,
Triibner & Co., Ltd., 1903.
Le Mort le Roi Artu, roman du XIIIe siecle. Edited by Jean Frappier.
Paris: E. Droz, 1936 and 1954.
La Queste del Saint Graal, roman du XIIIe siecle. Edited by Albert
Pauphilet. Paris: Edouard Champion, 1923.
The Vulgate Version of the Arthurian Romances. Edited by Heinrich
Oskar Sommer. 6 vols.; Washington, D. C.: Carnegie
Institution, 1908-16.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

'Guingamor,' 'Guigemar,' 'Graelentmor,' 'Lanval,' And 'Desire': A Comparative Study Of Five Breton Lays

PDF

Form As Theme: A Study Of Andre Gide

PDF

Studies In The Contemporary American And British Science Fiction Novel

PDF

The Giant And The Dragon Of The Folk Epic

PDF

Plutarch On The Glory Of The Athenians: A Reassessment

PDF

Cynewulf: The Ascension Of Christ

PDF

'Antigone': A Study In Critical Method

PDF

The Poetic Imagination Of Colette

PDF

The Game-Play In Twentieth-Century Absurdist Drama: Studies In A Dramatictechnique

PDF

Neo-Metamorphoses: A Cyclical Study. Comparative Transformations In Ovidian Myth And Modern Literature

PDF

The Critical Reception Of The Dramas Of Albert Camus In The United States, 1945-1964

PDF

False Prophets In Fiction: Camus, Dostoevsky, Melville, And Others

PDF

An Examination Of Three Major Novels In World Literature In The Light Of Critical Precepts Derived From Tolstoy'S "What Is Art?"

PDF

Ralph Ellison'S "Invisible Man" As A Repository Of Major Elements From Principal Western Literary Traditions

PDF

Servius' Knowledge Of Juvenal: An Analysis Of The Juvenalian Quotations In Servius' Commentary On Vergil

PDF

The Patriot In Exile: A Study Of Heinrich Mann'S Political Journalistic Activity 1933-1950

PDF

Blake, Novalis, and Nerval: the poetics of the apocalypse. A study of Blake's Milton, Novalis' Hymnen an die Nacht and Heinrich von Ofterdingen, and Nerval's Aurelia

PDF

Minnedienst Und Ehe In Wolfram Von Eschenbachs Parzival; Aufgezeigt An Folgenden Paaren: Gahmuret - Herzeloyde (Belakane); Orilus - Jeschute; Parzival - Kondwiramurs (Kunneware, Liasse); Gawan -...

PDF

Some Imaginative Motifs From Primitive Sacred Myths In The Theater Of Eugene Ionesco

PDF

The Act Itself And The Word: A Study Of Abstraction Versus The Concrete In The Work Of Albert Camus

Asset Metadata

Creator Stewart, Marilynn Zarwell (author)

Core Title The Proteges Of Lancelot: A Study Of Malory'S Characterization Of Lancelot In The 'Morte Darthur'

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Comparative Literature

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Literature, General,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Goodrich, Norma Lorre (committee chair), Berkey, Max Leslie, Jr. (committee member), Brown, William H., Jr. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-444575

Unique identifier UC11361955

Identifier 7026534.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-444575 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7026534.pdf

Dmrecord 444575

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Stewart, Marilynn Zarwell

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA