One of the significant adaptations Malory undertakes in the Morte is that Lancelot replaces Gawain as the key protagonist in the Arthurian Literature. Gawain in many versions of the Arthurian Literature is the chief knight of Arthur’s court but Malory’s Morte does not conform to that tradition. This shift of subjects indicates Malory’s mind of a different perspective as D.S. Brewer thinks that such remodeling of Malory’s sources is an example of Malory’s independent view of the characters.
Brewer further elaborates on Malory’s alteration by saying that “Malory accepts Lancelot’s predominance, but presents a Gawain of some complexity in the last two main sections” (23). It is believed that the downfall of Camelot is, apart from Lancelot and Guinevere’s adultery, due to Gawain’s outrage at Lancelot’s unfortunate killing of Sir Gareth that leads to his final deadly revenge. On his deathbed, Gawain repents that his pride causes the breakdown when Arthur’s kingdom is threatened by the imminent war waged by the treacherous Mordred.
However, although Lancelot and Gawain are to be blamed for bringing down the Round Table court, it seems that Malory, while sympathetic to Lancelot and showing lenience in addressing his sin, displays Gawain in an unfavorable light and much condemnation is imposed on him. Therefore this chapter hopes to delineate Gawain’s sin by looking at its causes and the way Malory presents the issue and compare it to that of Lancelot. In addition, Gawain’s sin should also be examined in the context of St. Thomas Aquinas’ theology to unearth the difference from that of Lancelot. This chapter therefore aims to point out that although Gawain sins through his pride like Lancelot’s adultery, pride and instability, Gawain is portrayed as a maliciously sinful knight and his wrongdoing is treated relentlessly from Malory’s perspective. This is because Gawain persistently declines to admit his mistakes and
shows no signs of humility in front of God. Besides, the causes of Gawain’s sin are of a more grievous nature than Lancelot’s because Gawain sins out of personal resentment and he has an intention to wound Lancelot whereas Lancelot means no harm in his sinning. This characterization contrast between Lancelot and Gawain confirms once again Malory’s sympathy for Lancelot’s willingness to take blame and his repugnance for Gawain’s refusal to recognize his misdeeds.
Gawain’s pride comes chiefly from two roots: one is from his revengefulness against Lancelot in the final tale of Morte because he is convinced that defeating Lancelot is the way to get even; and the other is from his seeking personal glory in the Sangkreal Tale. On the first count, because Gawain is so intent upon his personal vengeance and further demands Arthur’s renouncing of Lancelot’s alliance, he ignores the safety of the Arthurian court and thus his revengefulness works as the direct cause for the downfall of the kingdom and consequently renders his act a sin of pride. As Gawain himself makes clear his sin by saying, “And thorow me and <my> pryde ye have all thys shame and disease, for had that noble knight, sir Launcelot, ben with you, as he was and wolde have ben, thys un happy warre had never ben begunne” (Works III, 1230.19-21). Nonetheless, the recognition has come too late because the Arthurian society is already on the verge of a breakdown. Indeed, it is not until Gawain is notified of Lancelot’s killing of Gareth that Gawain loses grip of himself and gives way to hostility towards Lancelot. The final Tale of Morte opens with Sir Agravain and Mordred’s malevolent disclosure to King Arthur the illicit love between Lancelot and Guinevere. Gawain for the time being, still attempts to vindicate Lancelot even after he is informed of his brother Sir Agravain’s death, “’For I dare sey,’ seyde sir Gawayne, ‘my lady, your quene, ys to you both good and trew. And as for sir Launcelot, I dare say he woll make hit good uppon ony knight lyvyng that woll put uppon hym vylany or shame, and in lyke wyse he woll make good for my
lady the quene” (Works III, 1175.14-18). When reminded by Arthur of Lancelot’s killing of his brothers and sons, Gawain replies,
’My lorde,’ seyde sir Gawayne, ‘of all thys I have a knowlwche, whych of her dethis sore repentis me. But insomuch as I gaff hem warnynge and tolde my brother and my sonnes they wolde nat do be my councyle, I woll nat meddyll me thereof, nor revenge me nothynge of their dethys;
for I tolde them there was no boote to styve with sir Launcelot.
Howbehit I am sory of the deth of my brother and of my two sunnes, but they ar the causars of their owne dethe; for oftyntymes I warned my brother sir Aggravayne, and I tolde hym of the perellis [the which ben now fallen].’ (Works III, 1176.1-10)
The passage illustrates that Gawain continues to defend Lancelot and is able to analyze the death of his sibling and sons with sound judgment. Yet, this does not last long when Gawain is notified of the death of Sir Gaherys and Gareth, who are sent by Arthur to oversee the execution of Guinevere after Gawain refuses to do so.
Gawain’s disposition shifts thereafter and his brotherhood with Lancelot is destroyed because of this killing. Suffering from loss of his beloved, Gawain is determined to fight Lancelot, “hit ys my quarrel to fight with the because of the dethe of my brother, sir Gareth” (Works III, 1191.13-14). Later on, when Lancelot is explaining to Gawain that his killing of Gareth is caused by his failure to recognize him and asks for his forgiveness, Gawain answers with rancour and bitterness,
I have right well harde thy langayge and thy grete proffers. But wyt thou well, lat the kynge do as hit pleasith hym, I woll never forgyff the my brothers dethe, and in especiall the deth of my brothir sir Gareth.
And if myne uncle, kynge Arthur, wyll accorde with the, he shall lose my servys, for wyte thou well, . . . , thou arte bothe false to the kynge and to
me. (Works III, 1200.13-20)
With regard to Gawain’s violent reaction towards this unfortunate killing, critics have been very sympathetic with Gawain, taking pity on his excessive rage and fatal vengeance for the loss of his kin. For example, Professor Eugene Vinaver remarks that Gawain’s violent sentiments towards Lancelot is not from “vindictiveness, as in the French romance, but genuine grief that turns Lancelot’s truest friend, Gawain, into a mortal enemy” (1621). Another critic, David Benson, asserts that, “The Gawain who approves of Lancelot’s rescue and the Gawain who vows eternal revenge are not two inimical beings, but the same man following a single virtue” (271). His attitude is that Gawain is “honour bound” (271) to revenge in spite of Lancelot’s unsuccessful recognition. Benson argues that Gawain takes revenge out of a sense of duty of chivalry that requires him to rescue his fellow knights in need. Therefore, he declares that, “Gawain is by no means frenzied with emotion and grief or atavistically defending his kin,” but that Gawain is simply doing what accords to the Arthurian code in securing his honour by taking revenge for the untimely death of his fellow knights (271). In fact, David Benson believes that every knight in Morte is bound to the code of honor, i.e., every knight is obliged to do what chivalry required of them regardless of their personal account. David Benson makes such observation by drawing on the speech Gawain delivers upon hearing the death of Gareth. The speech is as follows,
‘A, Jesu, save me my two brethirn!’ seyd sir Gawayne, ‘For full well wyst I,’ sayde sir Gawayne, ‘that sir Launcelot wolde rescow her, other ellis he wolde dye in that fylde; and to say the trouth he were nat of worship but if he had rescowed the quene, insomuch as she shulde have
brete for his sake. And as in that,’ seyde sir Gawayne, ‘he hath done but knyghtly, and as I wolde have done myselff and I had stoned in lyke case.
But where ar my brethirn?’ seyde sir Gawayne, ‘I mervayle that I se <nor>
[here] nat of them.’ (Works III, 1184.17-25) In the above speech, Gawain actually approves Lancelot’s rescuing Guinevere on the ground to perform his knightly obligations and believes he would do the same in Lancelot’s position. Gawain’s adoption of revenge is under such circumstance in which knights are to carry out the dictates of chivalry even with reluctance. I do agree these two critics’ sympathy for Gawain and believe that perhaps Gawain’s dictates of honour or grief should drive him into that reluctant vengeance. It somehow seems to me that his vehement emotions override his prudence and reason at the expense of the safety of Camelot and that the critics’ view is grossly overlooking Gawain’s vagaries that lead him into extremities in the end. Gawain is carried away by his anguish regardless of Lancelot’s explanation and ultimately he becomes the contributor both to his own death and the breakdown of Arthur’s court.
However, I do sympathize with Gawain though in a reduced degree. I find Gray Babara Bartholomew’s view acceptable in that he sympathizes with Gawain but also recognizes his drawbacks in causing the final tragedy. He thinks that Gawain has two seemingly unreconciled characters though not split character, the best and the worst. Bartholomew is convinced that it is only out of humanity that Gawain is kind at times and wicked at others and contends that the characterization of Gawain by Malory is composed of “obvious inconsistencies of virtue and evil” (262). For instance, when Pellinor, the murderer of Gawain’s father, is honored by Merlin, Gawain bitterly speaks about killing the murderer.1 Bartholowmew says that, ____________________________
1 Gawain’s exact expression is, “And thereat had sir Gawayne grete envy and tolde Gaherys hys brother. ‘Yondir knyght ys putte to grete worship, which grevith me sore, for he slewe oure fadir kynge Lott. Therefore I woll sle hym’” (Works III, 102.10-14)
“Concern for a slain father is noble, but ‘grete envy,’ no matter how human an emotion, is a mortal sin” (265). Bartholomew comes to the conclusion that in Gawain, readers see a “bold juxtaposition of Cardinal Virtue and Deadly Sin” and this is to “present Gawain as typical of the best and the worst in the Round Table fellowship” (267). This signifies that Gawain is justified in resorting to vengeance for the loss of his loved ones on the basis of humanity but excessive emotions of his cannot be simply accounted for on the ground of humanity. Instead, Gawain should be held responsible for himself. I think Bartholomew expounds clearly that although Gawain is a victim of the tragic killing of his siblings, Gawain’s ill humour and impetuosity explain why later he seeks revenge on Lancelot which ultimately brings down the entire Arthur’s court. From another perspective, the incident of Gawain tricking Sir Pelleas enables us to see more about vengeance. Gawain has learned of Pelleas’ unrequited love for a lady and promises to bring Pelleas the lady to ease his pining by deception of Pelleas’ being murdered by Gawain. However, it turns out that “there was made a bedde, and there Sir Gawayne and Ettarde wente to bedde togedyrs” (Works I, 169.32-33). After Gawain has set out to look for Ettarde, Pelleas also goes on a journey in search of Gawain but finds himself betrayed by the sight of the couple lying together in bed. And then, “he toke his horse and might nat abyde no lenger for pure sorow” (Works I, 170.18-19). However, after he has left and rides half a mile, “he turned agayne and thought for to sle hem bothe” (Works I, 170.19-20).
Nevertheless in the end, Pelleas decides to walk away quietly and leaves his sword with them as a token of his discovery. At this point, even though Pelleas is not so noble as to exclude the idea of vengeance, I do not feel repulsed by the thought because it is Gawain who has wronged Pelleas in the first place. The thing is that Pelleas fights back the impulse of murder by means of his sense of honor and duty as the account goes,
And whan he saw hem lye so bothe slepynge faste, tha<n> unnethe he might holde hym on horseback for sorow, and seyde thus to himself:
“Though this knight be never so false, I woll never sle hym slepynge—for I woll never dystroy the hyghe order of knyghthode,” and therewith he departed agayne. (Works I, 170.20-25)
Pelleas’ reaction, from his first move to take leave, then to the idea of killing and finally coming to composure by observing his chivalric code, forms a stark contrast to Gawain’s. Pelleas’ case shows that one is able to overcome his emotions and act in accordance with reason even under the circumstances of being wronged with injustice.
Besides, Gawain is neither betrayed nor duped like Pelleas but that he is grieved at Gareth’s death. Some might protest my assertion that I am being unfair in comparing their responses because their misfortunes are of different types. I must say that I consider the mishaps a great blow to them respectively but I argue that if Pelleas, stricken by betrayal from his friend and lover, can resist the urge to slay on account of knighthood, Gawain, attacked by strong feelings, could have chosen to do the same too, yet he chooses to kill.
Although vengeance for clansmen is to a certain degree understandable and deserves sympathy, one can choose to act in a non-viloent way. For instance, during Tristram’s visit at the Anwysshe’s court, the queen discovers that, by identifying a dent in Tristram’s sword, he is the killer of her brother, Marhault. This piece of intelligence is disclosed to king Angwysshe and Tristram is interrogated for confirmation of the killing. After the homicide is verified and the king’s inquiries are satisfied, the king, though enraged at his clansman’s death, seeks no revenge.
Instead, the king says, “‘I [the king] may nat sey but ye dud as a knyghtt sholde do and as hit was youre parte to do for your quarrel, and to encree you worship as a knyght sholde do. Howebehit I may nat mayntayne you in this contrey with my
worship but that I sholde displese many of my barownes and my wyff and my kynne’” (Works I, 391.17-22). The king’s response implies that he acts according to discretion and the explanation offered by Tristram is taken into sound consideration.
It also shows that vengeance for vengeance is not the only way to adopt on personal account of sorrow and rage. It depends on one’s will and wisdom on how to act.
Additionally, if one goes back for textual analysis, after the siege of Benwick, Gawain is wounded fatally by Lancelot’s strike and on his deathbed Gawain begins to recall and reflect on his emotional outrage,
‘A, my uncle,’ seyde sir Gawayne, ‘now I woll that ye wyte that my deth-dayes be come! And all I may wyte myne owne hastynes and my wy[l]fulnesse, for thorow my wylfulnes I was causer of myne owne dethe;
for I was thy day hurte and smitten uppon myne old wounde that sir Launclot gaff me, and I fele myself that I muste nedis be dede by the owre of noone. And thorow me and <my> pryde ye have all thys shame
and disese, for had that noble knight, sir Launcelot, ben with you, as he was and wolde have ben, thys unhappy warre had never ben begunne;
for he thorow hys noble knyghthod and hys noble bloode, hylde all youre cankyrde enemyes in subjeccison and dangere.
(Works III, 1230.18-29, emphasis mine)
In this confessional speech, Gawain admits clearly that he sins through pride. As elaborated in Lull’s treatise and manifested in the Church’s dogma, pryde like Lancelot’s sin lachenes, belongs to the seven deadly sin. This is a proof that Gawain considers himself sinful and attempts no escape to excuse himself from the final tragedy of Camelot. His own confession supports my argument of the knight’s culpability and corresponds to the comparison with Pelleas and Tristram.
So, the first cause of Gawain’s pride is revenge, the second cause manifested in
the Sankgreal Tale is Gawain’s search for distinction from his fellow-knights; and for such desire of personal achievement Gawain fails in the quest. For instance, after Gawain sets out on the Holy Grail quest, his eagerness in the quest starts to wane gradually when he finds that he does not encounter as many adventures as Sir Galahad and Lancelot do. On the way of his search, Gawain comes to an abbey where one of his fellow knights, Melyas, lies sick in bed. As Melyas recounts the marvelous adventures Galahad has encountered, Gawain complains about his lack of similar adventures. One of the monks in the abbey tells Gawain that it is because of his wickedness and sinfulness that his chances to encounter adventures are deprived.
‘Sertes,’ side sir Gawayne, I am nat happy that I toke nat the way that he wente. For and I may nete with hym I woll nat departe from hym lightly,
for all mervaylous adventures sir Galahad enchevith.’
‘Sir’ seyde one of the munkes, ‘he woll nat of youre felyship.’
‘Why so?’ seyde sir Gawayne.
‘Sir,’ seyd he, ‘for ye be wicked and synfull, and he ys full blyssed.’
(Works II, 890.21-29) Later, when Gawain comes to a hermitage and enquires a priest of the monk’s comment, the priest replies,
‘He myght well sye hit,’ seyde the eremite, ‘for whan ye were made first knight ye sholde have takyn you to knightly dedys and virtuous lyvyng.
And ye have done the contrary, for ye have lyved myschevously many wyntirs. . . (Works II, 891.30-33)
The remarks of the monk and the hermit suggest that Malory intentionally directs readers’ attention to accentuate Gawain’s culpability. This narrative technique is starkly contrasting to that of Lancelot because Malory obviously attempts to eschew emphasizing the latter’s sinfulness. Malory has great concern for Lancelot and looks
up to him in many aspects. For instance, in the tale of Sir Urry’s healing, Lancelot is the only knight capable of performing such task after other knights have failed in it.
Before commencing the healing demanded by king Arthur, Lancelot claims that he is aware that he has to oblige the king but also asserts, “But and I myght or durste, wyte you well I wolde nat take uppon me to towche that wounded knyght in that entent that I shulde psse all other knyghtes” (Works III, 1151.26-30) Malory takes care not to give Lancelot’s intervention an impression of his sense of superiority but that he comes to rescure out of concern for his fellow. That Malory treats Gawain’s sin in a
Before commencing the healing demanded by king Arthur, Lancelot claims that he is aware that he has to oblige the king but also asserts, “But and I myght or durste, wyte you well I wolde nat take uppon me to towche that wounded knyght in that entent that I shulde psse all other knyghtes” (Works III, 1151.26-30) Malory takes care not to give Lancelot’s intervention an impression of his sense of superiority but that he comes to rescure out of concern for his fellow. That Malory treats Gawain’s sin in a