Daniel Alexander Apatiga
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in terms of Chivalric Rituals
The green knight was in opposition to British, chivalric values and rituals, which Sir Gawain symbolized. The characters had differing views in terms of the purpose of chivalric rituals, specifically with respect to homage. The green knight, who was unknown to King Arthur’s audience, viewed his visit to King Arthur’s court as a challenge to an acclaimed group, since he viewed everyone else as being arrogant compared to himself (Greenblatt 143.258). According to Knighting, homage and the meaning of ritual: The kings of England and their neighbors in the thirteenth century, the chivalric purpose that homage would have had, which was to maintain peace between rulers, was irrelevant to the green knight (294). King Arthur’s court of lowly and exalted people was engaged in observing the chivalrous ritual of homage, even though the homage ritual was unofficial in the initial setting of the epic poem. In my essay, I will be using the connotation of “chivalry” to mean the customs and practices of knightsaccording to the Oxford English dictionary, of which is a word that has been used since the 1300's. More denotatively, chivalry means simply: men in arms and men and "fully armed men" (OED). However, in my essay I mean the word “chivalry” to refer to the third connotation: "the position and character of a knight, knighthood” (OED).
Chivalric rituals such as homage and knighting only had symbolic power because they were done before large audiences. Rituals by knights were done in public settings and occasions, being typically planned beforehand. They were done to prepare an heir to the throne for rule, for instance. “A noble could only fully exercise his functions after he had been dubbed a knight”(Weiler 280). And also, “dubbing” (in knighthood) “cemented concord and peace” between kingdoms (Weiler 292). Not only that, but knighting “[denoted] both submission and honor” for the knighter and the knightee (Weiler 277). Knighting was seen by many as an entrance into a kind of adulthood in which one could take up arms. Young princes who weren’t knighted were largely seen as unable to rule unless they were knighted, except in the case of Alexander III of Scotland, who was 8 years old when he became king without being knighted (Weiler 281-2). But there was a difference in hierarchy between the knighter and knightee that would have been stressed, for instance, in King Arthur’s court. The knighter was always considered the superior in the hierarchy of knights (Weiler 276).
By 1375-1400 a.d., the epic poem aforementioned was written and the importance of chivalric rituals would have been waning (Weiler 277). This ridiculous ritual, because no one was expected to come out of it alive, of giving one blow of the axe for another at a later said dateset by the green knight would have been satirical in a world where written communication was becoming the dominant messaging mode in an increasingly complex social network—not official chivalric ceremonies such as the ritual of knighting or paying homage. Nonetheless, in determining social position and maintaining relationships with other kingdoms, homage would have still been paramount during the medieval period the epic poem is set. Cutting off the green knight’s head would have been parallel to other chivalric rituals such as knighting and paying homage, but most likely, it was intended in this fictional plot to have been satirical, making fun of chivalric rituals. The evidence for the satire latent in the aforementioned epic poem can be seen by the green knight possessing immortality (he was still alive after his head was chopped off), the fairy and the magical girdle could also be construed as being satirical about ancient medieval relationships.
The green knight, magical like a headless horseman because he could survive his head being chopped off, was part of another non-vassal, dominion outside of King Arthur’s kingdomand would have been in opposition to King Arthur’s court. King Arthur’s court, whichrepresented British values, was also the setting for the chivalric ritual of homage for other lords and kings to visit. According to the perspectives of King Arthur and Sir Gawain, the green knight was engaged in a chivalric ritual of homage to their court. This, however, was not the case according to the perspective of the green knight. From the perspective of Arthur and his court, homage was done to maintain ties between rulers, and they were bound, by honor, to maintain the tie they had with whatever ruler the green knight was subject under (Weiler 294). The green knight’s presence reminded them of their status in the hierarchy of knights (Weiler276). The difference would have been unimportant to the green knight, who was not a member of the round table, where the knights of the round table were famously attributed with equalityby their King. Sir Gawain, being knighted by him, would have had to be submissive towards his King even if he weren’t his King (Weiler 280). This important fact, however, was elided.
The green knight departed from the traditions of medieval chivalry multiple times: he did not plan his meeting with King Arthur, which would have been traditional when paying homage; and he did not fully explain what was required of sir Gawain before he took up the challenge of striking a blow with the green knight’s axe. The green knight says to Sir Gawain right after he has taken up the wager (that he could not do it), “…except for one thing: you must solemnly swear that you’ll seek me yourself; that you’ll search me out to the ends of the earth to earn the same blow…” (Greenblatt 145.394-6). Of course, sir Gawain feels obliged to accept the challenge, but this is a large request to make. During this time, the identity of the green knight has not been mentioned though it is at the end of the aforementioned epic poem. The question asto who knighted the green knight has also been omitted, though it probably would have been on the minds of the low and high people of King Arthur’s court.
The green knight’s idea of honor was less than that of the knight from King Arthur’s round table, or sir Gawain, because his honor depended on a lowly bet that sir Gawain would not find the green knight but would instead run away because he was a coward. The green knight didn’t have a higher cause in his ritual of self-sacrifice, except to see who was manlier or morehonorable in his lowly knowledge of honor. Futhermore, the green knight underhandedly, secretively withheld the knowledge that his wife was playing a role with a grander purpose beyond just looking pretty. Bertilak de Hautdesert (aka the green knight) mentions to sir Gawainabout how he had set him up with his wife to test his chivalry: “And I know of your courtesies, and conduct, and kisses, and the wooing of my wife—for it was all my work! I sent her to test you—and in truth it turns out you’re by the far the most faultless fellow on earth…” (Greenblatt 185.2360-3). The green knight here takes a higher position in terms of honor than sir Gawain, but overall, the green knight thinks that honor can be played with as though it’s a game.
Throughout the aforementioned epic poem, Sir Gawain, unlike the green knight, consistently showed great honor to King Arthur. For instance, when Gawain takes the place of King Arthur because he thinks it’s unbefitting of a king, during the challenge, sir Gawain’s honor becomes more evident: “For I find it unfitting, as my fellow knights would, when a deed of such daring is dangled before us that you take on this trial—tempted as you are—when brave, bold men are seated on these benches, men never matched in the mettle of their minds…” (Greenblatt 145.348-52). Essentially, Sir Gawain would have preferred to take the bet to save his knighter (person who knights someone, which would have been King Arthur most likely), as a good knight should feel towards his superior. For Gawain says, “I stake my claim, may this melee be mine” (Greenblatt 144.341-2). He followed through with the challenge that the green knight hadset before him, facing the green knight one year afterwards, which prevented any dishonor from shaming Gawain and King Arthur’s court.
Sir Gawain honored the challenge set up by the green knight exactly one year after Sir Gawain cut off his head, thus maintaining his notion of integrity as a knight. When Sir Gawain meets with the green knight, the green knight says to him, “you have timed your arrival like a true traveler, honoring the terms that entwine us together…” (Greenblatt 183.2241-2). Sir Gawain considered his obligation to the green knight fulfilled, taking the blow to the head yet surviving because of the green knight’s wife, who had given sir Gawain a magical girdle.
Sir Gawain doesn’t recognize the wife of Bertilak de Hautdesert (the green knight), nor his wife’s girdle that saves sir Gawain’s life. The green knight, though, had sent her to “to test [him]” (Greenblatt 185.2362). The fact that Sir Gawain kissed her does not hurt the green knight’s feelings, as he merely brushes it off because he knows his wife would not commit adultery. Sir Gawain feels as though he has somehow become less of a knight because he does not follow “the freedom and fidelity every knight knows to follow,” which somehow was at the expense of another fellow knight. Nonetheless, Sir Gawain is forgiven by the green knight, who considers the situation with his wife “healed.” Sir Gawain had cheated the outcome of the betjust as much as the green knight had cheated death with his magic, and so Sir Gawain is in thewrong to assume he did anything dishonorable.
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is a satirical piece about the abandonment of reason for the purposes of homage and chivalric rites that were common in the period of King Arthur reign.Sir Gawain embodied those idealized chivalric values, but the green knight satirized them and was a force of fear amongst King Arthur and his knights. Because chivalric rituals had fallen outof favor by the time written communication became the preferred mode, the author of this epic poem was able to make to poke fun at them without fear of reprisal (Weiler 277). King Arthur, who may have been merely a legend, would have been long dead by the time this epic poem was written.
Works Cited
Weiler, B. (2006). Knighting, homage and the meaning of ritual:
The kings of england and their neighbors
in the thirteenth century.
Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 37, 275-299.
Greenblatt, Stephen,
ed. Norton
Anthology of English Literature: The Major Authors vol. 1. New York:
Norton
and Company, 2013. Print.
Oxford
English Dictionary. Oxford U Press, 28 April 2014. Web. 28 April 2014
