 |
Edited and first published by William Caxton in 1485, Sir
Thomas Malory's unique and splendid version of the Arthurian
legend tells an immortal story of love, adventure, chivalry,
treachery, and death.
'La Queste del Saint
Graal' and another book in the Vulgate cycle the ‘Prose
Lancelot’ were the prime source used by Malory for ‘Le Morte
d'Arthur'. - The sinfulness of the inhabitants causes the
Grail to be taken from Britain. On
Galahad’s
death the Grail is
carried up into heaven. This is immediately followed by Lancelot's
return to Guinevere and the
public denunciation of the lovers. Civil War ensues, the
fellowship of the Round Table is destroyed and Arthur's
reign comes to its bitter close
"Sir Thomas Malory's 15th century work,
"Le Morte d'Arthur" is, perhaps, better known than Geoffrey
or ChrÚtien. He took their stories and
retold them with an epic unity, creating the Romantic Age of
Chivalry. With one stroke of his pen, he transformed Arthur's
Court from Dark Age obscurity to the height of medieval pageantry.
Being written in English and printed by Caxton, "Le Morte
d'Arthur" was instantly available to the masses, and it
remains highly popular, even today, as a classic work of
literature. Malory's work, however, is just that: a work of
literature. There is little history left amongst his pages."
- source unknown
|
|
The Victorian poet,
Alfred,
Lord Tennyson, based his twelve poem
'Idylls
of the King' (1859-85) on this book
From the Cambridge History of English and American
Literature(1907–21).
The
Morte d’Arthur, the publication of
which holds a chief place in Caxton’s work, looks back to the
Middle Ages. Based on translation, a mosaic of adaptations, it is,
nevertheless, a single literary creation such as no work of Caxton’s
own can claim to be, and it has exercised a far stronger and
longer literary influence.
If, as is possible, Malory was the
knight of Newbold Revell, he had been a retainer of the last
Beauchamp earl of Warwick, he had seen the splendours of the last
efforts of feudalism and had served in that famous siege of Rouen
which so deeply impressed contemporary imagination. Apparently, he
was a loyalist during the Civil Wars and suffered from Yorkist
revenge; his burial in the Grey Friars may, possibly, suggest that
he even died a prisoner in Newgate. In any case, he must have died
before the printing of his immortal book, which comes to us,
therefore, edited by Caxton, to whom, possibly, are due most of
the lacunae, bits of weak grammar and confusions in names.
Nevertheless, the style seals the Morte d’Arthur as
Malory’s, not Caxton’s. It is as individual as is the author’s
mode of dealing with the material he gathered from his wide field.
This material Malory several times says he found in a French book—the
French book—but critics have discovered a variety of sources. It
is in the course of the story that the multiplicity of sources is
at times discernible—in the failure of certain portions to
preserve a connecting thread, in the interruption of the story of
Tristram, in the curious doubling of names, or the confusion of
generations; the style reveals no trace of inharmonious originals.
The skilful blending of many ancient tales, verse and prose,
French and English, savage and saintly, into a connected, if but
loosely connected, whole is wrought in a manner which leaves the Morte,
while representative of some of the nobler traits of Malory’s
century, in other respects typical neither of that nor any
particular epoch, and this is an element in its immortality.
If such an ascetic purity and rapt
devotion as glows in the Grail story was practised among
the mystics, such a fantastic chivalry portrayed by Froissart,
such a loyalty evinced by a Bedford or a Fortescue, yet the Morte
assumes the recognition of a loftier standard of justice, purity
and unselfishness than its own century knew. These disinterested
heroes, who give away all they win with the magnanimity of an
Audley at Poictiers, these tireless champions of the helpless,
these eternal lovers and their idealised love, are of no era, any
more than the forests in which they for ever travel. And, if the
constant tournaments and battles, and the castles which seem to be
the only places to live in, suggest a medieval world, the total
absence of reference to its basic agricultural life and insistent
commerce detaches us from it again, while the occasional mention
of cities endows them with a splendour and remoteness only to be
paralleled in the ancient empire or in the pictures of Turner.
|
|
Medieval stories were, naturally,
negligent of causes in a world where the unaccountable so
constantly happened in real life, and a similar suddenness of
adventure may be found in tales much older than this. Malory,
however, on the threshold of an age which would require dramatic
motive or, at least, probability, saved his book from the fate of
the older, unreasoned fiction by investing it with an atmosphere,
impossible to analyse, which withdraws his figures to the region
of mirage. This indescribable conviction of magic places Malory’s
characters outside the sphere of criticism, since, given the
atmosphere, they are consistent with themselves and their
circumstances. Nothing is challenged, analysed or emphasised;
curiosity as to causation is kept in abeyance; retribution is
worked out, but, apparently, unconsciously. Like children’s are
the sudden quarrels and hatreds and as sudden reconciliations. The
motive forces are the elemental passions of love and bravery,
jealousy and revenge, never greed, or lust, or cruelty. Courage
and the thirst for adventure are taken for granted, like the
passion for the chase, and, against a brilliant and moving throng
jof the brave and fair, a few conceptions are made to stand forth
as exceptional—a Lancelot,
a Tristram, or a Mark. Perhaps most skilful of all is the
restraint exercised in the portrayal of Arthur.
As with Shakespeare’s Caesar and Homer’s Helen,
we realise Arthur by his effect
upon his paladins; of himself we are not allowed to form a
definite image, though we may surmise justice to be his most
distinct attribute. Neither a hero of hard knocks nor an effective
practical monarch, he is not to be assigned to any known type, but
remains the elusive centre of the magical panorama.
The prose in which is unfolded this scarcely
Christianised fairy tale—for the Grail was to Arthurian
legend something as the Crusades to feudalism—is, apparently, of
a very simple, almost childlike, type, with its incessant
“so—and—then,” but, unlike mere simplicity, it never
becomes tedious. There is a kind of cadence, at times almost
musical, which bears the narrative on with a gradual swell and
fall proportioned to the importance of the episodes, while
brevity, especially at the close of a long incident, sometimes
approaches to epigram. But the style fits the subject so perfectly
as never to claim attention for itself. A transparent clarity is
of its essence. Too straightforward to be archaic, idiomatic with
a suavity denied to Caxton, Malory, who reaches one hand to
Chaucer and one to Spenser, escaped the stamp of a particular
epoch and bequeathed a prose epic to literature.
|
|
|
