Sir Thomas Malory wrote ‘Le Morte D’Arthur’ – the
core compilation and central text of the British Arthurian mythos. The speech
in this section appears nowhere in Malorys source texts, suggesting it’s
probably something he invented and inserted himself.
(All of this is from the Norton Critical edition,
edited by Stephen H. A. Shepherd. The line breaks, punctuation, spelling and
fonts are as close to that book as I can get them.)
Now turne we to Sir Launcelot that rode with the damsel in
a fayre hygheway. “Sir,” seyde the damesall, “here by this way hauntys a knight
that dystressis all ladyes and jantylwomen, and at the leste he robbyth them
other lyeth by hem.”
“What?” seyde Sir
Launcelot, “is he a theff and a knight and a ravyssher of women? He doth shame
unto the order of knyghthode, and contrary unto his oth. Hit is pyte that he
lyvyth:
“But, fayre damsel, ye
shall ryde on before, yourself, and I woll kepe myself in covert; and yf that
he trowble yow other dystresse you, I shall be your rescowe and lerne hym to be
ruled as a knight.” So thys mayde rode on by the way a souffte amblynge pace –
And within a whyle com
oute a knight on horseback owte of the woode, and his page with hym; and there
he put the damesell frome hir horse – and than she cryed.
With that com Sir Launcelot
as faste as he might tyll he com to the knight sayng, “A, false knight and
traytoure unto knyghthode, who dud lerne the to distresse ladyes, damesels and
jantyllwomen?”
Whan the knight sy Sir
Launcelot thus rebukynge hym, he answered nat but drew his swerde and rode unto
Sir Launcelot. And Sir Launcelot threw his spere frome hym and drew his swerde,
and strake hym suche a buffette on the helmette that he claffe his hede and
necke unto the throte.
“Now haste thou thy
payment that longe thou haste deserved!” “That is trouth,” seyde the damesell-
“For lyke as Terquyn
wacched to dystresse good knyghtes, so dud this knight attende to destroy and
dystresse ladyes, damesels, and jantyllwomen – and his name was Sir Perys
de Forest Savage.” “Now,
damesell,” seyde Sir Launcelot “woll ye ony
more servyse of me?”
“Nay, sir,” she seyde,
“at thys tyme, but allmyghty Jesu preserve you wheresomever ye ryde or goo, for
the curteyst knight thou arte – and mekyste unto all ladyes and jantylwomen –
that now lyvyth:
“But one thing, sir
knight, methynkes ye lak-
“Ye that ar a knight
wyveles, that ye woll nat love som mayden other jantylwoman. For I cowed never
here sey that ever ye loved ony of no maner of degree, and that is grete pyte:
“But hit is noysed that
ye love Queue Gwenyvere, and that she hath ordeyned by
enchauntemente that ye shall never love none other but hir, nother none other
damesall ne lady shall rejoice you – wherefore there be many in this londe, of
hyghe astate and lowe, that make grete sorrow.”
“Fayre damesell,” seyde
Sir Launcelot, “I may not warne peple to speke of me what hit
pleasyth hem. But for to be a weddyd man, I thynke hit nat, for than I muste
couche with hir and leve armys and turnamentis, batellys and adventures. And as
for to sey to take my pleasaunce with paramours, that woll I refuse – in
prencipall for drede of God, for knyghtes that bene adventures sholde nat be
advoutrers nothir lecherous, for than they be nat happy nother fortunate unto
the werrys; for other they shall be overcome with a sympler knight than they be
himself, other ellys they shall sle by unhappe and hir cursednesse bettir men
than they be himself:
And so who that usyth
paramours shall be unhappy, and all thynge unhappy that is aboute them.”
[I feel I should translate, even a little, the
final paragraph because even for people who might actively enjoy reading old
English text it might be difficult to the point of annoyance. My translation is
inaccurate as to the exact meaning, as all translations must be:
“Fair damsel,” said Sir
Launcelot,
“I may not forbid people to speak of me what they please. But for me to be a
wedded man, I think it not, for then I must to-bed with and leave arms and
tournaments, battles and adventures. And as for to say to take my pleasure with
paramours, that well I refuse – in principal for dread of God, for a knight
that takes adventures should not be adulterer nor lecherous, for then he be not
lucky nor fortunate unto the wars; for either he shall be overcome by a lesser
knight than he be, other else he shall slay by mischance and his cursedness
better men than he be himself:
And so who that uses
paramours shall be unhappy, and all things unhappy that is about them.”]
Malory wrote this in prison. This is what he was
in for, again, quotes from the Norton Critical Edition:
“Aug. 23, 1451 Malory is charged at Nuneaton,
Warwickshire, in the presence of Humphrey Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, with
the following crimes:
·
Attempted murder of the Duke of Buckingham, by
ambush with twenty-six other men, in the Abbot’s woods at Combe, Warwickshire,
Jan 4, 1450.
·
“Rape” (raptus)
of Joan Smith, at Coventry, May 23, 1450.
·
Extortion of money from two monks of Monks
Kirby, Warwickshire, May 31, 1450.
·
Second “rape” of Joan Smith, and theft of £40’s
worth of goods from her husband, Aug.6 1450.
·
Extortion of money from another monk of Monks
Kirby, Aug. 31 1450.
·
Theft of seven cows, two calves, 335 sheep, and
a cart worth £22 at Cosford, Warwickshire, June 4, 1451.
·
Theft of six does and infliction of £500’s worth
of damage in the duke of Buckingham’s deer park at Cauldron, Warwickshire, July
20, 1451.
·
Escaping imprisonment at the house of Sheriff
Sir William Montford at Coleshill, Warwickshire (Malory swims the moat at
night), July 27, 1451.
·
Robbery, with ten accomplices, of £46 in money
and £40’s worth of ornaments from Combe Abbey, July 28, 1451.
·
Further robbery at Combe Abbey, with one hundred
accomplices, of £40 in money and five rings, a small psalter, two silver bells,
three rosaries, and two bows, and three sheaves of arrows.
By Jan. 27, 1452, and until July 1460. Held at
various prisons in London (Ludgate, King’s Bench, the Tower of London, and
Newgate) awaiting a trial that never happened. During this period Malory is
released on bail several times; during two of these periods of temporary
freedom he is implicated in further crimes:
·
Theft of four oxen from Lady Katherine Peyton at
Sibbertoft, Nottinghamshire.
·
Harbouring another alleged criminal, his servant
John, and attempting with him to steal horses in the environs of Great Easton,
Essex.
For the latter he is jailed at Colchester, Essex,
from whence he escapes, Oct. 30, 1454. He is recaptured and returned to prison
in London. Not long after the seizure of London by Yorkist forces in July 1460,
Malory is probably freed from prison.”
…
But he ends up back there, and probably dies
there.
This is probably the most interesting thing about
heroic fiction I have ever read. The Arthurian Myth is a deep dream of
harmonious order, written in prison in a time of chaos by a man who was
effectively an agent of chaos. A man who was effectively a D&D murder-hobo.
I am only about a third of the way in and this man
astonishes me. He feels like a fulcrum at the heart of British, and English
identity, this passionate, insanely romantic, violent, dreamy man who was
effectively a son of a bitch. Not one but two counts of rape and an attempted assassination.
This, to me, is the most psychologically
interesting writer in the English tongue.
The numbers involved suggest that he wasn't just some rowdy dude, and the dates indicate that this was possibly tied up with the lead-in to the War of the Roses?
ReplyDeleteSo maybe this doesn't so much mean he was a murderhobo so much as some guy doing things Westerosi-style.
(That doesn't make it any less fascinating, though.)
Yeah there are strong suggestions of political involvement, especially him going in and out of prison as different factions gain or lose in strength.
DeleteIt's a pretty "cold case", but I have to wonder whether those "rapes" were actually consentual liaisons, claimed as rapes to spare poor Mrs. Smith the likely harsh consequences of an adultery charge.
ReplyDeleteWikipedia, the font of all knowledge, says at the time "rape" could also mean (consensual) sex with a married woman if the husband didn't consent. It's even got a citation.
DeleteI think you could see Malory as somebody who had lived the life of a rogue and then regretted it afterwards. These sorts of people are always fascinating. I think King David fits into the same model. He wrote all these beautiful psalms but there's a pattern of him being a murderous adulterer who regrets it later on.
'To rape' means 'to abduct' or 'to carry off' as late as the eighteenth century. (You know, like hawks and other 'raptors' do to their prey.) That's why you'll see writers on the Trojan war writing about 'The Rape of Helen' even if, in their version, she eloped with Paris willingly: he carried her off from the house of her husband, ergo it was a rape. Note that Malory himself uses a different word - 'ravish' - to refer specifically to forced, non-consensual sex.
DeleteSo, basically, Malory's robbed Mr Smith twice. The first time he took his wife; the second time he took his wife AND his money. What Joan thought of all this - whether she was a willing accomplice, unwilling victim, or somewhere in between - is anyone's guess.
Great blog, by the way. Currently reading through the whole archive...!