Bonds Of Family In Arcite And Palamon In A Knight's Tale

This remorse, “blue-black like poison”, kills them slowly until nothing is left but, “dead ashen hollows” (15). This first chapter describes a war from beginning to end, dealing with the events that transform the men from “Iron Youth” to “old folk” in a matter of two years (18).

​Sir Gawain, nephew to the well-known King Arthur of the Round Table, is regarded as the most elite and noble of all the knights in the poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Yet, like anyone else in the world, Sir Gawain is far from perfect. Gawain, a courteous knight living a life dedicated to honor, courage, and self-preservation, is tested on his chivalrous code throughout his journey; a search for the Green Knight. Throughout the tests, Gawain’s actions reveal that even the best of men can be selfish and are subject to guilt and sin.

Many books of literature, no matter what time period they were written or who the author is, have many similarities. The books The Iliad and Bhagavad Gita are great examples of this. These two books consist of many of the same themes and characteristics within the readings that cause them to relate to each other. On the other hand, they also have some characteristics that contradict themselves in different ways. In the book The Iliad the author Homer, explains a story revolving around a Greek hero named Achilles. Both stories have two main characters, Achilles and Arjuna, which really have many of the same characteristics within them. Both Achilles from The Iliad and Arjuna from Bhagavad Gita have many similar aspects about themselves and what's expected of them in their daily life. The main theme characteristics that I’m going to discuss in this essay is what duty each character plays in their culture or what role they are expected to take on. I’m also going to compare War between the two stories. Both readings have many similar views under these topics but also have some differences within them. In this essay, I will be explaining the characteristics that are similar in both stories along with the characteristics that contradict in the pieces.

The relationships between parents and their sons in the Iliad are not relationships we expect to see in today’s society. The Iliad portrays the relationships between fathers and sons as something more than just physical and emotional. It is based on pride and respect for one another. The expectations of their son are more so to pass on their fathers reputable name and to follow in their father’s footsteps of being noble warriors. These relationships are the driving forces in the Iliad, making each son in the Iliad identifiable first by their father’s name. An outcome of the father–son relationships is ancestral loyalty among the characters which play a prominent role in war. Therefore, not only does the Iliad share a major war story, but

The concept of physical war is universally understood while many do not recognize internal struggles as a war within. The wife of bath, Beowulf, Lanval, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight all share a common theme of internal struggle. From a mental war over the kingdoms precedent, to an altering decision on whether knightly virtues are more important than his own life, these characters are battling the ideology of their roles during their time periods, as well as themselves.

"The Knight's Tale" is one of many tales from the Canterbury Tales. This story sets in the city of Athens. Which opens into the theme of violence, foolishness, impetuousness, and impulsiveness; initially exceedingly emotional responses. One example is when two of our main characters, Palmon and Arcite, both fall in love with Theseus's sister-in-law (Emelye). These two blood brothers, leave each other after seeing Emelye out of the window of the tower. Which, I believe is a very impulsive decision, for they have not got time to know who she is and her personality. Also, they act like mortal enemies after just seeing her, so this thought process was completely impulsive and based on her looks. And later, Arcite tries to get to know her better after he was released from his imprisonment sentence by disguising himself, so he can take a job as a page in Emelye's chamber. I believe this shows that he wants to know her, but also it shows he is not being honest with her, which shows he was being impulsive and deceiving. He only learned about the little things that she liked, not her personality. Emelye learned a little bit about Arcite after the little conversing they shared, so they learned a little of each other's personality. This shows that the friendship was growing and not an intimate relationship, like Arcite wanted. So the story goes on and both Palmon and Arcite have been released from prison. And they happen to both decide to wander in the woods. Then they confront each other, each claiming the right to Emelye. The next day, they were brutally hacking away at each other. Honestly, I believe they are being impulsive and violent, they still barely knew Emelye (especially Palmon), and they decide to go kill each other. Then here shows up Theseus, which a loving and wise duke, but he can also be a little impulse when it comes to violence (which is fairly normal for a duke in the 1390s). Theseus tries to be loving when he sees the two men fighting, but he changes his mind when he found out it was Palmon and Arcite fighting. And that they were fighting because they "love" Emelye. Then Theseus was about to respond by killing them, but his loving wife and Emelye intervened, pleading for their lives. They pleaded

Loyalty has always been seen as a commendable trait, not only in human beings but in any creature, all through history. Soldiers have admired their enemies for their loyalty to fallen comrades, thousands of stories have been written about the intense loyalty animals portray for their owners, and even companies in the workforce look for loyalty in potential employees. Loyalty has been seen as something that distinguishes the trustworthy from the untrustworthy, and something that sets the great apart from the good. The archetypal hero commonly has a cause, whether it be another person or personal beliefs, that they are loyal to, and this unwavering loyalty is what makes them appear so highly in the eyes of the reader. Loyalty can be found in practically any work of literature, but within The Torah, The Odyssey, and Inanna is the idea that true loyalty, although a rare attribute, is the key to a successful relationship.

Throughout William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar and Homer’s epic poem The Odyssey, loyalty is strongly presented as a major motif. In both texts, loyalty is highly valued as one of the most important traits to a person’s character. Not only do the loyal characters receive better fates, but those who are not loyal are punished for the actions, usually through revenge. In Julius Caesar, the characters that remained loyal to Caesar are the few who wind up alive at the end of the play, and in The Odyssey, those who remained loyal to Odysseus were rewarded by Odysseus, and those who weren’t were killed.

The comitatus “stressed the loyalty of a thane to his chieftain and treated exile and outlawry as the most tragic lots that could befall one. This secular sense of loss is keen in The Wanderer.”6 Not only is the loss of a lord evident in “The Wanderer,” but in “The Seafarer” and “The Wife’s Lament” as well.

The Anglo Saxons were an interesting people that were loyal to their lord. Each group had a leader that commanded and directed the warriors. Loyalty was an important part of the Anglo Saxons culture. In Beowulf, the Anglo Saxons were expected to remain loyal to their leader as he was responsible for protecting them in battle. The leaders of the Anglo Saxons were admired for their courage and determination as they guided the group of warriors in their endeavors. In “The Wife’s Lament”, the wife remains loyal to her lord even though she is treated harshly by him. She chased after him when he left, and continued to love him after he ostracized her. As evident in Beowulf and “The Wife’s Lament”, the Anglo Saxons greatly relied on a noble leader to protect them from danger and direct them towards success; as a result, the followers were loyal to their lord by showing reverence and admiration as well as honouring their legacy, even if the lord neglected to fulfill his duties.

Some would say that honor is a thing of the past; a thing long since extinct with the King Arthur and the knights of the round table. In fact, it is not, it is real and can still be seen all around through people all the time. In Charles Dicken’s novel, A Tale of Two Cities, honor and dishonor are main themes that are exemplified and enacted through many characters. To be honorable, or to act in honor, is to act in a way that is not necessarily socially acceptable, but is morally right, noble, and kind. To be dishonorable is to neglect the basic responsibility of treating every human being in the respectful manner they deserve, giving no variance to rank or status. Throughout the book different men show varying degrees of honor and dishonor.

To start, the two royal knights were acting like children fighting over the same girl. At one point, Palamon claims that he “loved her first, and told you [Arcite] of my woe” (1146). This reaction of the ‘I saw it first’ variety is one that is expected from children who are fighting over something, rather than that of two stately knights. Using honorable methods means that both knights should have worked to settle their quarrel in a civil manner, rather than resorting to childish behavior. In addition, both are caught by Theseus arguing over Emily, something that Theseus believes is punishable by death. As a knight, it is expected that you follow the law, so being caught committing a crime is known to be very bad. Although Theseus did not sentence them to death, he does tell them they need to “bring a hundred knights, / Armed for the lists, prepared to fight, / Ready to lay claim to her in battle.” (1851-1853). Therefore, their non-chivalric behavior led them to duel each other over a woman. Andreas Capellanus defined the eighteenth rule of love as “Good character is the one real requirement for worthiness of love.” By engaging in criminal behavior, they violated this important rule and thus upended the values of chivalric love.

Unfortunately, the same fate awaits him if he commits matricide, thereby avenging his father. Orestes chooses the latter and is besieged by 'the hounds of mother's hate.' (Lib: 1055-6). Through this sequence of murderous events, Aeschylus demonstrates the complexity and futility of the blood feud as a system of justice. There are no winners, and the cycle of violence does not end. Thus, this cycle of vengeance is not justice.

Family is meant to care for each other, love each other unconditionally, and support each other. Of course, as any holiday at home can prove, complete support is not always possible. Sometimes family members hurt each other and even, in worst-case scenarios, kill each other over issues as important as protecting another or as petty as fighting over a boy. In Shakespeare’s Othello, Macbeth, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, King Lear, and The Winter’s Tale, if family members operate with selfish motives, they hurt the hero and contribute to his fall; but if the family supports each other with only love, the hero can redeem himself from his fall and even succeed in finding lasting happiness.

Allowing their feelings to cloud their judgment and control their actions, the men lose all sense of reason and decorum as they resort to antagonistic behavior and name-calling; contrary to the standards of the pledge they have avowed to honor. Rossignol asserts Chaucer’s characters “undercut the very ethos [of chivalry] . . . the knights themselves display ambivalence toward their own motives and behavior” (Rossignol). Palamon and Arcite, oblivious to any personal responsibility or wrongdoing in the dispute over Emily, expect the other to uphold the chivalric code without doing so himself. Most certainly, if one or both of the men heeded the high expectations of conduct, they would spare their brotherhood and avoid the perils of their battle, but neither man finds it within his conscience to do so.