Themes Of Chivalry In The Film And Story Of King Arthur

Chivalry and courtly love are two Arthurian sentiments displayed in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Le Morte d' Arthur, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Monty Python and the Holy Grail differs from Le Morte d' Arthur and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight because the film satirizes chivalry and courtly love while the other works are upholding it as orthodox. Courtly love from the Middle Ages consisted of knights chasing a fair maiden while always being respectful and courteous to her. Chivalry is a code of conduct that King Arthur's conventional knights uphold, which includes remaining honorable and ready to help the weak. Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a lampoon that utilizes satire to ridicule chivalry and courtly love to not only amuse

There are countless versions of the legend of King Arthur and the knights of the Round Table. Most English versions are based on Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur, but where did these tales originate, and what different interpretations are there today? This essay seeks to examine the roots and different renditions of the various legends circulating today. The first section deals with the origins of the legend. The second section speculates on who the "real" King Arthur could have been. A comparison of several different versions, and suggestions of why they differ are given in the third section, and the conclusion presents an analysis on the ambiguity of the legend.

In the Medieval Period, knights dedicated their lives to following the code of chivalry. In Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, a number of characters performed chivalrous acts to achieve the status of an ideal knight. Their characteristics of respect for women and courtesy for all, helpfulness to the weak, honor, and skill in battle made the characters King Arthur, King Pellinore, and Sir Gryfflette examples of a what knights strove to be like in Medieval society. Because of the examples ofchivalry, Le Morte d’Arthur showed what a knight desired to be, so he could improve theworld in which he lived.

Knights are one of the most mistaken figures of the medieval era due to fairytales and over exaggerated fiction novels. When medieval knights roamed the earth, it was known that they were only human and, like humans, had faults. These knights did not always live up to the standards designated by society. However, in The Canterbury Tales, the knight is revealed as a character that would now be considered a knight in shining armor, a perfect role model in how he acts and what he does. Modern day people see them as chivalrous figures instead of their actual role as mounted cavalry soldiers. As time passes, the idea of what a knight is changes from a simple cavalry soldier to a specific type of behavior.

     An act of chivalry is described as the qualifications or character of the ideal knight. Knights were expected to uphold this code of conduct. In the English literature Le Morte d?Arthur, French for ?The Death of Arthur?, by Sir Thomas Malory, the characters display acts of chivalry from beginning to end. Though the code of chivalry contains many qualities or acts, nevertheless bravery, loyalty, and courtly love are demonstrated more throughout this literature.

King Arthur is an outstanding British leader of the 5th and the 6th centuries, son of Uther Pendragon and the Lady Igraine. Arthur is one of the greatest mythical heroes that the world has ever known. Arthur has had a great influence on other people and many of them looked up to him. The coming of Arthur was prophesied years before he was even born. Arthur was born into a world of chaos and disorder, full of love and tragedy. Nowadays, many of the scholars continue to argue whether or not King Arthur was a real person or just a mythological figure. Based on facts however, many believe that Arthur was not a real person; just a legendary British leader in the 5th and 6th centuries. According to history, there wasn't anyone named King Arthur

In Geoffrey Chaucer’s poem, The Knight’s Tale, the author encapsulates chivalrous characteristics in his telling of a battle for love. In its fundamental form, chivalry idealizes a knight’s conduct, both on and off the battlefield (Gregory-Abbott). Chaucer employs this “heroic code [of] bravery, loyalty, and service to one's lord” to illustrate the idillic knight throughout the narrative (Rossignol). Chaucer’s poem, The Knight’s Tale, exhibits the ideals of chivalry in the form of two knights, desperately in love with the same woman, and a wise Duke who embodies the voice of reason. Each knight upholds honor through compassion, troths, and heroism on the battlefield, despite their afflictions with each other.

A common belief is that a big part in the code of chivalry is courtly love. This is false. The documentary says the code of chivalry bound the aristocratic fighting class and protected the aristocracy families. This doesn’t have and didn’t have much to do with romance. Courtly love is more of the term to use for the code the knights followed in regards to romance. Chivalry was mostly a knights’ duties, roles, and behaviors he was to follow in order to remain honorable. It relates to the knights’ relationship with one another. Courtly love focused on how a knight treated his women. In The Knight’s Tale these two codes are at war with one another.

The legends and tales of the knights of King Arthur’s Round Table have resounded for ages—vivid stories of courageous and gallant knights usurping evil while simultaneously maintaining an upstanding reputation. Through the Arthurian tales, one has the opportunity to experience heroic narratives of exemplary models of knights who clearly illustrate the chivalry and honorability one should aspire to possess. No more evidently is this theme displayed than in the 14th century epic poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight—a narrative of Sir Gawain, nephew of the legendary King Arthur, and his heroic journey against a mysterious green knight. In this heroic journey, the inherent charisma Gawain possesses and is continually praised for affirms the

Alfred Lord Tennyson’s, The Coming of Arthur is a long poem that explains a fragment of King Arthurs journey to becoming the king of Cameliard. In this writing the author takes scenes that may require a long description and sums them up in under ten lines, while scenes that need less detailed descriptions are explained in over twenty lines. An example of this would be the stanzas where Arthur and Guinevere get married. These stanzas could easily be summed into ten or less lines but Tennyson decides to take care with his words in this scene and explain all he can. The reason the wedding scene is so heavily descripted is because it is a representation of how far Cameiliard has come and a celebration of its strong beginning. This idea can be explored through events that caused the wedding, the significance of the wedding scene, its hidden symbols in the text and its foreshadowing to a great reign.

In class, we watched the movie “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”. This movie is set in the time of the middle ages (roughly 476-1453). It follows King Arthur and his knights as they search for the Holy Grail. They look for the Holy Grail after they are told to by God. The movie at first may seem like nonsense and a silly parody, but in reality,“Monty Python and the Holy Grail” demonstrates the truth of the Middle Ages, feudal hierarchy, and other topics we have discussed in class.

Ideally, a king has an old look, a great amount of power, and naturally rules his domain with an iron fist in literature. In the two works, Le Morte d'Arthur and First Knight see two different versions of how king Arthur is portrayed. Yet the honor and respect that a king should have remains undisturbed, much like how both are products of their time. First Knight is told as a modern retelling of the legend and Le Morte d'Arthur is a minorly altered, much older work. While the depictions of king Arthur are seen as the paramount backbone for arthurian times, these two works have also proven to exhibit differences and similarities, illustrate Arthur’s figure in character, and serve as preservation of the time period.

At this point in history the men who fought the wars were lead by their leaders with a code of chivalry. Chivalry can be explained as “the Anglo-Saxon code on steroids.” (McGee) Which is, explained further, a moral system for a good way to conduct fighting. The knights in Arthurian time went even further with that code to say that it was a way to conduct oneself not only in battle, but at all times. Knights, by being chivalrous, were kind to all people, fought well and true, kept faith and believed in the Christian God, and fought for their kings. Chivalry can be found across the Arthurian texts, The Song of Roland is one of the texts that has multiple examples of chivalry.

Merriam-Webster's on-line dictionary defines chivalry as "the system, spirit, or customs of medieval knighthood." As Leon Gautier, author of Chivalry, defines this "system" and "spirit" of knighthood by identifying rules of chivalry, two of which are well illustrated in Lanval, "TheWife of Bath's Tale," and "The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnel:" "Thou shalt never lie, and shall remain faithful to thy pledged word," and "Thou shalt be generous, and give largess to everyone"(qtd. in Chivalry). All three stories seem to suggest the predominant theme of a knight living up to his word. This is shown by the fact that, in each story, the knight's oath is taken very seriously, is treated as a contract, and is

Chivalry was considered to be the code of behavior expected of a knight. It was the conduct, ideas, and ideals of the knightly class of the Middle Ages. It became standardized and referred to as chivalry, a term derived from the French word chevalier, meaning knight. The code urged the knight to be brave, courageous, honorable, true to his word, and loyal to his feudal overlord, and to defend his Church. A knight was truthful, honest, capable, educated, physically fit, noble, sincere, and subservient to the king. A serious violation of these vows could result in a knight being classed as an undignified knight, which was the ultimate insult because of all the hard work that was put into becoming a knight. It made it seem as if all of work