?

Arthur, Ross G.. Medieval Sign Theory and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987.

Medieval Sign Theory and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, by Ross G. Arthur is separated into five main categories; Pure Signification; The Shield of the Truth, The Uses of Sign, Faith and Truth, The Girdle and the Wound, and Gawain as Exemplary Individual. The book is easily read, and does not require previous knowledge besides having read the text itself. Anyone could read this book and gain insight into Gawain’s story. Sign theory is something that I find very interesting, and I know many others do also. Learning about signs and their meanings make the reader feel as if they are solving an exciting mystery, using textual clues.

Throughout the book, Arthur offers examples from many texts that are often in Latin or Medieval English. Arthur always offers the original version, and immediately below a translated version. This is extremely helpful to the beginning scholar, such as myself. At the same time, the Latin or Medieval English scholar will appreciate having the original text on hand. Arthur uses so many examples from other texts though, I sometime felt as if he was straying from the focal point of Gawain.

The first section of the book, entitled Pure Signification: The Shield of Truth deals with the symbolism behind Gawain’s shield. The description of Gawain’s shield is very lengthy, showing the great importance behind it. The pentangle is of utmost importance to the storyline. Arthur states “The pentangle is connected with an idea of endless self-replication in a geometrical as well as an arithmetical fashion…From both an arithmetic and a geometric point of view the pentangle is a figure that keeps coming back to where it started, ‘usque in infinitum’.” This chapter goes on to discuss other infinite symbols, such as the infinite triangle, circle, and line. Nicholas of Cusa states, “By this method, and guided by infinite Truth, we note the difference of expressions used by saintly men and brilliant intellects who gave themselves to the study of figures. St. Anselm, for example, compared Absolute truth to infinite straightness.” Therefore, the pentangle in Sir Gawain’s shield signifies Absolute Truth.

The second section, entitled The Uses of a Sign, discusses the signs throughout Gawain, and some of their possible meanings. Most of them relate to Christian beliefs and have a very complex background. One of the most significant signs in the text is the pentangle. The poet of Gawain offers two arguments for the pentangles meaning. The first is, “It is a sign that Solomon once established as a token of trawp, which it has a right to be, because it is a figure that has five points, and each line overlaps and locks into another, and everywhere it is endless.” Next he states, “Therefore it is suited to this knight and to his bright arms, for, always faithful in five ways and five times in each way, Gawain was known as good and, like refined gold, freed of each villainy and adorned with virtues in the field. Therefore he bore the new pentangle on shield and coat, as a man most true of word.” The poet believes that the pentangle is a sign of Truth, and therefore Gawain is true.

In the following chapter, Faith and Truth, Arthur states, “When Gawain wears the Shield of Faith, he is not doing so simply for its evocative and communicative powers. In addition to declaring that Gawain trusts in the truth and in addition to instructing observers in the nature of truth, the shield labels Gawain as true in a relative sense, that is, faithful. In a proposition about God, either truth or the pentangle may be per se consideratum; but in a proposition concerning Gawain they are restricted in meaning and declare not that truth exists in Gawain but that Gawain exists in truth.” Gawain accepts the pentangle as a sacramental badge; it indicates the spiritual grace he has received for his quest.

In the chapter The Girdle and the Wound, two more symbols are explored. One interesting definition for the girdle is “an appropriate sign for a man’s desire for continued earthly life.” The exact symbolic meaning of the girdle is unclear within the text. Arthur states, “this attempt to make the girdle a sign does not even succeed with Gawain, who is its first intended audience: the girdle cannot be a simple memento for the affair at the Green Chapel, because it is not accepted as a stable sign with such a meaning.” The most obvious meaning is the girdle is a representation of the sin Gawain has committed. The wound is another symbol for the Gawain’s sin. The difference between the two is that the wound will heal while Gawain will always wear the girdle in remembrance.

In conclusion, the final chapter, Gawain as an Exemplary Individual, Arthur says that Gawain shows humankind that we are all sinners since even Gawain was capable of sin. Gawain is another story such as that of Peter, David, or Mary Magdalene. It is to remind us that we are all human and that “Excessive honour for human beings, on the ground that man was created in God’s image, is an indication of a deviation from orthodox distinctions between God and man, especially God and fallen man.” This poem should provoke “the reader to move towards the enjoyment of God for God’s own sake and to the enjoyment of one’s self and one’s neighbor for the sake of God.”

Medieval Sign Theory and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight did not intrigue me as much as I initially thought it would. I felt that Arthur used too many other sources, constantly citing another person and going off on another tangent. There was interesting material in the text, but I felt as though I found out more information from many of the articles, with fewer pages. I expected complex answers to the signs within the text. In the end, Arthur just stated the obvious as his conclusion quite often. The book was interesting, and easily read, but not my favorite text on Sir Gawain.

Cassia Herndon 10/06

Cooke, W.G., and D’A. J. D. Boulton. “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: A poem for Henry of Grosmont?.” Medium Aevum 68(1999): 42-55.

This article makes an effort to date “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” as closely as possible due to location, politics, and the person who possibly requested the poem. There is much debate as to whether the poem was created in the mid fourteenth century or the late fourteenth century. The evidence this article points towards shows the poem to be written sometime in the middle of the fourteenth century. It seems impossible to pinpoint a specific author, but we can try to date and place it by finding real life parallels.

One of the first helpful facts is from J.R. Hulbert who pointed out that there was a real-life Green Count, named Amadeus VI of Savoy. He had strong connections with the English Court, with a proposed marriage to the daughter of Edward III, and his niece married his third son. Some years earlier J.R.L. Highfield discovered a real-life Green Squire named Simon Newton. He had a kinsman serving in the household of Edward III’s distant cousin, who was a close companion to Henry of Grosmont, the first Duke of Lancaster. Around 1500, a Humphrey Newton was discovered to be familiar with the story of the Green Knight. Further connections lead them to likely be related. These coincidences show that “two real ‘green’ warriors with English royal connections in the middle of the fourteenth century, one of them with lands in the very part of England that Gawain traversed looking for the Green Knight, and a later man living in the same district bearing the same surname as the Green Squire and displaying an apparent acquaintance with the poem.”

In the 1940’s, Mabel May noticed that the scenery described resembled the country of Derbyshire. She proposed a cave in Wetton mill in Staffordshire as the Green Chapel. Ralph W.V. Elliot made another case, and identified the country around Dieulacres Abbey in northwestern Staffordshire as the location. Elliot’s choice usually wins because he can identify the chapel as a crevice called Ludchurch, which is under the Castle Cliff Rocks, and Bertilak’s castle, which is on Knight’s Low where the Earls of Chester once had a hunting lodge. Linguistically, the borderland of Cheshire and Staffordshire is where the poet likely originated. All of these facts point strongly to some correlation.

Further evidence that the poem could date from the middle of the fourteenth century is by reviewing the “language, and the portrayal of civil costume, armour, and architecture.” The Gawain poet would have to have been moving in very fashionable, modern circles for this to be possible though. When the illustrations for the poem were reviewed, they reflected the fashions of the late fourteenth century. This is not surprising, because the images were created after the text was already complete. In addition, the description of armour in the poem is completely consistent with the armour in the middle of the fourteenth century.

The next step was to try to discover the patron behind the poem. The best candidate would have “considerable interests in the north-west Midlands, known to have spent some time there, and having the right character and outlook to have relished such a poem. There is one outstanding candidate: Henry of Grosmont, first Duke of Lancaster.” Henry was born around 1310 and passed away in 1361. If the poem was written mid-century, Henry would have been alive and flourishing. His largest group of lands contained Staffordshire and Derbyshire, where the poet is likely from. For further evidence, “Henry tried to practice chivalry after the Arthurian pattern.”

There are two significant analogues that tie Henry and the Green Knight together. The first is that Otto of Brunswick challenged Henry for a joust at Christmastide in 1352. At the last moment, Otto decided not to go through with the challenge, “and Henry, like Gawain, returned unscathed to a hero’s welcome at his own king’s court.” The second analogue refers to the girdle Gawain accepts from Lady Bertilak. There are three devices that connect the girdle to Henry’s life. The first was the belt of his almost-sainted Uncle Thomas, which allegedly contained miraculous properties. Gawain’s belt also had held its own magic. The second device is that of the Castilian Order, which Henry could easily have been a member of. Its members wore a band of cloth around their waist, just as Gawain wore his girdle. The third device was a garter, which was worn by the order of Edward III. He most likely got this inspiration from the Castilian Order. Henry would have been the link between the Castilian Order and Edward. Both sexes of gentlefolk began to wear the belt. “Like Gawain’s girdle, then, it is an article of civil dress that became the badge of an order of knighthood; and if tradition is true, both were ladies’ favours either bestowed on or taken by a gentleman.”

There are many interesting connections in this article, such as the association with green in this period with “joy, beauty, youth, strength, and readiness to fight.” I could not include all of them, but the article was indeed interesting. I enjoyed reading an analysis of the article based almost purely on history instead of personal insight. Although the author will probably never be discovered, this article helps the reader better understand how the author would have possibly come to writing the poem.

Cassia Herndon 10/06

Weiss, Victoria. “The play world and the real world: chivalry in ‘Sir Gawain and the Green Knight’.” Philological Quarterly 72(1993): 403-419.

Victoria Weiss explores the differences and similarities between games and real life in medieval literature. At the beginning of “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” Gawain finds himself caught in a life endangering “Cristmasse game.” Everyone in court takes the Green Knight seriously, but at the same time, Arthur makes the situation lighter by acting as if it was merely entertainment. Weiss states that “Arthur’s gambit works because noble men and women understood games or play in both ways: as a serious declaration of their status and worth, and paradoxically, as the kind of diversionary, inconsequential activity that working classes understood play to be.” Therefore, Gawain must decide how seriously he should take this game.

Arthur refuses to eat until he has seen “some ‘uncouthe tale… sum mayn mervayl’ (93-94) or some joust where ‘jopardy’ is involved, where men pit ‘lif for lif, leve uchone other, / As fourtune wolde fulsun hem / the fayrer to have’ (98-99).” Arthur’s two options are quite different in their seriousness. After the strange marvel they have witnessed of Gawain cutting off the Green Knights head, the party returns to its merriment to ignore the strange and grave happenings that have just occurred.

Weiss compares Gawain’s story with “Le Livre de Caradoc.” In this story after the Green Knight type character leaves, the court is angered and distraught at the circumstances. They are worried for the life of their knight, and in no way treat it as a game. The two stories show very different responses. In “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” the court finally seems worried and criticizes the king right before Gawain is about to begin his journey. At this point, it is of consensus that Gawain is under an obligation, and that this is no longer a game.

The initial reference of the “Cristmasse games” suggested to the people short-term amusement, not long-term consequences. Weiss states, “They clearly regard the loss of Gawain as too high a price to pay for a bit of entertainment at a feast of the sort that Arthur’s initial vow seemed to promise.” This confusion between the play aspect and the reality of the game confuses the reader throughout. The confusion between these two worlds was a staple part of chivalry. There is a definite “confusion between the genuine or authentic and the play or postured position (that) reveals the limitations of chivalry as a system which as J.J. Anderson has noted, ‘achieves its brilliance only at the cost of a distortion of natural life’.”

At this time period, play is in direct correlation with your social position and personal identification. If you do not follow through with “play promises,” you are disgraced. Gawain takes this idea very seriously, letting the game define his personal identity, so as to legitimize himself. He “ does not seem to know when he is playing a serious game and when he is playing a momentary, diversionary one.” Making Gawain’s character even more confusing is the basis of chivalry from Christianity. The act of Gawain cutting off the Green Knights head is against Christian morality. The Green Knight shows the reader that “one who fails to abide by the rules of a game is a ‘spoil sport’ but hardly a sinner.”

The element that makes this story unique is Bertilak’s, or the Green Knight’s access to magic. Those with the magical powers control the games that control life and death. Weiss says “When magicians—the ultimate players—begin to manipulate the rules and control the games, the tendency to seek out and celebrate one’s identity through participation in a world of artifice is exposed for the dangerous practice it is.” Chivalry is therefore exposed as a game that is merely a part of public performance. It is unconnected “to a moral code which demands something more than attention to public behavior.”

When Gawain returns to Arthur’s court after his encounter with the Green Knight, the fellow courtiers believe that he has fulfilled his moral obligations by “seeking, finding, and submitting to the Green Knight.” Gawain believes he has failed morally because he fell under temptation and kept the girdle. These two viewpoints are incompatible and the neither of them receives the poets approval.

The poet’s plan was to question “the authenticity of the chivalric soul.” We are than led to question; “To what extent is proper chivalric behavior real, moral behavior as opposed to public posturing? To what extent is the seriousness of aristocratic play a convenient class-distinguishing characteristic to be invoked in public surrounding when it suits one’s purpose?” To Gawain, agreeing to the terms of play is of moral imperative, no matter the treacherous terms.

The poet shows us the historical value of game play in the Middle Ages, by offering a very complex work entangled with ideas of chivalry. At the beginning of the poem, Gawain is merely participating in a game. At the end of the poem, Gawain has gone through serious moral tribulations, far past his first expectations when becoming involved. Weiss states “Gawain finds himself with a set of chivalric values which offer him no help-indeed, merely confuse him—in his quest to discover who he is and what to value.”

Weiss weaves many unique ideas of chivalry and moral attitudes in the middle ages in this article. I felt placed in the medieval mindset, understanding how the readers of the day would have understood the text. The two contrasting viewpoints of a game, whether serious or playful was extremely insightful. This was my favorite article, I felt Weiss was offering wonderful insight into what the Gawain poet wanted his readers to understand about the text.

Cassia Herndon 10/06

Whiteford, Peter. “Rereading Gawain’s five wits.” Medium Aevum 73(2004): 225-235.

Peter Whiteford begins his article by referencing A.D. Horgan, who suggests that the significance of the pentangle in “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight” is the “symbolic expression of the poem’s idea,” “central to the understanding of the poem.” Whiteford does not believe that those before him have explained in great enough detail the meanings behind the pentangle, even though they have claimed its importance. The reader more easily deciphers three of the five pentads. Whiteford states them as; “the five wounds of Christ, the five joys of the Virgin, and the five virtues.” These are all highly debated over, with many contrasting beliefs as to the meanings.

Whiteford believes that the poet is using the pentangle to signify “Gawain’s ‘fyue wyttez’ that acknowledges the artistry and design of the poem,” and “that the phrase should be taken as referring to the inner wits, or ‘gostli’ wits, that is, to ‘the powers of the mind that process sensory information’ (MED, s.v. ‘wit’, 4 d). There is a general consensus that Gawain’s five wits are his five senses; sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touch. Whiteford mentions R.W. Ackerman who makes a connection between Gawain’s five senses, the five wounds of Christ, and the five joys of Mary through common contextual evidence.

Ackerman associates the five senses with an individual’s tendency to sin. If this is a true connection than Gawain, who was perfect in all of these senses is an individual void of sin, which is not true. Ackerman states that Gawain’s poet “meant it to be understood that his hero was free from venial sin.” Whiteford believes that there is no way the poet would fashion one of his characters to be sinless, due to his orthodox upbringing. Whiteford believes that instead of Gawain as a sinless character, his reputation is well renowned. The main question here is of how much importance Gawain’s five senses have to do with the entirety of the story.

There are many instances throughout the text where Gawain uses the term wits in reference to how he perceives his surroundings. He appears to have more extrasensory perception rather than merely sensory perception. Whiteford states that “although the MED does record uses of ‘wits’ for which the external senses is the appropriate meaning, it is equally clear that ‘wits’ can refer to ‘the powers of the mind that process sensory information’.”

In accordance, many now believe that Gawain’s wits go beyond bodily senses, and enter into the judgmental role of the inner wit. Whiteford mentions, not in agreement, but for reference, the five inner wits that were popular in penitential and instructional literature. The list includes; will, mind, imagination, understanding, and reason. These ideas were brought to life by the revival of such classicists as Aristotle, Avicenna, and Averroes. Their ideas “led to a renewed interest in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in the question of how the soul acquires knowledge,” and “the development of the notion of the inner wits was part of the this effort to produce a coherent doctrine of cognition.”

In the culmination of the idea, “the inner senses were seen as providing a bridge between the external senses and the intellect, or between sensory perception and abstract thought.” The theory states that there are five faculties within the three ventricles of the brain. Beginning in the first ventricle, the first faculty is communis, or common sense, the function of combining and receiving sense perceptions. The second faculty is imaginatio, or retentive imagination, which stores our combined impressions. These faculties pass to the middle ventricle where we find imaginativa, or composing imagination, which creates new images from previous images stored in our brain. The fourth faculty is aestimative, which we form judgment towards the images we have created. In the rear ventricle, there is virtus memorialis, the memory, which stores information for the faculties of the middle ventricle. Whiteford states, “The inner senses, then, act as a kind of conduit between the material world that is apprehended immediately by the senses and the human intellect which, being immaterial, cannot directly apprehend material objects.”

How this all connects with the poem eventually comes into realization. The pentangle represents the physical, social, intellectual, moral, and spiritual dimensions of its bearer, Gawain. There are two instances in which Gawain must make a decision, and they both depend upon how mentally focused he is. The first is when Gawain’s guide offers him the opportunity to turn back on his quest for the Green Knight. Gawain’s clear mindedness in this instance, helps him make the correct decision to continue. When Gawain is tempted by the Lady Bertilak his mind his confused with her beauty and sexual appeal, and he therefore is led astray to take her girdle. Gawain realizes how easily he allowed himself to be led astray, causing self-reflection on his part. This shows that Gawain is not perfect, and he even states that he is “of wyt feblest.”

This article was at first confusing, delving into philosophy and extrasensory perception. It became somewhat clearer at the end of the article, as more connections were evident. I did have to make a continual effort not to get lost, and not wonder if the author would eventually relate all of the information back to Gawain. In the end, the author did offer unique ideas that I would never have contemplated without his personal insight.

Cassia Herndon 10/06

Walls, Kathryn. “The axe in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” ANQ 16(2003): p13-19.

In Kathryn Walls, “The axe in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” there are connections between the knight’s axe and biblical references, mainly words spoken by John the Baptist. Walls first notes that the axe is the last of the Green Knight’s property mentioned, described in great detail. The Green Knight says that he will give his axe to whoever will chop off his head. After Gawain receives the axe, Arthur asks him to hang up his axe. Walls states that, “Arthur seems to want the gruesome object safely out of the way, but—metaphorically speaking—it hangs over Gawain throughout the poem.” The girdle, the pentangle, and the holly branch are easily interpreted. The axe remains somewhat of a mystery.

One interpretation recalls the medieval act of knighting, where the initiate received a blow on neck from the sword. Another interpretation recognizes that the Green Knight arrives on New Year’s Day, also the day of the Feast of Circumcision, associating the axe with the knife used by a Jewish priest. The interpretation that this article follows alludes to John the Baptists words in Matthew 3.10: “And now also the axe is laid to the root of the trees: every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down.” This is a direct reference to an axe, unlike the other more outlandish connections.

There are two reasons that medieval readers would have made a connection between this biblical text and the Green Knights axe. Walls says, “The first is an iconographical tradition according to which John’s warning is represented by either a woodcutter felling a tree with an axe, or an axe leaning against a tree or hanging from a branch.” The Green Knight carrying an axe and a branch recalls this religious tradition. The trees from John’s reference undoubtedly stand for human beings, the axe is not that different from a battle-axe. When Gawain is waiting for the second blow from the Green Knight he is thusly described as a tree, “Gawayne graythely hit bydes and glant with no member, / Bot stode style as the ston other a stubbe auther / That ratheled is in roche grounde with rotes a hundredth.” Gawain is representing the vulnerability of humankind being chopped down, just like a tree. We are all susceptible to the same fate, and stand in fear unknowing of our outcome.

John prophesizes that, like in the Old Testament, the day was soon approaching when sinners would be “cut off” and receive their eternal punishment. Gawain goes through many temptations, and eventually succumbs. He is by no means “cut off” though. With the death of Christ, humans do not receive the blow of the axe, and we receive another chance. The Green Knight only partially wounds Gawain, giving him another opportunity at life.

There are two axes mentioned in the Gawain and the Green Knight. The first is ambiguous, while the second one relates to redemption. The first axe appears threatening, and therefore can represent John the Baptists harsh beliefs of eternal damnation. Walls states, “The relationship between it and the second axe might be compared with the relationship between the Old Testament ‘types’ and their ‘antitypes’ in the New Testament.” This conclusion draws the argument together, to form a very cohesive argument.

When first reading this article I felt as if I did not want to agree with their being a strong relationship between biblical text and the Green Knight’s axe. For some reason I wanted the text to stand alone, but all literature comes from the important texts that have come before. After reexamining the article, I realized that it had already convinced me of its relevance. The connections between the Green Knight and the text of Matthew are very clear, and offer insight into what the author could have been referencing.

The strongest part about this article is that it convinces the reader based on many correlations. It acted cohesively to illustrate the relationship between two texts. At the beginning of the article, Walls gave specific examples of others viewpoints on the subject. She stated ideas, and than just as easily rebuffed them for her stronger opinion. Walls showing the reader other viewpoints in correlation with her opinion, makes for a stronger argument.

I felt it was also a wise move on Walls part to focus on one part of the story in relationship to the bible. Instead of fighting for a completely religious story, this one aspect is emphasized and made clear to the reader. Walls focus, and use of a concise argument show the reader Walls insight into the story. I first read this piece very skeptically, but was soon convinced of the writer’s religious references.

Cassia Herndon 10/06