Berg 1

Anne Berg

Dr. Francis

Special Topics

20 November 2017

The Kings Two Bodies Throughout Time: An In Depth Look At King Arthur From Medieval to

Popular Literature

The story of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table is one that has been told

throughout time. It is a story of greatness, tragedy and sometimes love that has a strong pull on

readers and authors alike. The story itself has been adapted time and time again, and more than

that, the characters themselves have changed. They have gone from great knights to the lowest

scum, or the lowest scum to the best knights. Each retelling focuses on different aspects of the

characters and that is easily found throughout the medieval texts. But it is not only found in the

medieval texts, it is also found throughout the ages up until present day, and it is something that

will continue clear into the future. King Arthur himself is one of the main characters that

everyone knows of, but that most do not know much about. This can be attributed to several

things. When it comes to the medieval texts there are two main types of Arthurian stories.

Chronicles are the stories that focus on King Arthur as a warrior and the idea of knighthood and

the Round Table. Romances are stories in which King Arthur is usually part of the background

and he is more of a monarch than a warrior. Each of these two types of stories portrays a King

Arthur that is on the extreme opposite end of the spectrum from the other. And within these main

groups, King Arthur is also described very differently based on the author of the text.

Throughout time these two distinctions have blended together to create the King Arthur that is

popular today, a great warrior and monarch alike, whose reign was one of harmony and
 Berg 2

happiness. But how did Arthur get to this point of popularity and why has he stuck around so

long? The goal of this paper is to understand the transition of King Arthur from beginning to end

through extensive exploration of his character development in medieval texts and popular

literature, while also learning why he continues to be popular by studying scholarly articles.

Chronicle story telling in medieval texts is where the warrior King Arthur is first

discovered. Throughout several different texts he is shown to have a long list of characteristics

that make him, at some points, an amazing King, and at others, a kind of scary person. The one

characteristic of Arthur that is constantly repeated throughout different texts is his extreme

generosity and just general goodness. When Arthur is first introduced in Geoffrey of Monmouth

he is described as a youth of fifteen years, of remarkable valor and generosity, whose natural

goodness displayed such grace that he was loved by virtually all people (Loomis 64). At only

fifteen years old Arthur already has the entire kingdom in the palm of his hands. He is basically

described in the same way an angel might be. His generosity is mentioned again in Monmouth

when a large number of lords are invited to Arthurs kingdom and they all come in a parade of

wealth. Geoffrey states that this was no surprise as Arthurs generosity, famous throughout the

world, had attracted everyone by his love (72). He is constantly rewarding everyone he meets

with gifts and it is easy to wonder if the reason he is so well loved is because he has such a

generous heart, or directly as a result of the gifts that he is distributing. Arthur truly seems to care

about his subjects and is wildly generous, but is this enough reason to love him? It is very hard to

believe that one person can be so good and generous all of the time. It is not only Monmouth

who describes him in such a way; this is a theme that is continued time and time again

throughout a number of sources. In Malorys Le Morte Darthur Arthur is also described in this

way. When he first becomes king he recognizes the mistakes that his father made and he wants to
 Berg 3

right those wrongs. When his citizens come to him requesting the land that was taken from them,

he made the lands to be given again unto them that owned them (13). He could have easily

ignored their wants because he was not the one who took their lands in the first place. But he still

does everything in his power to correct the mistakes of those before him. In Waces Roman de

Brut Arthur is described as the good, strong, and certain monarch whom you all know as King

Arthur (Wilhelm 96). Later in a lengthy quote on page 97 Wace describes King Arthur as

literally perfect, and having no faults. No wonder people today think that Arthur was an amazing

king and person; he is supposed to be the nicest guy around. This is continued throughout

Layamons Brut. Every single time that Arthurs name is mentioned it is either after, or followed

by, a description of how amazing he is, whether he is great Arthur, Arthur the mighty, the

ablest of Kings, or the almightiest (Wilhelm 103-105), he is constantly surrounded with good

imagery. The same goes for the Alliterative Morte Arthure, where he is described as the good,

great, and noble king (Krishna 507-509). These are all simple little ways of describing a

person, but when it is consistently repeated it becomes a part of the persons actual identity,

rather than just a way to describe him. It is now impossible to think of King Arthur without also

thinking of how good he is. This is not something that really stands out when just reading one

medieval chronicle text by itself, but after reading several in a row, it becomes obvious that this

is a characteristic that is a staple part of who King Arthur is and always will be, at least in this

time period.

King Arthur is presented as more than just a nice guy; he is also a total beast in many

chronicle texts. He is actually almost god-like in his strength and skills. This is first evident in

Monmouth when he is fighting against the Saxons and the Britons are losing. He gets angry and

starts a rampage where he slew with a single blow every man he struck. Nor did he cease his
 Berg 4

assault until he killed four hundred and seventy men with only his sword (Loomis 67). That is

not almost god-like, that is god-like. It is absolutely super human. And this is the type of strength

and prowess that he is described as having continually. This same theme is continued later in

Monmouth when Arthur is attacking the Romans and it is stated that he overthrew, he killed,

and whomever he met, he slew him with one blow. They fled from him as from a ferocious

beast, a lion provoked by savage hunger to devour whatever chance offers (84-85). It is quite

honestly terrifying that one person can be depicted as having that much strength. In these

chronicle stories Arthur is depicted as having no equals in any of his qualities, but especially his

strength. In Le Morte Darthur Arthur is constantly winning battles and showing off his skills.

This is noticeable just in the description of a war when King Arthur is always shown as doing

marvelous deeds of arms, that many of the kings had great joy of his deeds and hardiness (14).

He is such a great warrior that he actually makes other kings happy just seeing him fight. In

Roman de Brut, the author says no way would you take him for a coward or a fool (Wilhelm

98). He is the bravest guy around, and this is extremely obvious, especially after reading about

the different ways that he slays his opponents. He is now switching from this all around good and

jolly guy, to someone who is a bit scary, and who is definitely not the person to spend time with

when angry. This becomes even more evident in the Alliterative Morte Arthure when he is

fighting against Mordred and he comes across a prince and with Caliburn cleaves him cleanly

asunder; / slices right through the man, splits the saddle in two, / and right there on the steeds

back burst open the bowel (Krishna 2201-2204). Not only is that a very graphic image, but now

Arthur is slaughtering people that he does not even know, solely through his anger. His brute

strength is astounding and hopefully not realistic. Discovering the way that Arthurs strength is
 Berg 5

consistently portrayed throughout chronicle medieval texts really explains why the world views

him as an unmatchable king, because from the start that is exactly what he was.

Knowing that King Arthur is consistently portrayed as good and strong is not that much

of a surprise, however, it is surprising to see just how relentless and savage he can be in many

chronicle texts. He actually murders innocents quite often while on a war rampage. This is first

evident in Monmouths text when Arthur wants to take over the Scots and Picts and after having

won immediate victory, he was again free to destroy the race of the Scots and Picts, which he did

with inflexible severity (Loomis 68). He literally practices genocide on several occasions.

Realizing that this is a common theme throughout the chronicle texts was extremely unexpected

and quite frankly upsetting because it does not coincide with the great King Arthur whose tales

have lasted for hundreds of years. This is happens once again just one page over when he moves

on to conquering Ireland, and when battle broke out, Gillmauruss naked and unarmed people

were pitifully cut down on the spot (69). This is definitely not the Arthur that is showcased in

childrens books. It is not a complete surprise that he is brutal because of his extreme strength

and slight anger issues, but what is surprising is that this good and generous King is capable of

slaughtering innocent citizens. In Malory people know of his temper and are actually afraid of

him. This is evident when Arthur is fighting with King Pellinore and neither knows who the

other is. When Pellinore realizes he is fighting Arthur he gets frightened and then would have

slain him for dread of his wrath (28). Pellinore is so scared that Arthur will kill him because of

his actions, that he believes the only way to prevent his own death is to kill Arthur. Another

instance of Arthurs temper is in Layamons Brut when Arthur finds out about Mordred and

Guineveres deception, and he says that hell kill cunning Mordred and torch the queen

(Wilhelm 14065). And this is almost sweet in comparison to when he says, only a little bit later,
 Berg 6

I shall string him up, that most sinful scoundrel, / and Ill pull the queen to pieces with my

horses! / For Ill never know bliss as long as they draw breath (14082-14084). This is a side of

Arthur that really is not noticeable unless multiple texts are taken into consideration, and as a

result it is a side that can be easily glazed over.

Even though it is now obvious that there are negative aspects found throughout chronicle

texts, Arthur still has a love and devotion for God and all aspects of his religion. This is first

noticeable after he slaughters the Scots and Picts and holy men from the land come to him and

ask him to stop, and since they appealed to the King in this way, pity moved him to tears, and,

yielding to the prayers of the holy men, he granted them mercy (Wilhelm 68). In this situation

he could have just continued on his rampage, but instead, he listened to their pleas and realized

his wrong doings. This is also evident when he returns to his home and when he entered the

city, he mourned to see the desolation of the sacred churches (68). Mourning for a lost life is

normal and mourning for a place that carries a large significance and specific memories is

normal too. But in order for Arthur to truly mourn the loss of several churches, that he most

likely did not attend himself, shows his extreme devotion to religion in general. Arthur also

regularly calls on his religion when he is entering battle. One time when this is evident is when

the Saxons break his trust and he says, Because the Saxons, who are known for being ungodly

and hateful, have scorned to keep faith with me, I, who remain faithful to my God, will strive to

be avenged on them today for the blood of my countrymen (66). Arthur is not only saying that

his religion will help him through the battle, but he is also saying that because the Saxons do not

practice Christianity they will be doomed. Honestly, in order to make a statement like that, being

invested his religion is a necessity. People who do not, or barely, practice a religion, do not judge

other peoples religion or lack of, the way those who are devout like Arthur do. More than just
 Berg 7

practicing and respecting his religion and everything that goes with it, he really cares. This is

especially evident when it comes to burial practices and honoring the dead by burying them

properly (85). In a war it would be very hard to find all the bodies of his knights, especially with

all of their armor on. But, he looked until he found them all so he could give them an honorable

burial. That says lot about how much he cares. In Le Morte Darthur Arthur depends on God and

believes that it is Gods plan for him to become king. This is stated when he pulls the sword out

of the stone and Sir Ector states that he is now king. Arthur says that if ever Gods will that I be

king as ye say, ye shall desire of me what I may do, and I shall not fail you (10). Arthur believes

that if God wants something, it will happen, and if it does he will do his absolute best to honor

God. In the Alliterative Morte Arthure God plays an even bigger role for Arthur as he actually

places all the credit for winning his battle against the giant on God, taking none of the credit for

himself (1210-1212). This is a really big deal because in other instances Arthur can be very full

of himself and quite greedy. Therefore, despite all of his downfalls throughout all of the texts, his

love for God is a strong theme throughout the chronicle texts, and this love keeps him a mostly

good person.

Greed and vanity is quite an issue throughout many of the chronicle texts and it is one of

Arthurs worst traits. Many of the biggest instances of greed take place in Monmouths text. One

of these instances happens when Arthur is invading all of the surrounding countries and the text

states, with all of Ireland conquered Arthur directed his fleet toward Iceland and took

possession of it after defeating the inhabitants (Loomis 69). Instead of being able to stop after

one country, or even after no countries, Arthur wants to rule over everything. Later Arthur finds

out that other Kings throughout Europe are afraid of him and are therefore trying to build up

their armies in case he invades, and when this was told to Arthur, he felt exalted that he was a
 Berg 8

source of dread to everyone, and he longed to win all of Europe for himself (69). Instead of

feeling bad for putting fear into everyones hearts, or just leaving well enough alone, the thought

of someone elses fear actually makes Arthur happy and makes him want to create more of it.

Arthur even lost control of his kingdom because he grew so greedy and stayed away longer than

he should have, leaving Mordred in control and giving him the chance to take over (86). As a

result it is really his own fault that his kingdom falls. Even the birth of Mordred can be

contributed to his greed. When he sees King Lots wife, his sister, the King cast great love unto

her and desired to lie by her (Malory 21). Not only is she another mans wife, which should

immediately stop him, but at this point he has already met Guinevere and likes her too. He

cannot just wait until his own marriage; instead he wants every woman he takes a liking to. And

as a result he ends up sleeping with his sister who then gives birth to his biggest enemy and a

source of evil. More than just his greed though, Arthur also has problems with vanity because he

believes, like everyone else, that he is the best around. As a result he is not used to being

defeated or even injured, so when he is, and he saw that his corselet and shield were red, he was

inflamed with a more burning anger (70). Knowing that he was not invincible made him even

angrier, which made him fight harder and win. But it could have been his arrogance in the first

place that left him open for injury. Simply the thought of losing drives Arthur crazy. When

Arthur started the battle with the Saxons and he was not immediately winning, he was indignant

that the Saxons were succeeding and that victory was not yet his (67). He has no patience

because he has never had to have any patience when it comes to victory. Realizing that Arthur

has so many negative aspects of his character makes him a more realistic character and it makes

the idea of a perfect King Arthur not a medieval literature based idea.
 Berg 9

Arthur normally always places his political body before his personal body in chronicle

texts because of his extreme love for his kingdom. This is evident through the timing of his

marriage, in that he waits until he had finally brought the state of the whole country to its

original dignity (Wilhelm 68). Even though he had known of Guinevere for quite some time, as

a King, he needed to wait for the best time to get married. And that time was not one that worked

best for him personally, but one in which the kingdom itself was in the best place possible. This

same instance is also found in Waces Roman de Brut. Arthur waits until his kingdom reaches a

time of peace before he marries Guinevere (Wilhelm 98). Of course his marriage is not the only

instance in which he puts the needs of his kingdom and his subjects before him. In Monmouth,

Arthur is not a warrior because of the fame and prowess it brings him, but because of what it

brings his people. In fact, he continues entire wars in order to help his people. This is evident

when Monmouth states that Arthur decided to harry the Saxons, so that he could bestow their

wealth on the retainers who served him (Loomis 64). Although he does not necessarily treat his

enemies with the most respect, he sometimes does this in order to simply help out his own

people. When he does not have enough of his own to give them, he takes it from his enemies by

force instead. More than just supplying money to his subjects, Arthur also really enjoys hosting

feasts and giving gifts to those in his court. This is especially evident after big victories when he

invites the entire court, so that he might celebrate the feast with reverence and renew lasting

peace among his princes (71). He has feasts in order to show his appreciation to his court, and

they are also a way to keep the entire court working smoothly together. And even though this

does not always work in his favor, it is still the thought that counts. In the Alliterative Morte

Arthure, Arthur again wants to create a time of peace for his subjects and his lands when he

realizes that they are suffering. When he comes across the town that is being ravaged by a
 Berg 10

murderous giant he determines that he will save them and finally give them the peace they

deserve. On page 503 he states that he wants to confront that fiend for defiling these lands, /And

bring peace for a time till things may tide better (Wilhelm 878-879). He always wants his

people to live in peace, and he hates the idea of them being degraded and terrorized by an

outsider. He is willing to risk his own safety in order to fulfill this. In the end, despite Arthurs

many misgivings he always wants the best for his kingdom and will do whatever is necessary,

even if it means putting his own life in danger, in order to help them.

Throughout chronicle texts Arthur is able to constantly win in battle because of the way

he treats his knights. Arthur cares a lot about his knights and never wants to put them into any

unnecessary danger. Because Arthur wants to keep his knights as safe as possible, he is actually

forced to become a better strategist in war. He never wants to put them into more danger than

necessary, so he takes precautions. This is evident when he is planning to take on the Romans

and he states, We shall more easily bear the assault of Lucius if with common zeal we plan in

advance how we can with stand it (Loomis 74). Even though King Arthurs brute strength and

the power of his knights is described over and over again, he is wise and realizes that there is no

need to make blatant bad decisions and just run in to war blindly. Of course there are times when

Arthur cannot discover a strategy that keeps everyone safe. When this happens, he could be

forced to make the decision of risking a few lives of his knights for the greater good. But instead,

he chooses to put only himself in danger, believing in his abilities, and hoping that he will win in

the end. This is evident in the fight against the giant and Arthur scorned to lead an army against

such monsters, and he hoped to give inspiration to his men by showing that he alone was enough

to destroy them (76). Although he could take the easy way out and use his army to his

advantage, even if it means the death of a few knights, Arthur refuses to do this. He never wants
 Berg 11

to put his knights in harms way, especially when he knows that he has the strength and skill to

defeat enemies on his own. He is also an inspiration to his men because of his ability to protect

them. In times when the Britons are losing, they only have to look to their King in order to

realize that the fight is not lost. This is evident when Arthur begins to single-handedly destroy

their enemy, reversing their loss to a win. Once King Arthurs army sees their King fight in this

way, the Britons gained greater courage, attacked the Romans with a single spirit, and assaulted

with close-packed squadrons (85). Having a King that can single handedly destroy an enemy

army not only makes subjects more likely to join in, but it also makes them less frightened of the

results. If King Arthur were a cowardly man that ran at the first site of conflict, his army would

also run. But because Arthur stays, fights and wins, his army is always there to back him up. And

even though Arthur is extremely capable in his own right, he still accepts help when it is offered.

When two of his knights go off to fight when he is not there, and ended up winning, he does not

get angry that his help was not vital. Instead, Arthur congratulated them and promised them

honors and promotions for performing so valiantly in his absence (79). Arthur realizes that

sometimes he cannot do everything himself, and he has to accept the help that is offered to him.

This is one of the things that makes him a great leader. Instead of being power hungry, he does

depend on his knights for guidance and help in different situations. By choosing to put himself in

danger first whenever possible, and by always trying to follow the best strategies, King Arthur is

able to create an environment that breeds the best knights and in which he is able to almost

always win.

While throughout chronicle texts King Arthurs knights follow him in battle, they also

have a much deeper devotion to him that is based on a mutual love and respect, which results in a

united front. Arthurs knights love him and as a result, depend on him for their safety and
 Berg 12

happiness. When they believe that they are losing him, or will lose him, they are absolutely

devastated. When Arthur fights with the giant in the Alliterative Morte Arthure, he is severely

injured and when the knights believe that he has been killed, Sir Kay laments, Alas we are lost!

My lord is laid low!/ Felled by a fiend! Evil befalls us!/ We will be finished, by my faith, and

exiled forever! (Krishna 1153-1155). For the knights, losing Arthur would literally mean losing

their identity and their life. Not just because he is their leader and ruler, but also because they all

have a deep love for him. They also depend on him to save them from different situations. When

they are fighting the Romans, Arthur has to come to their rescue because they are trapped and are

actually calling out for his help (2242-2245). The Knights of the Round Table get a lot of credit

for being great warriors, but in chronicle texts, it is Arthur who is the greatest warrior of all. But

despite his knights being little more than extra bodies most of the time, Arthur has a deep love

and appreciation for them. He loves them so much that when they die he is basically destroyed

and his life is no longer worth living. He is so upset that he states that my greatness and my

glory are all gone forever, /and I take leave of all lordship for what life I have left. / Here the

blood of the Britons has been parted from life, / And here with this battle ends all my bliss

(4287-4290). When he loses his knights he actually loses all of his future happiness. He basically

loses life itself. Although it might seem as though the extreme love that knights and King share

could cause some serious problems, it is actually because of this love that the Round Table is

able to stand so united against a common enemy. Just as Arthur will do anything for the knights,

they will do anything for him. This is evident when they are fighting the Romans in Geoffrey of

Monmouth and they are ready to die for the fight. The text states that all the knights gave their

assent with one shout, ready as long as Arthur lived to accept death first rather than abandon the

field by flight (Loomis 81). There is a deep love for both country and King evident in any group
 Berg 13

of men who is willing to run towards death for the fight. But more specifically, the knights are so

willing to do this because Arthur is still alive, and the second he dies, they, like him, lose their

will to fight and to live. The shared love between Arthur and his knights present in many

chronicle texts is what makes the Knights of the Round Table such a united front.

Throughout many chronicle texts Arthur is shown as having extreme wealth, both in his

Kingdom and his being. This wealth does not solely include his monetary wealth, but it extends

to how much he always has available to him. This causes him to be the subject of even more

adulation. Everyone wants to be like Arthur and his knights. This is evident in Monmouth when

it is stated that, whoever had a noble spirit counted himself nothing unless in dress or arms he

bore himself like Arthurs Knights (Loomis 69). Everything Arthur had was the best of the best

and if anyone else wanted to be the best they had to be exactly like Arthur. This shows two

things about Arthur, in that everyone wants what he has, but that he also always has the best. It is

not only with dress that this happens though. In general, the way his kingdom is made up of the

best knights is also something that causes extreme jealousy. This is evident after he wins over all

of Ireland, Scotland, and Iceland. Arthur summoned all who were most distinguished from

kingdoms far and wide and began to enlarge his household to have such elegance in his court

that he stirred emulation in people living far away (69). From the beginning Arthur is shown as

having a kingdom that is made up of only the best people. It is no wonder that he is also

constantly portrayed as great if he not only has the best, but also is the best. In fact, being

constantly surrounded by the best is one of the things that really portrays how great he is himself.

And having the best dress and armor, along with the best knights, is part of what makes him so

hard to defeat. This is evident just in the way he is portrayed through other kingdoms, as he was

known to have such a powerful army that it was hard for any other to over power it (70). It is
 Berg 14

easy to see Arthur as almost God-like. He has the most amazing kingdom and knights, and it is

basically impossible to go up against him. It is actually no wonder that Arthur is constantly

thought of as the most amazing King in history, because this is the way that he is portrayed

throughout chronicle texts.

Many people think of Arthur as the greatest King who has ever lived and this is part of

why he has lasted so long throughout the ages. But there is more than one side to Arthur

throughout medieval texts. Throughout chronicle texts he is portrayed as a warrior king who has

flaws, but who is still the most amazing King around. Romance texts are the texts that show

much less of Arthurs warrior side, and show much more of his King side. It is in romances that

the audience is given a king who leaves adventuring to his knights, and instead takes his place

solely at the throne. Even within romances there are several different sides to King Arthur. In

many romance texts he is portrayed in such a different light from one the audience is used to.

Instead of being a warrior King, he actually does nothing and just sits back and lets all of his

knights fight for him. The story is no longer about him; instead it is about his knights. However,

there are other texts in which he still has a part to play in the overall text, but he is still no longer

the main character. In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight Arthur still has the ability to be the

warrior king, but this time around he never gets the chance, because his knights stand in for him.

This is evident when the Green Knight comes into the Kingdom and sets a challenge for the

Knights of the Round Table and Arthur is the first to step in. The Green Knight insults the

kingdom and Arthur grew as angry as the wind, / As did all those who were there. / But the

king, always keen to act, / Answered that tough mans dare (Lupack 319-322). Arthur is the

first to act and wants to take the challenge on for himself. He is willing to fight and has the

strength and anger to push him forward. This is the same King that is present in chronicle texts.
 Berg 15

It is not until Gawain persuades Arthur to hand the reins over to him that Arthur actually gives

up the fight (343-365). This is not something that is evident in the chronicle texts. In those texts

Arthur is always the one that the knights follow, and they would not be able to fight without him.

But now they want only to protect him and so they take on the fighting for themselves. Although

the rest of this romance focuses on Gawain and his quest, the audience is still given a glimpse of

the warrior King Arthur that was evident throughout all of the chronicle texts.

The majority of romances portray a King Arthur that does not join in the fights, and some

of them even portray a King that is barely a monarch. In Chrtien de Troyes, King Arthur is

incapable of fighting or even coming up with solutions on his own. He accepts what is given to

him and it is instead up to his knights fix the Kingdom. This is evident when a stranger enters the

court and informs Arthur that he has many of his held people captive. Instead of jumping up in

arms and going after him, or even just trying to find a negotiation, Arthur just gives up. He

simply replies that he must accept this, since he could not change it for the better, but that it

grieved him deeply (Kibler 114). He is no longer the King that is sure that he will always win,

and he does not even attempt to come up with another solution. He does not even ask for help in

this situation. In fact, it is not until Sir Kay threatens to leave the court that he actually acts. But

still, instead of asking his knights what to do, in desperation King Arthur went to his queen

(115). He is no longer just asking for advice, instead he is actually begging her for help. This is

something that the warrior king present in chronicle texts would never do. In the Prose Merlin

and the Suite de Merlin Arthur is actually the one who needs saving. This is evident when Merlin

is discussing King Arthur with Vivian and he states that Arthur came so close to death that he

was terrified he might not escape; nor would he have, if not for the boldness of Kay, his

seneschal, who with two blows killed two kings (Rosenberg 368). The king in this text is so
 Berg 16

different from the one present in chronicle texts. For one, Arthur as a warrior king never would

have come close to death in a fight with just two kings. And even if he had been close to death,

he never would have been terrified. He would have welcomed death rather than escaping with his

life in defeat. In this text it is Kay that defeats both of the kings with one hit each. But, if Arthur

were a warrior King once more, he would have killed both kings at once with a single slice of his

sword. This is not the only time that King Arthur is frightened at the prospect of his own death. It

also happens in The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. When he is threatened by a

knight, Arthur is sad and tells his men, that if I get the answer wrong/ I know I shall be slain

right there. / Dont blame me for being a sorrowful man; / All this is what I dread and fear

(Lupack 178-181). He actually states that dying is what he fears the most. Arthur as a warrior

king would never have taken this deal as set in stone in the first place. He would have gone after

this man and killed him, even without his armor. He never would have accepted defeat from the

very beginning. And it is not until Gawain steps in to help that he is able to find the correct

answer and continue to live. This side of King Arthur that is present throughout several romance

texts is one that is the complete opposite of the warrior king present in chronicle texts.

The last side of King Arthur that is shown in many romance texts is probably his best

one. In these texts he is almost an afterthought, but he is always mentioned in a way that shows

just how amazing he is. He does not have a main part to play, but he is always in the background,

and part of what makes his individual knights so great. In The Romance of Tristran he is

described as the noble king (Lacy 273). Even though he does not have a large part to play in

this story, anytime he is described, it is in a way that shows how great he is. It almost makes it a

fact that no matter the circumstances, Arthur is always on the top of the latter, and he is basically

the supreme ruler. In the text, The Saga of the Mantle, King Arthur is first described as the most
 Berg 17

renowned ruler with regard to every aspect of valor and all kinds of manliness and chivalry,

combined with perfect compassion and most appealing mildness, so that in every respect was no

ruler more renowned or blessed (Kalinke 224). From the first moment he is introduced, King

Arthur is actually perfect, and there is no one else that is close to him. And even though he does

not have a large part to play in the following story, the audience will always think of him from

that point forward as a great king. This is definitely entirely up to the author, as he or she wants

to portray Arthur in this specific, can do no wrong, way. And although it is stated that he is good

in war, the audience is never actually shown specific details of this. In Marie de Frances Lanval,

King Arthur is once again introduced in the best light from the beginning of the story. The first

sentence about him describes him as, King Arthur, who was valiant and courtly (Lacy 5). The

way he is described throughout these romances is no longer just a description; instead, the words

used become part of who Arthur is as a person. And once again, the audience is now forced to

see him in this light throughout the rest of the story, even when his actions contradict these

statements. Even in texts where Arthur is not mentioned until the very end, he is still portrayed in

a certain light. In a Cantare on the death of Tristan, King Arthur is only mentioned when

everyone in Camelot finds out about the death of Tristan and Arthur leads the prayers. Even

though the author could have simply said Arthurs name without a description, he describes him

as good King Arthur (Wilhelm 35). If the audience knows nothing else about him, at least they

know that he was a good king. The way that Arthur is described throughout these romance texts,

even though he does not play a huge part, explains a lot about the way that people saw him in the

past and how they see him today as a result.

When reading through several medieval chronicle and romance texts it becomes evident

that there is not one way to describe King Arthur. He changes throughout the many texts and he
 Berg 18

has both good and bad characteristics. But, after reading these texts it does become evident that

King Arthur is not the simply great king that he has long been thought of as. He struggles with

his duties and his wants, his personal and political body, as much as any other normal person.

This is further acknowledged through scholarly articles on the matter. Armstrong writes an

article about chronicle texts in general, how they have changed throughout time, and how they

are showcased differently in medieval texts. In his article, he states in Geoffrey of Monmouth,

Wace, Layamon, wherein we see peace and war generally represented as equally important

components in a repeating cycle, even if less narrative space is given to the peace time activities

those of war (83). Because war is so highly focused on in these stories it can seem like the times

of peace are skipped over. This makes King Arthur more focused on conquering and less on his

kingdom itself and making that stronger. This topic is further discussed in his article when he

writes about the Alliterative Morte Arthure. Armstrongs article states that the Alliterative

Morte Arthure tells two stories simultaneously; one narrative confers critique on Arthur and his

actions, while the other points to potential positive outcomes that are, tragically, never realized

(82). The poet of the Alliterative Morte Arthure realizes that Arthur as a warrior king has a

certain pull and god-like qualities to him. Therefore the poet portrays these qualities. However,

the poet also realizes that this Arthur has some major downfalls to his character, so he also shows

how these flaws cause his overall downfall. Bruso discusses how there are two sides to being a

ruler, taking care of war and then the kingdom itself. In order to be a great king, one has to have

the perfect balance of these two sides. In chronicle texts like the Alliterative Morte Arthure,

Arthur struggles with differentiating between these two sides. In these texts, the article states that

Arthur emphasizes his role as king-as-warrior to the exclusion of governance (44). This is

extremely true, Arthur spends almost all of his time fighting, and hardly any time at home in his
 Berg 19

Kingdom. By doing this, his Kingdom is not as strong as it should be, and he is constantly

putting himself in danger. This is in connection with Brusos article where he states that the poet

of the Alliterative Morte Arthure believes that kings ought to concern themselves with matters

at home in the kingdom, rather than aspiring to accumulate territories abroad to create an

empire (45). If Arthur were more concerned with his Kingdom, and less concerned with

conquering other lands he would not have experienced his downfall. This is exactly what

happens in romance texts, where Arthur is almost always at home and never fighting wars. These

texts do not normally show his downfall, but he is also not always portrayed as positively as in

chronicle texts. Both texts show some of the negative aspects of Arthurs character, but in

chronicle texts Arthur is almost God-like, whereas in romances Arthur is just a good king.

Overall, there are several articles that discuss Arthurs struggle with himself over what is more

important to him: war or his Kingdom, and how this struggle is simplified over chronicle and

romance texts.

Although Arthur changes in chronicle and romance texts overtime, he also has specific

characteristics that have evolved throughout time. From the beginning Arthur was created as a

way to fix the problems of the time period. Although Arthur has issues of his own, Davidsons

article asks who would need Arthur if there hadnt been problems? (62). In a way, Arthur is

able to connect to the world that he is placed in because of his own issues. If the world had been

perfect then King Arthur would never have been established or been so popular for that matter.

The reason he has lasted as long as he has, is because people want to believe in an imperfect hero

that has the power to bring the world back to the best ideals. Davidsons article also establishes

that King Arthur is able to grow and evolve because he is recreated in each version in the image

of the storytellers ideal leader (62). Every version of Arthur is so different because each author
 Berg 20

creates their own flawed/ flawless hero, and yet they are all still similar because each author goes

off the text before them. It is because of this constant take and change storyline that Arthur has

been able to evolve and therefore stay relevant throughout medieval time up until today. The way

that Arthur has been described throughout texts has changed drastically, but overall there is a

theme. Alan Lupack summarizes this theme saying, In early Latin chronicles he is presented as

a military leaderIn later romance he is presented as king and emperor (Lupack). Having his

start as a military leader makes an extreme amount of sense as to why he is always portrayed as

such a great warrior in many chronicle texts. It also goes into explaining why these authors never

gave Arthur a sense of strong ties that keep him rooted at home in his kingdom. But overtime, he

is taken away from this way of thinking, and instead he evolves into a king that does spend most

of him time in his kingdom. And he also becomes a King that is extremely devoted to his

kingdom and his people, wanting always the best for them. In Huttons article he establishes that

there are actually three types of King Arthurs present throughout time. Hutton says, In addition

to the two Arthurs familiar to scholars, the Dark Age warrior and the King of high medieval

romance, there has long existed a thirda figure of superhuman might (28). Overtime these

three separate categories have morphed together to create a Dark Age warrior with

superhuman strength. To a warrior King with significant powers. To a King whos people look

up to him like he is God. These are three characteristics that describe the different Arthurs found

throughout chronicle and romance texts, however these characteristics no longer describe three

separate people. No matter how much Arthur has changed over time, it is still always possible to

find recognizable traits of his original background in different texts.

Within the most famous texts themselves, readers can trace the way that Arthur has

changed, especially with the help of scholarly articles. Arthur starts out in chronicle texts with
 Berg 21

Geoffrey of Monmouth, and then makes his way to the start of romance texts with Chrtien de

Troyes. Putter establishes in his article that from the beginning, Arthur is above all a conquering

hero, and the story of his rule is one of continual territorial expansion (40). From the beginning

in Monmouths text Arthurs status as a hero is the most important one for the audience to

follow. He is meant to be the ruler that takes the world out of the dark ages, and in order to do

something like that he needs to be the best hero he can be. This is why Putter also points out that

the values that Geoffreys Arthur embodies are primarily martial ones: pious patriotism,

bravery, and generosity (41). From the beginning Arthur is shown as the best fighter. This is

because he is warrior above all. If he were meant to be portrayed as King over all else, his

qualities as a fighter would not be as important. Layamons text is also focused mostly on the

war itself. Putter explains how impressive boasts are made before battle, spear-shafts shatter,

fated warriors fall in the field, death of kindred is avenged with honour (43). Layamon wants all

of the gory details of the fighting to be discussed. He is focused solely on Arthur as warrior. By

starting out with such a strong focus on Arthurs warrior qualities, they stay in the back of the

audiences mind, even if the author changes the way he is portrayed. With the next major text,

his warrior qualities are not emphasized as much because the times of peace are emphasized

instead. Putter notes how Wace tones down Arthurs ruthlessnessand expands the account of

the twelve years of peace (43). By making Arthur less violent, Wace makes him more relatable,

less of a warrior and more of a king. Now Arthur is finally becoming a more balanced character.

Putter explains how these three texts are so alike, because Wace and Layamon believed

Geoffreys account of Arthurs reign to be true, they did not want to take great liberties with the

story they inherited (43). Although each author made slight changes to the story over time, they

all stuck with the major idea of Arthur as warrior first, king second. This way of thinking about
 Berg 22

Arthur continued until Chrtien de Troyes came along to flip the scale. Putter states that King

Arthurs tale needed a writer who felt no obligations to history to change the face of Arthurian

Literature: that writer was Chrtien de Troyes (44). Because Chrtien did not care at all about

Arthurs history, he was able to create a new Arthur. This was an Arthur who was King first,

who had knights to fight his wars for him. Chrtien was able to create a better king overall,

because he cast away Arthurs history and warrior tendencies, and he started a new history for

future writers. Putter states, the format of the short Arthurian romance was enthusiastically

adopted by later writers (50). Putter is able to look at the way that Arthur is portrayed

throughout the first chronicle texts and why that is, and then move on to how he is then defined

in romance texts by Chrtien. Because of the way these texts are written it is easy for the

audience to trace Arthurs growth over time.

Arthur has changed and grown more popular from the beginning of his time in chronicle

texts. Many people wonder, or truly believe, that part of the reason that he is so popular is

because of his possible historical significance. It is a common thought that the Author of legend

is actually the Arthur of history. Lupack brings up a good point in consideration of this question,

stating, what cannot be denied is the influence of the figure of Arthur on literature, art, music,

and society from the Middle Ages to the present (Lupack). Whether or not Arthur was truly a

person in history does not really matter, what matters is the insane amount of time that he has

existed in all forms of art. Arthur has been around form the beginning of the middle Ages, even

though he has changed over time. In her book, Jenkins states, The transformation in peoples

imaginations of Arthur from a military commander to a king had begun by the 10th century (39).

At this point in time people are already starting to think of King Arthur in their own terms,

moving away from the way that he is displayed in texts. Taylors article goes into depth about
 Berg 23

when it actually is that the Arthur that is popular today came about. The article states, It is the

thirteenth centurythat institutionalizes the parameters of what a modern reader will think of as

the Arthurian Legend(66-67). From looking at popular literature examples of King Arthur, to

looking at the first medieval texts about him, it is easy to see a disconnect. However, now that

Taylor has established an actual timeline it becomes easier to see the connection. In todays

society, as Ashe points out in the introduction to his book, Mention the name King Arthur, and

the name conjures up a romantic image in war he quells his enemies with a magical sword,

Excalibur (ix). People today think of Arthur as an all around great guy who can do no wrong,

and who is a great warrior. They do not know that he has a dark side, or that he was not always

the best King because he spent more time as a warrior. Ashe goes on to state, Behind all the

fantasy he embodies a myth, an ideal, a need (16). The reason that Arthur is so popular, even

today, is because he represents something more. Even though Arthur has changed so much from

the beginning of his existence, and into the future, he has still remained a figure that people of all

ages could look up to.

Even though King Arthur found his roots in medieval times, he still continues to be

present and thrive in the popular literature of today. Each author or director pulls out specific

characteristics of his from medieval texts in order to create their ideal King Arthur. Meg Cabots

Avalon High is one example of a more realistic King Arthur story. A teen fiction book with a

twist, the twist being that all the main characters are actually reincarnations of King Arthurs

court. Cabot creates a new and interesting setting for the King Arthur characters: high school.

Arthur William Wagner, otherwise known as Will, is the star of this show as King Arthurs

reincarnation himself. Will is the all around popular guy at Avalon High. He gets good grades, is

the quarterback of the football team, and has great looks, and is nice to top it all off. So what
 Berg 24

makes him like King Arthur? Will definitely is not the warrior King, out for blood like

Geoffreys Arthur. But he does represent the ideal of King Arthur that everyone has come to

think of as his actual characteristics. He is the leader of the entire school, nerds look up to him,

and jocks follow his directions. This is evident when one nerd in particular is getting bullied and

Will lends a helping hand. When Will returns his notebook he takes it with trembling fingers,

his gaze, as he looked up to Will, worshipful (164). This guy does not just look up to Will; he

actually worships him, as if he is a God, or the long gone, finally reincarnated King Arthur. More

than just that reaction, though, the bigger identifier is when Will tells the jocks to apologize. The

jocks follow his directions because there was a steely note in Wills voice that made it clear no

one not even a two hundred pound halfback had better try to mess with him. Or dare to

disobey one of his commands (166). He has the same inner strength and authority that King

Arthur has over his knights. He not only inspires those around him, but he is in control of the

situation at all times. And when he finds out that his girlfriend and best friend are having a

relationship with each other behind his back, he easily forgives them. Thats the thing, he really

doesnt mind about me and Lance. Hes just sonice (618). He does not hold grudges and

always wants the best for everyone in his circle, just like King Arthur always wants the best for

his knights. And at the end of the story when Will is in danger of getting shot by his half

brother, Marco, he never wavers, and he is able to get Marco to do exactly what he wants in the

same way he did with the jocks. Will tells him Drop the gun Marcos fingers loosen on the

gun handle. It was almost as if he couldnt not do as Will said (760). Will is King Arthurs

reincarnation because he represents the ideal leader that most people believe is King Arthur.

After reading many medieval texts it is obvious that he was nowhere close to perfect, but today

authors are able to mold him into the exact character they want to portray.
 Berg 25

King Arthur is not just present in the teen fiction section of popular literature. He can also

be found in Disney Movies. Avalon High itself was made into a Disney Channel Original Movie,

this time starring a girl as King Arthur. Allie is a run of the mill girl with all her own problems.

This is why she makes such a great example of how much the portrayal of King Arthur has

changed over the years. If a normal teenage girl can be King Arthur, than anyone can. Before

Allie realizes that she is King Arthurs reincarnate, she believes that it is Will is King Arthur and

she tries to save him with a plastic sword. It is this moment that the plastic sword turns into

Excalibur and she realizes that she is King Arthur. This moment and the moment that she uses

Excalibur to defeat Mordred are the only two moments in the entire movie that she is shown as

King Arthur (1:00:00-1:10:00). And it all takes place in the last 10 minutes of the movie. This is

actually a lot like the Disney movie Sword in the Stone. The audience is introduced to Arthur as

a young boy, before he knows that he will one day be king. From the beginning of the movie he

tries to always be helpful to Kay, Merlin and Sir Ector. Of course he is usually the one who

caused an issue in the first place, and then he needs to fix it. This is evident when he accidentally

makes Kay shoot is arrow into the woods and he goes after it (5:50-7:20). This is a trait that is a

lot like the original King Arthur, as he is always trying to please everyone in his court. And when

someone asks a favor of him, he always wants to fulfill it to the best of his ability. Young Arthur

is also very curious and likes to learn new things. This is very obvious any of the times that

Merlin turns him into an animal, but especially the first time when he is a fish (24:00-30:00).

This can also be attributed to the way that Arthur always wants a challenge or something

interesting to happen before he can start a feast. However, it is not until the very end of the

movie that Arthur pulls the sword out of the stone and becomes King Arthur. At first no one

believes that Arthur pulled the sword out, but once they see him do it they believe, and make him
 Berg 26

king (1:01:00-1:06:30). Of course this scene is taken directly from medieval texts, but the rest of

the movie does not fit closely at all to the original portrayal of Arthur. It is very interesting to get

two Arthur characters that would have never been present in a medieval text, and both from

Disney. Women and children are both pretty taboo topics in the middle ages and so having both

take on the role of King Arthur, even if they did not necessarily share all the same

characteristics, made for a very interesting watch indeed.

Another form in which King Arthur is quite popular in is television series. Two in

particular are Merlin and Once Upon a Time. The TV series Merlin follows the coming of age

stories of the main King Arthur characters. They are all teenagers when the show starts, and

Arthur in particular starts the series of as a bit of a bully who constantly picked on those below

him in status (1,1). This is an interesting take, focusing almost entirely on the bad sides of Arthur

at the beginning. It works pretty well because the audience is able to find their own goodness in

Arthur, rather than being told right from the beginning how amazing he is. But, over the rest of

season one he actually starts to mature, and begins to help people when they are in need. This is

more like the chronicle Arthur, always running to the aid of someone in need, and always

winning the fight. In episode 4 of season 1 Arthur actually disobeys his father and tries to find a

cure for Merlin when he drinks from a poisoned cup. This is a different experience than other

King Arthurs would come across. This teenage Arthur is definitely not one who puts his

kingdom before his personal matters. He always tries to protect his friends, and is more of a

warrior king, but not as deadly. He even helps save Mordreds life (unknowingly) in episode 8 of

season 1. This is a big deal because even though he does not realize it is Mordred that he is

helping, it is still a complete stranger, which means that he is moving on from just helping his

friends to helping anyone in need. The Arthur from medieval texts only helped strangers if they
 Berg 27

asked for help, and even then he sometimes had circumstances that made the situations more

difficult. And his good deeds continue way into the second, third, and fourth season when he

tries to save Gwen (2,4), finds the captured Morgana (3,1), and tries for find a cure for his dying

father (4,3). He is constantly trying to help those that he loves, even when they do not always

have the best intentions for him. However, even though he is always trying to help, he still

struggles with other aspects of growing up. Throughout the fourth season, especially after the

death of his father, Arthur struggles with the responsibilities of being king. But this only makes

him a more realistic Arthur. This season is a good representation of the popular Arthur because it

is based in the same time period but it is before Arthur becomes an adult.

Once Upon a Time takes the opposite direction with their King Arthur. When he is first

introduced in season 5, episode 1 he seems to be the King Arthur of legend. He rides in on his

horse covered in armor, and he looks exactly how anyone would imagine King Arthur to look.

But farther into the season, it becomes more obvious that Arthur is not the good King of legend.

In episode 4 of season 5 Arthur begins to unravel as he tries to make Excalibur whole. He is so

focused on retrieving the lost piece that he forgets all about Guinevere and spends all of his time

researching, and going mad because of it. This is a very new Arthur, and it is almost scary to

watch him go crazy. With chronicle texts Arthur is always in complete control, and even in

romance texts he usually knows what to do. And when he does not, he is not all that bothered.

The main characters also start to realize in this episode that Arthur should not to be trusted. This

comes to a head in episode 8 when Arthur takes control of Merlin with the sword and tries to

make him kill Emmas family. Although Arthur has some moments of extreme greed and

ruthlessness throughout medieval texts, he never reaches the point of being evil the way this

Arthur does. He is so invested in trying to get what he wants that he will do anything in and
 Berg 28

above his power. It is because of this that he is on the extreme opposite of the scale for popular

literature, and this character shows just how much liberty modern day authors and directors can

take with the character of King Arthur.

Many people in todays society think of King Arthur as the greatest king that ever lived,

or did not live. This view of King Arthur is so extremely warped from the original King Arthur

that, when first reading medieval texts, it is hard to understand how anyone could have this

opinion. The Arthur that is written about in all of the earliest texts, both in chronicle and

romance texts, is a flawed individual. While he does have extreme strength, wealth and a love for

his country and God throughout chronicle texts, he is also extremely greedy and completely

ruthless at times. And in romances he is almost always an inactive king that is barely able to

defend his kingdom at times. So where did these people get their views? Well from popular

literature for the most part. Popular literature is able to pull only the best parts of King Arthur,

and sometimes the worst, from old texts, in order to create the ideal hero for whatever book,

movie, or TV show he is starring in. This means that most people only see the best in King

Arthur, and when they do see the worst, it is an evil version and not the true King Arthur. But

why is popular literature so interested in King Arthur? Well when all of the best parts of Arthur

in medieval texts are combined the ideal King Arthur is created. He is a king that rules his

kingdom with love and kindness, but can also defend it from any enemy. It is this ideal of a

perfect king that has stuck around so long, not the characteristics of the first King Arthur himself.

From medieval to popular literature King Arthur has changed so much that he is nearly

impossible to pin down. However, it is possible to find the characteristics of the ideal King

Arthur by sorting through the changes made from the start of medieval literature all the way to

the popular literature of today.

 Berg 29

Works Cited

Armstrong, Dorsey. Rewriting the Chronicle Tradition: The Alliterative Morte

Arthure and Arthurs Sword of Peace. Parergon, vol. 25, issue 1, 2008, pp. 81-
101. Humanities Source, doi:10.1353/pgn.0.0006.

Ashe, Geoffrey. The Discovery of King Arthur. Anchor Press/ Doubleday, 1985.

Avalon High. Directed by Stuart Gillard, performances by Brit Robertson, Samuel Levi,
and Greg Sulkin, Jaffe/Braunstein Films, 2010.

Bruso, Steven P.W. The Sword and the Scepter: Mordred, Arthur, and the Dual Roles of
Kingship in the Alliterative Morte Arthure. Arthuriana, vol. 25, issue 2, 2015, pp. 44-
58.

Cabot, Meg. Avalon High. HarperCollins, 2007.

Capps, Johnny, Julian Jones, Jake Michie, and Julian Murphy, creators. Merlin. Shine
and BBC Wales, 2008-2012.

Davidson, Roberta. The Reel Arthur: Politics and Truth Claims in Camelot, Excalibur,
and King Arthur. Arthuriana, vol. 17, issue 2, 2007, pp. 62-84. Project MUSE,
doi:edspmu.S1934153907200040.

Horowwitz, Adam and Edward Kitsis, creators. Once Upon a Time. Kitsis/Horowitz and ABC
Studios, 2011-2017.

Hutton, Ronald. The Early Arthur. The Cambridge Companion to Arthurian Legend, edited by
Elizabeth Archibald and Ad Putter, Cambridge University Press, 2009, 21-25.

Jenkins, Elizabeth. The Mystery of King Arthur. Coward, McCann & Geoghegan, Inc.,
1975.

Kalinke, Marianne E. The Saga of the Mantle. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J.
Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 223-235.

Kibler, William W. Chrtien de Troyes, Lancelot, or The Knight of the Cart. The Romance of
Arthur, edited by Norris J. Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis
Group, 2013, 112-180.

Krishna, Valerie. The Alliterative Morte Arthure. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J.
Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 501-541.

Lacey, Norris J. Broul, The Romance of Tristran. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J.
Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 236-281.
 Berg 30

Lacey, Norris J. Marie de France, Lanval. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J. Lacey
and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 294-314.

Loomis, Richard M. Arthur in Geoffrey of Monmouth. The Romance of Arthur, edited by

Norris J. Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 58-87.

Lupack, Alan. Arthur. The Camelot Project, 20 Nov. 2017,

d.lib.rochester.eu/Camelot/theme/arthur

Lupack, Alan. The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle. The Romance of Arthur,
edited by Norris J. Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group,
2013, 476-500.

Malory, Sir Thomas. Le Morte Darthur. Oxford University Press, 1998.

Putter, Ad. The twelfth-century Arthur. The Cambridge Companion to Arthurian Legend,
edited by Elizabeth Archibald and Ad Putter, Cambridge University Press, 2009, 36-52.

Rosenberg, Samuel N. The Prose Merlin and the Suite du Merlin. The Romance of Arthur,
edited by Norris J. Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group,
2013, 324-376.

Taylor, Jane H. M. The thirteenth-century Arthur. The Cambridge Companion to Arthurian

Legend, edited by Elizabeth Archibald and Ad Putter, Cambridge University Press, 2009,
53-68.

The Sword in the Stone. Directed by Wolfgang Reitherman, performances by Rickie Sorensen,
Sebastian Cabot, and Karl Swenson, Walt Disney Productions, 1963.

Wilhelm, James J. Cantare on the Death of Tristan. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J.
Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 315-323.

Wilhelm, James J. Layamon, Brut. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J. Lacey and
James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 100-111.

Wilhelm, James J. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris
J. Lacey and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 409-475.

Wilhelm, James J. Wace, Roman de Brut. The Romance of Arthur, edited by Norris J. Lacey
and James J. Wilhelm, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2013, 88-99.