7 Allison Dellion – Submitting Malory’s Application for Sainthood

This paper is a final project for the Middle English Literature course based on Le Morte D’Arthur by Thomas Mallory. Allison Dellion (she/her/hers) is from Terre Haute, Indiana. She will graduate in Spring 2025 receiving a B.A. in English with a concentration in Technical Writing. Professor Alisa Clapp-Itnyre notes, “Allison wrote an excellent reading of Malory against his famous Morte d’Arthur, using very good historical maneuvers and connections, great textual examples, and so well written. Well, well done!!”

Submitting Malory’s Application for Sainthood

For certain, the author of Le Morte D’Arthur lived during the War of the Roses, a civil war in England, in which contenders to the throne sought to make their claim strongest. England was in turmoil and a period of instability. While historians cannot be for sure, most believe the author of Le Morte D’Arthur to be the ‘Newbold Revel’ Thomas Malory of Warwickshire (Aurner 362). The implications of this assessment lead scholars to conclude Malory was a rebel with a cause. He has an embarrassingly long RAP sheet full of just about every injustice a person could commit in one lifetime. According to Nellie Slayton Aurner in “Sir Thomas Malory–Historian?,” Malory “had his youthful enthusiasm enlisted in the efforts of Henry IV to establish his royal title and quell rebellions against it” (362). His political aspirations occupied his mind and time for most of his life including during the authorship of his manuscript Le Morte D’Arthur. A careful review of Malory’s crimes and accusers provides a more lenient perspective and can be shown to have influenced his manuscript. He is accused of attempted murder, theft, extortion, and rape on two occasions, and even though he has rich and powerful friends, still spends a considerable amount of time in jail (Aurner 363). Taking into account historical events at the time, there are other perspectives to Malory’s list of crimes. Catherine Batt argues that Malory was guilty of rape and writes about its manifestations in her essay, however, she presents the argument from other scholars regarding Malory’s true identity and what can scholars infer about him personally. In her paper, “Malory and Rape,” she states that, “Helen Castor’s review for Arthuriana agrees with Field’s conclusion: the extant material offers ‘no possibility of reconstructing Malory’s emotional and intellectual life’” (78). Given Malory’s deplorable record, can scholars still justify encouraging his literature to remain mainstream? While scholars are having trouble reconciling Malory’s life with his deeds, there is an opportunity to review Le Morte D’Arthur as Malory’s answer to his life of crime. By taking the biographical and historical evidence we do have and closely analyzing Malory’s choices in Le Morte D’Arthur, we can better understand who Malory was and why it is still important to read his work.

Malory’s involvement in the War of the Roses put him into some uncomfortable positions with the law on multiple occasions. Batt quotes Tom Shippey as saying that Malory must be, “the least politically correct author still commonly read” (79). Therefore, it is important to make justifications on his behalf. The Duke of Buckingham regularly accused and assessed punishments to Malory until he was pardoned by King Edward IV in 1461. Perhaps some of Malory’s transgressions could be explained since he spent many years opposing the House of Lancaster in their vie for the throne. Taking a look at Malory’s criminal record allows historians to understand his position in England’s civil war. A pardon on July 14, 1468, from Edward IV excluding Malory and other York sympathizers left him imprisoned during his authorship of the Le Morte D’Arthur manuscript (Malory xxvi). Scholars agree Malory had access to an extensive library of resource material from which to write: “Prisoners with money were regarded by the jailer as paying guests, were given considerable liberty, and could be made comfortable as their means permitted” (Aurner 363). Aurner states that, “perhaps the militant knight, seeking an outlet for his outraged sense of justice and loyalty, discovered the means of long-circuiting his emotions through the channels offered by the romances in this library” (364). Malory was inspired by the injustices of the civil war and fueled his attempts to restore order by offering his version of King Arthur to the world.

Thomas Malory’s life was nothing like the ideals he established for Camelot. His decisions in life influenced his desire to create a perfect world, but then fill it with real people, which made it impossible to live up to those standards. In Le Morte D’Arthur, at the end of King Arthur’s wedding, he gives the knights a code by which to follow. He tells them, “never to do outerage nothir mourthir, and allwayes to fle treason, and to gyff mercy unto hym that asquith mercy” and “allwayes to do ladies, damesels, and jantilwomen and wydowes [socour]” (Malory 77). King Arthur’s moral standards are derived from Malory’s medieval perspective. While his criminal record may not necessarily reflect the life of an honorable man, taking into account Malory’s position in the civil war explains why he was so often accused. Shippey blames Malory’s personal moral code for the failings of Camelot, he “charts a general discomfiture over the charges of rape against the historical Malory” (Batt 79). Instead, Malory’s actions should be interpreted as a desire to end his country’s civil war and to establish the right heir to the throne. Living in a time of instability and uncertainty, Malory acted to restore order by causing his enemies chaos. In that same spirit, Le Morte D’arthur presents its characters with worldly personalities. Malory’s tale reflects real life and is not designed to be a fairy tale in the traditional sense.

The life and times of Arthur are parallel to Malory’s lived experiences during the War of the Roses. The landscape mimics the time period of Malory’s life. England’s countryside was turned into battlefronts on numerous occasions as both sides of the War of the Roses pushed back or antagonized the opposing side. In this fashion, Le Morte D’Arthur is Malory’s fictionalized version of the War of Roses. One section of the tale tells the story of how Sir Patryse was murdered by a poisoned apple at Queen Guinevere’s party (591). This was at the cause of another knight, Sir Pyonell, who held a grudge against another knight, Sir Gawayne. Everyone immediately blamed the Queen for Sir Patryse’s death with no evidence other than she was the party’s host. She is condemned to death, if no one will fight for her. After Lancelot wins back her honor, the Lady of the Lake reveals who the true murderer is (597). King Arthur’s ideal Camelot is smitten down again and again in one short tale. Jealousy, grudgery, murder, false accusation, and an exoneration that comes in at the final moment are just some of the shortcomings we can infer about the citizens of Camelot. Malory’s life experiences certainly put him face to face with many of these similar situations. Without the privilege of forensic analysis, many accused during the War of the Roses would have been implicated with little to no evidence. Malory also experienced this kind of situation when the Duke of Buckingham, Malory’s enemy, accused and condemned him (Aurner 362). Malory’s work imitated life by revealing the real nature of human character.

More connections between Malory’s King Arthur and significant historical figures during Malory’s lifetime include the kings of England. Since he was born in either 1393 or 1425, Malory would have known or heard about King Richard II, who was king from 1377-1399.  His predecessor, Edward III, known as one of the greatest English kings, restored stability to the English throne and ended the Hundred Years’ War. Richard II could not live up to his grandfather’s enormously popular reputation. Similarities between King Arthur and his father King Uther Pendragon, and Richard II and his grandfather, Edward III suggest that Malory interpreted real historical events to give credence to King Arthur’s story. King Richard and King Arthur both ascended the throne at a young age. Both kings struggled to maintain their predecessor’s power and stability. King Arthur was forced to fight several battles with neighboring kings in order to restore peace (Malory 22). King Arthur’s lack of good judgment regarding the people he surrounded himself with allowed him to be influenced by people who were at the root cause of his decline. His love for his wife and Sir Lancelot allowed him to ignore their affair until it was forcibly brought to his attention by Sir Aggravayne and Sir Gawayne (Malory 647). King Richard’s life was also marked by questionable decision-making when he arrested members of his nobility during the last few years of his life in an attempt to secure his throne. However, Henry Bolingbroke’s return to England forced Richard’s abdication. Malory was influenced to shape King Arthur by the details of the current English monarchs during his time. In this way, his tale provides legitimacy to King Arthur’s claim and makes the tale more realistic for readers.

Malory’s tale reflected the shortcomings of its characters by displaying less-than-perfect attributes and poor decision-making skills to mimic real life. Interpreting Malory’s characters as personifications of his life experiences reveals how Malory thought about his current political situation. On several occasions, the reader discovers that the characters do not live up to the chivalric code. During King Arthur’s wedding, only Sir Torres manages to come back from his quest unscathed. King Pellinore ignores his daughter and her lover and they die when he refuses to help them (Malory 77). Instead of giving mercy, as the chivalric code suggests, he ignores the cries of the girl, whose identity is unknown to him at the time, and lets her die because he is in a rush to complete what he believes is his real quest (73-77). Sir Gawayne also fails to live up to the ideals of Camelot by hastily murdering an innocent woman. He forgets to act mercifully in his cause (69). Failure to live up to the ideal would have been all around Malory in his real life. As he spent so much time in prison, he would have been interacting with other criminals. During Malory’s time, many political criminals would have been jailed simply for being on the wrong side of those in power. The failures of the knights display the vulnerabilities innate in all humans. Malory’s characters describe for the reader the social landscape of medieval England. Their decisions also explain why Malory himself was caught up in multiple instances which resulted in criminal charges.

Malory’s stroke of the pen created King Arthur, born in a time of instability and uncertainty around who deserved to be king. Malory experienced the same story, only in real life. Batt understands the issue of Malory’s identity stating, “At the root of concern over establishing who and what Malory was lies perhaps a humanist anxiety about how to reconcile ‘great writing’ with a writer deemed ‘unethical’” (80), but Malory is more than just the the pages of his criminal record. While we certainly won’t be able to submit his application for sainthood anytime soon, historians can take a lighter stance when analyzing his life of crime to be consistent with a political prisoner seeking justice. If scholars assume that Sir Thomas Malory of Newbold Revel, soldier to Richard Beuchamp, is the author of Le Morte D’Arthur, many details can be inferred about his life and his ultimate wish for the novel. We can infer his moral standards by reviewing King Arthur’s chivalric code. We can understand why he chose to portray characters as less than perfect, to paint a realistic portrait of how people behave. The downfall of Camelot was influenced by external historical influences and not because historians feel Malory was corrupt. His shady criminal record is because he wanted to encourage stability and a future for England just like Arthur did. Malory’s timeless creation allows readers a glimpse into the land of make-believe as well as the times in which the author found himself. Each version is reflected in Le Morte D’Arthur for readers to interpret for themselves.

Works Cited

Aurner, Nellie Slayton. “Sir Thomas Malory-Historian?” PMLA, vol. 48, no. 2, 1933, pp. 362–91. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/457782. Accessed 27 Nov. 2023.

Batt, Catherine. “Malory and Rape.” Arthuriana, vol. 7, no. 3, 1997, pp. 78–99. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=1997071831&site=ehost-live&scope=site