The story of King Arthur must be understood in the context of the ancient Celtic culture from whence it came. Women in that culture enjoyed equal rights with men. It was common for a chieftain to encourage his wife or queen to have relations with allied chieftains to ensure their alliance (the Guinevere-Lancelot story). Since they could never be sure of the bloodline of the child of the queen, the heir of the chieftain would be chosen matrilineally, or the son of the chieftain's sister (the nephew of the chieftain).
So the relatively normal cultural events of the Arthur story were overlaid with a Christian interpretation. Guinivere became an adultress. They assumed that since Mordred was his heir, that Arthur had incestuous relations with his sister, instead of being the natural son of Lot of Lothian.
In fact, he may not even be Lot's son. He has a Saxon name Mordred (meaning death counsel), so he may be the son of Hengist, whom Morgan le Fay may have had "alliance" relations at the encouragement of her husband Lot.
Since Morgan le Fay enjoyed the independent power of a Celtic woman (more so, since she was the King's sister), the Christians would have viewed her as uppity and rebellious in her behavior - something a Christian King would crush in an instant.
2007-10-06 07:29:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Robin Runesinger 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Morgan Le Fay Arthur
2016-12-16 04:48:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Robin Runesinger and nightshadetn certainly gave some of the more creative answers. But there isn't any actual historical evidence supporting these hypotheses. The fact is that people, especially primitive people, tend to think in stereotypes, and Christianity had two archetypes for female characters: seductress (like Eve) or pure, virtuous woman (like the Virgin Mary), so women in medieval literature tended to fall into those roles. It's certainly a possibility that there was older literature indicating that Mordred had been Arthur's nephew, and that later writers got this confused because of the mating customs of older Welsh society. But there's no indication that that's the case.
Another thing to consider is that historians have commented on how a medieval audience would have understood the role Mordred played in the literature. That is, that he was essentially the unwanted relative who was plotting your demise, who you couldn't get rid of. This was a real concern for the nobility during the time the legends were written, and this would have been understood by the audience. To a similar extent, I think the argument can be made that the audience also would have understood why Morgan hated Arthur. In most works, she's portrayed only as his half sister. That is, she was the daughter of his mother Ygraine when he was still with Duke Gorlois, before Merlin helped Arthur's father, Uther, take his dukedom. See the full story here: http://www.heroofcamelot.com/legend/birth-of-a-king
So I think it's understandable why Morgan would have felt deeply betrayed, and would have wanted revenge. And I think a medieval audience would have understood this dynamic.
2014-08-11 11:29:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is not exactly certain in Arthurian legend that Morgan le Fey did hate Arthur Pendragon. It is only in recent popular culture that she has been portrayed as the eternal antagonist to Arthur and the Knights of the Round table.
Her earliest incarnations were actually not even human, but as a spirit or a "fey", which is where her name comes from, and her character was never really expanded beyond that. It wasn't until later legends about her sprang up that she became the half-sister of Arthur through his mother Igraine.
In some recountings of Arthurian lore, including Mallory's Le Morte d'Arthur, she actually ends up an ally of the Round Table and is one of the four enchantresses who carry Arthur to Avalon after his final battle.
2007-10-06 07:13:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Aaron Spencer 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Morgan le Fey was a villain. She stole Arthur's scabbard, making him mortal. As for Mordred, most stories go like this. Arthur and a few knights went questing and left Mordred in charge. Morgan told Mordred how great he would be if he ruled Camelot. So Mordred manipulated Arthur's knights, turning the against their king. Arthur had a few hundred knights, so they made a formidable army. These knights were often quite rich, so they hired swordsman and archers. So Arthur was technically killed by his own army. Arthur had lost his greatest knights, Gawain, Lancelot, and Galahad. So he was doomed to be defeated.
2016-04-07 07:34:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
According to the research Marrion Zimmer Bradley did on the Arthurian legends Morgan was Arthur's sister as well as a priestess of the island of Avalon.
2007-10-06 07:10:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by danielle_1ca 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Noted several conflicting interpretations. I'll take mine from cinema. In the movie 'Excalibur', the young Morgan recognizes that the man who returns is not her father. She sees through the disguise Merlin used on Uther. She sees then that Arthur, her half-brother, should never have been born. He represents, In a child's mind, the man who betrayed her mother, wouldn't you hate someone like that?
2007-10-06 09:27:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Clyde 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is a very good question! Having read all of the original Arthurian legends as penned by Sir Charles Mallory in "Le Morte D'Arthur," I am shocked to realize that I have taken this conflict for granted. Since you have asked, however, it occurs to me now that, like in Beowulf, we find elements of both the Christian and Pagan traditions existing side by side. I consider now that this is the key. Morgan represents the remnants of the fading occult traditions of the Brits, while Arthur represents the rise of the Church and a New World Order. While for his chivalry and compassion he must forgive her, she realizes herself as defender of a cause that is passing away, hence, she cannot forgive lest she suffer defeat of her cause thereby. It is intended as a classic tale of "light" against "darkness." Any reader may decide for oneself which side is which.
2007-10-06 07:06:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Hi,
Are you wondering how to downoad for free King Arthur Gold? You can get it for free here: http://bit.ly/1qXIpFZ
it's a perfectly working link, no scam!
King Arthur’s Gold is a game set in the time of legends. There are castles that need to be built, and he meets that need to be destroyed, and of course gold that must be mined.
2014-09-15 17:58:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
y a pagan one), to have Arthur in power? And if she were so fanatical about paganism, why not kill Arthur? She certainly could have, even if she wouldn't have gotten away with it.
2014-02-26 18:31:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bosque 2
·
0⤊
0⤋