Research Portfolio 4
David Scott Wilson-Okamura. “Adultery and the Fall of Logres in the Post-Vulgate Suite du Merlin.” Arthuriana 7.4, Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1997: p 17-46
The fall of the Kingdom of Logres is often blamed on the incestuous relationship between King Arthur and the wife of King Lot, which resulted in the birth of Mordred. However, David Scott Wilson-Okamura uses his article “Adultery and the Fall of Logres in the Post Vulgate Suite du Merlin” in hopes to prove that the egregious error made by King Arthur was not the incestuous aspect of the relationship, but the adulterous aspect. He asserts that the affair of King Arthur with those of King David in the Old Testament, stating that this earlier story from the Bible actually served as a model for the later one in both textual style and in philosophy. Using comparative examples from each text, Wilson-Okamura states a convincing case that Arthur’s affair with the wife of Lot was in fact the event that triggered a chain reaction, which ultimately ends in the fall of Logres. To appreciate the article itself, one must have a basic understanding of both texts, as well as a willingness to accept the broad assumptions and divergence of thought that Wilson-Okamura applies in his article.
To reason with his audience as to why the adulterous action is the more prominent offence, Wilson-Okamura first must dispel the more widely accepted understanding that the incestuous relationship between Arthur and the wife of Lot as the cause of the fall of Logres. He states that Arthur’s ignorance as to his own sister’s existence exempts him from intentionally committing to an incestuous relationship (Wilson-Okamura 19). Though there is an abundance of prophecy as to the impending downfall of King Arthur, often it is ambiguous or obscure, so the intended meaning is lost in the attempted aid. Also, the use of prophecy can be very frank as to its meanings, yet given at an inopportune moment, the hero may be unable to see the necessity to heed the advice. However, Wilson-Okamura describes the necessity of recognizing that Arthur committed two sins—sins that prompt Merlin to prophesize “‘just as aventure [or destiny] gave you your kingdom so aventure will take it away from you’” (Wilson-Okamura 23). The graver of these two sins, adultery, is such because Arthur committed this sin knowingly, as opposed to the sin of incest that he performed in ignorance.
Wilson-Okamura finds the story of King David to have been the model on which King Arthur’s story was based. King David as well commits an act of adultery as he seduces Bathsheba, and, like the wife of Lot, Bathsheba becomes pregnant. To avoid scandal, David sends Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, to the front lines of the war where he is killed. David weds Bathsheba and begins the sequence of events that ultimately lead to the fall of the Hebrew nation. In both the story of King David and that of King Arthur, Wilson-Okamura takes it upon himself to point to the similarities of each of the stories. Each king committed a terrible sin by knowingly taking another man’s wife (Wilson-Okamura 29). The consequences of a child in both cases caused a need for a “cover-up,” bringing about murderous tendencies. In David’s case, murder was carried out when Uriah was sent to the front lines, while Arthur’s attempted murder of his unknown child Mordred are thwarted (Wilson-Okamura 30, 33). Finally, both stories show a prophecy (for David a parable; for Arthur a dream) that indicates the forthcoming destiny of each king. He is reminded “that his elevation to the throne was God’s own doing; his sin has placed him at enmity with God [and thus] the demise of the kingdom is prophesized” (Wilson-Okamura 33).
The concluding remarks of the article call into question why it is fated that the kingdom must suffer the dire consequences put forth by the previous actions of each king. Wilson-Okamura has difficulty accepting his own writing as he states that “Logres suffers for Arthur’s crime: not because it deserves to, but because ‘the evil that men do lives after them’” (Wilson-Okamura 37). He struggles with the idea that there is no such thing as “fair” and that the arbitrary rules of life must be applied, no matter how “grim” they may seem (Wilson-Okamura 37). However, Wilson-Okamura finds his own answer in a section of the story of David. When David says he has sinned against God only, his comment refers to his adulterous affair as being a violation of obedience to God. Such obedience, to the ‘laws’ of life serve a distinct purpose in the story as “they restore a sense of contingency to a legend, the shape of which has been fixed now for nearly a century” (Wilson-Okamura 40). For Wilson-Okamura, these laws or forbidden actions create the possibility of choice by the characters, allowing for consequences to follow as they may.
The article “Adultery and the Fall of Logres,” fully fulfills its attempt at comparing the Post-Vulgate Suite de Merlin with that of the story of King David in the bible. It is apparent that the two stories are related in form and style, as they possess similar occurrences. Though the slight difference in actions both King Arthur and King David suffer from the same adulterous sin. As each story follows in its series of events, Wilson-Okamura makes plain the paralleling actions between each. The images and thematic lenses in both stories are also compared and found to be similar as each king struggles to cover-up the sin that ultimately leads to the downfall of the Kingdom. The article suggests that the stories in the romance of Arthur could possibly all be based on biblical texts. As each knight in Arthur’s court set out on their quests for knowledge, truth and adventure, so too do the prophets and disciples of God set to find these fulfilling virtues. The article also implies that the fate of an entire kingdom in a medieval romance rests squarely upon the soldiers of the aristocratic families, because their downfall also marks the fall of the kingdom into war and siege.
An interesting aspect of the comparison between the lives of King Arthur and King David that has seems to have been forgotten are the roles of the women who bear each King a son. It is prophesized that Guinever will cause Arthur great trouble because of her great beauty, but no such implications are made about Bathsheba by Wilson-Okamura. Likewise, Guinever’s alleged adulterous relationship with Lancelot helps to bring about the final events in Arthur’s story, yet, after bearing David’s son, Bathsheba does not seem to be present with an important role in the story.
In the book study of Medieval Romance by John Stevens, there is a discussion about the relation of the medieval romance to stories of the Bible. It is abundantly clear in this article that the great number of parallels between the biblical story of David and the story of Arthur, yet it does not appear as to what end. None of the characters, save Lancelot, seem to reference God in anyway other than as the one who bestowed upon each king his Kingdom. There is no sense of fidelity to the Lord, nor are there strong Christian virtues present within the story itself as Arthur violates one of the ten commandments by taking to bed his neighbors wife. Stevens suggests that the reference to the bible is to further the idea that romance is heightened in its comparison to those things holy. However, especially in this reading and application of the Bible to Le Suite de Merlin, this is definitely not the case as there is no reference to real love at all.
The article provides a basic comparison between the story of King David and King Arthur and most readily calls into the fact that the story of Arthur could in fact be based on the story of David. In the conclusion of his article, Wilson-Okamura questions why it is necessary that the fall of the Kingdom of Logres must coincide with the death of King Arthur. He considers the suggestion that the gods do not seem to care, a bit of irony based upon the article he has just completed. However, it appears that the downfall of the kingdom is inevitable and not due to the disdain of god, rather, because without Arthur the entire inner-workings of the kingdom have become unraveled. With so many connections in aristocratic families and the supreme reign of Arthur ruling over them all, such conflict is destined to arise when he is no longer present. The article, while being an easily understood read, provides an exemplary comparison of King David and King Arthur while it follows the moral statement being made in each.
Meredith Marconi
University of Mary Washington
