Arthurian Alignments

[Jaguira]

...Because I'm in an Arthurian mood (as always) and a general dork like that

So, what are the alignments of some of the better-known (Or lesser-known, if you want) Arthurian characters, in your opinion? Please discuss and give reasons why

Just to get things started: Odd as this may seem to some, Arthur has always struck me as Neutral Good as opposed to Lawful Good, mostly because he seems more concerned with goodness in itself then law or chaos in particular. Granted, when his own laws force him to sentance his wife to burn at the stake, he follows through, but that's more out of concern for "setting a good example" for the people- He doesn't want people to think of him or future kings as "above the law," because to him, that would be an evil act/lead to corruption in the future.

Guinevere... I'd say more of Chaotic Neutral. She isn't too terribly concerned with good or evil, although she clearly preferrs the former over the latter- She just doesn't go out of her way to promote it. The chaotic bit comes from her tendancies to follow her heart and concience, and from her general willingness to sacrafice "lesser" beleifs in order to make herself happy.

Mordred has me stuck. Part of me wants to place him as Lawful Evil, but... He doesn't seem too terribly concerned with following laws, or even a personal code, unless "kill Arthur and rule the country not matter what" counts as a code So maybe Neutral Evil for now.

Lancelot's another tricky one. He has strong held convictions and tries his absolute best to stick to them (Lawful), but periodically breaks them because of his love for Guinevere. No question about him being some type of Good, however, because he actively persues personal betterment ("perfection") and the betterment of others' situations/lives.

Anyways, I hope I put this in the right forum ^_^;

[Tallis]

Well, I agree that Arthur would be neutral good.
I'd say Lancelot started as lawful good, but later slipped to neutral good through his affair with Guinevere.
Galahad? Lawful Good, easy. He is the definition of paladin.
Mordred I would say Chaotic evil. He cares for noone but himself and will use any means to get what he wants.
Merlin is neutral with good tendencies. I think he's got the good of the country in mind, but he'll use whatever means are necessary to protect it.
Gawain is maybe chaotic good. He's got a hell of a temper if I remember correctly.
Morgan LeFay I would say is neutral evil. She hates Arthur and wants to bring him down, but she supports her son and tries to avoid having him come to harm.

That's all I can remember well enough to label for now.

[Jaguira]

Well, I agree that Arthur would be neutral good.
I'd say Lancelot started as lawful good, but later slipped to neutral good through his affair with Guinevere.

Lawful ---> Neutral Good fits Lancelot perfectly! :3

Mordred I would say Chaotic evil. He cares for noone but himself and will use any means to get what he wants.

He cares for his dear old mum, Morgan le Fey/Morgause! Going by what you put for her, I'd say her son would be Neutral Evil as well. Also, he does't actively promote chaos and exploits the law when possible, for example by forging a letter of his father's death in order to become king.

Merlin is neutral with good tendencies. I think he's got the good of the country in mind, but he'll use whatever means are necessary to protect it.

Wouldn't that make him more Chaotic Good? Then again, if "whatever means necessary" includes evil acts, then I suppose he would be some form of neutral.

Gawain is maybe chaotic good. He's got a hell of a temper if I remember correctly.

Gawain does have a very, very nasty temper, and although he's done a few bad things because of it, overall he means well. Chaotic Good fits him quite well.

[jamroar]

Arthur, Lawful Neutral with good tendencies. He is lawful due to his desire to unify the land and codify the rules of knightly chivalry. He did have his evil moments when he went all Herody and tried to kill the baby Mordred.
Merlin, True Neutral, with lawful tendencies.
Guinevere, I agree, Chaotic Neutral.
Launcelot, Neutral Good, the original fallen paladin due to being ruled by his passions.
Galahad, his son is the LG archtypical paladin who succeeds at the Grail Quest.
Morgan Le Faye, Neutral Evil.

[Anxe]

Sir Kay would be Lawful Good wouldn't he?
And what about that knight that Arthur fights right after he becomes king. The one who's holding up people on the road. Sir P-something. He'd be Chaotic Neutral wouldn't he?

[Driderman]

Eh... being chaotic doesn't mean you have a temper or use whatever means necessary. It means that you dislike order and rules and act accordingly. As an extreme, it means you see no need for an orderered society because you feel that everyone can and should be self-sufficient and beholden to no man or woman. That's pretty contrary to being a knight of the round, innit?

Its been a long while since I read up on my Arthurian legends, but I can't really think of anyone who would fit a chaotic alignment, except maybe Mordred but thats mainly because he's a loony

[Tallis]

Eh... being chaotic doesn't mean you have a temper or use whatever means necessary. It means that you dislike order and rules and act accordingly. As an extreme, it means you see no need for an orderered society because you feel that everyone can and should be self-sufficient and beholden to no man or woman. That's pretty contrary to being a knight of the round, innit?

I base alignments more on actions than beliefs. Gawain might believe in order, but when his temper gets the best of him that goes out the window. Arthur was willing to break the laws to save those he cared about, even though he knew order was for the good of everyone.

[puppyavenger]

Agreed I don't understand why people think that ends justify the means is cg, if you ask me it's closer t LN or TN.

[Tallis]

He cares for his dear old mum, Morgan le Fey/Morgause! Going by what you put for her, I'd say her son would be Neutral Evil as well. Also, he does't actively promote chaos and exploits the law when possible, for example by forging a letter of his father's death in order to become king.

You may be right, it's been a long time since I read anything Arthurian. However, I'm not sure that exploiting the law is a good example. He twists the law to benefit himself. He doesn't follow it because he believes in order. How does he react to a law that doesn't suit him? Don't kill the king for instance?

[jamroar]

Sir Kay would be Lawful Good wouldn't he?
And what about that knight that Arthur fights right after he becomes king. The one who's holding up people on the road. Sir P-something. He'd be Chaotic Neutral wouldn't he?

Pellinore? The guy who sundered Arthur's "My First Excalibur™"? I don't know, challenging strange knights to duels/jousts at the drop of a hat seems to be in the knightly charter.

That depends, which version of Arthur are we talking about? True Neutral with evil tendencies, if it's the one who drowned a boatload of babies trying to kill Mordred. Lawful Good, if we're going by TH White's model.

The "Once and Future King" does have that episode, Arthur confesses to it being a stain on his conscience to Launcelot and Guinevere in his old age.

[Telonius]

That depends, which version of Arthur are we talking about? True Neutral with evil tendencies, if it's the one who drowned a boatload of babies trying to kill Mordred. Lawful Good, if we're going by TH White's model.

[Jaguira]

Arthur, Lawful Neutral with good tendencies. He is lawful due to his desire to unify the land and codify the rules of knightly chivalry. He did have his evil moments when he went all Herody and tried to kill the baby Mordred.

One evil act may stain an otherwise "Good" record, but it doesn't make them neutral. Besides, in most stories he felt awful about it afterwards. He sees the code of chivalry as more of a means of getting people to behave ("Might for Right"), and when the code expends its usefulness he tries something else instead (The Grail Quest). He wants to do good, and uses whatever's most useful for it- be it law, chaos, or a bit of both.

You may be right, it's been a long time since I read anything Arthurian. However, I'm not sure that exploiting the law is a good example. He twists the law to benefit himself. He doesn't follow it because he believes in order. How does he react to a law that doesn't suit him? Don't kill the king for instance?

True... I still think he's Neutral Evil, though. Because he cares about his mother and doesn't nesecarily act very chaotic OR lawful. He uses the law, but doesn't feel beholden to it- yet doesn't promote chaos, either- typical "Law/Chaos" neutral :3


Now that I think about it, in T.H. White's The Book of Merlyn, Merlyn/Merlin states that he's "An Anarchist, as all sensible people are." Which would make him Chaotic Good... But that's Mr. White's interpitation of him.

[Jaguira]

That depends, which version of Arthur are we talking about? True Neutral with evil tendencies, if it's the one who drowned a boatload of babies trying to kill Mordred. Lawful Good, if we're going by TH White's model.

He tried to drown Mordred and the rest of the babies in those books, too.

And I kind of meant over-all/in general :3

[lotofsnow]

Gawain does have a very, very nasty temper, and although he's done a few bad things because of it, overall he means well. Chaotic Good fits him quite well.

Remember though, in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Gawain vowed to accept a blow in exchange for his blow to the Green Knight. He kept his vow, and headed to the Green Knight's kingdom to be there at the appointed time (a year and a day, if I remember correctly). Throughout his stay at Bercilak's castle, he was tempted by the lord's wife. Though tempted, his honor prevailed. However, he did accept the magic girdle from the lady to avoid succumbing to the blow (one he knew would most certainly fell him). When the Green Knight eventually points out that he knows Gawain is wearing the belt his wife gave him, his face turns read, not with anger, but with shame.

In the Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, Gawain holds his word and duty to his king as most important and marries the hideous Dame Ragnelle.

In my opinion, Gawain is a man of honor and of a strict code. At worst, I would say he's Neutral Good, but more likely Lawful Good despite his temper, which was rarely flamed due to trivial things but more often ignited by injustice.

[Raum]

I’m going to buck the trend here. In my opinion, Arthur was Neutral Evil. He was out for himself first, foremost, and only. It shows in Mordred’s birth, Guenivere’s death, and his grasp for power to start with.

Merlin is Lawful Neutral. He spends most of his time supporting Arthur’s laws while attempting to mitigate some of the excesses.

Mordred is the tough one, it really depends on which of the legends you use as the basis for his motivations. Since the revenge motif is one of the most prevalent, I’ll go with it and say Mordred was Lawful Evil. He and his mother were wronged and dishonored, his efforts are about redressing that wrong.

[Wraithy]

but what of brave brave sir Robin?
sorry, i know what i've done, i'll leave now

[Matthew]

Ummn. Definitely a difficult one this, since the various legends present conflicting representations of the key characters.

I would say, that in general, most of the Knights are Lawful Neutral with Good tendencies. Personal honour codes are a big thing with them, as is order and place within the world. Galahad, I would say, is a Lawful Good Paladin and Lancelot a fallen Lawful Good Paladin.

Gawain, Kay and Bors are all Lawful Neutral Fighters (hee, hee, screw that stupid Knight Class), Percival is some kind of Lawful Good Character, could be a Paladin, but I'm thinking Fighter. Gareth would be in a similar situation.

Agravain, Mordred and the 'evil' Knight camp are probably Neutral with tendencies towards Evil and Law. Mordered might be outright Neutral Evil, but that depends on the version of the tales you read and your Alignment definitions.

Guinevere and Elaine are probably Neutral with Good tendencies. Merlin is almost certainly Lawful Neutral with tendencies towards Neutrality and Good.

Morgana I would peg as Neutral to Neutral Evil, Nimue probably Neutral.

Tristan and Isolde are hard to guess at, probably Neutral with tendencies towards Law and Good.

The Green Knight is probably Lawful Neutral.

[Tallis]

Remember though, in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Gawain vowed to accept a blow in exchange for his blow to the Green Knight. He kept his vow, and headed to the Green Knight's kingdom to be there at the appointed time (a year and a day, if I remember correctly). Throughout his stay at Bercilak's castle, he was tempted by the lord's wife. Though tempted, his honor prevailed. However, he did accept the magic girdle from the lady to avoid succumbing to the blow (one he knew would most certainly fell him). When the Green Knight eventually points out that he knows Gawain is wearing the belt his wife gave him, his face turns read, not with anger, but with shame.

In the Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, Gawain holds his word and duty to his king as most important and marries the hideous Dame Ragnelle.

In my opinion, Gawain is a man of honor and of a strict code. At worst, I would say he's Neutral Good, but more likely Lawful Good despite his temper, which was rarely flamed due to trivial things but more often ignited by injustice.

You make some very good points. I'll change my answer to neutral good for Gawain.

[elliott20]

like everybody else has said, this all depends upon the version of the tale that you follow.

If we go with Malory, where Arthur actually does follow pretty strict form to ascend to legitimacy, you can see plenty of the lawful side of him come out. The later versions of the tale have made arthur to become far more morally impeccable than his earlier versions. And if we're going with that, we can clearly see an LG alignment emerging from the later works. Cross this with the religious subtext and the strict following of the royal bloodline, Arthur is almost certainly an example interpretation of paladinhood himself.

If, however, we go with Arthur from his earlier traditions, he could very well be just about any alignment you damn well please, as each version of him have done things that are less than honorable.

The thing is, the chivalric code effects ALL arthurian characters in some capacity, especially in the later arthurian traditions. So, just following the code should not be sufficient to make them lawful. Their interpretations of it, however, does.

[Tequila Sunrise]

Shall we get into Marion Zimmer Bradley's The Mists of Avalon? Now that's morally grey area right there.

[Jaguira]

Jeez, no kidding! I liked the bits of the book I read (It was far too wordy for my attention span, so I skipped around rather arbitrarily) but never was able to bring myself to finish it. But, from what I have read of it, it for the most part turns a lot of the roles upside down, particularly those of the "fey" bloodline- Morgain/Morgan, Morgause, Lancelot, The Lady of the Lake, ect.

Raum: Mordred's birth is usually atributed to the fact that neither Arthur nor Morgan/Morgause knew they were related, so I see no evil act there. Guinevere's death was him following out his own laws- she had commited treason, and it was his duty as king to have her executed. Also, I don't see how claiming your birthright is a grasp for power.

[Matthew]

Mordred as Arthur's son is also often ascribed to a textual error that got away during translation.

[Raum]

Raum: Mordred's birth is usually atributed to the fact that neither Arthur nor Morgan/Morgause knew they were related, so I see no evil act there.

Possibly, but his reaction to and treatment of both Morgause and Mordred are just as telling. In at least one story he attempts to murder Morgause to prevent Mordred's birth. And most stories have him shunning Mordred when Morgause sends him to court.

Guinevere's death was him following out his own laws- she had commited treason, and it was his duty as king to have her executed.

As you say, it was his own law. Oppressive laws are not "good."

Also, I don't see how claiming your birthright is a grasp for power.

Technically, it wasn't his birthright. He was a bastard and unable to inherit. What he did do, was take up a sword and prove he was more ruthless and a better military commander than those opposing his rise to power. He even married Guenivere to secure an alliance, not for less selfish reasons.

[Ramza00]

It really, and I mean really, depends on whose version of Arthur we are talking about. Arthurian myth has been retold hundrends of times by different authors and the motivations of each character changes with each tale.

[Jack Mann]

As well, the morality of the culture changes in each telling. We're less accepting of the divine right of kings these days.

[Jaguira]

Matthew: Really? I didn't know that! Still, I'm kind of glad it did. Makes things more interesting :3



Just as many stories have him having the crap scared out of him by Merlin and everyone else for "siring a bastard" that will "bring the ruin of the kingdom"- arguably, he's killing them in the hopes of saving the country. And honestly, who wouldn't shun a child that was prophesised to kill you? (Besides Elan, who would know from the start via his knowlage of literarry techniques that it's the "shunning" of the child that brings it to kill the "shunner." )

Oppressive laws are not good, obviously. However high treason is hardly a crime to be taken lightly, and keep in mind that for a very long time he was willing to turn a blind eye to Guinevere and Lancelot's affair- Right up until Mordred and Agravaine forced his hand, in fact.

Alright, his parents weren't married at the exact time of his conception, but he was as close to a legitamate heir as was around. I don't think Gawain and his brothers were anything but wee babes at the time, and they weren't actually blood related anyways. Also, marriages merely to secure alilances or gain power were the norm of the time- love was supposed to be the result of marriage, not the cause of it. The rule of the strongest wasn't such an unusual thing, either- and after Arthur defended himself against the upsurpering lesser kings, he worked to destroy the institution of "might makes right" because he felt it was wrong.

[Jaguira]

It really, and I mean really, depends on whose version of Arthur we are talking about. Arthurian myth has been retold hundrends of times by different authors and the motivations of each character changes with each tale.

Then state the version you're going with! Or just go for an over-all feel :3 I, for example, am basing my interpetations mostly off of T.H. White's works.

As well, the morality of the culture changes in each telling. We're less accepting of the divine right of kings these days.

True. But that doesn't mean that the entire concepts of "good" and "evil" have been turned on their heads, either- they're just slightly different now then they were then. Whether you want to take these differences into account is up to you :3

[Matthew]

Matthew: Really? I didn't know that! Still, I'm kind of glad it did. Makes things more interesting :3

Yeah, at least that's as much as I recall offhand from a Seminar a few years ago. Check out the Wiki Article: Mordred. I cannot remember what the mistranslation is said to be exactly, but it was said to have happened during the story's transition to the big French Vulgate version. I know there's a book I ought to be recommending that will have fuller details... something like "An Arthurian Love Triangle"... hmmn, time to check my Bibliography: Ahah:

Korrel, Peter, An Arthurian Triangle: A Study of the Origin, Development and Characterisation of Arthur, Guinevere and Mordred (Leiden: Brill, 1984)

There you go, a good read if you get the chance.

[Jaguira]

...
Korrel, Peter, An Arthurian Triangle: A Study of the Origin, Development and Characterisation of Arthur, Guinevere and Mordred (Leiden: Brill, 1984)

There you go, a good read if you get the chance.

If only I had known of this book when I was at the library earlier today D: Oh well, thanks for posting it regardless. I'm going to check it out ASAP!!