Since “social construction of identity has been a central concern in the criticism of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (SGGK) for at least the last thirty-five years,” there have been gender studies that analyze the construction of “femininity” and the roles of women in SGGK (Rowley 158). If it is true that femininity is constructed, then masculinity is also constructed. Previous scholarship have mainly concentrated on the construction of women, motivated by the observation that even though the entire plot is initiated by the “plans initiated by one woman [...] directed at another, performed by a third, and modulated by the actions of a fourth, ” women are still depicted minor and instrumental roles in a poem (Heng 501). However, if these women are engendered in their role, then the men are also engendered, because whatever the women supposedly lack, the men supposedly possess. This puts the men in as definitive a role as the women. Furthermore, the men in SGGK are not only under the definitive powers of manhood, they are also a particular type of male-knights. In addition, the protagonist, Gawain, is a knight at Arthur’s court, which means that he is at the social center for the establishment of knight-identity. Arthur’s court is the home base for knighthood validation, so that the actions of individual knights on their private quests are reported back to the public court of peers as proof or disproof of their knighthood. In this way, “knighthood” is socially defined and then individually performed, so that Gawain’s actions on this quest will become proof (or disproof) for his identity as a knight.
In the poem, the way in which Gawain becomes a great knight shows the construction of his identity as well as its performative aspects. In the beginning, when Gawain accepts the Green Knight’s challenge, he is subjecting himself to the role of a great knight, despite what his identity might have been before. In fact, the reason Gawain provides for accepting the challenge is that he is “the wakkest…and of wyt feeblest” among all the knights of the Round Table (“Sir Gawain and the Green Knight” line 254). Physically and mentally, he is supposedly not the best knight available. Gawain even suggested that he is only accepted at the Round Table because he is the nephew of Arthur. As part of his reasoning to take the challenge, he says to Arthur, “No bounté bot your blod I in my bodé knowe” (line 357). His kinship to Arthur brings up another issue: whether the status of knighthood is thrust upon him from birth (as with manhood). With his reasoning, he basically presents himself as a weak knight, and as the reasonable sacrifice. Although the other knights agree with his reasoning and therefore validates him as a weaker knight, the problem here is that once Gawain accepts the challenge, he ceases to be simply the knight that he has presented himself to be, and becomes the knight who has accepted the Green Knight’s challenge. The challenge has been first posed to King Arthur, and when Gawain takes over, he is stepping into the position that has been deemed worthy of King Arthur. By accepting the challenge, Gawain is now acting in the way that King Arthur would have acted if he were in the position. It does not matter whether Arthur or Gawain takes up the axe because whoever it is would act the same and would deal the same blow to the Green Knight. In this way, “knighthood” is dispossessed. As with the construction of “female” or “male,” the definition of “knighthood” is created “outside oneself, beyond oneself in a sociality that has no single author” (Butler 1). The concept of “knighthood” is formed based on how he is supposed to act. Judith Butler says that “If I am someone who cannot be without doing, then the conditions of my doing are, in part, the conditions of my existence” (Butler 3). Knighthood, then, is a performance. “A man [and in this case, a knight] is not what one is but something one does, a condition one enacts” (Culler 103). By behaving as a worthy knight, Gawain becomes a worthy knight. No matter who he has been before he accepts the challenge, Gawain is now identified as a great knight.
Gawain’s knighthood is extravagantly performed on the day that he rides out of Arthur’s court to find the Green Knight. When he leaves for the quest, “he watz hasped in armes, his harnays watz ryche: / The lest lachet other loupe lemed of golde” (lines 590-591). He is also described as “thik thrawen thyghez,” indicating his warrior strength (line 579). Then, armored in this lavish, almost ostentatious uniform, “he herknez his masse,” and then was offered a shield that has painted on the outside a “pentangel” of pure gold, and painted on the inside the image of the Virgin Mary (lines 592, 620). He is viewed, at that moment, an icon, and the same knights that agreed a year ago that Gawain should be the one to risk his life are now lamenting that “hit is scathe / That thou leude, schal be lost, that art of lyf noble” (lines 674-675). Based on what the text provides, Gawain has done nothing during the past year that proves him to be any different than he was, but now he is agreed upon by the court to be a great knight, and therefore given the means to act as one. His image as a knight is socially constructed. And since this image is created as an example of what a great knight, it is useful in discerning the two prized aspects knighthood: chivalric and Christian, which encompass the physical and the mental, respectively. Not only is Christianity a crucial part of knighthood, but it is intricately infused with chivalric knighthood. As Gawain begins his quest, he is given the means to perform both his chivalric and Christian knightliness, and whether or not his actions follow the dispossessed conventions knightly behavior would prove or disprove his knighthood.
It is sometimes difficult to simultaneously satisfy both aspects of knighthood, for there is an “essential and inescapable conflict between chivalry and Christianity” (Howard 207). For example, regarding death (a brooding concern for Gawain) the warrior code and the Christian code both have a mode of response that is contradictory to each other.
The warrior code calls on [knights] to defy death in acts of heroism and thereby gain worldly fame. Christianity warns them to reject worldly things and to accept death as the passage from this imperfect world to eternity. (Clein 55)
And because being Christian is part of being a knight, “chivalry demands that knights somehow reconcile these opposing responses” (Clein 55). Throughout his journey, Gawain will be tested on both aspects of knighthood and his ability to reconcile them.
Gawain is faced with two tests that at first seem separate from each other. The first test is the Challenge, and the second test is the Temptation. I am going to argue that the tests are designed so that the Challenge tests Gawain’s chivalric knighthood, and the Temptation tests Gawain’s Christian knighthood.
The Challenge is devised by Morgan le Fay; however, although a woman creates the challenge, she still operates under the assumption that the people of Arthur’s court are essentially their disembodied identities. As revealed at the end of the poem, Morgan has sent Bertilak to Arthur’s court in attempt to “assay the surquidré, if hit soth were / That rennes of the grete renoun of the Rounde Table” and also to “have greved Gaynour and gart hir to dyghe” (lines 2457-2458, 2460). If Morgan expected her plot to work, then she is assuming that Guinevere and any one of Arthur’s knights are their respective roles, and assuming that all their actions are results of their identity. That is, she is not testing two people, but testing two identities: the “ideal knighthood” of Arthur’s knights, and the “courtly lady-hood” of Guinevere. However, Guinevere immediately disproves Morgan’s assumption by failing to die of fright. Morgan’s assumption that Guinevere would die of fright is based solely on the identity of Guinevere, that is, because Guinevere is a courtly woman. This reasoning is preposterous because even if Guinevere wanted to perform her lady-hood, she cannot simply die on command. Arthur, however, can enact the expectation of the king of the knights, and he accepts the deadly challenge. Gawain, out of knightly responsibility, asks to accept the challenge in place of Arthur. It falls on him to accept the challenge because he thinks of himself as a weak knight, and therefore he should take one for the team. Gawain asks Arthur in a courteous way, and the decision is up to democracy, because all the knights agree “to ryd the kyng with croun, / And gif Gawan the game” (lines 364-365). The danger that is first taken up by the king is now transferred onto Gawain, and though the Green Knight has threatened that to decline the challenge is to “dares for drede,” the transition happens with such knightly courtesy so that even though Arthur does not perform the challenge, he is not a coward (line 315). The results of the Green Knight’s visit are that the queen lives, and the renown of the court now falls onto Gawain’s head.
If the Challenge is taken separately from the Temptation, then it becomes clear that it is aimed to test chivalric knighthood. The nature of the game itself is based on valor, along with the “essential chivalric attribute” of having “fidelity to one’s word” (Clein 20). The Green Knight even tells the court that “…here is kydde cortaysye, as I haf herd carp, / And that hatz wayned me hider…” (line 263-264). Also, the Green Knight claims that if he were in his full armor, then “here is no mon me to mach,” so that he has left his “hauberghe” and “helme” at home, and challenge any knight that “be so bolde in his blod, brayn in hys hede” to exchange one blow for another (lines 282, 268, 286). The way he phrases these rules is a call to the “bolde” and “brayn” of masculinity, and challenging the strength of their manhood. The combative ability to behead another knight is part of chivalric knighthood. Later on his journey to find the Green Chapel, Gawain also combats many enemies such as “wormez,” “wolues,” “wodwos,” “bullez,” “berez,” “borez,” and “etaynez” (lines 720-723). By defeating all his foes, he is well on his way to prove his chivalric knighthood.
It is interesting to note that although the Challenge tests chivalric knighthood, Christianity still influences Gawain’s performance in his knightly combats. When he is fighting the enemies in the wild, he believes that “Nade he ben dughty and dryghe, and Dryghtyn had served, / Douteles he hade bend ed and dreped ful ofte” (lines 724-725). There is no telling whether or not he would have fought as well, or even lived through the numerous attacks on his journey if he had not kept steadfast faith. To achieve chivalric success, Gawain calls on both warrior and religious strength. Here, the two aspects of knighthood intertwine, and are difficult to separate when it comes to their contributions to the resulting performance.
Before Gawain can get to the Green Chapel to finish the quest, his Christian knighthood is tested by the Temptation at Bertilak’s castle. When Gawain discovers Bertilak’s castle (which will later lead him to the Green Chapel), he has just finished praying to Mary and Jesus to help him on his quest and is in the midst of is crossing himself. When he sees the castle, he thanks Jesus and Saint Julian, and prays to them that he will find lodging there. Of course, Bertilak is already waiting for him in the castle with his test, so Gawain would have had lodging whether or not he prayed to Jesus and Saint Julian. However, the challenge has been to find the castle. The fact of this being the first time the text shows Gawain praying for lodging, after which Bertilak’s castle is immediately revealed to him, makes the revelation seem miraculous. The revelation is not surprising when the Christian nature of the test is taken into consideration. In the Bible, Jesus says to his disciples:
Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. (Luke 11:9-10)
While Gawain is passing the test for chivalric knightliness, if he has not asked to be tested spiritually as well, he might have wandered the wilderness, fighting enemies until the Christmas deadline has passed, and failed to prove his identity as a knight. By asking for help from the Lord, he is forefronting the Christian aspect of his knighthood. This type of asking is actually similar to his asking Arthur to take on the beheading game in the beginning. Back then, he has been asking for a chivalric challenge. Now he is asking for spiritual guidance, which will lead to a spiritual challenge. Once Gawain initiates these tests of knighthood, he has to see them through, because if he fails to pass either, then he is not acting like a knight, therefore disproving his identity as a knight.
Following the truth of the scripture, once Gawain asks for lodging from the Lord, he receives lodging, but nothing further. Bertilak only reveals his knowledge of the way to the Green Chapel after Gawain tells him about his quest, exclaiming, “so me oure lorde help!” and asks Bertilak if he knows where it is (line 1055). And since Gawain has told him that he needs to be there by New Year’s morning, Bertilak even offers his castle up until New Year’s morning, upon which someone will show Gawain to the Green Chapel. I point this out not to show Bertilak’s generosity, but to comment on the exactness of the answer to Gawain’s prayer. Gawain is grateful to Bertilak’s response, and tells him that he would stay until New Year’s morning and that “ellez do quat ye demen” (line 1082). Only because Gawain promises to do whatever Bertilak wants does Bertilak pose the gift exchange, which is part of the Temptation test. This test offers Gawain the opportunity to perform, and therefore prove or disprove, his Christian knighthood.
When posing the gift exchange as part of the Temptation test, Bertilak asks Gawain to “sware with trawthe,” and Gawain responds by swearing, “Bi God…I grat thertylle” (lines 1106, 1110). Here, as with his performance of the Challenge, Christian and chivalric influences are intertwined. “Trawthe” is also a chivalric attribute, so is keeping one’s word. However, by swearing his “trawthe” in God’s name, Gawain’s ability to keep his word also becomes a Christian virtue, and failure to keep his word also becomes a Christian sin.
As agreed, for three days until New Year’s morning, Gawain stays in the castle as Bertilak goes out hunting. This parallel highlights the difference between Gawain’s courtly, intellectual atmosphere and Bertilak’s warrioristic, physical atmosphere. Gawain’s interactions with the Lady are filled with reference to God, and by contrast, the intersecting scenes of Bertilak’s hunting do not include spoken speech, and their narration does not once refer to God. In a rough generalization, it could even be said that Gawain’s actions are that of Christian knighthood, while Bertilak’s actions are that of chivalric knighthood. In any case, Gawain is now being tested morally, and therefore is not asked to go hunting with the men, but rather is asked to privately interact with a woman who can tempt him in ways that men cannot.
The Temptation test is designed to tempt Gawain to act against his promise to God of exchange winnings with Bertilak. The Lady uses three strategies to tempt Gawain to sin in this way.
The first strategy is to tempt Gawain to desire her, so as to take something that he cannot in turn give to Bertilak. Her attempt of this bodily seduction can be traced throughout their three interactions, the last of which she appears before him with “Hir brest bare” (line 1741). This temptation is so hard to resist that “Grete perile bitwene hem stod, / Nif Maré of hir knyght mynne” (lines 1768-1769). Gawain resists bodily temptation by saying, “God schylde, that schal not befalle” (line 1776). Soon after his appeal to God, the Lady ceases this temptation, and moves on to another strategy. It is important to note that if Gawain gave in to the sexual temptation of the Lady, he would have committed double sin. One sin is against the Ten Commandments, and the other sin is against his own promise to God to exchange his winnings with Bertilak. He would be sinning against the Commandments because one of them states that: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife” (Exodus 20:17). He would be sinning against keeping his word to God because, unlike kisses, sex cannot be exchanged with Bertilak in exactly the same way in which he shares with the Lady, because Bertilak is not a woman. If Gawain gave in to the Lady, he probably would have to repent under the Green Knight’s axe in a much harsher way.
After the Lady realizes that her sexual seduction would not work, her second strategy is to use material temptation. She offers an expensive ring, which Gawain would not accept. She switches to the third strategy of tempting Gawain with the girdle.
This green girdle is the source of Gawain’s misstep, and deserves more attention. The Lady offers it to Gawain with two tempting reasons. One reason is for him to accept it as a love token. If Gawain accepts it because of this reason, then he would be giving credence to the sexual attraction between them, therefore allowing sin into his mind. Another reason the Lady provides is that the green girdle would give Gawain chivalric power. She says that as long as he has the girdle around his waist, “Ther is no hathel vnder heuen tohewe hym that myght, / For he myght not be slayn for slytht vpon erthe” (lines 1853-1854). The Lady does not refer to the beheading game, and offers the girdle as a way to help him live up to his chivalric knighthood. If Gawain accepts the girdle on this basis, then he would be forsaking his Christian knighthood for his chivalric knighthood. However, it does not matter how great he is on the battlefield, for Christianity and chivalry are intertwined in knighthood and are often hard to separate. Therefore, if he does not act properly in one, he fails knighthood altogether. Gawain, however, does not accept the girdle on either of these terms. He is only thinking about surviving the blow of the Green Knight, and he accepts the girdle with the hope of living through the encounter at the Green Chapel. He thinks, “Myght he haf slypped to be vnslayn, the sleght were noble” (line 1858). The acceptance of a gift in itself is not un-Christian or un-chivalric. However, Gawain’s attempt to save his own life is exemplary of the contradiction between the warrior code and the Christian code of the way to deal with death. As mentioned earlier in the essay, “the warrior code calls on [knights] to defy death in acts of heroism … while Christianity warns them to accept death as the passage from this imperfect world to eternity” (Clein 55). Gawain is torn between these codes. It is almost as if by fighting to live, and accepting the girdle that is tainted with chivalric power, he is giving up the spiritual aspect of knighthood for the physical aspect.
Gawain attempts to resolve this contradiction by going to a priest to confess all his sins. He does this right after he accepts the girdle, and therefore before concealing it from Bertilak at the gift exchange. The priest “asoyled hym surely and sette hym so clene / As domezday shulde haf ben dight on the morn” (lines 1883-1884). The text, then, suggests that the Christian sin that Gawain has just committed of not accepting death as a rite of passage is absolved. However, the carefree attitude of Gawain after his confession suggests that perhaps he has neglected the fact that although he has confessed, he will still act out the sin of going against his promise to God by keeping the green girdle from Bertilak.
Before I analyze Gawain’s actions during the last gift exchange, I wish to briefly expand on the overall situation of the Temptation by highlighting the intricate interconnectedness of Christian knighthood and chivalric knighthood. At times, Gawain is not sure how he is supposed to act, because “He cared for his cortaysye, lest crathayn he were, / And more for his meschef ghif he schulde make synne” (lines 1773-1774). In other words, according to courtly courtesy he needs to act politely toward the Lady, but according to Christian doctrine he cannot be too polite as to accept the Lady’s offer. He needs to somehow satisfy both codes of conduct so that he is courteous while still refusing the Lady. The Lady makes this balance difficult by calling onto Gawain’s chivalric knighthood, constantly speaking along the lines of
So god as Gawayn gaynly is halden,
And cortaysye is closed so clene in hymseluen,
Couth not lyghtly haf lenged so long wyth a lady,
Bot he had craued a cosse, bi his courtaysye, (lines 1297-1300)
reminding him that as a knight in his position, the right thing to do would be to ask for a kiss. So that, Gawain is being pulled by his courtesy to comply with the Lady, and being kept back by his Christian obligation to refrain from acting too friendly with the Lady.
At the gift exchange, although Gawain has confessed his sins, his act of withholding the girdle shows that he does not feel the contrition of the heart, which is part of a complete confession. In this way, withholding the girdle endangers his performance of his Christian knighthood. However, because of the intertwining aspects of Christianity and chivalry, it might confuse Gawain as to whether he should or should not keep the girdle. Hypothetically, even if the Christian aspect is disregarded, the chivalric aspect of knighthood calls for the oxymoronic act of both keeping the girdle and giving away the girdle. Chivalry calls for keeping the girdle because it is presented to him as an opportunity to perform better during his encounter at the Green Chapel. At the same time, chivalry also calls for Gawain to give Bertilak the girdle so as to keep his “trawthe,” and keep his word to his fellow knight. When presented with the girdle under these conditions, it is hard to say what a “knight” would do. If the correct knightly action is hard to identity, then it is hard for Gawain to know how to perform knighthood. Gawain’s acceptance of the girdle, his confession, and his withholding the girdle are attempts to reconcile the contrasting aspects of knighthood, and to verify his knighthood by performing as a “knight.”
To be clear, when Gawain faces the Green Knight on New Year’s morning, he arrives with three faults: infidelity to his word to God, infidelity in his word to his fellow knight, and failure to feel the contrition of the heart as part of his confession to these two sins. These faults are not so big as to be unmendable. To successfully perform the identity of a knight, Gawain needs to somehow pay for, repent, and truly feel contrition in his heart for both his infidelities.
When Gawain is led to the Green Chapel, he proceeds without hesitation despite the guide’s fearful warnings, performing his chivalric knighthood to the tee. When the Green Knight greets him, both chivalric and Christian codes of conduct expect Gawain to treat him courteously, and to receive the blow of the axe passively. Because there is no conflict between the two aspects of his identity, Gawain has no trouble acting knightly. The Green Knight cuts Gawain’s neck, and the blow releases him from his passivity so that he is now free to stand up and to defend himself, as a chivalric knight should. At this instant, Gawain passes the Morgan le Fay’s Challenge. He has acted by her rules and finished the requirements he has agreed upon, proving himself to be a chivalric knight.
Whether he passes his Christian knighthood, however, is harder to determine. As discussed before, all three faults need to be mended. The Green Knight tells Gawain that because “At the thrid thou fayled thore, / And therfor that tappe ta the” (lines 2356-2367). It is interesting that the Green Knight seems to use a warrioristic method to punish Gawain’s infidelity to his word to both man and God. However, further analysis would show that the cut in the neck does punish Gawain for both infidelities. To punish Gawain’s infidelity to his fellow knight, Bertilak (as the Green Knight reveals himself to be) harms him physically. He does not harm Gawain mortally because the infidelity that he has performed can be repented for and set right. That is, Gawain can be punished, repent, and feel true contrition in his heart for what he has done. He even tries to return the green girdle, albeit via throwing it back at Bertilak. Because Gawain can performs these three actions, he is absolved of his crime against his fellow knight.
As for the way in which a neck wound could punish Gawain for his infidelity to God, I should take some time to review the Feast of Circumcision. In Christian liturgy,
New Year’s Day is the Octave of Christmas and the day of the Feast of the Circumcision of Jesus…[Gawain's neck wound] displaces and resembles the wound of circumcision. [However,] it is not…allegorically the same thing as circumcision-it only suggests circumcision. (Shoaf 15)
The Gawain-poet’s careful devotion to Christian references throughout the poem suggests that he would be familiar with this reference. Bertilak is not God, and therefore cannot punish Gawain in a spiritual way, but by giving Gawain a scar that he has to carry for the rest of his life, Bertilak brands him with a constant reminder of his spiritual infidelity. The visibility of the scar causes Gawain “schame,” so that if Gawain were to act as a true knight, he would show penance (line 2504). And he does punish himself, for after this quest he would always wear the green girdle, which “is the bende of this blame I bere in my nek,” as a “token of untrawthe” (lines 2506-2509). Wearing the girdle is an act of self-punishment, and shows repent and contrition of the heart. In this way, Gawain performs his Christian knighthood.
Since Gawain has mended all his faults, his trespasses are forgiven so that when he goes back to Arthur’s court, his actions are validated as knightly. This peer-validation puts his quest into context and confirms his identity. At the beginning o f his quest, the socially constructed identity of a knight has been given to Gawain; and through completing tests aimed at both his chivalric knighthood and Christian knighthood, Gawain is able demonstrate his identity as a knight by performing as a knight. Although sometimes the innate contradictions of the two aspects of knighthood confuse Gawain as to how he should act, he manages to reconcile both aspects and satisfy them by the end of his quest. By acting like a knight, Gawain successfully confirms his identity, and is proven to be a knight.
Works Cited
Butler, Judith. Undoing Gender. New York and London: Routledge, 2004.
Clein, Wendy. Concepts of Chivalry in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Norman, Oklahoma: Pilgrim Books, 1987.
Culler, Jonathan. Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Heng, Geraldine. “Feminine Knots and the Other Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” PMLA 106.3 (1991): 500-14.
Howard, Donald R. “Structure and Symmetry in Sir Gawain.” Sir Gawain and Pearl: Critical Essay. Ed. Robert Blanch, J. vols. Bloomington & London: Indiana University Press, 1966. 195-208.
Rowley, Sharon, M. “Textual Studies, Feminism, and Performance in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” The Chaucer Review 38.2 (2003): 158-77.
Shoaf, R.A. The Poem as Green Girdle: Commercium in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Gainesville: University Presses of Florida, 1984.
“Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” Eds. J.R.R. Tolkien and E.V. Gordon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967.
Further Research
Arthur, Ross G. Medieval Sign Theory and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987.
Burrow, John. “The Two Confession Scenes in Sir Gaain and the Green Knight.” Sir Gawain and Pearl. Ed. Robert Blanch, J. vols. Bloomington & London: Indiana University Press, 1966. 123-34.
Cox, Catherine S. “Genesis and Gender in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” The Chaucer Review, Volume 35, Number 4, 2001. 378-390.
Dinshaw, Carolyn. “A Kiss Is Just a Kiss: Heterosexuality and Its Consolations in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” Diacritics 24.2/3 (1994): 205-26.
Edwards, A. S. G. “Review: Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and French Arthurian Tradition by Ad Putter.” The Review of English Studies 48.190 (1997): 224-26.
Hadley, D. M. “Introduction: Medieval Masculinities.” Masculinity in Medieval Europe. Ed. D. M. Hadley. vols. London: Addison Wesley Longman Limited, 1999. 1-18.
Ingledew, Francis. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and the Order of the Garter. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2006.
Kelly, Kathleen Coyne. Performing Virginity and Testing Chastity in the Middle Ages. London: Routledge, 2000.
Kittredge, George Lyman. A Study of Gawain and the Green Knight. Gloucester: Harvard University Press, 1916.
Machann, Clinton. “Tennyson’s King Arthur and the Violence of Manliness.” Victorian Poetry, Volume 38, Number 2, Summer 2000. 199-226.
Mills, M. “Christian Significance and Romance Tradition in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” Critical Studies of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. First published in Modern Language Review, LX (1965), 483-493. Ed. Donald R. Howard, Christian Zacher. vols. Notre Dame, London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968. 85-105.
Putter, AD. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and French Arthurian Romance. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
Sadowski, Piotr. The Knight on His Quest: Symbolic Patterns of Transition in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. London: Associated University Press, 1996.
Saunders, Corinne. “Violent Magic in Middle English Romance.” Violence in Medieval Courtly Literature: A Casebook. Ed. Albrecht Classen. vols. New York: Routledge, 2004.
Shepard, Alexandra. Meaning of Manhood in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
“Sir Gawain and the Grene Gome.” Ed. R. T. Jones. New York: Barnes & Noble Inc., 1962.
Sweeney, Mickey. “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: Classical Magic and Its Function in Medieval Romance.” Sir Gawain and the Classical Tradition. Ed. E.L. Risden. vols. Jefferson: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2006. 182-210.
