This volume of essays on "The Scots and Medieval Arthurian Legend" addresses several different ways in which tensions between Scotland and England are reflected in Medieval Scottish literature about King Arthur as a legendary and historical figure. The focus remains on texts written in Latin or Scots, not in Gaelic. In their introduction Rhiannon Purdie and Nicola Royan (1-8) give a short overview of the collection, explaining that Scotland has its own idiosyncratic approach of Arthur. The period covered extends from the Historia Regum Britanniae (c. 1136, henceforth HRB) up to the accession of James VI in 1603 to the English throne as James I. HRB is the first text in which the idea of Arthur as king of the whole of the island of Britain is upheld, with the implication that the sovereignty of the ruler of England extends over Scotland.
Juliette Wood then discusses the similarities and dissimilarities between the reception of HRB in Scotland and Wales (9-23) within a geo-political context. It is illuminating to see how a political setting influences the way people view King Arthur. In both countries they use him to comment upon contemporary affairs and to define the nature of the country's identity. In Wales it is stressed that the Welsh are the true heirs to Arthur's kingdom, but in Scotland the Scots reject the notion that Arthur conquered their land, and they question his legitimacy because of his conception out of wedlock. Thus, in Scottish eyes, Modred and Gawain are the rightful heirs. This argumentation is found in many chronicles from Scottish origin. These chronicles were not used by Edward I of England when he decided twice (1291 and 1301) to "appeal to history" after the deaths of Alexander III of Scotland (1286) and his granddaughter Margaret (1290), as Thea Summerfield explains (25-41). Scotland was left without an heir and Edward I sent out a request to monastic houses "for any material 'touching in any way our realm and the rule of Scotland'" (29). But the request was not sent to the houses in Scotland. In response Edward received information from chronicles and charters, but also from legendary history based on the HRB. Summerfield explains that while this legendary history was not used by Edward in 1291, it is included in 1301, and the English Pierre de Langtoft has used the material of both "appeals" in his own vernacular work.
Whereas Wood considered the Latin tradition, Nicola Royan's essay considers the vernacular sources when discussing the deployment of the claim for the Scots kings to be the true heirs to authority over the whole of Britain (43-54). She demonstrates that Wyntoun's account of Arthur in his Original Chronicle shows omissions, resulting in conserving Scottish sovereignty and equality. As he also questions the reliability of his source, he also seems to subvert the authority of Arthur's narrative. In Scottis Originale Arthur is portrayed outright as a tyrant, while Modred and Gawain have a far better claim to the throne than their uncle, which is the same line of argument as we have seen in the Latin tradition.
Further contributions in the collection of essays consider the vernacular romances. Tony Hunt discusses a novel telling of a story which takes place in Scotland, the Roman de Fergus (55-69). He shows convincingly that Guillaume le Clerc was in his Fergus a resourceful rewriter of Chrtien's romances, and thus a striking witness to the reception of Chrtien within half a century after his death. Elizabeth Archibald focuses on Lancelot of the Laik (71-82), a close rendering of the war between Galehaut and Arthur in the French non-cyclic Prose Lancelot, including the long passage of advice on kingship, and the development of the affair between Arthur's wife and Lancelot. This is the only version extant in English of this episode of Lancelot. As the passage of advice on kingship is more elaborated than in the original Archibald suggests that the LL might have been included in the sole manuscript in which it survives because it could be seen as a "useful Mirror for Princes" (81).
Priscilla Bawcutt describes the fragment of Sir Lamwell (83-93) that has survived in a Scottish manuscript (Cambridge University Library Kk.5.30) and is printed in the appendix to this essay (91-93).
Golagros and Gawane is compared by Rhiannon Purdie to the Perceval Continuation and the English Arthurian tradition to filter out the elements that GG has not in common with these two texts (95-108). These elements, the treatment of the sovereignty theme, the transformation of the figure of Bran the Liz into Spynagros, and the use of the term "freedom," can all be linked to current trends in fifteenth-century Scots writings. These trends are also discussed in other essays (Archibald, Wood, Royan) and involve the popular Advice to Princes tradition in Scotland and Scottish belief in an unbroken line of independent Scottish kings stretching back to antiquity.
Cory J. Rushton discusses the Scots from a different angle: the way Malory made use of the (negative) stereotypes about Scotland and inhabitants (109-119). According to Malory the Scots are naught but trouble, and play a fundamental part in the downfall of Arthur's kingdom. Andrew King discusses the use of the Arthurian world in The Misfortunes of Arthur and the Anglo-Scottish politics around Elizabeth's handling of the Mary Queen of Scots crisis in 1587 (121-134). The last essay is by Sergi Mainer, who compares the reception of the Matter of Britain in Catalonia and Scotland through the medium of French literature (135-148).
All in all this collection of (partly outstanding) essays is a welcome addition to our knowledge of Scottish Arthurian literature. It is clear that the Scots have indeed made their own interpretation and use of the Arthurian legend. Now we have to wait for a study on the Gaelic language texts. I, for one, have become very curious to know if there is a correlation between Scottish texts written in the Gaelic language and the ones discussed here.