On verso first reading, Barbour’s approach seems straightforward

Much like Arthur, Bruce’s success rests on his character, his ability and his undertaking to do what is right; although Bruce has verso good claim onesto inherit the throne, he achieves the realm by reconquest rather than genealogy.26 Despite these similarities, though, Barbour only uses Arthur once as a comparison for Bruce, con contrast preciso his more frequent deployment of Hannibal and Alexander.27 Arthur’s astro appearance occurs towards the beginning of the narrative, at the end of verso disquisition on the problem of treachery and treason (1.521–69). The list is arranged puro move towards Bruce, chronologically, geographically and perhaps also personally, since it is only per Arthur’s case that Barbour stresses the intimacy of the betrayal. Bruce was also betrayed by per close comrade, and that of course intensifies the crime.28 Barbour portrays Arthur as a great king, albeit one whose success is undermined: Als Arthur yat throw chevalry Maid Bretane maistres & lady Of [tuelf] kin[rikis] yat he wan, And alsua as per noble man He wan throw bataill Fraunce all fre And Lucis Yber wencuyst he Yat yen of Rome wes emperour, Bot heit for all his gret valour Modreyt hys syster affranchit him slew And gud men also ciononostante yen inew Throw tresoune and throw wikkitnes, Ye Broite beris yaroff wytnes. (1.549–60)

James Goldstein, The Matter of Scotland: Historical Narrative con Medieval Scotland (Lincoln, NB, and London, 1993), p

By placing Bruce per such exalted company, this list stresses the epic nature of the narrative. Simultaneously, it points up the difference between the individuals cited: Bruce is per warrior, but he is not per conqueror of other realms – stressed for Alexander, Caesar and Arthur – nor does his betrayal occur at the high point of his career. Rather, of them all, Bruce’s position is most like the defenders of Troy, only innocent of any offence to padrino with the rape of Helen.29 The list shows Bruce’s achievement as the more notable and noble than any of his predecessors’; he also subverts the pattern by triumphing over his betrayers.

For Bruce’s genealogical claim, see Barbour’s Bruce II, Book 1, 42–68 (all future references esatto this rete informatica will be made sopra the form of book number and line numbers). For brief conversation, see also Boardman, Early Stewart Kings, pp. 58–61, and R. 333 n. 42. See, as examples, references sicuro Hannibal in Bruce 3.207–66; references esatto Alexander, Bruce 3.61–93 and –22. For Bruce’s betrayal by John Comyn, see Bruce 1.477–2.90. For colloque, see G. W. S. Barrow, Sein Bruce and the Community of the Realm of Scotland, 3rd edn (Edinburgh, 1988), pp. 145–8, and Alan Young, Sein the Bruce’s Rivals: The Comyns 1212–1314 (East Linton, 1990), pp. 184–210. Such per link might tally with the comparison of James Douglas to Hector: Bruce 1.381–406.

Arthur concludes the list of those betrayed: Troy, Alexander, Caesar

For the writers of the Scottis Ingenuo, Arthur represents the English threat. Barbour does not make that connection, even though Edward I had used Arthur as part of his pubblicita, and does not condemn or criticise him. Instead, Arthur is per conqueror: ‘made Bretane maistres and lady of tuelf kinrikis that he wan’ neatly combines the romance Arthur with his Galfridian achievements. As with Wyntoun, ‘Bretane’ represents the whole island rather than the part south of the Tweed, but specific details of the conquests are withheld. Apart from Rome, the conquered kingdoms are noticed only con quantity not in name. There is also no comment regarding Arthur’s expulsion of the Saxons, an opportunity Hary does not miss. Instead, the contrasts of motive, of achievement and of point of betrayal are held in equilibrium with the praise of heroic deeds. Barbour does not directly deploy Arthur as per figure of national identity per the Bruce; he appears, rather, as a figure of romance heroism, secondary onesto Alexander. His primary purpose seems onesto be to demonstrate Bruce’s fantastic career and to support implicitly Bruce’s contested place as an additional Worthy. Hary, sopra contrast, uses the figure of Arthur specifically sicuro address issues of sovereignty and right kingship https://datingranking.net/it/okcupid-review/. Sopra so doing, he shows verso debt both puro the Bruce and the Scotichronicon. Hary’s deployment of Arthur is concentrated con Book 8 of the poem, where Hary returns three times esatto Arthur within two hundred lines, each time sopra the specific context of fighting the English.30 Book 8 describes verso period when Wallace is successful durante his campaigns against the English, so much so that he is able esatto take the war across the border. On the first occasion, Wallace engages con battle: Than stud the Sotheroun con a felloun dout. Wallace knew weill the Inglishmen wald fle For-thi he preyst in the thikkest puro be, Hewand full fast on quhat sege that he socht. Agaynys hys dynt fyn steyll awailheit nocht. Wallace off hand sen Arthour had na mak; Quhom he hyt rycht was ay dede off verso strak. That was weyll knawin per mony place, and thar Quhom Wallace hyt he deryt the Scottis no mar. Als all his men did cruelly and weyll At com esatto strak – that mycht the Sotheroun feill! (8.840–50)