The fact that only two actual Scots Arthurian romances survive – Golagros and Gawane and the incomplete Lancelot of the Laik – gives an entirely false impression of how important Arthurian legend was for Scotland and the Scots. If romances are few, the engagements of medieval and early modern Scottish historiographers with Arthur are many and varied. As Nicola Royan observes in her essay here: ‘Arthur remains a contested figure, a point at which the relationship between the Scots and the English is examined.’ As will become clear from the other essays in this volume, this statement holds equally true for English writers, and the reasons for this are not far to seek. Although Arthurian legend became popular throughout Europe in the Middle Ages, and many of its more famous and influential proponents – such as Chrétien de Troyes and his continuators – were continental, the legends themselves are set in Britain and many of its principal characters are further localized to particular areas of Britain. Scotland can claim, among others, Gawain of Lothian and/or Orkney and, in the guise of Lailoken, Merlin. Arthurian legend clearly belongs both to and in Britain, but the devil is in the detail. What exactly is the relationship between Arthur's world and the real territories of England, Wales and Scotland? Within the British Isles, Arthur's status as a purported historical king who ruled the entire island of Britain has direct political implications, and these have been exploited by authors and power-hungry monarchs alike through the Middle Ages and beyond.

A good example of the political import of Arthur even in the avowedly fictional world of romance can be found in the respective introductions to Chrétien de Troyes’ Yvain and its fourteenth-century Middle English translation Ywain and Gawain:

Chrétien's Arthur ruled ‘Bretaigne’: if he ruled other places as well, it is apparently not worth mentioning.