This Arthurian cycle, sometimes referred to as the Little Grail Cycle, adds substantial backstory, detail, and lore to the Arthurian legends. The man these three stories are attributed to, Robert de Boron, might not have authored all three. He might not have authored any of them. There seems to be some mystery as to whether he authored the first two, and a growing consensus that he did not author the third. But if he didn’t write them, it’s not known who did. For simplicity I’ll assume he’s the author.
Robert borrows heavily from Geoffrey of Monmouth’s legend-building myth-history published decades earlier, in his handling of Merlin and Arthur, and from Chrétien de Troyes’ developments of Perceval and the Grail. He builds off of these and ties together many threads of existent Arthurian lore that, before this point, had not been connected into a seamless whole. He places the genesis of all Arthurian legend in the time of Jesus, framing the Holy Grail and the bleeding lance in Biblical mythos. Merlin is conceived as a consequence of the events that unfold here. He plays a crucial role in uniting the Grail with Arthur and Perceval and the engrossing quests that were central to these romances. Robert, or whoever wrote this trilogy of tales, was responsible for a major leap in the legends of Arthur.
Chrétien de Troyes left his tale of Perceval unfinished. It was such an enigmatic and puzzling story that many came along to try to finish it. Robert de Boron doesn’t just finish it, he gives a purpose and mythic significance to the grail and the lance that were never made known in the original story. He unites Geoffrey’s Arthur and Merlin to Chrétien’s Perceval, bringing together the creations of arguably the two most significant figures in the evolution of Arthurian romance.
The lance bleeds from the tip because it is the spear with which Longinus stabbed Jesus in the ribs. The grail is holy because it is the vessel in which Joseph of Arimathea collected Jesus’ blood after he pulled his body off the cross.
The Round Table, too, has its origins in Biblical history, in Robert’s telling. Arthur’s is to be the third, modeled after a round table at which Jesus had his last supper with his supporters — one space left empty, signifying a traitor. A second round table was then built by Joseph, also to seat the faithful, and an empty seat signifying a traitor, a false believer, who, if deciding to sit at this seat, is cast into the abyss. So Arthur’s round table, many years later, is supposed to signify this, and its empty seat will be one day filled by a hero who has proven himself. It is no secret this hero will be Perceval.
At the end of the Joseph of Arimathea story, Jesus descends into Hell and frees Adam and Eve and generations of sinners. This is an outrage to the demons, who take their revenge through a conspiracy: impregnating a woman with Merlin. His all-seeing knowledge of all that has happened in the past comes from his demonic parentage, but the intervention by angels gives him the ability of prescience, making him the most powerful prophet in the world. The story of Vortigern’s tower, taken from Nennius and Geoffrey, is retold here with new life and a thoughtful back story that reveals more of Merlin’s childhood, character, and shape shifting abilities, seemingly a nod to his characterization in Taliesin’s poems, or those from the Black Book of Carmarthen.
Merlin’s involvement in the conception of Arthur, by disguising Utherpendragon as his Duke in order to gain entry to Tintagel and to trick the duke’s wife, is similar to how it appears in Geoffrey’s telling, but again with more back story and fleshing out. Merlin becomes a central figure in the book, whose oversight is known even when his presence is not. A new backstory is also provided for Arthur’s childhood, clarifying and elaborating on his relationships with most of his best known knights and men, like Kay, his foster brother, Gawain his nephew, and others.
Although there’s a lot of material added here by Robert that would go on to shape Arthurian legend, perhaps the most enduring and iconic thing introduced by Robert is the sword in the stone motif. Arthur casually pulls this sword from the stone and anvil that is to show who will be the true king of Britain. After many great men and knights have failed, Arthur succeeds without effort. He returns the sword to the stone st his foster father’s command, where it still poses a challenge for all men. Only Arthur is able to remove it, and thereby he becomes king.
The story of Perceval is changed from Chrétien’s, leaving out much of his boyish ignorance and stupidity, presenting him instead as an already heroic youth who is destined for greatness. Other mysterious aspects of the original are cleared up or left out entirely. Robert’s thorough fleshing out of many of the peculiar aspects of the original makes a cool contrast, still with enigmatic and enchanting puzzles, but filling in so many gaps that what was once dreamlike and esoteric is now a bit more grounded and cohesive. Less alluring in some ways, but still riveting and magnificent. Perceval’s quest has just as many diversions and distractions as one remembers from the earlier tale, and Gawain’s adventures that eventually take over much of the original narrative are nowhere to be seen. Merlin continues to guide our heroes, first Arthur, then Perceval, and again Arthur, after Perceval’s climb to lordly heights as the new Fisher King.
Arthur’s conquest of France is given an impetus here not seen before, as a way to win back his barons and knights, who are about to leave to seek out new adventures. Perceval’s achievement has ended the enchantments of Britain, and thereby ended all the marvelous adventures. To keep his kingdom united, Arthur sacks France. As in Geoffrey’s telling, he does so through single combat with France’s king. His conquest of Rome, his pursuit and defeat of his traitorous nephew Mordred, and his ultimate wounding and disappearance to Avalon serve as the grand climax, bringing together many of the threads of myth into a single strand of heroic epic. Robert’s characterization of these by-now familiar personalities is consistent with the lore while introducing some new motivations and quirks.
The trilogy is a terrific read and a worthy growth of the Arthurian traditions. There is some fuzziness in the chronology, and many anachronisms and timeline confusions that make it hard to place this in the proper mythical historical context. There is reference to Normandy in Arthur’s invasion. Normandy didn’t exist until after the Viking invasions of the European mainland, hundreds of years after Arthur was to have reigned. Plus, an attentive timeline of this trilogy sets Arthur’s reign not in the 5th-6th centuries, but within the first century. This is never stated but implied, given that Perceval’s grandfather the Fisher King/Bron was Joseph of Arimathea’s brother in law. Joseph’s nephew, Alain li Gros, son of Bron, is prophesied to have a son who will play a critical role in the grail. That son is Perceval.
So the span of time between Joseph (and therefore Jesus) and Perceval, unless his father and grandfather lived hundreds of years before reproducing, which is never suggested, must be merely a few decades. This would put Arthur’s reign sometime in the first or second century AD. Weird. Since there are explicit references to the Saxons, to Hengist, and their ongoing conflicts with the Britons, there is obviously a fusion of historical eras. That’s one of the great things about myths. They all do this. The Nibelungenlied did it, for example, placing Atilla and Theodoric of Ostrogoth in the same time, and making them allies.