Dictionnaire de mythologie arthurienne by Phillipe Walter (review)

phillipe walter, Dictionnaire de mythologie arthurienne. Paris: Imago, 2014. Pp. 441. isbn: 978-2-84952-709-2. 25 euro.This book is an Arthurian dictionary offering some six hundred entries, from Aarladin (a character in the First Continuation) to Zephir (in Perlesvaus). It is a welcome tool for francophone users, offering a great deal of information, though characterized by an approach that is unapologetically Celticist. For some, the point of view will be welcome; others may find that it frequently strains to connect Arthurian names and themes to Celtic or sometimes other sources.This volume is particularly notable for an introduction that is more lengthy and detailed than one will find in most literary or cultural dictionaries. Here, Walter insists that 'le roman arthurien est incomprehensible sans le recours a la mythologie celtique (galloise ou irlandaise)' [Arthurian romance is incomprehensible without recourse to Celtic (Welsh or Irish) mythology (9; his emphasis)]. Walter praises the glorious era of Celtic and, presumably, Arthurian studies in France and suggests (11) that the event that marked the end of that golden age was the 1974 death of Jean Frappier (1900-1974). Thereafter, according to Walter, Arthurian studies unfortunately fragmented and developed in multiple directions, with scholars assuming that all approaches-linguistics, psychoanalysis, a 'naive psychologism,' narratology, etc.-are of equal value ('tout se vaut', 11). Obviously, in his view, these approaches are not only equal but also equally deficient. In other words, some forty years ago, Arthurian scholars lost their way, and this dictionary, with its preface, represents an effort to set them right.Walter's polemical stance leads him to criticize or condemn some previous research tools. Those tools include the 1992 Dictionnaire des lettres francaises. le Moyen Âge, ed. G. Hasenohr and M. Zink, (7; 22n), which he considers inadequate and fitted with a-naturally-obsolete bibliography. He vigorously questions the utility of various other Arthurian tools, generally characterizing them as lists of proper names of 'evanescent knights,' and he suggests that dictionaries of Arthurian works offer only a vague impression of bewildering repetitions ('deconcertantes redites,' 7). It must be added, though, that he does include several Arthurian dictionaries and encyclopedias in his bibliographies.Walter also condemns (9) statements such as one by Philippe Menard, who commented that most episodes of the Tristan story were inventions of a French author, perhaps around 1160; Walter finds this notion 'incroyable' [unbelievable] because both Beroul and Thomas state that they are drawing their material from previous accounts. …