You can download this volume here - Electric Scotland

Communications and Replies
VIDAS ACHINLEK, CHEVALIER. In the last issue of this
Review (S.H.R. VIII. i.) Professor Skeat proved to the satisfaction of
those who have studied the poems that the Scottish Lancelot of the Laik
and the hiair of Je lousy are by the same author. As to that author's
identity, however, he accepted the suggestion made by David Laing in
1836, viz. that the ^uair of Jelousy was the work of a certain James
Auchenleck whose name appears in the list of graduates of Glasgow
University in 1471 as 'Ja. Auchlek, pauper,' who, according to Laing,
can be subsequently identified as the '
Maister James Achlik, Secretar
to the Earl of Rosse,' 1 and as the holder of a Chantory in Dornoch
which is vacant by his death in I497- 2 This ascription is based solely
on the name James Auchenleck ; the Auchenleck being derived from the
Quod
from Dunbar's Lament
colophon of the manuscript of the >uair of Jelousy which is
, *
Auche ,' the Christian name being supplied
for
the Makaris.
That Scorpion fell has done infek
Maister Johne Clerk and James Afflek
Frae Ballatmaking and tragede.
But the name Auchenleck occurs not infrequently
in the Registrum Secreti
Sigilliy the Registrum Magni Sigilli^ the Acta Dominorum The Lord High Treasurer's Accounts
Goncilii, and
especially in the two first, while
even the combination James Auchenleck is not uncommon. It appears
as landowner, as witness to deeds, even as accomplice in a murder, but in
no case in a
capacity which suggests likelihood of literary
activities.
When verifying the various citations of the name given by Laing
I have been unable to find the name in the lists of graduates and licentiates
this work
printed in the Munimenta Universitatis Glasguensis, although
covers the period referred to, and is presumably compiled from all extant
documents. Laing may have had access to some document now lost, but
he possibly wrote Glasgow University in place of St. Andrews University.
The matter, however, does not seriously affect the point under discussion.
Although convinced by Prof. Skeat's arguments, and by a comparison
of the poems, of the identity of authorship of the two poems, I would
ascribe them to an entirely different Auchenleck.
1 Acta Dominorum ConciRi.
2
Registrum Secreti Sigilli ; Bannatyne Miscellany, vol. i. p. 161,
X