Brian Herrmann
September 12, 2000

Historians know very little about Geoffrey's early life. He was born around 1100 in an unknown location, but references in his work point to Monmouth or some surrounding province (Parry and Caldwell, 72). He was a clergyman of no great religious conviction. He seems to have chosen the clergy because it was a logical occupation for a man of his interests and talents (Parry and Caldwell, 74). In 1125, Geoffrey became prior of the Abbey of Monmouth (Keller, 388) after which he set himself to writing and releasing his manuscripts. He was made bishop of St. Asaph in 1152, but most likely never went there because of the rebellious Welsh (Keller, 388). After a life of research and writing, Geoffrey died in 1155 (Keller 387).

Various sources indicated that Geoffrey had several patrons and made great use of all of them. In the dedications to his various manuscripts, he changes the person to whom he dedicates the work presumably to gain the favor of a particular patron who might expose his work on a large scale. One of Geoffrey's greatest patrons was Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford who provided Geoffrey with many of the resources and early texts upon which he based his History of the Kings of Britain. Another important patron to Geoffrey was Robert de Chesney who had important connections with King Stephen. Another name that popped up during the course of research was the Earl of Gloucester. Sources never specified the Earl's importance, they only said he was a friend and a patron.

Geoffrey made use of many different sources while compiling his three manuscripts. These sources included past historians (chroniclers), old texts, oral traditions, and contemporary historians.

Geoffrey used the work of the Venerable Bede, a late seventh- and early eighth-century monk who wrote Ecclesiastical History of the English People. This accurate and meticulously compiled history is the foundation of all our knowledge of British history (Thurston, 1-3), and Geoffrey relied upon this text for much of his information. Another monk, Nennius, compiled a work called History of the Britons from old documents which are filled with legends, errors, and inconsistencies, and are generally untrustworthy. Nennius's work is concerned with the peopling of Britain from the influx of the Trojans through Arthur's time (Ashe, 342). The later sections of Nennius's History are genealogically and historically accurate and acceptable (Ashe, 342). Another chronicler upon whom Geoffrey relied was Gildas (Keller, 387). Historians contemporary to Geoffrey, such as William of Malmesbury, were also useful to him (Keller, 388).

Geoffrey also utilized two texts called Annales Cambriae and Historia britannica. The Annales is a collection of Welsh pedigrees (Keller, 387) and can still be found today.

In his work, Geoffrey also cites an ancient text called Historia britannica, which, historians say, never existed or has been lost since Geoffrey's time (Keller, 388).

Another source of information for Geoffrey was Welsh oral tradition, which could be relied on quite well in Geoffrey's day (Turner, 3).

From all of these sources, Geoffrey was able to write three works: Prophetiae Merlini (hereafter Prophecies of Merlin), Historia Regum Britanniae (hereafter History of the Kings of Britain), and Vita Merlini (hereafter Life of Merlin). Prophecies of Merlin was written around 1135 and is made up of three parts. The first part is events that have already taken place which Merlin (and Geoffrey) can accurately foretell. This part establishes Merlin as a prophet. In the second part, Merlin foretells future events. Some of these prophecies are believable, but others are ridiculously fantastic. Parry and Caldwell call the third part an "astrological nightmare" but do not go into detail as to why. They write that there is biblical influence present in the language of this section (Parry and Caldwell, 75-9).

History of the Kings of Britain was probably finished sometime in December 1135 and is Geoffrey's most famous work. This work relies on historical information as well as Geoffrey's own lively imagination. It traces the history of Britain from its founding. When first published, Geoffrey's History was a smash hit. It was immediately translated into other languages and was used as a model for other subsequent histories. This work is also important because here Geoffrey adds the legends of Arthur and Merlin to British history. He takes historical accounts of Arthur and old legend of Merlin and blends them with his own ideas and creates much of what we consider Arthurian legend today (Parry and Caldwell, 79-89). There is a bit of controversy surrounding Geoffrey's History of the Kings of Britain because there are two texts which could have arguably been done by Geoffrey. The "Vulgate Text" refers to the main text published in Geoffrey's time of which over 200 manuscripts have survived to the present day (Keller, 388). The other text, the "Variant Text", is a manuscript that is basically Geoffrey's History without the dedications and without Prophecies of Merlin. Scholars believe that this "Variant Text" could be a rough draft of History or that it could have come from another, anonymous author. The controversy arises because this could have been Geoffrey's main source, or it could simply be a preliminary draft to Geoffrey's work. Historians, however, cannot say conclusively one way or another (Keller, 388-9).

Geoffrey's final work, Life of Merlin, recounts Celtic, Irish, and Scottish tales and texts. This work is of no great literary importance in terms of influence on future writers.

Based on the available information about Geoffrey and his work, one crucial question must be asked: Can we believe Geoffrey's accounts of British history? Some historians argue yes, others argue no.

Hans-Erich Keller believes that Geoffrey is believable. He claims that the embellished details contained in Geoffrey's History prove that he had additional sources not available to other historians (Keller, 389) and that the information is completely historically accurate. P.F.J. Turner also defends Geoffrey's historical validity by saying that he "resisted the temptation to deliberately falsify the record" and that he occasionally "drew inappropriate conclusions from the facts at his disposal, but he did not invent his own 'facts'" (Turner, 2). Turner also states that Geoffrey's undertaking was rather formidable because he had to "combine the different accounts found in these sources into a single coherent narrative" (Turner, 5). Given the breadth and diversity of sources, Geoffrey's History is an "extraordinary achievement" (Turner, 5).

On the other hand, Parry and Caldwell believe that , as good as Geoffrey's History is, much of his work is the creation of his own imagination. Ashe is also against the validity of Geoffrey's writings. He believes that Geoffrey "is no doubt" a "writer of fiction and can never be relied on for facts" (Ashe, 181). He contends that while Geoffrey's History is fiction, there is also "no doubt that he makes use of older materials both genuine history and preexisting legend" (Ashe 181).

Thorpe's introduction to Geoffrey's History calls the believability of the work a "well-nigh insoluble mystery" (19). He claims that much of Geoffrey's material is unacceptable as history, "yet history keeps peering through the fiction" (19). This seems to be where most scholars are left in the discussion of Geoffrey of Monmouth. They cannot ignore the fact that most of Geoffrey's work seems to be fiction, and they also cannot ignore the sound historical basis of Geoffrey's work.

While the validity of Geoffrey's work is in doubt, its influence, however, is not. As stated before, his History had an immediate impact. It was translated into many languages and served as the basis of many subsequent histories. Geoffrey is also credited with the invention of the legends of Arthur and Merlin. His works gave rise to and inspiration for much of the Arthurian Romance of later centuries.

Geoffrey's influence can be traced through the literary ages to modern times. Malory turned to Geoffrey while writing Morte d'Arthur. Geoffrey's influence can also be seen in Spenser's Faerie Queen, Shakespeare's Cymbeline and King Lear, Wordsworth's Artegal and Elidur, and Tennyson's Idylls of the King. The influence on later authors like Tennyson, however, is more indirect because they turned to Malory or someone else rather than directly to Geoffrey's work (Thorpe, 31). But, as Thorpe writes, without Geoffrey's History "there would have been no Morte d'Arthur, and no Idylls of the King either" (Thorpe 31).

Though he has not always been reliable in what he wrote, Geoffrey of Monmouth has always been a constant source of study, inspiration, and influence for more than eight centuries. No matter if his work is believable or not, the fact that it is good and important will never change.

Bibliography

Ashe, Geoffrey, and Norris Lacy, The New Arthurian Handbook (NY: Garland, 1991).

Keller, Hans-Erich, "Geoffrey of Monmouth," in J. Strayer, ed., Dictionary of the Middle Ages, vol. 5 (NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1985), pp. 387-90.

Parry, John J., and Robert A Caldwell, "Goeffrey of Monmouth," in R. S. Loomis, ed., Arthurian Literature in the Middle Ages: A Collaborative History (Oxford: Clarendon, 1959), pp. 72-93.

Thorpe, Lewis, "Introduction," in Geoffrey Monmouth, The History of the Kings of Britain, trans. Lewis (London: Penguin, 1966), pp. 9-37.

Thurston, Herbert, "The Venerable Bede," in The New Catholic Encyclopedia <www.newadvent.org/cathen/02384a.htm>

Turner, P. J. F., "Geoffrey of Monmouth as a Historian," in The Saxon Shore <www.geocities.com/~gkingdom/saxonshore/turner_appendix.html>