Geoffrey of Monmouth and ethnogenesis
Geoffrey claimed his authority from an unnamed (and probably mythical) “ancient British book in the British language” given to him by the Archdeacon of Oxford. He never names the author of this book, nor has anything which could plausibly be identified as this alleged book survived written in either Latin or Welsh. Yet it is difficult to believe he just made it all up on his own – pure fabrications of this sort were not the normal practice in the middle ages. . . . “history keeps peeping through the fiction” as the introduction to the Penguin edition says (19). However, the fiction of the non-Latin British book makes it difficult for others to check his sources.
Brutus comes to Albion
Brutus, grandson of Aeneas, kills his own father accidentally by an unlucky shot with an arrow – he is exiled from Italy. After many travels reminiscent of Aeneid 1-5, he gains allies in Greece and accomplishes a re-conquest of Greece, but leaves after being directed to Britain by an oracle of Diana.
Brutus, beyond the setting of the sun, past the realms of Gaul, there lies an island in the sea, once occupied by giants. Now it is empty and ready for your folk. Down the years this will prove an abode suited to you and your pepole; and your descendants it will be a second Troy. A race of kings will be born there from your stock and round circle of the whole earth will be subject to them (65).
Geoffrey engages in some creative etymologizing (a favorite occupation of the middle ages) to explain the origins of the British language and the British people as descendants from Troy.
Brutus called the island Britain after his own name, and his companions he called Brutons. . . A little later the langauge of the people, which had up to then been known as Trojan or crooked Greek, was called British for the same reason (72).
The destruction of the British people by invasions led by Hengist and Horsa becomes not so much a narrative of Conquest as in Bede, but one laden with xenophobia: the tragedy is that Vortigern becomes smitten with a “heathen” woman, the sister of Hengist, and there is widespread “miscegenation” as a result:
Already no one could tell who was a pagan and who was a Christian, for the pagans were associating with their daughters and female relations (161).
K_eng wrote:
I know it has been a while since we covered all of this, but I just thought of a few questions I would like to raise for the sake of clarification.
First is something of a minor detail. According to the Geoffrey of Monmounth text, wasn’t Renwein the daughter, not sister, of Hengist?
Secondly, it seems that according to this text, that the major source of the xenophobia stems from the fact that the invaders are “heathens”. Vortigern was disturbed by Hengist’s invocation of Mercury. ” ‘I am greatly grieved by,’ replied Vortigern, ‘by your belief, which indeed, can better be called unbelief…”(157)
Further reaction is already cited above.
We were prefaced with a note about how Geoffrey was writing for the “edification and persuasion of Norman overlords.” My question about all of this is: Was the reaction of Vortigern and the Britons to the “heathens” really true to the times, or was it over-exaggerated somewhat by Geoffrey to please his audience?
I personally believe there are elements of both, but I would really like to hear from someone who has more knowledge on this topic.
Posted 08 Feb 2008 at 1:34 pm ¶
sean wrote:
“We were prefaced with a note about how Geoffrey was writing for the “edification and persuasion of Norman overlords.†My question about all of this is: Was the reaction of Vortigern and the Britons to the “heathens†really true to the times, or was it over-exaggerated somewhat by Geoffrey to please his audience?I personally believe there are elements of both, but I would really like to hear from someone who has more knowledge on this topic.”
I should probably field this one as it is picking up on some elisions in the original post. It seems to me that GM is making the Saxons more “heathen” and foreign for his Welsh-nationalist purposes. There were certainly those in sub-Roman Britain who welcomed the Saxons at first, as there were certainly those who thought they were uncivilized pagans who should have no place in Christianized, Romano-Celtic Britain. GM is at lengthy pains throughout his History of the Kings of Britain to concoct genetic, cultural, and historical connections between the Welsh and Bretons (i.e. Celts who fled Britain at various times and took refuge in northern France) and the Norman invaders who came to England in 1066 and years following. Geoffrey’s intended audience were the ruling and clerical classes who had control of both England and France at that time. So, all in all, GM’s project is to find historical alliances between the (Celtic) Britons and the new French-speaking masters of Britain.
One of the ways he does this is to portray the Saxons as foreign interlopers by emphasizing their pagan religion, and their weird language. When Vortigern is introduced to Renwein for the first time, Renwein’s greeting of “Laverd King wes hail” (Lord King, be well) (139). This is not of course OE as it was spoken in 450 CE, but it is early Middle English as it was spoken ca. 1135 Laverd = OE hlaford (lord). An interesting etymological note: “hlaford” = hlaf + weard “guardian of the loaf.” Lady = hlaf + eadig “maker of the loaf.”
Posted 10 Feb 2008 at 1:01 pm ¶