Violence, Memory, and History: Geoffrey of Monmouth and Kazuo Ishiguro’s The Buried Giant

Kazuo Ishiguro has suggested that his work of medieval fantasy, The Buried Giant (2015), draws on a “quasi-historical” King Arthur, in contrast to the Arthur of legend. This article reads Ishiguro’s novel against the medieval work that codified the notion of an historical King Arthur, Geoffrey of Monmouth’s History of the Kings of Britain (c. 1139). Geoffrey’s History offered a largely fictive account of the British past that became the most successful historiographical phenomenon of the English Middle Ages. The Buried Giant offers an interrogation of memory that calls such “useful” constructions of history into question. The novel deploys material deriving from Geoffrey’s work while laying bear its methodology; the two texts speak to each other in ways sometimes complementary, sometimes deconstructive. That Ishiguro’s critique can be applied to Geoffrey’s History points to recurrent strategies of history-making, past and present, whereby violence serves as a mechanism for the creation of historical form.

Welsh Writing Before 1500

Welsh writing before 1500 consists of a rich tradition of writing in Latin and the vernacular, in a range of genres including literary prose, poetry, chronicles, law, medicine, grammar, wisdom literature, genealogy, and religious writing. The earliest extant Welsh-language writing is epigraphy (on, for example, the Tywyn Stone) and Old Welsh glosses and marginal texts in 9th-century Latin manuscripts. Use of Latin in early medieval Wales, continuous from the Roman period, is attested in works of history, poetry, and record keeping. Early medieval writing is poorly served by the manuscript record, with only twenty pre-12th-century manuscripts extant, and only eleven before c. 1100. The early books that do survive display technical skills of manuscript production and handwriting on par with elsewhere in Europe, and studies of surviving Latin texts, Old Welsh glosses, and later copies of Old Welsh texts reveal a rich, varied written practice grounded in careful study of Latin classics. Wales is also the birthplace of three significant 12th-century Latin authors, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Gerald of Wales, and Walter Map. The use of Latin for recording Welsh law is also very well attested. A group of vernacular codices survive from the 13th century onward, preserving a proliferation of prose literature, poetry, dozens of texts translated or adapted from Latin and French, and a cache of technical prose writing—law, medicine, and grammar—characterized by a vast technical vocabulary and mnemonic devices indicative of oral transmission. Orality is an important dimension of Welsh writing, with several genres displaying interplay between oral and written transmission. The oral medium of knowledge transmission, often referred to as cyfarwyddyd (oral lore), is attested in the prose style that frequently uses mnemonic devices and oral formulae. This oral literature was composed and transmitted by a professional class, and then written down and rewritten in successive phases. Another major area of Welsh writing is bardic poetry, which represents a longstanding tradition of professional poets composing mostly panegyric, eulogy, and elegy for royal patrons from the early medieval period until the Edwardian conquest of Wales in 1282, at which point patronage shifted to a new gentry class. Alongside this native practice, Welsh writing was also influenced by imported Latin and French texts, including romance, geography, history, apocrypha, and devotional literature. Historically, scholarship has prioritized vernacular compositions over Latin, and original texts over translations, but this has shifted in recent decades.

Origins and Introductions

The chapter compares different uses of the legend of Troy as a ‘Trojan preface’ to historical and literary texts in medieval England, Wales, and Ireland. Typically used to introduce narratives of nationalist significance, the ‘Trojan preface’ forms a distinctive genre that functioned to establish or confirm myths of national origin. The work of early historians such as Henry of Huntingdon and Geoffrey of Monmouth provides examples of the uses of Troy to construct a particular kind of English identity. In Welsh and Irish texts, the Trojan legend was inserted as a chronological milestone which aligned the ethnic histories of Wales (or Britain) and Ireland with world events. The legacy of Rome was another source of English identity which worked to exclude the early British people and their descendants, the Welsh. Rome was also an important point of reference for the Welsh and Irish, who established their claim to ancient lineage through literary references to Britain under the Romans and through adaptations of Latin epic. The ambiguity of Troy, represented by Aeneas as a figure of both heroic endeavour and treacherous betrayal, is addressed in different ways by English, Welsh, and Irish writers. The chapter ends with a discussion of the Trojan prefaces in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and Chaucer’s House of Fame, suggesting that these prefaces are motivated comments on the questionable historical construction of English identity.

Geographesis, or the Afterlife of Britain in Chaucer

Through a close reading of several of the Canterbury Tales (but especially the Franklin’s Tale), this chapter maps the glimmers of British (especially Welsh) history within Geoffrey Chaucer’s Anglocentric narrative ambit. The inquiry is framed through the use of postcolonial anthropology and ecomaterialism, and discussion returns repeatedly to how humans compose narratives with and on stone (menhirs, monoliths, Stonehenge), especially because stone’s duration is so vast. A major focus of the chapter is Chaucer’s unspoken debt to the twelfth-century British historian Geoffrey of Monmouth, who stands at the commencement of the Arthur myth that Chaucer so often dismisses as dead or long past. Stone ensures that this history endures.