With details of troop deployments and excerpts from speeches kings deliver to their men before battle, it becomes obvious it is unlikely that the details are historically accurate. Little time is spent discussing personal relationships; most of the stories revolve around battle. The book is easy reading for the most part. Some of the details offered before any given battle are hard to understand, but they rarely have a significant impact on the course of the plot. The price is more than fair, considering the volume of the book itself and the multitude of fantastic stories. Despite the fact that the work cannot be considered a true source of history, there is still a great deal of educational value.

With details of troop deployments and excerpts from speeches kings deliver to their men before battle, it becomes obvious it is unlikely that the details are historically accurate. Little time is spent discussing personal relationships; most of the stories revolve around battle. The book is easy reading for the most part. Some of the details offered before any given battle are hard to understand, but they rarely have a significant impact on the course of the plot. The price is more than fair, considering the volume of the book itself and the multitude of fantastic stories. Despite the fact that the work cannot be considered a true source of history, there is still a great deal of educational value.

I had to read some parts of this book for class and there were times when I was so confused by the writing that I had to reread parts three or four times. At other times I had no problem understanding what was going on. Overall, it is an enjoyable read if you are interested in how biographies were written in the middle ages and if you don't take every word seriously since the author wasn't very faithful to history.

I'm not sure why another reviewer asserts that "this is not a translation of the Latin HRB." Thorpe is translating the Latin Historia Regum Britanniae from the Cambridge MS. 1706 (see p. 34 of Thorpe's intro).

Geoffrey composed the History of the Kings of Britain ca. 1136-38. It is a medieval chronicle, and it adheres to the standards of historiography of the time. While it does not provide the kind of coherent reading experience one might expect from a modern novel, it does offer early versions of what will become familiar tales. Most Arthurian courses (including mine) begin with excerpts from this book--which places the figure of Arthur and his prototypes somewhere in the twilight between Late Antique history and medieval romantic legend. Later vernacular versions of the HRB will be Layamon's Brut (in early Middle English) and Wace's Roman de Brut (in Anglo-Norman French).

Geoffrey was probably Welsh, and some believe that he writes the HRB to please the Norman ascendancy as they have defeated the Anglo-Saxons (the old enemy of the Welsh) a few generations earlier.

Geoffrey's "The History of the Kings of Britain" is an engaging book about the King's who ruled over Britain and the great deeds they accomplished. I will concentrate particularly on the tales concerning Uther Pendragon and Arthur, since these are the characters that, in one way or another, helped form the image of Arthur we relate to in today's society.
The book is, for the most part, event driven. Geoffrey describes one battle after the next after the next. It is almost certain that he will name each and every important character just as he will explain what happens to them at one point or another. He takes great care in describing how the battles take place. You can be sure he will never miss a name. Although these and other little details about battles and events are interseting, they do not make up for the lack of insight into the characters lives, especially Arthur's.
Throughout the novel it is possible to get a feeling that Geoffrey continues to try and convince us that Arthur is the noblest and most generous of men. Arthur's actions, however, don't always seem to be so. Was his generosity true at heart, or was it a form of subtle bribery to keep his people's and allies favor? Why was Arthur so eager to enter battle, one after another, despite losing so many of his mens lives? Geoffrey does a good job of "telling" us of Arthur's greatness, but does a poor job of "showing" it.
Despite these minor flaws, The History of the Kings of Britain is, if not historically acurate, at least entertaining. The constant battles, change of events and the casual appearance of supernatural powers gives the book that old, medieval feel. As for the text, it is not difficult to understand. Some effort is required to completly comprehend the events taking place, but it's nothing too time consuming. Personally, I enjoyed the book and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys reading about conquest, battles and anything relating to King Arthur.

"The History of the Kings of Britain", by Geoffrey of Monmouth, is a piece of literature like no other. Anyone with an interest in medieval tales, ancient battles, and adventurous kings will be right at home while reading this book. If you are looking for accurate historical details of this time from long ago, then this may not be the best source. The book is full of multiple stories consisting of trickery, magic, and conquest. Whether it be King Utherpendragon magically disguising himself as a Duke to be with the woman he longs for, or King Arthur defeating all who stand in his way building an empire that spans from Britain to the heels of Rome itself, the events are all exhilarating to read. Magic defines the events of the stories, only adding to their appeal. Great kings lead their men to victory and there is a lot of backstabbing and destruction. The suspense never ends, and the ending always leaves you wanting more. The urge to continue on to the next story is persistent and that next story is never disappointing. Geoffrey does exaggerate beyond what is humanly possible. Utherpendragon actually acquires the physical likeness of the Duke, and Arthur is able to slay hundreds of men singlehandedly in one attack. With details of troop deployments and excerpts from speeches kings deliver to their men before battle, it becomes obvious it is unlikely that the details are historically accurate. Little time is spent discussing personal relationships; most of the stories revolve around battle. The book is easy reading for the most part. Some of the details offered before any given battle are hard to understand, but they rarely have a significant impact on the course of the plot. The price is more than fair, considering the volume of the book itself and the multitude of fantastic stories. Despite the fact that the work cannot be considered a true source of history, there is still a great deal of educational value. This is one of the earlier surviving medieval works, and it is most likely the first to mention King Arthur; this is considered the source of all King Arthur tales. Based on the events in this book, the well-known "King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table" story lines were developed. A great book to read, I submit a rating of 5 stars.

In The History of the Kings of Britain, Geoffrey of Monmouth presents a detailed history of the Britons, beginning with Brutus in the twelfth century B.C. and ending with Saxon invasion in the seventh century A.D. Through the main characters of his book, Brutus, Belinus and Arthur, Geoffrey illustrates Britain's glorious past, recalling the events in chronological sequence and providing detailed descriptions of every event, especially those strategic to the building of Britain.
While Geoffrey's source has yet to be proved, in his own introduction, Geoffrey claims to follow a reliable and ancient source given to him by a friend. The lack of evidence to support this claim, coupled with the supernatural elements incorporated into The History of the Kings of Britain, makes it difficult for the modern reader to place complete trust in the text as a historical account of Britain's history. The text is, however, rich in historical value as from his writing, one can deduce much about the political structure of Britain in that time frame, as well as the sociological makeup of the nation. The emphasis on politics, war and international relations, form a rough picture of Britain's power system, and the lengthy stories revolving around his characters give the reader insight on the lives of the British nobility.
The History of the Kings of Britain deserves as much credit (if not more) for its literary value as its historical one. While Geoffrey considers himself a historian, his artistic talents, fluency and extensive use of vocabulary bring his accounts to life, turning the text into an enjoyable literary piece. Especially in key passages (in particular those concerning Arthur), Geoffrey makes very fine and detailed points, often narrating livelily.
Lastly, Geoffrey writes "to be read by the solitary reader, not to be declaimed aloud...recital." While unable to resist the temptation to exalt certain characters he favor, Geoffrey is sensitive to leave much room for the reader's imagination. The experience of reading Geoffrey includes filling in the gaps in his stories with speculations of your own, giving every reader a personal "version" of the book.
The History of the Kings of Britain is both an acclaimed literary piece and a famous historical account. The richness of its text lies in the careful description of the events, and the accessible style of writing. A marvelous attempt at introducing Britain's early history, the History of the Kings of Britain also provides one of the greatest accounts of the Arthurian legend.

Geoffrey's "The History of the Kings of Britain" is an engaging book about the King's who ruled over Britain and the great deeds they accomplished. I will concentrate particularly on the tales concerning Uther Pendragon and Arthur, since these are the characters that, in one way or another, helped form the image of Arthur we relate to in today's society.
The book is, for the most part, event driven. Geoffrey describes one battle after the next after the next. It is almost certain that he will name each and every important character just as he will explain what happens to them at one point or another. He takes great care in describing how the battles take place. You can be sure he will never miss a name. Although these and other little details about battles and events are interseting, they do not make up for the lack of insight into the characters lives, especially Arthur's.
Throughout the novel it is possible to get a feeling that Geoffrey continues to try and convince us that Arthur is the noblest and most generous of men. Arthur's actions, however, don't always seem to be so. Was his generosity true at heart, or was it a form of subtle bribery to keep his people's and allies favor? Why was Arthur so eager to enter battle, one after another, despite losing so many of his mens lives? Geoffrey does a good job of "telling" us of Arthur's greatness, but does a poor job of "showing" it.
Despite these minor flaws, The History of the Kings of Britain is, if not historically acurate, at least entertaining. The constant battles, change of events and the casual appearance of supernatural powers gives the book that old, medieval feel. As for the text, it is not difficult to understand. Some effort is required to completly comprehend the events taking place, but it's nothing too time consuming. Personally, I enjoyed the book and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys reading about conquest, battles and anything relating to King Arthur.

Geoffrey of Monmouth is the man who really started the "King Arthur Craze" of the 12th & 13th centuries. After writing "The History of the Kings of Britain" we have the explosion of works by Chretien de Troyes, Wolfram von Eschenbach, Marie de France, Gottfried von Strassburg, the Vulgate Cycle and all the rest, eventually culminating in the 15th century with Le Morte D'Arthur. No matter what oral tradition may have been in place before this time (the "little book" loaned to Geoffrey?), this is THE book that starts the true interest in The Matter of Britain.

While King Arthur is the centerpiece of the work, this book contains many tales, many of which were later reworked by other authors, most notably Llyr (Lear) and his three daughters.

This book is not a history in the modern sense. "History" derives from "historia", a story, a tale; such "historical" stories were meant, first and foremost, to be moral, didactic lessons on how to (or how NOT to) conduct one's life. Very little in this book could be construed by modern standards to be a "true history"; conversely, here are tales of nobility, gallantry, perfidy, excess, and the like. The characters are exemplars, not real people. The book, starting with the Fall of Troy, leads towards the glory of King Arthur and then falls away from this point, with the slow decline of the Britons in the face of the Anglo-Saxons.

This book is not an easy read by modern standards. On the other hand, it was a medieval "best seller", a book for which there are dozens of manuscripts to sort out (often with slight differences in the text). If you have a real interest in the Arthurian legends or in medieval literature in general, you owe it to yourself to read this volume. While the tales of the Mabinogian may be older, this is the spark-point that introduces Europe to King Arthur.

Geoffrey of Monmouth's chronicle of the Britons (mostly in England) reads a bit like Herodotus though on a lesser scale. As the author himself admits, his prose is brutally plain and of a "homely style," and only a few vivid scenes come to mind when recalling two thousand years of British history (mostly consisting of public speeches, warriors' last stands and Merlin's prophecies). This might have been a great flaw for a work that is more literature than history, but the subject matter is intriguing enough for one interested in British civilizations to enjoy the book. Despite his appearance on the front cover illustration, King Arthur does not figure greatly in the History as one might have thought.

This edition includes a chronology of historical events reffered to in the History with approximate years and a list of contemporary British rulers as recalled by Geoffrey.

I highly recomend Geffory of Monmouth's "History of the Kings of Britain". This book explors the first rulers of Britain to the time when the Saxons took over the island. The book is a run through of the different people who tover the monarchy of Britain. The first person the reach Britain was Brutus the Trojan who was a decendant of the great Aeneas. For example King Lear called Leir and Cymbline were real. Shakesphere took them from ancient history and changed them around. This book explors the times when Britain was at wars with the Romans and the emperors such as Caesar and Vespasian came to the island. Other famous kings in the book are Cassivellaunus who was the king of Britian before it was taken over by the Romans. Other kings are Caedwalla who was the last king before the Saxons took over. Some parts in this book are farfetched , such as during the reigns of Vortigern and KIng Arthur. Also in the beginning the book states that Britain was inhabited by giants. There is also a section on the prophicies of Merlin the is complicated. We are still talking about a book thatv was published in 1136. No one can be sure of the true history, but Geffory of Monmouth gives a good outline of it. It is easy to find a book on the history of England beginning with the Normans, but This book is before that period and is a rare find. If you love history, especially on Britain, then this brilliant book is for you!

As to this book's worth to either History or Literature is, in my mind, seriously in doubt. To anyone wanting to read this be forewarned that it reads as a list of: who invaded who, who killed who, who was poisoned who, who laid siege to who, who betrayed who, etc. No sense of the character of the individuals within this book are given so that one may come away not caring about anyone.

The book is supposed to cover 2000 thousand years of Britain's history. But by reading the text alone it is very difficult to place events in a certain time. There are interesting tidbits sometimes dispersed through the "histories" that one can be grateful for having an occasional diversion through the many listed events. One example is the familiar story of King Lear. These exceptions, however, are too few and very short. One would be better off going to other sources for a more enjoyable and complete presentation.

King Arthur is, of course, here as is Merlin. But, according to Geoffrey, King Arthur lays siege to Gaul and Ireland, killing many men and then, out of the goodness of his heart, he becomes generous. Go figure. Meanwhile Merlin shows up a couple of times briefly. His prophecies are listed inexplicably in the middle of the book, which have seemingly no bearing on the rest of the story. Indeed, this placement severely disturbs the flow of the narrative. One might be best to skip over it until the end.

As a piece of literature from the 12th century this book is interesting in that fact alone. If you want interesting history or good literature look elsewhere.

Geoffrey of Monmouth's History traces the kingship of Britain from its mythical origins after the fall of Troy to the beginning of Saxon rule. According to Geoffrey, the Britons are descended from Brutus, refugee from Troy and the grandson of Aeneas, the founder of Rome. Most of his history centers around Brutus, Belinus and Arthur, three fictional kings who got the better of Rome and the rest of Europe, either in battle or by duplicity.

Geoffrey also provides the earliest surviving stories of Arthur and Merlin. Geoffrey apparently admired bloody conquest (as long as the conquerors were Britons) and his Arthur is the bloodiest of all. In this first version of the Arthur story there is no Lancelot or Morgan le Fey, no Grail and no Camelot. But Geoffrey inserts a lengthy chapter containing the prophecies of Merlin, and a few magical episodes as well, such as the story of Arthur's conception.

The style is the terse and elegant, but lacks the deeper moral sense of some other medieval literature and later Arthurian tales. Arthur's justifications of conquest are shallow at best. Sometimes the austere style leaves your mouth watering for more detail. Try this single sentence description of an entire reign: "In his reign the sky rained blood for three days and many Britons died from the massings of flies." Fascinating. Tell me more! But he doesn't. Still definitely worth reading.