1. That, upon its first appearance in the world, the book met with universal approbation, and that too from those who had better opportunities of examining the truth of it, as there were then more monuments extant, and the traditions were more fresh and uncorrupted, concerning the ancient British affairs, than any critics of the present age can pretend to. 2. That except William of Newburgh, about the end of the reign of Richard I, it met with no opponents even down to the seventeenth century, but was, on the contrary, quoted by all, in particular by Edward I, in a controversy before Boniface the Eighth. 3. That we see in this history the traces of venerable antiquity. 4. That the story of Brute, and the descent of the Britons from the Trojans, was universally allowed by Giraldus Cambrensis and others, and was opposed for the first time by John of Wethamstede, [Nicolson's Eng. Hist. Lit. 2nd ed. p. 1, c. v.] who lived in the 15th century: that Polydore Virgil's contempt for it proceeded from his wish to preserve unimpaired the glory of the Romans, and Buchanan's observations betray his ignorance of the story. 5. That Leland, who lived under Henry the Eighth, Humphrey Lhwyd, Sir John Price, Dr. Caius, Dr. Powel, and others, have supported the story of Brute, etc. Such arguments may have satisfied the credulous students of the seventeenth century, but the more enlightened criticism of the present day will no longer listen to them. It may not, however, be uninteresting to hear the account which Thompson, the English translator gives of this work, which in his own words, and with his additional remarks upon it, is as follows:--"The story, as collected from himself, Leland, Bale, and Pitts, is that Walter Mapes, _alias_ Calenius, archdeacon of Oxford, who flourished in the reign of Henry I, and of whom Henry of Huntingdon, and other historians as well as Geoffrey himself, make honourable mention, being a man very curious in the study of antiquity, and a diligent searcher into ancient libraries, and especially after the works of ancient authors, happened while he was in Armorica to light upon a History of Britain, written in the British tongue, and carrying marks of great antiquity. And being overjoyed at it, as if he had found a vast treasure, he in a short time after came over to England; where inquiring for a proper person to translate this curious but hitherto unknown book, he very opportunely met with Geoffrey of Monmouth, a man profoundly versed in the history and antiquities of Britain, excellently skilled in the British tongue, and withal (considering the time,) an elegant writer both in verse and prose; and so recommended this task to him. Accordingly, Geoffrey, being incredibly delighted with this ancient book, undertook the translating of it into Latin, which he performed, with great diligence, approving himself, according to Matthew Paris, a faithful translator. At first he divided it into four books, written in