What do you think?
Rate this book
Liber querulus de excidio Britanniae. English
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.
18 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 540
33 people are currently reading
464 people want to read
About the author
Gildas
42 books11 followersGildas (Breton: Gweltaz; c. 500 – c. 570) - also known as Gildas the Wise or Gildas Sapiens - was a 6th-century British monk best known for his scathing religious polemic De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae (On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain), which recounts the history of the Britons before and during the coming of the Saxons. He is one of the best-documented figures of the Christian church in the British Isles during the sub-Roman period, and was renowned for his Biblical knowledge and literary style.
Gildas was born in what is now Scotland on the banks of the River Clyde, the son of a royal family. In his later life, he emigrated to Brittany where he founded a monastery known as St. Gildas de Rhuys.
Gildas was born in what is now Scotland on the banks of the River Clyde, the son of a royal family. In his later life, he emigrated to Brittany where he founded a monastery known as St. Gildas de Rhuys.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
October 3, 2022
Update 02/10/2022 - I read through another edition of De excidio Britanniae today, mainly to see whether there were any differences in translation with the version I read in 2015 - review below. The version I have just read was a 19th century one edited by a Hugh Williams, and it includes the Latin text as well as the English translation. The Williams version also includes a range of other writings by or attributed to Gildas, of a purely religious nature.
The translation was similar to the version I read in 2015, but there was one significant difference in interpretation. Gildas refers at one point to a rebellion by the Britons against the Romans, which came from "the treacherous lioness", leaena dolosa are the words he uses. The use of the word "lioness" has commonly been taken as a reference to Queen Boudicca and her famous revolt of 62AD, - see my original review - but Dr Wiliams believed that the word referred to Britain as a whole. He bolsters his case by pointing out that on several other occasions Gildas uses the term "lioness" to describe a country. The arrival of the Saxons is described with the words Tum erumpens grex catulorum de cubili leaenae barbarae - "A brood of cubs burst forth from the lair of the barbarian lioness". Later when denouncing a local British king of Devon (Gildas does a great deal of denouncing) he describes said king as leaenae Damnoniae tyrannicus catulus "tyrannical cub of the Devon lioness".
The reader can take their choice as to which they prefer. I suppose if nothing else the example shows that interpreting ancient texts can be a tricky business.
Original Review
About 30 years ago I read a book called "Celtic Britain" in which the author quoted from this work. At the time I never thought I'd read the original (even in translation) but in the intervening period the Internet has come to be and made these texts much more accessible.
Gildas was a Romano-British monk, thought to have lived in the early to mid 6th century, and just about the only contemporary source for the early Dark Ages in Britain. The English language title of this is normally given as "On The Ruin of Britain", and how it would have pained Gildas to learn that his book had been translated into the language descended from that spoken by the hated Saxons!
I was actually a bit surprised at how short this text is. It can be read in about half an hour, and to say that Gildas is critical of his fellow Britons is a bit of an understatement. The book is basically an extended rant against his own countrymen for their supposed cowardice and sinfulness. For Gildas, the Romans were definitely the good guys, constantly rescuing the wretched Britons from their enemies. Queen Boadicea is described as "that deceitful lioness" (and it is clear that the term "lioness" is not meant as a compliment).
Much of the history is pretty confused, but Gildas appears to have some knowledge of Northern Britain, since he refers to "two foreign nations... the Scots from the northwest, and the Picts from the north," which accurately describes the homelands of those peoples. Interestingly they are described as "differing from one another in manners".
"On The Ruin of Britain" sounds as if it could be the title of a UKIP election leaflet, and indeed the last part of the book is a sort of warning of the supposed dangers of immigration, with the twist that here it is the English who are the immigrants. According to Gildas it was King Vortigern who sealed the country's fate by inviting in "the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful to God and men, to repel the invasions of the northern nations". The Saxons then spread across the country "to the western ocean" until the Britons managed to gather strength under a new leader, Ambrosius Aurelianus, who "of all the Roman nation" was "by chance left alive." Gildas relates that with this new leader the Britons won many victories, especially Mons Badonicus, "the last almost, but not the least slaughter of our cruel foes."
The fact that the only contemporary source from this period makes no mention of King Arthur has been well debated by historians, and some have concluded that Ambrosius Aurelianus may have been the inspiration for Arthur. That though, is a whole different subject.
The translation was similar to the version I read in 2015, but there was one significant difference in interpretation. Gildas refers at one point to a rebellion by the Britons against the Romans, which came from "the treacherous lioness", leaena dolosa are the words he uses. The use of the word "lioness" has commonly been taken as a reference to Queen Boudicca and her famous revolt of 62AD, - see my original review - but Dr Wiliams believed that the word referred to Britain as a whole. He bolsters his case by pointing out that on several other occasions Gildas uses the term "lioness" to describe a country. The arrival of the Saxons is described with the words Tum erumpens grex catulorum de cubili leaenae barbarae - "A brood of cubs burst forth from the lair of the barbarian lioness". Later when denouncing a local British king of Devon (Gildas does a great deal of denouncing) he describes said king as leaenae Damnoniae tyrannicus catulus "tyrannical cub of the Devon lioness".
The reader can take their choice as to which they prefer. I suppose if nothing else the example shows that interpreting ancient texts can be a tricky business.
Original Review
About 30 years ago I read a book called "Celtic Britain" in which the author quoted from this work. At the time I never thought I'd read the original (even in translation) but in the intervening period the Internet has come to be and made these texts much more accessible.
Gildas was a Romano-British monk, thought to have lived in the early to mid 6th century, and just about the only contemporary source for the early Dark Ages in Britain. The English language title of this is normally given as "On The Ruin of Britain", and how it would have pained Gildas to learn that his book had been translated into the language descended from that spoken by the hated Saxons!
I was actually a bit surprised at how short this text is. It can be read in about half an hour, and to say that Gildas is critical of his fellow Britons is a bit of an understatement. The book is basically an extended rant against his own countrymen for their supposed cowardice and sinfulness. For Gildas, the Romans were definitely the good guys, constantly rescuing the wretched Britons from their enemies. Queen Boadicea is described as "that deceitful lioness" (and it is clear that the term "lioness" is not meant as a compliment).
Much of the history is pretty confused, but Gildas appears to have some knowledge of Northern Britain, since he refers to "two foreign nations... the Scots from the northwest, and the Picts from the north," which accurately describes the homelands of those peoples. Interestingly they are described as "differing from one another in manners".
"On The Ruin of Britain" sounds as if it could be the title of a UKIP election leaflet, and indeed the last part of the book is a sort of warning of the supposed dangers of immigration, with the twist that here it is the English who are the immigrants. According to Gildas it was King Vortigern who sealed the country's fate by inviting in "the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful to God and men, to repel the invasions of the northern nations". The Saxons then spread across the country "to the western ocean" until the Britons managed to gather strength under a new leader, Ambrosius Aurelianus, who "of all the Roman nation" was "by chance left alive." Gildas relates that with this new leader the Britons won many victories, especially Mons Badonicus, "the last almost, but not the least slaughter of our cruel foes."
The fact that the only contemporary source from this period makes no mention of King Arthur has been well debated by historians, and some have concluded that Ambrosius Aurelianus may have been the inspiration for Arthur. That though, is a whole different subject.
October 19, 2016
I've seen quite a few reviews on Goodreads and Amazon complaining that On the Ruin of Britain is inaccurate, or biased, or pro-Christian propaganda. It's all three of these things, but to mark it down as such is ridiculous. It's like digging up a sixth-century British helmet and complaining that it's rusty, and the horns look stupid, and it doesn't offer adequate protection against rifle bullets.
If you're looking for a reliable overview of British History in the Sub-Roman period, you're in the wrong place. But what we have here is one of the few surviving voices from a people and a historical period that have left very little in the way of written documentation. Gildas is an indifferent writer (much less fun than, say, Bede) and yes he's a terrible historian, but his personality and passion comes through very strongly, and given that he's speaking to us over a distance of nearly 1,500 years I think that makes this book priceless.
If you're looking for a reliable overview of British History in the Sub-Roman period, you're in the wrong place. But what we have here is one of the few surviving voices from a people and a historical period that have left very little in the way of written documentation. Gildas is an indifferent writer (much less fun than, say, Bede) and yes he's a terrible historian, but his personality and passion comes through very strongly, and given that he's speaking to us over a distance of nearly 1,500 years I think that makes this book priceless.
February 4, 2021
Ever feel completely out of step with the culture surrounding you and think to yourself, "Everyone sucks!" Well, St. Gildas of the 6th century says, "Hold my beer." Or ... mead.
I'm still not quite sure what precipitated this excellent diatribe in which Gildas Sapiens rakes both the secular and religious leaders of his days over the coals. It seems to be nothing more specific than their general corrupt, debauched, and otherwise unsavory behavior. He really, really didn't want to have to write this, guys. He weeps and moans that it has come to pass that he must compose this admonition. "The work is, in fact, poor," he notes in his introduction, "but I believe faithful and friendly to all noble soldiers of Christ; but severe and hard to bear to foolish apostates." In other words, it's not him; it is most definitely YOU, princes and clergy.
This little work of high dudgeon is famous for being, according to the back cover, "the only substantial source for post-Roman British history," but I find myself agreeing with translator Hugh Williams in his preliminary note that this work "is, really, in no way a history, nor written with any object a historian might have." St. Gildas does give us a rundown of the Britons - portraying them as stubborn, cowardly, feckless, faithless, among other terrible qualities - but the most historical context is saved for the endnotes given by Williams. What remains is the frustrated outcry of a man disgusted with the surrounding culture who, with great assistance from liberal and lengthy doses of Scripture, harangues his contemporaries something fierce. And it is beautiful to behold.
I'm still not quite sure what precipitated this excellent diatribe in which Gildas Sapiens rakes both the secular and religious leaders of his days over the coals. It seems to be nothing more specific than their general corrupt, debauched, and otherwise unsavory behavior. He really, really didn't want to have to write this, guys. He weeps and moans that it has come to pass that he must compose this admonition. "The work is, in fact, poor," he notes in his introduction, "but I believe faithful and friendly to all noble soldiers of Christ; but severe and hard to bear to foolish apostates." In other words, it's not him; it is most definitely YOU, princes and clergy.
This little work of high dudgeon is famous for being, according to the back cover, "the only substantial source for post-Roman British history," but I find myself agreeing with translator Hugh Williams in his preliminary note that this work "is, really, in no way a history, nor written with any object a historian might have." St. Gildas does give us a rundown of the Britons - portraying them as stubborn, cowardly, feckless, faithless, among other terrible qualities - but the most historical context is saved for the endnotes given by Williams. What remains is the frustrated outcry of a man disgusted with the surrounding culture who, with great assistance from liberal and lengthy doses of Scripture, harangues his contemporaries something fierce. And it is beautiful to behold.
November 20, 2017
Gildas does tend to rant rather, but with so few primary sources to illuminate Britain's Dark Ages, beggars can't be choosers!
August 13, 2019
Gildas è un monaco del VI secolo e la sua è una delle rarissime testimonianze scritte che ci sono giunte di quel periodo, sia per la storia trattata sia per il periodo in cui fu scritta.
🗡️🗡️🗡️
Il monaco ci racconta del periodo cruciale dell'isola che vide la fine della dominazione romana e l'inizio delle invasioni delle popolazioni barbariche: prima Scoti e Pitti, tribù celtiche e pre-celtiche che risiedevano nell'antica Alba, l'antica Scozia, e in seguito Angli, Sassoni e Iuti di derivazione germanica, chiamati in soccorso per liberarsi dei primi invasori.
🗡️🗡️🗡️
Lo scopo di Gildas è spiegare come i cattivi costumi dei britanni abbiano provocato la punizione divina e per fare questo associa il proprio popolo a quello israeliano.
🗡️🗡️🗡️
Non è un classico testo di storia, è più una ricostruzione mitica con scopi morali e da questo deriva tutto il piacere della lettura inoltre, con la citazione di re Vortigern, questa rimane la prima fonte scritta della leggenda di re Artù, direi che gli amanti della leggenda non possono lasciatelo scappare
🗡️🗡️🗡️
Il monaco ci racconta del periodo cruciale dell'isola che vide la fine della dominazione romana e l'inizio delle invasioni delle popolazioni barbariche: prima Scoti e Pitti, tribù celtiche e pre-celtiche che risiedevano nell'antica Alba, l'antica Scozia, e in seguito Angli, Sassoni e Iuti di derivazione germanica, chiamati in soccorso per liberarsi dei primi invasori.
🗡️🗡️🗡️
Lo scopo di Gildas è spiegare come i cattivi costumi dei britanni abbiano provocato la punizione divina e per fare questo associa il proprio popolo a quello israeliano.
🗡️🗡️🗡️
Non è un classico testo di storia, è più una ricostruzione mitica con scopi morali e da questo deriva tutto il piacere della lettura inoltre, con la citazione di re Vortigern, questa rimane la prima fonte scritta della leggenda di re Artù, direi che gli amanti della leggenda non possono lasciatelo scappare
October 12, 2023
this could have been an email
no seriously: i read this as research for my upcoming MA thesis in medieval literatures. i’ve read a couple of sermons (albeit not this one) already so i know what i was getting myself into: the text is filled with quotations from scripture where Gildas tries to find a reason for the impending doom of the British isles in the sins of its inhabitants.
from the standpoint of a medieval studies nerd, i appreciate the text for what it is: a document that partially recalls historic events set between Roman occupation and Anglo-Saxon settlements (a period which, to my knowledge, we don’t have that many sources of?). for that reason alone it is a valuable source. however, if you’re not familiar with works of this type, you will probably have a hard time getting through it.
no seriously: i read this as research for my upcoming MA thesis in medieval literatures. i’ve read a couple of sermons (albeit not this one) already so i know what i was getting myself into: the text is filled with quotations from scripture where Gildas tries to find a reason for the impending doom of the British isles in the sins of its inhabitants.
from the standpoint of a medieval studies nerd, i appreciate the text for what it is: a document that partially recalls historic events set between Roman occupation and Anglo-Saxon settlements (a period which, to my knowledge, we don’t have that many sources of?). for that reason alone it is a valuable source. however, if you’re not familiar with works of this type, you will probably have a hard time getting through it.
March 5, 2021
This short public domain ebook is taken (it seems) from J A Giles’ translation published in 1841, entitled The Works of Gildas and Nennius (as is my separate copy of Nennius’ History of the Britons). This particular edition seems to only contain two out of three parts of the work, the introduction and the history, but is missing the epistle. This review covers that content.
Gildas was a monk and he wrote a sermon rather than a history, but it is an important document as it is the only near contemporary chronicle of the Anglo-Saxon invasion in existence.
Gildas castigates the Britons for being feckless and allowing the Romans to conquer them, and then for imploring Roman help against the Scots and Picts whenever Roman troops left them to their own devices. He also castigates them for being more interested in internecine disputes than defending their Christian lands from pagan invaders. This sinfulness culminated in the Britons inviting the Anglo-Saxons to defend their land against the Scots and Picts, with disastrous results. This, according to Gildas, is a well-deserved divine punishment and a warning to the rump of Britain, his Celtic homeland still in existence at this time, to mend its ways if it is to survive.
The interesting thing is that Gildas quite clearly summarises (in paragraph 23) what is likely to have happened: the Germanic mercenaries were brought in as imperial federates, given quarters throughout the land and provided with a third of the land’s produce as was the customary approach of the Romans (see the works of J B Bury). The mercenaries got greedy, as they alone defended the island, and demanded ever more. They were refused, and they turned to plunder instead, becoming rulers rather than servants. This fairly leaps from the page.
Gildas paints such a vivid picture of a troublesome little province at the edge of the world let alone at the edge of the Empire, an emperor’s vanity project, a drain on military resources with the unfortunate side effect of being a breeding ground for ambitious generals with an eye on the purple, that it seems no surprise the Romans would conveniently abandon it when the Empire was in trouble.
Although this sermon is built from quotations from scripture and much embroidery, it is more readable and more cogent than the later version of events provided by Nennius.
*********
I have since found the complete work on Wikisource, collected in J A Giles’ 1848 work Six Old English Chronicles. I can see why the epistle, much larger than the previous two parts, seems to be left out of this and many other public domain editions of the book. It is of no interest to the casual reader of history, being a lengthy biblical fire and brimstone rant against certain sinning chieftains and schismatic priests. It may be of interest to scholars of divinity, but not me, as it has little or no historical content.
Gildas was a monk and he wrote a sermon rather than a history, but it is an important document as it is the only near contemporary chronicle of the Anglo-Saxon invasion in existence.
Gildas castigates the Britons for being feckless and allowing the Romans to conquer them, and then for imploring Roman help against the Scots and Picts whenever Roman troops left them to their own devices. He also castigates them for being more interested in internecine disputes than defending their Christian lands from pagan invaders. This sinfulness culminated in the Britons inviting the Anglo-Saxons to defend their land against the Scots and Picts, with disastrous results. This, according to Gildas, is a well-deserved divine punishment and a warning to the rump of Britain, his Celtic homeland still in existence at this time, to mend its ways if it is to survive.
The interesting thing is that Gildas quite clearly summarises (in paragraph 23) what is likely to have happened: the Germanic mercenaries were brought in as imperial federates, given quarters throughout the land and provided with a third of the land’s produce as was the customary approach of the Romans (see the works of J B Bury). The mercenaries got greedy, as they alone defended the island, and demanded ever more. They were refused, and they turned to plunder instead, becoming rulers rather than servants. This fairly leaps from the page.
Gildas paints such a vivid picture of a troublesome little province at the edge of the world let alone at the edge of the Empire, an emperor’s vanity project, a drain on military resources with the unfortunate side effect of being a breeding ground for ambitious generals with an eye on the purple, that it seems no surprise the Romans would conveniently abandon it when the Empire was in trouble.
Although this sermon is built from quotations from scripture and much embroidery, it is more readable and more cogent than the later version of events provided by Nennius.
*********
I have since found the complete work on Wikisource, collected in J A Giles’ 1848 work Six Old English Chronicles. I can see why the epistle, much larger than the previous two parts, seems to be left out of this and many other public domain editions of the book. It is of no interest to the casual reader of history, being a lengthy biblical fire and brimstone rant against certain sinning chieftains and schismatic priests. It may be of interest to scholars of divinity, but not me, as it has little or no historical content.
August 31, 2025
I've been meaning to read this important historical document for years. Finally I found the time to sit down and plough through it.
I've long been intrigued by this book. It is the only substantial piece of literature to survive from Britain in the 5th/6th centuries. Not only has it survived, but it has done so in several different versions. Given the effort needed to copy out such a book by hand and the cost of ink and vellum back then this must have meant that educated people at the time felt that this was an enormously important and valuable book that had to be preserved for future generations.
But what a turgid read. Page after page of quotes from the Bible or the Church Fathers. And yet, it was considered incredibly important by his contemporaries. So what do I think was going on.
Clearly Gildas has produced a mighty and lengthy moan about how terrible everything is. And yet at the time he was writing the real disaster to Christian/Romanised Britain had not yet happened. Compared to what was about to happen, things weren't too bad. Maybe the book was preserved by those who lived after Gildas and who knew the utter devastation that happened and viewed Gildas as being a sage and powerful prophet who had been ignored?
That said, this book does tell us a lot about Britain at the time Gildas was writing.
He says that there are 5 rulers in Britain, but that they are all tyrants - meaning that they had grabbed power illegally rather than that they were cruel. This is usually taken to refer to Ramano-British princes who ruled over what had been civitates - relatively small territories in late Roman times. But I wonder if actually he means rulers of what had been the 5 governorships in Britain. If so it would indicate that when Gildas was writing the bulk of the territory of Britain was still be administered by successors to legitimate Roman governors. But Gildas makes no mention of a position equivalent to the late Roman Vicarius - an administrative position above the 5 governors who made sure that taxes were sent to Rome. Maybe with Rome having abandoned Britain this was allowed to lapse.
Gildas describes a basically Christian country with bishops, priests and monasteries. He makes no complaints about heresy - unusual at this time - but does talk at length about corruption and simony as well as unspecified sins and evil that he alleges the bishops indulged in.
One thing I did wonder is what Gildas means by "the Devil". This figure corps up a lot. At first I thought Gildas meant the Devil in the hypothetical abstract since anybody evil must serve the devil. But as the Devil cropped up again and again in specific circumstances I began to wonder if he was talking about very real and specific human. Clearly this man was so evil Gildas could not bring himself to name him. Or maybe the Devil was so powerful that Gildas feared him too much to name him. Who could this person be? I can only think he was a pagan English warlord. If that is true then the key sin that Gildas ascribes to the 5 rulers and the assorted bishops and priests is that they obeyed the Devil - or a pagan English ruler.
This is a fascinating book, but a turgid read that is far from obvious what it was talking about. If you can face it, read it. But be prepared for long quotes from the Bible, obscure references and much that is utterly meaningless.
Worth having on your bookshelf, but worth reading? hmmmm
I've long been intrigued by this book. It is the only substantial piece of literature to survive from Britain in the 5th/6th centuries. Not only has it survived, but it has done so in several different versions. Given the effort needed to copy out such a book by hand and the cost of ink and vellum back then this must have meant that educated people at the time felt that this was an enormously important and valuable book that had to be preserved for future generations.
But what a turgid read. Page after page of quotes from the Bible or the Church Fathers. And yet, it was considered incredibly important by his contemporaries. So what do I think was going on.
Clearly Gildas has produced a mighty and lengthy moan about how terrible everything is. And yet at the time he was writing the real disaster to Christian/Romanised Britain had not yet happened. Compared to what was about to happen, things weren't too bad. Maybe the book was preserved by those who lived after Gildas and who knew the utter devastation that happened and viewed Gildas as being a sage and powerful prophet who had been ignored?
That said, this book does tell us a lot about Britain at the time Gildas was writing.
He says that there are 5 rulers in Britain, but that they are all tyrants - meaning that they had grabbed power illegally rather than that they were cruel. This is usually taken to refer to Ramano-British princes who ruled over what had been civitates - relatively small territories in late Roman times. But I wonder if actually he means rulers of what had been the 5 governorships in Britain. If so it would indicate that when Gildas was writing the bulk of the territory of Britain was still be administered by successors to legitimate Roman governors. But Gildas makes no mention of a position equivalent to the late Roman Vicarius - an administrative position above the 5 governors who made sure that taxes were sent to Rome. Maybe with Rome having abandoned Britain this was allowed to lapse.
Gildas describes a basically Christian country with bishops, priests and monasteries. He makes no complaints about heresy - unusual at this time - but does talk at length about corruption and simony as well as unspecified sins and evil that he alleges the bishops indulged in.
One thing I did wonder is what Gildas means by "the Devil". This figure corps up a lot. At first I thought Gildas meant the Devil in the hypothetical abstract since anybody evil must serve the devil. But as the Devil cropped up again and again in specific circumstances I began to wonder if he was talking about very real and specific human. Clearly this man was so evil Gildas could not bring himself to name him. Or maybe the Devil was so powerful that Gildas feared him too much to name him. Who could this person be? I can only think he was a pagan English warlord. If that is true then the key sin that Gildas ascribes to the 5 rulers and the assorted bishops and priests is that they obeyed the Devil - or a pagan English ruler.
This is a fascinating book, but a turgid read that is far from obvious what it was talking about. If you can face it, read it. But be prepared for long quotes from the Bible, obscure references and much that is utterly meaningless.
Worth having on your bookshelf, but worth reading? hmmmm
September 5, 2023
The historian (if I may call him that) Gildas has written probably the most biased, angry and hateful history I have ever read… and I love it!! This guy is hilarious and so done with everyone. Is it an accurate history? No, probably not. But is it a remarkable piece of writing that we are lucky to even be able to read? Absolutely.
“For it has always been a custom with our nation, as it is at present, to be impotent in repelling foreign foes, but bold and invincible in raising civil war”
“For it has always been a custom with our nation, as it is at present, to be impotent in repelling foreign foes, but bold and invincible in raising civil war”
June 30, 2021
Gildas, the Monk, sets out his History of the Decline and Fall of Britain after the Roman withdrawal.
The translation flows, but the layout of the book could do with a bit more work.
The translation flows, but the layout of the book could do with a bit more work.
June 15, 2020
I can't say I enjoyed this one, but as sub-Roman sources go this one is significant to say the least. The book was written in the 6th century by Gildas as a polemic, but I can detect a tone of utter disgust at everything from Gildas. He seems to me to a grumpy old man angry. As the historical content of the Ruin of Britain is very light and vague, it becomes obvious that he is an atrocious historian. Even Nennius is better! Bede borrowed a lot of his stuff about the early anglo-saxons from Gildas and because of this and the fact that his source if contemporary to the events somewhat its earned fame in the late antiquity departments. But it really doesn't deserve that fame!
January 11, 2015
" No sooner were they gone, than the Picts and Scots, like worms which in the heat of the mid-day come forth from their holes, hastily land again from their canoes, in which they had been carried beyond the Cichican valley, differing one from another in manners, but inspired with the same avidity for blood, and all more eager to shroud their villainous faces in bushy hair than to cover with decent clothing those parts of their body which required it."
" And again a little further, thus:—"The barbarians drive us to the sea; the sea throws us back on the barbarians: thus two modes of death await us, we are either slain or drowned.""
" Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant Gurthrigern [Vortigern], the British king, were so blinded, that, as a protection to their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them like wolves into the sheep-fold, the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful both to God and men, to repel the invasions of the northern nations."
" And again a little further, thus:—"The barbarians drive us to the sea; the sea throws us back on the barbarians: thus two modes of death await us, we are either slain or drowned.""
" Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant Gurthrigern [Vortigern], the British king, were so blinded, that, as a protection to their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them like wolves into the sheep-fold, the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful both to God and men, to repel the invasions of the northern nations."
June 4, 2020
The fact that this manuscript even exists today means it's worthy of five stars. As the earliest British voice in British history, Gildas is the reason later scribes had anything to reference. He might be 'that old monk who hates everybody,' but at least this text has survived over the millennia and through it we can get a tiny glimpse into 6th century Britain.
December 23, 2021
An interesting peek into an era of the British isles we know rather little about. I'd recommend this book if you're looking for a hundred new ways (or really rather old ways) to lament and criticize bad political leaders.
May 1, 2016
the most savage drag of all time. amen.
January 8, 2026
no one in the scriptorium like i am
February 15, 2022
'The Ruin of Britain' by 6th Century monk Gildas is a key source of information from this enigmatic period of British history. It grants a unique insight into cultural values and opinions of the time, as well as pressing political issues and even the names of some local rulers.
Reading Gildas' highly-biased, Christian perspective on historical events such as the Boudicca revolt, Christian persecution in Roman Britain, and the Saxon invasions after Roman withdrawal from the island, all shed light on a particularly dark era of history, adding a personal flair to events I'm used to reading merely as dates on a timeline, or passages in history textbooks. (My personal favourite was his reference to Boudicca as a 'deceitful lioness', which probably sounded like an insult back then, but just sounds kind of badass now).
But, back to historical value - it should be noted that many other famous sources of knowledge from the following centuries cite Gildas and this text... and for good reason. It's the only text of its kind - at least, that we currently know of - so, if you're at all interested in 5th and 6th century British history, then you should absolutely read 'The Ruin of Britain'.
It's a rare first-hand account of this period that also happens to be fairly entertaining, in part due to the writer's skill with words, but also due to his overt personal feelings and biases, which read somewhat like a Twitter rant about the state of modern affairs, or an angry blog post about the general incompetence of political and religious leaders.
So long as you go in with the expectation that this is an angry sermon written by a 6th century monk (and therefore not an academic text or 'objective' history), then you will not be disappointed with Gildas' 'The Ruin of Britain'.
Reading Gildas' highly-biased, Christian perspective on historical events such as the Boudicca revolt, Christian persecution in Roman Britain, and the Saxon invasions after Roman withdrawal from the island, all shed light on a particularly dark era of history, adding a personal flair to events I'm used to reading merely as dates on a timeline, or passages in history textbooks. (My personal favourite was his reference to Boudicca as a 'deceitful lioness', which probably sounded like an insult back then, but just sounds kind of badass now).
But, back to historical value - it should be noted that many other famous sources of knowledge from the following centuries cite Gildas and this text... and for good reason. It's the only text of its kind - at least, that we currently know of - so, if you're at all interested in 5th and 6th century British history, then you should absolutely read 'The Ruin of Britain'.
It's a rare first-hand account of this period that also happens to be fairly entertaining, in part due to the writer's skill with words, but also due to his overt personal feelings and biases, which read somewhat like a Twitter rant about the state of modern affairs, or an angry blog post about the general incompetence of political and religious leaders.
So long as you go in with the expectation that this is an angry sermon written by a 6th century monk (and therefore not an academic text or 'objective' history), then you will not be disappointed with Gildas' 'The Ruin of Britain'.
2025
December 9, 2025An interesting critique, with a compelling, arguably sarcastic, bite! Gildas is very descriptive, almost poetic, but not excessively flowery, in his writing which added to the overall appeal.
I hadn’t known much of the history of the Britons, so his chronological account was really insightful. I thought it was particularly interesting to hear of the Romans just giving up on them, like “we keep coming back to rescue you, you should be able to defend yourself, these enemies are at your same level. Please just TRY to be self reliant. Here - fine - here is a wall.”
But did that wall help them? No, not the timorous natives were useless.
“To oppose them there was placed on the heights a garrison equally slow to fight and ill adapted to run away, a useless and panic-struck company, who slumbered away days and night on their unprofitable watch.”
It was also interesting because the Britons had - before asking the Romans over and over to rescue them - fought the Romans out and declared how much they hated them.
Overall, I probably found it more humorous that Gildas intended, but his critiques and concerns still hold weight today and can shine a light on modern problems as well.
Note - I read the English translation of On the Ruin of Britain rather than the original Latin.
I hadn’t known much of the history of the Britons, so his chronological account was really insightful. I thought it was particularly interesting to hear of the Romans just giving up on them, like “we keep coming back to rescue you, you should be able to defend yourself, these enemies are at your same level. Please just TRY to be self reliant. Here - fine - here is a wall.”
But did that wall help them? No, not the timorous natives were useless.
“To oppose them there was placed on the heights a garrison equally slow to fight and ill adapted to run away, a useless and panic-struck company, who slumbered away days and night on their unprofitable watch.”
It was also interesting because the Britons had - before asking the Romans over and over to rescue them - fought the Romans out and declared how much they hated them.
Overall, I probably found it more humorous that Gildas intended, but his critiques and concerns still hold weight today and can shine a light on modern problems as well.
Note - I read the English translation of On the Ruin of Britain rather than the original Latin.
December 10, 2022
Caveat: This eBook edition is not the complete work, but only (I believe) the first of three parts. That said, also know that the 5 stars is not for the quality of the work, but merely the importance of a written work touching on the history of the sub-Roman period in England, which was nearly contemporaneous to some of the events mentioned.
That said, Gildas amounts to an old man yelling "Get off of my lawn!", wrapped in blankets of religious blithering. Amid that, there are a few nuggets of tantalizing historical tidbits, but utterly lacking in detail. Were there more sources from the time, we could ignore this woefully inadequate work, but alas we cannot, especially since it served as the kernel for many later writings of Bede, Nennius, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Wace, etc.
That said, Gildas amounts to an old man yelling "Get off of my lawn!", wrapped in blankets of religious blithering. Amid that, there are a few nuggets of tantalizing historical tidbits, but utterly lacking in detail. Were there more sources from the time, we could ignore this woefully inadequate work, but alas we cannot, especially since it served as the kernel for many later writings of Bede, Nennius, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Wace, etc.
February 22, 2023
If you think politicians such as Trump are too harsh in words with their adversaries, you haven't yet met St. Gildas. This book, translated from latin, is a collection of 3 sermons. Suffice it to say, I now understand why Britain had such a powerful foundation. They believed in God as the God of Britain who through a covenant with his church in the pagan lands would protect them if they followed him. The powerful foundations are in part due to the polemical men like Gildas Sapiens (Gildas the Wise) who from the early foundings of the island nation vehemently condemned the corruption and cowardice of men in the "Christian Land" of 6th century Britain who came to power after the Christian warrior-king Ambrosius Aurelianus slaughtered the Saxon barbarian hoards in battle. Ambrosius most likely is the figure King Arthur is based upon. This was a fascinating and eye opening read. 10/10
March 29, 2020
I bet the other monks sat around saying, "Boy, that Gildas sure is cranky! Always whining and complaining!"
This is an important and rare source for Dark Ages Britain. The Battle of Mount Badon is mentioned but a lot goes by without mentioning any name just when you would like some mentions. I was pleased to see mention of Julius and Aaron, martyrs at Caerleon, which I think is a pretty early source. He gets St. Alban right. For the most part, there is way too much scripture quoting and religious moralizing.
This edition is another cheap reprint of a 19th Century translation. I don't see anything here to interpret upside down or backwards to support Arthur and as I'm not that proficient in Latin, it will have to do.
This is an important and rare source for Dark Ages Britain. The Battle of Mount Badon is mentioned but a lot goes by without mentioning any name just when you would like some mentions. I was pleased to see mention of Julius and Aaron, martyrs at Caerleon, which I think is a pretty early source. He gets St. Alban right. For the most part, there is way too much scripture quoting and religious moralizing.
This edition is another cheap reprint of a 19th Century translation. I don't see anything here to interpret upside down or backwards to support Arthur and as I'm not that proficient in Latin, it will have to do.
November 28, 2020
I love this.
Oh my God, how fickle the British are!
How degenerate in morality and loyalty, how compliant and weak in upholding or defending their beliefs!
We are talking here about a text written some 1500 years ago and who we mean by " The British", is even then already in doubt!
A few of the legends are mentioned; Vortigern, Henga and Horsa and then there are a few interesting geneologies and that tantilizing reference to our "Mythical" Arthur.
These only serve to raise yet more questions about this important but unrecorded era of our history.
Oh my God, how fickle the British are!
How degenerate in morality and loyalty, how compliant and weak in upholding or defending their beliefs!
We are talking here about a text written some 1500 years ago and who we mean by " The British", is even then already in doubt!
A few of the legends are mentioned; Vortigern, Henga and Horsa and then there are a few interesting geneologies and that tantilizing reference to our "Mythical" Arthur.
These only serve to raise yet more questions about this important but unrecorded era of our history.
March 11, 2018
I'd quite forgotten how judgemental Gildas was!
An interesting look at early Romano-Briton, but this edition, annoyingly, is missing section lll, The Epistle, which is the largest portion of Gildas' writings. Had to go online and find a PDF of the whole. No idea why it was omitted from this one
An interesting look at early Romano-Briton, but this edition, annoyingly, is missing section lll, The Epistle, which is the largest portion of Gildas' writings. Had to go online and find a PDF of the whole. No idea why it was omitted from this one
Read
January 17, 2022I need to read/know the Bible way better to appreciate this
w/out knowing the scriptural references, hard to appreciate the interplay of invective + source material....
some good quotes
in Winterbottom translation
vermis = worm
--like a hound drawn to its own disgusting vomit
--foaming phlegm
w/out knowing the scriptural references, hard to appreciate the interplay of invective + source material....
some good quotes
in Winterbottom translation
vermis = worm
--like a hound drawn to its own disgusting vomit
--foaming phlegm
April 15, 2022
What a blast. I forgot what a cracking read pre=modern history can be. It’s also nice to see that Americans weren’t the first to )falsely?) claim our nation to be the next Israel. It always makes the littlest things seem much more important.
May 15, 2022
Mostly quotes from scripture which Gildas uses to fiercely reprimand the vices of the kings and priests in Britain, but there are also some fascinating, tantalising historical tidbits about the coming of the Anglo-Saxons
April 18, 2023
Gildas je nekako savremeno ljut na zemlju, vlast i crkvu i svima im to jasno stavlja do znanja. Sve u svemu, lep uvid u razmišljanje pripadnika, što bi se reklo, dobro obaveštene čaršije iz 6. veka, definicije Mračnog doba, o trenutnom stanju, iako ne nužno i istorijski potpuno tačno.
January 8, 2024
Part I: Ecclesiastical perspective of history from the beginning of Roman Britain to the early Saxon era. Raids by the Picts and the building of the Antonine Wall and Hadrian's Wall. Notable people mentioned: Boadicea, Maximus, Ambrosius Aurelianus, Vortigern.
January 20, 2019
Interesting read, does not mention Arthur by name.
dnf
January 25, 2020Read some parts for class
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews