SOURCE: "Walter Map and Giraldus Cambrensis," Latomus, Vol. XXI, No. 3, October-December, 1972, pp. 860-75.

[In the following excerpt, Bate refutes the popular notion that Map and fellow Medieval writer Giraldus Cambrensis (also known as Gerald of Wales) were close friends, and further suggests that Giraldus plagiarized some of Map's work.]

Over the past fifty years or so, scholars attempting to define the origins of Goliardic poetry and Arthurian romance have shown that two of the most widely propagated ideas about Map are far from being the most accurate, and gradually the bulk of the literature attributed to him, that is Goliardic and Arthurian poems, has been taken away from him, and with them, of course, some of the characteristics which helped to form his personality in the eyes of the nineteenth and even twentieth centuries. Since he did not write the Goliardic poems which later circulated under his name, e.g. Meum est propositum, we have to drop the idea that he was "the Anacreon of his age". Since he was not Welsh¹ we cannot accept Colton's view of his "marked Welsh character."² All thoughts of his fiery Welsh temper must be reviewed without prejudice. Similarly, this discovery removes one of the reasons for the statements about the friendship of Giraldus and "his fellow countryman". This friendship between Map and Giraldus is the fourth widely propagated idea about Map, and this idea must be reviewed and modified as the other three have been. That Map and Giraldus were close friends is perhaps the only "fact" on which, so far, there has been unanimous agreement, and no one has even begun to question its validity. Purnell wrote of Gerald's "friend and countryman, Walter Mape";³ Hinton: "Gerald … became for the time a Boswell to his less ambitious friend, Walter Map"⁴; Owen: "The two famous archdeacons were friends throughout life"⁵; Sandys and Jones wrote of them as "friends"⁶, as did Wright⁷. Even Bezzola talks of Map and Giraldus as "issus de families minor-mandes, migalloises", and more than once refers to them as "amis"⁸.

Though in some cases these views are merely repetitions of earlier views, they do have some foundation, even if not a solid one, and even if the reasons for them have never been given. That Map was Welsh derived ultimately from Ward's misinterpretation of his name, and later writers elaborated on this point, e.g. Colton: "His bright lively manner and epigrammatic turn are the earmarks of his race"⁹. Similarly, writers have taken up Purnell's idea of the friendship between Map and Giraldus, and some of them, in particular Hinton and Owen, have elaborated it from time to time, without bothering to ascertain whether the additions they made to the accepted idea were mere fancy, or even to discover what evidence there was for the idea in the first place.

What then, are the reasons for the general acceptance of the idea that Map and Giraldus were friends? They derive from the works of Giraldus himself, who gives us some information about Map and wrote a letter and a poem to him, to which Map replied, calling Giraldus amicus. Add to this the "fact" that they were both of the same nationality, the fact that two literary men in a barbaric country, such as Wales was at that time, would almost be bound to know each other, and that they were both at the court of Henry II, and one has seemingly strong reasons for arriving at the idea. However, the reasons are not really so strong as they appear, and to show this one must consider first of all the evidence which probably prompted the original statement, that is the evidence provided by Giraldus. Giraldus mentions Map eleven times, sometimes in quite lengthy passages, in terms which suggest that he held Map in high esteem and affection, but a closer look at the text and the context indicates that these passages are not so straightforward, and in some cases are actually misleading. Giraldus was fond of quoting authors, his favourite being Giraldus. Consequently, in his later compositions he quotes whole passages from his earlier works, and the mentions of Map are several times included in these quotations. Other times he repeats his own material in slightly different terms. He was particularly proud of his literary talents, constantly repeating how good they were in order that no one should be unaware of this great author. Three times he gives Map's opinion of his Topographica Hibernica¹⁰. His great struggle in life was with the Archbishop of Canterbury concerning the see of St. David's, and twice he gives us an account of this struggle, in which Map was one of the pawns¹¹. A lesser struggle of Giraldus's was with the Cistercian monks, for whom he seems to have had almost as great a dislike as Map did, and twice he gives examples of Map's witticisms against them, though admittedly they are not the same jokes¹². So, in actual fact, Giraldus mentions Map on only seven occasions, not eleven, since four are repetitions.

Giraldus is very consistent in his choice of adjectives when describing Map. He constantly remarks on Map's literary knowledge and ability in glowing terms. However, on closer inspection of the text one finds that he is praising Map's literary knowledge not for itself, but for his own glorification. Four of the eleven mentions of Map concern Giraldus's literary talents¹³. Each time he praises Map only to add immediately that Map considered him, Giraldus, a great writer, worthy of fame. He comments: Quod si tantam a uiris magnis uiridis aetatis (he has also given Archbishop Baldwin's and Robert, Canon of Salisbury's favourable opinions of his worth) opuscula laudem mereri poterant, quanto magis ea quae maturior aetas et instructior edidit et edit, sunt laude dignissima?¹⁴. In the preface to the so-called second edition of the Expugnatio Hibernica, after recommending that some competent scholar should translate his book into French if he wants to find fame, Giraldus gives Map's opinions of his writings as a whole.…

This last passage, together with Map's views on the "Topographica Hibernica ", suggest that Map did not think so highly of Giraldus's literary talents as the latter imagined. Of this particular work Map said: circumscripto residuo toto, inspecta prooemia sola et digne pensata, opus et operam commendatione dignissima reddere poterant. Unde et de prooemiis operum suorum solis, si simul conserta per ordinem essent, opus egregium fieri posse dicebat¹⁵. Elsewhere Giraldus goes on to say: Eoque dicto, rogauit quatinus libellum de prooemiis operum nostrorum uariis, in unum consertis ei donarem¹⁶. He was an extremely egotistical man, unaware of his shortcomings (he has the effrontery to call someone verbose and loquacious) and his vanity prevented him from seeing the point that Map was making here. When speaking of the whole of Giraldus's work of which he was aware, Map stressed that Giraldus had written a great deal, and without doubt would write much more in the future. He pointed out that Giraldus's works were longe laudabiliora et longaeuiora than his own words (note the emphasis on length brought about by the repetition of words whose root is long). When speaking of some of the works of Giraldus, especially the "Topographica Hibernica ", Map slyly pointed out that the introductions to these works, put together, omitting the lengthy works themselves, would make something worthy of praise. Giraldus's pride was such that he presented six of his books to the pope, "perhaps the best present the pope ever had", and that the pope read them cum uacaret. As Owen points out¹⁷, the pope would not have had to read much before falling sleep from boredom, and it certainly appears that Map felt the same way.

Two references to Map occur in the account of the struggle for the Bishopric of St. David's. In his letter to Archbishop Hubert Walter of Canterbury about the nomination of candidates for the position, Giraldus calls Map: uirum liberalitate conspicuum, copiosa litteratura et urbana eloquentia praeditum, and in his history of the church of St. David's "De iure et statu Meneuensis ecclesie" where he recounts the struggle in great detail, he calls him bonus et honestus. If his words do not give us any information concerning the supposed friendship, the incident itself does. Having been informed that he himself could not become Bishop of St. David's, of which church he was already archdeacon, even though the chapter had nominated him, Giraldus was permitted by the justiciary to nominate the bishop, as long as the nominee did not belong to that church already. Giraldus's obvious choice in such a situation would be his "friend" Map, archdeacon of Oxford (Giraldus was prebend of Chesterton, Oxford) and his fellow canon of Hereford, yet for some reason he nominated Richard and Philip, respectively dean and archdeacon of Rouen. It was not until he was asked to nominate someone from England that he thought of Walter Map, and even then he coupled him with Roger, dean of Lincoln. Map was refused, yet Giraldus did not argue that he would be suitable, but immediately nominated two men from the church of Hereford. This episode says little for any bonds of friendship which Giraldus is said to have had with Map. Furthermore, Giraldus was intent on causing a rupture between the church of Wales and that of England in order that the Welsh church could be delivered from its subservience to the English and regain its former independence. He knew that the Archbishop of Canterbury and King John wanted the prior of Llanthony to be appointed because the latter was completely subservient to Canterbury, and he himself wanted the new bishop to be outspoken, and unlikely to side with the king against Wales. Map had no love for John, who had cancelled his election to the see of Hereford on his accession, so he would have been eminently suitable for the position. Apart from his poor knowledge of Wales, which Giral-dus, as his archdeacon, would have improved, Map was the ideal person for Giraldus to nominate. Surely if he had been his friend too, Giraldus would at least have insisted on asking the reason for the refusal of Map as a nominee for the Bishopric of St. David's?

Giraldus refers twice to Map in connection with the Cistercian monks. On the first occasion he describes Map as celebri fama conspicuus et tam literarum copia quam curialium quoque uerborum facetia praeditus¹⁸, and goes on to recount a witticism of Map's against the monks of Garendon Abbey in Leicestershire (Giraldus says that Garendon is in the north of England). The account does not give the impression that Map himself related it to Giraldus, so it was probably passed on to Giraldus by someone who had visited that abbey with the court. He then devotes a whole chapter of his Speculum Ecclesiae to Map's witticisms against the monks of the Cistercian order. First of all he relates the original reason for Map's dislike of the Cistercians—the fact that the monks of a nearby abbey in the forest of Dean had appropriated part of the land belonging to his church at Westbury upon Severn. This was probably common knowledge, but even if it were not, Giraldus would have heard about it in his capacity as fellow canon of Hereford. He need not have been a friend of Map's to have learnt this. The next piece of information he gives us is very revealing, however. He says that Map pluriesque iusticiariis errantibus ad iura tuenda iustitiamque regiam exercendam associatus esset. In fact, Map was justice in eyre on two occasions only, in 1173 and 1185, which hardly merit the use of the word pluries.¹⁹ One is left to assume from this that although Giraldus knew that Map had been employed as a justice in eyre, he did not know him well enough to know on how many occasions he had filled this position. At last Giraldus arrives at the theme of the chapter, promised in the title. These witticisms of Map's which follow are similar in character to the single episode about the monks of Garendon Abbey, and shed no light on the relationship between the two men. Map's skirmishes with the Cistercians were well known, and Giraldus may simply be repeating the stories of these skirmishes which he heard at the court or at Hereford.

Likewise, a reference to Map in connection with the extortion practised by bishops²⁰ tells us nothing of the relationship between the two men, but it does suggest that Map knew something about the church of St. David's. Giraldus repeats his remarks about Map's eloquence and sarcastic wit.

This leaves us with the two references to Map on which most of the argument for friendship is presumably based. They are the letter and the poem accompanying the gift of a stick which Giraldus sent to Map, but of which he thoughtfully kept copies. The poem is a series of elegiac couplets from which Map was to choose his favourite.

De baculo cui caput natura curuauerat, pedem
 ars armauerat, Mapo transmissus.

Versibus ornatum bis senis accipe munus,
   Et de tot gemmis elige, Mape, duos.
Dat camurum natura caput, finemque fabrilis
   Ars facit armatum, fabrica fessa leuat.
Ars nodum, natura modum firmans in acumen
   Ferri descendit, fessaque membra regunt.
Artis figmentum firmans natura recuruum
   Apponit recto, dat faber arma pedi.
Artis opus geminat, iuuit natura, senique
   Prodiit hinc podium fessa focosque iuuans.
Me duo componunt ars et natura, seniles
  Artus sustineo, fessa focosque rego.
Pes ego decrepitis, offensis uirga, leuamen
  Fessis, obscuris orbita, furca focis.

"Accept this gift with its ornament of twelve lines, and from so many gems, Map, choose two".

"Nature gives it a curved head and the craftsman's art an armed foot; all this an aid to the weary".

"Art reinforces the knot and nature the form, descending into an iron point. Together they guide weary limbs".

"Nature reinforces the work of art and places together straight and crooked while the craftsman arms the foot".

"This is a twofold piece of art. Nature has helped and has thus appeared a support for the aged, helping weary limbs and hearths".

"Art and nature together make me; I guide aged limbs and control weary bodies and hearths".

"I am a foot to the infirm, a rod to the sinner, a relief to the weary, eyes to the blind, and a poker for the hearth".

Luckily Giraldus has preserved for us Map's reply, though if he had not misunderstood it, as he did Map's comments on his literary talents, it is doubtful if we would have been so fortunate.

                  Responsio
Versibus imparibus respondet amicus amico
   Bis senis totidem reddit agitque uices.
Munus amicus amat, et munera laudat amici,
  Muneris et laudes laudat amatque magis.
Quaelibet ergo probans baculi plus approbo
 laudes,
  Et uersus laudo uersibus arte minor.
Hos dum specto places, illos dum specto
 places bis,
  Specto hos atque illos terque quaterque
 places.
Praecipui primi sunt, praecipuique secundi,
  Sic qui praecedunt, quique sequuntur,
  erunt.
Eligo sic igitur cunctos et praefero nullos,
   Extollens titulis singula quaeque suis.

"Friend replies to friend with twelve verses which are inferior in quality (or in elegiac couplets), but not in number. He thanks him and returns the compliment. Your friend likes the gift and praises the gift of his friend, but has more praise and liking for the praises of the gift. Therefore, approving of everything, I approve more of the praises of the stick, and I praise your verses with my own, inferior poet that I am. When I look at these I think kindly of you, and when I look at those I think twice as kindly of you, and when I look at both you rise three or four times in my estimation. The first are best and the second are best also, so those that precede and those that follow will always be best. So I choose them all and prefer none, praising all of them for their own merits".

Giraldus's verses reveal his incomparable vanity. One cannot agree with Owen that this vanity is "touching and endearing" unless one is a rabid Welsh nationalist. It is altogether far too strong to be tolerable, and one would not expect a quick-tempered man like Map, who hated presumption, to take kindly to it. This is revealed in Map's reply.

Unlike Giraldus, Map was not addicted to endearing himself to superiors for the sake of advancement nor even to his colleagues of similar rank in order to be polite, and the language of his reply is a parody of the sort of language someone like Giraldus would use, that is a parody of friendship poetry as practised by writers such as Baudri of Bourgueil, Marbod of Rennes, Hildebert of Lavardin, and Godfrey of Reims. He makes great show of words such as amicus, laudare, laus, amare, placere, praecipui, etc., in the poem. The amount of exaggerated friendship and esteem, coupled with what we know of Map's feelings about pretentiousness and vanity, suggest very strongly that Map is doing the same thing here as in his remarks on Giraldus's literary talents, actually denigrating his ability while appearing to praise it. The praise is too gushing and too fulsome to be credible when it comes from a man such as Map.

The last reference to Map by name in Giraldus's works is the letter which unfortunately cannot be dated²¹. It was written however when Map was an old man²². To call such a document a letter is to be euphemistic, perhaps, for it better deserves the title "A treatise on the superiority of theology to all other studies". He starts off in a reasonably friendly and tactful vein: Familiare est sapienti tolerare nescientem praesertim ubi mentis conceptum prodit affectio, but then proceeds to quote ancient and more recent authors in moralizing fashion for fourteen of the ensuing eighteen pages. In the letter he points out the superiority of theology to all other studies and castigates Map who in his maturer years is avoiding this subject, and indulging in trifles and secular literature, the study of which more befitted his youth. He asks Map to turn his eloquence from the secular to the Christian, addressing him as frater carissime and mi charissime. These two addresses do not have any positive value in determining the relationship between the two men since they were quite common modes of address in medieval times. The form of address does not mean that the writer of the letter and the recipient are necessarily known to each other. In fact, the justiciary Geoffrey fitz Peter addresses Map as his carissimus amicus, yet a few months later he refused out of hand Map's nomination as Bishop of St. David's on a trifling excuse. There are no words of friendship at all in Giraldus's latter, no enquiries about the old man's health, which means that it can be viewed in two lights. It is a plea to devote time to the study of theology, made either by an undemonstrative Giraldus to his friend Map, or else by one canon of Hereford to another for failing to do his duty.

It is on these mentions of Map, for what they are worth, in the works of Giraldus, that the prevalent view that they were friends is based. However, presumably this is not all that has led people to come to this conclusion, for other factors are involved. Certain similarities of a fairly superficial nature could be found. They were both Welshman; Giraldus attended the school of St. Peter's, Gloucester, when a child, and Map probably did the same; they were both students at Paris; both literary men; both employed by the king at court; both canons of Hereford; both hated the Cistercians. Furthermore, Map was archdeacon of Oxford and Giraldus was the prebend of Chesterton in Oxfordshire. Here then was a series of "facts" linking the two men together in life, Giraldus's comments on Map proving that the link was a friendly one.

But is this necessarily true? We have seen that most of Giraldus's comments are two-edged or else do not provide any information at all. On the other hand, the fact that Giraldus sent Map a stick suggests that they were more than just chance acquaintances. What of the factors linking their lives? A close look at the lives of each man shows these links are very superficial. Map was born circa 1135²³, Giraldus in 1146 or 1147. Map went to school, probably at St. Peter's, Gloucester, until circa 1154, when he went to Paris to study until 1161.

Giraldus was, on his own admission, a slow starter, and probably because he was a poor scholar he stayed at St. Peter's until 1169 when he was 22 or 23 years of age. In the years between 1161 and 1169 Map was a courtier and unlikely to come into contact with the schoolboy Giraldus. From 1169 to 1172 Map was still a courtier but Giraldus had left St. Peter's to study at Paris for three years. The next four years, 1172 to 1176, Giraldus spent in Wales, while Map, still at court, was in France in the late part of 1172 and early part of 1173, returning to England about September to be justice in eyre for Gloucestershire. That year also he became prebend of Mapesbury and canon of St. Paul's. In 1176, presumably still a member of the court, he became parson of Ashwell in Hertfordshire. That year Giraldus returned to Paris, to stay there until 1180. During the period 1176 to 1180, in the latter part of 1178 to be exact, Map set out to attend the Third Lateran Council at Rome, breaking his journey to pay a visit to the count of Champagne before reaching Rome by March 1179. On the return journey he probably stayed with the French king, Louis VII, at Paris, but there is no reason to suggest that he met Giraldus during this stay. The next four years, 1180 to 1184; Giraldus spent in Wales while Map was having a hectic time at court, travelling to Normandy in 1181, back to England where he was present at Geoffrey fitz Roy's resignation from the see of Lincoln at Marlborough on January 6th, 1182, and returning to France almost immediately. He was present at the meeting of King Henry II of England and Philip Augustus of France at Senlis in April 1182 and spent the Christmas of that year with the court at Caen. In 1183 he was still at the court in France during Henry II's struggles with his sons. In June he was at Limoges and in the following month at Rouen and Angers. In 1184 came the event which could have brought Map and Giraldus together—King Henry made Giraldus one of his chaplains at court. Almost immediately Giraldus accompanied the court to Normandy (1184) and in the following year he accompanied Prince John on his tour of Ireland because of the number of his relatives in that country. These is no reason to suppose that Map went on either of these journeys, and this is the period of his life when his attendance at court began to diminish in its frequency. In 1184 Map was witness to a charter ratifying the gift of Sleaford Mill in Lincolnshire by Robert to the nuns of Sempringham. In 1185 he was justice in eyre for Gloucestershire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Worcestershire and probably Herefordshire. In 1186 Giraldus returned from Ireland and stayed at Oxford for a while. In 1188 he accompanied Archbishop Baldwin on a tour of Wales, and then rejoined the court to travel with it to France. He was present at the King's death at Chinon in 1189. Map does not appear to have been with the court, and was probably at Westbury on Severn at the time of the King's death. Giraldus returned to Wales later in the year and remained there until 1192. Map may well have been at Westbury on Severn still, and they may have met each other during these years. From 1192 to 1198 Giraldus lived at Lincoln, and as it is quite possible that for some of this period Map lived there or near there, Lincoln may have provided another meeting place for them. In 1197 Map was elected archdeacon of Oxford in the diocese of Lincoln, presumably moving to Oxford to take up residence. Towards the end of 1198 he accompanied a delegation from the chapter of Hereford to Angers to obtain King Richard's consent to his nomination to the bishopric of Hereford. In that year Giraldus went to Rome to see the pope about his election to the see of St. David's, and he spent the following four or five years travelling between France, Rome, Wales and Ireland, always engaged on his own affairs. During this time he was so engrossed in his struggle with the king and the Archbishop of Canterbury about the see of St. David's that he would have had no time to devote to Map who would not have been able to help him. We know nothing of Map's activities during these years. In 1202 Geoffrey fitz Peter, the justiciary, ordered Map in his capacity of archdeacon of Oxford to confiscate the land held by Giraldus in his diocese. From Giraldus's words et transiens per Oxoniam in reuersione litteras tales archidiacono terrae istius misit, it is almost certain that Map, whom Giraldus does not name, was living at Oxford at the time²⁴. It is probable that Map continued to live there until his death in 1210, during which period Giraldus remained in Wales, devoting most of his time to writing and revising his books.

From this review of their lives it would appear that their having gone to the same school and to Paris to study is merely coincidental, and that furthermore they could not have come into contact with each other during these formative years of their lives. Neither does their court life seem to have brought them together. For short periods of time their connexions with Hereford and Lincoln probably did bring them into contact. Thus Owen's opinion that "the two famous Welsh archdeacons were close friends through life" cannot be maintained, and the evidence available from their lives suggests that if they were friends at all, the friendship must have developed after 1189. This is also suggested by the fact that there is no mention of Giraldus in De Nugis. Map's book, written between 1180 and 1193, contains frequent references to his contemporaries of all ranks and occupations. If Map and Giraldus were friends during this period then we should expect to find his name somewhere in De Nugis. This could have been in connection with stories of the supernatural in Wales and Ireland, of which Giraldus gives us many examples, or else with the Cistercians, for whom both of them had a strong loathing. Yet we find no mention whatsoever of Giraldus, and even in those parts of De Nugis which we know to be missing (e.g. part of the comparison between court and hell, and the chapter on the Knights of St. James of Compostella) there seems little possibility that a reference to him might have been found. That the relationship between the two men developed after 1189 is further suggested by the fact that Giraldus always refers to Map as archidiaconus Oxoniensis, a post which he held from 1197 onwards but as all references to Map occur in works which Giraldus wrote after 1197, he may be referring to Map by his latest title. However, the letter Giraldus wrote to him was obviously composed when Map was ageing, and the only dateable event referred to by Giraldus in which both men were participants was the struggle for the see of St. David's, in 1202 and 1203. Thus it would appear that the relationhip developed after 1197, certainly after 1193, and that therefore the years spent near each other in or around the diocese of Hereford (1189-1192) were of little or no import to the relationship.

To sum up so far, we have six reasons of varying worth for suggesting that Map and Giraldus might have been friends;

1. Giraldus sent Map a stick.
2. He wrote Map a long letter.
3. He said favourable things about Map.
4. They both hated the Cistercians.
5. They were both canons of Hereford.
6. They were both officers of the church of Lincoln, both being resident probably in the diocese between c. 1193 and 1198.

If there are no more reasons to back up the argument that the two men were friends, there are reasons suggesting the opposite. Firstly, the fact that Giraldus remarks that Map was frequently a justice in eyre whereas in fact he filled this position on only two occasions. Giraldus is not loose in his language, so we can only deduce that he honestly thought that Map was a justice on several occasions. His ignorance of the true facts about this important position suggests that he was not a friend of Map's, though it must be admitted that both of Map's justiceships occurred in the years before Giraldus made his acquaintance. He probably heard Map or someone else talking about Map's oath to be cunctis … praeterquam Iudaeis et albis monachis fidelem, and deduced that this happened on several occasions. However, we would expect a friend to be more conversant with the facts.

Secondly, the attitudes of the two men towards King Henry II and his illegitimate son, Geoffrey fitz Roy, Archbishop of York. On the whole, Map's view of Henry was a very favourable one, though from time to time he does make a criticism, normally of a mild nature. This is true of Map's comments written after the King's death, too. In the first draft of the comparison of court and hell he writes: Rex autem huius, si bene nouit eam, non est a calumpnia liber, quia qui rector est tenetur esse corrector²⁵, and in his description of the character of Henry, among the numerous virtues he remarks on three of Henry's faults—slowness to make a decision, not allowing his people to see him, his love of war²⁶. Contrast Giraldus's view of him: "In all that he (Giraldus) wrote after the king was dead, his attitude is that of unrelenting hostility; and even the earlier extracts, which to some extent serve as palliatives, were introduced perhaps less with that intention than as specimens of fine writing. Thus the character drawn of Henry is almost unrelieved in its blackness; his tyrrany and oppression, his duplicity, his gross licentiousness and his blasphemous impiety being continually kept in view to the exclusion of any less reprehensible features. In many respects the portrait is undeniably true; but it is thoroughly one-sided and coloured by strong personal feelings"²⁷. Admittedly, Henry died before. Map and Giraldus met, but Giraldus obviously kept his opinions of the king long after 1189 and it would be difficult to reconcile them with Map's.

The relationships of the two archdeacons with the king's illegitimate son, Geoffrey, Archbishop of York, though not so completely different, differ sufficiently for us to perceive that it would have been difficult for the two archdeacons to agree on their attitudes towards him. Map hated Geoffrey, and from his editor's comments²⁸ it is obvious that this hatred was deep-seated, of long standing, and continually active. Geoffrey felt the same way about Map because of the latter's barbed shafts of wit, and they could not stand the sight of each other. Giraldus, however, was on good terms with Geoffrey, and this is only to be expected since Giraldus was always kind and flattering to those people of higher rank who might he helpful to him in his attempts to be promoted to the see of St. David's. It is probable that Geoffrey himself furnished Giraldus with much of the material for the writer's De Vita Galfridi Archiepiscopi Eboracensis²⁹, and though Giraldus's final comments on the character are not flattering, this does not invalidate the argument, since Giraldus thought that the Plantagenets were odious and tyrranical, and he would have to say something against Geoffrey. Geoffrey would hardly be likely to furnish material to a writer whom he knew to be unsympathetic to him. For the most part Giraldus does use flattering terms about Geoffrey, as, for example, in the first prologue to the "Vita Galfridi".

… It is difficult to see how Map, who was not a flatterer, could be on close terms with Giraldus, who was one of the grossest flatterers of the 12th and 13th centuries.

Thirdly, the sense of humour of the two men suggests that they were not likely to be compatible with each other for a long time. Map's wit was pithy and incisive. As the examples of it in De Nugis show—e.g. the account of Bernard and the dead boy, and Geoffrey's ability to speak French³⁰"he did not waste any words, but let the joke speak for itself. "Brevity is the soul of wit" was certainly Map's criterion, and he avoided the bad habit of explaining his jokes in case the reader does not understand them. Contrast Giraldus's comments in his chapter on Map's witty remarks against the Cistercians³¹. He tells how the abbot of a Cistercian abbey in the north of England took the King and Map on a tour of the rooms. Finally they reached the chapter, where the abbot pointed out that that was the place the devil hated most, quoniam errata corriguntur hic, peccata puniuntur. To which Map replied: Nec mirum si locum hunc prae ceteris locis omnibus magis exosum habet perniciosus ille suggestor, multotiens enim in eo uapulant amici sui boni. Giraldus then explains: Disciplinas itaque crebras, castigationes et flagella, reis tam monachibus quam fratribus, perque reatum diabolo caris, saepius inflicta, sic obliqua responsione significauit³². One would not expect a friendship to remain close or to last long when one person explains the other's jokes, especially when he misses the point of them. Map's point here, as indicated by multotiens and boni, is that the Cistercians sin more in this way than any other class or sect of people. There is nothing which a witty man cherishes more than his sense of humour. It is anathema to him to see it not only unappreciated but also misinterpreted.

Another factor suggesting that the friendship was not particularly close is to be found in Giraldus's struggle for the see of St. David's. By 1202 he had so antagonised the king and the Archbishop of Canterbury that the chief justiciary Geoffrey fitz Peter had to proscribe him as a danger to the king and take proceedings against him. One of his acts was to order Map, as Archdeacon of Oxford, to confiscate all Giraldus's lands and possessions in that diocese. Giraldus reports this without even naming Map, a strange thing to do if they were friends. Giraldus's plight would appear much more wretched if he pointed out that even his close friends were forced by the king's oppression to be his enemies. In fact, Giraldus does not even tell us if Map carried out the order. Giraldus's report of this incident would suggest that they were not very close friends, and probably not friends at all.

What points are left then to be considered as pros and cons for the argument that Map and Giraldus were friends at a late stage of their lives, probably after 1197, and how close was that friendship? In favour of some form of friendship we have the fact that Giraldus sent Map a stick. As evidence of their being merely acquaintances there is the fact that they were both canons of Hereford and officers of the church of Lincoln, both being resident probably in the diocese between c. 1193 and 1198. Against the argument for friendship we have the following reasons:

1. Giraldus's error about the number of Map's justiceships.
2. Their different attitudes to King Henry II.
3. Their different attitudes to Geoffrey fitz Roy.
4. Their different sense of humour.
5. Giraldus's omission of Map's name concerning the justiciary's actions in 1202.
6. Giraldus's hesitation in nominating Map as candidate for the Bishopric of St. David's.
7. Map's comments on Giraldus's literary ability.

Although these are not all of equal importance, the weight of evidence suggests that if Map and Giraldus were friends, the friendship was a very weak one. In fact, it is much more likely that they were merely acquaintances.

Another factor which points towards acquaintance rather then friendship is Giraldus's attitude towards De Nugis, and it also reveals the type of acquaintance. How well the contents of this book were known to Map's contemporaries, or even to the Middle Ages as a whole, has not been satisfactorily ascertained. James, pointing out that his knowledge of Medieval English literature was fragmentary, wrote: "All I can say is that I can adduce no single instance of use of the treatise before the seventeenth century"³³. The view that none of Map's contemporaries had read De Nugis was shaken by Hinton who suggested that certain parts of it, such as the comments on the monks (Distinctio I, Cap. 25), were circulated to friends, but he does not include Giraldus among the recipients. If the acquaintance between Giraldus and Map did not develop until 1197 then this is not surprising, but Hinton seems to be of the opinion that Giraldus never saw the contents of De Nugis³⁴. Owen, on the other hand, had visions of Giraldus reading De Nugis and enjoying it, pretending not to know that its author was Bishop Golias. Neither of these views is correct, however, as Map was not Bishop Golias, and, as I hope to prove, Giraldus had read De Nugis, or at least parts of it. It is impossible to say whether he read them after Map's death or during their acquaintance, but the fact that he never credits Map with being the source of his material suggests the former. Anyone would be wary of taking material from a sarcastically eloquent man such as Map and using it during his lifetime without acknowledging his debt. Moreover, Map's comments about Giraldus's having written much while he himself had written nothing could be more readily repeated by Giraldus if he was not aware of any of Map's writings at the time. Giraldus wrote most of his works after 1200, and even those which he wrote earlier he revised substantially afterwards, in the last years of his life, so there can be no question of Map's having obtained the material from Giraldus. Giraldus must be the plagiarist if any plagiarism has been perpetrated. The parts of De Nugis which appear to be parallelled in Giraldus's works are the comments on the monks which were probably circulated as a separate tract, remarks on the Welsh (some of which are found in the said tract) and the account of Map's conversation with King Louis VII of France³⁵.

In the "Incidencia magistri Gauteri Mahap de mo-nachia" Map starts with some general observations on the Cistercians. In these observations Map uses the phrase spoliamus Egypcios, ditamus Hebreos³⁶ which we find in Giraldus's letter to Map as spoliando Ae-gyptios et ditando Hebraeos³⁷ and a misquotation from Horace si non recte faciunt quocunque modo rem, to be found in Giraldus as Quod si non recte possis, quoqunque modo rem³⁸. It must be said, however, that both these quotations were widely used in the Middle Ages. Map then goes on to recount eight examples of the duplicity and illegal activities of the Cistercians. In Giraldus, immediately following the chapter devoted to Map's witticisms against the Cistercians, there are two chapters containing accounts of the Cistercians' illegal methods of obtaining land, and their fraudulent bargains. Of Map's eight examples, five, in some form or another, are present in Giraldus's accounts.

Map's eight examples are:

1. The removal of the tree which acted as a boundary mark.
2. The pasture scattered with salt, and then rams let loose on it.
3. The pasture ploughed up and manured.
4. The two title deeds.
5. The surreptitious and gradual incursion on the property of William of Neath.
6. The murder at Woolaston.
7. The treason of the slave, letting in the Cistercians at night.
8. The bacon fraud.

In Giraldus's account of the Cistercians, examples (a) and (c) have become one story, and the ending of (h) is added to it³⁹. Example (b) is fairly faithfully retold, but without the incident of the rams⁴⁰. Example (e) is greatly enlarged⁴¹. Example (h) is given⁴², set in a different locality, but the language used is very similar, e.g. bacones, pinguissimos, porcis, torcular, dolia; pellem herentem ossibus (Map), and cutem aridae carni uix adhaerentem (Giraldus). The difference in detail between the two authors suggests that whether Giraldus was copying Map or both were using the same source, truth was of little importance. The main intention was to blacken the reputation of the Cistercians. As there is no similar collection of examples known, the inference must be that Giraldus was copying Map, while appearing not to, so as not to have to acknowledge his debt. Similarly, the language of the remarks on the Welsh is alike in both authors. The comments made by Map which Giraldus appears to have used are found in the "Incidencia … de monachia", where he makes a comparison between the Welsh and the Cistercians, and in chapters 20 and 23 of Distinctio II, echoed by Giraldus in his "Descriptio Kambriae". In the "Inci-dencia" Map writes that the Welsh nudis pedibus et tibiis incedunt. This is parallelled by Giraldus in his nudis autem pedibus ambulant⁴³. Similarly, Map's isti (sc. Cistercienses) non uescuntur carne, nec illi (sc. Walenses) pane finds an echo in Giraldus's carne plenius, pane parcius uesci solent⁴⁴. Map's comments on the Welsh in chapters 20 and 23 of Distinctio II, cum omnino sint infideles ad omnes tam ad inuicem quam ad alios and rapina et furto gloria Walensium⁴⁵ are joined together by Giraldus, who says Ad haec etiam rapinis insistere, raptoque uiuere, furto et latro-cinio, non solum ad exteros et hostilespopulos, uerum etiam inter seproprium habent⁴⁶; and another comment from chapter 23, Hoc inicium pacis egregium, sed more Walensium obseruatum est usque ad potestatem nocendi, is echoed by Giraldus: Pacis et ami-citiae foedera, uisa nocendi opportunitate, non respiciunt⁴⁷.

The other occasion on which Map and Giraldus use similar language for an event is the account of Louis VII's summary of the different types of wealth enjoyed by different kings and princes. Map expressly says that Louis told him in private conversation: contigit ut cum rege moram facerem atiquamdiu Parisius, mecumque tractaret de regum diuitiis inter sermones alios …, so either Map personally told Giraldus about the conservation, or else Giraldus found it in De Nugis. The language and complexity of Giraldus's account suggest that he read it rather than heard it, and then enlarged upon it, although the differences might possibly be explained by the fact that Giraldus had forgotten the exact details of the conservation when he wrote the De principis instructione in 1217. Map says that the emperor of the Byzantines was rich in auro pannisque sericis. Giraldus says that the emperor of the Greeks was rich in purpuris et pannis holosericis. Of the German emperor Map says that homines habet armis aptos et equos bellicos. Giraldus remarks de Aleman-nicis armatorum uiribus, bellicosisque uiris et robustis. However, it is the end of the account which strongly suggests that Giraldus was looking at De Nugis when he wrote this part of De principis instructione. After telling of the different wealth of various kingdoms Louis said, according to Map, Nos in Francia nichil habemus nisi panem et uinum et gaudium, of which sentiment Map remarked Hoc uerbum notaui quia comiter et uere dictum. According to Giraldus Louis said Et nos certe panem habemus et uinum et gaudium, Giraldus commenting himself, sed ecce quam mirum fuit hoc et quam man-suetum tanti principis uerbum.…

Notes

¹ That Map was English is conclusively shown in the works of Giraldus, I, 306; III, 321.

² A. Colton, Poet Lore, vol. V, (1893), p. 550.

³ T. Purnell, Literature and its Professors.

⁴ J. Hinton, Walter Map's De Nugis Curialium, Harvard thesis, 1915, p. 1.

⁵ H. Owen, Gerald the Welshman, London, 1889, p. 175.

⁶Cambridge History of English Literature, vol. I, 1907.

⁷ T. Wright, Biographica Britannica Literaria, 1846.

⁸ R. R. Bezzola, Les origines et la formation de la litterature courtoise en Occident, vol. III, part i, p. 5, 47, 55, 88, 104. Unfortunately, he presents no evidence whatsoever to substantiate his claims.

⁹ Colton, loc. cit.

¹⁰ Gir., I, 412; III, 92; III, 335.

¹¹ Gir., I, 306; III, 321.

¹² Gir., IV, 140; IV, 219-225.

¹³ Cf. note 11. Also GIR., V, 140.

¹⁴ Gir., III, 336.

¹⁵ Gir., III, 336.

¹⁶ Gir., I, 413.

¹⁷ Owen, op. cit.

¹⁸ Gir., IV, 140.

¹⁹ Pipe Rolls, 19 Henry II, p. 154, and 31 Henry II, p. 128, 156, 166, 198.

²⁰ Gir., III, 145.

²¹ Gir., I, 271-289.

²² Giraldus advises Map maturioribus studiis … annos applicemus maturiores and et sobrie consenescere sa-tagamus.

²³ For all dating of Map's life see Chapter I of the author's dissertation.

²⁴ Gir., III, 200, 201.

²⁵De Nugis Curialium, ed. M. R. James, Oxford, 1914, p. 245, lines 11, 12.

²⁶ D.N.C., p. 241, lines 15-25.

²⁷ Warner, Introduction to Gir. VIII, p. XLVIII. See p. 159-170 of VIII, 213-215, 251, 255, for texts.

²⁸ The comments of Map's editor are found in D.N.C., p. 246, line 15 to p. 248, line 19. Briefly, my reasons for calling this the work of someone other than Map are a) Map is spoken of in the third person instead of in the first person as elsewhere in D.N.C.; b) the name Map occurs only in this passage; c) fuit D.N.C., p. 246, line 16, indicates that Map is dead; d) the style is different; e) the editor uses plural essemus yet refers to Map in the third person. For fuller arguments see my dissertation, p. 406.

²⁹ Cf. Gir., VII, Introduction, sub Geoffrey.

³⁰ D.N.C. Dist., I, chap. 24; V, 6.

³¹ Gir., IV, 219-225.

³² Gir., IV, 220.

³³ James, Introduction to text, p. XIV. J. Th. Welter, in his book, L 'Exemplum dans la littérature religieuse et didactique du Moyen Age, 1926, Index sub Map, lists five MSS of collected Exempla, the compilers of which presumably give Map among their sources. In some cases Welter gives Map as a source, in others De Nugis. I have been unable to see these MSS for myself, and thus cannot say whether De Nugis was circulated to any great extent or whether the exempla are from some unknown work by Map.

³⁴ Hinton, op. cit., p. 119, 120. Hinton feels that not only did Giraldus not see parts of De Nugis at the time they were written, but that he never came across them later by accident or design.

³⁵ D.N.C., p. 225, lines 9-25.

³⁶ D.N.C., p. 42, line 15. Cf. Exodus 12, 36.

³⁷ Gir., I, 287. As the Incidencia was a separate tract, Giraldus would probably have read it before Map's death.

³⁸ D.N.C., p. 45, line 3; Gir. IV, 227. The quote, from Horace I. Ep. I, 66, is Si possis, recte, si non, quocunque modo rem.

³⁹ Gir., IV, 225-227.

⁴⁰ Gir., IV, 228-229.

⁴¹ Gir., IV, 230-231.

⁴² Gir., IV, 231-232.

⁴³ D.N.C., p. 48, line 25; Gir. VI, 181.

⁴⁴ D.N.C., p. 48, line 25; Gir. VI, 180.

⁴⁵ D.N.C., p. 89, line 18; p. 96, line 6.

⁴⁶ Gir., VI, 207.

⁴⁷ D.N.C., p. 95, line 11; Gir., VI, 207.