One of the qualities that make William of Malmesbury’s twined histories Gesta regum and Gesta pontificum Anglorum so absorbing, but one that also bedevils the efforts of historians to make use of their contents, is their studied ambiguity. These works are full of paradoxes – full of sudden shifts of perspective and dramatic changes of direction. There are many passages where the author sets out contrasting positions without committing himself to either side. Consider, for instance, his comments about the effects of King William I’s almsgiving, one of the most quoted passages in the Gesta regum. He begins with praise:

But then he continues by reporting reservations expressed by others:

Thomson and Winterbottom translate mussitatio as ‘grumbles’, a word whose connotations imply that William meant to criticize the ‘murmuring’ – that he saw the dissenters as mean-spirited and backward; but it is far from clear that William is on the side of the builders. There are, to be sure, passages where he celebrates the achievements of the Normans in architecture and religion, but there is invariably a word or a detail which undercuts that praise. Consider, for example, another much-quoted passage from book three of Gesta regum: