Other than an origin in or close association with Strasbourg, nothing is known of his life. Perhaps, he was born in 1165. He is always referred to in German as Meister (master) and not Herr (sir), it seems safe to assume he was not a knight.
His poem-the only work that can with any certainty be attributed to him-bears witness to a learned education. His thorough familiarity with Latin literature and rhetorical theory suggest someone who had enjoyed a high level of monastic education. He also shows detailed technical knowledge of music and hunting, far beyond anything found in the works of his contemporaries.
The dates of his birth and death are alike unknown, but he was the contemporary of Hartmann von Aue, Wolfram von Eschenbach and Walther von der Vogelweide, and his epic Tristan was written about the year 1210.
It was Gottfried, however, who gave it its final form.
A comparison of the German epic with the French original is, however, impossible, as Chretien's Tristan is entirely lost, and of Thomas's only a few fragments have come down to us.
At this point Gottfried's narrative breaks off and to learn the close of the story we have to turn to two minor poets of the time, Ulrich von Turheim and Heinrich von Freiberg-the latter much the superior - who have supplied the conclusion.
Translations into modern German have been made by H. Kurz (Stuttgart, 1844); by K. Simrock (Leipzig, 1855); and, best of all, by W. Hertz (Stuttgart, 1877).
Gottfried's rhetorical style is very distinct among his contemporaries. It is incredibly complex, marked by the extensive use of symmetrical structure in his organization of Tristan as a whole, as well as in the structure of individual passages. Gottfried also uses detailed word and sound patterns, playing with such things as rhyme, alliteration, and assonance.
Gottfried draws more on the learned tradition of medieval humanism than on the chivalric ethos shared by his major literary contemporaries.
One of the greatest hallmarks of Gottfried's style is his skillful use of irony, to both humorous and tragic effects. He may also have relied on irony to disguise his criticisms of contemporary society in order to avoid censure.
