Post by Andorinha on Jan 15, 2009 11:55:22 GMT -6
Beowulf ARCHIVE: Paganism and Christianity
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 1 of 11 in Discussion
From: Zauber
Sent: 11/7/2002 6:33 AM
I said this was a flexible syllabus, so I'm adding this topic now. We keep dancing around the subject, so here's a dance floor!
I doubt if this is needed, but here goes: For an honest discussion of this subject, I want to remind everyone of the precedent set on the "Middle Earth and Spirituality" board. Essentialy, we decided to discuss religion and spirituality in a respectful, tolerant, open-hearted and open-minded manner, and that rule applies to this section also.
From what I have read, it is assumed that the author(s) of Beowulf were Christian, writing about the Pagan Germanic culture. I don't think this group needs discussion questions to get started, but just in case:
Beowulf makes statements that sound as if he is addressing the Christian God. Do you think he is talking to God, or to an overarcing Pagan diety?
And, since Tolkien's writings lend themselves to both a Pagan and Christian interpretation, how does this relect upon his writings, particularly the Silmarillion?
See csis.pace.edu/grendel/projsld/christ.html, and same address but 'pagan' instead of 'christ' for some discussion if needed.
Have fun!
Zauber
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 2 of 11 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameIarwainBen-adar1
Sent: 11/7/2002 11:09 AM
This has always been one of the most galling points of Beowulf for me. I do not believe it is the Christain god or relegion they refer to at all and I always voiced this opinion to my teachers/professors to their chagrin or mine depending upon their debate tactics.
Far too many versions express the Christain belief to be the focus of this tale, even though if one considers the supposed region and time period the god referred to is more likely of the Norse or Germanic gods of the Aseir sky pantheon Odin or Othin (Sorry no thurisaz on my keyboard). As I study Beowulf's history within this tale I am more inclined to consider him a Beserker or Beserk (Fanatical warrior cult) and interestingly enough Odin is the patron God of this cult.
I think the translations could be argued to tears and no one right answer could/would ever be found, because little factual information of that cultures relegious practices and ideas survive. But from an overview of translations verses cultural opinions God is God. But are we missing something from the translation by presuming that it translates into the Christain God?
Not being Christian I tend to see things from perspective outside of relegion, where not everything has it's roots or beginings with God. I say this because I think it's fine for one to have faith, and believe but that same faith becomes a relative origin for everything and in extreme cases blinds one from seeing other cultures motivations. I hope I don't offend, I just think all relegions are equal, and it's faith not relegion that gives the individual strength. Such as in Beowulf's case.
Namárië,
Iarwain
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 3 of 11 in Discussion
From: CathyL
Sent: 11/7/2002 1:36 PM
Hey Zauber,
I couldn't get to the two sites you listed, though if I cut off everything after /grendel I can get to the course, but I can't find the pages from there. Help, I'm lost in cyberspace. Again. LOL
Cathy
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 4 of 11 in Discussion
From: Slade
Sent: 11/7/2002 10:20 PM
Here's my promised bit on this topic..
Iarwain - I sympathise with your viewpoint, as it is not entirely dissimiliar to my own (& I shall be arguing this point at the next Anglo-Saxonists conference). Some thoughts, in no particular order -
(1) Christ is never explicitly mentioned in any of the 3000+ lines of the poem. Nor is Christ implicitly referred to at any point in my opinion. The lack of Christ's name is unusual, even in a mainly secular heroic Germanic poems (e.g. Hildebrantslied, Nibelungenlied, &c.) the word 'Christ' often appears as a matter of course.
Furthermore, the poem lacks any use of the usual epithets for the Christian god, such as Nergend, weoroda drihten, engla þeoden, weroda Wuldorcyning--moreover the poem avoids even divine names lacking any obvious Christian theology, such as Þeoden or Aldor.
[Beowulf-as-Christ theory] The only way to 'get Christ into the poem' seems to be to see Beowulf himself as a Christ-figure, as some Jesuit scholars of Beowulf have done. This seems most unlikely an interpretation to me, esp. in view of the poem's conclusion. But the Jesuit-scholars (and Klaeber himself, to a lesser degree) suggest that, for instance, Beowulf's battle in the underwater hall of Grendel is like Christ's Harrowing of Hell, and his submergence in the same water is akin to baptism, &c. All of these parallels are very tenous in my opinion.
[virtuous-Germanic-'Israelites' theory] A more plausible 'Christian reading' reason for the lack of reference to Christ is that the action takes place before the introduction of Christianity into the North and thus it would be, in a sense, 'anachronistic' to mention Christ since none of the characters would know of him (see ll.180-3). Yet, Beowulf, Hrothgar, Wealhtheow and other characters seem to practice some sort of monotheistic religion, and this certainly seems to be the belief of the narrator. So it has been proposed that the poem is a sort of 'Germanic Old Testament', or, rather, set in a sort of Germanic equivalent of the situation of the Israelites in the Old Testament. They cannot yet know Christ, yet there are virtous and God-fearing men all the same, who are, like the Israelites, also monotheistic. Thus, Dorothy Whitelock & more recently Nicholas Howe, have proposed that this is the reason behind the lack of references to the New Testament and the presence of references [sic] to the Old Testament.
(2) [Christian revisionist?] The above theories, and other 'Christian' readings are partly a backlash against a (primarily German) tradition of the 19th-century as considering the poem as being an early 'pure' expression of Germanic heroic culture which has been heavily 'corrupted' by some later Christian-revisionist. Klaeber wrote a number of very influential articles in the 1900s which seemed to have marked the turning of the tide against at least the stronger version of the 'Christian revisionist' theory. This theory is also tied up with the 19th-c. Liedertheorie , first proposed by Karl Lachmann in reference to the Nibelungenlied and later extended to Beowulf by Muellenhoff and other Germans, which considers these longer Germanic epic poems to be 'cobbled together' from once separate lays, or shorter epic poems. So, the 'Christian readings' also tend to consider the poem as a unified whole, rather than an accretion of various lays, topped off with some Christian homilising. Tolkien was one of the main proponents of Beowulf as a 'unified' whole, against the Liedertheorikers.
One good point, which I believe was first made by Klaeber, is that: if Beowulf was 'corrupted' by a Christian revisionist, he seems to have done a rather half-hearted job in his Christianisation. Surely any Christian revisionist worth his salt could have worked in some mention of Christ?
(3) There is no obvious Christian dogma in the poem, nor any obvious reference to Christian (or Judaic) rituals, such as any sort of eucharist (sharing of the host, the 'blood & body' of Christ).
Usually, there are considered to be three direct references to the Old Testament:
Genesis: ll.90-98
sægde se þe cuþe
frumsceaft fira feorran reccan
cwæð þæt se ælmihtiga eorðan worhte
wlitebeorhtne wang swa wæter bebugeð
gesette sigehreþig sunnan ond monan
leoman to leohte landbuendum
ond gefrætwade foldan sceatas
leomum ond leafum lif eac gesceop
cynna gehwylcum þara ðe cwice hwyrfaþ.
he spoke who knew how
the origin of men from earliest time recount;
said he that the almighty one wrought the earth,
that fair, sublime field bounded by water;
set up triumphant the sun and moon,
luminaries as lamps for the land-dwellers
and adorned the corners of the earth
with limbs and leaves; life too He formed
Now, even a cursory examination of Genesis shows that the 'Beowulf "Genesis"' is not strikingly similar. It doesn't contradict the biblical genesis story, but it is as similar to Indian and Sumerian creation myths as to the Christian.
[ii] Cain & Abel ll.105-8
wonsæli wer weardode hwile
siþðan him scyppend forscrifen hæfde
in caines cynne þone cwealm gewræc
ece drihten þæs þe he abel slog
the wretched creature ruled for a time
since him the Creator had condemned
with the kin of Cain; that killing avenged
the eternal Lord, in which he slew Abel;
first thing to know is that in the MS 'Cain' is originally written as 'cames' (rather than 'caines'), so the scribe apparently wasn't that familiar with the story of Cain & Abel! (though it may be some confusion between Cain and Cham, the son of Noah, as Cham's descendants in some traditions are also considered to be evil, like Cain). But, aside from this scribal 'error', the poem's reference to Cain & Abel is the only explicit Biblical/'Christian' reference!
[iii] The Flood ll.1690b-95
on ðæm wæs or writen
fyrngewinnes syðþan flod ofsloh
gifen geotende giganta cyn--
frecne geferdon þæt wæs fremde þeod
ecean dryhtne him þæs endelean
þurh wæteres wylm waldend sealde--
on which was engraved the origin of ancient strife, when the flood slew
the pouring ocean, the race of giants--
they fared terribly; that was a tribe foreign
to the eternal Lord; them the end-reward
through the surging of waters the Ruler granted--
Much has been written on the destruction of giants in the Flood (in Genesis, it is wicked mankind which seems to be the target), some of which is quite plausible. But something which seems to have been missed by most critics (with the notable exception of the late Herr Doktor Professor Karl Schneider) is the Norse story of the world's creation, through the slaying of Ymir by Odin & his brothers:
Ór Ymis holdi /
vas jörð of sköpud, /
en ór beinum björg, /
himinn ór hausi /
ens hrímkalda jötuns, /
en ór sveita sær
Of Ymir's flesh the earth was shaped,
the barren hills of his bones;
and of his skull the sky was shaped,
of his blood the briny sea
[Vafþrúðnismál 21, in the Elder Edda (Old Norse)]
& from Snorre's Edda: 'Bor's sons killed the giant Ymir. And he fell, so much blood flowed from his wounds that with it they drowned all the race of frost-giants, except that one escaped with his household. Giants call him Bergelmir'
(3) [Slade-smrti-shruti-theory] My own idea, to put it most simply, is that Beowulf is a pre-Christian poem, and that the apparent 'Christian' lines are indeed not interpolations but 'original' to the poem, at least in the basic form we have it now. However, the Flood reference, for instance, may or may not be derived in part from the biblical Flood, but it certainly must owe its basic form to some Anglo-Saxon version of the Eddic myth of Ymir. (and, indeed, we find stories of a great Flood in many cultures, including India). And the story of Cain & Abel, having to do with kin-slaying, would be easily adopted in Anglo-Saxon 'mythology'. But the use of such a story does not imply that the rest of 'Christian mythology' was adopted at the same time. We know that oral poet-singers travelled about, reciting poems; and in the Christian period, the oral-poetic medium was quickly used, adapting Christian stories into various poems, such as 'Genesis', 'Exodus', 'Daniel', &c. A scop in a non-Christian court would surely have heard the Christian poem-songs of travelling Christianised minstrels and would have had no reason not to add those 'Christian myths' he liked to his 'story-hoard'. Cain & Abel in Beowulf is an excellent example of how this can be done, as Cain and Abel themselves play no real role in the poem, other than Cain's role as Grendel's ancestor - fleshing out the background of one of the poem's villains quite nicely with a bit of borrowed lore.
In sum, there are many reasons why I find my own theory
the most plausible, which I shall go into in further depth in my A-S meeting talk. But this bit has become long enough, so I'll stop here.
Hope this provides some good fodder for thought & discussion.
--B.
www.heorot.dk
_________________________________________
Reply
Message 5 of 11 in Discussion
From: Zauber
Sent: 11/8/2002 8:41 AM
Cathy try
csis.pace.edu/grendel/projs1d/christ.html
and then press the buttons for either Christian or Pagan elemnts. I hope this works!
_______________________________________
Reply
Message 6 of 11 in Discussion
From: Zauber
Sent: 11/8/2002 9:12 AM
Iarwain, what does thurisaz mean? I am new to the study of languages, and have just (thanks to Slade) gotten a grasp on the thorn (OUCH!) and the eth. I tried the dictionary, and although I found thurible and thurifer (one who carries the thurible!), I did not find thurisaz.
I will be re-reading with a more enlarged viewpoint. I had assumed that the criticisms of Beowulf that I have read (not a lot) were correct when they said pagan interpreted by Christian, but what if that is incorrect? Mind expanding. Love it!
So, the biblical references (Cain, the Flood, etc.) all come from Old Testament material? I hadn't thought about that, but that to me is persuasive of the poem/author not necessarily being Christian. A lot of good, definately thought-provoking stuff here! When and where is your Anglo-Saxon conference, Slade? And, for my future reference, what edition of the Eddas would you recommend? (My pocket book just screamed!)
Zauber
___________________________________________
Reply
Message 7 of 11 in Discussion
From: MusicMom
Sent: 11/8/2002 1:25 PM
Slade, Thanks you for such a thought provoking "article." I have printed it out and plan to spend some time studying it. I have always thought that "Beowulf" was a unified work of literature that borowed from many sources. Sometimes it is difficult to determine what the "original" sources might have been because many traditions have drawn on a multitude of sources (e.g. your example of a "great flood" story existing in many myth systems and folklore. Just where did the idea first originate? Is it possible to ever determine this?)
Just a few random thoughts before I really sit down to work:
A person can be a Christian and write a piece of literature without mentioning Christ. Tolkien would be an example of this--Christ is not mentioned in either LotR or Sil, but there is no debate about Tolkien's belief in Christianity. On the other hand, a person can be a nonChristian and use Christian references in his work--a good example doens't leap to my mind but I have run across this occasionally. So the lack of the mention of Christ does not, in itself, mean that the poet was not Christian or was uninfluenced by Christian ideas. Certainly Christian thought has been influenced by many of the Germanic myths and legends--influence is a two way street.
Because I do not read Anglo-Saxon I am at the mercy of the translater, but in the Heaney edition I am currently reading the following passage appears which suggest some belief in (at least) a God that is similar to the Christian God .
170 ff
Those were hard times, heartbreaking
for the prince of the Shieldings; powerful counsellors,
the highest in the land, would lend advice,
plotting how best the bold defenders
might resist and beat off sudden attacks.
Sometimes at pagan shrines they vowed
offerings to idols, swore oaths
that the killer of souls might come to their aid
and save the people. That was their way,
their heathenish hope; deep in their hearts
they remembered hell. The Almighty Judge
of good deeds and bad, the Lord God,
Head of the Heavens and High King of the World,
was unknown to them. Oh, cursed is he
who in time of trouble has to thrust his soul
in the fire's embrace, forfeiting help;
he has nowhere to turn. But blessed is he
who after death can approach the Lord
and find friendship in the Father's embrace.
It is interesting to note that later (line 381-3) Hroathgar (the leader of the Shieldings whose counsellors made "offerings to idols") says of Beowulf, "Now Holy God/ has, in His goodness, guided him here/ to the West-Danes, to defend us from Grendel./"
This is not a "rebuttal" of your thesis, just more food for thought.
MusicMom
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 8 of 11 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameIarwainBen-adar1
Sent: 11/8/2002 5:59 PM
Zauber, Thurisaz is the 21st rune of the Futhark writting system it would be akin to thorn I assume.
Slade,I'm in awe. So many new thoughts to now add to my limited Beowulf experience. I have always felt the translation had been altered along the way by Christain scribes to promote the glory of God, but you have offered other venues to consider thanks. I tend to be straight forward and sometimes miss subtleties, so your input is much appreciated.
Namárië,
Iarwain
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 9 of 11 in Discussion
From: Slade
Sent: 11/14/2002 7:38 PM
Eddas
The translations I used (since I don't really read Old Norse, other than guessing at things through similarities to Old English/German) are:
Hollander, Lee M. The Poetic Edda . Austin: University of Texas Press, 1970 (2nd. ed.). [=Elder (poetic) Edda]
Sturluson, Snorri. Edda. Anthony Faulkes, ed. & trans. London: Dent, 1987.
[=Younger (prose) Edda of Snorre]
but also available free online (at Northvegr.org) are:
Benjamin Thorpe's translation of the Elder Poetic Edda
Andersen translation of the Prose Edda of Snorre
___________________________________________
Reply
Message 10 of 11 in Discussion
From: Slade
Sent: 11/14/2002 8:16 PM
Zauber - yes, any of the Christian/Biblical references, either explicit (like Cain & Abel) or assumed (creation, the Flood) are all exclusively from the Old Testament. As I said, a number of theories have been advanced as to why this is so. It is not, as a few have suggested, that the missionaries started with the beginning of the Bible in their evangelising, Christian missions have, and continue, to begin their teaching with the gospel of Christ, and only later move to the OT. So it is not that the Beowulf poet was a 'Christian' who was still only as far as Genesis in his conversion! Nor does a Jewish conversion of Anglo-Saxon England seem likely! One interesting suggestion, though one I find also improbable, is that the poet was an Arian Christian [Arian Christianity (nothing to do with 'Aryans', but with a man named 'Arian') is a 'heretical' belief that Christ is not 'the son of God' any more than any man is a son of God, and a faith which the Goths, the first Germans to be converted, espoused. Essentially Arianism denies the divinity of Christ, and the existence of a divine Trinity, and is thus actually a much more 'monotheistic' religion than orthodox Christianity. Modern day 'Arians' are the Unitarians (vs. the 'trinitarians', i.e. believers in a trinity)].
musicmum - yes, one can be a Christian without writing about it, but a writer of fantasy in the 20th century and a writer (especially a monastic writer, as many presumably were) in, say, the 10th century, are in rather different circumstances. Whilst there are some secular Old English poems, they are mainly very short verse, of 100 lines or less. I do not believe that there is any long (500-1000+ line) Old English verse, other than _Beowulf_, which does not at least mention the name of Christ. Even the quite secular _Nibelungenlied_ of Old High German, which is quite non-christian in its actual outlook & substance, is filled with references to Christ. The only significant Germanic verse, outside of Beowulf, to my knowledge, which does not mention Christ would be Old Norse (eddas, sagas, &c.), some of which is presumed to be 'pagan'.
The lines you mention actually probably are the most 'christian sounding' of the poem, but even there Heaney's translation makes it seems all the more so, e.g. Heaney's 'Almighty Judge' is actually OE. metod ('the Measurer'), 'Lord God' drihten god is more literally translated 'War-chief God', Heaney's 'Head of the Heavens' is heofena helm 'helm of the heavens ('helm' meaning "protector"), Heaney's 'High King of the World' is very free rendering of OE. wuldres waldend ('wielder of glory'). The relevance is that other than 'god' & 'metod', all of the other terms are appropriate, and used for, earthly kings and war-leaders.
The phrase halig god ('holy god') sounds very Christian, but this is misleading (at least potentially), as 'holy' is a _very_ rough rendering of Latin 'sanctus', and originally referred to strong, charismatic magic (i.e. it was very 'pagan' word). To make this point more explicit, I'll mention that the Arian Goth Wulfila deliberately avoided the Gothic cognate of 'holy', and chose to use the more numinous word weiha (Proto-germanic *wihaz) instead, due to the almost political connotations of Germanic *hailagaz ('holy'). 'Holy' is closely related to the English terms 'whole, hale, healthy' (i.e. they are all derivitives of the same root word) and also to the German Heil .
The 'Christian' reading of Beowulf is actually the norm today, as I mentioned, and I am mainly interested in stimulating thought & discussion, so of course anyone is free to argue any of these points without fear of insult - I always welcome such dialogues in fact.
By the bye, it's interesting to read & discover that from early mediaeval times to the present day, the shape of mainstream Christianity has been significantly transformed by Germanic ideas & mores.
____________________________________
Reply
Message 11 of 11 in Discussion
From: MusicMom
Sent: 11/16/2002 6:30 PM
Slade, thank you for your information on the meanings and derivations of the "Christian sounding" terms in Heaney's translation. I love this poem and have read it several times, but the last time I read Beowulf was about 20 years ago and it was the Burton Rafell translation. As I was reading Heaney I was thinking that I did not remember Beowulf seeming to be such a "Chrisian" poem. (I am a Christian, and I tend to notice when what I am reading seems to come from a Chrisian tradition.) You have nicely cleared that up for me. However, it does seem that there is some sort of monotheistic feeling in the poem and a conflict with pagan ideas--especially in the passage that seems to criticise Hrothgar (sp?) for consulting "pagan counselors." Or am I misreading that, also? I've always read and enjoyed Beowulf because it is a good, "riproaring" story. (Same reason I love the Iliad and the Oddysey--epic poetry is one of my favorite genres.) I haven't spent much time analyzing its religious implications. This is a fascinating discussion. BTW--as "inaccurate" as it seems to be, the Heaney translation is good poetry and very easy to read!
MusicMom
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 1 of 11 in Discussion
From: Zauber
Sent: 11/7/2002 6:33 AM
I said this was a flexible syllabus, so I'm adding this topic now. We keep dancing around the subject, so here's a dance floor!
I doubt if this is needed, but here goes: For an honest discussion of this subject, I want to remind everyone of the precedent set on the "Middle Earth and Spirituality" board. Essentialy, we decided to discuss religion and spirituality in a respectful, tolerant, open-hearted and open-minded manner, and that rule applies to this section also.
From what I have read, it is assumed that the author(s) of Beowulf were Christian, writing about the Pagan Germanic culture. I don't think this group needs discussion questions to get started, but just in case:
Beowulf makes statements that sound as if he is addressing the Christian God. Do you think he is talking to God, or to an overarcing Pagan diety?
And, since Tolkien's writings lend themselves to both a Pagan and Christian interpretation, how does this relect upon his writings, particularly the Silmarillion?
See csis.pace.edu/grendel/projsld/christ.html, and same address but 'pagan' instead of 'christ' for some discussion if needed.
Have fun!
Zauber
____________________________________________
Reply
Message 2 of 11 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameIarwainBen-adar1
Sent: 11/7/2002 11:09 AM
This has always been one of the most galling points of Beowulf for me. I do not believe it is the Christain god or relegion they refer to at all and I always voiced this opinion to my teachers/professors to their chagrin or mine depending upon their debate tactics.
Far too many versions express the Christain belief to be the focus of this tale, even though if one considers the supposed region and time period the god referred to is more likely of the Norse or Germanic gods of the Aseir sky pantheon Odin or Othin (Sorry no thurisaz on my keyboard). As I study Beowulf's history within this tale I am more inclined to consider him a Beserker or Beserk (Fanatical warrior cult) and interestingly enough Odin is the patron God of this cult.
I think the translations could be argued to tears and no one right answer could/would ever be found, because little factual information of that cultures relegious practices and ideas survive. But from an overview of translations verses cultural opinions God is God. But are we missing something from the translation by presuming that it translates into the Christain God?
Not being Christian I tend to see things from perspective outside of relegion, where not everything has it's roots or beginings with God. I say this because I think it's fine for one to have faith, and believe but that same faith becomes a relative origin for everything and in extreme cases blinds one from seeing other cultures motivations. I hope I don't offend, I just think all relegions are equal, and it's faith not relegion that gives the individual strength. Such as in Beowulf's case.
Namárië,
Iarwain
_____________________________________________
Reply
Message 3 of 11 in Discussion
From: CathyL
Sent: 11/7/2002 1:36 PM
Hey Zauber,
I couldn't get to the two sites you listed, though if I cut off everything after /grendel I can get to the course, but I can't find the pages from there. Help, I'm lost in cyberspace. Again. LOL
Cathy
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 4 of 11 in Discussion
From: Slade
Sent: 11/7/2002 10:20 PM
Here's my promised bit on this topic..
Iarwain - I sympathise with your viewpoint, as it is not entirely dissimiliar to my own (& I shall be arguing this point at the next Anglo-Saxonists conference). Some thoughts, in no particular order -
(1) Christ is never explicitly mentioned in any of the 3000+ lines of the poem. Nor is Christ implicitly referred to at any point in my opinion. The lack of Christ's name is unusual, even in a mainly secular heroic Germanic poems (e.g. Hildebrantslied, Nibelungenlied, &c.) the word 'Christ' often appears as a matter of course.
Furthermore, the poem lacks any use of the usual epithets for the Christian god, such as Nergend, weoroda drihten, engla þeoden, weroda Wuldorcyning--moreover the poem avoids even divine names lacking any obvious Christian theology, such as Þeoden or Aldor.
[Beowulf-as-Christ theory] The only way to 'get Christ into the poem' seems to be to see Beowulf himself as a Christ-figure, as some Jesuit scholars of Beowulf have done. This seems most unlikely an interpretation to me, esp. in view of the poem's conclusion. But the Jesuit-scholars (and Klaeber himself, to a lesser degree) suggest that, for instance, Beowulf's battle in the underwater hall of Grendel is like Christ's Harrowing of Hell, and his submergence in the same water is akin to baptism, &c. All of these parallels are very tenous in my opinion.
[virtuous-Germanic-'Israelites' theory] A more plausible 'Christian reading' reason for the lack of reference to Christ is that the action takes place before the introduction of Christianity into the North and thus it would be, in a sense, 'anachronistic' to mention Christ since none of the characters would know of him (see ll.180-3). Yet, Beowulf, Hrothgar, Wealhtheow and other characters seem to practice some sort of monotheistic religion, and this certainly seems to be the belief of the narrator. So it has been proposed that the poem is a sort of 'Germanic Old Testament', or, rather, set in a sort of Germanic equivalent of the situation of the Israelites in the Old Testament. They cannot yet know Christ, yet there are virtous and God-fearing men all the same, who are, like the Israelites, also monotheistic. Thus, Dorothy Whitelock & more recently Nicholas Howe, have proposed that this is the reason behind the lack of references to the New Testament and the presence of references [sic] to the Old Testament.
(2) [Christian revisionist?] The above theories, and other 'Christian' readings are partly a backlash against a (primarily German) tradition of the 19th-century as considering the poem as being an early 'pure' expression of Germanic heroic culture which has been heavily 'corrupted' by some later Christian-revisionist. Klaeber wrote a number of very influential articles in the 1900s which seemed to have marked the turning of the tide against at least the stronger version of the 'Christian revisionist' theory. This theory is also tied up with the 19th-c. Liedertheorie , first proposed by Karl Lachmann in reference to the Nibelungenlied and later extended to Beowulf by Muellenhoff and other Germans, which considers these longer Germanic epic poems to be 'cobbled together' from once separate lays, or shorter epic poems. So, the 'Christian readings' also tend to consider the poem as a unified whole, rather than an accretion of various lays, topped off with some Christian homilising. Tolkien was one of the main proponents of Beowulf as a 'unified' whole, against the Liedertheorikers.
One good point, which I believe was first made by Klaeber, is that: if Beowulf was 'corrupted' by a Christian revisionist, he seems to have done a rather half-hearted job in his Christianisation. Surely any Christian revisionist worth his salt could have worked in some mention of Christ?
(3) There is no obvious Christian dogma in the poem, nor any obvious reference to Christian (or Judaic) rituals, such as any sort of eucharist (sharing of the host, the 'blood & body' of Christ).
Usually, there are considered to be three direct references to the Old Testament:
Genesis: ll.90-98
sægde se þe cuþe
frumsceaft fira feorran reccan
cwæð þæt se ælmihtiga eorðan worhte
wlitebeorhtne wang swa wæter bebugeð
gesette sigehreþig sunnan ond monan
leoman to leohte landbuendum
ond gefrætwade foldan sceatas
leomum ond leafum lif eac gesceop
cynna gehwylcum þara ðe cwice hwyrfaþ.
he spoke who knew how
the origin of men from earliest time recount;
said he that the almighty one wrought the earth,
that fair, sublime field bounded by water;
set up triumphant the sun and moon,
luminaries as lamps for the land-dwellers
and adorned the corners of the earth
with limbs and leaves; life too He formed
Now, even a cursory examination of Genesis shows that the 'Beowulf "Genesis"' is not strikingly similar. It doesn't contradict the biblical genesis story, but it is as similar to Indian and Sumerian creation myths as to the Christian.
[ii] Cain & Abel ll.105-8
wonsæli wer weardode hwile
siþðan him scyppend forscrifen hæfde
in caines cynne þone cwealm gewræc
ece drihten þæs þe he abel slog
the wretched creature ruled for a time
since him the Creator had condemned
with the kin of Cain; that killing avenged
the eternal Lord, in which he slew Abel;
first thing to know is that in the MS 'Cain' is originally written as 'cames' (rather than 'caines'), so the scribe apparently wasn't that familiar with the story of Cain & Abel! (though it may be some confusion between Cain and Cham, the son of Noah, as Cham's descendants in some traditions are also considered to be evil, like Cain). But, aside from this scribal 'error', the poem's reference to Cain & Abel is the only explicit Biblical/'Christian' reference!
[iii] The Flood ll.1690b-95
on ðæm wæs or writen
fyrngewinnes syðþan flod ofsloh
gifen geotende giganta cyn--
frecne geferdon þæt wæs fremde þeod
ecean dryhtne him þæs endelean
þurh wæteres wylm waldend sealde--
on which was engraved the origin of ancient strife, when the flood slew
the pouring ocean, the race of giants--
they fared terribly; that was a tribe foreign
to the eternal Lord; them the end-reward
through the surging of waters the Ruler granted--
Much has been written on the destruction of giants in the Flood (in Genesis, it is wicked mankind which seems to be the target), some of which is quite plausible. But something which seems to have been missed by most critics (with the notable exception of the late Herr Doktor Professor Karl Schneider) is the Norse story of the world's creation, through the slaying of Ymir by Odin & his brothers:
Ór Ymis holdi /
vas jörð of sköpud, /
en ór beinum björg, /
himinn ór hausi /
ens hrímkalda jötuns, /
en ór sveita sær
Of Ymir's flesh the earth was shaped,
the barren hills of his bones;
and of his skull the sky was shaped,
of his blood the briny sea
[Vafþrúðnismál 21, in the Elder Edda (Old Norse)]
& from Snorre's Edda: 'Bor's sons killed the giant Ymir. And he fell, so much blood flowed from his wounds that with it they drowned all the race of frost-giants, except that one escaped with his household. Giants call him Bergelmir'
(3) [Slade-smrti-shruti-theory] My own idea, to put it most simply, is that Beowulf is a pre-Christian poem, and that the apparent 'Christian' lines are indeed not interpolations but 'original' to the poem, at least in the basic form we have it now. However, the Flood reference, for instance, may or may not be derived in part from the biblical Flood, but it certainly must owe its basic form to some Anglo-Saxon version of the Eddic myth of Ymir. (and, indeed, we find stories of a great Flood in many cultures, including India). And the story of Cain & Abel, having to do with kin-slaying, would be easily adopted in Anglo-Saxon 'mythology'. But the use of such a story does not imply that the rest of 'Christian mythology' was adopted at the same time. We know that oral poet-singers travelled about, reciting poems; and in the Christian period, the oral-poetic medium was quickly used, adapting Christian stories into various poems, such as 'Genesis', 'Exodus', 'Daniel', &c. A scop in a non-Christian court would surely have heard the Christian poem-songs of travelling Christianised minstrels and would have had no reason not to add those 'Christian myths' he liked to his 'story-hoard'. Cain & Abel in Beowulf is an excellent example of how this can be done, as Cain and Abel themselves play no real role in the poem, other than Cain's role as Grendel's ancestor - fleshing out the background of one of the poem's villains quite nicely with a bit of borrowed lore.
In sum, there are many reasons why I find my own theory
the most plausible, which I shall go into in further depth in my A-S meeting talk. But this bit has become long enough, so I'll stop here.Hope this provides some good fodder for thought & discussion.
--B.
www.heorot.dk
_________________________________________
Reply
Message 5 of 11 in Discussion
From: Zauber
Sent: 11/8/2002 8:41 AM
Cathy try
csis.pace.edu/grendel/projs1d/christ.html
and then press the buttons for either Christian or Pagan elemnts. I hope this works!
_______________________________________
Reply
Message 6 of 11 in Discussion
From: Zauber
Sent: 11/8/2002 9:12 AM
Iarwain, what does thurisaz mean? I am new to the study of languages, and have just (thanks to Slade) gotten a grasp on the thorn (OUCH!) and the eth. I tried the dictionary, and although I found thurible and thurifer (one who carries the thurible!), I did not find thurisaz.
I will be re-reading with a more enlarged viewpoint. I had assumed that the criticisms of Beowulf that I have read (not a lot) were correct when they said pagan interpreted by Christian, but what if that is incorrect? Mind expanding. Love it!
So, the biblical references (Cain, the Flood, etc.) all come from Old Testament material? I hadn't thought about that, but that to me is persuasive of the poem/author not necessarily being Christian. A lot of good, definately thought-provoking stuff here! When and where is your Anglo-Saxon conference, Slade? And, for my future reference, what edition of the Eddas would you recommend? (My pocket book just screamed!)
Zauber
___________________________________________
Reply
Message 7 of 11 in Discussion
From: MusicMom
Sent: 11/8/2002 1:25 PM
Slade, Thanks you for such a thought provoking "article." I have printed it out and plan to spend some time studying it. I have always thought that "Beowulf" was a unified work of literature that borowed from many sources. Sometimes it is difficult to determine what the "original" sources might have been because many traditions have drawn on a multitude of sources (e.g. your example of a "great flood" story existing in many myth systems and folklore. Just where did the idea first originate? Is it possible to ever determine this?)
Just a few random thoughts before I really sit down to work:
A person can be a Christian and write a piece of literature without mentioning Christ. Tolkien would be an example of this--Christ is not mentioned in either LotR or Sil, but there is no debate about Tolkien's belief in Christianity. On the other hand, a person can be a nonChristian and use Christian references in his work--a good example doens't leap to my mind but I have run across this occasionally. So the lack of the mention of Christ does not, in itself, mean that the poet was not Christian or was uninfluenced by Christian ideas. Certainly Christian thought has been influenced by many of the Germanic myths and legends--influence is a two way street.
Because I do not read Anglo-Saxon I am at the mercy of the translater, but in the Heaney edition I am currently reading the following passage appears which suggest some belief in (at least) a God that is similar to the Christian God .
170 ff
Those were hard times, heartbreaking
for the prince of the Shieldings; powerful counsellors,
the highest in the land, would lend advice,
plotting how best the bold defenders
might resist and beat off sudden attacks.
Sometimes at pagan shrines they vowed
offerings to idols, swore oaths
that the killer of souls might come to their aid
and save the people. That was their way,
their heathenish hope; deep in their hearts
they remembered hell. The Almighty Judge
of good deeds and bad, the Lord God,
Head of the Heavens and High King of the World,
was unknown to them. Oh, cursed is he
who in time of trouble has to thrust his soul
in the fire's embrace, forfeiting help;
he has nowhere to turn. But blessed is he
who after death can approach the Lord
and find friendship in the Father's embrace.
It is interesting to note that later (line 381-3) Hroathgar (the leader of the Shieldings whose counsellors made "offerings to idols") says of Beowulf, "Now Holy God/ has, in His goodness, guided him here/ to the West-Danes, to defend us from Grendel./"
This is not a "rebuttal" of your thesis, just more food for thought.
MusicMom
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 8 of 11 in Discussion
From: MSN NicknameIarwainBen-adar1
Sent: 11/8/2002 5:59 PM
Zauber, Thurisaz is the 21st rune of the Futhark writting system it would be akin to thorn I assume.
Slade,I'm in awe. So many new thoughts to now add to my limited Beowulf experience. I have always felt the translation had been altered along the way by Christain scribes to promote the glory of God, but you have offered other venues to consider thanks. I tend to be straight forward and sometimes miss subtleties, so your input is much appreciated.
Namárië,
Iarwain
__________________________________________
Reply
Message 9 of 11 in Discussion
From: Slade
Sent: 11/14/2002 7:38 PM
Eddas
The translations I used (since I don't really read Old Norse, other than guessing at things through similarities to Old English/German) are:
Hollander, Lee M. The Poetic Edda . Austin: University of Texas Press, 1970 (2nd. ed.). [=Elder (poetic) Edda]
Sturluson, Snorri. Edda. Anthony Faulkes, ed. & trans. London: Dent, 1987.
[=Younger (prose) Edda of Snorre]
but also available free online (at Northvegr.org) are:
Benjamin Thorpe's translation of the Elder Poetic Edda
Andersen translation of the Prose Edda of Snorre
___________________________________________
Reply
Message 10 of 11 in Discussion
From: Slade
Sent: 11/14/2002 8:16 PM
Zauber - yes, any of the Christian/Biblical references, either explicit (like Cain & Abel) or assumed (creation, the Flood) are all exclusively from the Old Testament. As I said, a number of theories have been advanced as to why this is so. It is not, as a few have suggested, that the missionaries started with the beginning of the Bible in their evangelising, Christian missions have, and continue, to begin their teaching with the gospel of Christ, and only later move to the OT. So it is not that the Beowulf poet was a 'Christian' who was still only as far as Genesis in his conversion! Nor does a Jewish conversion of Anglo-Saxon England seem likely! One interesting suggestion, though one I find also improbable, is that the poet was an Arian Christian [Arian Christianity (nothing to do with 'Aryans', but with a man named 'Arian') is a 'heretical' belief that Christ is not 'the son of God' any more than any man is a son of God, and a faith which the Goths, the first Germans to be converted, espoused. Essentially Arianism denies the divinity of Christ, and the existence of a divine Trinity, and is thus actually a much more 'monotheistic' religion than orthodox Christianity. Modern day 'Arians' are the Unitarians (vs. the 'trinitarians', i.e. believers in a trinity)].
musicmum - yes, one can be a Christian without writing about it, but a writer of fantasy in the 20th century and a writer (especially a monastic writer, as many presumably were) in, say, the 10th century, are in rather different circumstances. Whilst there are some secular Old English poems, they are mainly very short verse, of 100 lines or less. I do not believe that there is any long (500-1000+ line) Old English verse, other than _Beowulf_, which does not at least mention the name of Christ. Even the quite secular _Nibelungenlied_ of Old High German, which is quite non-christian in its actual outlook & substance, is filled with references to Christ. The only significant Germanic verse, outside of Beowulf, to my knowledge, which does not mention Christ would be Old Norse (eddas, sagas, &c.), some of which is presumed to be 'pagan'.
The lines you mention actually probably are the most 'christian sounding' of the poem, but even there Heaney's translation makes it seems all the more so, e.g. Heaney's 'Almighty Judge' is actually OE. metod ('the Measurer'), 'Lord God' drihten god is more literally translated 'War-chief God', Heaney's 'Head of the Heavens' is heofena helm 'helm of the heavens ('helm' meaning "protector"), Heaney's 'High King of the World' is very free rendering of OE. wuldres waldend ('wielder of glory'). The relevance is that other than 'god' & 'metod', all of the other terms are appropriate, and used for, earthly kings and war-leaders.
The phrase halig god ('holy god') sounds very Christian, but this is misleading (at least potentially), as 'holy' is a _very_ rough rendering of Latin 'sanctus', and originally referred to strong, charismatic magic (i.e. it was very 'pagan' word). To make this point more explicit, I'll mention that the Arian Goth Wulfila deliberately avoided the Gothic cognate of 'holy', and chose to use the more numinous word weiha (Proto-germanic *wihaz) instead, due to the almost political connotations of Germanic *hailagaz ('holy'). 'Holy' is closely related to the English terms 'whole, hale, healthy' (i.e. they are all derivitives of the same root word) and also to the German Heil .
The 'Christian' reading of Beowulf is actually the norm today, as I mentioned, and I am mainly interested in stimulating thought & discussion, so of course anyone is free to argue any of these points without fear of insult - I always welcome such dialogues in fact.
By the bye, it's interesting to read & discover that from early mediaeval times to the present day, the shape of mainstream Christianity has been significantly transformed by Germanic ideas & mores.
____________________________________
Reply
Message 11 of 11 in Discussion
From: MusicMom
Sent: 11/16/2002 6:30 PM
Slade, thank you for your information on the meanings and derivations of the "Christian sounding" terms in Heaney's translation. I love this poem and have read it several times, but the last time I read Beowulf was about 20 years ago and it was the Burton Rafell translation. As I was reading Heaney I was thinking that I did not remember Beowulf seeming to be such a "Chrisian" poem. (I am a Christian, and I tend to notice when what I am reading seems to come from a Chrisian tradition.) You have nicely cleared that up for me. However, it does seem that there is some sort of monotheistic feeling in the poem and a conflict with pagan ideas--especially in the passage that seems to criticise Hrothgar (sp?) for consulting "pagan counselors." Or am I misreading that, also? I've always read and enjoyed Beowulf because it is a good, "riproaring" story. (Same reason I love the Iliad and the Oddysey--epic poetry is one of my favorite genres.) I haven't spent much time analyzing its religious implications. This is a fascinating discussion. BTW--as "inaccurate" as it seems to be, the Heaney translation is good poetry and very easy to read!
MusicMom