Literacy, Royal Power, And King-Poet Relations

7/17/2019 Literacy, Royal Power, And King-Poet Relations

1/28

University of Oregon

Literacy, Royal Power, and King-Poet Relations in Old English and Old Norse CompositionsAuthor(s): Robin WaughSource: Comparative Literature, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Autumn, 1997), pp. 289-315Published by: Duke University Presson behalf of the University of OregonStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1771534.

Accessed: 07/10/2013 06:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of OregonandDuke University Pressare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Comparative Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 209.129.47.117 on Mon, 7 Oct 2013 06:26:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dukehttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uoregonhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1771534?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1771534?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uoregonhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke


2/28

FALL

1997

Volume

49,

Number

4

ROBIN WAUGH

Literacy

o y a l

P o w e r

a n d

King Poet

Relations

i n

l d

English

a n d

l d

N o r s e

ompositions

N

OLD

NORSE

WORKS,

kings

often steal acts

of

praise

from

the

poets

who

normally

offer these

judgements.

The

motivation

for

these

thefts

comes from

a

tradition of

competitiveness

within

Anglo-Saxon

and Scandinavian societies: most characters in

sagas

and heroic

poems, especially

in

compositions

that

seem

to

come

from an oral

tradition, compete constantly

with one another and

with

characters

from the

past.'

The

verbal combat between

politi-

cal

leaders and

poets

in

Old

Norse

works

provides

a useful case

study

of this

general competition.

This

king-poet

competition

ap-

pears

to have three consecutive

stages,

which

trace

a decline in the

social influence

of

court

poets,

and of

oral

poets

in

general,

as

the

kings

of

Anglo-Saxon England

and Scandinavia

come to

use

the

newly

introduced and

powerful

technique

of

writing

to extend

their dominance.2

' By competitive tradition, I mean competition between poems and individuals

in

any possible

combination.

I realize that

a

reader of

Beowulf might object,

for

instance,

that a

mighty

warrior

who

acts

and

a

wise

king

who

rewards

cannot com-

pete

because,

as

aspects

of a

poetic

tradition,

they

are

characters -necessary

for

the

purposes

of

a

heroic

work,

but

not real

people

who

can

actually

do combat.

In

contrast,

I

argue

that combat

pervades

all existence. Since

Beowulf

is

based on

oral

poetic

tradition,

and since

competition

is essential

to

this tradition

(Ong

43-5;

Waugh,

Word

359-86),

everyone competes

with

everyone

in

oral

society: kings,

heroes,

anybody-whether

real or

imaginary.

Therefore,

the fact

that

Hrothgar

adopts

Beowulf

(946b-950)

in

no

way disengages

competition

between the two.

I

use

the

Klaeber

edition of

Beowulf

and refer to all

Old

English poems

by

line num-

bers

in

the

text. Unattributed translations are

my

own.

I

would like to

acknowledge

the

helpful suggestions

from

anonymous

reviewers of this article.

2

I do

not mean

to

imply

that

certain events

in

the

sagas

and

in

Beowulf

actually

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/28

COMPARATIVE LITERATURE

/

290

Old Norse compositions have more direct evidence of this de-

cline than

Anglo-Saxon

ones.

Nevertheless,

certain

Anglo-Saxon

records

describe

rulers first

connecting

their

power

to

objects,

and

then

connecting

it

to

written

texts.

Certainly,

evidence shows

a

vir-

tually

immediate

interest

in

books

as

objects

(Bede 1.25);

however,

rulers and

other nonclerics do

not

demonstrate

sure

knowledge

of

the content

of these texts until later

(4.26;

Asser

23).

This

growth

of

knowledge

occurs at

the

same

time

as

an increase

in

royal

politi-

cal

power,

which rulers consolidate

by

using

books

among

other

agents (Bede 2.5). The records thus suggest that English society

passes

through phases

of

kingship

and

of the

king-poet

relation-

ship

that

are similar to the

developments

that occur more obvi-

ously

in

the

sagas.

I

identify

the

stages

of

these

developments

in

Beowulf

the

sagas,

and a few later

compositions

in

order

to estab-

lish a

chronology

of

king-poet

relations that will

help

increase

our

understanding

of these

Anglo-Saxon

and Old Norse

works,

of

com-

petition,

and of the

transition

between

orality

and

literacy.

I

In the

early

medieval

north,

kingship

falls

into three

stages

of

development:

orality,

object literacy

(with

episodes

of new

object

literacy),

and content

literacy.3

Although

the earliest

stage

of

king-

ship

(c.

450- c. 600

in

England

and on

the

continent;

to

c. 1000

in

Scandinavia)

evades full

description

because

records

of

tribal

soci-

eties

in

general

and of Northern

Europe

in

particular

during

the

first few hundred

years

after the Roman

period

are

lacking,

field

studies

of

political

leadership

and

of

poetic practice

in

contempo-

rary oral societies help us to be more confident in the necessary

guesswork

(Opland,

Imbongi Nezibongo

185-208).

Two kinds of

guesses

are

involved: those based

on the

vestiges

of oral traditions

still

present

in

literate

societies,

and

those based

on

written

records and

descriptions

of

leaders

and

poets

from oral

societies,

records

that

are

often

limited,

distanced,

and

prejudiced.

An

ex-

ample

of

the first kind of evidence

is

the

power

over

naming

ex-

hibited

by

later-than-oral

kings,

which

suggests

that ancient

rulers

probably

had some control over

the

community's

use of

language.

took

place.

In

addition,

I

acknowledge

the

dangers

of

using

a

much

later,

far-re-

moved

body

of

literature

such

as the Icelandic

sagas

to make

points

about

Beowulf.

Yet researchers

constantly

discover connections

between the two cultures

in terms

of

trade,

ideas, behaviors,

and aesthetic

influences

(Chaney

4-5).

Essentially,

the

family sagas

carry

on

the

heroic tradition

of

Germanic

poetry

(Andersson,

Icelan-

dic

65),

though

not

slavishly

(Andersson,

Displacement

593).

I refer to the

sagas

by page

numbers

in

the

Islenzk

Fornrit editions.

I mean these

stages

of

kingship

to be observations

of

trends

that

one

may

see in

the

requisite

records and

not,

say,

a

general

theory

of

kingship.

I

outline all

three

stages, but concentrate on the second one because it needs more definition than

the more conventional

categories

of

oral

and literate.



4/28

LITERACY &

ROYAL

POWER

/

291

Evidence of the second kind confirms this power. Written ac-

counts

depict

oral societies as

imagining

that

their

gods

would ex-

ercise control over

language

(Chaney

23;

Tacitus

10).

Early

chief-

tains descended from these

gods,

according

to

several

genealogies

(Sisam,

Anglo-Saxon

308),

and

the

records

suggest

that

this

sa-

credness demanded ritualistic

praise

to

help

insure the tribal

king's good

fortune,

which was

tied

to

that of his

community

(Chaney

11-3;

11

n9).

Power

(and

therefore

reputation)

resided

in

his

body.

Some evidence exists that

kings

were sacrificed in order

to produce good harvests (Gregory 3.30; Snorri 1:31-2), thus re-

newing

their

lives

in the

eyes

of the

population.

Power manifested

itself

in

oral acts: Offa

gains

success

once his

ability

to

speak

finally

appears

in a

miraculous fashion

(Saxo

4.106-7,

113-7).

In

Beowulf

Hrothgar

creates Heorot with

words,

plays

the

harp,4

and seems

to

recite

(78b-9,

2107-8;

cf.

Procopius

4.6.33).

Despite

the

sketchy

outline

of

oral

society,

it seems

likely

that

the

population

at

large

retains much

power,

as does

any poet

who

connects a ruler's fame

(as

bards recorded

it)

to a

supposed

immortality (Bloomfield and Dunn 122), and who memorizes the

traditions

of the

oral

community.

Since most

people

cannot

re-

member all

of the

rules of

a

society

all of the

time,

periodic

assem-

blies would

be

necessary,

assemblies in which

the

king

has an advi-

sory

power

only,

and where

(likely)

a

designated

individual

(the

chief? a

scop?)

or individuals

recites the

requisite

traditions

in

or-

der to affirm the

society's

laws

and taboos

(Bede

2.5,

13;

Tacitus

11, 12;

Wormald

136-8).

The rules

may

then

encompass

all

of the

people

at

any

such

gathering.5

But

this

public

event

is

inevitably

a

slave to the

fallibility

of voice, the selectiveness of memory (Biuml

246-51),

and

the

passage

of time.

While

someone is

speaking

the

leader's

power,

it

lives

as

an

oral

thought.

Outside

of

such

action,

much

political thinking

and

activity

rely

on

the

memory

of the

individual,

which often

clashes with the memories

of others.

During

the second

stage

of

kingship,

c.

600-

c. 800

in

England,

the

ruler

gains prominence,

as

compounds

like

peodcyninga

in

Beowulf

(2a)

suggest.6

Bede

and other

historians

show

that,

as

4The (king's?) treasure at Sutton Hoo contains a small harp. Beowulf s presenta-

tion

of Danish

society

is

suspect

as

history

because

the

poet likely composes

the

work

hundreds of

years

after

the

supposed

events

of

the

poem's

story,

but he

is

probably

aware of

oral

traditions

and

written ones

(Brodeur

2-6),

and

he

certainly

seems to

present

the Danes

prior

to

the sermon

scene

as an

oral

society.

The

poet's

perspective

on

oral

society

in

early

Scandinavia,

although

distant,

is

a

viewpoint

nearer to this

society

than

a

modern

one can

ever

be.

5

I

am

thinking

of the Icelandic

althing,

founded in 930

(Ari

1:6-7). I

consider

the

period

from the settlement

of Iceland

(c. 874)

to the arrival of

Christianity

in

that

land

(999)

as

roughly

similar to

the

period

of tribal societies in

Anglo-Saxon

England.

6I realize that I use Beowulf to demonstrate two successive periods and, actually, I

see the

poem

as

depicting

(so

far as a

literary

creation

can)

all

three

stages

of



5/28

COMPARATIVE

LITERATURE

/

292

tribes and chiefdoms grow into kingdoms through military suc-

cess,

the

war-band's

loyalty

to the chief increases his

social influ-

ence. Once

nobility

through

associates

gives way

to

nobility

through genealogy,

the

leader's individual

reputation

can flour-

ish

(Stock

26;

Bede

2.5).

Like

the

Roman

emperor,

a

sovereign

becomes

a

paternal authority

who

possesses

the

distancing

at-

tributes

of

prophetic

knowledge

and

'justice

(Wolff

71).7

Now

the

royal

interpretation

of

events

can

go

against

the

majority's

and

nevertheless

hold

sway,

even

if the

prince's thoughts

are influ-

enced by untrue reports (Egils saga 35). And a king's new distance

would cause some

people

to

perceive

him as

omnipotent.

This

second

stage

of

kingship

corresponds

to the

beginnings

of

literacy.

The

texts that the Christian missionaries

bring

to

England

and Iceland

embody

a new

technology

(plus

a new

technology

for

language),

a new

history

(plus

a

new

history

of

language),

and

a

new

god.

A

book owner

may

partake

in

these

three

new

powers,

which

might,

to

a

person

unfamiliar with

t

hem,

seem

to be

insepa-

rable.

Writing helps

to make a ruler's sacredness into

a

totem

outside of the ruler's person: when the missionaries offer their

precious

artifacts as

gifts

to

kings,

the

value of

these

objects,

like

a

development

in the

psychological

self,

confire

a

l'autre

reel

son

obscure

autorite

(with

this

other

as the

king

[Lacan

2:168]).

This

extension increases

royal

political

control,8

as

for

example

in

Oldfs

saga Tryggvasonar,

where Snorri Sturluson describes the effects of

the

king's

Christian

evangelism

upon

three

unbelieving

spokes-

men

at

a local

assembly.

Olkifr

urges

the

unsympathetic

gathering

to

accept

Christianity

and declares that

anyone

who

speaks

against

him should expect punishment; he thus explicitly connects the

new

religion

to his

political power.

Then,

kingship. Perhaps

the

poet

holds

his

attitudes

toward

oral

tradition due

to,

in

some

measure,

the

poem's

date of

composition-notoriously

difficult to

establish.

For

many

years,

most

experts

on

Beowulf

considered

it

to be one

of

the earlier

surviving

Old

English poems, composed

in or

around

the

early

eighth century

(Chambers

329).

In

the

1970s and

1980s,

as

the so-called

Anglian

and Mercian forms

(Klaeber

lxxxviii-xci)

became

less sure

as indicators

that the

poem

had

gone through

many

manuscript copies,

critics

began

to

suggest

later dates

(up

to

1000)

as well

as

early

ones

(Chase).

R.

D.

Fulk

finds

convincing linguistic

evidence

for

c.

685-825

as the

most

likely period

of

composition

(381-90),

which allows

me to

place Beowulfs

composition

within

the

period

of

increasing royal

power.

SI

discuss the

king

as a

type

of the

paternal

figure

because

of the

strong

associa-

tion

between

royalty

and

fatherhood

that occurs

everywhere

in

the historical

record.

My understanding

of this father

figure

owes

much

to

Jacques

Lacan.

8

The first

manuscripts

from Christian missionaries contribute to

this

political

change,

but

runic

inscriptions

also

play

a role

in

the

king's

increasing

influence.

Runes and their

origins

are not

fully

accounted

for,

but texts

in this

ancient

alpha-

bet

appear

to have

had a

psychological

force,

and runes seem to have been able

to

transfer

meaning

over

great

distances

(Grettis

saga

249-51).

We

know little about

runes, but some participation of them in the political life of the community is cer-

tain:

they express

value,

possession,

and

memorial

in

many

cases

(Page).



6/28

LITERACY & ROYAL

POWER

/

293

en er konungr lauk mali sfnu, dist6o upp

si

af b6ndum, er einna var snjallastr

ok

fyrst

var

til

1ess

tekinn,

at svara

skyldi

6Olfi

konungi.

En

er hann vildi til

mils

taka,

pi

setr

at honum

h6sta

ok

prongva

sva

mikinn,

at

hann fekk

engu

oroi

upp

komit,

ok

sezk

hann

nior.

Di

stendr

upp

annarr

b6ndi,

ok

vill

si

eigi

fallask

lita

andsvgrin, 16tt

inum

fyrra

hefoi

eigi

vel til tekizk. En

er

si

hefr

upp

mil

sitt,

Pi

var

hann

svi

stamr,

at

hann fekk

engu

oroi

upp

komit. T6ku

Pi

allir at

hlaja,

er

d

heyrou.

Settisk

Pi

b6ndi nior. Di

st6o

upp

inn

prioi

ok

vill

tala

f

m6ti

61ifi

konungi.

En

er

si

t6k til

mils,

var

hann

svi

hiss

ok

rimr,

at

engi

maor

heyroi

pat,

er

hann

talaoi,

ok

settisk

hann nior. Di

varo

engi

til

af

b6ndum

at

maela

i

m6ti

konungi.

En er

boendr

fengu engi

til

andsvara

vio

konung,

Pi

varo

engi uppreist

1eira

til m6tstqiu vio

konung.

(Snorri 1:305)

(when

the

king

had

finished

his

speech,

one of the farm owners

stood

up,

who

was the

most

well-spoken,

and

who

had

been settled

upon

as the

first

who would

give

answer to

King

61ifr.

But

when

he wanted

to

begin

his

speech,

a

cough

seized

him,

and

so

great

a shortness of breath that he could

not

make

a word

come

out,

and he

sat down. Then

another farmer

stood

up,

who wished that there

be

no

failure to

answer,

although

the

previous [speaker]

had

not

fared

well. But when he

took

up

his

speech,

he

became

such a stammerer that he could

not

make a

word

come out. All those who heard

this

began

to

laugh,

and

the

farmer

sat

down.

Then

the third stood

up

to

make

a

speech

against

King

6lifr's,

but

when

he

began

to

speak,

he

became

so

hoarse and

husky

that

nobody

heard

what

he

said,

and he sat

down. Now there was nobody among the farmers to speak in response to the king,

and

since no

farmer

would

offer

an

answer

to

him,

there was

no

rising

of

their

rebellion

against

the

king.)

O1ifr

has a

magic

power

that cancels

the

oral

abilities of

his

en-

emies

almost

as

if

he

were

physically

attacking

their

speech

organs.

The Christian

message,

which the

king

here

delivers

orally

al-

though

it

comes

from

written

texts,

apparently

gives

him

this

(now

royal) power.9

The

arrival

of

literacy

and

the

ensuing

transition

between

orality

and

literacy

are thus

catalysts

in

the

development

of

second-stage kingship.

I

call this

kind of transitional

period

ob-

ject literacy,

which

occurs

(c.

600-

c. 800

in

England,

c.

1000- c.

1300

in

Iceland)

just

after

the introduction

of

the

technology

of

writing

to

a

society

and

while

this

technology grows

in

significance

for

the

society. ' Object literacy

is an

understanding

that

inscrip-

tion on an

object

embodies

information

that

otherwise

exists

only

within

memory

and

may

be

conveyed only through

speech.

The

9

One

might

note that

Hrothgar's

sermon,

which

he

delivers

from

a

distin-

guished royal

position

similar

to

Olifr's,

contains

some of the most homiletic ma-

terial to

appear

in

Beowulf

For other

examples

of oral

aggression,

see

Waugh

( Word 359-86).

10

M. T.

Clanchy

writes

about

documents

existing primarily

as

symbolic objects

rather

than understandable

texts,

but he

places

the

period

of transition

between

orality

and

literacy

late

in

English history

(203-8;

Wormald

134).

I

call the earlier

part

of

this transition

period

object

literacy

because

the

word

symbolic brings

up

associations

that are too variable and individual.

Of

course,

primary

contact

with

a

new written

language may

not

make

the

majority

of the

population

literate,

and

certainly

not

immediately.

And

I

do not mean to

turn the shift from

orality

to

literacy

into a

kind of

Rousseauist

myth

concerning

the

origins

of some

kind of

social

construct

(Derrida

144-178).

For

instance,

I

doubt

that

a

period

of

pure

oral-

ity has ever existed; very few cultures offer no evidence of any graphic representa-

tion.



7/28


/

294

object-literate person knows that an inscription may involve more

than

the

object

itself,

and that

the

inscription may

or

may

not

merely

name

or

represent

the

object upon

which

the text occurs

(Clanchy

203-8).

This

person

understands the

inscription's power

to

communicate

and that

this

power

relates to the

social cohesion

of the

community.

Records

of

object

literacy

are the artifacts that

have

only

the runic

alphabet,

the

futhorc,

written

upon

them.

Since

the

alphabet

itself is

unlikely

to be

the name of

the

object,

the

object's

meaning

is

perhaps

its

ability

to

embody

a mode of

ex-

pression (Wilson, plate 4a).

The

Beowulf-poet

seems

to

present

a movement from

orality

to

object

literacy

during

the

transfer

from

Beowulf's hands

to

Hrothgar's

of the

giants'

sword hilt

(1651-99),

which Beowulf

brings

from the mere as a relic of the

fight

with Grendel's mother.

Before this

scene,

the

poem

seems to

depict

the main

characters

as

only

verging upon

literate

knowledge.

For

instance,

Michael

R.

Near

notes the

near

complete

absence

of the

acts

of

writing

or

reading

in the

poem

(323),

and the

poet

emphasizes

how

Hrothgar expresses power through the spoken word (Beowulf 78b-

9).

In

the hilt

scene,

however,

most

of

the

major

characters make

contact

(apparently)

with more than one written

language

(1677-

98a).

This encounter

imitates

the

points

of

contact between rulers

and new

written

languages

in

such records as Bede's

History

(1.25,

29,

33),

though

such an

episode

in

Beowulf

is not of course a his-

torical event.

The

law codes

of the

tribal

kings

(c.

500- c.

700)

provide

more

solid evidence of

object literacy

than

Beowulf

can

and show

how

this new instrument increases a ruler's power. I prefer to call these

law

codes

examples

of

new

object

literacy

because

they embody,

for these transitional

societies,

a

new

inscribed

language

rather

than

the

introduction of

inscribed

language

itself.

Under

Roman

influence,

the

king

saw

proclamations

of law

as

extremely

powerful

political

acts that allowed

him to underline his social influence

through

the

use

of a new

technology

for

expressing

that influence:

Latin

script,

and,

on the

continent,

Latin

language.

The

proof

that

this introduction of new

script

produced

a different understand-

ing

from content

literacy

(understanding

of the texts themselves)

becomes clear from

an

examination of

the

early

tribal law codes:

Much barbarian

legislation

...

gives

the

impression

that its

purpose

was

simply

to

get

something

into

writing

that looked

like

a

written

law

code,

more or

less

regardless

of

its actual value

to

judges sitting

in

court.

The

pronouncement

and enforcement of

law remained

essentially

an oral

process

(Wormald

115).

Thus,

continental laws

appear

in

Latin,

a

language

that the

population

probably

could not

understand,

and some written laws

are non-

Perhaps

these kinds of

objects

were

aids

for

teaching.



8/28

LITERACY & ROYAL

POWER

/

295

sense or contradictory (135; Drew 53). Their content does not

matter.

The

fact

of

their

existence as

objects

does

(Wallace-

Hadrill

37).

The

population perceived

these

objects

as

deeds

of

the

king,

and

a code such

as

fEthelberht's

must

first and foremost

have struck

[its]

readers as

a form of

kingly

literature

(37;

Bede

2.5)

with

political

and

ideological

purposes

more

important

than

any legal

purposes

(Wormald

135,

131).

A

new

technology

expresses

the

ambition

of the

prince

and furthers his

fame.

For

example,

after

the first

Frankish

laws,

the

manuscripts

of

later law

codes for the Franks normally contain much royal information:

king-lists,

royal

genealogies,

even,

in one

case,

pictures

of

kings

(Wormald

130,

134-6).

The

codes record

'just

that fraction

of

cus-

tom that seemed

enough

to

satisfy royal

pride

in

legislation

(Wallace-Hadrill

37;

Wormald

129),

a

pride

that

appears

in

acts

that imitate those

of

Roman

emperors

in order to

gain

quasi-impe-

rial

status.12

Inscribed

objects,

such as

manuscripts

of

law

codes,

act as

repositories

of

royal

power,

continue after death as

political

events and

inheritances,

negate

the

need to

bring

much of the so-

ciety together to restate the political situation, and are less per-

sonal,

less recalcitrant

objects

than the memories of

poets, lawyers,

and

other

subjects.

A

written

work

may

preside

over

disputes

in-

stead

of an individual's

memory

of the oral

record;

neither

popu-

lace

nor

even monarch

need

to

be

present.

Dominion

may

now

reach

beyond memory

(Isidore

1.3.1;

IEthelred,

Charter

530;

Clanchy

203-5).

The

new

technology

of

writing,

according

to

Wormald,

allowed

the

king

to obtain a

power

over law that

previ-

ously

had

belonged

to other

figures

(Wormald

138).

With this increase in royal power, changes in the king's percep-

tion of his

role mean

changes

also for the

poet.

The

early

chieftain's established

poets,

who

normally

produced

his

panegy-

rics,

were

tied to

him

(Wolff

71),

but these

bards were not tied

to

any particular

subject

matter,

because oral verse

had

a

variety

of

ceremonial and

spiritual

functions,

and served

community

needs

(Beowulf

867b-97),

not

just royal

ones.

As

the

king's

power

in-

creases

in

the second

stage,

he

increasingly

dominates

poetry's

content with his

patronage.

In

Germanic

works

from around the

sixth century, NicolasJacobs finds that a shift in emphasis occurs

from

straightforward panegyric

to

pseudo-historical

epic

(20;

15);

from

subject-matter

common to

most of

the

northern

Ger-

manic

tribes

to

exploits

of

royal

ancestors and

national

heroes.

A

12

Wormald

also notes that

kings

reissue law codes

when the content

of the code

requires

no substantive

revision,

that

kings

reproduce

earlier

law

codes

along

with their own even

when some laws

supersede

old

ones,

and that

all

this

legisla-

tion seems to occur

at

politically

sensitive

moments

(133).

For

example,

King

Edgar's

law code

appears

while

plague

rages

in

the

land

(Robertson

29).

What

is

new is that the king, by causing [laws] to be written, makes them his own (Wallace-

Hadrill

44).



9/28

COMPARATIVE

LITERATURE

/

296

similar development takes place c. 1000- c. 1300 in the Scandina-

vian

countries,

where chronicles

of

the lives

of

princes

and of local

saints become more

prominent

than in

the

past. Correspondingly,

eulogistic

skaldic

poetry, strong

in

the tenth and

eleventh centu-

ries,

weakens

in

the twelfth

(Opland, Anglo-Saxon

165).

When

books

commissioned

by

princes

can

represent

truth,

a

skald's

truth-telling

becomes

eclipsed.

In all

likelihood,

he

must

produce

more

praise

of

the

king's

ancestors and

warrior-exploits

than

previously; yet, during

a

period

of

second-stage kingship

and new

object literacy, any oral poet continues to represent a body of

tradition,

sets

a

royal

pattern

from

his

memory,

and makes

judgements

and

interpretations

in

the

process.

And,

as the

royal

position

shifts,

the

king

must react to all of

these,

or somehow

change

the tradition.

The clearest dramatization of the

shifting

of

roles

that

both

ruler and

poet

undergo during early

second-stage kingship

takes

place during

a

king-poet

meeting

in

Egils

saga

Skalla-Grimssonar,

where the

relationship

between

fame,

poetry,

and

biography

shows

itself as quite complex.' In the events leading up to the perfor-

mance of

Egill's head-saving

poem,

the

hero,

a

poet

of

great

repu-

tation who has

composed

verses

on

many subjects

and in

many

situations,

insults

King

Eirikr and

Queen

Gunnhildr

(171),

then

falls into their hands.

They

plan

to execute

him.

His

scandalous

opinions

demand

revenge.

However,

Arinbjgrn,

a friend of

Egill

and

a

courtier

of

the

king, suggests

that

Eirikr

spare

the

skald:

ef

Egill hefir

mclt

illa til

konungs,

pd

ma hann

pat

bwta

i

lofsordum

peim,

er

allan aldr

megi

uppi

vera

(180-1)

( if

Egill

has said bad

things

about the king, he can repay those with such praise that it will be

recalled

forever

after ).

One

might

think that the hero

would

lose

his

reputation

by

having

to

adjust

his

art

to

this

unexpected

task,

and lose

his honor

over not

having any

choice

concerning

the

con-

tent

of his

work,

but

these

strictures

only

add to his

challenge.

For

Eirikr the

poem promises

fame,

because stanzas

by

a

great poet

like

Egill

will

travel

far

and wide.

While

he

speaks, Egill

demands

attention,

ends

any

debate,

and

wins

his life for the duration

of

the

poem

(185).

No

one

can

easily

demand

verbally

a

person's

death

during

the course of a work that

the

king

has

agreed

to hear. Time

belongs

to the

skald. He men-

tions Eirikr's fame and

praises

him

as

a

great

warrior

(185-92).

But

the

irony

is that the

head-saving

poem (despite

its

content)

gives

Egill

more

glory

than the

prince.

The skill of this

poet

inspite

of

the situation

outweighs

the

king's reputation,

which

pales

in

sig-

nificance;

the

composition

even

hints at this subversive

agenda

'3

I

also list

Egill's experience

with

Eirikr

at

length

because

it

might give

some

indication of what Beowulf's and Hrothgar's dealings would be like were Unferth

not

present

in

Beowulf



10/28

LITERACY & ROYAL

POWER

/

297

with its references to the art of verse-making, and with its requests

for

silence

(185-92). 4

The

performance

changes

history

despite

the ruler's

wishes that

the

poem

not stand as

a

settlement for

any-

one

wishing

to

exact

revenge

for

Egill's past

actions

(193),

because

the skald's

words,

not

Eirikr's

fame,

will

earn

immortality.

The

poet

reverses his

traditional court role into one

entirely

in

his own

favor. His

function

changes

from

providing praise

to

creating

art-

for art's

(or head's)

sake. His

power

is realized

in

his

act

of

compo-

sition.

But such triumphs over kings are rare in the sagas and in other

records.

Instead,

the

increasing power

of

monarchs means

that

they

often

express

more

power

over

poets

than

previously.

Even

in

Egils saga,

rulers

occasionally

criticize the skalds'

versions

of

royal

actions

(180-1).

Saga

narrators

sometimes seem to

conspire

with

kings against poets:

Snorri

(c. 1210)

says

that stories told at

court

are

likely

to be more

truthful than

others

(1:5).

According

to

the

narrator of

Orkneyinga saga, poets

in an

earl's retinue are

further

down the social scale than

the earl and the

captains

of

the earl's

ships (204). Sovereigns also direct their social authority and intel-

lectual

influence

specifically

at

poetry

and

poets.

In

Gunnlaugs

saga

Ormstungu

(c. 1260-1300),

the title character

asks

King

Olifr

to call for

silence and hear his

poem.

Instead the

king

momen-

tarily

silences

Gunnlaugr

79).

Likewise,

according

to the

skald,

certain

actions of

King

Abalrair

stop

the

poet's

flow of

verse

(91-2,

verse

16).

O1ifr

kyrra

silences his

poets

by

not

engaging

in

battle

(Snorri

3:206,

208),

thereby starving

them of

their

customary

sub-

ject

matter,

and Earl

Paill

in

Orkneyinga saga

(c. 1200)

has

enough

power to prevent the spreading of stories about St. Magn-is (122).

In

Beowulf just

after

contemplating

the

inscribed

object

that indi-

cates the

coming

of

object literacy

to his

society, Hrothgar,

with a

lengthy speech,

silences the

crowd

in

the

hall

(1699b),

including

the matchless

hero, Beowulf,

who does not

reply

to the

sermon's

warning

(Hill

100).

From

this

point

in

the

poem,

the court

poet

is

conspicuous

by

his absence

(Beowulf2458b,

3023b),

and

Unferth,

the

king's

official

spokesman,

speaks

no

more

(Klaeber

149).

Fur-

ther,

there

are

slight

hints

in

the

poem

that

Hrothgar

does

not

allow

complete

freedom to

scops

in the Danish realm.

Jeff

Opland

notices that

harpers

are

confined

to

Heorot under the

king's

eye,

while the

performances

in

the

hall

differ

from

th

[o]se [out-

side]

in

that

they

refer to the individual

experience

of one mem-

ber of the

community

or to events that neither

performer

nor

au-

dience

witnessed;

outside the hall

every performance

refers

to

an

event

that

both

performer

and audience shared in

( Beowulf'

14

True,

Egill

revises the oral

tradition

by producing

a

poem

in

praise

of

King

Eirikr's deeds, but the hero, once safe in Aialsteinn's court, can return to his pre-

vious low

opinion

of

Eirikr

(194).



11/28

COMPARATIVE

LITERATURE

/

298

461). Spontaneous poetry, including praise of Beowulf, occurs out-

side of

Hrothgar's

court. The

apparent

lack of

muttering against

the Danish

king,

despite

the

ravages

of

Grendel,

may

indicate

that

his control over

scops

is

generally

successful.

In

fact,

Hrothgar

seems to have

very

little interaction with

scops-a major

difference between

him

and

the

kings

in the

sagas,

which often record a

dialogue

between

king

and

poet

over

the

king's

reputation.

This

ongoing

argument,

which occurs

among

friends and allies

as

often as

it

occurs

between

enemies,

is an essen-

tial motif of Old Norse literature: many pcettir describe the meet-

ing, falling

out,

and

reconciliation

of an Icelandic skald and

a

ruler

(Harris

1-27).

On

the

other

hand,

much of the

conversation

in

Beowulf

occurs between

Hrothgar

and

Beowulf,

and these talks

seem to

be,

for the most

part,

amicable.

Nevertheless,

the

Hrothgar-Beowulf relationship

recalls

in

important

ways

the rela-

tions between

court

poets

and Icelandic

rulers.

Of

course,

Hrothgar's

attitude towards Beowulf seems to be

nothing

like the

opinions

of

the Scandinavian rulers

concerning

skalds. The Geatish hero is not a court poet, and his personality

differs

from

that

of

the

usually

sullen Icelandic

poets, particularly

Egill

in

Egils

saga.

However,

both

Egill

and

Beowulf contact

kings.

Both

share a

desire

for

fame.

Both mix

warfare with

verbal

prow-

ess.

Beowulf,

like

Egill,

travels abroad

and

gives

accounts of his

deeds to several courts.

Also,

one cannot be

sure that

Beowulf is

not

a

court

poet.'5

In the

poem,

an

anonymous

thane

improvises

a

song

(867b-74a),

and

there is no

reason

to

suppose

that Beowulf

could not do

the

same.

In

fact,

Beowulf's skills

command much the

same respect when he arrives at Hrothgar's court as do the poets'

in

several

sagas.16

Special pleading

aside,

the main link between

the

hero-king relationship

in

Beowulf

and the

poet-king

relation-

ship

in

the

sagas

is

the

competitiveness

of these

dealings.'7

Beowulf

has

enough

assessments

of

kings-good,

bad,

and

indifferent-to

suggest

that

it contains the same kind of

dialogue

concerning

the

king's reputation

found

in

the

Old

Norse

narratives

(Beowulf4-52,

15

He cannot be

a

poet

like

Egill,

because

Egill

happened

to

live

during

a

unique

period when metres for complex short oral poems developed. Within the confines

of his

era,

Beowulf's

eloquence

is

perhapsjust

as

admirable

as

Egill's.

16

The earlier

epic

also does not

carry

the

anti-royalist

bias of the thirteenth-

century saga,

and this fact must

distinguish

Egill

from

Beowulf.

In

his

second visit

to

Abalsteinn,

Egill

tells the

king

not

to

remain silent

(198)

and

almost

usurps

the

royal

voice. The hero

surpasses princes

again

when

he

composes

a

superb praise

poem

in honor of

his

friend

Arinbj9rn

(258-67)

who

is a

courtier,

not a ruler. De-

spite Egill's public

achievement,

he

comes

from a

farming family

and returns to

the farm

at

the

end

of

his life.

His

story implies

that one need not

compete

for the

kind

of influence that a

king

or

an

earl

has,

because

Egill's

verbal

ability

continues

throughout

his

life,

while the value

of

regal power

remains

ambiguous

in

this

saga.

17

A few critics suggest a competition between Hrothgar and Beowulf (Jackson

31;

Shippey

121,

124).



12/28

LITERACY & ROYAL

POWER

/

299

901-15, 1709b-24a, 1931b-62), although this epic does not concen-

trate these

opinions

into

the

expression

of

any

one

poet

and

shields

Hrothgar

from

any

direct criticism.

Without

this

protec-

tion,

the

Danish

king's

encounter with Beowulf

would be

similar

to the

king-hero

exchanges

in

the

sagas.

For

example,

at a

Scandi-

navian court

in

Gunnlaugs saga,

the

ruling

earl

receives

a

caustic

suggestion

from

Gunnlaugr

the

poet

that the earl

try

to

avoid the

same kind of death as his father's. The earl setti

svd

raudan sem

bldo,

ok

ba6 taka

f6

l

etta

skj6tt

(69-70) ( blushed

as red as

blood,

and

ordered that this thoughtless man [Gunnlaugr] be seized at

once ).

Only

the intervention of

a

retainer saves the life of the

skald

(70).

Gunnlaugr

seems to

have

a

love-hate

relationship

with

rulers.

He

even criticizes a

king

who does

him

nothing

but honor

(92;

cf.

71).

In

Beowulf

Hrothgar

does not have to deal with

any

man as

hostile

as

Gunnlaugr,

but Unferth does:

...

Ou

pinum

broirum

to

banan

wurde,

heafodmaxgum;

Paes

Pu

in

helle scealt

werhio

dreogan,

peah

pin

wit

duge.

(587-9;Jackson 12)

( .

..

you

became

the killer of

your

brothers,

your

close

relatives;

for this

you

must suffer damnation

in

hell,

though

your intelligence

is

strong. )

Beowulf's harsh words

to

the

pyle

restate the

challenge

that an

out-

sider

automatically

brings

to

any

court he

visits,

while the Danish

ruler

can

have

amicable relations with this

visitor

to his court

because his

spokesman,

not he

himself,

offers and

receives

the

challenges

and

possible

humiliations that

reputation

demands

(980-4a).

When

Beowulf

contacts

the Danish

court, then,

he contacts the

pride

of its monarch as

surely

as

Egill

contacts

Eirfkr's.

Like

a

trav-

eller from

Iceland,

Beowulf is

an intruder at the Danish court

(Jackson

27).

There

is

no overt

competition,

however,

between

Hrothgar

and Beowulf. The hero's

challenge

to

the Grendel

fam-

ily

is

one of the few occasions where

one

may

strive,

without

pre-

sumption,

to be

a

better

warrior than the

king:

Hrothgar

cannot

defeat

Grendel,

removes

himself from the

heroic arena

by

his in-

activity,

and

grants

the control of Heorot

to the

young

hero

(658).

Nor

does

Beowulf come to Heorot to vie with its

creator,

or to steal

from the Danes the unusual heroic

opportunity

of

fighting

a mon-

ster;

he

responds

to

a

need

for

help

(199b-201)

with

apparently

selfless

motives,

and his constant deference

to

Hrothgar

rein-

forces the idea that

Geatish

success will not be

a

blot on the Dan-

ish record.

Yet

these

sympathies

do not short-circuit

the ambition for re-

nown. A hero who must choose between emotional ties

and honor

is a commonplace of heroic tales. Also, the essential competitive-

ness

of

early

medieval

society

extends

to

almost

every

individual



13/28

COMPARATIVE ITERATURE

300

and every situation, even if that situation is fictional. Since

Beowulf's

deeds must relate

to the

Danes'

honor,

his

entry

into

the

Danish

hall

provokes

challenge,

and he

responds

in kind.

And,

al-

though

the

hero chastises

Unferth,

not

the

king,

Unferth sits

so

close

to

his

lord that one

might

consider

the

pyle

almost

an

aspect

of

Hrothgar's personality

(1165b-6a),

an

external

representation

of the

king's

renown,

perhaps

in

a

professional

capacity

at

the

king's

behest.

At the

mere,

for

instance,

Unferth

makes

sure

that

Beowulf carries

a

complex piece

of Danish

history

into

the

fight

with Grendel's mother by bestowing on him a gift that echoes

Hrothgar's

previous

gift

giving.

This action

ensures

a

Danish

pres-

ence

in

the

fight

(the

poet

personifies

the sword

by

giving

it

a

lineage

[1455-64]),

and

Hrunting

represents

(among

other

things)

Beowulf's

agreement

with the

Danes to kill

Grendel's

mother.

Beowulf

promises

to use this

sword

in the encounter

(1490b-1)

and

hence

goes

into

his second

great

fight

with

the bur-

den of the Danish

reputation

as well

as

of his

own,

with

a material

reminder

of Unferth's

magnanimity

and

of his

challenge.

II

I

feel at

liberty

to treat

Hrunting symbolically

because the

poem

continually

invests

swords,

gifts,

and

treasures

with

extramaterial

significance,

as do the

societies

on

view

in

Beowulf

Critics have

of-

ten

noted

the

significance

of material culture

in

the

poem,

but for

the most

part

have

not

connected

this

cult

of

the

object

with

kingly

power

or with the

growth

of

literacy

(Bjork

1002-3,

1005;

Shippey

109-26;

Raw

167-74),

even

though

such connections

help

to

clarify

the

dealings

between

Hrothgar

and Beowulf

in

the

hilt

scene. Bede's

History

provides

historical evidence for the associa-

tion

of

power

with

objects,

particularly

for the association

of the

king

with

objects during early

second-stage

kingship: Gregory's

in-

structions

to

replace

the idols

in

heathen

temples

with

altars and

relics

(1.30);

Edwin's

banner

and

royal

drinking

bowls

(2.16;

Saxo

5.169-171;

Chaney

121-55); 1

Hilda's necklace

(4.23).

Similarly,

in

Beowulf

the

gifstol

seems to harbor

an

unnamed

power:

Grendel

may

not

approach

it

(168-9).

The

cult of

the

object

foretells

object

literacy

and

likely

begins

with

expanded

military

success

and

the

growth

of

farming.

Rulers then have

the

power

to

give

land,

which

marks

space

around

any recipient

(Stenton

234-5;

Clanchy

203;

Beowulf

5b,

78,

1087,

2196).

In

turn,

the

recipients

realize the

power

of

possession

and of

working

the land for

economic

gain.

Due to

the

nature of this kind

of

exchange,

the

poet during

sec-

ond-stage kingship

becomes more

dependent

upon

the

king's

good

will than

previously,

for

sometimes

princes

give

land to

scops

18

The

perception

of

writings

as

being

similar

to

objects

is

clear

when an

Anglo-

Saxon will notes that one copy of the will should be stored with the king's collec-

tion of

relics

(Whitelock

464-7).



14/28

LITERACY & ROYAL

POWER

/

301

and sometimes they take it away (Widsith 95b-6a; Deor 35-41).19 Re-

ward becomes the

explicit

motivation for

poetry.

For

example,

the

fierce and

independent Egill,

who

has little use for

rulers,

never-

theless acts like a court

poet

on occasion. After

fighting

a

battle for

AOalsteinn

in

which

Egill's

brother

dies,

the hero sits in the

king's

court

with

his

sword

across his

knees,

constantly drawing

the

weapon

out of its

scabbard

part

of the

way

(Egils saga

143).

At last

he

emerges

from

his

black mood

of

silence and

threatening ges-

tures

in

order to

accept

a

gift

and so to succumb

eventually

to the

court convention of material reliance on the king (144). Since any

society

invests

gifts

with

histories,

rules,

and

procedures

(as

with

the

sword

examples

in

Beowulf

1807-12, 2190-4,

2610b-25a),

the

taking

of a

reward

from a

community's

representative

grafts

a

poet

onto that

community's

traditions.

In

Gunnlaugs

saga, King

Sigtryggr

hears his

first

court

praise

from

Gunnlaugr

and asks his

court treasurer what kind of reward

it

would

be,

...

ef ek

gef

honum

knQrru

va?

F6hiroirinn

svarar:

Of

mikit

er

pat,

herra,

segir

hann;

aorir

konungar

gefa

at

bragarlaunum gripi

g68a,

svero

g68

ea

gullhringag6oa. Konungr gaf honum klaeoi in af

nfju

skarlati,kyrtilhlabfibinn

ok

skikkju

meo igaetum

skinnum

ok

gullhring,

er

st658

mrk.

(76)

( .

.. if

I

gave

him two

trading

ships?

The treasurer

responded,

Too

great,

my

lord,

and added:

Other

kings give costly gifts

as rewards or a

praise-poem,

such

as valuable

swords

and rich

gold

rings.

The

king

gave

Gunnlaugr

some new scarlet

cloth from his own

clothing,

an embroidered

waistcoat,

a cloak

with the finest of

fur

linings,

and

a

gold ring

which cost

one

mark.)

In

this

instance,

the monarch

respects

tradition,

but rewards as he

pleases.

The enormous

potential gift

illustrates

Sigtryggr's power.

The fact

that he

neither

pays

the

poet

too

much,

nor

fully accepts

the

suggestion

of his

treasurer,

establishes

Sigtryggr's

will.

Rewarded

poets

become

part

of a

relationship

of

service

and

payment

for

helping royal

reputations.

Egill composes

a

verse

in

praise

of

his new armband and

produces

another

stanza in

praise

of

Abalsteinn

himself.

The

king

further rewards

him

with

gold

and

skikkja

dfr,

er

konungr

sjdlfr haf5i d0r

borit

(Egils saga

147)

( an

ex-

pensive

cloak

that the

king

himself

had

worn

before ).

Princes fre-

quently give

suits of

clothing

(cf.

Gunnlaugs saga

71

and

89),

which

often become issues

in

the

war between

king

and

poet,

because the

wearing

of

certain cloaks and other

garments

has social and

per-

haps

ritual

significance

(Bede

2.10;

Frank,

Old Norse

141;

Asser

180

nl).

This kind of

gift

absorbs

a

poet

and makes

him

into

what

the

sovereign

wants

him

to be: dressed

for

court;

visibly

in the

king's

debt;

obviously

a member of

an

individual

lord's retinue. Like

land,

such

rewards

circumscribe a

potentially damaging poet

or

hero and make

him

into a

possession,

another

inscribed

object

'1

For all Old English poems except Beowulf I use the Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records.

These two

poems

appear

in

ASPR

3,

The Exeter

Book.



15/28

COMPARATIVE

ITERATURE

302

that restates a ruler's power.

Since

Egill's

new suit

of

clothing

is an old set of the

king's

(cf.

Gunnlaugs saga

76,

89-90),

the

absorption

is

personal.

Of

course,

one dilutes

these

individual connections when

one

travels to

an-

other court and

gives

the

objects

to

someone

else,

as in

Gunnlaugs

saga

(90),

so

kings

who

make such

rewards

are

usually

reluctant for

the

recipients

to move on to other domains and to other

subjects

for

poetry

(83).

Hrothgar,

like

these

other

kings, repays

Beowulf

with

personal belongings

(1899),

including

the saddle on which

the Danish king rode to battle (1037b-41a), while Denmark appar-

ently

retains the relics

of Beowulf's individual

victory

over

the

monsters.

As

power

becomes associated with

objects,

especially

inscribed

ones,

the

sense of

sight

becomes more valuable to

kings

and

to

others.

The

composer

of

Beowulf frequently

uses the

verb

sceawian

( to

look

at )

to indicate the

Danes',

and

particularly Hrothgar's,

growing knowledge

of the monsters

(132b,

840b, 843b, 983b,

1391b, 1413b,

1440b,

1687b).

Part of Grendel's terror comes

from

the baleful light in his eyes (726b-7). The poet uses the word eage

( eye )

on

only

three occasions besides

line

726b,

each

a

descrip-

tion of

royal power:

the

eyes

that

may

not

light upon

Modthrith

unless

they

belong

to a masterful husband

(1935b),

Hrothgar's

gratitude

for the

sight

of Grendel's severed head

(1781b),

and this

king's description

of the onset of death.

Revealingly,

he

interprets

life's end

as

brightness fading

from the

eyes

(1766b-7a).

During

the

expansion

of

literacy,

blinding

becomes

the

preferred

method

of

making

a

king

or earl

unfit

to

rule

(Orkneyinga saga

142,

170,

173; Snorri 3:86-7,

287-8).20

According to the Anglo-SaxonChronicle,

Earl

Godwine blinds

King

IEthelred's

son

Alfred

in

1036

(C),

most

likely

to

destroy

Alfred's

candidacy

for the throne.

The

cetheling

seems

to

be

good only

for the

monastery

after this mutilation

(1036).

Two

kings

of Tara must also forsake

their

kingdoms

after

they

each

get

blinded

in

one

eye:

an Irish

saga

tells

of the

wound-

ing

of

Cormac mac

Airt;

a

law

tract

reports

that a bee

stings Congal

Caiech

(Byrne

55,

113).21

Ethelbert's

and

King

Alfred's

laws

de-

mand a

very large payment

in

compensation

for an

eye

that

is

of

20

The

Anglo-Saxon

Chronicle

entry

for 993

(E)

notes that

King

AEthelred

has

AElfgar

blinded

(I

use the

edition of

Plummer

and Earle and refer

to the Chronicle

by

date of

entry,

then

manuscript

designation,

if

necessary.)

The

text does not

say

why,

although iElfgar's

father,

Ealdorman

iElfric,

betrayed

the

English army

to

the

Danes and switched

allegiance

(992).

The same

king

(apparently)

has two other

nobly

born

men blinded

in

1006

(E).

I contrast this focus

upon

the

royal

gaze

with

an earlier

focus

upon

other

aspects

of

the

king's

person,

for instance the hair

of

the

Merovingians

(Gregory

2.9,

41;

3.18).

The

killing

of

earlier,

sacral

kings

seems

to have

sometimes

involved

hanging,

which would affect

powers

of

speech

more

than

powers

of

sight

(Adam 4.27.259).

21

The saga states that a ruler of Tara should be a perfect physical specimen

(Byrne

55).



16/28

LITERACY

& ROYAL POWER

/

303

weord ( knocked out ) (/Ethelbert 43),22 but only the later set of laws

demands

compensation

specifically

for

the

blinding

of an

eye,

while

the

earlier one demands

compensation

gifsprcec

awyrd

weorp

( if

the

power

of

speech

is

harmed )

(AEthelberht

52;

cf.

Alfred

47-52,

71).

(Both

codes

refer

only

to

single

eyes

and do

not mention

ex-

tra

compensation

for

total

blindness.)

The

eyes

are associated

with

literacy

and

Christianity.

A

bishop

has his

tongue

cut

out

and his

eyes

slit

with

a knife

in

Orkneyinga saga

(294),

but the cleric miracu-

lously

recovers both faculties

(295),

as does

Pope

Leo

III,

accord-

ing to Anglo-Saxon Chronicle 797 (A). There are no blindings re-

corded

in the Chronicle before this

date,

except

for

an

interpolated

reference to

the

supposed blinding

of Eadberht

Praen

in

796

(F).23

A

king

or

a

priest

needs his

sight

to

establish

the

rule

of

the

book.

He must

demonstrate

direct

knowledge

of

literacy.

If the

oral

poet supports

the

community

with

his

voice,

the

king

does so

by

the

royal gaze

(Miller

151),

like the

gaze Hrothgar applies

to

the

giants'

sword

hilt

before

he

speaks

(1687b).

This

piece

of trea-

sure,

while

it

displays

the

powers,

conventions,

and emotions at

work in the king-retainer relationship, also draws attention to the

powers

of

sight

and

literacy.

Seth Lerer

proposes

that the manu-

script

of

Beowulf actually conveys

two

versions of the

Beowulf

story:

an oral one and

a

written

one

(199).

One

may

perceive

an

apposition

of

these two when

Hrothgar

examines

the text on the

hilt

(Beowulf

1687-99)

because,

significantly,

the

poet

surrounds

the

description

of the hilt

with

announcements

of

Hrothgar's

speech-making

(1687a,

1698b;

Lerer

162,

163)

and

because,

like

an oral-heroic

poem,

the hilt offers a

story

(Lerer

181, 182,

199;

Frantzen 186-8). In order to gain access to this story, one must

carefully decipher

an

inscription

with

one's

eyes,

a

private

task

that

subverts

the

public immediacy

of

oral

poetry.

The

physical

context

of this

inscribed

narrative contrasts

with

oral

set-pieces

such as the

Finnsburg episode,

and the

new

truth

of

written

lan-

guage

now

threatens

to dominate

Beowulf

One

story

on the relic narrates

the defeat of God's enemies

22

For the

Anglo-Saxon

laws,

I use the

edition

of

F.

Liebermann

and refer

to

law

codes

by

their

royal

names.

23

let him

pytan

ut

his

eagan.

7

ceorfan

of

his handa

(Plummer

and Earle

56).

The

word

pytan

is

uncertain

(56).

This

blinding

would be an

interesting

case

because

other sources indicate

that Eadberht was removed

from his

throne when he

tried

to take on the roles

of

king

and Christian

priest

at the same time

(Levison

18).

The

fact

that this instance

appears

in

the

only manuscript

of the

Anglo-Saxon

Chronicle

that

is in both Latin and

Old

English

also

suggests

the

influence

of

literacy.

How-

ever,

I

suspect

that this

blinding

is

the

intrusion of

events

from Leo's

legend

into

a

nearby

entry.

One

may

note that the literate

missionary

Augustine, bringer

of

Christian

writings (among

other

things),

heals

the blindness of an

Englishman,

according

to Bede

(2.2),

and

David

Megginson

tells

me that some Old

English

manuscript manumissions put a curse of blindness upon the person who dishonors

the document's

agreement.



17/28


/

304

(1688b-93) and another identifies the former owners of the giant

sword

(1695-7).

Lerer

notes

that

both

of these texts

relate stories

of control and

power

(162).

AllenJ.

Frantzen

proposes

that

the

letters themselves have an association

with

power.

He

connects

verbs

of

inscribing

with

those

of

cutting

with

a

sword,

so

that the

hilt

'juxtapose

[s]

the

sword

as a

text,

.

.

.

with

the

sword

as a

weapon

(187; 184-7).

According

to

Lerer, then,

the entire hilt

and

sermon

passage

is about

power

in

language

(163-8;

cf. Near

324).

The

phrase

rihte

gemearcod,

/

geseted

ond

gested ( rightly

in-

scribed, set down, and said ) (Beowulf 1695b-6a) draws attention to

the

rune

writer's

control over

words.

But the

most obvious focus

of

attention is

upon

the man

who holds the

hilt. The

possession

of

a

written

text,

Lerer

suggests,

separates Hrothgar

from the other

characters

(181).

And,

by concentrating

on this

object,

the

poetry

digresses

from

the

subject-matter

of

Beowulf's deeds

and

allows

the

king

to

appropriate

history

for

himself.

This

appropriation begins

with

Hrothgar's

ownership

of

(and

therefore

physical

control

over)

a

piece

of

history

(the hilt).

Beowulf, careful to continue the social cycle of gift giving, passes

this old heirloom

into

Hrothgar's

control

(1684a-8a).

The

poet

emphasizes

this

change

of owners

in

order

to stress

the idea

that

the

king

will now administer

the

poetic

and social situation.

Both

the

content and

the

method of

transmission of the hilt's

story

reinforce

Hrothgar's

dominant

social

position.

He

may

now

un-

dertake the

private,

exclusive,

and

therefore

powerful

act

of

exam-

ining

the words

on his new

possession. Appropriately,

the

story

about

the

giants

describes an evil

society

far

different

from

Hrothgar's kingdom, where social order depends on the goodness

of the monarch.

24

Symbolically,

the hilt

may

also

represent good

and

evil..,

sud-

den

and extreme

shift of

power

(Irving

147),

God's

justice

(Brodeur 212),

a

trajectory

for the

[future]

sword

signs

in the

poem (Overing

577),

a silent vehicle for a

history

of

suffering,

estrangement,

and

violent

separation

(Near 324),

and the

past

(Hanning

3).

Further,

the hilt

provides physical proof

of the

events under

the

mere,

and

its

fragmentary

state recalls the

body

of Grendel (Lerer 179). For the

poem's

audience, this treasure

possibly

also

represents

a number

of heroic virtues from the oral

tradition

that are now

largely

unknown

(Hanning

5).

Since

the hilt

encodes

all of these values and

is a

Literacy, Royal Power, And King-Poet Relations

Documents

royal power

university of oregonliteracy

jstor terms

jstor archive

terms conditions of

university of oregonstable

amall use subject

duke university presson