On mythical smiths and plundered gear (ll.399-406) [Old English]

Abstract
Translation
Recordings
Vague words and allusions
Plundered gear
Closing


Back To Top
Abstract

Wulfgar having given him the okay, Beowulf strides in to Hrothgar with his thanes in tow.

Back To Top
Translation

"Arose then the hero, from amidst his many thanes,
various valiant warriors, some remained there,
to watch the war-gear, as they were strictly ordered.
They hurried together, their chief going first,
under Heorot's roof; on went the war-fierce,
under hard helmets, until they stood upon the hearth.
Beowulf spoke - on him the byrnie shone,
his corslet crafted with the smith's skill:"
(Beowulf ll.399-406)

Back To Top
Recordings

Old English:

{Forthcoming}

Modern English:

{Forthcoming}

Back To Top
Vague words and allusions

Although the poet/scribe here describes Beowulf's walking "under Heorot's roof" ("under Heorotes hrof" (l.403)) we're no closer to figuring out whether he and his fellow Geats have been waiting outside or in some sort of antechamber. Even the Old English is of no help since it literally means "under Heorot's roof." Either Beowulf has walked in to be under it, or is striding (no doubt manfully) beneath Heorot's golden eaves.

Though really, what sort of hall could be called "great" without some sort of antechamber?

Moving from one vague phrase to another, at the end of this passage we encounter "smiþes."

This word translates easily into "smith," but the question is: is it plural or singular?

A quick look at the University of Virginia's famed Magic Sheet reveals that "smiþes" is in fact singular.

So what?

It's possible that this word is an allusion. In Norse myth there is a famous smith named Wayland who crafted many wondrous things (like the incredible, instantly-travelling "Wade's boat" referenced in Chaucer's "The Merchant's Tale"). Normally it would be ridiculous to pick this reference out of a throwaway use of the word "smiþes." But the end of this passage is special.

After we're told that Beowulf speaks, the poet/scribe decides to go on and describe the armour that Beowulf is wearing.

We're told that Beowulf's byrnie (waist-length maille shirt) shone and that his corslet (breastplate) was made "with the smith's skill" (l.406). All of this talk of armour, however brief, opens up the possibility of "smiþes" being a reference to Wayland. This description being the set up for Beowulf's speech also suggests a reference because reading even the first line of the Geat's gab shows that it is a formal, carefully worded address. It's not every day (even during the lifetime of the poet/scribe) that you use "þu," ("thou") after all.

Now, if "smiþes" is a reference to Wayland, it doesn't necessarily mean that Wayland made Beowulf's armour. Though that would fit in well with why Beowulf (not to mention the poet/scribe) prizes it so highly. It could just be a reference that is idiomatic in that the real live smith who fashioned the Geat's battle gear seemed to have channelled the mythical skill of the smith when making it. It's just that good.

Mythological reference or not, as we'll see soon, whoever the smith was that made Beowulf's armour, he made it to last.

Back To Top
Plundered gear

Along with a bizarre, translation-blocking typo in the Old English text of the bilingual edition of Heaney's translation (the apparently non-existent "pryðlic" for "þryðlic" (l.400)), this passage has a word of note.

Yet another word for "war-gear," "heaðo-reaf," has a curious meaning when pulled apart and patched back together.

Separately, its words translate as "war" and "plunder, booty, spoil; garment, armour, vestment." These don't exactly come together like "Wig/laf" (literally "war legacy/relic"), there's a definite implication that this armour is directly related to combat. Beowulf has pulled it from the battle field.

But in what sense?

Could it simply refer to its being plundered from a battlefield?

Or should the reference be taken to mean that it's seen many close scrapes and yet been "plundered" from each one in that its wearer has survived to wear it again?

Either way, it's not used here to avoid some sort of reference to genitalia, but instead, to simply alliterate in the first half of the line.

Back To Top
Closing

Next week, Beowulf to Hrothgar speaks.

Back To Top

Young Beowulf's Melancholic Tale [ll.2430-2440] (Old English)

Summary
What is and What's to Come
All About a Name
Beowulf's Phrasing
Closing

Back To Top
Summary

This part of Beowulf is one that makes the Anglo-Saxon propensity for melancholic reflections painfully obvious. We see the old king sitting on the sea cliffs and talking with his thanes about his life, and how even at an early age he witnessed something tragic - fratricide.

Back To Top
What is and What's to Come

Lines 2430 to 2440 actually present a curious kind of contrast. In the first five lines Beowulf tells of Hreðel's (Hrethel) warm reception ("mindful as kin," "sibbe gemunde" (l.2431)).

But then in the second, we get his report of the murder. According to Beowulf (no mean storyteller, he did, after all, boast to Hrothgar about his deeds, clear up the matter of the swim with Breca, and give Hygelac a slightly diverging story about his fights with the Grendels upon his return to Geatland) Hreðel's eldest son, Herebeald, was shot and killed by the youngest, Hæðcyn (Haethcyn).

Within his account, two things come up that I want to expand upon here. First is one of the brother's names, and second is Beowulf's phrasing.

Back To Top
All About a Name

Perhaps a bit of Christian propaganda, Herebeald's name echoes a similarly killed Aesir in Norse mythology.

This Aesir is the son of Odin, Baldur, god of Light and Spring. For the full story of his death check here. The gist of it is that Baldur's death is foretold, all of the things on the earth take an oath that they will not hurt Baldur, yet through some of Loki's trickery and a technicality Hodor is given a sprig of mistletoe that did not take the oath. Hodor fires and Baldur is killed.

This could be some low level Christian propaganda because it points towards fratricide within Nordic myth, thus attempting to show its wrong-headedness. However, Beowulf seems to be defending Hæðcyn.

Here is how he describes Hæðcyn's act: "he aimed for a misted mark and shot his own kin" ("miste mercelses ond his mǣg ofscēt" (l.2439)). Because this is a whole line and not just a word or phrase, I think that strategic language on the poet/scribe's part for the sake of form can be ruled out.

Back To Top
Beowulf's Phrasing

Within the phrase itself, all of the words are quite clear. "Miste," "ond," "his," and "ofscēt" are all more or less left unchanged on their way into Modern English. "Mǣg" is less immediately clear, but translates as "kin, family." Ah, but "mercelses," that offers some difficulty.

Knowing that the word is a form of "mearc" meaning "mark, sign, standard, border, etc." means that it's just a matter of figuring out its case. That it ends in "es" gives solid ground to say that it is indeed in the genitive case, which I expressed by adding in "aim" to clarify a more literal translation.

Such a literal translation is: "mark of mist and his brother shot." Since it's mentioned that Hæðcyn has a bow in line 2437 ("bogan"), the logical step that must come between his having it and the mention of a "mark of mist" is that he must have been aiming his bow. Hence the addition.

Though even without this addition, the emphasis that the line's alliteration puts on "misty" suggests that Hæðcyn was in some sort of daze.

I think that this ambiguity absolves him of the murder, in a way. it certainly makes it more ambiguous, and might even be pointing towards the moral idea that a person cannot be judged on their actions but only on their intent.

Beowulf (and/or the poet/scribe) might just be unclear on what his motivation was, but there is a germ of something more here, I believe. Why? Because it's coming in at a part of the larger story of Beowulf in which Beowulf is looking for solace in the sorrows of his past.

Perhaps, some might argue that he is trying to forgive himself for killing Grendel whom he somehow viewed as a brother. Or perhaps he is just trying to work out his feelings for the Geats that he will be leaving behind through an analogy with Hreðel and the loss of his son.

Beowulf has seen the Geats come far, but also has seen their youth lose their spark. Whatever the case is, the ambiguity presented here makes it plain that this whole episode is more opaque than evil dragons and troublesome killers.

Back To Top
Closing

Next week the story continues, as Beowulf adds more detail to his tale - what becomes of Hæðcyn? Just how melancholic can Anglo-Saxon poetry get? Read on next week to find out!

And if you've got any opinions, arguments, or points on or about this week's section, toss them in the comments.

Back To Top