What has Ingeld to do with Lindisfarne?

1993 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 93-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald A. Bullough

In the course of a long letter written in 797 to Speratus, bishop of an unnamed English see, Alcuin declares:Verba Dei legantur in sacerdotali convivio: ibi decet lectorem audiri, non citharistam, sermones patrum, non carmina gentilium. Quid Hinieldus cum Christo?Nowhere else in the substantial corpus of his letters does Alcuin name a known figure in early Germanic legend and literature – the Ingeld ofBeowulfandWidsith– or refer specifically to the vernacular literature of his home country. Unsurprisingly, since the publication of the first complete and correct text of the letter in 1873, this passage has been quotedin toto(in varying translations) or alluded to in virtually every history of Old English literature and every commentary onBeowulf. Jaffé, however, in the notes he left with his transcript when he died prematurely in 1870, had proposed an identification of the addressee, Speratus, with Bishop Hygbald of Lindisfarne, recorded from 780 to 803. Dümmler adopted Jaffé's view in his editions of the letter: and he has been followed without demur by every subsequent scholar who has quoted or referred to it. Furthermore, for most of the century it has been tacitly assumed that the letter was directed not merely to the bishop in person but also to the community of which he was head – a monastic one, even after the disasters of 793; and that Alcuin's exhortations, whether or not they were a response to the actual practice of Lindisfarne and other Northumbrian houses, are evidence of the acceptability (and indeed, cultural importance) of secular vernacular verse in eighth-century English monasteries.

1954 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 62
Author(s):  
R. M. Wilson ◽  
Kenneth Sisam

2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-93
Author(s):  
Helena W. Sobol

Abstract Bliss & Frantzen’s (1976) paper against the previously assumed textual integrity of Resignation has been a watershed in research upon the poem. Nearly all subsequent studies and editions have followed their theory, the sole dissenting view being expressed by Klinck (1987, 1992). The present paper offers fresh evidence for the textual unity of the poem. First examined are codicological issues, whether the state of the manuscript suggests that a folio might be missing. Next analysed are the spellings of Resignation and its phonology, here the paper discusses peculiarities which both differentiate Resignation from its manuscript context and connect the two hypothetical parts of the text. Then the paper looks at the assumed cut-off point at l.69 to see if it may provide any evidence for textual discontinuity. Finally the whole Resignation, seen as a coherent poem, is placed in the history of Old English literature, with special attention being paid to the traditions of devotional texts and the Old English elegies.


1980 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 223-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. G. Stanley

The new bibliography by Stanley B. Greenfield and Fred C. Robinson of the entire body of publications on Old English literature provides the occasion for reviewing not so much the bibliography itself as the subject it covers. This article is, of course, not a brief history of Anglo-Saxon studies from the dissolution of the monasteries in Henry VIII's reign to the 1970s. It is a highly selective exemplification of some of the changing aims and achievements of scholars when they went to the vernacular records in prose and verse that survive from Anglo-Saxon times.


1966 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 361
Author(s):  
Francis Lee Utley ◽  
Stanley B. Greenfield

PMLA ◽  
1927 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fr. Klaeber

By way of caution a sub-title should be added: “A Set of Questions”—questions, that is, to which I do not presume to return a positive answer.The classical parallels (Vergil, Homer) of Beowulf's obsequies as well as the Jordanes parallel are well known to students of Old English literature (cf. Klaeber's edition, pp. 209, 213, 216). It is especially the latter which has commonly been considered of very great value as illustrating the authentic character of the notable closing scene of Beowulf. “The accuracy [of the Beowulfian funeral],” says Chadwick1—to cite an English authority—“is confirmed in every point by archeological or contemporary literary evidence. We may refer especially to the account of Attila's funeral given by Jordanes.” Again, “the agreement between the two versions could not possibly be greater; here [i.e., in the recital of Attila's obsequies] everything is Germanic”—this was the verdict of Kögel,2 who regarded that 49th chapter of Jordanes' history3 as a most precious source of information on ancient Germanic poetry. It is true, certain differences between the sixth century and the eighth century version did not escape observation, as may be seen from Chambers' Introduction to Beowulf, p. 124, or from Klaeber's Edition, p. 216. But it remained for Edward Schröder's incisive article (ZfdA. LIX, 240-44) to aim a deadly blow at the famous account of Attila's funeral as currently interpreted.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document