Byrhtnoth's Great-Hearted Mirth, or Praise and Blame in the Battle of Maldon
2003; University of Iowa; Volume: 82; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
0031-7977
Autores Tópico(s)Comics and Graphic Narratives
ResumoSince J. R. R. Tolkien's Homecoming of Beorhtnoth, Beorhthelm's Son, (1) commmentary on The Battle of Maldon has focused on one word, sometimes almost to exclusion of rest of poem. That word is, of course, ofermod. How one glosses word, as any survey of scholarship on subject will demonstrate, determines to a great extent reader's assessment of Byrhtnoth's heroism and leadership. This tight focus frames debate in a kind of either/or dichotomy. Criticism has tended toward either praise or blame of Byrhtnoth, and which side individual critic takes has depended in many cases on his or her assessment of significance of hero's ofermod. It is my contention that word's ambiguity is no accident or aesthetic failure on part of poet; rather, like poem as a whole, word pushes reader in contradictory directions, both toward heroic elegy and toward Christian admonishment. It is a sign of both praise and blame. I also posit that this ambiguity resonates throughout poem and specifically in presentation of Byrhtnoth as he prepares for and engages in battle, that there are essentially two contradictory visions of hero in poem that poet attempts to reconcile. In order to clarify Byrhtnoth's double nature, I will first review critical debate and examine similar contradictions in a hitherto undiscussed analogue, Skaldic poem Hakonarmal. The lines that have been source of so much controversy read as follows: da se eorl ongan for his ofermode alyfan landes to fela lalaere deode. (2) [Then earl, because of his great-hearted pride began to give too much land to those hostile people.] Tolkien translates these lines quite differently in support of his thesis of Byrhtnoth's unredeemable folly: then earl in his overmastering pride actually yielded ground to enemy, as he should not have done. (3) He discusses Byrhtnoth's actions as an attempt to gain personal glory, rather than to do his duty, and in an interesting aside compares hero to Beowulf and assessment that he was lofgeornost 'most desirous of glory.' (4) Translations that do not carry this sense of sinful pride, he contends, are not adequate. He takes issue with Ker's translation of same lines: then earl of his overboldness granted ground too much to hateful people. (5) Boldness, he asserts, is not an accurate translation of mod: means 'spirit,' or when unqualified 'high spirit,' of which most usual manifestation is pride. But in ofer-mod it is qualified, with disapproval: ofermod is in fact always a word of condemnation. (6) Thus, according to Tolkien, a poem that at first reading seems in praise of heroic spirit, is actually a condemnation of heroic pride or chivalry. (7) The argument that follows from this assessment of Byrhtnoth has become an orthodox reading of poem: hero is at fault because his pride leads him to allow Vikings to cross causeway, an allowance that leads inevitably to his death and to defeat of English. However, there have also been a number of unorthodox and even heterodox readings. Paul Cavill observes in his review of issue that interpretation of The Battle of Maldon has tended towards polarization. (8) Helmut Gneuss carries out a thorough lexicographical study of issue in his 1976 essay Battle of Maldon 89: Byrhtnod's ofermod Once Again, (9) which has proven to be something of a turning point in Maldon criticism. Indeed, according to Donald Scragg, one of poem's recent editors, Gneuss has settled question: the debate on whole ofermod issue was ended by Helmut Gneuss, whose philological study of word proved beyond doubt that ofermod meant 'pride.' (10) Fred C. Robinson concurs: Professor Helmut Gneuss has provided virtually certain evidence that latter word(i. …
Referência(s)