Christian Language and Theme in Beowulf

Christian Language and Theme in Beowulf: Article Summary and Analysis

            Thomas D. Hill, in "The Christian Language and Theme of Beowulf," adds his voice to the decades of analysis of how paganism and Christianity function in Beowulf.  Hill suggests that although the extant criticism concerning this matter is substantial, it deserves re-examination; indeed, this theme of paganism and Christianity will most likely never be satisfactorily reconciled and will thus perpetuate a continual re-examination as others read both the elements that contribute to the analysis differently, and read themselves into the poem as well.  Hill asserts in the beginning that "most comparable early medieval epic texts are either emphatically and militantly Christian . . . or unapologetically pagan or secular in their viewpoint. . . ." (198).  Hill contends, however, that Beowulf is actually neither.  What he proposes, then, is that the poem is instead a "radical synthesis" (198) of the two, that is, Beowulf is both pagan and Christian in scope simultaneously, in language and also in theme.  Hill recognizes that his proposal will be controversial, as the idea, as far as he is aware, is without parallel in any other Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Latin literature, but, interestingly, has parallels to Old Irish and Old Norse-Icelandic literature.

            Hill begins the body of his article by recognizing the ideological problem that the Beowulf poet faced: oldness.  Hill notes that "Anglo-Saxons . . . were deeply conservative and venerated antiquity" (198).  So the origin of the issue is that Anglo-Saxon Christians had to face the fact that at this point Christianity, especially their Christianity, was not very old, much less antiquated.  Regardless of the dating of the poem that one accepts, Hill says, "it is clear that a reflective Anglo-Saxon must have been aware that the roots of his nation and culture were pagan and Germanic and that Christianity was a relatively recent innovation among a people to whom antiquity was precious and innovation suspect" (199). 

            One way in which medieval authors remedied the juxtaposition of paganism and Christianity, then, was to just pretend that their civilization began with their peoples' conversion to Christianity and ignore everything before that date, or at least not recognize any potential significance those events may have carried.  As an illustration, Hill notes how Bede placed more emphasis on the sins of the Christians than on the "heroic accomplishments of the pagan Anglo-Saxons and Jutes" (199) in his Historia Ecclesiastica, dismissing the importance of the Anglo-Saxon past.  Hill does note, however, that an aristocrat who depended on his Anglo-Saxon lineage, instead of a monk separated from culture, would not have been so dismissive with his ancestry, but would have made sure to include what he knew to be culturally important in addition to the religious elements.

            Additionally, as concerns the antiquity of the Anglo-Saxon culture, the state was founded by pagans and lineage could be traced for many generations, whereas a Christian would be able to produce lineage of not more than three of four generations.  In this respect, one must also consider that an Anglo-Saxon Christian, though not a monk like Bede, would probably not be comfortable with dismissing his secular heritage, nor should he be expected to be, as he would have an attachment to the Anglo-Saxon history and ancestry.  Yes, there is a tradition of hostility of Christians toward the pagan past, but often thoughtful Christians, like the aforementioned non-monk Anglo-Saxon, who are confident in their cultural background and faith can recognize the importance of that past and how it has shaped their own present.  Hill considers this to be the beginning of reconciliation of the two positions.

            The Beowulf poet, Hill suggests, as a solution to reconcile the elements of a "peculiar spiritual atmosphere," came essentially to a "humanistic" view of his ancestors' paganism.  The Beowulf poet must have seen these men as having known about God, moral Law, etc. and claims this can be supported from the text itself.  "Beowulf is a remarkably consistent text in that the religious language of the poem reflects the religious knowledge of those patriarchs who lived before the covenants and the creation of Israel" (202).  Hill insists on the term Noachites for the men in the poem; there is a resemblance to Noah's knowledge of God and creation without having the revelation of the Law that would provide them the understanding of Israel.  The men, therefore, cannot be Christian, but, as Hill demonstrates in the language of their prayers, are treated as such, which is indeed warranted; the men of the poem knew God, which provides support for the religious aspect of the poem.  The point here is that spiritual atmosphere must be interpreted correctly in order to properly understand the synthesis of paganism and Christianity and also to read the poem consistently.  The poem is indeed religious, but also very pagan, illustrating the both/and nature.

            A second issue in this reconciliation is that no other Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Latin authors were at all sympathetic to paganism and its past.  This is surely an anomaly, as is also the fact that Beowulf and the other characters are not strictly pagans, but, as referred to above, monotheists, Noachites as it were.  The suggestion here is that the poet is not being so sympathetic to pagans, then, as he is to the characters as monotheists and recognition of this serves to underscore the religious nature of the poem as it relates to the pagan nature.  In this respect, the Beowulf poet is being wholly original in his claims and for this reason Hill notes that many scholars are unwilling to take the Christian language on its simplest implications.  "Thus when Beowulf says of his grandfather Hrethel when he died 'godes leoht geceas'. . . -language which in a Christian context would clearly imply that the person who died went to heaven- many scholars implicitly assume that the poet is more or less thoughtlessly using Christian formulas without careful attention to their implications" (205).  But to Hill, the poet seems actually to be using his religious language carefully.  This all contributes to the idea that the poet treats the characters as both pagan and religious and is reconciling the two positions, instead of, as quoted above, "thoughtlessly using Christian formulas."  Scholars are perhaps right to see these "Christian formulas," but the point is that they must be interpreted correctly as indicating monotheism and not necessarily Christian,

            To further reconcile paganism and Christianity and in order to have a clearer picture of the poet's treatment of this language and context, one must look outside Anglo-Saxon literature to Celtic and Old Norse-Icelandic literature, as there does not exist enough secular Old English literature to which to compare it.  This influential literature provides parallels in which one can view religion and its effects similar to that in Beowulf.  The poet's views at times in the poem does seem unorthodox concerning Christianity, but Hill calls the reader to remember that there is evidence for other unorthodox ideas in Anglo-Saxon culture, showing that this "unorthodox" reconciliation of the two positions may not, in fact, be out of line.  If there was indeed more Anglo-Saxon secular literature, then these ideas an themes may not seem quite so anomalous.  Since they do seem anomalous, however, Hill draws on Old Irish and Old Norse-Icelandic literature, both geographically close to Old English literature to show parallels.  Like in Beowulf, the heroes of Old Irish literature were depicted as monotheists in that the poets wrote them in a way that illustrated their belief that the heroes were saved and went to heaven, although the ways that were suggested by the authors were both bold and imaginative, as Hill shows.  As a broad generalization, this idea of linking Old Irish literature to Old English is appropriate, though at the individual textual level, there are admittedly differences and variations.  Old Norse-Icelandic literature is even closer to Beowulf.  Hill draws on parallels to the Vatnsdoela Saga to make his point clear.  Suffice it to say, however, so as not to draw the present discussion out further, that there is a "strikingly similar [treatment] to Beowulf. . . of 'pagan' heroes who are nonetheless committed monotheists set apart from their pagan surroundings" (208).  Viewed through this lens, one can better understand how Beowulf may not be so unique and anomalous as is commonly suggested. 

            Hill recognizes in the end that the poet must have been willing to question the authority of the established church in writing Beowulf, evidenced by both the theme and the language of the poem.  Hills also suggests that the humanistic reading of the poem is not heretical.  This is important in understanding that the poem shows a radical synthesis of pagan and Christian ideas.  There is a certain tolerance of the Christian poet concerning the pagan past and a willingness to reconcile the two.

            In his article, Hill adds his voice to what he admits is an already at least century old discussion and provides a linguistic and thematic analysis of the text, specifically concerning the Christian and pagan histories and how they are portrayed.  Hill argues for a synthesis of the pagan and Christian themes and language in the poem and suggests that Beowulf is both pagan and Christian, which identifies with postmodern thought and the both/and theme.  Hill structures his article fairly well.  He clearly introduces his idea that what he proposes as a reconciliation of paganism and Christianity is a radical synthesis of the two and recognizes that his idea will most likely be controversial, as it is not common in other Old English Literature, though it is in other world literature.  One aspect he does not mention, however, is why this would be such a controversial position.  Perhaps it would be obvious to a scholar?  This seems to be one of the only areas where he lacks in the essay.  He then unpacks this idea by showing how the two positions are juxtaposed and wraps the essay up nicely, though the transitions between the ideas are a little abrupt and difficult to follow.  The essay is one continuous argument, of course, but it seems disconnected as he moves from one point to another and fails to present a seamless argument.  That said, the writing is strong, as one would expect, and his point is well made.  It just seems that the transitions and synthesis of ideas were a little difficult to follow.

            Hill's article expands the first two essays read in the course by Allen J. Frantzen and John D. Niles, both of which concern the historical aspect of Beowulf and how the poem fits into literary history.  In the section of Niles's article on dating the poem, Niles addresses many of the same elements as Hill, such as language and rhetoric that is specifically Christian.  Hill expands this language further in his essay than does Niles, but they both recognize what Niles calls a "well-developed vocabulary of religious experience" (144).  Niles says of the virtuous pagans that "While the Beowulf poet depicts the characters of his poem as pagans, as is historically accurate, he also presents at least some of them as admirable persons" and later notes that "No authors writing in Latin during the eighth century portrayed the ancestral Germanic past in so favorable a light" (144-145).  Recalling Hill, then, one remembers that he also recognized these "virtuous pagans" and furthered the idea by labeling them Noachites and also addressed and expanded the idea that the pagan past being portrayed in a sympathetic light was anomalous to the other literature of the era.  Niles also, like Hill, draws parallels to the Old Norse literature, but Hill unpacks this further for his reader by spending much ink to support his idea.  These are just a few similarities of the two and Hill's article would have fit well with the discussion of the two history/historicism articles in The Postmodern Beowulf and would have advanced an already interesting topic and filled it in more.

            While the article itself is not postmodern, it does inform a postmodern approach to Beowulf.  The article addresses the both/and aspect of the poem and also illustrates its polychronicity and multitemporality.  Hill illustrates this by showing that the Christian ancestry could be traced to three or four generations at most, whereas the pagan ancestry for an Anglo-Saxon could be traced much farther back.  In this regard it can be seen that the poem represents the pagan past and has that feel, but it also represents the Christian present of the poet.  The religion for the characters, however, is not Christian but is, as Hill says, monotheistic nonetheless.  So Hill shows how the poem can be read in two different ways, but at the same time shows how there indeed exists a radical synthesis of the two different readings that provides a more complete reading of the text.  The Beowulf poet, considering Hill's position, allows for two different readings simultaneously, a radical synthesis of pagan and Christian.  The reader always has one foot in the pagan past and an the other in the Christian present, which allows for a very different and very lively reading.  In this way, the reader can read himself into the text, as Frantzen suggests in his article and with each reread can recognize a number of different elements that make the text seem as if it is living and breathing and changing.  The text in most respects is truly both/and, not either/or.  So the text is polychronic in that it folds two different eras together-pagan and Christian- and it is multitemporal as it evokes multiple understandings- also a pagan and Christian understanding, though with a reconciliation of the two that begs recognition. 

            I do not know what kinds of discussion that this would have led to, as the Frantzen and Niles articles do an excellent job of placing Beowulf in its literary context and touch on the same elements that Hill does; Hill just expands the argument further and fills in some gaps in the thought.  That said, I do think the article is very well written and, aside from the aforementioned issues of transition and seamlessness, is clear and adds greatly to the topic.  Though this text would have offered only a small degree of adding to the overall class, it would be an excellent article to include with Frantzen and Niles in a class not devoted to postmodernism.  If there were to ever be a class that dealt primarily with the historicity of the poem and how different historical and cultural aspects, when taken into account, can affect the reading of the text, Hill's article would provide an incredible amount of weight.

            Overall, this article expanded my understanding of the text that I have been trying to wrap my head around up to this point in the semester: Beowulf is a fantastic text that can be read in so many ways and each reading provides more information that serves to continually pull the reader in different directions.  Hill, in more depth than others I've read on this topic, showed me that there really is no one true reading of the text.  This essay really solidified this idea for me.  If read from a pagan point of view, recognizing the elements that speak to that history, the poem reads completely different than when read from a Christian point of view, understanding that the Christian poet included elements that speak to those readers.  Read in each way, the poem really speaks to each specific group.  Then when read as a synthesis of the two, if the reader keeps in mind both positions, the poem becomes actually more difficult to work out, but nonetheless provides another reading altogether.  The poem really is polychronic in that it combines two different periods of thought and culture, and it is also multitemporal in that it, aside from the multitemporality of the text itself, speaks to different readers simultaneously through language and theme.

Works Cited

Hill, Thomas D.  "The Christian Language and Theme of Beowulf."  Beowulf: A Verse       Translation: A Norton Critical Edition.  Ed. Daniel Donoghue.  New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2002.  197-211.  Print.

Niles, John D. "Locating Beowulf in Literary History."  The Postmodern Beowulf: A Critical         Casebook.  Ed. Eileen A. Joy and Mary K. Ramsey.  Morgantown: West Virginia   University Press, 2006.  131-161.  Print.