In this paper I argue that the titular character of Beowulf is, in accordance with Aristotle’s perspective, a tragic hero. I will apply Aristotle’s ideas from the Poetics into the plot and characterisation of Beowulf. I will first look into the definition of a tragedy in Chapter 6, and proceed to examine the idea of the tragic hero in Chapter 13. Therefrom I will work with the overall plot and structure of Beowulf, then direct my attention specifically towards the character Beowulf. My essay and criticism draw ideas from the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, Robert Emmett Finnegan, Seamus Heaney, Arthur Brodeur, Frederick Klaeber, et al. I will also take to consideration the culture and ideals of the Anglo-Saxon audience to which the author of Beowulf wrote, observing how they might identify with the hero and the circumstances that affect him.
In setting the ground for us to expound on Aristotle’s idea of a tragic hero, it is of chief import to know and understand first the definition of a tragedy. Aristotle explains the essence of a tragedy in Chapter 6 of his Poetics:
Tragedy is…an imitation of a noble and complete action, having the proper magnitude; it employs language that has been artistically enhanced by each of the kinds of linguistic adornment, applied separately in the various parts of the play; it is presented in dramatic, not narrative form, and achieves, through the representation of pitiable and fearful incidents, the catharsis of such pitiable and fearful incidents.
…In addition to the arguments already given, the most important factors by means of which tragedy exerts an influence on the soul are the parts of the plot, the reversal and recognition[1].
In Chapter 13, we have the definition of a tragic hero, defined thus: “This would be a person who is neither perfect in virtue and justice, nor one who falls into misfortune through vice and depravity; but rather, one who succumbs through some miscalculation”. We are then equipped with the proper elements of tragedy: the catharsis, reversal, recognition, and suffering – and the hero who succumbs because of Hamartia.
Trying to incorporate Aristotelian ideas into Beowulf presents us with a minor, solvable problem. It is uncertain whether the author of Beowulf, whoever he may be, had any knowledge of Aristotle’s Poetics. Although he was most likely a cleric (O’Donohue 11), knowledgeable in Latin[2], possessing “a considerable learning in native lays and traditions” (Tolkien, Monsters and the Critics 26-27), and thus was a learned man. In any case, there is no evidence in the text that he was interested in purposely trying to assimilate Aristotelian ideals into his work. This does not mean, however, that they are not present in Beowulf. Rather, being elegiac in tone, we can find it rife with elements of a tragedy.
How, then, is Beowulf a tragedy? As an “imitation of a noble and complete action, having the proper magnitude”, the story depicts the actions of King Hrothgar, Ruler of the Danes, descendant of the Shieldings[3], and, more importantly, those of Beowulf, Géata dryhten, Ruler of the Geats (l. 2576). In style, it is written in Old English alliterative verse, abounding with kennings such as hron-ráde (10) and different names for mythological creatures such as eotenas, ylfe, orcneas, gígantas (112-113); “a product of thought and deep emotion” (Tolkien, Monsters and the Critics 20). Beowulf, moreover, depicts plenty of pitiable and fearful events (and the catharses of such) regarding the Danish and Geatish people.
We hear first of the desolation caused by Grendel’s gúð-cræft (127). What had started as a celebration of God’s creation actually brought about the attention of Grendel:
…sé þe in þrýstrum bád,
þæt hé dógora gehwám dréam gehýrde
hlúdne in healle (87-89).
Grendel’s “powers of destruction were plain” (Heaney 127) “as dawn brightened” (Heaney 126). Thus we are presented with the story’s first example of peripeteia, anagnorisis, and consequently of suffering. Hrothgar himself admits to believing
…þæt ic mé ænigne
under swegles begong gesacan ne tealde.
Hwæt mé þæs on éple edwenden cwóm
gyrn æfter gomne, seoþðan Grendel wearð,
eald-gewinna, ingenga mín (1772-1774).
Herein comes Beowulf, our tragic hero; and along with him, the audiences’ realisation of what is meant to be a foreknown beleaguering of Hrothgar’s hall by Grendel. Hrothgar and Heorot do not appear only in Beowulf, but in a few other sources as well, most noteworthy of which is Widsith. R.W. Chambers remarks: “The chief value of the references to Heorot in Widsith lies in their correcting the impressions which we get from Beowulf” (79). By this he meant that “the poet meant Beowulf to stand out in contrast to the masters of Heorot, a house of heroes second to none in all northern story, but tainted by incest and the murder of kin[4]” (84).
We are thus given a very ironic picture of Heorot, which is furthermore intensified with the introduction of Unferth in the story. Unferth, whose name means Unpeace or Quarrel (Tolkien, Beowulf 209), is guilty of sifjaslit[5], the murder of kinsmen. “Þéah ðú þínum bróðrum tó banan wurde, / héafod-mægum” (587-588). And yet he is one of Hrothgar’s trusted men, his þyle.Being accused of sifjaslit was not something to be taken lightly in Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian societies. The death of the beloved god Baldr was caused by the betrayal of Loki, his kin. This triggered the events which would eventually lead to Ragnarök.
The same grievous offence is charged against Grendel’s clan, where God himself made them outcasts and set a curse upon their kin (ll. 107-114). It comes as no surprise, then, that a monster representative of kin-slaying would lay waste to a tribe whose roots are tainted with the same sin. Only a hero endowed with módgan mægnes, Metodes hyldo (670) would reasonably be able to defeat Grendel. The only reason why Beowulf won the battle, as the poet puts it, was because God’s favour was upon him – Beowulf’s might was a gift from God:
…hwæþre hé gemunde mægnes strenge,
gim-fæste gife, ðe him God scealde,
ond him tó An-waldan áre gelýfde,
frófre ond fultum (1270-1273).
It is the same favour that grants Beowulf victory in his battle against Grendel’s mother. Hrunting, Unferth’s sword, offers him no offensive nor defensive prowess against her. As Robert Emmett Finnegan puts it, “the defenses Beowulf’s society affords him against the evils of the mere are insufficient for victory….Even so, the poet attributes the hero’s ultimate salvation to God” (49). Beowulf himself exclaims:
Ic þæt unsófte ealdre gedíge,
wigge under wætere, weorc genéþde
earfoðlíceæ ætrihte wæs
gúð getwæfed, nymðe mec God scylde (1555-1558).
And so Beowulf lives many years thereafter to become king of the Geats, where we “find the young proud Beowulf so much like Hrothgar so soon as the Link or Interlude of his return home is over (Tolkien, Beowulf 312). But it is in his rule here as king of the Geats where we will see his final and tragic encounter with the dragon.
Upon hearing about the dragon, Beowulf became “restless hastening toward death: the fate very nigh indeed that was to assail that aged one, to attack the guarded soul within and sunder life from body – not for long thereafter was the spirit of the prince in flesh entrammelled” (Tolkien, Beowulf 84). He had erstwhile not known how he would die (Tolkien, Beowulf 102), and so he “disdained with a host and mighty army to go against that creature flying far abroad. For himself he did not fear the contest, nor account as anything the valour of the serpent, nor his might and courage” (Tolkien, Beowulf 81-82). Too late does he realise that “the defences he brings against the beast are essentially those of his society, and are therefore essentially flawed” (Finnegan, 54).
Moreover, the blessing of God, which was present in Beowulf’s battle against Grendel and his mother, is alarmingly absent in his fight against the dragon. It may well be that it was not the “Almighty’s will” (Heaney 192). Or it may be wyrd that goes ever as it must (Tolkien, Beowulf, 243)[6].
Where, then, can we find Beowulf’s hamartia? “Is Beowulf’s decision to fight the dragon imprudent?”… “Wiglaf criticises Beowulf’s retaliation, and the retainers, Wiglaf testifies, tried to dissuade Beowulf from the attack” (Gwara 243). “Should the hero have accepted help?” (Gwara 267) Perhaps he should have, as Hrothgar would have advised (1771-1784). Had he more retainers with him when he fought the dragon, the outcome would of course be vastly different. However, the poet comments: “Appointed was it that the prince proven of old should find now the end of his fleeting days, of life in this world” (Tolkien, Beowulf 81). Finnegan explains his situation:
…as the hero becomes increasingly entrammeled in the meshes of the society of which he is a part, the victory becomes harder, as in the struggle with Grendel’s mother, until it finally becomes impossible. With the failure of the best of men of his time to overcome the dragon, the society which he as king represents is judged and found wanting (54).
Beowulf’s pagan society is ultimately found defenceless without the help of God. As the poet has lamented in lines 183-186:
Wa bíð þæm ðe sceal
þurh slíðe níð sáwle bescúfan
in fýres fæþm, frófre ne wénan,
wihte gewendan!
A more positive yet similar expression may be found in the last lines of The Wanderer:
Wel bið þam þe him are seceð,
Frofre to fæder on heofonum, þærus eal seo fæstnung stondeð.
Beowulf as a Northern hero trusted in his own might, not in God’s power – nor could he, for he knew not God. Thus to be simply himself, the ideal hero, would yet be lacking, and the ideals and the values which he represents, though noble, are “found wanting”. And though this be so, the poet deals with the characters with reverence, and not with condemnation, as he epitaphs Beowulf with
manna mildust ond mon-ðwærust,
leodum líðost one lof-geornost (3181-3182).
[1] In Chapter 11 of the Poetics, Aristotle furthermore says, “these are the two parts of the plot, reversal and recognition, and there is also a third part, suffering”; a statement which we will add to his definition.
[2] See Tolkien’s Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary, p. 162
[3] The Shieldings (Skjöldungs) themselves are descended from the Norse god Odin (Sturluson, Prose Edda 7).
[4] “Equally with the poet of Widsith, the poet of Beowulf cannot mention Hrothulf and Hrothgar together without foreboding evil” (Chambers 83).
[5] See Snorri Sturlusson’s “Gylfaginning”, Chapter 51.
[6] Gæð á wyrd swá hío scel (l. 455)
Works cited:
Chambers, R.W. Widsith: A Study in Old English Heroic Legend. Cambridge: University Press, 1912. Print.
Finnegan, Robert Emmett. Beowulf at the Mere (and elsewhere). Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1978. Print.
Gwara, Scott. Heroic Identity in the World of Beowulf. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2008.
Heaney, Seamus. Beowulf. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2000. Print.
O’Donohue, Heather. English Poetry and Old Norse Myth. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
- Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 2014. Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin Publishers, 1983. Print.
Works Consulted:
- and E. Keary. The Heroes of Asgard. New York: Mayflower Books, 1979. Print.
Anlezark, Daniel. Myths, Legends, and Heroes. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011.
Print.
Bloom, Harold. Bloom’s Modern Critical Interpretations: Beowulf, Updated Edition. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2007.
Brodeur, Arthur. The Art of Beowulf. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969. Print.
—. The Prose Edda. New York: American Scandinavian Foundation, 1916. Print.
Byock, Jesse. The Prose Edda. London: Penguin Books, 2005. Print.
Chambers, R.W. Widsith: A Study in Old English Heroic Legend. Cambridge: University Press, 1912. Print.
Crossley- Holland, Kevin. The Anglo-Saxon World: An Anthology. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2009. Print.
Dougherty, Martin. Vikings. London: Amber Books, 2013. Print.
Earl, James. Thinking About Beowulf. California: Stanford University Press, 1994. Print.
Finnegan, Robert Emmett. Beowulf at the Mere (and elsewhere). Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1978. Print.
Greenblatt, Stephen. Simpson, and Alfred David. The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 2 vols. New York: W.W. Norton &Company, 1962-2013. Print.
Gwara, Scott. Heroic Identity in the World of Beowulf. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2008.
Hall, John. A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1916. Print.
Heaney, Seamus. Beowulf. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2000. Print.
Jones, Gwyn. Kings Beasts and Heroes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972. Print.
Jónsson, Guðni. Fornaldar Sögur Norðurlanda. Reykjavík: Prentsmiðjan Edda, 1950. Print.
Jónsson, Finnur. Sæmundar-Edda. Reykjavík: Prentsmiðja D. Östlunds, 1905. Print.
Jónsson, Guðni. Edda Snorra Sturlusonar. Reykjavík: Prentfell, 1949. Print.
Klaeber, Frederick. Beowulf. Toronto: University of Toronot Press, 2008. Print.
Larrington, Carolyne. The Poetic Edda. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
Mitchell, Bruce. An Invitation to Old English and Anglo-Saxon England. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1995. Print.
Mitchell, B. and Robinson, F. A Guide to Old English. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2012. Print.
New International Version. Caloocan: Image Builders Services and Publishing Foundation, 1984. Print.
O’Donohue, Heather. English Poetry and Old Norse Myth. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
- Print.
Portnoy, Phyllis. The Remnant: Essays on a Theme in Old English Verse. London: Runetree Press, 2005. Print.
Stitt, J. Michael. Beowulf and the Bear’s Son. New York: Garland Publishing, 1992. Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 2014. Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays. Ed. Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin Publishers, 1983. Print.
Tripp, Raymond P. Jr. More about the Fight with the Dragon. Lanham: University Press of America, 1983. Print.
Zoega, Geir. A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. Print.
In this essay I argue that the Old English elegies “The Wanderer” and “The Seafarer” demonstrate the instability and fragility of Anglo-Saxon society. The reason for such instability is that the members of the un-Christian Anglo-Saxon society have no knowledge of God nor subsequently could they have any relationship with him. My analogies are based primarily on Plato’s “Myth of the Cave” from Book 7 of The Republic, and shall be furthermore expounded upon with Plotinus’ writing “On the Intellectual Beauty”. After discussing the essential content of Plato’s myth and the relationship thereof with Plotinus’ work, I shall apply them both as filters for my interpretation first to “The Wanderer”, and then to “The Seafarer”.
Galderbook 