michael lapidge beowulf and the psychology of … member area/lapidge - psychology of...134 michael...

134 MICHAEL LAPIDG E

Schiicking, L. L. "Das Konigsidea l im Beowulf." Modem Humanities Research Association Bulletin3 (1929): 143-54. Trans, as "The Idea l of Kingship in Beowulf." A n Anthology o f Beowulf Crit-icism. Ed . Lewi s K. Nicholson. Notre Dame: U of Notre Dam e P , 196V 35-49 .

Sorrell, Paul . "Oral Poetr y and th e Worl d o f Beowulf." Oral Tradition 7 (1992): 28-65.Steiner, George. After Babei. Aspects o f Language and Translation. Ne w York : Oxford LIP, 1975 .Stock, Brian . Th e Implications o f Literacy: Written Language an d Models o f Interpretation i n th e

Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries. Princeton : Princeton UP , 198 V. Listening for the Text: On th e Uses o f th e Past. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins UP, 1990 .

Tolkien, J. R. R. "On Fairy-Stories. " Tree and l£af. London : Allen and Unwin , 1964 . 11-70 .Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure an d Anti-Structure. Ithaca: Cornell UP , 1977 .

. "Social Drama s and Storie s about Them." Mitchell 137-64 .Vaihinger, Hans. The Philosophy o f "As If." Trans . C. K . Ogclen. New York : Harcourt Brace, 1935 .Weber, Max . Economy an d Society. Vol . 1. New York : Bedminster , 1968 .White, Hayden . "The Valu e of Narrativity in the Representatio n of Reality." Mitchell 1-24 .Williamson, Linda. "What Storytellin g Means t o a Traveller." Arv 3 7 (1981): 69-76.Wolf, Joh n Quincy . "Folksinger s and th e Re-Creatio n o f Folksong. " Western Folklore 3 2 (1973):

225-36.Wormald, C. P . "The Use s of Literacy in Anglo-Saxon England an d It s Neighbours." Transactions

of th e Royal Historical Society, 5t h series 2 7 (1977): 95-114.Zumthor, Paul. Introduction a la poesie orale. Paris: du Seuil , 1983 . Trans, by Kathy Murphy-Judy

as Oral Poetry: An Introduction. Minneapolis : U of Minnesota P, 1990 .

MICHAEL LAPIDG E

Beowulf an d th e Psycholog y of Terror1

It i s a commonplace o f literary criticism tha t Beowulf i s a heroic poem. 1

The commonplac e ha s been stated so often that i t has lost any precisionit might once have had . Fo r what do we mean b y "heroic poetry" ? Her eis the definition , in plain words, given by Sir Maurice Bowr a in his bookHeroic Poetry:

The firs t concern o f heroic poetr y i s to tell of action, and thi s affect sits character both negatively and positively . Negatively it means tha tbards avoid much tha t i s common t o other kind s of poetry, includ-ing narrative—not merely moralising comments an d descriptio n o fthings an d plac e fo r description's sake, but anythin g that smacks of

t From Heroic Poetry in the Anglo-Saxon Period: Studies in Honor of less B. Bessinger, jr., eel. HelenDamico and Joh n Leycrl e (Kalamazoo , Ml : Medieva l Institut e Publications , 1993) : 373-402 .Translations appearing in brackets are the editor's.

1. Ther e would he littl e point in providing a complete conspectus o f secondary literature in whichBeowulf i s referred t o a s a heroi c poem . Not e simpl y that th e notio n i s pervasive in th e Intro -duction t o what i s the standard edition of the poem , tha t by Fr. Klaeber, Beowulf an d Th e Fightat Finnsburgh, 3r d ed. (Lexington , Mass.: Heath , 1950) , esp. p. Iviii ; and tha t i t informs the twostandard literary histories of Old English : C. L . Wrenn, A Study of Old English Literature (Lon -don: Harra p & Co. , 1967) , esp. p . 10 7 ("Beowulf is th e editoria l title of the lon g heroi c poe mwhich i s the suprem e monument o f the Anglo-Saxon poetic genius"} ; and S . B. Greenfield an dD. G. Galder , A New Critical History of Old English Literature (Ne w York: New York Univ. Press,1986), esp. p. 136 , where Beowulf i s treated i n a chapter devote d t o "Secular Heroic Poetry." Se ealso K . Sisam, The Structure o f Beowulf (Oxford: Clarendon , 1965) , p. 1 : "1 start from th e posi -tion that , thoug h i t contains historical , elegiac, gnomic , an d didacti c elements , Beowulf i s anheroic narrative poem. . . . " In what follows I cite Beowulf fro m th e Klaebe r edition (see above);other Old Englis h verse is cited from The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, ed. G . P . Krapp and E . V.K. Dobbie , 6 vols. (Ne w York: Columbia Univ . Press, 1931-53) .

BEOWULF AN D THE PSYCHOLOG Y OF TERRO R 135

ulterior or symbolical intentions. Positively it means that heroic po -etry makes its first an d stronges t appeal through it s story.2

If it is the firs t concern o f heroic poetr y to tell of action, to make it s pri-mary appeal throug h story , and t o avoid symbolic language, then I sub-mit tha t Beowulf K in no sens e a heroic poem. I t is true that some o f th echaracters mentione d i n th e poe m figur e elsewher e i n heroi c poetry ,properly defined; but the Beowulf-poet's primar y concern coul d scarcelybe said to lie solely in action, o r i n his characters ' involvemen t in it . O nthe contrary , Beowulf is very much take n up with reflection —on huma nactivity and conduct , on the transience of human lif e — and i t is couchedthroughout i n languag e tha t i s characteristically oblique an d allusive.Calvin Kendal l has recentl y described th e natur e o f the poem , an d hi sdescription strike s me a s a valuable antidote t o earlie r notion s concern -ing its heroic nature :

. . . eve n thoug h Beowulf i s a poe m abou t a her o wh o engage smonsters an d a dragon i n morta l combat , i t i s extraordinarily lack -ing in action. The poe t spends most o f his time circling about a fewmoments o f intense activity. He meditates , an d hi s characters med -itate, on the meanin g o f the event s which occu r o r which hav e oc-curred o r which ar e likely to occur .

A central concern o f the Beowu/f-poet, in other words, is with human per -ception o f the externa l world and with the workings of the human mind ,as he himsel f states at one point :

Forban bi< 5 andgit asghwSe r selest,ferhdes forebanc . (1059-60a )

[Therefore discernment , menta l anticipation , is best in everything.]

1 should like here to explore one facet of the Beowu/f-poet' s concern wit hthe working s of the huma n mind , namel y hi s portraya l of the monste rGrendel an d hi s description of the monster' s approac h t o Heorot .

.Qnce we have read Beowulf (severa l times), we have a moderately clearnotion o t Grendel' s nature : wha t (roughly ) he looke d like , how h e be -haved, where h e lived , who his mother was , and s o on. H e looked lik e aman, excep t h e wa s bigger (ruefne h e wee s mam fronn e cenig man Oder;line 1353) ; indeed h e wa s so big tha t i t took fou r me n t o carr y his hea dback from the mer e o n a stake (lines 1634-39). He had rea l joints , like aman, which cracke d (line 760). His fingers had nail s like steel (line 985),and a terrifying ligh t shone fro m his eyes (him ofeagum stod / ligge geli-cost leoht unfceger; line s 726b-27) . H e wa s invulnerabl e t o iro nweapons (line s 802-03, 987-89). He carrie d with him a bag or gfo/'into

2 C . M. Bowra , Heroic Poetry (London : Macmillan , 1952) , p. 48. , ,3. C . B . Kendall, The Metrical Grammar of Beowulf, Cambridg e Studie s in Anglo-Saxon Kngiaiui ,

5 (Cambridge: Cambridg e Univ . Press, 1991) , p. 5 .


which he stuffe d hi s victims (line 2085). He bi t off their heads and dranktheir blood (line s 742-45), like a vampire. He stalked the moors at night,sometimes alone , sometime s wit h his mother, with who m h e live d i n acave unde r a mere (line s 1345-72).

All thes e detail s em&rpejnnce^we hav e read th e entir e poem — I stressthis fact—an d allo w u s t o se e wKaTsor t 6r^re^ttire~Th"tT'Beowirl/-poe thad i n mind . Tha t i s to say , the detail s sugges t that Grende l i s analo-gous t o certai n monster s i n othe r Germani c literatures , particularlyOld Nors e sagas. 4 What emerges fro m consideration o f these analogue sis tha t th e Beowulf-poet mus t i n th e firs t instanc e hav e conceive dGrendel in terms of an Old Nors e draugr, an "undea d man " or "ghost"or "zombi, " a dea d ma n wh o ha d no t bee n properl y buried an d there -fore becam e a n animate d corps e abl e t o haun t th e livin g by walkingabout, usuall y at nigh t an d i n th e mist. ' Suc h draugar ar e frequently -encountered i n th e Ol d Nors e sagas : thu s ther e i s one name d Agnar rin th e Hdlfdanar Saga Eysteinssonar, an d anothe r o f th e sam e nam ein Gullfroris Saga. Mor e pertinen t t o Beowulf i s th e draugr calle dOgmundr i n Orvar-Odds Saga, wh o i s invulnerabl e t o iro n weapon sand wh o live s beneat h a waterfal l wit h hi s mother , a troll-woma n o rgygr, wh o i s sai d t o b e huma n o n to p bu t beas t (claw s included )beneath. However , th e draugr tha t mos t closel y resemble s Grende l i sGlamr i n Grettis Saga. The characte r o f Glamr provides so striking andinstructive a contras t wit h Grende l tha t i t i s worthwhile briefl y t o sum -marize the outline s of the story , eve n though they may be wel l know nto student s o f Beowulf. Th e stor y i n questio n i s found i n chapter s thir -ty-two to thirty-fiv e of Grettis Saga:

Thorhall of Vatnsdal acquired a Swedish shepherd name d Glamr t olook after his flocks i n winter . Glam r was a surly and difficul t manwith wolf-grey hair who was irreligious (he never wen t to mass) and

4. Se e especiall y two studies by N. K . Chadwick: "Nors e Ghosts: A Study in th e Draugr an d th eHaugbui," Folk-Lore 57 (1946): 50-65 and 106-27 , and "Th e Monster s and Beowulf," i n Th eAnglo-Saxons: Studios in some Aspects of their History and Culture presented to Bruce Dickins.ed. P . Clemoes (London : Bowes & Bowes, 1959), pp. 171-20? . A more recent essay by K. Hume("From Sag a to Romance : The Us e of Monsters in Old Nors e Literature," Studies i n Philology77 [1980] : 1-25 , esp . 9-15) i s concerned with monsters in the contex t of social reality. See alsothe brie f but helpfu l discussio n by ]. D. Niles, Beowulf: Th e Poem and it s Tradition (Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 198?), pp. 10-11 .

5. Th e Beowu/f-poet nowhere say s explicitly that Grende! is a living dead ma n (h e seldom says any-thing explicitly), though that is probably the implicatio n of the terrifyin g ligh t in his eyes. Notethat there appears to be no Ol d Englis h cognate of ON draugr; such a cognate, i f it ever existed,

uld ha dreah. However , it would seem tha t ON draugr originally me . int somethingical; se e J . d ewho point s to1 as to variou s:o Paul Bibir eirot surprising

that there i s no Old Englis h cognate .6. Se e Grettis saga Asmundarsonar, ed . G. Jonsson, Islenzk Fornrit 7 (Reykjavik: Hid Islenzka Forn-

ritafelag, 1936) , pp. 107-2? ; the episod e i s translated in Beowulf an d Its Analogues, trans . G. N .Garmonsway and ]. Simpson (London: J.M. Dent & Sons, 1968) , pp. ?02-12.

like "tree-stump, " an d it s use t o mea n "livin g dead" ma y therefor e b e metaplro iVries, Altnordisches etymohgisches \V6rterhuch (Leiden : Brill, 1961) , pp. 81-82 ,Finnish raukka (verstorbener, hoser Geist) and Lappis h rauk (Seegespenst), a s weluncertain Indo-Europea n analogues , without arriving at certainty (I am gratefu lfor advic e on thi s matter). It draugr is in origin a metaphorical usage, it is perhaps


was hate d b y everyone . A t Yuletide Glam r appeare d a t Thorhall' sfarmstead demandin g foo d (eve n thoug h th e farmstea d wa s fastingfor Christmas) . He wa s given food , an d the n wen t ou t int o a bliz-zard, his breath smellin g abominably. The followin g day they foundhim dead , hi s body swolle n to the siz e o f an ox . They tried to dragthe bod y bac k t o th e churc h fo r burial , but unsuccessfully ; whenthey took a priest out t o find the bod y s o as to perform the las t rites,they becam e lost , and di d no t fin d i t unti l afte r th e pries t had de -parted. Accordingly , the y simpl y buil d a cair n o f stone s ove r th ebody and lef t i t at that.

This form o f unconsecrated buria l wa s clearly insufficient , and Glam rduly became a draugr: he walked over houses, breaking them up, and as-saulted men . A shepherd appointe d t o replace Glam r wa s found dea d a tGlamr's cairn , "hi s nec k broke n an d ever y bone i n hi s body wrenche dfrom it s place" (chap. 33) . Thorhall's cowherd was then killed i n a simi -lar way, leaving only Thorhall an d hi s wife alive at the farmstead . At thispoint Grettir, the principa l character of the saga , heard abou t the draugrand determine d t o challenge it . The stor y of the encounte r i s well knownand provide s a particularly striking parallel to Beowulf' s encounte r wit hGrendel: Grettir wait s alone i n the hall , seated o n a bench; Glam r seize shim; a violent wrestling match ensue s durin g which al l the furnitur e i sbroken up ; eventuall y the tw o tumble outside , Gretti r o n top of Glamr ;Glamr's eye s catch th e moonlight , an d "Gretti r himself related tha t thatsight was the onl y one whic h eve r made him tremble " (chap. 35) . Gret-tir eventually kills Glamr b y cutting of f his head .

The terrifyin g ligh t emitted b y Glamr's eyes is reminiscent o f the leohtunfaSger tha t stood ou t fro m Grendel' s eyes , as many commentators hav eobserved. I do not wish to press these parallels: my point is simply that theBeowu/f-poet's starting-poin t fo r hi s conceptio n o f Grende l mus t hav ebeen a draugr lik e Ogmundr i n Orvar-Odds Saga o r like Glamr i n Gret-tis Saga, though thes e sagas are of course several centuries late r than Beo-wulf. Bu t wha t a differenc e ther e i s i n presentatio n an d conception !Whereas th e autho r o f Grettis Saga give s u s a cas e histor y of ho w hi sdraugr cam e t o haunt Thorhall' s farmstead , and give s us at the outse t amoderately detaile d accoun t o f hi s appearanc e (wolf-gre y hair , abom -inable breath) , suc h detail s a s w e hav e concernin g th e appearanc e o fGrendel only emerge after th e confrontatio n wit h Beowul f (an d indee din certai n cases—th e glof, fo r exampl e —only afte r Beowul f himsel f i sback i n Geatland) . I n m y view, the Beowu//-poet' s obliqu e an d allusivepresentation o f Grendel i s a crucial featur e of his art. ' I n order t o appre -ciate this art , i t is necessary to put ourselve s in the positio n of someone

7. Th e sam e point i s made tellingl y by Niles, Beowulf: Th e Poem and it s Tradition (n . 4 above), p.8, who remark s that "Such vagueness [in the descriptio n of Grendel J is calculated" and goe s onto draw an instructiv e contrast with the detaile d description of the Green Knigh t in Gawain andthe Green Knight.


hearing or reading the poe m fo r the firs t tim e and t o eliminate any pre -conceptions we might have about the monster' s natur e or appearance.

(1) The firs t rnepi-irir i o f HIP mnnsfp r occur s immediatel y after Heoro thas been completed:

Da se ellengaastprage gepolode,

earfo61lcese be in pystrum bad .

[Then the fierce spirit painfully endured hardship for a time, he whodwelt in the darkness. ]

The firs t noun used in the poem to describe the monster, ellengaest, is nota precise , defining term: 8 i t i s a compoun d forme d fro m e/fen~fsffengt h[or] power) and gcest. This second elemen t i s probably intentionally am-bivalent, insofa r a s gcest (wit h lon g az) mean s "demon " o r "spirit^_(cf .ModE ghost), whereas gcest (shor t eg) means "visitor " (cf. MqdF, g»esfV_ _Grendel i s both" ghost and guest . So at the firs t mentio n o f the monster ,the audienc e learn s only that i t was a powerful ghost/guest that dwelt indarkness.

(2) TJie_jj£xtJirrieJiJ s mentione d th e monste r i s zjeond o n helle(line IQlb) , a n "enem y i n hell, " an d w e ar e tol d bot h it s nam e an dhabitat:

wass se grimma gsesi Grende l haten ,mSere mearcstapa, s e he moras heold,fen on d festen . . . . (line s 102-04a)

[The gri m spirit was called Grendel, known as a rover of the borders,one wh o held the moors , fen and fastness. ]

.Again it is a gcest, a grim onejhis time, which inhabits moors, fens, an dfastnesses (inaccessibl e places). I t i s alsojijmzrejnearcstapa (notoriou swanderer inmarch-lands). 2 Mnr p important, it s name" is~Crendel. Th enaming ofthe monster implies tamiliarity, a process of identification, andhence, a demystification o f what i t i s or migh t be . Ye t I suspect (a s wil lbecome clear ) tha t thi s read y familiarit y i s somethin g tha t th e poe t

8. Th e wor d ellengasst occurs uniquely in line 86. Should on e emend t o read ellorg&st (alie n spirit)[with Grein an d Riegel ; cf. lines 807, 1349 , 1617 , and 1621] ? See discussion b y J. Hoops, Kom-mentarzum Beowu//~(Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1932) , p. 26.

9. Se e Hoops, Kommentar, pp. 29-30.1. O n th e medieva l association o f fenland s with hell , se e R . D . Cornelius , "Palus inamabilis, "

Specu/um2(1927): 321-25 .2. I t has been suggested b y N. Kiesslin g ("Grendel: A New Aspect, " Modern Philology 6 5 [1968] :

191-201) that niosre in line 103 is not the adjectiv e meanin g "famous, notorious" but rather thenoun mazre (night-monster , incubus), as in Mod E nightmare . According to Kiesslin g the sam emeaning i s intended i n lin e 762 , Mynte s e masra. There ar e serious difficulties wit h this inter-pretation, however , seriou s enough t o rende r i t impossible : in th e first place, mere meanin gnightmare ha s a short syllable, whereas the metrica l position of mcere in line 10 3 requires a longsyllable; and, more importantly, the Old Englis h word mcere meaning nightmare is elsewhere inOld Englis h and the Germanic languages invariably a feminine noun (see J. D. Pheifer, ed., OldEnglish Glosses in the Epinal-Erfurt Glossary [Oxford : Oxford Univ . Press, 1974], p. 95). 1 returnto the questio n of Grendel an d th e nightmar e below.

BEOWULF AN D THE PSYCHOLOG Y O F TERRO R 139

wished to avoid, an d the us e of such a name free d hi m fro m th e nee d t ouse any further defining or descriptive nouns. The prope r name, i n otherwords, identifie s withou t describing. In an y case , i f the poe t wishe d t oavoid communicating anything ofthe monster' s nature, he chose an idealname fo r it, for thej;tymology and rnpanin g nf thp namejGremJe/ are nn-known. Variou s etymological explanation s wer e propose d i n th e nine -feentFTcentury, an d thes e were carefull y catalogue d by E. G. T. Rooth: 4

the opinio n o f Jacob Grimm, tha t the wor d was related t o OHG_grinri/(bolt, bar); that o f Karl Weinhold, tha t i t was a derivative of QE grindan(to grind, shatter , prnsh \e Grendel mean t "th e crusher, 7' a deriva-tion that was endorsed by W. W. Skeat; that of Thomas Arnold, that it wasan earl y form o f ME gryndel (angry) ; and tha t of Gregor Sarrazin , thai i lwas cognat e wit h O N grindill (violen t wind o r gale) . T o thes e Root hadded hi s own explanation, namely, that i t was cognate with ON grandi(a sandban k beneath th e water) , whenc e *ynndrt woul d b e a creatur efrom th e bottom ofth e se a (cf. ModE grindle, a "mudfish"); hence Gren-del, accordin g t o Rooth , mean t Seegrundmann o r "Sandmann, " ametaphor for death (Grendel is t der Tod)5 A few years later, A. Pogatscherproposed tha t th e nam e wa s dgrjve d ultimatel y fro m th e wor d gram ,which i n all early Germanicjanguages means "angry" o r "filled wit h ha-tred," whenc e th e Germani c etymo n fo r Grendel's name , "grandilaz,meant "hostil e pursuer." 6 I t wil l b e clea r eve n fro m thi s brief review ofetymologica[ explanations of Grendel's nam e tha t the meaning s are de-rived mor e fro m a sense o f how Grende l behave s i n Beowulf tha n tro many convictio n abou t wha t the_elements_o f _the nam e mighj_b_e . I t i s a tleast possible that the poet consciously chose for his monster a name tha tdefied explanatio n and lacke d precise denotation or connotation .

("37 The nex t line s offe r som e explanatio n o f th e monster' s forme rhabitat: ~~

ftfelcynnes eardwbnssellwer weardod e hwlle. (line s 104b-05)

[Unhappy creature, he lived for a time in the home of the monsters 'race.]

3. Th e capitalizatio n of Grendel's nam e i s a modern editoria l device and on e tha t obviously con-tributes to ou r sens e of familiarity. Bu t n o suc h capitalizatio n i s found i n th e manuscript , a i 1 Ihave often wondere d i f the nam e should b e lef t uncapitalize d i n order to accentuate the feel n gof strange unfamiliarit y tha t th e monste r provokes: "the gri m ghost/guest wa s called a grcn le i(whatever that is). " However, I realize that the constructio n w&s haten implies a personal na ncand that , i f a common nou n grendel wa s intended throughout, w e should expec t tha t i t wo I dat some poin t be qualified with a definite article.

4. E . G. T . Rooth , "De r Nam e Grende l i n de r Beowulfsage, " Ang/ia Beiblatt 2 8 (1917): 335-40 ;Rooth's information is summarized by R. W. Chambers, Beowulf: A n Introduction t o the Studyofthe Poem, with a supplement b y C. L . Wrenn (Cambridge : Cambridge Univ . Press , 1959) . p.309.

5. Rooth , "Der Nam e Grendel " (n . 4 above ) , p. 340.6. A . Pogatscher, "AltenglischeGrendel" i n NeusprachlicheStudien: FestgabeKarl Luickzu aeinein

sechzigsten Geburtstage (Marburg : N. G . Klwcrt'sch e Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1925) , p. 151.

140 MICHAEL LAPIDG E BEOWULF AN D TH E PSYCHOLOG Y OF TERRO R 141

Interesting here i s the fac t that , for the firs t lime , we are given some im -pression o f th e monster' s shape : h e i s referre d t o a s a womeSll wer(wretched man). Th e "lan d o f the /i/e/-kin " wher e thi s wretched ma ndwelled i s presumably water , sinc e elsewher e i n Old Englis h poetry th enoun ftfe l (sea-monster ) is used i n compound s a s a ter m fo r th e se a o rocean: for example, thejifelwceg i n Elene (line 237), the fifeldor i n Wid-sith (line 43), or the fifehtream i n the Metres ofBoethius (lin e 26). ' Th ei triplication i s that Grendel wa s at some pojiiLajlejnizen o f water (possi- _hlyjhe referenc e here i s simply an anticigation_of tjiejiierejibout whic hwe are_^bsec|ueiTny''Tolc1 : line s 82 0 and , esp. , 845-49) . Immediatel ythereafter 'we~ar e tol d That the_Creator_ha d condemne d _this race _ of(seajmonsters as being progen y oLCain. and, b y way of further explana-tion, th e poe t give s jijjstjafjjthg^jnojnsjr Cai n —eotenas and ylfe ond orcneas, l^swylce gigantas ["troll s and elve s andmonsters— likewisejhe_giants"] (line s 1 12-13a). These moiTsTerTaTejs ^

insofar a^JiejiiuxjJa^llejimjJTeaiKl o f frfel-kin: not e tha t th e poe t doe s no t sa y tha t Grencle l wa s an y o f thes emonsters. They are named to evoke an atmosphere of ancestral evil, not

i^ ~ ~(4)~Trie monster i s n^xfrnenlioned whe n i t launches it s first attack on

Heorot— when i t enter s th e h^~gT?m~?nd~gieedy , aiid~seize s tEirt ythegns. At this point i t is described as a Wiht unhcelo, I grim ond graidig,. . . T T h e creature of evi"L~grim and fierce^Qlrne s 120b-21a) . A wiht isa^'creature," no more , n o less ; whether i t carried a connotatio n o f thesupernatural, as Mary Serjeantson suggested by reference to phrases suchas unfeele wiht [ba d creature ] or yfel wiht, [evi l creature],8 is unclear t ome. I_suspec t rather tha t the poet hasjjeliberately chose" a" imprpfi<; ptejîiiriIiiikr.lQjaask-tliîMtuie_Qf_his monster .

(5) During thp_rnnngWg_ ep si i i n g_ai±g rl^nnjjpnrn i t i s referred t o a sagast ["demon", "spirit"] (line Hâ healdegn ["hall-thane " (lin e 142),

(gggfQ'-]gn£njyjXy£tagain (line_Lli) : but n o furthe r specification "ana a.-QJLits-appearance i s given.

(6) The monster' s depredations continu e fo r a period of tvêlvej/ears^during which time it goes on persecuting:

(ac se) aegteca ehtend e was,deorc deabscua. . . . (line s 159-60a)

[for thejnonsterjvas relentless , the dark death-shadow]

That the monste r i s a "dark death-shadow " i s anything bu t a precise de -scription. More precisio n seems promised from th e qualificatio n tha t i twas an aglceca \] (for the spelling , cf. lines 732, 739, 1000 , an d

/ . Cf . M . S . Scrjeantson, "Th e Vocabular y of Folklore in Old an d Middl e English " Folk-Lore 47(1936): 51 .

8. Ibid. , p. 46.

1269; the spellin g aeglceca, as here, presumably represents the effect s o fi-mutation on the a-). Unfortunatel y the precis e meaning of this term i sdisputed, and th e matte r is complicated by the fac t that elsewhere in th epoem it is used of Sigemund (line 893) and jointly of Beowulf and his ad-versary the drago n (line 2592). 9 Etymology might help t o throw light onthe meaning o f the word, but there is as yet no consensus abou t what thatetymology might be. F . Holthausen concluded that i t was unknown.' I n1931 F . A. Wood suggeste d tha t i t was formed fro m a protheti c vowe la plus an elemen t g/ac, 2 but mor e recentl y it has been derive d from th eelements ag- and__-jgc._C. M . Lotspeich in 194 1 derive d th e second ele-ment fro m O E lacan (to jump, move rapidly) and suggested that the firs twas cognate with Lithuanian eiga (a going, a march) and Greek oi%ou,cc i(to go away), whence th e wor d aglceca ha d a fundamental sense of "pur-suing" o r "slalking." 3 I t might seem curiou s tha t no close r cognate s forag- can b e foun d than Lithuania n and Greek , an d a more plausibl e (inmy view) etymology wa s proposed by F. Mezger in 1946 , who suggestedthat ag - wa s cognat e wjtJT_Gothi c agi' s (tejror^Jright) . OH G egiso an dhence OE eg e and egesa (terror). 4 Thus, following Mezger's etymology,an aglceca i s a "demon [or ] monster striking terror into the_h£ait of mexi."^This Tatter explanation i s evidently more appropriat e t o the atmospher eof the poem; but, whatever its meaning, it in no way contributes to the vi-sual definition of the monster .

(7) Tne poet nex t pauses briefly Jo sum up the , dire pffpc-tS-Qfth e mon -ster's depredatioas^

Swa fel a fyren a feon d mancynnes,atol angengea of t gefremede. (line s 164-65 )

9. Tb e meaning of aglceca i s normally derived contextnally , as by Klaeber in the glossary to bis edi-tion, or (at greater length) by D. M . K . Gillam, "The Us e of the Term azgltuca i n Beowulf at l ine s893 and 2592, " Studio Gennanica Gandensia 3 (1961): 145-69 . There is an excellent (but in -complete) surve y of proposed explanations of the wor d by S. M. Kuhn , "Old Englis h aglceca —Middle Irish ochlach," i n Linguistic Method: Essay s in Honor of Herbert Penzl, ed. I . Ranch a i 1G. F. Carr, ]anua linguarum series maior, vol. 79 (The Hagnc : Mouton, 1979) , pp . 213-3U.214-20.

1. V. Holthausen , Altenglisches etymologisches Wfirterbiwh (Heidelberg : Carl Winter, 1934) , p .2. F . A. Wood, "Protheti c Vowel s in Sanskrit , Greek, Lati n an d Germanic, " American journal f

Philology 5 2 (1931): 137 : ". . . i n the meanin g 'warrior, hero' the prefi x ha s its more comiruperfective o r intensive force."

3. C . M . Lotspeich , "Ol d Englis h Etymologies, " Journal o f English ami Germanic Philology 4 0(1941): 1 : "This fundamenta l meanin g of OE ag - as 'pursuing, ' 'stalking ' explain s the twofol duse of aglfEca a s 'monster' and 'hero, ' because a pursuer can be eithe r detested or admired.'

4. F . Mezger, "Goth. Aglaiti 'Unchastity, ' OF. Aglasc 'Distress'," Word 2 (1946): 69. The sam e ety-mology was proposed (independently) b y M. L . Huffines , "O K agliece. Magi c and Mora l De -cline o f Monsters and Men, " Semasia 1 (1974): 71-81 . I confes s mysel f unable , however, tofollow the logic of Huffines's argumen t by which OE lacan i s associated with "the type of move-ment and dance which accompanied sacrificia l rites" (p. 72), whence an aglieca "can be definedas a being who inspires fea r by magical powers" (p. 74) .

5. Huffincs , "O E agliece" (n . 4 above [p . 141]; cf. Mezger, "Goth. Aglaiti," p. 70: "The deed s ot theaglceca Grende l ar e s o terrible that horrible fright strike s th e heart s of the Norb-Den e (Norb-Denum stod atelic egesa) whe n they hear Grendel sing a 'song causing terror. ' . . . " I t is withthe term s ege, egesa, gryre, hroga tha t the action s of the agtiecan an d thei r effec t o n human be -ings are characterized . It is, accordingly, with good reaso n that one connect s ag- in ugteca wit hege, egesa (fear , horror, terror , monster) . On egesa see also below.

142 MICHAE L LAPIDG E

[Thus man y crimes the enem y of mankind committed, the terriblewalker-alone, cruel injurie s one afte r another. ]

We know already that the monste r i s the enemy of mankind; that i t is atojqngengea (direjjghtary ) i s a new , but no t visual , descriptive detail . Th eword angenga i s relatively rar e in Ol d English , berng med hL-ip^-it f th emonster (her e an d i n line 449) an d elsewher e onl y by /Elfrivjl '4 1 he soli -taiy_nature of the monste r serves to accentuate the sens e of mysteodmt,once again , does nothin g t o clarif y ou r visual perception o f it.'

(8) Thus fa r we , the audiencf , hav nn rlpn r visua l impressio n of the_monsters appearance: i t i s a dark death-shadow i n th e shap e o t a rnan TTfficFtwelve year s of attacks, the Dane s have presumably formed some vi-sual impressio n o f Grendel . Bu t th e poe t i s carefu l alway s t o presen tGrendel fro m th e GeabjDoint of view: to them, as to us the audience, th emonster i s unknown. \Vhen i n du e cours e Beowul t arrive s m Denmar k ~to challenge this mcmster, he has no clearer perception of its appearancethan we do, as he state s specifically :

E>u wast, gifhiti sswa we sobllce secga n hyrdon ,bast mid Scyldingum sceafion a i c nat hwylc,deogol dsedhat a deorcu m nihtu meawed burh egsan uncuSn e nl6. (line s 272b-76)

[You know whether it is so, as we have indeed heard , that among th eScyldings I know no t wha t foe , what dar k doer o f hateful deeds i nthe black nights, shows in terrible manner strang e malice.]

Although he ha s gone t o the troubl e of crossing the se a with a companyof chosen men, Beowul f himself has evidently acquire d onl y the^vagn£sl_of informatio n concerning th e opponen t h e ha s com e t o Denmarkjo ^confront: h e knows only that it is sceaSona ic nat hwylc (some kind of de-stroyer, I know not what) , that i t is a furtive persecuto r (deogol daedhata),and tha t i n it s campaign o f terror i t wreaks incomprehensibl e hostilit y(uncuSne nlS). Th e poe t i s careful to protract our (an d Beowulf's ) senseof the monster's incomprehensible nature. Nor does the coastguard trou-ble t o suppl y details to Beowul f s lacunose knowledge of his futur e op -ponent, an d indee d a t n o tim e doe s anyon e a t Hrothgar' s cour t brie fBeowulf properly about what he i s about to undertake.' Beowulf presents

6. /fr'.lfri c use d the word in Catholic Homilies I.vii to refer to the solitar y star seen tj^Lthe 'Three WiseTVlen (ed. B. Thorpe, 'ike i-lomilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, 2 vols. (London: The /liltri c So-ciety, 1844-46], 1:106) and again in Clf I.xxxi v to describe die miraculous bull seen on Mt. Gar-ganus (ibid. , p . 502) . These usage s b y /Elfri c rul e ou t th e suggestio n b y Serjeantso n ("Th eVocabulary of Folklore," n. 7 above [p. 140] , p. 45) that angenga might connote the Devil . Ser -jeantson was unaware of/Elfric's usages , however. Here and elsewher e 1 have had th e benefi t ofdrawing o n A . diP . Healey an d R . L . Venezky , A Microfiche Concordance t o Ol d F.nglish(Toronto: Univ . of Toronto Press , 1980) .

7. On e migh t compare the somewhat fuller briefin g given by Hrothgar after Beowul f has defeate dGrendel, and afte r Grendel' s mother_has attacked Heoro t for the firs t time : at that point Hroth-gar deems i t appropriate to give Bcowulfan a ccconnt of what hi

BEOWULF wo THE PSYCHOLOGY OF TERROR 14 3

Hrothgar wit h hi s credential s fo r dealin g wit h feondas [enemies ] an dthen outlines elaborat e arrangements for the disposa l o f his corpse i f heshould fai l i n hi s challeng e o f th e monster . Durin g th e cours e o f thi sspeech, Beowul f refer s to the monste r a s a fryrs (line 426) , a n (Egl&caagain (lin e 433) , a feond again (lin e 439), an angenga agai n (line 449) ,and yet again an atol (Bglceca (lin e 592) . Hrothgar an d the court then goto bed, and Beow i il f sits awaiting thejipproach o f tliejnorMer. The poin tis sinirjly that^yher^thejTK)inister_doe s approach Heorot,_neither .the au-djejTcjjiQLJ3£{jw4ilf has4h«-sligJite^noJ:ioiio f what i t is or what it looksLike. The poe t has carefully created an impression o f the monster' s dir einipact but ha s avoided giving any indication of its appearancefi-lhe en >ohasis has rather been on the incomprehensibl e aspect of the nionste rr^—~—-—_— , , , r —_ _ • ^ —- — — — -

(sceafiona i c na t hwylc, . . . uncudne ni6; line s 274b , 276b).J j i s be^cause the monste r lies beyond our comprehension, because we cannotvisuali/e i t at all , thatjts_a2p_rpach i s one o f the_jnost_terrifying moment sin En;

Com o n wanre nihtscrloan sceadugenga. Sce~oten d swarfon ,ba bast hornreced healda n scoldon ,ealle buton anum. f>0e t waes yldum cub ,bast hie ne moste, b a Metod nolde ,se s[c]ynscaba unde r sceadu bregdan; —ac he wasccende wrabu m on andanbad bolgenmod beadw a gebinges .

Da co m o f more unde r misth.leob.u mGrendel gongan, Code s yrre bsr;mynte se mansca5a mann a cynne s

that two prowlers had ofte n appeared , one i n the likenes s of a woman,_the_gthcr like a man onl ylarger, etc. (lines 13jj-7Z). One might thlriTiWatBeowTnf wonTdlTay£_beej_a3tefuJJgr such in -fomiaHnn afTnTTmtse t Th e detail s are withheld becariseJhe_Bgown/f-npe t wa s trying to createan atmosphere of terror, not to describe the antagonist s with militar y precision .

8. A pyrs, as we learn from Maxims II, i s a solitary fen-dweller: jjyrs sceal on fenne gewunian, / anainnan lande (line s 43-44) . Se e als o R . )ente , Di e mythologischen Ausdriicke im altengtischenWortschatz, Anglistisch e Forschungen 5 6 (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1921), pp. 187-89 , as wellas E . G . Stanley , "Two Ol d Englis h Phrases Insufficiently Understoc k for Literary Criticism:]>ing gehegan an d seonofi gehegan," i n Ol d English Poetry: Essays o n Style, ed . D . G . Calde r(Berkeley and Lo s Angeles: Univ. of California Press , 1979) , pp. 6 9 71 .

9. I n a brief article ). R . Hulbert ("A Note on th e Psycholog y of the Beowulf Poet," i n Studies inEnglish Philology: A Miscellany in Honor of Frederick Klaeber, ed. K . Malone and M . B . Rund[Minneapolis, Minn.: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1929| , pp. 189-95 ) speculated intelligentl y onthe Beowu/f-poet' s persisten t avoidanc e o f graphic visual detail . Hulbert was concerned espe-cially with replyin g to W. W. Lawrence ("Th e Haunte d Mer e i n Beowulf" Publications of th eModern Language Association 27 [1912] : 208-45) , who ha d pointe d to a serie s of inconsisten-cies in the poet' s description of the mere , namely that it appeared to be situated both in fenlan das well as on high and rock y land. Hulbert argued that these inconsistencies were irrelevant: "thepoet did not visualize the scene because he was not accustomed to visualizing anything" (p. 192) .By the same tokenjhe appearanc e of Grendel is left vagu e (jxjjjjjycausethe poet's ; concernwas rather with suggesting moods and state s of mind (p. 195) . See also Stanley, ' Iw o Old Krig -iisb Phrases" (n. 8 above [p. 143]), p. 69: "Part of the obscurity of the poem as far as a literary un-derstanding is concerned is that we do no t know what criteria to adopt for visualizing monsters."1 am suggestin g jhatjhejxx-t. fa r from wishin g us to adopt criteri a fo r visualizing Grendel,_ex 1_crcised £rea t care in choosing language that would prevent' sucTi vTs'iializ'SttouT

144 MICHAF.I , LAPIDG E

sumne besyrwan i n sele barn hean .Wod unde r wolcnu m t o bass be he wlnreced ,goldsele gumena gearwos t wissefsettum fahne . . . .Com b a to recede rin c sl6iandreamum bedseled. (line s 702b-21a)

[There cam e glidin g in the blac k night the walker in darkness. Thewarriors slep t who shoul d hol d th e horne d house—al l bu t one . I twas known t o men tha t when th e Rule r did no t wis h i t the hostil ecreature migh t no t dra g the m awa y beneat h th e shadows . Bu t he ,lying awake fo r the fierc e foe , with hear t swollen i n anger awaite dthe outcom e o f the fight. Then fro m th e moo r unde r the mist-hill sGrendel cjmie_walking , bearin g God's anger . Th e fou l ravage rthought to catch some one of mankind there i n the high hall. Underthe cloud s he moved unti l he coul d se e most clearl y the wine-hall,treasure-house o f men , shinin g with gold . . . . Th e creatur e de -prived o f joy caiTie.waJkirigJ:o the hall. ]

The emotiona l effec t o f thi s passag e ha s bee n brilliantl y analyze d b yArthur Brodeur , who showe d ho w the threefol d repetition of com, eac htime with a different infinitive , marks distinct stages in Grendel's advanceand in the audience' s mountin g sens e of horror; it is, as he rightl y noted,a "hair-raising depiction of death o n the march." 1 Subsequen t commen -tators have amplified Brodeur' s analysis in interesting ways,' and ther e isno need here for further analysis, save to mention that ]J]e reason why thismoment i s so terrifying i s precisely that what approaches Heorotjs a cre£-ture of completelyTinknown aspect orjjmTension^' Itjidyaaops . no1"'" prp-cise, definiteJootiFp but W-iiJLajTurffled, glidin g movement (scfldan). A sitjiraws closer_ajid_ciosp r :m d close r (th e advance jTiarkgrThy the_three-fold repetitio n ofcom^fii e terro r grows and b.ecomesjitifljng , ahnost_a sin~a nightmare ^

I shal l retur n t o th e nightmar e sensatio n i n a moment ; fo r no w i t isenough t o stress that the_noet was demonjtaajjlvinterested i n the natur eand mechanis m o f fear. Throughou t th e poem isarecurren t vocarjular yused t o describe sensations o f fear and terror , muc h of it unique to Beo-wulf. Thre e word s i n particula r requir e discussion : broga, egesa, an d

1. A . G. Brodeur , 'The Art o f Beowulf (Berkele y and Lo s Angeles: Univ . of California Press , 1959) ,esp. pp . 89-91 (quotatio n from p . 90).

ngu«ge 23 (1981): 484-94.n (n. 4 above [p . 1 36]), p. 8 :

rae x p o n g e power a e unknown, the half-known, th e ar ,ean exer t over the imagination s of adults who hav e not los t the child' s ability to fantasize. "

niiiiian, lexas dtuaies in i .nerature ana i^ingua^ . . - ,. ,^,,. , „ .Cf. Niles , Beowulf: The Poem and its Tradition (n. 4 above [p. 136]) , p. 8: "It is as if the poet weredeliberately exploiting the powe r that the unknown, the half-known , th e dark , and th e shapeles s„,.,-, n,,e,,.i ,,',,«, - 4-k, , ; ;„„»:,-.,, - ^r.,,!..u ^ ...l... i i i _ - i a L M . I V . _ L : i - i , ._ . r _ _ , _ •


l\Ta) broga (terror [or ] horror),— When Grendel's mother attacks Heoro tin revenjprfo r th ~e ~3earrTof her so n th e attac k i s one o f pure horror: noneof the warrior s had tim e even to think of helmet or spear, ba hine se brogaangeat [whe n th e terro r seize d him ] (lin e 129 1 b). Late r i n th e poem ,when th e drago n attacks the Geats , th e horro r of the attac k (broga) wa smade quickly known to Beowulf (line 2324); and when Beowul f confrontsthe drago n eac h adversar y was horrifi c t o th e other : aSghwcedrum wa s Ibealohycgendra broga fram odrum [To eac h o f them a s they threatene ddestruction there was terror of the other ] (line s 2564b-65). The horro r ofwarfare is conveyed by a compound, herebroga (line 462). That broga con-notes a sense of indescribable horro r i s clear from a passage in Guthlac Athat describes the hellish fiends who assaulted the sain t in his hermitage:

Oft bag r broga cwo megeslic on d uncu6, ealdfeond a ni<5 . (line s 140-41)

[Often th e terror came there, appalling, incomprehensible, the mal-ice o f ancient foes. ]

The sens e her e thaLfcrog a connote s a sensation o f horror no t previouslyexperienced (uncuS) i s clear from th e fac t tha t it is used esclTatplogicahj _

^ Da y // ,line 123) , and ma y give point to the chronicler' s observatio n that in A.D .991 tribut e wa s firs t pai d t o th e Viking s for Sa m miclan bmgan b e h iworhton [fo r their campaign of terror-}, — — ^

r" "horrorl 3 is more generally used tha nSgtTbut has a similar semanticrange. We have already seen that , accord-

TngTo the reports that had'reached Beowulf in Geatland, the monster on darknights wa s revealin g previousl y unexperience d hostilit y (uncuSne niS)through it s campaign o f terror, burh egsan (lin e 276) , and, when Beowulfand th e monste r ar e locke d i n deadl y combat , th e nois e of their strugglecaused atehc egesa (dire terror; line 784), among the Danes.6 The word con-veys perhaps less intensity than broga— it is used b y old Beowulf when h esays that for fifty years no-one ha d threatene d hi s kingdom with egesa (lin e2736), meaning simply "provoked fear" — but like broga i t is used to refer t othe terror s o f the Las t Judgement . Interestingly, i t is used i n Daniel t o de-scribe the terror that filled Nebuchadnezzar when he awoke from hi s dream:

ba of slsepe onwoe, (swef n wae s art ende),eordlic aadeling, hi m bas s egesa stod ,gryre fro m Sa m gaste. (line s 523-25a )

4. Fo r diseussion o f this wor d i n Ol d English , se e L. L . Schiicking , Untemichimgeu zur Bedeu-tungdehre de r angelsdchsischen Dichtersprache, Germaniseh e Bibliothe k I I (Heidelberg : CarlWinter, 1915) , pp. ?(M1.

5. Ibid. , pp. 33-37.6. Th e Beowulf-poet frequentl y use s compound s o f egesa, suc h a s egesfull ( l in e 2929 ) 01 t^es/jc1

(lines 1649 , 2309 , 2825), or gledegesa (lin e 2650) an d figegesa (line 2780, the terro r of fire), orwceteregesa (lin e 1260 , the terro r of water).

j46 MICHAE L LAPIDG E

[then th e earthl y prince awok e fro m sleep , (hi s rest was at an end) ,fear arose in him, terror of that spirit. ]

The terro r cause d b y dreams, especiall y nightmares , wil l occup y u s i na moment ; not e here only that egesa is-used synonymously with gryre.

f(c) gryre alsojriean s "terror " o r "hoilpj^ I t i s used frequentl y i n th eearlielTpart o f Beowulf t o d^scriblTm e terro r inflicte d b y th e monster :Grendles gryre i n line 384, and agai n in 478. At another poin t Beowulf re-torts t o Unfert h tha t the monste r woul d neve r hav e committed swa felagryra (s o many deeds o f terror; line 591 ) if Unferth were a s tough a s h esays he is . The terro r of Grendel's mother i s said to be only so much les sthan his , as a woman's strengt h i s less than a man's : Wees s e gryre laessa. . . sw a bid mcegba crceft (line s 1282b-83b) . Outsid e o f Beowulf, th eword i s used frequently by the poet of Daniel, nearly always in combina -tion wit h egesa, to describe (fo r example) th e terro r o f the flame s facedby the Three Youths in the furnace (line 466) o r the terror inspired by theGod o f th e Israelite s (lin e 592) . Wha t distinguisjj efrom al l other Old English poets-inthis respect, however , is thejregiiencand natur e o f tire poetic compounds'ihatjT e employed , an d sometimes.coinecrrh~aving gryr^as'^cpn^TrlTJerrt element : not e fcergryre ( a horror -attack; line 174) , (gryre)broga (horrifi c horror ; line 2227), gryrefsh (terri -fying i n adornment) , a word uniqu e to Beowulf (line s 257 6 and 3041) ;gryregiest (horrifi c stranger ; lin e 2560) , gryregeatwe (horrifi c armament ;line 324) , gryreleod ( a song of horror; line 786) , gryrellc (horrifying ; lines1441, 2136) , gryresld ( a horrific expedition; lin e 1462) , wJggryre (th e hor-ror of battle; line 1284), and so on.

The entir e semantic field o f fear and terror would make an interestin gsubject for study in it s own right . My poin t i s simply that Beowulf i s per-meated wit h it . I t is essential t o ask why, and i n what ways, the Beowulf-poet was so interested in the representation of terror.

Fear o f the unknow n i s one o f the mos t innat e an d primeva l o f al lhifflajjTnstirjctsTand i t is~orie that has bee n vrel l sFudied by mode_m_psy -chologists (who refe r to it as fear of "the novel") . Eve n fro m th e very be-'ginnings~of the modern discipline, psychologists have been interested inthe mechanis m o f fear . Thu s Willia m James , i n Th e Principles o f Psy-chology (1890) , describe d th e "peculia r kin d o f horror" associate d wit hthe supernatural :

To bring the ghostly terror to its maximum, many usual elements ofthe dreadfu l must combine, such as loneliness, darkness, inexplica-ble sounds , especially of a dismal character, moving figures hal f dis-

7. Se e Schiicking, Vntersuchungen zur Bedeutungslehre (n . 4 above [p . 145]) , pp. 48-49.8. Fo r general orientation , se e I. M. Marks , Fears and Phobias (London : Heinemann, 1969) , pp .

13-35 ("Aetiology of Fear"), esp. 26—2 8 on th e fea r o f novelty, and S . Rachman, The Meaningsof Fear (Harmondsworth: Penguin. 1974). DD. 40-44.

BEOWULF AND TH E PSYCHOLOG Y OF TERRO R 147

cerned (or , i f discerned, o f dreadfu l aspect) , and a vertiginous baf-fling of the expectation .

These word s could serve , mutatis mutandis, as an accurat e descriptio nof the emotional effect o f the monster' s approach to Heorot (note , in par-ticular, "movin g character s half discerned"). Whereas Jame s identifie dand describe d this instinctua l fear, i t was left t o other s t o analyze moredeeply its causes and mechanisms . I n an influentia l article published in1946, fo r example, Donald Heb b analyzed fear o f the nove l i n animals,in term s of visual pattern s tha t diffe r fro m those familia r t o the animal; 1

subsequent researcher s have note d th e mechanis m o f fear i n reaction sby animals to objects moving towards them> where the reactio n i s clearlynot dependen t o n previou s visual experience. 2 This phenomeno n i s re-ferred t o b y psychologists as "looming." Onc e again . ij_wjmld_be possi -ble t o describ e th e audience' s reactio n t o the approac h ofjGrendeli ntermsjjfthe instinchicdfea r cause d b y the "looming " o f something un -known.

A different, bu t parallel , avenue of analysis was broached by SigmundFreud, wh o i n 191 9 published hi s influential essa y on Das Unheimliche(The Uncanny). I n thi s essay Freud identifie d the mos t terrifyin g exam -ple o f "the uncanny " as follows:

Many people experienc e the feeling [of fright] in the highest degre ein relatio n t o death an d dea d bodies , t o the retur n o f the dead , an dto spirits and ghosts . . . . Ther e is scarcely any othe r matte r . . .upon whic h ou r thought s an d feeling s have changed s o little sinc ethe ver y earlies t times, an d i n whic h discarde d form s have been socompletely preserved under a thin disguise, as our relation to death.'

Freud tende d t o see the reactio n t o the uncann y i n terms o f tension be -tween wha t has been "repressed " an d wha t ha s been "surmounted " (derCegensatz zwischen Verdrdngtem un d Uberwundenem), a distinction thatis analogous to Hebb's analysi s of instinctual reactions in animals to th eunknown.

One characteristi c way in which dee p instinctual fears and represse danxieties find expression is in nightmares . Freud himsel f did no t devot e

9. W . James, The Principles o f Psychology, 2 vols. (London : Maemillan , 1890) , 2:419 .1. D . O . Hebb , "On th e Natur e of Fear," Psychological Review 5 3 (1946): 259-76, esp. 268-72;

Hebb note s (p . 268) tha t "fear occurs when a n objec t i s seen whic h i s like familia r object s i nenough respect s t o arous e habitua l processe s o f perception , bu t i n othe r respect s arouse s in -compatible processes, " an d observe s tha t the effectiv e conditio n fo r fear o f the strang e or novelis a "perceptual deficit " (p. 272).

2. Se e G . W . Branson , "Th e Fear o f Novelty, " Psychological Bulletin 6 9 (1968) : 350-58 , esp.352-53.

3. Sigmund Freud: Studienausgabe IV, Psychologische Schriften (Frankfurt : Fische r TasehenbuchVerlag, 1982) , p . 264 ; trans. The Pelican Freud Library, vol . 14, Ar t an d Literature (Har -mondsworth: Penguin , 1985) , p. 364 . 1 am gratefu l t o my colleagu e Stephe n Heat h fo r adviceon Freud .

4. Sigmund Freud: Studienausgahe IV, p. 271; trans. The Pelican Freud Library, 14:372 ; on Hebb' sanalysis, see n. 1 above [p . 147].


detailed attentio n t o nightmares, 5 and i t was left t o on e o f his followers,Ernest Jones , t o explor e th e mechanism s an d manifestation s of night -mares. I n hi s classi c study , O n th e Nightmare (1931) , Jones applie dFreudian principle s to the analysi s of nightmares an d deduce d tha t th enightmare "i s a form of anxiety attack . . . essentiall y due t o an intens emental conflic t centreing [si'c j aroun d |szc j som e represse d componen tof th e psycho-sexua l instinct." 6 Moder n psychologist s are les s incline dthan Jones to stress the sexua l nature of the impulse s lying behind night -mares;' Jones' s grea t meri t wa s to hav e assemble d a mas s o f evidence ,mostly literary , much o f i t from earlie r centuries , illustratin g the form sthat nightmare s characteristicall y take. From hi s wor k i t became clea rthat (t o quote th e words of J. A. Hadficld) : "The distinctive feature of anightmare i n th e mor e restricte d sens e o f the ter m i s that o f a monster ,whether animal or sub-human, whic h visits us during sleep and produce sa sense o f dread." I t is the intens e feeling of dread and horro r created b ythe monster' s approach that, in the view of modern psychiatrists , does in-deed constitut e th e distinctiv e feature of the nightmare . Moder n med -ical technique s o f measurement , suc h a s electroencephalographic an delectromyographic tracings , have mad e i t possible t o define th e mecha -nism o f nightmares mor e accurately , and psychologist s are no w able t odistinguish, fo r example , betwee n th e mos t explosiv e kind s o f terror -attack, or nightmare proper , whic h occu r durin g the phase o f non-RFM(= non-Rapi d Ey e Movement ) o r slow-wav e sleep , an d sever e anxiet ydreams, which occu r durin g th e phas e o f REM ( = fas t o r paradoxical)sleep.1 The detail s of modern psychiatri c analysis need no t concer n u shere; ou r concer n i s with the natur e o f the nightmare s themselves .

The nightmar e drea m image , a s we hav e seen , i s characteristically amonster i n anima l o r sub-human form , which approache s th e dreame rin a threatening manner ; as Mack has observed, all nightmares follow thiscommon pattern : "Inevitabl y th e dreamer , whethe r chil d o r adult , i sabout t o becom e th e victi m o f a murderou s o r devourin g attac k o r i sthreatened wit h death b y a destructive creature. " I t is probably not pos -sible to define the appearanc e o f the destructiv e creature o f nightmaresmore specifically , but certai n feature s d o ten d t o recu r i n th e report s

5. Tw o o f Freud's most famous case-histories involved nightmares: "Analysi s of a Phobia i n a Five-Year-Old Boy" (1909) and "Fro m the Histor y of an Infantil e Neurosis " (1918). However, as J. E.Mack ha s note d (Nightmares an d Human Conflict [Boston : Little , Brow n & Co., 1970], pp .24-25), Freud's concer n her e was more with neuroses than wit h nightmares per se.

6. E . Jones, On th e Nightmare (London : Leonard an d Virginia Woolf at the Hogart h Press , 1951) ,p. 75.

7. See , fo r example, th e remark s of Mack, Nightmares an d Human Conflict (n . 5 above [p . 148]) ,pp. 9 , 16.

8. J . A. Hadfield, Dreams an d Nightmares (Harmondsworth : Penguin, 1954) , p. 176 .9. Se e R . L. Verteuil, "A Psychiatric Approach t o the Stud y of the Nightmare, " Canadian Psychi-

atric Association Journal 1 (1962): 151-58, as well as Mack, Nightmares an d Human Conflict (n .5 above [p. 148]) , p. 2 .

1. Mack , Nightmares an d Human Conflict (n . 5 above [p . 148]) , pp. 60-61.2. Ibid. , p. 147 .


of subjects. Fo r example, one repor t quoted b y Mack referre d t o the "ter -rifying muffle d soun d o f the haunter' s step," wherea s other reports fro mGermany spea k o f a mor e o r les s formless (gestaltlos) monste r havin g alarge hea d an d uncann y bulgin g eyes (unheimliche Glotzaugen)? Th erelevance of these description s to Grendel wil l be obvious : a destructivecreature, more o r less formless, launching a devouring attack, approach-ing by terrifying muffle d steps , havin g a large head an d unusua l eyes (ifnot precisel y Glotzaugen) tha t emi t a terrifyin g light . It i s as i f the Beo-wulf-pod wa s attempting t o evoke th e creatur e o f nightmares i n hi s de -scription of Grendel .

Forjwentieth-ccntury psychologists , buildin g on th e w'or k o f Freu d™dJpI!ei!jkej3ioASt merel y our own impulsesand anxietie s projected an d objectifie d and personalize^nln^cTeaTure soTTnirextenTaTw'orld. Wliati s striking, however, i s the objectiv e realitytnarpeopTe"of"elTr1ier~centuries attribute d t o such monsters . The cause sof such projectio n are convincingl y explained by psychologists in termsof differentiatio n betwee n intrapsychi c phenomen a an d th e externa lworld (I quote th e opinio n o f Mack fo r convenience) :

The deepes t anxieties of the nightmare relate to a time in early child-hood whe n th e abilit y to differentiat e between wha t i s inside an dwhat is outside is a fragile o r developing capacity, easily upset underthe condition s of sleep. I t is the tim e before age five when dream ex-periences ar e accepted a s real and whe n th e malevolen t agents th esmall chil d confront s in th e nightmar e cannot b e pu t asid e by hisown correctiv e powers . . . . Onl y i n th e pas t century . . . ha s i tbeen possibl e t o approach nightmare s and othe r dream s a s havingprimarily a psychologica l o r physiologica l reality o r a s reflectin gman's struggle to integrate internal and external realities, rather thanas possessing objective validity in the surroundin g environment.1

The poin t i s simply that, i n centurie s befor e ou r own , th e monster s ofnightmares were perceived to have an external, objective reality and werenot simpl y figments of a tortured imagination .

How di d th e Anglo-Saxon s perceiv e thei r nightmares ? Anglo-Saxonphysicians were evidently aware that the nightmar e was both a (diseased)mental stat e an d a n external , objective phenomenon. Thi s much i s im-plicit i n th e norma l Ol d Englis h wor d fo r "nightmare," ' namel y niht-

X IDK1- , p . / .4. Se e the detaile d account of nightmares in the Handworterbnch de s deutschen Aberg/dubens, ed .

E. Hoffmann-Kraye r an d H . Bachtold-Staubli , 1 0 vols . (Berlin-Leipzig : W. cl c Gruytcr ,1927-42), vol . 1 , cols. 281-305 , s.v . Alptraum); se e esp. col . 28 5 fo r the formles s monste r withlarge head an d bulgin g eyes.

5. Hadfield , Dreams an d Nightmares (n . 8 above [p . 148]) , p. 189 .6. Mack , Nightmares an d Human Conflict (n . 5 above [p . 148J) , pp. 9 , 11 .7. Th e compoun d "nihtmare i s (oddly perhaps) not attested i n survivin g Old Englis h records ; it

first occur s as a compound i n th e lat e thirteent h century in th e South English Legendar\ (se eNED, s.v . nightmare}. Th e simple x mare occurs i n the Epinal-F.rfur t Glossar y (spelled i n eVv S


genga, whic h mean s "night-goer " o r "night-stalker. " Severa l recipe s o rprescriptions agains t nihtgengan are found in Old Englis h medica l writ -ings, and thes e giv e us a sense o f how Anglo-Saxon physician s classifiedand treate d th e nightmare . Thu s i n th e so-calle d Third Leechbook, a nanonymous compilatio n tha t accompanie s Bald' s Leechbook i n th eunique survivin g manuscript ( a mi d tenth-centur y manuscrip t perhap sfrom Winchester , no w London, British Library, Royal 12. D. XVII), thereis a recip e fo r various mental afflictions . Th e medicatio n i s decidedlyodd. The physicia n is instructed to :

seek i n the cro p o f young swallows for some little stones, an d min dthat the y touch neithe r eart h no r wate r no r othe r stones . Look ou tthree of them; they are good agains t headache an d eye-suffering an dthe foe' s affliction s an d night-goer s (nihtgengan) an d . . . night -mares (h i beob gode wib heafodece and wi b eagwcerce and wi b feon-des costunga and nihtgengan and . . . maran [I/J.I]). 8

It woul d b e helpfu l t o kno w wha t precisel y was meant b y the "foe's af-flictions"; but leaving these aside, and with the possible exception oteag-wcerc, the othe r disorder s in thi s list are menta l states . Elsewher e i n th e

• Third Leechbook ther e i s a recipe for a salve to be use d specifically againstnihtgengan: Wyrc sealfe wio nihtgengan, wyl on buteran elehtran, hegeri-fan, bisceopwyrt, reads magpan, cropleac, sealt; smire mid him, bid sonase/(III.54). I n yet another Anglo-Saxon medicinal recipe , this time in theHerbarium pseudo-Apulei, th e plan t beton y i s prescribe d a s a remed yagainst variou s menta l afflictions : hi e hyne scyldefi wio unhyrum niht-gengum and wib egeslicum gesihdum ond swefnum. I t emerges from thesevarious recipe s tha t th e external , objectifie d form o f a nightmare , th enihtgenga, wa s treated b y Anglo-Saxon physician s as a menta l disorder ,in the same category as headaches and othe r kinds of terrifying nocturna lvision.

We hav e see n tha t ther e ar e clos e similaritie s jjfitweeiujhe Bemvulf-po£fsjjejicn£tion o f Grendel an d th e monstersQijFnightrnares^slnow ntg_modern psychologists . The poe t was , i t seems t o me , attemptin g t oevoke_in_his audience the sensatio n o f terror that i s experienced irrnight -mares. ThUis not tantamount t o saying, crudely, that Grendel i s a night-mare. The poe t does no t explicitl y describe Grende l a s a nihtgenga; ye tthe diction of the poem play s on this suggestion. Gj£ndeJijjfjhcJiQiis-ai e

as mera or merae), where it glosses Latin incuba; see Pheifer, Old English Glosses in the Epinal-Erfurt Glossary (n. 2 above [p. 138]) , p. 30 , line 558, with commentary at p. 95 .

8. O . Cockayne , Leechdoms, Wortcunning, and Starcraft o f Early England, Roll s Series 35 ,3 vols.(London: Longman, et al. , 1864-66) , 2:306.

9. Ibid. , 2:342: "Work up a salve against nightgengan: boi l in butter lupins, hedgerife, bishopwort,red maythe , eropleek, salt; smear the patien t with this , he wil l soon b e well."

1. Th e Ol d English Herbarium an d Medicina d e Quadrupedibus, ed . H . J. de Vriend , Earl y Eng -lish Text Society, o.s. vol. 286 (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1984), p . 30 : "it shields him [th e pa-tient] from uncann y night-goers j nihtgengan} an d fro m terrifyin g vision s and dreams. "


described as the nihtbealwa nicest (worst of night-horrors; line 193). z Th emonster i s twice referre d to as an angeng a (linesjj)5 1_449). Mor e rx>int -edly jtilLthe monster i s a sceadugenga tha t advances on wanrejiiht (lines702-0^ to a placp wliprp nearly pygrvnnp k sWpi'ng (srent

^The configuratio n o f thes e variou s term s — nihtgenga, nihtbealu, an-genga, sceadugenga o n nz'ftr — can scarcel y be coincidental . Withou t ex-plicitly saying so, the Beowulf-poet wa s drawing his Grendel i n term s ofthe nihtgengan o f terrifying nocturna l visions.

It may be worthwhile, finally, t o reflect briefly on the descriptiv e tech-niques by which th e poet evoked hi s nightmarish monster. In certain in -teresting respects , thes e technique s ar e similar to those use d b y moder nwriters of horror fiction , and indee d b y makers of horror films ; i n short ,by the creator s o f what i s called "art-horror. " Becaus e ther e ha s bee n amassive burgeonin g o f "art-horror" durin g the pas t generation th e for mhas begun t o attract the attention o f scholars and critics , an d som e criti-cal discussion of "art-horror" i s relevant to Beowulf. Particularl y relevantis the analysi s by Noel Carrol l i n his recent study , The Philosophy o f Hor-ror."1 Carrol] begins from th e premise that monsters are the distinguishingmark of "art-horror" and then attempts to define the nature of these mon -sters by reference t o various categories o f unnatural beings:

Boreads, griffins , chimeras , baselisks , dragons, satyrs , and suc h ar ebothersome an d fearsom e creature s i n the worl d of myth, but the yare no t unnatural ; they can b e accommodate d b y the metaphysicsof the cosmology that produced them . The rnonster s of horror, how-everr breac h th e norm s o f ontologj_ca l propriet y presumecTbj v th epositive human character s in the story.

The distinctio n drawn here i s a crucial one. The monster s tha t were de-picted i n Anglo-Saxo n illustrate d manuscript s o f work s suc h a s th e

2. A s we have seen, Grendel i s referred t o constantly as a feond (line s 101 , 143, 164,439,725,748,etc.). For this reason it would 'be especially interesting to know what kind of medical disorder th ecompiler of the Third \£echhook wa s referring t o by the ter m feondes costunga (see above): wasit, too, a sort of terrifying nocturnal vision? If so, the Beowu//-poet' s repeated reference to Gren -del a s a feond woul d heighte n the impressio n of a nightmare, which the poe t was (in my view )trying to create.

3. Th e bibliograph y i s too extensiv e to b e liste d here . Som e notabl e recen t studie s include : J.Briggs, Night Visitors: Th e Rise and Fall o f th e English Ghost Story (London : Faber & Faber,1977); L. Daniels , Pear: A History o f Horror i n the Mass Media (London : Paladin Books , 1977) ;G. St . J . Barclay , Anatomy o f Horror: Th e Masters o f Occult Fiction (London : Weidenfelcl &Nicolson, 1978) ; D. Punter , The Literature o f Terror: A History o f Gothic Fictions from J76 5 fothe Present Day (London : Longman, 1980) ; M. B . Tymn, Horror Literature: A Core Collectionand Reference Guide (Ne w York an d London : Bowker, 1981; } . B. Twitchell, The Living Dead:A Study o f the Vampire i n Romantic Literature (Durham, N.C.: Duke Univ. Press, 1981) ; idem,Dreadful Pleasures: An Anatomy o f Modern Horror (Oxford : Glarendon Press , 1985) , D. J . Huf-ford, The Terror that Comes in the Night: An Experience-Centered Study o f Supernatural AssaultTraditions (Philadelphia . Pa. : Univ . o f Pennsylvani a Press , 1982) ; and M . Aguirre , The ClosedSpace: Horror Literature an d Western Symbolism (Manchester : Univ . o f Mancheste r Press ,1990).

4. N . Carroll , The Philosophy o f Horror o r Paradoxes of the Heart (Ne w York an d London : Rout-ledge, Chapman an d Hall , 1990) .

5. Ibid. , p. 16 .


Mirabilia Orientis'' are like Carroll's "boreads, griffins" etc. : they are fear -some enough , bu t consis t essentially of startling combinations o f animaland huma n member s an d ca n b e easil y visualized as such. Fo r this rea-son I am no t persuade d b y the imaginativ e attempt b y J. D. Nile s to vi-sualize Grende l i n term s o f the hellis h monste r i n huma n for m wit hape-like features and steel y claws depicted i n one Englis h manuscript ofthe Mirabilia Orientis (London, Britis h Library, Cotton Tiberius B. v, fol.81V), which serves as the frontispiece of his book. A s we have seerijn thefirst seve n hundre d or so lines of the poemjbefore Grendel' s confronta -tiQILwith_I5eowulf^ tTi e .Beowu/J^pp.el. carefully avoided~givin g his reader sany descriptive details concerning Grende l that would enable thenvtp vi-sualize Turn wTfhi n categorie s familia r Trom thei r externa l world . (Afte rthe~coiifrontatioh7oTcourse, GrendePsliatur e i s well known to Beowulfand the Geats, so the sense of suspense and terror is dissipated.) The mon -ster Grende l provoke s a sensation o f horror precisely because i t lies out-side perceive d cultura l _QL_scientifi c categorie s an d is , therefore ,

L_ I t is the purpos e o f a horror story tojagke rrprl -iblejjie existen£e,jjisuallv ibyj;ra3Tia1Tneansrot something tha t is in_grir>ciple unknowable: i n Carroll' s words , "somethin g which , e x hypothesi,cannot, given the structure of our conceptual scheme , exist , and that can -not hav e th e propertie s i t has."9 As Freud recognize d lon g ago, 1 an d a smodern philosopher s hav e reaffirmed, 2 th e mos t successfu l author s o fhorror fiction aim tp_exgloij_th£Jjiatin£tua 1 hiimarTreaTof-FIi e unknown^ .

The Beowulf-poet clearl y realized tha t instinctua l human fea r result sfrom th e perceptio n o f monstrous creature s that lie outside familia r con-ceptual categorie s (an d hence are unknowable, or "uncanny" in Freud'sterm). That i s why he carefull y ^avoided supplying any kind of precisajdrsiia[_description ofhis monster , s o that what eventually approachedjjeo-rot _ w o u l d p e sense d a s somethin g trul y horrifi c becaus e totall y

familiar. The horro r resulting from th e threatenin g approach o f unfa-un

6. Se e R . Wittkower, "Marvels of the East : A Study in the Histor y of Monsters," Journal o f the War-burg an d Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942): 159-97 , an d J . B. Friedman , Th e Monstrous Races i nMedieval Ar t and Thought (Cambridge , Mass.: Harvar d Univ. Press, 1981) .

7. Niles , Reowulf: The Pnern and its Tradition (n . 4 above [p . 136]),pp . 14-15 .8. Carroll , The Philosophy o f Horror (n. 4 (p . 151 ] above), p. 35 : "it i s tempting to interpre t the ge -

ography o f horror as a figurative spatializatio n o r literalization o f the notio n tha t wha t horrifie sis that which lies outside cultura l categories an d is , perforce, unknown. "

9. Ibid. , p. 182 .1. Sigrnund Freud: Studienausgabe IV, pp . 271-72; trans. The Pelican Freud Library (n . 3 above [p .

147|), 14:372-73 ; "Th e Contras t betwee n wha t ha s bee n represse d an d wha t ha s bee n sur -mounted canno t b e transposed on the uncanny in fiction without profound modification; for therealm o f phantasy depends fo r it s effect o n th e fac t tha t it s content i s not submitte d t o reality -testing . . . ther e ar e man y more mean s o f creating uncanny effect s i n fiction than ther e ar ein rea l life. "

2. Se e especiall y K. L. Walton, Mimesis a s Make-Believe: O n th e Foundations o f th e Representa-tional Arts (Cambridge , Mass. : Harvard Univ. Press, 1990) , pp . 195-20 4 ("Fearing Fictions") .Walton explores th e mechanis m offea r tha t i s experienced b y a subject watching a horror fil m(which h e define s as "quasi-fear") in distinction to "real" fear . I am gratefu l t o Neil Malcolm fo rdrawing my attention t o Walton's discussion , and fo r much helpfu l advic e on th e natur e offear .

W/ES GEOMURU IDES! " 153

miliar monsters i s experienced mos t intensely in nightmares , and i t is nocoincidence tha t the poet described hi s monster in terms evocative of thenihtgengan o f nightmares. Hi s evocation o f terror i s unique i n Old Eng -lish literatur e and, indeed , ha s no rea l paralle l i n narrativ e fiction untilthe nineteent h century ; even th e Old Nors e sagas , with thei r monstrou sdraugar, bea r n o resemblanc e t o Beowulf, insofa r as these ar e presente din clearly defined visual terms. TjieBeowu//-poer.VrjrgsentationofGren -cleL_in othe r words , betray s hjs_|a_scinalio n wit h th e working s of th ehuman mind and the mechanism offear. Anc l here, not in the narrativ eaction o f heroi c poetry , wher e know n heroe s figh t wit h know n adver -saries, is where the poet' s primar y interests lay.

michael lapidge beowulf and the psychology of … member area/lapidge - psychology of...134 michael...

Documents