|
|
|
|
How Judith represents a reworking and a reinterpretation of its source.
A look at this Anglo-Saxon, Old English text.
‘It has long been recognised that the source of our poem was the Latin Vulgate text of the apocryphal book of Judith.’ 349 lines remain in the Cotton Vitellius manuscript due to its partial destruction in 1731 by fire. It is suggested by Dobbie, that the original length of the poem was between 1200-1300 lines based on its proportion to the Latin text and the length of the surviving sections of the manuscript. It has been argued more recently however that given the completeness of the episode, it would be far too coincidental, given the neatness of the structure, for much to be missing at all. Possibly, much of the missing manuscript was other writing. It is un-argued, however that at least some of the text was destroyed and the contents of the missing sections can only be guessed at, but we can examine the extant portion and see if it displays any differences to its source. Examining these differences and comparing them to a range of other extant Anglo-Saxon texts may help us understand if there are reasons for these alterations. If we can find evidence for the date of the poem, we may also be able to extrapolate what some of these reasons may be. Though Judith has a similar spirit to both Cæmonian poetry and Cynewulf, the grammar and meter suggest a later date. Based on the work of Kluge and Luick, Dobbie concludes the poem to be late in the tenth century. Additionally, Brandl and C.W. Kennedy assign it to the tenth century, though K. Malone and G.K Anderson suggest the ninth. The time span suggested here was a very significant period in Anglo-Saxon history, the bearing of which I shall explore later as to why there may be a reworking of the Apocrypha text. The confusion over dating also suggests that the biblical Judith is only the source for the content of the piece. The style of the Anglo-Saxon account of Judith comes from a different source altogether, which is the reason that some have attributed this version to the schools of Cædmon or Cynewulf. The timing and the style of Judith will give us real insight into the reasons for the differences between this version of Judith and the source of its contents.
The probable date of Judith is the mid to late tenth century. A time of huge turmoil and warfare for the Anglo-Saxons, who had been trying to defend their country from the Viking onslaught since 787 and soon after the devastation of Lindisfarne in 793, a new interest was sparked in the heroic ideals of their past. Englaland needed heroes in the vein of Beowulf and due to the fact that the Angelcynn had become complacent and lost their war-like natures, due to commerce and agriculture, there were few heroes to be found. Thus the Christianised Anglo-Saxons found themselves in an ongoing struggle against a heathen empire, which appeared impossible to defeat. The author obviously wished to convey this struggle within his work and took some careful decisions in his alteration of his source. J.F Doubleday notes that the author made ‘three major changes: a reduction in the number of characters, the addition of a battle, and a new emphasis on irony.’ The first two of Doubledays points, certainly affect the essence of the Judith to a very marked degree. We cannot be sure how many characters would have been contained in the whole piece, but it is evident from the remaining portion that the author has decided to remove many characters including Ozias, who is mentioned twelve times in the Vulgate and Achior, mentioned fourteen times, as well as Joachim and Vagao and others . In fact, in the Anglo-Saxon version, the author trims his protagonists down to three characters, with only Judith and Holofernes named. This heightens the heroic effect of the narrative by concentrating ‘the attention of the audience on a single dramatic confrontation between two champions.’ The heroic style of the author is echoed in many ways and can often be seen in the epithets given to the principle characters. Holofernes is referred to as ‘dēofulcunda’:- devil (ish) at line 61 and Judith as ‘Þrymful’- glorious / peerless at line 74. The use of ‘gefrægen ic’:- ‘I have heard tell’, at lines 7 and 246, is a common device in the heroic idiom. It is used in Beowulf at line 1010 and also in The Phoenix, Mologium, Neorxnawang, The Death of Edgar and many others. Reputation and renown was all important to a heroic warrior, and harkens back to a pre-Christian age. Given the date of probable authorship, Judith was written ‘after the passing of the ‘heroic code’ as a realistic guiding principle for aristocratic society.’ Regardless of this fact, we still see repeated use of the compound ‘wigend’ ‘warrior’ at lines 11 and 20, using ‘rondwiggende’ and 42, ‘byrnwiggend’ again harking back to strong heroic language. This kind of language simply is not in the original Latin version and so displays a deliberate attempt by the poet to use his source for another purpose. We can also see a marked absence of Nebuchadnezzar in the Anglo-Saxon text. Instead the role of Holofernes is significantly raised, again by language, to emphasise the heroic struggle between two forces. Holofernes is referred to as ‘hlaford’ ‘lord/master at line 117, ‘eorla dryhten’ ‘king of warriors/lord of earls’ at line 21 which echoes Beowulf (line 2339) and The Battle of Brunanburh (line 1). Also the use of the word ‘træf’ which is usually translated as ‘tent’ has far more connotations. Huppé contests that ‘træf’ is not used anywhere else with this meaning in the extant literature, and moreover that its compound in the pieces: - Andreas (line 842), Beowulf (line 175), and Elene (line 926) it translates to either a ‘heathen temple’ or the ‘abode of evil (i.e. hell).’ We can look at this while considering the responses of the Assyrians to their leader, specifically when they discover his body; "Hēr ys ġeswutelod ūre sylfra forwyrd, tōweard ġetācnod, þæt þǣre tīde ys mid nīðum nēah ġeðrungen þe wē sculon nȳde losian, somod æt sæċċe forweorðan. Hēr līð sweorde ġehēawen, behēafdod healdend ūre." Lines 285 -290 (Here is made manifest our own perdition, here also is it imminently signalled that the time is near-drawn, along with its tribulations, then we must perish and be greatly lost together in strife. Here hewed with sword, decapitated lies our lord) It appears that Holofernes is much more powerful than in the original and is idolised by the Assyrians. Added to this argument is the appearance of the word ‘fleohnet’ and the different way in which it is used in the Anglo-Saxon version of the story. In the Vulgate, the conopeum (from kOnOps- mosquito) is removed from the tent with Holofernes’ head to be displayed as a symbol of his power. In the Anglo-Saxon it remains in the tent and is given rather more prominence. This has lead Doubleday and Berkhout to pose ‘the poet’s use of fleohnet suggests Beelzebub, Lord of the Flies.’ Here he is almost the Devil incarnate, in marked contrast to Judith who is described as ‘hālige mēowle’-‘holy woman’ (line56) and ‘Nergendes Þēowen Þrymful’-‘glorious handmaiden of the Saviour’ (lines 74-75). Although the Vulgate obviously is concerned with the fight between good and evil, here, in the Anglo-Saxon, it is made far more specific. The poet juxtaposes Holofernes, as a false idol, against God by applying the same epithets to them both. One noticeable occurrence is the use of the word brytta referring to Holofernes at line 30 and Brytta referring to God at line 93. It is built up to Hollywood Blockbuster proportions with the hand of God on one side, and Satan incarnate on the other. The story is no longer the nationalistic story of the Jews and the adversaries of God, but becomes between ‘the chaste and virtuous Judith and the evil dissolute Holofernes.’ The ‘blockbuster’ idea has been suggested in the form of ‘cinematographic techniques’ by Alain Renoir, as cited by Daniel G. Calder. This is to be found in ‘English Studies 43 pgs 111-55’. Unfortunately, I have been unable to read this article, but the suggestion does interest me. Calder cites Renoir as saying about Judith: ‘The method whereby the poet moves through space and time, and shifts the point of view of his narrative, is one that can be best understood through the analogy of the cinematograph.’ The shift here are presumably relating to the second half of the work. After Holofernes’ head is shown to the Jews, there is a large scale battle that is not in the Vulgate source material. This conflict is highly charged and a very descriptive account of a traditional Anglo-Saxon battle. Again we are thrust back into a heroic encounter when the poet uses ‘the anachronistic accompaniment of the wolf, the raven and the eagle, the traditional beasts of battle in Old English poetry.’ The poet interjects with a scene outside of Holofernes’ tent. The action subsides and we have a comic interlude, which is none-the-less in anticipation of the Assyrian army’s slaughter. With the vivid imagery used by the poet we are invited to see the marked contrast between the individual success of Judith and the martial success of the whole Bethulian army in true Anglo-Saxon heroic terms. The Assyrian warriors do not simply flee as they do in the Vulgate. We are told of the marching forth of the Bethulian army, juxtaposing Judiths return to Bethusala just before. Judiths speech to the Bethulians also juxtaposes Holofernes’ to his troop at the banquet. The use of strong juxtaposition, for which there are many examples, would also seem to be a directorial technique. It allows us to see the polar opposition of the two leading protagonists, as well as in the two nations. Indeed with powerful and descriptive language we do not really see the Assyrians as a mere opposing nation for the Bethulians. As has been noted above, their leader is in no uncertain terms portrayed as a satanic figure, being termed ‘se inwidda’ ‘the evil one’ at line 28 which is evocative of Mathew 13:19 ‘then cometh the wicked one’. But it is not only Holofernes who is described in these terms. The whole Assyrian army is described as ‘ealdfeondas’ (line 315) and ‘ealdhettende’ (line 320) both meaning ‘old enemy’ which is almost certainly a translation of hostis antiquus, an epithet for the devil and the minions of hell. From this we can understand that the battle is ‘not merely…an historical event, but as a battle against the Devil and his minions by a bold warrior troop.’ The effect of this language is to appropriate the victory away from the Bethulians and the defeat away from the Assyrians. Instead we have a Christian victory over a heathen enemy. The Anglo-Saxons, like all Christians, could now claim the victory as their own. Judith is also no longer just a Bethulian Jewish woman, but an agent of God with classic Anglo-Saxon heroic virtues. The poet goes as far as to make this point explicit; Hi ða se hehsta dema ædre mid elne onbryrde, swa he deð anra gehwylcne herbuendra þe hyne him to helpe seceð mid ræde ond mid rihte geleafan. (Then the Highest Judge inspired her completely with courage, as he does for all earth dwelling ones who look for his loving help with wisdom and faith.) Lines 94b -97a. From this we can draw strong parallels with some other works of the time. The poet was not simply chronicling historic events with fidelity ‘rarely supplementing or deducting… (preserving) its proportions almost exactly’ like other Anglo-Saxon translations of the Bible such as Genesis A or Daniel. But rather had a motive behind the vivid changes that were made. One such comparison is The Battle of Maldon. Judith is not a major book in the Old Testament, and is indeed removed from the Protestant Bible all together. In just such a way, Brytnoð is not a hugely significant figure in Anglo-Saxon history. The importance of these characters is that they were Christians fighting a Heathen invader. They both represent nations that seemed to be impotent against the threat of war with an aggressive and alien invader. As the Vikings had been successfully raiding since 787, there was obviously a real and present threat to the Anglo-Saxons of just such a heathen aggressor which was going seemingly unchecked. It would seem almost certain that the changes made were due to the fact that Judith was ‘a good example of resistance to a heathen invader.’ If this is the case, then the Behulians are good examples of heroic warriors. In a further reworking of the Vulgate original, the bethulian army actually manages to overcome their oppressors in a rather more heroic mode. In the Vulgate, The Assyrians do not route until the discovery of their slain general. In the Old English version, the Assyrians have effectively already lost the battle before this discovery. The poet also makes more explicit the irony of the original piece by highlighting certain events and adding new dimensions through language. The most obvious irony, to the point of being comical, is when the Assyrians are making noises to awaken their already dead lord. This is actually in the original ‘Then Vagao going into his chamber, stood before the curtain, and made a clapping with his hands: for he thought that he was sleeping with Judith.’ The Anglo-Saxon makes this more explicit though, by having the soldiers coughing (cohhetan –line 270) and calling or making noises (cirman line 270). Ironic also is the comment made by the poet on Holofernes’ confidence in hi power over Judith. Consider the contrast of; ‘brema on mode bliðe’ joyous of mood (lins57-8) with; ‘hæfde ðā his ende gebidenne on eorðan unswæslicne,’ he had then come to his violent end upon the earth lines (64-5) It is also noted by J. Doubleday that these lines (54-68) ‘are all hypermetrical, and have more rhyme than the text does as a whole’ The irony is also present by the constant uses of wiggend again, to describe the Assyrians at very inappropriate times. For instance, ‘lindwiggend’ shield warrior at line 42 during a drunken feast, ‘wiggend’ warrior at line 69 when they are escorting Judith to Holofernes’ tent (hardly an example of high martial prowess), and most ironically perhaps as ‘cynerof’ noble/renowned at line 312 when they are fleeing from the enemy! As has been postulated, the Assyrians here represent the invading heathen Vikings. The only explanation I can offer for these ironies is to utterly humiliate the interlopers. Although reasonably faithful to the original Biblical text, the poet of the Old English Judith has made some obvious and very intentional changes to his interpretation. The shape and pattern of the extant work, as discussed, point to the fact that the surviving portion is actually rather complete as apposed to being only a small fraction of the original content as postulated by Dobbie et al. There is nothing within the remaining piece that convinces me otherwise, and therefore it appears to me that, rather like the Old English Exodus, the poet has provided ‘an admirable example of a poet’s selection of an episode with its relevant historical background, without paraphrasing the whole of his Biblical source.’ The use of the story of Judith is a very poignant one to the poet, as is the style he has adopted for its retelling. As with the Battle of Maldon, it is a call to arms for a beleaguered Anglo-Saxon culture, desperate to defeat its heathen oppressors once and for all. It is the blockbusting spectacle that has all of its onlookers inspired to recreate the scenes they have witnessed. The author was almost certainly a cleric given the subject matter, just as the author of the Battle of Maldon was also probably a cleric. Brytno^ had several clerical connections, and the similarity between this story and the style of the Saints Lives is remarkable. Pbviously the clerics had a vestige interest in keeping the heathens at bay, possibly more than the common man. It was imperative that they were stopped. This action epic would have gone a long way to help such a cause. Just as a modern audience comes away from the latest Ridley Scott film, believing themselves capable of defending their families against any manner of improbable enemies, the rousing and fluid pace of Judith must have influenced its contemporary audience to take up arms against the very real threat of the Viking aggressor. As the Battle of Maldon took place in 991, it is not inconceivable that Brytno^, himself, read or heard this version of Judith and decided, like Judith, that enough was enough. Unfortunately for Brytno^, of course, was that the outcome at Maldon was rather different. The anachronistic use of the Heroic Code and language has strong resonance even now. As recently as the Second World War, Churchill was quoting the Battle of Maldon in his speeches and using strong heroic metaphor to spur his troops on, as well as keeping up the morale of the civilians at home. It takes little thought, therefore, to imagine the poet doing exactly that. To a certain extent, of course, it worked. The Angelcynn, by necessity, did indeed become great warriors once more and kept the Vikings from taking over the whole country. Of course, one hundred years later sees the end of this success with the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Harold had met Williams army immediately after another battle against the Vikings, however, and as history tells, his army fought valiantly and well despite exhaustion. It would seem unlikely that any Anglo-Saxon army of the early tenth century could have met with such success. The Anglo-Saxon accounts of The Battle of Maldon and Judith could therefore be of extreme importance to historical researchers, when we consider that the outcome of these pieces may well have helped to shape one hundred years of our history. Without these stirring accounts, England may well have been a Viking province instead of a Norman one. It may, even, not be called Englaland at all. Bibliography Dobbie, E.V.K, Beowulf and Judith, The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records IV, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, London, 1953 J. F. Doubleday, ‘The Principle of Contrast in Judith’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 72. 1971 Elizabeth M. Tyler, ‘Style and Meaning in Judith’, Notes and Queries, 237, 1992, Huppé B. F. The Web of Words, Structural analysis of the Old English Poems Vainglory, The Wonder of Creation, the Dream of the Rood and Judith, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1970 Berkhout C.T & Doubleday J.F, The Net in Judith 46b-54a’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 74, 1973 R. E, Woolf, ‘The Lost Opening to “Judith”’, Modern Language Review, 50, 1955 Daniel G. Calder, Essays on Style, Old English Poetry, University of California Press, 1979 Herman, John P, ‘The Theme of Spiritual Warfare in the Old English Judith’, Philological Quarterly, 55, 1976 Pearsall, D, Old English and Middle English Poetry, Vol 1, Routledge Histery of English Poetry, 1977 From an English translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible; Book of Judith. Available at http://www.drbo.org/book/18.htm. |
Library
~ Table of Contents ~
|
