Metrics, Scribes, and Beowulf: A Response to Neidorf (2017), The Transmission of Beowulf

Nelson Goering

doi:10.1007/s11061-018-9583-7

Abstract

Neidorf (2017), The Transmission of Beowulf, synthesizes a variety of philological approaches to propose a new ‘lexemic theory’ of Anglo-Saxon scribal behaviour. In this response article, I build on Neidorf’s arguments, suggesting ways that his theory may be adapted to account for differences between the two scribes of the Beowulf manuscript, and addressing some of the ways that metrical evidence only more weakly supports, or sometimes directly contradicts, some of Neidorf’s specific claims.

Highlights

Neidorf begins with a programmatic introduction, in which he lays out the scope, premises, and methodology that informs the rest of the study. He accepts the linguistic consensus that Beowulf originally dates to the early eighth century (Ringe and Taylor 2014: 9), giving the poem a textual history of around three centuries before the extant witness was produced
Neidorf’s primary set of data comes from ‘errors’ in the text, which, he argues, can be detected when they disturb observable regularities in the poem. Some of these regularities are grammatical or semantic, but Neidorf places a particular emphasis on metre as an indicator of textual corruption, noting that ‘[i]n the wars fought over textual criticism, metre is an impartial weapon: it undermines conservative efforts to defend corrupt readings as effectively as it constrains liberal efforts to bring about specious improvements of sense or style’ (2017: 21)
This principle is a worthy one, but needs to be employed carefully; I will discuss below cases where metrical evidence is either less strong than Neidorf implies, or actively speaks against some of his claims

Summary

Introduction

Neidorf reviews a few of Tolkien’s specific proposed emendations, including some not otherwise discussed in this book, but mostly he concentrates on Tolkien’s general views on the text’s history and on the role of the scribes in copying the poem.

Results

Conclusion