The Anglo-Saxon Warrior Ethic: Reconstructing Lordship in Early English Literature by John M. Hill (review)

Abstract

REVIEWS The Anglo-Saxon Warrior Ethic: ReconstructingLordship in Early English Literature. By John M. Hill. Gainsville, Tallahassee, and Tampa: University Press of Florida. 2000. ix+174 pp. $55- ISBN 0-8130-1769-6. In a recent review of Jos Bazelmans's illuminating study of lord-retainer relation? ships, By Weapons Made Worthy(Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1999), in Tijdschrift voor geschiedenis, 113 (2000), 240-42, I expressed my surprise that the work of John M. Hill did not feature prominently. It is now frustrating to find that this unawareness is mutual, and that John Hill in turn ignores Bazelmans's very simi? lar approach. Bibliographical problems aside, Hill's examination of some aspects of the Anglo-Saxon warrior ethic is very interesting and lucidly presented. The slim hardback volume contains half a dozen gently probing discussions of lord-retainer relationships and a number of related issues, such as the formative influence of battle, matrilinearity, feud, revenge, and group identities, as exemplified in a selection of vernacular material, above all The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (especially s.aa. 755, 901, 905), The Battle ofBrunanburh, The Battle ofMaldon, and Beozvulf. Could this be the sort of study that the Anglo-Saxon poets themselves might have appreciated? Hill's close readings (particularly of Beowidf) and a supremely cautious introduction seem subtle enough, and one hopes that the author will go on to deal with furtherand more extensive material, of both the primary and secondary type. In Hill's bibliography (entirely anglophone), more recent editions should have appeared for Chambers and Wilson, and John of Worcester should be cited from the recent Oxford Medieval Text. Given Diana Greenway's efforts,Forester's translation of 1853 also seems a curious choice for Henry of Huntingdon(pp. 78-79, 155, 163). It is not clear what Hill means when he attributes the appearance of Beozvulf in the manuscript next to Judith to 'the dominant cultural and text production context? religious and monastic?in which any Anglo-Saxon revival of secular story would occur' (p. 143); the problem is surely more complicated and perhaps not just one that pertains to the later Anglo-Saxon period; see the relevant publications on the presumptive construction ofthe B eowulf codex, and also recent interpretationsof Judith. Hill's study seems to have been proof-read quite carefully, but the bibliographical details forde Vries, Bremmer, Sawyer, Malone, and Enright should be checked again; forFruhmitter- alterliche read Fruhmittelalterliche. University of St Andrews Christine Rauer Beowulf and theDragon: Parallels and Analogues. By Christine Rauer. Cambridge: Brewer. 2000. x + 23opp. ?45; $75. ISBN 0-85991-592-1. In Chapter 1, 'Source Study and Beowulf, Rauer distinguishes between analogues and sources, attributingthe lack of consensus about them to unclear definition (p. 20). In Chapter 2 she shows 'that comparatively few of the [Germanic] analogues sug? gested so far supply parallels for the dragon episode in Beozvidf (11. 2200-3182)' (p. 24). By 'the dragon episode' Rauer means Klaeber's synopsis of it, which she accepts without question and cites in full (pp. 24-25). A review of opinions concerning the subject matter of the codex and its manuscript history, i.e. monsters, transitional passages, possible existence as a 'codicological sub-unit', and so on, highlights 'the idiosyncratic character of the dragon' (p. 27). Rauer divides the full episode into three sections?(1) 'events which precede the dragon-fight'; (2) 'events associated with the fightitself; and (3) 'events which follow the fight' (pp. 31-32)?but finds 'no ...