DOCSLIB.ORG

AUTHORSHIP and UNITY in the EXETER BOOK RIDDLES by John

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AUTHORSHIP and UNITY in the EXETER BOOK RIDDLES by John AUTHORSHIP AND UNITY IN THE EXETER BOOK RIDDLES by John Neilson Mason B.A., University of British Columbia, 1972 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of English We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1976 © John Neilson Mason, 1976 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of ENGLISH The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date MAY 7, 1976 - ii - ABSTRACT Nineteenth-century scholars generally felt that the Exeter Book riddle collection was a unified whole under the authorship of Cynewulf, or that it was made up of two major parts, Riddles "1" (now known as "Wul'f and Eadwacer") to 59 and 61-95. Most scholars since the first decade of this century, however, have viewed the riddles as a miscellany, with a few individual riddles perhaps sharing common authorship, but with no overall unity or organization in the collection as a whole. If the riddles are examined in terms of their point of view (I am..., I saw..., There is...), a distinct pattern emerges which demonstrates Riddles 61-95 to be separate from the rest, and which also divides Riddles 1-59 into two more or less equal groups. The distribution of point of view does not indicate the exact point of division between the first two groups, but if the groups originally comprised 60 riddles (like the collection of Eusebius), and if the two groups are assumed to have been equal collections of 30, then deduction based on the amount of missing material due to the loss of folios between fols. 105 and 106, and between 111 and 112, would locate the break between Riddles 29 and 30. Riddle 30b, then, could have been simply a mis-start of the second group at a point later in the MS. Examination of the distribution of opening and closing formulas arid of the adverbs hwilum, oft and nu over the collection supports the three-part theory. Stylistic diversity in the third group, from crude riddles like Nos. 75 and 76 to the fine 'horn' and 'water' riddles suggests that •oh:' - this group is a miscellany containing the work of a number of authors. Connections between riddles of this group and the two earlier ones appear to indicate some sort of dependence of these on riddles of the first two groups. The relationship in several of the cases can be explained as imitation or modelling of the later riddles on earlier ones. Such a suggestion is not inconsistent with practice at the time, as other riddles of the period appear to have been used as exercises in grammar. - iv - CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I THE CYNEWULFIAN CONTROVERSY 1 Footnotes to Chapter I 18 CHAPTER II IS THERE UNITY IN THE COLLECTION? 21 Treatment of Material 21 Unity and Sources 27 Arguments Based on Date 29 Footnotes to Chapter II 35 CHAPTER III SECTIONS OF THE TEXT AS SEPARATE UNITS 37 Evidence for Distinct Groups in the Collection 37 The Original Groupings Ul Opening and Closing Formulas, and Three Adverbs i|8 The Relationship Between the Groups 57 Footnotes to Chapter III 66 CONCLUSION 69 LIST OF WORKS CONSULTED 71 APPENDIX A 77. APPENDIX B 78 APPENDIX C 80 _ v - LIST OF TABLES Table I Distribution of Points of View p. 38 Table II Distribution of Opening and Closing Formulas p. 50 Table III Frequency of Opening and Closing Formulas p. 51 Table IV Occurrence of hwilum, oft and nu i. Adverb Begins Half-Line p. 53 ii. Scribal Point Precedes Adverb p. 51i - vi - LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Forster's Collation of Gatherings XIV, XVI and XVII p. hh Figure 2 Possible Loss from Gathering XVII p. kh - vii - ABBREVIATIONS REB Frederick Tupper, ed., The Riddles of the Exeter Book (Boston: Ginn and Co., 1910). K-D G.P. Krapp and E.vK. Dobbie, eds., The Exeter Book (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936). EBOEP R.W. Chambers, Max Forster and Robin Flower, eds., The Exeter Book of Old English Poetry (London: Lund, Humphries and Co., 1933). - yiii- Note on Numbering The four, most widely-used editions of the Exeter Book riddles today are those of Tupper, Wyatt, Mackie and Krapp and Dobbie; earlier scholars usually used Grein's edition.1 Unfortunately, all these editions vary in their systems of numbering the riddles. Tupper includes "Wulf and Eadwacer" as his Riddle 1, but presents K-D 68 and 69 as one riddle. Wyatt and Mackie also group 68 and 69, but Mackie omits K-D 90, the Latin Riddle. Grein includes "Wulf and Eadwacer," but omits the fragments K-D 78, 82, 89, 92 and 9U. All numbering in this study will follow the Krapp and Dobbie system, but the following key can be used for adjusting the other systems to K-D numbering. Wyatt THEEe r K-D 1-68 = W 1-682 K'- D 1-68 = T 2-69 (K-D = T-l) K-D 69-89 = W 683-88 (K-D - W+l) K-D 69-95 = T 69-95 K-D 91-95 = W 89-93 (K-D = W+2) Mackie Grein ,2 K-D 1-66 » G 2-67 K-D 1-68 = M 1-68' K-D 68 = G 681"2 J K-D 69-95 = M 683-94 (K-D = M+l) K-D 69-77 = G 68 -76 K-D 79-81 = G 77-79 K-D 83-88 = G 80-85 K-D 90-91 = G 86-87 K-D 93 = G 88 K-D 95 = G 89 1 C W M Grein, Bibliothek der Angelsachsischen Poesie (Goetingen: Georg H. Wigands Verlag, ltJbo), n, Joy-u07- CHAPTER I THE CYNEWULFIAN CONTROVERSY A study of authorship and unity in the Exeter Book riddles is inextricably involved with the Cynewulfian controversy. This is the scholarly dispute which raged in the nineteenth century, and a little into the twentieth, in which opinions were voiced concerning possible authorship by Cynewulf of almost every piece of Anglo-Saxon poetry extant. The riddles were at the heart of the Cynewulfian dispute, due to charades on the name Cynewulf which were supposedly found in two of the riddles, and on alleged biographical details in another. These charades were thought to be similar to the runic signatures found in the four 'signed' Cynewulfian poems. The idea of Cynewulfian authorship of the riddles came for a while to be regarded almost as an established fact, but began losing favor in the 1880*s. Many scholars, still held to the theory, though, and it continued to be revived sporadically until 1910. The basis of the theory which assigned authorship to Cynewulf, indeed virtually the only piece of evidence upon which all the later opinions were grounded, was Heinrich Leo's solution of the so-called 1 v r 'First Riddle.' This poem, which appears on Folios 100 and 101 of the Exeter Book, and which immediately precedes in the MS the first group of what are now considered by most scholars the true riddles, is now generally known as "Wulf and Eadwacer." The inspiration for Leo's solution took place in 18U0, with the almost simultaneous, though completely independent discoveries, by 2 3 Jacob Grimm and John M. Kemble, that the runes at the end of the - 2 - Old English poems "Elene," "Juliana," and "Christ II," when properly arranged, formed the name Cynewulf in the first two cases, and Cynwulf in the third. Grimm and Kemble suggested that the person in question might be Cenwulf, Abbot of Peterborough, who flourished in the early tenth century; Grimm assigned no historical significance to the name, but supposed Cynewulf to have been an eighth-century Northumbrian, per• haps a pupil of Aldhelra. The discovery of an author's name connected with Anglo-Saxon verse, in contrast to the usual complete anonymity of the poetry, was an exciting find which prompted a minute search over the next few decades for more hidden signatures in Old English poetry. As well, specifically Cynewulfian features were claimed for many unsigned poems, and scholars tentatively assigned more and more works to Cynewulf. An early product of this research, and one which added considerable impetus to further investigation, was Leo's 'discovery' in 18£7^ of a charade in the First Riddle, which, he claimed, revealed the name of Cynewulf. By a process of emendation and twisting of meaning to suit his purpose, , Leo produced an ingenious interpretation which finds the whole poem to be a play on the syllables of Cynewulf's name. I reproduce here the original and Leo's interpretation. For Morley's English trans• lation of Leo see Appendix A. - 3 - . Leodum is minura swylce him mon lac gifej willa3 hy hlne abecgan, gif he on breat cyme5. Ungelic is us. Wulf is on iege, ic on oberre. Faest is baet eglond, fenne biworpen. Sindon waelreowe weras baer on ige; willa8 hy hine apecgan, gif he on preat cyme5. Ungelice is us. Wulfes ic mines widlastum wenum dogode; bonne hit waes renig weder ond ic reotugu saet, bonne mec se beaducafa bogum bilegde, waes me wyn to pon, waes me hwaebre eac lad.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Leeds Studies in English
    Leeds Studies in English New Series XLII © Leeds Studies in English 2012 School of English University of Leeds Leeds, England ISSN 0075-8566 Leeds Studies in English New Series XLII 2011 Edited by Alaric Hall Editorial assistants Helen Price and Victoria Cooper Leeds Studies in English <www.leeds.ac.uk/lse> School of English University of Leeds 2011 Leeds Studies in English <www.leeds.ac.uk/lse> Leeds Studies in English is an international, refereed journal based in the School of English, University of Leeds. Leeds Studies in English publishes articles on Old and Middle English literature, Old Icelandic language and literature, and the historical study of the English language. After a two-year embargo, past copies are made available, free access; they can be accessed via <http://www.leeds.ac.uk/lse>. Editorial Board: Catherine Batt, Chair Marta Cobb Victoria Cooper, Editorial Assistant Alaric Hall, Editor Paul Hammond Cathy Hume, Reviews Editor Ananya Jahanara Kabir Oliver Pickering Helen Price, Editorial Assistant Notes for Contributors Contributors are requested to follow the MHRA Style Guide: A Handbook for Authors, Editors, and Writers of Theses, 2nd edn (London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 2008), available at <http://www.mhra.org.uk/Publications/Books/StyleGuide/download.shtml>. Where possible, contributors are encouraged to include the digital object identifiers or, where a complete free access text is available, stable URLs of materials cited (see Style Guide §11.2.10.1). The language of publication is English and translations should normally be supplied for quotations in languages other than English. Each contributor will receive a free copy of the journal, and a PDF of their article for distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Old English Ecologies: Environmental Readings of Anglo-Saxon Texts and Culture
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 12-2013 Old English Ecologies: Environmental Readings of Anglo-Saxon Texts and Culture Ilse Schweitzer VanDonkelaar Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations Part of the Literature in English, British Isles Commons, and the Medieval Studies Commons Recommended Citation VanDonkelaar, Ilse Schweitzer, "Old English Ecologies: Environmental Readings of Anglo-Saxon Texts and Culture" (2013). Dissertations. 216. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/216 This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OLD ENGLISH ECOLOGIES: ENVIRONMENTAL READINGS OF ANGLO-SAXON TEXTS AND CULTURE by Ilse Schweitzer VanDonkelaar A dissertation submitted to the Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of English Western Michigan University December 2013 Doctoral Committee: Jana K. Schulman, Ph.D., Chair Eve Salisbury, Ph.D. Richard Utz, Ph.D. Sarah Hill, Ph.D. OLD ENGLISH ECOLOGIES: ENVIRONMENTAL READINGS OF ANGLO-SAXON TEXTS AND CULTURE Ilse Schweitzer VanDonkelaar, Ph.D. Western Michigan University, 2013 Conventionally, scholars have viewed representations of the natural world in Anglo-Saxon (Old English) literature as peripheral, static, or largely symbolic: a “backdrop” before which the events of human and divine history unfold. In “Old English Ecologies,” I apply the relatively new critical perspectives of ecocriticism and place- based study to the Anglo-Saxon canon to reveal the depth and changeability in these literary landscapes.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-‐Publication Draft
    1 Martin Foys UW-Madison [email protected] Revised draft for: Transitional States: Cultural Change, Tradition and Memory in Medieval England (ACMRS 2016) Pre-publication draft The Undoing of Exeter Book Riddle 47: ‘Bookmoth’1 I. Doing the Riddle: Creation Exeter Book Riddle 47 (hereafter, Riddle 47, or "BookMoth" riddle) reMains one of the literary stars of the Manuscript’s riddle collection – often anthologized and regularly discussed, despite the curious fact that in conventional terMs, it has never been regarded as that iMpressive a riddle:2 Moððe word fræt. Me þat þuhte wrætlicu wyrd, þa ic þæt wundor gefrægn, þæt se wyrM forswealg wera gied suMes, þeof in þystro, þryMfæstne cwide ond þæs strangan staþol. Stælgiest ne wæs wihte þy gleawra, þe he þaM wordum swealg. A Moth ate words. I thought that a marvelous occurrence, when I learned of this wonder – that the worM devoured the sayings of one Man, - this thief in the dark – the glorious speech, and its strong foundation. The thievish-guest was not a whit wiser – he who devoured those words!3 1 This essay was originally composed to be part of a festschrift in honor of Allen Frantzen. But in light of public statements made by Frantzen regarding women, feminism and the academy (see Rio Fernandes, "Prominent Medieval Scholar’s Blog on ‘Feminist Fog’ Sparks an Uproar," in The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 5, 2016 <http://chronicle.com/article/Prominent-Medieval-Scholar-s/235014>), I can no longer offer this essay in that context. Because an academic publication is a durable record, this essay remains in this volume to provide an explicit citation of Frantzen's views and the controversy that surrounds them, so that their witness and an objection to them is registered within it.
    [Show full text]
  • Leeds Studies in English
    Leeds Studies in English New Series XLII 2011 Edited by Alaric Hall Editorial assistants Helen Price and Victoria Cooper Leeds Studies in English <www.leeds.ac.uk/lse> School of English University of Leeds 2011 Looming Danger and Dangerous Looms: Violence and Weaving in Exeter Book Riddle 56 Megan Cavell Violence in the Exeter Book riddles is not a new topic. Many discussions of these fascinating texts focus on the way in which commonplace objects are personified and then attacked, bound, mutilated and/or killed.1 This violence, which is both carried out by humans and at the same time frequently punctuated by expressions of human empathy for the wounded objects, has been explained as acceptable because it occurs in the safe, playful and inverted world of the riddle.2 Indeed, Ruth Wehlau notes that, as with the saints’ lives, ‘[p]art of the pleasure in reading the riddles comes from the idea of violence as spectacle, combined with our knowledge that the violence is confined to the words’.3 The loom riddle,4 which is Riddle 56 according to the numbering in the Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records (hereafter ASPR),5 is one of these texts, and the violent imagery here is particularly problematic because it characterizes the construction 1 See, for example, Dieter Bitterli, Say What I Am Called: The Old English Riddles of the Exeter Book and the Anglo-Latin Riddle Tradition (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009); Jerome Denno, ‘Oppression and Voice in the Anglo-Saxon Riddles’, Papers Presented at the 35th International Congress on Medieval Studies, 2000 <http://www2.kenyon.edu/AngloSaxonRiddles/Denno.htm> [accessed 19 January 2011]; Ruth Wehlau, ‘The Riddle of Creation’: Metaphor Structures in Old English Poetry, Studies in Humanities: Literature-Politics- Society (New York: Peter Lang, 1997), pp.
    [Show full text]