Jump to content

Talk:Beowulf

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 72.220.156.80 (talk) at 18:38, 13 November 2007 (→Grendel). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Mohammadianism?

Can someone tell me why at the end of themes someone continues to put comments on mohammadianism? As far as i can tell this has nothing to do with this. Is it now wikipedia policy to put every religions views on every subject? Also the refrences lead to random sites which have nothing to do with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.104.130.77 (talk) 10:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Grendel

Can someone give me some insite on Grendel, Im doing a literary Reasearch paper on Beowulf and I would like to explain Grendel In a way, that isnt colouded, I want to know were I can find out History on Grendel, Ive looked everywhere and cant find anything.

A movie is coming out

Why is this not in the article? I saw the trailer on Nick At Nite tonight and am shocked it hasnt been mentioned —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.188.218 (talk) 03:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's discussed in the Beowulf in Art section here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beowulf#Beowulf_in_art -Classicfilms 14:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just modified the header to "Beowulf in film, literature, music, and popular culture," so try here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beowulf#Beowulf_in_film.2C_literature.2C_music.2C_and_popular_culture
-Classicfilms 15:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copies printed

I removed this sentence from the introduction:

"There are over 1.5 million copies of Beowulf printed today."

It needs to be sourced and clarified - there are numerous translations of Beowulf in many different languages. This sentence needs to clarify which editions are included in this number and which languages they are translated into. It also needs to differentiate between translations and either dual language editions or editions published in Old English. -Classicfilms 20:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beowulf (character)

The section below should be sourced before being restored back to the article. -Classicfilms 19:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Main article: Beowulf (hero)

J. R. R. Tolkien argued that the name Beowulf means bee-hunter (literally, bee-wolf) in Old English. The name Beowulf could therefore be a kenning for "bear" due to a bear's love of honey.[citation needed] Jacob Grimm attributes the term "bee-hunter" to a type of woodpecker.[citation needed]

Some scholars[who?] suggest that Beowulf could correspond to Bödvar Bjarki, the battle bear, from Norse sagas. Both left Geatland (where Bjarki's brother was king), arrived in Denmark and slew a beast that terrorized the Danish court. They also both helped the Swedish king Eadgils defeat his uncle Áli in the Battle on the Ice of Lake Vänern.

Author John Grigsby argued that the word Beowulf translates as 'Barley wolf'[citation needed] and links this character to ancient warrior cults of Indo-European tradition. R. D. Fulk[citation needed] and Joseph Harris[citation needed] suggest that the name is theophoric, related to the germanic god Beow, citing the rarity of kenning derived names and other similar names such as Gott-fried, Gott-lieb, Torsten(Thor-stone), the Norse þór-ólfr, and the English Tiu-wulf.

The connection with Bjödvar Bjarki is notable and I have seen it mentioned both in older works and in more recent ones.--Berig 05:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the only reason it was moved is because I tagged it with reference tags in individual places instead of the broad tag that existed before. If nobody beats me to it, I will eventually reference as much as I can. :bloodofox: 06:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the section has been tagged for a long time without references being added which creates problems re: Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Of course, if sources are found the section should be restored. -Classicfilms 14:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that there appear to be so few editors who would make the effort of providing references. Bödvar Bjarki has been on my to-do list for about a year now, and I haven't seen any other editors trying to expand the info on him.--Berig 15:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Have you looked at the three sources below? They are good places to begin, particularly Klaeber's introductory section-
1. Orchard, Andy. A Critical Companion to Beowulf. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 2003.
2. Frederick Klaeber, ed. Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg. Third ed. Boston: Heath, 1950.
3. Mitchell, Bruce, et al. Beowulf: An Edition with Relevant Shorter Texts. Oxford, UK: Malden Ma., 1998.
-Classicfilms 15:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! They'll come in handy in a while. I am working on some runestone articles at the moment, and when I'm done, I intend to revisit the legendary articles.--Berig 16:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, glad to help out. Beowulf is potentially a featured article but it still has a long way to go - I think the entire article needs to be re-worked with more sources and references to notable Beowulf scholars. The section above should probably be attended to first, but there are other portions as well. These three texts are a good place to begin because they contain extensive bibliographies which will point the way to other notable scholars and articles. For a general overview, you might also want to look at the related sections in the Norton Anthology of English Literature -Classicfilms 16:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I already have Norton :). I'd be great if the article could be raised to FA status, but we'd need to be several editors to make it happen, I think.--Berig 16:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed :-) Maybe other editors will see this thread and also take a look at the texts mentioned... -Classicfilms 16:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for this particular section, Olson (1916) is a source that should be used. He discusses the connections between Beowulf and Bödvar Bjarki in various old sources, but it would need to be updated with more recent works.--Berig 16:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It probably wouldn't hurt to mention it, but yes more recent articles should be sourced. Also, a well-written section would refer to the articles by the most notable scholars who have written on the subject. For example, the Beowulf article frequently references Tolkien (I suspect due to the popularity of the Lord of the Rings books and films). While no one will doubt Tolkien's importance to the field, the number of references to him coupled with the lack of references to other scholars decreases the overall value of the article. So my overall comment would be that the references should be relatively current (unless notable such as in the case of Tolkien), should be from sources who are considered leaders in the particular area discussed, and should be balanced with a variety of viewpoints to achieve NPOV. -Classicfilms 17:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would not refer to Olson in particular, but it's a good source for the views of classic authorities like Sophus Bugge. Bugge might need to be referred to because of his notability, although his main theory became outdated when Georges Dumézil launched his comparative theory. Bugge maintained that the Norse mythos had arrived in Scandinavia from Rome and Greece by the way of Anglo-Saxon England, whereas Dumézil showed that the Norse mythos dates back to Proto-Indo-European times.--Berig 17:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CE v AD

There is a wikipedia editor, Jpeterson46321, who has been going about making wholesale changes of dates from BCE/CE style to BC/AD style. This, I believe, is expressly against Wikipedia policy. I reverted a number of his edits, including the one he made to this page, but I have some doubts about my reversion here. When Jpeterson found this article it had one CE and one AD. When I came here I found three AD's and made them all CE's. Others who are more familiar with this article may have contrasting views and I will happily bow to consensus on this point so far as this article is concerned. Steven J. Anderson

In response to editor Steven Anderson, I believe that my reversions to AD are both proper and correct. First, the original usage was the AD/BC format. Secondly, the usage conforms with traditional usage in Western culture. I will revert the improper changes by editor Anderson and await a consensus on the matter. Jpetersen46321 18:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is now common practice in western culture to use the BCE/CE format, especialy in academic circles. I would suggest it would be better to change it to that format here as the outdated BC/AD style doesnt fit in a modern resource like wikipedia.-vibranceuk 8 november 2007

I think BCE/CE is more appropriate. :bloodofox: 03:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To quote the manual of style, "Either CE and BCE or AD and BC can be used—spaced, undotted (without periods) and upper-case. Choose either the BC/AD or the BCE/CE system, but not both in the same article. AD appears before or after a year (AD 1066, 1066 AD); the other abbreviations appear after (1066 CE, 3700 BCE, 3700 BC). The absence of such an abbreviation indicates the default, CE/AD. It is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is a substantive reason; the Manual of Style favors neither system over the other." For what it is worth, the earliest available version of this article used AD see here. Dsmdgold 05:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, to sate the lust of people who want Jesus Christ mentioned in our date system, but to keep religious neutrality, and also sate the lust of those who think it is necessary to use Latin, we could use AOI
(Annō ortī Iesī), in the year of the birth of Jesus. Except for a few atheist naysayers, it is universally excepted that Jesus of Nazereth did exist at the time which Pontius Pilate was procurator of Iudea, and it is from the year of his birth that the "Common Era" dates from.

Beowulf and danish mythology

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beowulf and danish mythology, what follows is the content of the now-deleted article Beowulf and danish mythology, by Roldanaf (talk · contribs). Some of it may be useful here. Sandstein 20:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beowulf’s poet adapts certain motifs found in Danish mythology (also see Norse Mythology) to relay a directed moral to his audience.[1] The poet expects his audience to possess a general knowledge of these myths and he uses them to contrast the actions and choices of the mythical characters with the characters in his own poem. There are two important myths that he incorporates into his poem: those of Freyja’s Brísingamen, and Thor and the World Serpent.
The first of the myths is that of the Brísingamen, a necklace owned by the goddess Freyja. In the poem, there is a brief mention of Brosinga Mene, wherein the poet alludes to a decision made by Hama to forego earthly treasure for eternal reward (Beo 1195-1201). This allusion “[links] the pursuit of treasure with damnation.”[2]
Finally, and arguably most importantly, there is the connection between Beowulf and the Dragon and Thor and the World Serpent. It is suggested by some scholars that the poet uses Beowulf’s character as an analogy to Thor. Numerous similarities may be found: their battles with giants, the loss of hope experienced by their people after their deaths and their final battles with serpents.[3] The use of these Danish myths, although Christianized, adds an interesting perspective on the poet and his own views on the salvation of “heathens.”[4]

Response

The only thing that I have not already seen mentioned in other articles is the analogy with Thor's battle against the Midgard Serpent. Still, there are other more close analogies, such as Sigmund's battle against a dragon in Beowulf itself and Sigurd/Sigfried's battle against Fafnir. Maybe the Thor-Beowulf analogy could be used in a section or article on dragons in Germanic paganism. I wonder what is meant by "Danish mythology" since there are only references to Beowulf and Norse mythology.--Berig 17:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Berig! - Have you read the text mentioned in the article? I'd like to track it down and take a look before offering a comment on the summaries provided here. Regards, -Classicfilms 17:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Which text do you mean? Richard North's book?--Berig 17:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.-Classicfilms 17:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm afraid not. I simply assume good faith on the part of the contributor who wrote about his book.--Berig 17:41, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that - I didn't mean to imply anything but good faith. I do not doubt the accuracy or good faith of the summaries above. What I was referring to is the scholarly practice of reviewing the original document that summaries or quotes come from before developing a response. I did find the book listed in the library - once I have reviewed it myself, and have a larger context for the summaries above, I'll comment. Regards, -Classicfilms 17:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One comment that I forgot to add - since the above is the work of a single scholar, the text needs to be re-written to indicate this fact. In other words, the paragraphs should begin with a sentence such as: "Richard North, Professor of English, University College London, argues that Beowulf’s poet adapts certain motifs ..." In addition, the work of a few more scholars will be needed for a balanced view of the topic before this can be placed in the main article. -Classicfilms 01:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, such theories are more useful for the article Beowulf (hero).--Berig 08:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I looked through the chapter last night. The summary offered above is useful but misses a number of other points offered by the author. I reviewed each point offered above and elaborated on it according to North's text. Also - I could not find the quote attributed to p. 198 - I would appreciate a second set of eyes to look through the chapter for it. I re-wrote the text and added a new quote which offers the same information. As I said, there is quite a bit of information given in this chapter but I thought it best to limit my re-write to what is offered above. It looks useful, though for balance we should add the work of a few more scholars (as I mentioned above). Here is the re-write:

In Chapter 7 of his text Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf, Richard North (Professor of English, University College London) argues that the Beowulf poet interpreted, "Danish myths in Christian form." [5] North states:

As yet we are no closer to finding out why the first audience of Beowulf liked to hear stories about people routinely classified as dammed. This question is pressing, given Pages' demonstration that Anglo-Saxons saw the Danes as 'heathens' rather than as foreigners, even if he concludes that 'in different parts of England, a variety of positions was possible,' including the composition of a praise poem for Danes during the Viking Age.[6]

North continues by stating that the poet expected his audience to possess a general knowledge of these myths which he used as a tool to contrast the actions and choices of the mythical characters with the characters in his own poem.

He suggests that a few important myths influenced the poem. The first, he argues, was the tale of Freyja’s Brísingamen. North refers to Wealtheow's act of giving a necklace to Beowulf [7] and then suggests that,

The wider Old Norse-Icelandic tradition attributes the Brisinga men or giroli Brisings (Brisinger's girdle c.900) to Freya who is at once the sister of Ingvi-freyr of the vanir, the leading Norse goddess of love, and a witch with the power to revive the dead. Freya's aquisition of this necklace and its theft by Loki are the central incidents in Sorlaþattr. [8]

North also argues that there is the connection between Beowulf and the Dragon and Thor and the World Serpent. It is suggested by some scholars that the poet uses Beowulf’s character as an analogy to Thor. Numerous similarities may be found: their battles with giants, the loss of hope experienced by their people after their deaths and their final battles with serpents.[9] North suggests that this version of the myth was "Christianized." [10]

Notes

  1. ^ Richard North, "The King's Soul: Danish Mythology in Beowulf," in the Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf, (New York: Oxford University, 2006), 195.
  2. ^ Ibid., 198.
  3. ^ Ibid., 202-203.
  4. ^ Ibid., 205.
  5. ^ Richard North, "The King's Soul: Danish Mythology in Beowulf," in the Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf, (New York: Oxford University, 2006), 195
  6. ^ Richard North, "The King's Soul: Danish Mythology in Beowulf," in the Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf, (New York: Oxford University, 2006), 195
  7. ^ Richard North, "The King's Soul: Danish Mythology in Beowulf," in the Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf, (New York: Oxford University, 2006), 194
  8. ^ Richard North, "The King's Soul: Danish Mythology in Beowulf," in the Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf, (New York: Oxford University, 2006), 197-8
  9. ^ Ibid., 202-203.
  10. ^ Ibid., 205.

As this is just the beginning of a draft, I would appreciate the input of other editors. -Classicfilms 18:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, your presentation answers some questions raised by the text from the deleted article, and it looks considerably more scholarly. My two cents:
1) North appears to date Beowulf to the Viking Age, so that has to be taken into consideration when using his thesis, since others date it to 8th century East Anglia or Offa of Mercia.
2) The information on Brisingamen could be used in the articles Brisingamen and Wealtheow.
3) The analogy with Thor and the Midgard serpent could be used in Beowulf (hero)where it should also compared to Bödvar Bjarki's fight against a dragon in Norse tradition, as well as to other Germanic heroes fighting dragons. Hopefully, there are good and recent articles treating such comparisons.
4) He appears to consider Grendel to be a jotun, which is highly relevant.
5) He appears to maintain that Beowulf is a eheumerized version of Norse mythology, and there could be an entire article on this on WP, mentioning for instance the analogy between Haethcyn killing Herebeald and Höthr killing Balder, which has been noticed by scholars.--Berig 18:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure! Glad to help out. Regarding your first point, I'm going to quote from the opening of North's text:
"This book suggests that Beowulf was composed in the winter of 826-7 by Eanmund, abbot of the minister of Breedon on the Hill in north-west Leicestershire, not only as a requiem for King Beornwulf of Mercia who was killed in a battle earlier that year, but also as a work of recommendation for Wiglaf, an ealdorman who was plotting to succeed him" (p.vii, Preface).
Your other suggestions sound great. Maybe you could start some of these changes? Thanks for the feedback. -Classicfilms 18:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like a very reasonable thesis. About a year ago, I wrote extensively on Beowulf and I plan to start writing again in a few weeks.--Berig 19:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great! I'm sure that this will help to improve the article. -Classicfilms 01:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Character List

The character list is quite long - it is also (obviously) a list. For both of these reasons, I would like to suggest moving it to another article called "List of characters in Beowulf." -Classicfilms 13:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of agree on this since it takes up a lot of space. However, it might be better just to remove it since a "List of characters in Beowulf" will probably be attacked by the List of X deletionists anyway.--Berig 20:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hesitant to delete the list since it is enormously useful to have the character names in one place. I checked Wikipedia:Lists and can't find a reason to delete such a page. There are also Wikipedia:Featured lists to imitate. -Classicfilms 20:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If there is place for an article like List of English words containing Q not followed by U, there should be place for an article named "List of characters in Beowulf". I can make it tomorrow afternoon, if it is fine by you.--Berig 20:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Berig for making me laugh (I certainly needed it :-) Yes, it is remarkable to see what becomes an FA (also gives us hope that one day Beowulf will be an FA as well). By all means, please do make the list if you have the time - it would be greatly appreciated (and in line with the current header, it should probably be called, "List of characters and objects in Beowulf" since some of the important terms refer to inanimate objects). -Classicfilms 20:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it does not hurt to start it right away, although I should be going to bed :-). Here it is: List of characters and objects in Beowulf.--Berig 21:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey great start! Though I think that there is no rush on this - take your time -Classicfilms 21:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Don't hesitate to improve it until I return tomorrow afternoon.--Berig 21:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I just did. I added a basic intro, cats, images, and subheaders to the article. Please feel free to edit and tweak these additions as you format the list. I also deleted the list from the main article, add a "main" tag and wrote a very short intro that could use some more work. I'll leave that to you. Thanks, -Classicfilms 21:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great work as usual :)! I will make some additions and fixes.--Berig 16:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Thanks too for cleaning up the list and making more additions - I'll keep a watch on it. -Classicfilms 16:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meter

I'm surprised that there's no discussion of Sievers' Theory of Anglo-Saxon Meter, but then the section on meter is rather scattered in general (why two form sections?), and might benefit from some copy and paste replacement from alliterative verse. The section on common Germanic features explains alliterative verse much more clearly and concisely than here. I'd {{sofixit}}, but I'm a physicist and trying to stay on wikibreak. 206.81.65.30 19:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point. I'd like to add that Alliterative verse is a featured article (and was a "Today's Featured Article" in 2004). I would like propose that the sections Language and verse-form and Form are combined into one section (perhaps called "Form and meter"), and that much of the general information be removed. What is left can serve as an introduction and a Main Link can be added, pointing to Alliterative verse. It would improve the article dramatically. -Classicfilms 19:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Those two sections should be merged.--Berig 20:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll wait a few days and if there are no objections, I'll take care of the merge and main. -Classicfilms 21:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to propose that we remove the long translation in "Form." The translation does not improve or help the article and since there are literally hundreds of modern English translations of the poem, it seems beyond the bounds of the Wikipedia to promote one particular version. -Classicfilms 20:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IN SPITE of being Danish?

As of 13 Nov 2007, A sentence in the into reads: As the single major surviving work of Anglo-Saxon heroic poetry, the work—in spite of dealing primarily with Danish and Swedish events—has risen to such prominence that it has been described as "England's national epic.". Well... In that time frame, being Danish rather than British is what makes it an English rather than a Welsh epic. So the wording "in spite of" doesn't look appropriate to me. Can anybody suggest something better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Farry (talk • contribs) 14:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Beowulf&oldid=171251611"