Conceptualizing the Enemy in Early Northwest Europe: Metaphors of Conflict and Alterity in Anglo-Saxon, Old Norse, and Early Irish Poetry by Karin E. Olsen

Parergon ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-245
Author(s):  
Roderick McDonald
Mediaevistik ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 380-381
Author(s):  
William Sayers

In this ambitious study Karin E. Olsen ranges far and wide in the early poetry of medieval Northwest Europe, far in the sense of incorporating the literary evidence from three adjacent but distinct cultures, wide in the sense of greatly expanding on the common notions of the enemy and conflict, often by making alterity one side of a conflictual situation. A uniform methodology seeks to encompass this sprawling investigative field, where ‘conceptual metaphor’ is a key heuristic term.


PMLA ◽  
1902 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-295
Author(s):  
William Henry Schofield

In the preceding article my friend Mr. Lawrence has shown clearly that all indications point to an Old Norse source for the Anglo-Saxon poem usually termed The First Riddle of Cynewulf. After he had come to a conviction on this point, he communicated his theory to me in private conference, in the hope that I might perhaps be able to supply confirmatory evidence by showing what that source was. It was my fortune to make what I believe scholars will agree to be the correct identification of the material, and, with the new light thus thrown on its meaning, to interpret the poem more satisfactorily, I think, than has hitherto been done.


Author(s):  
Helena Hamerow

The primary aim of this book is to provide an overview of the evidence for the settlements and everyday life of rural communities in northwest Europe from c. ad 400 to 900, broadly the period from the collapse of the western Roman Empire to the rise of early states in its former provinces and Scandinavia. Its secondary purpose is to relate this evidence, which comes mainly from archaeological excavations, to Anglo-Saxon England and to consider its implications for our understanding of settlements here. Each chapter concludes, therefore, with a brief discussion of the comparable evidence from England, even though detailed comparisons cannot always be drawn due to differences in the quantity and nature of the data available. The evidence is examined under five broad topics: buildings and what the ‘built environment’ tells us about the household and its activities; the layout of farmsteads and settlements and how these may reflect the social structure of communities; the formation of territories and demographic developments; farming strategies; and, finally, the role of non-agrarian production and exchange in the economies of rural settlements. Working with evidence spanning such a broad chronological and geographical range is naturally beset with methodological difficulties. One obvious complication is introduced by the different traditions of periodization and terminology used by scholars working in different countries. Thus, a settlement dating to the sixth century might be described as ‘Germanic Iron Age’, ‘Migration period’, ‘early Anglo-Saxon’, or ‘Merovingian’, depending on its location. The chapters which follow draw primarily on evidence from a large region, stretching from southern Scandinavia, through northwest Germany to the Netherlands. This brings with it the danger of adopting a ‘melting pot’ approach, however unintentionally (Halsall 1995a, 1–3). Yet, an appreciation of regional, indeed local, diversity and of the potential for rapid social change in this period is essential. This North Sea zone has been chosen, furthermore, not out of a misguided belief in a ‘homogeneous Germanic culture’ (ibid.), but because it was in close cultural and economic contact with England and includes the regions from which the Anglo-Saxons believed their forebears to have originated.


1930 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 196
Author(s):  
H. A. C. Green ◽  
H. Van der Merwe Scholtz
Keyword(s):  

Ramus ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-28
Author(s):  
Jon Hesk

TheIliadandOdysseyare replete with single speeches or exchanges of speech which are described by the noun νεῖκος (‘quarrel’, ‘strife’) or its derived verb νεικέω. Some time ago, A.W.H. Adkins showed that νεῖκος and νεικείω are used in Homer to designate various kinds of agonistic discourse: threats, rebukes, insults, quarrels and judicial disputes. Critics often now describe νεῖκος-speeches and νεῖκος-exchanges in theIliadas examples of ‘flyting’. This term, shared by the languages of Anglo-Saxon and Old Norse and the dialect of Old Scots, is transferred to the combination of boasting, invective and threats which Homeric heroes hurl at each other. This is because Iliadic νεῖκος has affinities with the traditional and highly stylised verbal exchanges which take place in the feasting halls and battles depicted in Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Germanic heroic poetry.In his bookThe Language of HeroesRichard Martin has argued persuasively that the flyting νεῖκος is a significant speech-act genre performed by Homeric characters and that its competitive mode is analogous to the Homeric poet's poetic projecttout court. Just as Homer produces a monumental epic whose focus on Achilles may well be competitive with other renderings of epic tradition and is certainly derived through the manipulation of memory, Homeric heroes and gods flyte by manipulating and contesting the resources of memory. The best Homeric flyting is creatively poetic within existing conventions or strategies and is thereby rhetorically devastating. And Martin sees Achilles as the best flyter because he rhetorically manipulates memory better than any other hero. Thus, the hero is like his poet and the poet is like his hero. Achilles' competitive way with words is unique in (and to) theIliadand is emblematic of Homer's overpowering competitive poetic achievement.


1977 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 213-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas D. Hill

The Old English æcerbot charm, whichs is preserved in London, British Library, Cotton Caligula A. vii, in a hand of the first half of the eleventh century, has always attracted a good deal of attention, since it is one of the few surviving texts which unquestionably reflect the influence of Anglo-Saxon paganism – pagan religion, not merely pagan magic, if one can make the distinction. Our knowledge of Anglo-Saxon paganism is so limited, particularly in comparison with the rich corpus of myth and heroic legend preserved in Old Norse-Icelandic, that inevitably scholars give close attention to any text which reveals something of it. So far as the æcerbot charm is concerned, this has meant a preoccupation with distinguishing between pagan elements and Christian accretions. For instance, in Stopford Brooke's translation of lines 30–42 quoted by Storms in his edition, ‘old’ pagan parts of the prayer are printed in italics and ‘new’ Christian ones in roman print. Storms doubts the possibility of drawing a hard and fast line in all cases, but his quite lengthy commentary on the charm as a whole shares the same fundamental concern.


2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gjertrud Flermoen Stenbrenden

AbstractThis article argues against the claim by Emonds and Faarlund (2014,English: The language of the vikings. Palacký University: Olomouc) that English died out after the Norman Conquest, and was replaced by a North Germanic variety referred to as “Anglicised Norse”, which had been formed in the Danelaw area in a concerted effort by the Norse and Anglo-Saxon populations, presumably to overthrow the ruling French elite. Emonds and Faarlund base their claim on the existence of some 20–25 linguistic features which are said to have been absent from Old English, but which are present in Present-Day English and in Scandinavian languages. This article argues that genetic affiliation cannot be inferred from shared syntactic, morphological or lexical features, which may easily result from independent convergence in historically related languages. The main counter-argument, however, is chronological: the majority of the features adduced are indeed attested in Old English and often in other West Germanic languages also, and hence may not be attributed to Old Norse; nor can features which are not attested in English until late Middle English or early Modern English come from Old Norse. The continuity of English in the written record likewise renders the suggested scenario highly unlikely.


2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Viola Miglio

The Scandinavian occupation of wide territories in the British Islands from about 900 CE onwards has left a number of vestiges both in place-names, in the pronunciation and lexicon of northern dialects, especially Scottish, as well as loanwords in standard English, some of which are remarkably common, ugly, to take and window to name but three.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document