Written under the supervision of Helena Znojemská, PhD, and submitted on 28 May 2012, this essay was part of my total coursework at the Department of Anglophone Literatures and Cultures at Charles University’s Faculty of Arts. The essay is published with the kind permission of the faculty.

Heroic Tradition in The Battle of Maldon

The Battle of Maldon, commemorating the 991 battle between a substantial Viking army and English troops led by Birhtnoth, the earl of Essex, may at first sight appear to be a mere realistic depiction of the bloody event. After all, as E. V. Gordon writes in the introductory chapter of his book on this battle, the poem seems to have been written by a man “well acquainted by the topography of the battlefield, the character and the history of the English leaders, and all events of the battle. His account […] is reasonable and consistent” (Gordon, 5). At the very same time, though, the poem is indisputably also a part of the heroic tradition, the poet being obviously aware of the heroic coda and the large stock of various features which go hand in hand with it. Gordon later on goes as far as to claim that since The Battle of Maldon is according to him “the only purely heroic poem in Old English, it is natural that the heroic ideals […] should be concentrated more intensely there than in most Old English poetry” (Gordon, 25). These two ways of reading the poem, the realistic or historical one on the one hand and the heroic one on the other, are intertwined in this vivid battle, “enacted by everyday men, many of them untrained for war, […] who nevertheless find themselves put to a test as absolute as any that the heroes of legend encountered” (Pope, 71). This essay is to concentrate precisely on the heroic material, on the poet’s use as well as function of set themes and images associated with heroic poetry and epic mentality.

First and foremost, it would be helpful to state what is meant by this constantly mentioned heroic standard. Alluding to the work of the 1^st century Roman historian, George Clark generally defines it as “the code of behavior Tacitus remarked among the ancient Germans” (Clark, 59). Indeed, Tacitus’ writings, albeit hundreds of years older than the action in The Battle of Maldon, provides us with a good insight into the heroic state of mind and being. As Gordon puts it:

Tacitus describes the same military nucleus of society, the chief with his comitatus, bound to each other by the closest ties of loyalty; […] the great disgrace incurred by leaving the chief dead on the field and returning lordless home; the importance of kinship in the military organization; […] the patronage of young warriors by the chief. (Gordon, 26)

The poet seems to be well acquainted with all of the characteristics mentioned above as well as with many others. When he writes “Godric went from the fight and left the good man that had given him many a steed” (The Battle of Maldon), he not only points to the breach of the devout bond, but also clearly alludes to the tradition of depicting lords or kings as gift-givers who, by regularly bestowing presents upon their retainers, grant their friendship and loyalty in battle. Furthermore, when Aelfwine says: “Remember the speeches we have spoken so often over our mead” (The Battle of Maldon, 5), the poet clearly touches upon another common element in Old English poetry – feasting in halls. There are many other instances which could be mentioned when discussing this topic, and they will be in due course. For now, suffice to say that the unknown poet indubitably makes use of the heroic tradition of Germanic nations, and even though it is questionable whether people at the time indeed behaved in the same way as Birhtnoth and his retainers, it is clear that these men pose an ideal pattern of behavior to the audiences of the poem. When analyzing these heroic ideals in more depth, let us begin on the very level of language.

Perhaps, without the modern reader even realizing it, the poem is full of formulas, typical for the genre of epic. The formula, according to Milman Parry’s definition, is a term constituting “a group of words which is regularly employed […] to express a given essential idea” (Riedinger, 294). In other words, the term is applied to instances of very similar, if not all the same, words or expressions employed to describe a recurrent image, idea, or event (Redinger, 295). One instance of this peculiar case of intertextuality is to be found in the 91^st line – the expression ofer cald wæter is mirrored in the same form in the 851^st line of Christ II (Riedinger, 197). Most cases of this formulaic language seem to be, however, related to another heroic poem – Beowulf. As Gordon points out, “there are minor epic formulae which Maldon shares with various poems, but more with Beowulf than with any other” (Gordon, 23). Even though there is no reason to believe that the author of The Battle of Maldon was intentionally trying to imitate Beowulf in any way, these cases of formulaic mirroring only help to set the poem firmly within the milieu of heroic tradition.

Turning aside from the level of language, the poem is also clearly part of this heroic tradition with regard to its characters. Birhtnoth, for instance is depicted as a prototypical hero. Based on a real-life “man of great power in his district, high in king’s favor, a great respecter and patron of monastic foundations, as well as a great scourge of the Danes” (Trapp, 105), the character is depicted not only as a fearless warrior – which is evidenced by his refusal to pay the war tribute to the Vikings, or by the poet describing him as “wise in war” (The Battle of Maldon, 4), or by him being defeated only when his arm is wounded, incapacitating him to hold his sword anymore – and gift-giver but also as an experienced leader. He is described in the poem as commanding and advising his men, assuring them to “have no fear,” all the while “trusting in his hands and in his good courage” (The Battle of Maldon, 2). Furthermore, “he saw the strategic importance of the ford and brought his army up in time to bar it against the Vikings, […] was familiar with the details of the shield-wall formation, and knew how to place his forces” (Gordon, 20). All of these heroic virtues point to the fact that the character is to be understood as the ideal of manhood, the epitome of all things good in a leader.

It is true, though, that we may perceive his grave tactical error – that is, when “in his overconfidence the earl began to yield ground” (The Battle of Maldon, 3) – as diminishing his heroic standing, but it is vital to see this instance on the background of the heroic coda. In the original text, the word overconfidence corresponds to ofermod. As J. B. Trapp writes, ofermod is “generally translated rashness, but it more likely means magnanimity, noble warrior’s pride, scorning expediency, relying on fate and force of arms to settle the matter” (Trapp, 106). In the genre of heroic epic, ofermod generally appears to have been heavily made use of – as evidenced, for instance, also in Beowulf’s insistence on fighting Grendel with his bare hands (Donaldson, 2). In spite of the potentiality to imagine this fatal act of hybris as heroic or noble, J. R. R. Tolkien provides a little more critical reading of the passage:

[Whatever] the precise nature of the flaw in Birhtnoth’s character that caused him to make his mistaken decision at the battle of Maldon, the flaw is certainly there. And, although the implications are not worked out in the poem, Birhtnoth is essentially a tragic hero. (Clark, 57)

Perhaps a tragic hero, but a hero nonetheless.

The other characters in the poem, Birhtnoth’s retainers, also help to place the poem firmly in the heroic tradition. Described as “loyal,” wishing to “serve [their] lord the earl in the battle,” and thus carrying out “the vow [they] had made” (The Battle of Maldon, 2), they stand as a perfect example of men utterly faithful to their lord, intending to serve him even if such service was to lead them to their deaths. Gordon even describes the poet as being “deeply moved by their loyal and unflinching end [as] he records with care how the noble retainers kept their vows to their lord” (Gordon, 22). As a matter of fact, it has to be pointed out that not all of Birhtnoth’s men kept their promise, and it is the juxtaposition of these two groups that provides the poem with an additional layer of conflict. As Gordon suggests: “In the heroes themselves the source of heroism was the instinctive sense of honor: to live without honor was universally agreed among the heroes of old to be worse than death” (Gordon, 26). Following this line of reasoning, breaking a vow to one’s lord, fleeing from the battlefield, and leaving his body lying there for the enemy was indisputably a sign of dishonor, failure, and infamy. In other words, an honorable retainer who is true to his word ought to fight till his last breath for the cause of his lord, regardless of his own safety and ought to yearn only, in the best-case scenario, to be able to die alongside of him. Summing up this issue, Clark writes that “those who advance against the enemy are the good, those who flee from him are the bad. Judging from the poem’s completed action, the good die and the bad survive” (Clark, 57), eventually concluding that “the central conflict in The Battle of Maldon is not between Anglo-Saxons and Vikings but between heroism and cowardice” (Clark, 58).

All of the aforementioned sentiments are reiterated by the retainers themselves by the end of the poem in their speeches. The heroic retainers who refuse to leave the battlefield deliver their heroic speeches which, although varied and individual, recur always to the same theme – not only do they “tell of Birhtnoth’s exhortations, his skill in front of the battle, and his heroic death” (Gordon, 27), the men also pledge to keep fighting until they die, not to leave the body of their lord and instead to attempt avenging his death. By presenting his audiences with these speeches, rather than indulging in a colorful description of the blood-soaked carnage, the poet clearly shows that “he was interested less in the spectacle and movements of battle than in the heroic problem and how it was solved by the hero” (Gordon, 28). The speeches also introduce the audiences to the heroic ideal they, perhaps, ought to be aspiring to themselves.

The whole of the 10^th century appears to have been a period of instability in England. Especially after the accession of King Ethelred II, the Unready, in 978, the Danish raiders began to plunder the English coast, causing a wave of treachery and betrayal among the nobility who, instead of fighting the attackers, decided it would be better to simply pay them off (Trapp, 105). It was precisely in this atmosphere of warfare, misery, and defeat that The Battle of Maldon was written. Filled with heroic characters, it depicts their brave, albeit futile, fight against the evil enemy of the time, and as such, it may have been intended to lead to a rise of the nationalistic feeling among the English. Perhaps it was meant as a piece of social criticism, presenting an almost idealistic picture of the resistance movement and thus highlighting the laxity and ineffectiveness of the state in protecting itself from the Viking raiders; or, perhaps, as R. W. V. Elliott suggests, its focus was much more narrower and the poem was merely “intended as a deliberate criticism of the policy [paying tribute] so characteristic as Ethelred’s reign” (Clark, 58). Be it as it may, one thing is certain – The Battle of Maldon is much more than a simple poem about two armies fighting.

Bibliography

Clark, George. “The Battle of Maldon: A Heroic Poem.” Speculum 43.1 (1968): 52-71.

Gordon, E. V. The Battle of Maldon. London: Methuen, 1937.

Riedinger, Anita. “The Old English Formula in Context.” Speculum 60.2 (1985): 294-317.

Pope, John C. Seven Old English Poems. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966.

The Battle of Maldon. Transl. by E. T. Donaldson.

Trapp, J. B. Medieval English Literature. London: Oxford University Press, 1973.