Anglo-Saxon Poetry: The Dream of the Rood

 

The 'Dream of the Rood', with its mixture of Pagan and Roman-Catholic interpretation of the Crucifixion, or, assimilation, of the Roman-Catholic Gospel account, carries with it the partially subdued, yet rebellious character of the cultural intertwining between the Anglo-Saxon literature and the apocalyptic styles of biblical scripture. It highlights the gradual influx of Christian theology into the Anglo-Saxon world, and moreover the success of interpreting the word of God, for the Anglo-Saxons at the time a foreign ethos, into the existing structure of the culture’s arts, society, and belief. The aim of this essay is to remark upon omissions from the Gospel accounts and why; and to what degree the assimilation has captured and changed the original meaning of the scripture. Thereupon focusing on the elements of the Pagan culture, which have altered the Gospel accounts, and how these have helped to create the unique narrative, potpourri of colour and symbolism within 'The Dream of the Rood'.

The translation of the Dream of the Rood is divided into two sections: the dreamer and his dream followed by a second half that resembles a prayer or colloquy. Even upon initial translation of the work, the reason for this distinction becomes clear, as the style of the latter half of the poem, from line 79 onwards, makes a tangent, losing the plot and colour of the initial half. The contents and theme, reflect more an invitation to take up belief in the Cross rather than a conclusion of the story. In adherence with this view, the essay will thus treat the second half as written by a different hand, being a moral evaluation of the original fable rather than an extension. Conversely the second segment contains by far more Christian theology: themes of the original sin, doomsday, the mentioning of ‘halgum’. It clarifies the purpose of the cross in its redeeming qualities, which is never fully explained in the former half. In its own way, the prayer provides an answer to the riddle of the Cross.

Referencing the crucifixion with the poem yields a vast omission from the original story: the main omissions include the superscription above the cross (Mk 15 vs 26), the crucified robbers (Mk 27 vs 44), Mary Magdalene’s appearance (Mk 15 vs 40), and the Angels at the sepulchre warning of the fulfilment of the scripture (Lk 24 vs 7). Taking its starting point after Pilate's abstinence from Christ’s trial, and finishing before the resurrection, the story of the cross has excluded some of the essential events necessary in understanding the crucifixion.

Narration in the Dream of the Rood replaces biblical dialogue, and where the superscription of ‘I am Jesus King of the Jews’(Lk 23 vs 38), or the mockery from priests and soldiers takes place (‘If he be the true son of God then shalt God let him down’), the story refers to these segments under ‘They mocked us both together’. The courage of Jesus in the face of his adversaries, and the humiliation he experienced are represented in the poem by the hero in his state of ‘unforht’: ‘modig on manigra gesyhde’. It is as yet unclear to what degree the author understood Jesus' death on account of it being a necessary fulfilment of the scripture, or merely took the idea of suffering and weakness, and interpreted it as literal definition for the courage of a brave warrior. The narrator refers to Christ as 'sigora wealdend' in his deeds throughout the poem. 'Victory through death' would have been an unusual paradox for the Old English poet to represent. The authors may have interpreted Christ knowing that his death would have saved mankind, with the intention therefore of dying in order to become victorious. Although the Bible states that Jesus did foresee his death and in particular his betrayal, it never shies from a sense of Providence at the hands of the ‘Almighty One’, and readers would not have subscribed to a view of Jesus taking matters into his own hands if for the slightest hint of ‘ego-tripping’.

This is not to suggest that in Old English folklore there was no reference to fate or the supernatural order. The felling of the three crosses is described in the dream as ‘egeslic weird’, which translates to 'cruel fate'. The events, which take place in Beowulf, for example, are imbued with the pagan sense of Wierd, whereby the hero's battles are tinged with success in the narration even prior to their occurrence. Even so, the inescapable way of things is even given its cause: ‘But God was to grant to the Geat people the clue to war-success in the web of fate’ ¹. Parallels between the two deterministic powers show similarity between Beowulf being aided by unknown powers in defeating his enemies, just as Jesus was given the strength of God to preach the truth about the Gospel or survive several hours on the cross. Whereas the enemies in Old English folklore were usually monsters taken from Norse mythology, the dragons and wretched beasts in the life of Jesus and his disciples were the scribes and priests promoting hypocrisy and the bureaucratic status quo of the Church. The overall message of the New Testament may have been a mighty task for the storytellers to translate into their own blood thirsty battle ethos, it being one of compassion, suffering, and servility: "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth". Meekness in the eyes of ones enemies, and casting ones right cheek after the other be slapped, may have been wholly unknown moral territory for the authors who counted on unflinching physical courage as the key to defeating monsters like Grendel in Beowulf. This type of courage was one of personal redemption, and it was within the soul and the heart through which one fought evil, not with the sword. Whether the supernatural manipulation of events is strongly related to the apocalyptical stringency of Christian Providence such as found in the New Testament remains as yet unclear.

One hint may be the relationship between the Cross and God. It is a case of typical 'Lord-Thane' allegiance common throughout Old English folklore and particularly prominent throughout Beowulf. The Cross' subservience to God, ‘ne durste ic hwaethre bugan to eordan’, where it dare not bend against the ‘Dryhtnes word’ ('The will of God'), exemplifies the bravery of the 'Cross-as-Thane' theme yet reminds of the fixed nature of Jesus' death, as it forcefully succumbs to the pains of the ‘Prince of glory’: ‘thurhdrifan hi me mid deorcan naglum’. Divine commandment outweighs the individual's personal sense of justice. It is this cataclysmic restraint which acts like a contact point between two tectonic fault lines, the desire for personal glory against the acceptance of the command of a higher power. The Rood wishes to fall on the felons: ‘Ealle ic mihte feondas gefyllan’, yet the prophecy had to be fulfilled and the cross has no choice but to stand firm.

Yet ambiguity of descriptive language leads to the lack of any conclusive evidence: the text states that the hero was in ‘haste’ to mount the gallows ‘efstan elne micle’. A modern Christian interpretation of the Gospel would sympathise less with Jesus as being 'eager' to climb the cross: the term points towards individual bravery, which tips the scales yet again. Christ is also given the title of ‘hilderincas’ after the ‘athelinge’ take him down, and is referred to as a warrior once again in the passage. Two lines further the poem states that the task of Christ was for him to:‘mancyn lysan’, and in the light of what has lead up to and proceeds after this statement there is little to suggest that the author new how Christ saved mankind: merely by suffering physical pain or being embarrassed? At this point in the passage the knowledge of Christ's Resurrection, possibly as a conclusion to the poem would have aided in clarifying the bold statement of Christ being the ‘Frean mancynnes’.

It is earlier on the plot, however, where the author's versatility in allegorical adornment kicks in and sheds light on the matter. The dreamers account of the Rood describes how the cross, floating in its 'bubble' of glory and light reveals, through the changing colours and masking treasure, signs of suffering: the ‘earme aergewin’, which may be the truth behind this magnificent apparition. The reader is being given clues as to what type of cross it is. The transformation from treasure, to sweat and blood in the cross’ appearance alludes to the transience of Christ' body, the worldly possessions of man, and contrasted with the immortality of the soul. In the Gospel account of St John, the soldiers pierced the legs of Jesus and from them came blood and water, the two constituents of life. The water may have been interpreted as sweat by the author, although sweat being produced outside the body and not within, and accounting for the fact that Jesus was "drenched in sweat", this comparison holds weak ground. There is no doubt that these metaphors are an allusion to Christ's transience, in particular since the text states ‘Hwathre ic thurch that gold ongytan meahte earmra argewin’.

Where a gradual progression in events of the crucifixion is emphasized in the Gospel, the atmospherics of the narrator replace dialogue, the suffering Mary Magdalene, and the shock of by-standers at the spectacle before them. At this point, the most intense action in the story begins where the darkness of the Gospel, referred to "...when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour" (Lk 15 vs 33) is faithfully reproduced with details of the darkness enveloping the ruler's body (‘bewrigen mid wolcnum Wealdendes hraw’). The sense of the epic ‘Weop eal gesceaft’, brings the story to boiling point whereupon the exclamation ‘Crist was on rode’, which resurfaces as part of the author's technique of echoic repetition, plunges the final ‘naglum’ in the plotline, the cross, and the reader's, experience. This is the art of the author, and it catapults, an oftentimes drably narrated sequence of events in the Gospel dialogue, into action.

Towards the end of poem, the author acknowledges the arrival of ‘aethelinge’, with possible reference to the wise councillor Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 16 vs 43)) who claimed back the body of Christ from Pilate, and laid his body in a sepulchre cut of ‘beorhtan stane’. The Gospel account does not refer to the sepulchre being made by the atheling however, and moreover the text states that there were several athelinge, whereas in the Gospel it was only Joseph who fetched Jesus' body immediately after his death. The author may have referred to the Disciples of Jesus, although this would have been chronologically incorrect as the Disciples only came to the sepulchre on morning after, and this was after Mary Magdalene saw the Angels. Neither does

the Gospel mention of a lament being sung: these were clear inventions on behalf of the author. The addition of this element may have been appropriate from a theological stand point, its also typical of burial rites in Anglo-Saxon England that a lament be sung or sombre atmosphere be kept, as depicted in Beowulf where clans lay him in a funeral pyre of mail coats. Where Beowulf is engulfed in flames, Jesus is left in the tomb, marking the difference in burial rites and the necessity of fulfilling the scripture: the body may not be harmed prior to the ghost's leave-taking. Unlike Beowulf's burial amongst coats of armour and shields, that of Jesus is a sparse one. The priests were keen to dispose of the body and memory of Jesus Christ quickly. It is thus of importance where Joseph of Arimathea request the body of Jesus, and Nicodemus wrapped it in oil, as was the practice of the Jews. Yet ultimately, Christ is left alone in the Sepulchre, ‘reste he thar maete weorode’. Since the essence of his crucifixion be that he should die alone, the poems reference to this departure of the athelinge, emphasises the necessity of a lonely death. The sense of isolation is thus brought about between the tree, which is thereupon felled in ‘cruel fate’, and Christ who barely escapes a pauper's miserable death.

Although it is widely accepted that Jesus carried the cross until exhaustion, the plot in the dream intervenes where the cross stands erect before the arrival of Jesus. Thus emerging from two antithetical worlds, are the Rood and hero: the terrestrial Pagan world on one hand with its characteristic values of loyalty, bravery, and a swirling embellishment of ornate pagan peculiarities; and the celestial city of Jerusalem where humbleness and servility has become the new law. The concatenation of visual imagery created by these opposing directions of culture and mores is suffice to stress the multitude of parallels between the cross, dreamer (who wishes to be blessed by the cross), and the pagan non-believer, trembling in ‘forcht’ beneath the "best of wood".

The narrating cross, with its first person 'eye- witness' account, enables an objective perspective to be held of the death of Jesus, in particular because the suffering of Jesus is reflected in the Cross' experience. The effect is that the reader inadvertently empathises with the Cross to the same degree that the cross empathises with Jesus' pain, as it is the Rood which feels the nails being driven through it, and the Rood which describes deep wounds being visible on itself. It is this quality of Old English riddles which show the power of the poet's cryptic ‘catalogueing method’ of his earthly surroundings. The second segment has its own qualities in that it makes clear the symbolical power of the cross, and exudes the pious idolatrous Roman Catholic Church. It carries less artistic merit partly because it merely reiterates several points of the storyline and accounts of the doomsday from the Bible, such as those found in the Book of Revelation. Yet without any knowledge as to what the ending of the initial half be, the message remains appropriate to the whole: 'He who carries the best of signs need not be terrified'.

1 Michael Alexander: Beowulf A Verse Translation, Penguin, 2001