Return to Matheliende Home Page
Matheliende is published quarterly by the students and faculty of Anglo-Saxon studies at The University of Georgia.
Matheliende welcomes any and all articles related to Anglo-Saxon studies; such material should be sent to Mr. Alexander M. Bruce, Park Hall, The University of Georgia.
Copyright 1996 Alexander M. Bruce
by Eric Rochester
Although most of us are comfortable with traditional critical approaches such as philology, the new literary theories' popularity in other areas of literature forces us to ask how they relate to and impact Anglo-Saxon studies. A comprehensive considerat ion of this is beyond the scope of this paper, but by seeing how two authors have applied one such theory--semiotics--to Beowulf, we can see some of the benefits of semiotics when applied to Anglo-Saxon poetry.
The key to understanding semiotics is understanding its sometimes bewildering jargon, but a working knowledge of the terminology can be gained with just a few terms. Semiotics is the study of signs. A sign is anything from which meaning can be generate d. For instance, from the word "rock" can be generated a meaning, namely, of a lump of minerals, or rather, of the mental construction the reader attaches to that word. The physical rock (or the mental construction of it) is known as the signified. The system of conventions by which signs are organized in a medium, context, or culture is a code.
There are many ways to categorize signs, but one of the most common is to classify them as being either icons, indices, or symbols. An icon is a sign that directly signifies the signified, for example, a picture, photograph, or map. An index is a sign that is inherently connected with its signified, such as smoke signifying fire. A symbol has the most abstract relationship between sign and signified. The connection between the two in a symbol is purely arbitrary and a matter of convention, with a pri me example being language. The word "rock" only has the meaning it does through the convention of the English language.
Using these terms, semiotics analyzes texts as systems of signs, "as verbal structures where cultural codes intersect" (Evans 142). The assumption here is that by examining a text, one can make observations about the world view of the cultures that prod uced the text and about the signifieds to which the signs in the text refer.
In applying this approach to Beowulf in "Swords and Signs: A Semeiotic Perspective on Beowulf," Gillian R. Overing (who follows the spelling of C. S. Pierce) examines the overall structure and narrative mode of the poem and concludes that i t is mainly indexical, which is to say that the poem's meanings would have had the natural, intrinsic, immediate force that indices exhibit, as in the smoke and fire example above. For instance, an audience raised on the formulaic phrases and kennings us ed in Beowulf would have perceived those phrases as having a natural connection with their signifiers. Thus, they would not have thought of swan-rad as a metaphor for the sea (metaphors have a looser, more symbolic relationship to what they refer to), but usage would have made the connection tighter and more natural.
Another sense in which Overing sees the structure of the poem as being indexical is in the pattern of repetition and variation. She maintains that the variations in a particular area, and ultimately in the entire poem, refer to each other in a close, in dexical relationship. These references weave a pattern, with each thread crossing and intersecting the other threads, giving it a structure reminiscent of the interlace patterns common in insular art and lending to the overall complexity of the work. Th ese threads weave back and forth not just through the poem, but also through narrative time, and force the audience to keep past, present, and future simultaneously in mind.
Overing traces several such threads in her article, all revolving around various forms of treasure and two concerning swords. Swords occupied an important place in Anglo-Saxon society. They were highly decorated objects that served as treasure as well as weaponry. As gifts, they helped to cement the relationship between a king and his retainers. Elaborate decorations were visual reminders of the value of the blade and therefore of the bravery and valor of its owner, since a sword also acquired the at tributes of its owners and vice versa. Moreover, in some circumstances a sword could even substitute for its owner. Overing points out that while "in the Sutton Hoo burial no body was found, a sword was laid in its place" (43).
One of the threads Overing traces occurs near the end of the poem, in lines 2609-30, when Wiglaf helps Beowulf fight the dragon. After Wiglaf takes his armor, the poet explains the sword's sordid past. Over the course of these twenty-one lines, the swo rd is referred to by a number of terms, all of which bring to mind different aspects of the sword, its history, and therefore its future, since it cannot pull free from its past. The first reference is in line 2610, where it is called swyrd. According t o Overing, the context here of Wiglaf helping Beowulf makes the sword an example "of loyalty and good retainership" (50), with a focus on the present. In the next line, the sword is called Eanmundes laf, which brings in a past focus and calls to mind tha t Wiglaf's father had taken the sword from Eanmund, whom he had just killed. In line 2615, the sword is again referred to, this time as ealdsweord. Along with the surrounding text, this continues the past focus, recalling that Onela had rewarded Wiglaf' s father for the killing of Eanmund, Onela's nephew, rather than avenging his kinsman's death. This brings in a promise of future revenge. Finally, the sword is called maeges laf in line 2628, which returns the focus to the present and Wiglaf's courage in "using his inherited sword to help Beowulf" (50).
This is just one small example, but it clearly illustrates how the threads work to force a temporally more complete image of the sword into the minds of the audience, who is forced to remember the sword's history, its current use, and its potential futur e, predicated by its infamous past. This also hints at the complexity of the threads that weave throughout the poem. Overing does not, for instance, try to connect the thread in this episode with those in any other part of the poem, though this would ce rtainly be a legitimate and rewarding inquiry.
In "Sign and Psyche in Old English Poetry," John D. Niles takes a similar approach to a similar object in Beowulf: armor. He notes the formula used whenever Beowulf speaks: Beowulf mathelode, bearn Ecgtheowes. In one place, however, this line is not used. When Beowulf first addresses Hrothgar after entering Heorot, the poem reads, Beowulf mathelode-on him byrne scan, / searonet seowed smithes orthancum (404-05). Niles wonders why Beowulf's corselet should be mentioned at this point, and comes up with several answers. First, the breaking of the pattern would draw attention to what he is about to say in this important speech as he announces who he is and asks permission to undertake this mission. Second, a corselet acts as an index in much the same way that swords do, pointing out the worth of the wearer. It would be "a sign of their status," making them distinct from ordinary freemen (14). Also, being a defensive weapon, it emphasizes the peace-keeping aim of his mission. And finally, the corselet acts as a metaphor in several aspects. Its woven, net structure signifies the "theme of human community and those traits of human character that hold a society together" and protect society in the same way the corselet protects the body (14).
Moreover, Niles sees the fact that the corselet shines as having symbolic significance. In analyzing this, he relates the corselet to the groups of words including sunne, leoht, beacen, and tacen, all of which are "embedded in an essentially religious m atrix" (15). The corselet serves as a counterpart to Heorot, of which the poem says, Lixte se leoma ofer landa fela (311). Both the corselet and the hall "call to mind the divine power that serves as the ontological basis of human civilization" (15), an d the hall is likened to the world. Each of these functions in a similar way: as the corselet protects the warrior from weapons, so the hall protects society from anarchy, and the land-the middan-geard-protects the human race from the sea.
These approaches each allow us to go beyond pure language structures to look at what the words and structures mean in the work and in the broader context of the culture. They look at texts as verbal structures created by the code of the Germanic culture . Overing does this by looking at sword signs and their structure throughout the text, providing clues to swords' importance in Anglo-Saxon society and to the way that the audience has to think about time elements in Beowulf. Niles does this by e xamining the importance of armor in society then and its importance at a particular point in the narrative and how it relates to the Germanic heroic world view. These critics take us beyond the verbal meaning of the poem and into the non-verbal communicat ions-swords and armor-that the poem alludes to or describes and which help create the text, thereby deepening our understanding of the culture as well.
by Alex Bruce
We are most familiar with the legendary Germanic heroes Scyld and Scef from their manifestation as the composite hero Scyld Scefing in Beowulf. Yet the two ought to be studied as distinct figures, for they appear separately in a number of Germani c works. Of note, we can explore how the Anglo-Saxons incorporated the two figures in to their genealogies. We have references from five different sources: the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Asser's Life of King Alfred, AEthelweard's Chronicle, and the Textus R offensis and MS Cotton Tiberius B.v, a collection from the eleventh century. Each work makes reference to both Scyld and Scef, with the exception of the A-text of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and Asser's Life of King Alfred, which mention only Scyld. The t wo figures are incorporated for both political and religious reasons. As well, we note that the presence of Scyld and Scef in the genealogies serves as "evidence for the perseverance of a sense of Germanic identity" (Gatch 30) among the Anglo-Saxons, the reby emphasizing the role of the two figures in the Anglo-Saxons' continuing efforts to maintain a connection with their Germanic ancestry and cultural foundations.
We need first to examine the general structure and purpose of the genealogies before examining the precise references to Scyld and Scef within them. It has long been held that the most important historical account of the Anglo-Saxon period is the Anglo- Saxon Chronicle. Recent scholars, though, have cautioned that the "history" presented in the various manuscripts of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle might better be described as the historiographic product of "Alfredian revisionism" which has "the welfare and q uite possibly the justification of the state at its foundation" (Kretzschmar 145). And such a "revisionist" view seems the case, especially when one considers how the genealogies were used, for the genealogies of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, especially the highly-developed one of King AEthelwulf, father of Alfred the Great, seem to have a greater purpose than simply listing the predecessors of the current monarch. This particular genealogy goes back forty-four generations to Adam and is perhaps modeled up on "the highly articulated genealogical lists . . . [of] biblical genealogies" (Gatch 32). As Kenneth Sisam outlined in his seminal study "Anglo-Saxon Royal Genealogies," generating ancestors older than Woden allowed the genealogist to avoid "producing a conflicting tradition which would raise doubts" concerning the legitimacy of the monarch's claim (308). By claiming so many heroic Germanic ancestors, a king cemented his right to the throne; such claims and "backward expansions of the Anglo-Saxon king- lists testify to a growing, and constantly changing, need to establish legitimacy through illustrious continental ancestors" (Frank 95). As the motivating force behind the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Alfred certainly could have taken advantage of the propaga nda to cement his own claim as "King of England"; he in fact seems to have done so, for he presents himself as "descended from a line of which any Germanic chieftain in the Continental homeland or abroad would have been proud" (Gatch 31).
The biography of King Alfred written by the Welsh bishop Asser at the end of the ninth century provides additional insight into the Anglo-Saxons' approach to the heroes of their pagan past. Asser's biography reveals that the identification of Alfred wit h specifically pagan ancestors was apparently not detrimental to his claim to power and perhaps may have been instrumental in confirming his authority. In his genealogy of Alfred, Asser does not hesitate to list as one of Alfred's forefathers a certain G eat "quem . . . iamdudum pagani pro deo venerabantur" ["Whom the pagans venerated as a god for a long time"] (Asser 3). As Hermann Moisl observes, "[T]he presence of Woden, Seaxnet and Geat at the beginning of royal dynasties in the genealogical lists sh ows that these lists incorporate a pre-Christian myth which the English shared with a variety of Continental Germanic peoples" (227). To Moisl's list we can easily add Scyld and Scef, for the inclusion of the pair stands as a reminder that "the Anglo-Sax ons retained tales from their Germanic past and [with them] a lively sense of the fact that, ethnically, their identity was Germanic" (Gatch 30).
Yet in the post-conversion Anglo-Saxon world, kings were expected to have embraced Christianity; too strong an identification with the pagan Germanic past would have created a potential paradox. According to Nicholas Howe, in response to this dilemma, t he more expansive genealogies explain that the well-known Germanic heroes were actually descendants of the ancient Hebrew patriarchs, thereby "setting this memory of the pagan past within Christian history" and thus "transform[ing] it into a myth of the c ulture" (Howe 143). The Germanic gods thus continued to have a place in the genealogies, but in a history re-defined by a Christian interpretation of the past. Ultimately, the Anglo-Saxons are "assimilated to the larger Judeo-Christian kin-group and are integrated into its history: in short, they are welcomed to the family" (Niles 135). Kings like AEthelwulf and Alfred thus become doubly qualified; they could claim descent from both great Germanic heroes and important Biblical figures and thereby be su pported both by the people's cultural memory and by their religious beliefs.
This simultaneous acceptance of the pagan Germanic and Christian elements within Anglo-Saxon culture became so much a part of tradition that even later genealogies and regnal lists such as those in the Textus Roffensis and MS Cotton Tiberius B.v--written centuries after the conversion--maintained the presence of both Germanic heroes and Judeo-Christian patriarchs. (See folios 101R and 104R of the Textus Roffensis and folio 23R of An Eleventh-Century Anglo-Saxon Illustrated Miscellany.)
The final source, AEthelweard's Chronicle (written at the end of the tenth century), offers another perspective on the place of Scef as the founder of the Germanic peoples. His work influenced the twelfth-century chronicler William of Malmesbury, especi ally concerning a particular account of Scef that simultaneously reflects and rejects the Scyld Episode of Beowulf. The crucial moment of AEthelweard's genealogy of AEthelwulf reads as follows, from the list of "fathers" of Cerdic:
And this Sceaf arrived with one light ship in the island of the ocean which is called Skaney, with arms all round him. He was a very young boy, and unknown to the people of that land, but he was received by them, and they guarded him with diligent attent ion as one who belonged to them, and elected him king. From his family King AEthelwulf derived his descent. (33)
In examining this passage we should note certain things. First, Scef is the oldest ancestor; no one, pagan or Christian, stands above him in the genealogy. Scef--the agricultural figure--thus stands as the founder of the culture. Yet the story also see ms reminiscent of the Scyld Episode in that the hero comes as a child to a Germanic people and eventually becomes their leader; the hero, however, is clearly Scef and not Scyld. Additionally, this agricultural figure Scef comes surrounded by weapons; suc h martial elements suggest the warrior figure Scyld, though the genealogical list clearly identifies separate ancestors.
As AEthelweard's scene of Scef's arrival so strongly parallels the Scyld Episode of Beowulf in its basic structure while at the same time completely countering the details found in Beowulf, scholars have been greatly vexed. Some have assum ed that, based on this "original pagan tale," the "real appellation" of Scyld from Beowulf was indeed Scef (Branston 18-19). But again, rather than trying to determine the "authentic" tale of Scef, we ought to concentrate on what this and the othe r accounts reveal about the nature of the figure. Scef is of great prominence, for, as AEthelweard and the other chroniclers indicate, he is the most ancient strictly Germanic ancestor. He, associated with agriculture, precedes any warrior figure, the s ame way that the need to establish a constant source of food seems to have been a more initial concern than fighting neighbors. Certainly the Germanic tribes were at one time nomadic warriors, but once they discovered that settling a land and cultivating the earth led to a more constant supply of food and thus a greater margin between life and death, they turned their attention to farming. However, as Thomas Cahill has pointed out, the "seasonally predictable store of grain caused the inevitable populat ion explosion. . . which quickly triggers the need to acquire new land to feed new mouths" (17-18). So, between the fourth and sixth centuries, the land-hungry Germanic tribes migrated across Europe, fighting those, like the Romans, who occupied land the y wanted. In AEthelweard's account, the fertility figure Scef came with tools of war; in a sense, success in agriculture had brought war.
This study of the presence of Scyld and Scef in the genealogies of the Anglo-Saxon period thus invites further study of the figures' mythological functions and their place in the Anglo-Saxons' search for cultural origins. With these pedigrees the Anglo- Saxons defined themselves as being descended from both pagan Germanic heroes and Judeo-Christian patriarchs. The two figures, especially Scef, played a role in this clarification of origins, and their presence helped to allow the Anglo-Saxons to "think o f themselves as a Christian people," though with a "sense of identity . . . shaped by their memory of migration" from the Germanic lands and their pagan heritage (Howe 34). This dual-natured origin, so reflective of the Anglo-Saxons' awareness and revere nce of their own past, became an important aspect of their traditions, enduring until the arrival of the Normans and even influencing the understanding of those who came centuries later.
by Joy Day
Many ancient societies did not have a conception of land ownership in the modern sense, that is, the notion that a discreet parcel of land may be exploited freely by one individual (an owner), that access to the land may be restricted by the owner, and t hat the owner may dispose of the land as he desires. Land ownership is one of the most common means by which modern Americans hold land, but purchase was only one of several ways--and not the most common one--of acquiring and transferring land in Anglo-S axon England. The problem of land tenure and conveyance is one of great importance to students of early English cultural history, for in a society of people who live off of and work directly on the land, land is the common social referent; it plays a maj or role in determining standards of living and status, gives us insights into religious and philosophical beliefs, and helps clarify cultural and political facts. While information that would supply us with a clear picture of the Anglo-Saxon land market is scarce and obscure, the literature of the period provides surprising insights into land ownership.
Although hard data for the Anglo-Saxon period is indeed extremely scarce as compared to that for the Norman era, a diligent study of the extant materials reveals that the ways in which the English held land from circa 700 c.e. up to the Conquest reflect both old ideas of land tenure based on communal-clan ownership and more recent innovations in alienability. While there were five means by which a person could hold or transfer land, this essay focuses on the most common: odal, or allodial land held by t he common custom. Allodial tenure, though, was subject to governance by unwritten custom, and thus its rules of tenure are most obscure to the modern historian.
Linguistic evidence helps us understand the nature of allodial land tenure. The modern term "allodium" is derived from the Latin alodium, which has a cognate in the Scandinavian--odal, a word indicating land which had been held by the same family for se veral generations, was subject to a rigid conveyance code which strongly discouraged alienation of property outside the family, and which called for equal partibility among sons. Other cognates abound among the various early Germanic languages: haim-odil (Gothic); edal (Old English), ethel (Old Frisian), othil (Old Saxon), and uodal (Old High German) (Gurevich 372). Thus we see that the concept, whatever its particulars, predates the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain, and we may not be taking a ras h risk in applying to the Germanic societies collectively those characteristics of allodium which we can substantiate. We can trace those characteristics of hereditary tenure in some Old English poems.
Beowulf illustrates that chieftains reserved to themselves the right to validate community members' inheritances or, conversely, to deprive a cowardly warrior of his family property. The instance commonly cited is the scene which recounts both th e death of Beowulf and Wiglaf's subsequent speech to the faithless followers who failed to come to their lord's aid in his battle with the dragon. Wiglaf addresses the men thus: "Now all treasure, giving and receiving,/all home-joys, ownership (edal), co mfort,/shall cease for your kin; deprived of their rights/each man of your families will have to be exiled,/once nobles afar hear of your flight,/a deed of no glory. Death is better/for any warrior than a shameful life" (Chickering 233). Eric John saw W iglaf acting as Beowulf's successor to the kingship, denying the warriors' right of inheritance, refusing to "renew the followers' title to their estates." John used his interpretation of the events in this scene to explain the exchange between Beowulf a nd Hygelac upon Beowulf's return home, when Hygelac gives Beowulf extensive estates. John said that Beowulf's ancestral land must be earned before he can take possession of it, and in slaying the Grendel-kin Beowulf has succeeded in proving his worthiness to inherit (John 54).
But there is no real evidence, either in the poem itself or from other sources, to support this interpretation. In the scene of Beowulf's death, Wiglaf is exercising a judicial prerogative of Germanic kings: outlawry. In this case, the young warriors h ad failed their lord in battle, the ultimate act of treason. The punishment was outlawry: being publicly placed outside the protection of the laws and stripped of all rights, including the right to hold land. Such men were at the mercy of their enemies, who could with impunity slay them and their family members, to whom the judgement extended, and their land would be given to the stewardship of another. If the reader attends closely to the speech of Wiglaf, it quickly becomes apparent that Wiglaf is de scribing the conditions of outlawry, and that he is passing a judgement on the spot, based on the events which have just transpired. With this new understanding of the scene of Beowulf's death, Hygelac's rewarding of Beowulf with lands can be viewed in a new light, as the bestowal of land for military service upon a faithful retainer, not as Beowulf's having earned his king's permission to assume his inheritance.
Widsith is another Old English poem that has been invoked in the argument concerning land tenure. In it, Widsith praises his lord for having permitted him to accept, for a gift of a gold bracelet, his "father's estate" (edal), a line which has been used, notably by H. Munro Chadwick, to argue that the conveyance of allodium to inheriting sons must be confirmed by the monarch, and that such conveyance is usually preceded by a gift from the recipient of the estate to his lord (Chadwick 379). Chadwick was supported in his theory by Eric John, who defined the Saxon gecynde as land that was "heritable but not hereditary"; it could be inherited at the king's pleasure only (John 55). But the lines in Widsith which explain how the poet ca me into possession of the bracelet in the first place are very reminiscent of the Beowulf passage which describes the rewards which Beowulf received from Hrothgar. It is clear that in all of his endeavors a Germanic warrior-errant was considered t o be representing his lord twenty-four hours a day. As long as he was employing the armor given him by his lord, he was in the lord's service, and any spoils which came his way were rightfully the property of his lord, who was then expected to return a p ortion to his retainer. Just as Beowulf gives to his lord all that Hrothgar placed in his care and in return receives a share back from Hygelac, so Widsith gives the bracelet to his own lord. In no way should the gift of the bracelet be construed as being a payment for the right to inherit.
The crux of the Widsith argument, however, lies in the fact that the poet has made use of the Old English cognate for allodium, thus implying that he is taking possession of ancient family land. This line has two possible interpretations which ex clude the necessity of a payment-for-inheritance explanation. The first concerns the fact that land held by military tenure--a stewardship of royal lands--could come to be held by the son of the steward; it would be treated de facto as allodium, although it was still the king's land de jur. A court poet was first a warrior, and thus Widsith's position at court is as a military retainer of the king; thus it is quite possible that his father is one of the king's stewards. It is not clear, however, that s uch an arrangement would warrant an estate being referred to by the holder as edal, which held a very specific meaning, as has been explained. But, as seen in such Scandinavian works as Egil's Saga, for a king to refuse to allow a cherished retainer to a ssume his inheritance is rare but not unheard of, and we assume that Widsith's king released him from service to take charge of his father's farm. Common sense might indicate to us that if the poet had brothers or other male relatives capable of running the estate, a king might very well wish to keep a valued retainer within easy access, rather than losing his fighting and artistic skills to the occupation of agriculture. Thus it is possible to construct a reasonable interpretation without resorting to accepting a decidedly late-period arrangement as an explanation.
With the poetic evidence of Beowulf and Widsith, coupled with other Scandinavian evidence, several observations can be made. Land seems to passed from father to son upon the father's death; a woman may inherit if she has no brothers, and a man dying without issue may alienate land outside the family. This last situation, which seems to imply that the disposition of land is controlled not by the family but by the individual currently in possession, may be challenged.
Other observations then follow. First, as long as relatives existed, even if of illegitimate or questionable birth, a non-family member could never anticipate having more than a tenuous hold on that family's land--even if the king himself had witnessed the will. Second, oral wills were certainly considered legitimate even in the case of sudden death when there might be only a few moments for a dying man to whisper his wishes into the nearest ear. Third, not even the king could deprive a person of land inherited within the family, barring outlawry. Fourth, we see the early incarnation of what would later become feudal tenure: stewardship over royal lands, given to proven warriors as reward for excellent service, and terminated at the king's pleasure. In the various cases of tenure and conveyance illustrated in this single episode, only one, direct inheritance from one's father, was inviolable, and so it would seem that inviolability, except in extreme cases of treason, is the essence of allodium.
Thanks to the Anglo-Saxon poetry, we may conclude that allodial land was land which was so unquestionably held to belong to one particular family, free of any outside claims, that further justification for the family's exploitation of it (i.e. a written deed) or its devolving on the family's sons upon the death of the patriarch (i.e. a written will), were deemed unnecessary by the community who were familiar with the circumstances of the family's tenure. Further, the disposition of allodial land was str ictly governed by the custom of partible inheritance, and alienation outside the paternal family was strongly discouraged by the common custom. The literature has thus provided a window into an element of the culture that was so integral to the society t hat it did not at the time bear being commented on, leaving a dearth of data for students of the period.
Semiotics and Beowulf
Evans, Jonathan. "Irony and Ambiguity in the Medieval Dragon Code." Semiotics 1982. Ed. John Deely and Jonathan Evans. Lanham: UP of America: 141-150.
Klaeber, Fr. Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg. 3rd ed. Lexington, MA: Heath, 1950.
Niles, John D. "Sign and Psyche in Old English Poetry." The American Journal of Semiotics 9.4 (1992): 11-26.
Overing, Gillian R. "Swords and Signs: A Semeiotic Perspective on Beowulf." The American Journal of Semiotics 5.1 (1987): 35-58.
Scyld and Scef in Anglo-Saxon Genealogies
AEthelweard. Chronicon AEthelweardi, or The Chronicle of AEthelweard. Ed. and trans. A. Campbell. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1962.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Translated, edited and introduced by G. N. Garmonsway. London: J. M. Dent and Sons Ltd. for Everyman's Library, 1972.
Asser. Asser's Life of King Alfred. Ed. William Henry Stevenson. A new impression with article on recent work on Asser's Life of Alfred by Dorothy Whitelock. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1959.
Branston, Brian. The Lost Gods of England. London: Thames and Hudson, 1957.
Cahill, Thomas. How the Irish Saved Civilization. New York: Doubleday, 1995.
An Eleventh-Century Anglo-Saxon Illustrated Miscellany, British Library Cotton Tiberius B.v, part 1. Ed. P. McGurk et al. Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile 21. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1983.
Frank, Roberta. "Germanic Legend in Old English Literature." The Cambridge Companion to Old English Literature. Ed. Malcolm Godden and Michael Lapidge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. 88-106.
Gatch, Milton McC. Loyalties and Traditions: Man and His World in Old English Literature. New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 1971.
Howe, Nicholas. Migration and Mythmaking in Anglo-Saxon England. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
Kretzschmar, William A. "Adaptation and 'anweald' in the Old English Orosius." Anglo-Saxon England. Vol. 16. Ed. Peter Clemoes et. al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. 127-145. 23 vols. to date. 1972-.
Moisl, Hermann. "Anglo-Saxon royal genealogies and Germanic oral tradition." Journal of Medieval History 7 (1981): 215-248.
Niles, John D. "Pagan Survivals and Popular Belief." The Cambridge Companion to Old English Literature. Ed. Malcolm Godden and Michael Lapidge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. 126-141.
Sisam, Kenneth. "Anglo-Saxon Royal Genealogies." Proceedings of the British Academy 39 (1953): 287-348.
Textus Roffensis: Rochester Cathedral Library MS. A.3.5. Ed. Peter Sawyer. 2 parts. Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile 7, 11. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1957-1962.
Rules of Land Tenure in ANglo-Saxon England
Chadwick, H. Munro. Studies on ANglo-Saxon Institutions. New York: Russell and Russell, Inc., 1963.
Chickering, Howell D. Jr., trans. Beowulf. New York: Doubleday, 1977.
Gurevich, Aaron. "Land Tenure and Inheritance." Medieval Scandinavia: An Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishers, Inc., 1993.
John, Eric. Land Tenure in Early England: A Discussion of Some Problems. London: Leicester UP, 1964.