SOURCE: “Revenge and Reward as Recurrent Motives in Beowulf,” in Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, Vol. LXXIV, No. 2, 1973, pp. 193-213.

[In the essay below, Liggins argues that the pattern of reference to vengeance and reward—both earthly and divine—in Beowulf emphasizes the poem's sense of order. She stresses however, that there is a dearth of evidence indicating that the poet intended to convey this sense of order. Rather, the poet's interest in the “duty of vengeance” imbues the poem with an internal orderliness.]

In the Introduction to his edition of Beowulf, C. L. Wrenn discusses the parallels between the Finn Episode and the tale of Ingeld, of which one is that”they both treat of the supreme necessity of vengeance for a slain leader to be taken by a faithful member of his comitatus”,¹ and he also suggests that one purpose of the Finn Episode may be to illustrate”the great Germanic duty of vengeance for a slain leader of one's comitatus” which”is not at all fully illustrated by the events of the hero's life dealt with in Beowulf”.²

The treatment of vengeance in these two episodes is very powerful, both within the scope of each tale itself and in its bearing on the poem as a whole. The opening lines of the Finn Episode are not concerned with the moral duty of vengeance, but they pick out the other elements of violence and poignancy as they might appear in the case of the warriors and then in the situation of Hildeburh: sudden disaster (se fær), death at the decree of inexorable fate (feallan scolde and hie on gebyrd hruron), treachery (Ne huru Hildeburh herian þorfte / Eotena treowe), the injustice of suffering and the loss of kindred (unsynnum wearð / beloren leofum … bearnum ond broðrum).³ The tragedy of Hildeburh, whose happiness and security are destroyed in the conflict between the two groups with whom she has ties of the deepest affection and loyalty as both kinswoman and subject, is summarized in a phrase which concentrates on her sorrow, without reference to moral issues, and which, moreover, is itself almost impersonal in tone, þæt wæs geomuru ides. A variation of þæt wæs god cyning, the comment expresses no overt sympathy, and assumes that her dignity will remain constant, however deep are her sufferings. Indeed, the next reference to Hildeburh shows her giving orders at the cremation:

Het ða Hildeburh                    æt Hnæfes
ade
hire selfre sunu                    sweoloðe befæstan,
banfatu bærnan,                    ond on bæl don
eame on eaxle

(1114-17).

Only when that has been attended to is she permitted to display her emotions and even then the expression of her grief becomes a part of the formal ceremony:

                                                            Ides gnornode,
geomrode giddum

(1117-18).

The details of the fighting are of much less importance in the poem than the emotions of the protagonists, and, particularly, than those of Hengest, whose situation and temperament make him one of the most complex and interesting of all the heroic figures in Beowulf. His dilemma, as a partner to the compact with Finn⁴ and as the one upon whose shoulders falls the duty of avenging the leader, is one incapable of easy solution. It is brilliantly suggested in the passage of atmospheric writing (lines 1127 ff.), in which the poet divides his attention between the brooding, turbulent-spirited leader and the bleak, violent weather of winter, which both echoes his own mood and in large measure causes it by the inactivity it forces upon him. Man and nature are brought together violently in the opening lines, with the strongly evocative epithet for winter:

                                                                                Hengest ða gyt
wælfagne winter                    wunode mid Finne
[ea]l unhlitme

(1127-29).

His thoughts of home are in part nostalgic (and to some extent, perhaps, emotional memories of the dead leader whose duty had been to defend his land have been transmuted to longings for the land itself), and in part, perhaps, very practical, in Hengest's awareness of the impossibility of travel either for those who would be able to return after the battle with Finn or, if we accept one suggestion,⁵ for reinforcements of Danes to come to his aid before the battle:

                                                                      eard gemunde,
þeah þe ne meahte                    on mere drifan
hringedstefnan,—                    holm storme weol,
won wið winde,                    winter yþe beleac
isgebinde

(1129-33).

The coming of spring both brings with it the possibility of action which alone can lift Hengest's depression and also symbolizes the lightening of his spirit. (The dual significance here resembles that in the case of winter.) It is only after the poet has marked the change of season and implied the joy which this usually brings to mankind that he turns to Hengest. In his case, the beauty of spring for its own sake means nothing, but the relief he feels comes from the opportunity to take positive action at last, to purge his feelings of guilt by performing his duty of vengeance:

                                                                                Da wæs winter scacen,
fæger foldan bearm;                    fundode wrecca,
gist of geardum;                    he to gyrnwræce
swiðor þohte                    þonne to sælade,
gif he torngemot                    þurhteon mihte,
þæt he Eotena bearn                    irne gemunde

(1136-41).

His feelings of relief and the overwhelming force of the memory of Hnæf perhaps obliterate any last thoughts of the temporary, and hated, bond with Finn. The poet gives no hint, though in his attitude towards the Frisian leader there is a certain ambivalence. His own approbation is unqualified for Hengest and for the Danish viewpoint that, no matter how honourable are the terms offered by the Frisians, an alliance with them is no substitute for independence and for a single bond of loyalty to their own leader, but his sympathy for Finn comes through very clearly in

Swylce ferhðfrecan                    Fin eft begeat
sweordbealo sliðen                    æt his selfes ham

(1146-47),

just as it had been implied earlier in his account of Finn's generous treatment of the Danes after the first battle and in his reference to Hildeburh's happy married life. Finn's appreciation of the difficult and galling situation of the Danes is implied in his willing agreement to the condition that his own men should never, through enmity or malice (þurh inwitsearo) remind the visitors of their subjection to the slayer of their lord, and that any Frisian who transgressed should be immediately put to death.

But the poet's sympathy seems to vanish suddenly as he summarizes the report of Guthlaf and Oslaf, and the death of Finn is hurried over in half a dozen words (though this of course is in agreement with the scant attention paid in the Episode to physical action). The ethics of the last attack are ignored, perhaps because the poet had no wish to commit himself, perhaps because he saw no problem there.

Within the framework of the whole poem, the Finn Episode emphasizes the point that tragedy and death are never far away. The happiness of Hildeburh cannot last, and the triumph of Beowulf will eventually be replaced by at least partial defeat and by death. The tale of Finn is told as part of healgamen and the tragic outcome is given in the opening lines. There may possibly be word-play between the gid oft wrecen (1065) by Hrothgar's scop as he entertains the warriors at this feast of triumph and the very different kind of gid uttered beside Hnæf's pyre (1118), and also between the sense of mænan in l. 1067,

ðonne healgamen                    Hroþgares scop
æfter medobence                    mænan scolde,

and that in which it is applied to the two Danes of old,

siþðan grimne gripe                    Guðlaf ond
Oslaf
æfter sæsiðe                    sorge mændon,
ætwiton                    weana dæl

(1148-50).

Beyond this, one may perhaps see a contrast between the faithfulness of the Danes to their dead lord and the cowardice of the Geats of the last part of the poem, who, with the shining exception of Wiglaf, desert their living leader in his time of desperate need.

The Ingeld story is concerned with vengeance for a slain parent, not specifically with that for a leader, and it is apparently not Ingeld, the bridegroom, who makes the first move. However, the prince is named separately when Beowulf speaks of the resentment of the Heathobards against the Danish nobles who so tactlessly wear the arms of those whom they had overcome:

Mæg þæs þonne ofþyncan                    ðcodne
Heaðo-Beardna
ond þegna gehwam                    þara leoda,
þonne he mid fæmnan                    on flett gæð:
dryhtbearn Dena,                    duguða biwenede

(2032-35).

Both here and in the Finn Episode, the warrior who actively begins the second stage of the quarrel is urged on by somebody else. Here it is an eald æscwiga (2042) who makes an inflammatory speech. Lines 1142-44 have been interpreted in a number of different ways, but the most widely accepted one sees the laying of the sword in Hengest's lap as a symbolic act reminding him of his duty. There is something especially appropriate in this (apparently) silent reminder to the introspective leader. It is as though his thoughts are suddenly given visible form. Whether by chance or by the poet's deliberate design this is more subtly powerful in these particular circumstances than a speech could have been. The Heathobard's action is more hotheaded, provoked by the sight of the thoughtless or arrogant visitors and by the beer at the feast, whereas there is an implication of cooler and more deliberate action by Hengest and his party, but in both cases the memory of the earlier battle is bitter and the desire for vengeance strong. In both episodes, the dead man is avenged, though subsequent events are different: whereas the Finn tale is brought to an end with a second fight leading to the destruction of the leader and his men and the lady's return to her own people, in that of Ingeld there is clear reference only to a single encounter. (However, mention of the breaking of the aðsweord (2064) seems to imply further bloodshed and there are suggestions of more reprisals at a still later date when Ingeld's love for his wife has cooled in his grief for the slaughter of his men.)

Although it is in these two episodes that the duty of vengeance appears most strongly, it is important in a number of other interludes. Moreover, in most of the exploits of Beowulf, it is used in a new way, in his struggles with non-human creatures: with the sea-monsters, with Grendel, Grendel's mother and finally the dragon. Sometimes the poet uses words that specifically mean “vengeance”, “avenge”, “revenge”. At other times he does not do so, but, while nothing can be proved, it seems highly probable that in any counter-attack upon an enemy who had previously been victorious, the notion of revenge or of vengeance would play an important part. That the desire was very long-lived is shown by Wiglaf's reference to the threat which the Franks and Frisians will offer once the news of Beowulf's death has become known: the memory still rankled of the raids which the Geats had made upon the Franks more than half a century before. In them Hygelac, after initial victories, was slain (lines 2913 ff); however, his death was itself followed by an act of vengeance, for Beowulf, fulfilling a double obligation, as kinsman and as thane, had at once killed Dæghrefn, who may well have been the actual slayer of Hygelac (lines 2501 ff). The Swedes, too, says Wiglaf, may be expected to renew their ancient feuds (ll. 2922-23, 2999-3007).

The complicated story of the wars between Geats and Swedes is a pattern of revenge (and its concomitant, reward for the loyal service of thanes). The attack made upon the Geats at Hreosnabeorh by the arrogant Swedes, after the death of Hrethel, is followed by the vengeance of the Geats, who raid Sweden and capture Ongentheow's queen. In reprisal, Ongentheow again engages with his enemies at Ravenswood, kills Hæthcyn, the son of Hrethel, releases his wife, and pursues the leaderless Geats. He besieges them all night long, with threats of wholesale destruction in the morning. At daybreak Hygelac, Hæthcyn's younger brother, arrives with reinforcements, and the battle is resumed. Ongentheow's powers of resistance are already lowered by his knowledge of Hygelac's prowess, and the Geat, for his part, is inflamed by his desire to avenge the one who was both his near kinsman and his lord:

Þæt mægwine                    mine gewræcan,
fæhðe ond fyrene,                    swa hyt gefræge
wæs

(2479-80).

In this case Hygelac does not personally slay the Swedish ruler but, in his capacity as new leader of the Geats, is responsible for seeing that this is done. It is the brothers Eofor and Wulf who actually engage Ongentheow. Wulf strikes the first mighty blow, and, despite its effect, the Swede immediately repays it with even more violence:

                                                                      Næs he forht swa ðeh,
gomela Scilfing,                    ac forgeald hraðe
wyrsan wrixle                    wælhlem þone,
syþðan þeodcyning                    þyder oncirde

(2967-70).

Wulf is too badly wounded to return the blow,

Ne meahte se snella                    sunu Wonredes
ealdum ceorle                    ondslyht giofan

(2971-72),

and the responsibility for retaliation therefore passes to his brother Eofor, who now has the double duty of avenging his leader's death and his brother's wounding. Having slain Ongentheow, he strips him of byrnie, sword and helmet and hands the armour to Hygelac. On their return home, Hygelac rewards the brothers for their services with magnificent gifts and to Eofor he also gives the hand of his only daughter. The pattern has been completed, with the aggressors punished and services recompensed. There is no bitterness and the bravery of Ongentheow is fully acknowledged. The fighting is very much a pitting of the strength of one man against another. Eofor takes no part until his brother has been disabled.

Years later, the Geats and Swedes again become involved in a fierce quarrel, when the young Geatish king, Heardred, gives shelter at his court to the Swedish princes Eanmund and Eadgils, who had fled when their uncle, Onela, seized the throne. Seeking revenge for this unfriendly act (at this stage the Geats do not seem to have been directly involved in the quarrel), Onela invades Geatland, killing both Heardred and Eanmund. A couple of years later, Eadgils with Geatish support marches against his uncle, in retaliation for Onela's seizing of the throne, killing of Eanmund and exile of himself:

                                                                                he gewræc syþðan
cealdum cearsiðum,                    cyning ealdre bineat

(2395-96).

The crime of usurpation has been punished at last. But the seeds of further trouble between Swedes and Geats have been sown.

On many occasions, the poet refers to Beowulf's fights with the various monsters in terms appropriate to the code of revenge. This conception appears in Beowulf's account of his struggle with the sea-beasts, which is a kind of self-recommendation to Hrothgar and which serves as a prelude to his later and even more desperate encounters. He concludes the brief tale of his victory over the giants and water-demons with the comment

wræc Wedera nið                    —wean ahsodon—,
forgrand gramum

(423-4),

which transforms his actions from mere deeds of bravado and turns them into a sacred duty, concerning not only the safety of his people but also their honour. He thus establishes his right to ask for the privilege of fighting Grendel, not in the role of an adventurer but in that of a saviour, of one who, if the Lord wills it, may be able to “cleanse” Heorot (and the same word, fælsian, is used by the poet after he has succeeded (825)). It is probably significant that he offers himself in this role only to Hrothgar; in his earlier speech to the coastguard he says simply:

                                                                      Ic þæs Hroðgar mæg
þurh rumne sefan                    ræd gelæran,
hu he frod ond god                    feond oferswyðeþ

(277-79),

and he tells Wulfgar that he will declare the real purpose of his journey to the prince alone:

Wille ic asecgan                    sunu Healfdenes,
mærum þeodne                    min ærende,
aldre þinum …

(344-46).

In Beowulf's reply to Unferth's taunting speech, there is a strong suggestion that Grendel's attacks on the Danes may be a direct consequence of Unferth's treachery, but I shall return later to the matter of Divine Vengeance.

The revenge theme comes out strongly in the case of Grendel's mother. The first reference to her when she attacks Heorot is in the role of avenger and it is interesting that this motive is immediately ascribed to her by the Danes and Geats; in fact, she is called a wrecend before she is identified in any other way, by name, sex, or relationship to Grendel:

                                                            Þæt gesyne wearþ,
widcuþ werum,                    þætte wrecend þa
gyt
lifde æfter laþum

(1255-57).

Grendel may be laþ, but he is still entitled to an avenger. And when the poet returns to her again fourteen lines later, after an interpolation dealing with Cain, the origins of the evil spirits and a brief recapitulation of the fight between Beowulf and Grendel, he makes the same point:

                                                                      Ond his modor þa gyt
gifre ond galgmod                    gegan wolde
sorhfulne sið,                    sunu deoð wrecan

(1276-78).

Even though Hrothgar is filled with grief for æschere, and although Grendel's mother is to him wælgæst wæfre and atol æse wlanc, he still thinks of her action in similar terms, and even, to some extent, sees Beowulf's defeat of Grendel from her point of view:

                                                                                Heo þa fæhðe wræc,
þe þu gystran niht                    Grendel cwealdest
þurh hæstne had                    heardum clammum,
forþan he to lange                    leode mine
wanode ond wyrde.                    He æt wige gecrang
ealdres scyldig,                    ond nu oþer cwom
mihtig manscaða,                    wolde hyre mæg wrecan …

(1333-39).

(Here, Beowulf's action is seen as the result and the punishment of Grendel's long series of raids, but the poet's “sympathy” seems to be more with the bereaved mother who for the moment is raised to human dignity.) At the climax of the underwater struggle, when Grendel's mother sits on top of Beowulf and draws her knife, the poet pauses briefly to add wolde hire bearn wrecan, / angan eaferan (lines 1546-47). Despite the fact that he happens to be the one who first attracts the attention of the creature when she realizes that she is discovered, there is perhaps a certain ironic justice in the slaying of æschere:

Se wæs Hroþgare                     hæleþa
leofost
on gesiðes had                    be sæm tweonum

(1296-97).

The death of a son has been avenged by the death of a specially beloved thane. But even if the choice of this victim is only the working of chance, the poet is specific enough, a few lines later, in drawing up a balance sheet in terms of the obligations of the code of revenge:

                                                                                Ne wæs þæt gewrixle til,
þæt hie on ba healfa                    bicgan scoldon
freonda feorum!

(1304-06).

Beowulf sees the coming struggle with Grendel's mother as an act of vengeance (and so accords her a certain human dignity by implying that she is to be considered as the offending party in a feud) when he takes the situation which follows the death of æschere as a particular example of a common case:

                                                                                Selre bið æghwæm,
þæt he his freond wrece,                    þonne he
fela murne

(1384-85).

In his later account of the underwater fight, the slaying of the female and the beheading of Grendel are regarded as acts of vengeance, not for the killing of any one man but for the long series of deeds of violence and destruction:

                                                                      fyrendæda wræc,
deaðcwealm Denigea,                    swa hit gedefe wæs.

(1669-70).

Beowulf's report to Hygelac also presents both sides of the operation of the code of revenge. In the opening lines he gives the gist of the news that his lord is anxious to hear, when, after a reference to the many sorrowful deeds done by Grendel to the Danes, he says ic ðæt eall gewræc (line 2005). Later he can afford to be generous to his adversaries and even to spare a thought for the sorrow of the monstrous woman as she goes about her duty of revenge:

                                                                      þa wæs eft hraðe
gearo gyrnwræce                    Grendeles modor,
siðode sorhfull;                    sunu deað fornam,
wighete Wedra.                    Wif unhyre
hyre bearn gewræc,                    beorn acwealde
ellenlice;                    þær wæs æschere,
frodan fyrnwitan                    feorh uðgenge

(2117-23).

The emphasis is laid upon her grief and even upon her courage and the reference to æschere is almost cursory.

The theme of vengeance appears several times in the story of the dragon. When he is disturbed by the fugitive, the dragon at once plans revenge:

                                                                                wolde guman findan,
þone þe him on sweofote                    sare geteode

(2294-95),

and when he discovers the theft of the flagon, he at once begins to ravage the countryside:

wolde se laða                    lige forgyldan
drincfæt dyre

(2305-06).

As soon as Beowulf learns of his depredations, he plans revenge (lines 2335-36). Up to this point, vengeance has been taken (by the dragon) for the breach of privacy and for the theft of valuable objects and planned (by Beowulf) for widespread destruction of property. The crimes have been of increasing gravity and each is met by a punishment, not by a closely-matching act of vengeance. In the last case the progression continues, and now it is life that is at stake. To save his country and his people Beowulf attacks the dragon and quickly wounds him. But the dragon fights back until each mortally wounds the other and the feud between dragon and humans is brought to an end. Wiglaf had played his part in aiding his leader, but ascribes the credit to Beowulf alone, in words that once more use the language of the code of revenge:

                                                                      hwæðre him God uðe,
sigora Waldend,                    þæt he hyne sylfne gewræc
ana mid ecge,                    þa him wæs elnes þearf

(2874-76).

It is fitting that he should have avenged himself. The implication is that no other was able to do so, for Wiglaf lacked experience and the other Geats had fled from the scene. For Wiglaf to have succeeded alone when his leader had failed would perhaps have detracted from Beowulf's own glory, and would moreover have been out of harmony with the poet's prophecy of the impending collapse of the Geats. It is a part of Beowulf's supremacy that even in old age and close to death he alone can avenge himself.

Forming a variation on the theme of vengeance are the cases in which, for different reasons, such action is impossible and the grief of the relatives is accordingly exacerbated. Twice, in the course of a speech made near the end of his life, does Beowulf refer to the accidental slaying of Herebeald by his younger brother Hæthcyn and to the impossibility of seeking compensation, either by money or by human life:

Þæt wæs feohleas gefeoht,                    fyrenum
gesyngad,
hreðre hygemeðe;                    sceolde hwæðre
swa þeah
æðeling unwrecen                    ealdres linnan

(2441-43).

The somewhat generalized statement here is replaced by one of greater poignancy in the second reference, when Beowulf is concerned with the grief and helplessness of the old father, who finds relief only in death (lines 2462-71). The intervening lines (2444-62) picture the sorrow of the man whose son has been hung, and who has to bear the weight of his death in circumstances where there can be no vengeance and who has also to suffer the knowledge of his guilt. Both this nameless father and Hrethel are isolated from men by their impotence even more than by their grief; neither can put into practice the advice which Beowulf as a young man had offered to Hrothgar in Heorot:

Ne sorga, snotor guma!                    Selre bið æghwæm,
þæt he his freond wrece,                    þonne he
fela murne

(1384-85).

(This third case of an old man unable to take vengeance for the death of one who, though not his son, was specially dear to him, presents a number of contrasts with the other two. Here he is prevented from taking action not because of any legal restrictions but because of old age and physical inability. Here the foe is a supernatural one whose power no ordinary man could expect to overcome. But here there is a champion at hand, a man of another race but one who owes Hrothgar a debt for the protection the Danes had given to his own father, Ecgtheow, in bygone years, and, though the chance of success seems slight, vengeance is at least possible.) Another variation is found in a brief reference in lines 2618-19:

                                                                                no ymbe ða fæhðe spræc,
þeah ðe he his broðor bearn                    abredwade.

Wihstan has slain Eanmund, the nephew of Onela, but he is rewarded by the uncle, not punished, since Eanmund, as an exile, has forfeited all his natural rights. Rebellion against his ruler cancels out family ties.

The alternative method of settling a feud—by a money payment—appears several times in the poem, both in the main action and in episodes. Hrothgar cannot avenge the death of Hondscio, but, at the celebration banquet which follows the fight with Grendel, he not only rewards the living Geats but also promises to make a money payment on behalf of the dead one:

                                                                      þone ænne heht
golde forgyldan,                    þone ðe Grendel ær
mane acwealde

(1053-55).

Hrothgar had settled Ecgtheow's feud with the Wylfings by means of money (lines 470-72). Such payments were intended to put a stop to violence and, from being a substitute for revenge, they could easily become a means of buying off a would-be attacker. Grendel's blood-lust is not to be satisfied, however:

                                                            sibbe ne wolde
wið manna hwone                    mægenes Deniga,
feorhbealo feorran,                    fea þingian

(154-56).

Finn's offer that the Danes should share in the use of a hall and in the distribution of treasure rather than that the battle should continue between the two weakened sides is a further variation in methods of compounding a dispute.

The poet sometimes applies the terminology of the civil law code to cases where the methods are much more direct:

                                                                                Ne wæs þæt gewrixle til,
þæt hie on ba healfa                    bicgan scoldon
freonda feorum

(1304-06),

where the “purchasers” are Hrothgar and Grendel's mother. Grendel's death at the hands of Beowulf is seen as a just punishment:

                                                                                He æt wige gecrang
ealdres scyldig

(1337-38),

though he is given a curious dignity when his planned snatch-and-run raid is seen as wig, or when Beowulf vows:

                                                                      ond nu wið Grendel sceal,
wið þam aglæcan                    ana gehegan
ðing wið þyrse

(424-26).

The cycle of acts of vengeance between warring tribes could also be brought to an end—at least temporarily—by a marriage alliance. Freawaru's betrothal to Ingeld was an act of expediency, by which Hrothgar calculated

þæt he mid ðy wife                    wælfæhða
dæl,
sæcca gesette

(2028-29).

The reference to the bongar two lines later confirms that this has been a blood-feud, and Beowulf comments on the frequency with which the strong instinct to reopen the feud in active fighting quickly prevails (lines 2029-31).

When Beowulf arrives at Heorot, both Hrothgar's answer to Wulfgar (the first speech we have heard from the king) and his reply to Beowulf's greeting begin with a reference to Ecgtheow and then pass on to the depredations of Grendel. Although reminiscence is natural enough in an old man trying to construct a framework of familiar material into which he can fit a new acquaintance, and although there is no specific reference⁶ to a return by Beowulf for services rendered to his father in the past, there is at least a strong implication that Beowulf is partly motivated by this awareness of a debt which can only be paid by his own actions. The concept of return for services, in the form either of material rewards or of further service, is closely allied to that of vengeance, and is a basic one in the organization of Germanic society.

There are frequent references to the generosity of a leader and some also to the lack of it (for example, to the meanness of Heremod—lines 1719-20). The remuneration may or may not be related to a specific act on the part of the recipient; it is when it is so related that it is most clearly the obverse of vengeance. In general, the ruler rewards his thanes with gold, with treasures and occasionally with armour, while the thane repays his lord with loyal service. But a special obligation may carry a special reward. When Beowulf kills Grendel and saves the Danes from threatened destruction, Hrothgar takes him into his own family:

                                                                      Nu ic, Beowulf, þec,
secg betsta,                    me for sunu wylle
freogan on ferhþe;                    heald forð tela
niwe sibbe

(946-49).

In his emotion, this is what the old king mentions first and, in one sense, the material gifts are thought of as a consequence of this relationship:

                                                                      Ne bið þe [n]ænigre gad
worolde wilna,                    þe ic geweald hæbbe.

(949-50)

Sometimes a promise of reward is made in advance of the service, as when Hrothgar, before he sees Beowulf for the first time, tells Wulfgar, the messenger:

                                                                      Ic þæm godan sceal
for his modþræce                    madmas beodan

(384-85),

and this promise is repeated to Beowulf himself, in lines 660-61. The fulfilment of the promise is narrated in lines 1020-49 and 1193-96 (while in 1173-74 Wealhtheow urges Hrothgar to be generous in his gifts to the company of Geats as a whole). Later, Beowulf speaks of it again in his report to Hygelac (lines 2101-04). Similarly, before Beowulf's struggle with Grendel's mother Hrothgar promises a further reward of gold and treasures if the young man survives (lines 1380-82, and again 2134, when Beowulf reports to Hygelac). This time there is no narrative of the celebration feast and we hear of the actual bestowal of the gifts from Beowulf's lips (lines 2142-43 and 2145-47). Hygelac rewards Eofor and Wulf with great treasures for their service in slaying Ongentheow (lines 2989ff.) and Ongentheow's son, Onela, rewards Wihstan with helmet, byrnie and famous sword for his action in killing Eanmund. It is not only for martial deeds that rewards are given: the gentle Wealhtheow implores Beowulf not to excite her young sons too much, and promises a reward, which may or may not be monetary (lines 1219-20).

To receive a reward for services already rendered does not, as it were, finalize the account. On the contrary, a new cycle of obligation is begun. Beowulf tells how he with his shining sword repaid Hygelac for the treasures and land given by the prince (lines 2490-93). The fullest development of this theme of the retainers' duty to requite the generosity of their lord is found in the last five hundred lines of the poem, in the contrast between the behaviour of Wiglaf and that of the rest of the Geats. As Beowulf and the dragon come together in the second stage of their encounter, the hero's plight is briefly and dramatically described. Though encircled by flames, he takes heart in the thought of his responsibility to his people. In violent contrast with this is the action of his followers, who, with one exception, flee to the woods to save their own lives:

                                                                      nearo ðrowode
fyre befongen                    se ðe ær folce weold.
Nealles him on heape                    handgesteallan,
æðelinga bearn                    ymbe gestodon
hildecystum,                    ac hy on holt bugon,
ealdre burgan

(2594-99).

(And the point is made again in lines 2882-83). The poet dwells much longer on what we may call the positive side, on the immediate response of the faithful Wiglaf:

                                                                      geseah his mondryhten
under heregriman                    hat þrowian.
Gemunde ða ða are,                    þe he him ær
forgeaf
wicstede weligne                    Wægmundinga,
folcrihta gehwylc,                    swa his fæder ahte

(2604-08),

and on some of the details of his fight. Having shown his own valour, and in a pause in the battle, Wiglaf expresses his grief in a speech whose whole theme is the obligation of the thanes to the lord who has given them rings and treasures and the disgrace of abandoning him in his time of need:

Ic ðæt mæl geman,                    þær
we medu þegun,
þonne we geheton                    ussum hlaforde
in biorsele,                    ðe us ðas beagas geaf,
þæt we him ða guðgetawa                    gyldan
woldon,
gif him þyslicu                    þearf gelumpe,
helmas ond heard sweord

(2633-38),

and

                                                                                Nu is se dæg cumen,
þæt ure mandryhten                    mægenes behofað,
godra guðrinca …
… God wat on mec,
þæt me is micle leofre,                    þæt
minne lichaman
mid minne goldgyfan                    gled fæðmie

(2646-52).

When Beowulf is dead, the last offices are seen as the final opportunity for his men to repay the gifts of their lord:

                                                                                Nu is ofost betost,
þæt we þeodcyning                    þær
sceawian,
ond þone gebringan,                    þe us beagas geaf,
on adfære

(3007-10).

Though it is in the last part of the poem that the theme of the thane's obligations to his lord is developed most fully, the mutual relationship is epitomized in the moralizing sentiments of the introductory fitt when the poet interrupts his account of Scyld and his son to comment

Swa sceal geong guma                    gode gewyrcean,
fromum feohgiftum                    on fæder bearme,
þæt hine on ylde                    eft gewunigen
wilgesiþas,                    þonne wig cume,
leode gelæsten;                    lofdædum sceal
in mægþa gehwære                    man geþeon

(20-25).

In the last clause the duties of lord and of thane are neatly drawn together. The bond of loyalty must be proved by deeds on each side.

The obligation of one who is both relative and thane is expressed—ironically as events prove—by Wealhtheow, in her speech of confidence in Hrothulf (lines 1180-87).

For the most part we see Beowulf receiving rewards for his exceptional services to the Danes with whom his bond is a somewhat loose one, but in a long reminiscing speech he recalls how he repaid the generosity of his own lord, Hygelac, in a normal lord-thane situation:

Ic him þa maðmas,                    þe he me
sealde,
geald æt guðe,                    swa me gifeðe wæs,
leohtan sweorde;                    he me lond forgeaf,
eard eðelwyn

(2490-93).

Sometimes the lord's generosity takes the form not of gifts but of protection or of other services to his thanes or to members of other tribes who have come to his court. So Beowulf, before going out to his encounter with Grendel's mother, can ask Hrothgar to assume responsibility for the young Geats, if he himself should not return:

gif ic æt þearfe                     þinre scolde
aldre linnan,                    þæt ðu me a wære
forðgewitenum                    on fæder stæle.
Wes þu mundbora                    minum magoþegnum,
hondgesellum,                    gif mec hild nime;
swylce þu ða madmas,                    þe þu me
sealdest,
Hroðgar leofa,                    Higelace onsend

(1477-83).

And, after his return, Hrothgar reaffirms his gratitude:

                                                                                Ic þe sceal mine gelæstan
freode, swa wit furðum spræcon

(1706-07).

Beowulf, by his generous treatment, makes amends to Eadgils for the losses he has suffered:

Se ðæs leodhryres                    lean gemunde
uferan dogrum,                    Eadgilse wearð
feasceaftum freond

(2391-93).

Rewards may be given, too, for slighter services faithfully performed, as when Beowulf, in his capacity as leader of the band of adventurers, gives a sword, bound with gold, to the Danish batweard who has guarded the Geatish ship (lines 1900-01).

Allied to the idea of reward is that of compensation for injuries or ill-fortune suffered, as in the military successes of Scyld Scefing which the poet sees as atoning for his destitute childhood (lines 4-11), or the good fortune which was brought to the Danes by Scyld's son, the first Beowulf,

… þone God sende
folce to frofre;                    fyrenðearfe ongeat,
þe hie ær drugon                    aldorlease
lange hwile;                    him þæs Liffrea,
wuldres Wealdend                    woroldare forgeaf

(13-17).

In a small group of examples, the notion of “reward” is ironically applied to the struggle between Beowulf and the Grendel-kin. Once the payment is made by Grendel's mother, when Beowulf has thrown her to the floor:

Heo him eft hraþe                    andlean forgeald
grimman grapum                    ond him togeanes feng

(1541-42).

When Beowulf decapitates Grendel's body, the poet comments that this is in return for the monster's depredations, He him þæs lean forgeald (line 1584), and Beowulf reports his success to Hrothgar in similar terms:

To lang ys to reccenne,                    hu ic ðam leodsceaðan
yfla gehwylces                    ondlean forgeald

(2093-94).

In line 1577 the verb forgyldan alone is applied to Beowulf's actions:

                                                                      … he hraþe wolde
Grendle forgyldan                    guðræsa fela
ðara þe he geworhte                    to West-Denum
oftor micle                    þonne on ænne sið

(1576-79),

while Beowulf

                                                                      forgeald hraðe
wyrsan wrixle                    wælhlem þone

(2968-69).

The “reward” for evil is, thus, vengeance.

Both rewards and retribution may be dispensed also by superhuman forces, either by Wyrd or by God. The act of repayment may be implied, as in the maxim,

                                                                      Wyrd oft nereð
unfægne eorl,                    þonne his ellen deah!

(572-73),

or Hrothgar's confident assertion to Beowulf that, despite his ravages, Grendel may eventually be overcome:

                                                                      God eaþe mæg
þone dolsceaðan                    dæda getwæfan!

(478-79).

(Similarly with lines 106-110 (of Cain), 168-69 (of Grendel), 587-601 (of Unferth, whose act in slaying his brother is claimed by Beowulf to be the cause of Grendel's continued depredations), 977-79 (of Grendel on Judgment Day), 1263-65 (of Cain), which all concern punishments, and with 1553-56 (which tell how Beowulf, having once displayed his strength and determination, receives divine assistance). In lines 1724-27 the poet speaks of the lavishness of God which far exceeds mere human deserts:

                                                            Wundor is to secganne,
hu mihtig God                    manna cynne
þurh sidne sefan                    snyttru bryttað,
eard ond eorlscipe.

In some places, the direct vocabulary of reward is used, either literally, as in Hrothgar's wish for Beowulf,

                                                                      Alwalda þec
gode forgylde,                    swa he nu gyt dyde!

(955-56),

or ironically, as in the two references to the giants,

swylce gigantas,                    þa wið Gode wunnon
lange þrage;                    he him ðæs lean forgeald

(113-14),

and

… syþðan flod ofsloh,
gifen geotende                    giganta cyn,
.....… him þæs endelean
þurh wæteres wylm                    Waldend sealde

(1689-93).

Most of the references to divine vengeance and rewards are found in the first part of the poem. The dragon has, in fact, no theological connections; however, Beowulf's first thought is that the series of raids are intended as a punishment for some offence he himself has committed against the Lord:

wende se wisa,                    þæt he Wealdende
ofer ealde riht                    ecean Dryhtne
bitre gebulge

(2329-31).

Occasionally, retribution is exacted by somebody who does not appear to have any natural right to do so. So Wiglaf prophesies that the cowardice of the Scyldings will be quickly followed by the seizing of all property and the removal of the privileges normally enjoyed by a landowner,

                                                                                syþðan æðelingas
feorran gefricgean                    fleam eowerne,
domleasan dæd

(2888-90),

though here the implication of punishment is doubtless combined with that of opportunism when the weakness of a once powerful tribe has become apparent. The ambivalent role of Grendel appears in Beowulf's reference to Unferth's fratricide, when the creature who is elsewhere depicted as the enemy of God seems to become the instrument of His vengeance. One can only conjecture whether the poet is indulging in a subtle piece of theology or whether he is merely being inconsistent.

The poet's brief recapitulation of the story of the dragon's crime and punishment neatly stresses the moral by concluding the summary with the retribution, even though to do this means a disturbance of the chronology of the earlier full narrative of the battle:

Þa wæs gesyne,                    þæt
se sið ne ðah
þam ðe unrihte                    inne gehydde
wræte under wealle.                    Weard ær ofsloh
feara sumne;                    þa sio fæhð gewearð
gewrecen wraðlice

(3058-62).

There is, of course, no evidence to prove that the poet thought in terms of any overall purpose apart from that of the main narrative of two principal episodes in Beowulf's career, and allusions to revenge are natural enough in heroic tales of the age. But at the same time, the references to revenge taken or not taken, to conflicting loyalties in blood-feuds, to vengeance for crimes, and to rewards for loyalty are so frequent in the main narrative, in all the major episodes and in several of the briefer ones that they help to give the poem a continuity and a pattern just as much as do the many references to Hygelac or to such things as the contrasts between good and evil or joy and sorrow, to sapientia et fortitudo, or to the pattern of Beowulf's three great fights against the monsters.⁷ The poet may or may not have planned or recognized this, but his own keen interest in situations involving the duty of vengeance helped to give his poem a certain internal orderliness and shape apart from the parallelisms within its central narrative.

Notes

1. C. L. Wrenn, Beowulf, with the Finnesburg Fragment, revised and enlarged ed. (London, 1958), p. 74.

2. Ibid., p. 75.

3. All quotations are from F. Klaeber, Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg, 3rd. ed. (Boston, 1950).

4. The problems involved in the treaty are not relevant to my subject, and hence are not discussed.

5. F. Klaeber, Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg (1st ed.), p. 220; R. A. Williams, The Finn Episode in Beowulf, (Cambridge, 1924), pp. 101 f.; K. Malone, JEGPh XXV, 169, ELH X, 282f.; and A. G. Brodeur, Essays and Studies (University of California Publications in English, Vol. XIV), p. 27.

6. There would, of course, be such a reference if MS fere fyhtum (457) is a mistake for for gewyrhtum, as suggested by Trautmann, followed by Chambers and Klaeber.

7. See, for example, A. E. Du Bois, ‘The Unity of Beowulf’, PMLA XLIX, 374-405; A. G. Brodeur, ‘The Structure and Unity of Beowulf’, PMLA LXVIII, 1183-95; Kemp Malone, ‘Beowulf’, English Studies XXIX, 169-72; H. G. Wright, ‘Good and Evil; Light and Darkness; Joy and Sorrow in Beowulf’, RES, N. S. VIII, 1-11; R. E. Kaske, ‘Sapientia et Fortitudo as the Controlling Theme of Beowulf’, Studies in Philology LV, 423-56; H. L. Rogers, ‘Beowulf's Three Great Fights’, RES, N.S. VI, 339-55.