achieve owing to the lack of sources. Bede reports that Cædmon limited his entire poetic output to sacred themes, avoiding secular subjects altogether. He translated large portions of the biblical books into Old English alliterative verse, including “all the history of Genesis; . . . the Exodus of Israel out of Egypt and entrance into the promised land; and many other stories of sacred scripture, about the Lord’s incarnation, and his passion, resurrection and ascension into heaven; about the advent of the Holy Spirit and the teachings of the apostles.” In addition, he wrote about the horrible punishments of hell, the heavenly kingdom, and divine love and justice.

This passage led scholars to conclude that the poems found in the Old English Junius Manuscript, located in Oxford University’s Bodleian Library, were by Cædmon. The four poems, totalling about five thousand lines, are Genesis, Exodus, Daniel, and Christ and Satan. Those that purport to be biblical translations are in reality loose paraphrases of the biblical books, with many omissions and interpolations. None represents a complete version of the book on which it is based. Although Christ and Satan deals with biblical themes, it represents an independent treatment of New Testament material. All four titles adapt sacred themes to Anglo- Saxon civilization, mores, and culture with a freedom that in later translations would be inadmissible.

Subsequent scholarship has established that these works are by various hands, and most scholars now agree that their style and probable dates of composition make it unlikely that Cædmon contributed anything to their composition. Though the works have been characterized as belonging to the “School of Cædmon,” this claim seems inadequately founded. All that relates them to Cædmon is the reference in Bede to their subject matter and a few tenuous formulaic similarities to the Hymn.

This leaves the nine-verse Hymn as Cædmon’s surviving contribution to English literature, yet the poem itself poses serious textual problems. The earliest surviving version is in Bede’s Latin text, recorded not later than 731. The word order and tone of Bede’s text strongly suggest a previously extant Anglo-Saxon text that was known to Bede. Cædmon’s monastery was located not far from Bede’s, some fifty miles, and his life may well have overlapped Bede’s. Thus, arguably, Cædmon’s work and reputation could have been known in Jarrow while the poet was still alive. In addition, Bede informs the reader that his Latin translation, like all poetic translations, fails to capture the beauty of the original. This wording suggests that he has either seen or heard an earlier version in English. The scholarly consensus appears to be that the Hymn is rightly attributable to Cædmon and that Bede somehow knew an earlier version.

In addition to Bede’s Latin text, at least seventeen Old English versions of the poem, or a portion of its verses, exist in early manuscripts. The majority represent translations into the West Saxon dialect dated from the late tenth through the eleventh centuries. These were produced as a result of the translation of Bede’s entire Ecclesiastical History into Old English during the revival of learning inspired by King Alfred. To the translators, Bede’s Latin lines were easily rendered into the standard poetic dialect of Old English.

Four of the seventeen versions, however, are in the Northumbrian dialect, derived from the Angles who settled that area of England. Of these, two date from the early eighth century. While Northumbrian would have been Cædmon’s vernacular dialect, these versions were recorded long after Cædmon’s death and were related to Bede’s text. It appears that monastic copiers of Bede’s Latin added the Old English version of the poem in the margins. Scholars have put forth the plausible argument that the Old English text was known to the translators independently of Bede’s Latin. In addition to differences attributable to dialect, the early holographs include some minor variations of diction, and these have been the subject of careful scrutiny by scholars of the period.

Like much Old English poetry, Cædmon’s work was heavily indebted to the oral tradition. According to Bede, he composed by hearing the biblical texts read and then turning the passages into Anglo-Saxon poetry. There is no indication that Cædmon ever learned to read and write. How, then, did he learn to compose poems? Bede would have his readers believe that Cædmon received divine inspiration from a miraculous dream vision. A more skeptical, less exalted view suggests that he learned to create verses through hearing the oral performances of his fellow herdsmen and agricultural workers. Bede’s account suggests that their oral secular verses, though never recorded, preceded those of Cædmon. Further, such a view is consistent with the known customs of celebration among the Anglo-Saxons and the Teutonic tribes from which they came.

Summary

Although Cædmon’s surviving poetic output is small, he holds an important place in literary history as the founder of English vernacular poetry. His Hymn embodies the vigorous expression, style, and conventions of later Anglo-Saxon poems, with their strong metaphors, alliterative verses as an aid to memory, unrhymed verses, half-line construction, and memorable epithets.

Aldhelm recited Anglo-Saxon verse to his parishioners in order to motivate them to attend church, but none of his verses have survived. Cynewulf left four early Anglo-Saxon religious poems, but nothing is known about his life. Among the named seventh century English poets, only Cædmon is known as a poet and a person.

Bibliography

Bessinger, Jess B., Jr., and Stanley J. Kahrl, eds. Essential Articles for the Study of Old English Poetry. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1968. A collection of twenty-six articles on Old English poetry. Offers general studies of stylistics, themes, oral influences, and metrics as well as studies of individual poets and works. The Hymn is mentioned numerous times, but the book is most valuable for C. L. Wrenn’s comprehensive analysis in “The Poetry of Cædmon.” Articles by Morton W. Bloomfield, Francis P. Magoun, Jr., and Robert D. Stevick also treat the Hymn in important ways.

O’Keeffe, Katherine O’Brien. Visible Song: Transitional Literacy in Old English Verse. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990. In a chapter entitled “Orality and the Developing Text of Cædmon’s Hymn,” O’Keeffe analyzes the composition of most extant versions of the poem, with attention to such matters as spacing, spelling, punctuation, word division, and capitalization. She relates Cædmon’s Hymn to the rich tradition of oral poetry and explores scribal awareness of the distinctions between Old English transcription and classical Latin verse.

Smith, A. H., ed. Three Northumbrian Poems. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968. Smith provides texts of and extensive commentary on three Old English poems: Bede’s Death Song, Cædmon’s Hymn, and The Leiden Riddle, a poem related to a Latin riddle of Aldhelm. The commentary on each discusses authorship, manuscripts, date, and location of the extant texts, and spelling and variants of the existing texts. Heavily annotated; includes a glossary, a bibliography, and an index, along with the important manuscript versions of each poem in the original language.

Stevens, Martin, and John Mandell, eds. Old English Literature: Twenty-two Analytical Essays. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1968. Contains several essays that treat Cædmon in passing. G. L. Brook’s “Old English” analyzes texts of the two dialect versions. Robert D. Stevick in “The Oral-Formulaic Analyses of Old English Verse” explores how the Hymn can be classified as formulaic. In an important article, “Cædmon’s Hymn,” Bernard F. Huppé offers a skeptical reading of Bede’s narrative account and a careful analysis of the Hymn.

Wrenn, C. L. A Study of Old English Literature. New York: W. W. Norton, 1967. In a readily accessible, chronologically arranged study of Old English, Wrenn offers a highly informed overview of Anglo-Saxon literature. The chapter on Cædmon, “Cædmon and the Christian Revolution in Poetry,” relates the poet to his time, assesses his contribution, and offers a thorough analysis of the poem and its background.