[In the following essay, Tyler provides a brief study of the relationship between style and theme in Judith.]

Even the most casual reading of the Old English poem Judith cannot help but reveal the poet's repetition of key words and phrases. In this paper I will consider the poet's use of heroic language and language which describes the state of the mind or spirit in the light of the importance of style for conveying meaning in Old English poetry. Close attention to the style of Judith, which brings to the surface levels of meaning the modern reader may see as secondary or indeed miss altogether, shows the poem to be a rich and complex work.

One of the most obvious features of Judith is the application of themes and language from traditional heroic poetry to Biblical narrative. The repeated use of the traditional gefrægen ic (7 and 246) signals to the audience that the poet has cast his poem in a heroic mode. This reworking is not, however, a naïve example of a poet taking a book of the Old Testament and retelling it in the native idiom because that is the only way he and his audience can conceive of the story. Judith is generally agreed to be a late Anglo-Saxon poem and was presumably written after the passing of the ‘heroic code’ as a realistic guiding principle for aristocratic society, if it ever was that.¹ The poet was not, then, a slave to the heroic. He consciously controls his language, applying it in the traditional manner as we find it in Beowulf and breaking expectations by applying it in ways which are, strictly speaking, inappropriate.

A close examination of the poet's use of hæleð, wiggend and steppan—all words with martial connotations in heroic verse—reveals the poet's conscious manipulation of the heroic idiom.² He uses hæleð three times in a fairly traditional manner to describe the Bethulians. Judith addresses the Bethulians as hæleð (177) when she urges them to attack the Assyrians. The poet twice refers to the Bethulians as hæleð (203 and 225) when they bravely fight against the Assyrians and clearly deserve to be called ‘warriors’ or even ‘heroes’. In [Illegible Text] the poet uses hæleð and its compounds for the Assyrians when they are engaging in behaviour which cannot be seen as heroic. The Assyrians are heroes as they bring Judith to Holofernes (51 and 56), and as they wake from their drunken sleep to discover the Bethulian attack (246).

The poet uses wiggend or its compounds to describe both Bethulians and Assyrians. As with hæleð, the poet applies it appropriately to describe the Bethulians but inappropriately to describe their Assyrian enemies. With a frequency and manner which seems almost comical, the poet uses rondwiggend (11 and 20) and byrnwiggend (17) three times in ten lines to describe the men attending Holofernes' banquet, where they hardly behave themselves with the decorum expected of a heroic warrior. The Assyrians are lindwiggend (42) and wiggend (69) when they conduct Judith to Holofernes and leave her behind in his tent. In the most ridiculous scene in the poem, Holoferres' cowardly retainers, standing outside their leader's tent coughing and gnashing their teeth in hopes that he will awaken, are described as wiggend (258 and 283). In their shameful retreat from the Bethulians after the discovery of Holofernes' beheading, the Assyrians are described as cynerof (312) and wiggend (313). The adjective cynerof intensifies the inappropriateness of wiggend to describe the Assyrians.

The poet's use of the verb steppan reinforces his use of the nouns hæleð and wiggend. The Bethulians stopon (227) when they are defeating the Assyrians. But the Assyrians stopon (39 and 69) only when they march Judith to Holofernes' tent and when they march out of the tent leaving Judith alone with Holofernes—hardly martial activity.

The poet also uses the language of treasure-giving in a manner similar to his use of heroic martial language. Treasure-giving is a central theme of heroic poetry, symbolizing the creation and cultivation of the bonds which hold society together.³ As he presides over his banquet, Holofernes is described as goldwine gumena (22) and swiðmod sinces brytta (30). In marked contrast to Beowulfian banquets, treasure-giving, as well as the sense of ‘comitatus’ and the mannered ceremony which are also elements of hall joy, is absent from Holofernes' banquet.⁴ Treasure-giving, however, forms the centre of the Bethulian victory celebration when the treasure that Holofernes had hoarded swiðmod sinces ahte (340) is given to Judith as a gift. Using treasure-giving language, the poet compares God and Holofernes. Judith calls God Brytta (93) when she asks him to help her kill Holofernes. Holofernes was brytta (30) at the banquet where he distributed no treasure. The Bethulian victory over the Assyrians can, in this light, be interpreted as a gift from God.

The poet applies heroic language of warfare and treasure-giving in such a way as to heighten the contrast between the Bethulians and the Assyrians. The Assyrians appear not simply as enemies of the Bethulians but also as weak and even foolish cowards. The Bethulians are God's warriors and people—Holofernes is not just the enemy of the Bethulians but also the enemy of God.

The density of the words mod and ferhð and their compounds and adjectival forms (at least thirty-one times in 350 lines of text) recalls the frequency of similar words in The Wanderer and The Seafarer and the emphasis in those poems on the state of the heart, mind, and soul. This is not to say, however, that there is any similarity in tone between Judith and these more contemplative, spiritual poems. What goes on in the minds and spirits of Judith, Holofernes, the Bethulians, and the Assyrians is far from contemplative. The comparison, though, does serve to draw attention to the high density of references to mod and ferhð in Judith which points to design on the part of the poet.

The use of se stiðmoda (25), se modiga (52), and swiðmod (30) to describe Holofernes highlights his loathsomeness. Holofernes is called se stiðmoda when he is yelling in drunken revelry and swiðmod as he plies his retainers with alcohol until they pass out. He is se modiga when he speaks to his retainers through the gold curtains of his tented bed.

With heroic language, the poet used the same words to describe opposites. With mod and ferhð, he uses adjectives and nouns with opposite meanings but similar stems to contrast Holofernes and Judith, the Bethulians and the Assyrians. Adjectives with clearly negative moral connotations describe Holofernes. He is galferhð (62) and galmod (256). Judith merits her descriptions as wise, thoughtful, and determined. She is ferhðgleaw (41) and stercedferhð (55) as she is brought to Holofernes' tent. She is collenferhð (134) when she steals away from the Assyrian camp and glædmod (140) when she returns to Bethulia. Contrasting adjectives based on ferhð and mod also describe the Bethulians and Assyrians. The Bethulians who were geomormod (144) when Judith left for the Assyrian camp are styrnmod (227) and stercedferhð (227) when they attack the Assyrians. The Assyrians, demoralized by the death of their leader, do not put up a valiant effort against the Bethulians, rather they are sweorcendferhð (268), hreowigmod (290), and werigferhð (291).

A close look at the poet's use of the word mod makes even sharper the spiritual contrast between Holofernes and the Assyrians, and Judith and the Bethulians. Holofernes is se brema on mode bliðe (57-8) at the thought of defiling Judith. Before she kills Holofernes, Judith prays to God to avenge þæt me ys þus torne in mode (93). God renews her hope þa wearð hyre rume on mode (97) which gives her the strength to kill Holofernes. After she kills Holofernes, Judith tells the Bethulians that it is no longer necessary to grieve murnan on mode (154). The Bethulians are mod areted (167) at Judith's return while the retainer who discovers the beheaded Holofernes is hreoh on mode (282).

The poet's application of the phrase þearlmod ðeoden gumena (66 and 91) both to God and to Holofernes cannot be ignored in an interpretation of the poem. Holofernes is so described when the poet writes that he is doomed to the fate he deserves. God is þearlmod þeoden gumena when Judith calls on him to help her kill Holofernes. The parallel certainly does not imply any similarity between God and Holofernes rather it serves to emphasize Holofernes' evil in contrast to God's goodness.

The repetition of specific words from heroic language and language which describes the state of the mind to draw parallels and make contrasts serves to juxtapose characters and events in the poem. This juxtaposition, which takes place not just within the space of a few lines but back and forth throughout the poem, weaves the poem tightly together, creating cohesion. Works as accomplished as Beowulf and The Seafarer show Old English poets relying on structural and stylistic techniques such as juxtaposition, prefiguration, digression, and cohesion rather than on plot to create unity and convey meaning.⁵ In contrast to Beowulf and The Seafarer, whose meanings modern readers find so puzzling, Judith with an Old Testament narrative as its source, does have a strong plot. But superimposed on top of this plot, the reader finds other layers of meaning created by the cohesion and juxtaposition we have looked at closely. Scholars have paid attention to how the structure of Judith unifies the poem and sets up the contrast between Judith and her followers and Holofernes and his followers.⁶ But little attention has been focused on the role that the poet's careful choice of diction plays. The technique of deliberate verbal repetition has long been recognized as a characteristic of Old English poetic style and it is one that the Judith poet has clearly mastered.⁷

The poet's use of verbal repetition has implications for our understanding of the meaning of the poem. A comparison of the Old Testament book of Judith with the Old English verse Judith shows that the poet has thinned out the plot considerably. This thinning out serves to juxtapose more clearly Judith and Holofernes, the Bethulians and the Assyrians. The poet's style makes this juxtaposition more fully developed. The poet used not only the native heroic idiom but also the native poetic style to retell the story of Judith. The contemporary audience was accustomed to look beyond plot for meaning and the poet can rely on style rather than plot to make major points. Although the poet has streamlined the Old Testament narrative, the layers of meaning he has added with his style—with his tight control and repetition of heroic language and language describing the mind and soul—enrich the poem. These layers of meaning do not work against the plot but rather support the plot making the poem a more subtle work than it appears at first glance. If the reader looks only at the plot of Judith the poet seems to have turned the Biblical story into a merely physical conflict. When the reader considers that Judith has used her sexuality to ensnare and kill Holofernes the tale might seem to be unedifying, even to border on the secular.⁸ But rather than stating it explicitly, the poet uses style to portray the conflict between the Bethulians and the Assyrians, and Judith and Holofernes, not simply as between two warring nations, but between God's people and God's enemies. The poet has raised the conflict to one between good and evil and this is surely central to the meaning of the poem.

Notes

1. For the date of Judith see G. Shepherd. Scriptural Poetry’, in E. G. Stanley (ed.), Continuations and Beginnings (London, 1966), 13.

2. See, for example, the use of these words by the Beowulf poet.

3. See, for example, the gnomic verses from the opening passage of Beowulf:

   Swa sceal (geong g)uma          gode gewyrcean,
   fromum feohgiftum          on fæder (bea)rme,
   þæt hine on ylde          eft gewunigen
   wilgesiþas,          þonne wig cume,
   leode gelæsten;          lofdædum sceal
   in mægþa gehwære          man geþon.

   (Beowulf, lines 20-5)

   The Wanderer expresses his exile in terms of the absence of treasure-giver and treasure-giving (The Wanderer lines 19-35 and 92).

4. Cf. M. Swanton, English Literature Before Chaucer (London, 1987), 156 and 158.

5. Cf. P. Gradon, Form and Style in Early English Literature (London, 1971), 93-151.

6. On the structure of Judith, see J. J. Campbell, ‘Schematic Technique in Judith’, ELH xxxviii (1971), 155-72; and J. F. Doubleday, ‘The Principle of Contrast in Judith’, NM, lxxii (1971), 436-41.

7. On deliberate verbal repetition, see A. Bartlett, The Larger Rhetorical Patterns in Anglo-Saxon Poetry (New York, 1935); J. O. Beaty, ‘The Echo-Word in Beowulf’, PMLA, xlix (1934), 365-73; M. Cornell, ‘Varieties of Repetition in Old English Poetry’, Neophil lxv (1981), 292-307; E. R. Kintgen, ‘Echoic Repetition in Old English Poetry, Especially The Dream of the Rood’, NM [Neuphilologische Mitteilungen] lxxv (1974), 202-23; and J. L. Rosier, ‘Generative Composition in Beowulf’, ES [English Studies], lviii (1977), 193-203.

8. See Swanton's comments to this effect (see n. 4 above), 155 and 159, and Shepherd (see n. 1 above): ‘But of all the surviving treatments of the Bible, Judith is the most empty of theological or typological implication.’