[In the following essay, Jurovics explicates the Sermo Lupi ad Anglos, arguing that Wulfstan's most well-known homily—an impassioned call for repentance and a return to Christian morality—is entirely consistent in tone and style with his remaining works.]

Because of its style and subject Dorothy Bethurum argues that the Sermo ad Anglos, though the best known of Wulfstan's works, is in some respects the “least characteristic” of him.¹ But when the Sermo is considered in the light of Wulfstan's lifework as churchman and lawmaker, the Sermo stands, I believe, as his most characteristic work.² Wulfstan was, above all, a man of practical morality. All of his activities reflected the dominant purpose of his career, which was the moral regeneration of the English nation. He believed that such regeneration would heal the political and social maladies of his people. All his legal codes, those for clergy and those for laity, as well as many sermons, testify to his intense concern for “an orderly arrangement of society.”³ To this end he brought to his episcopal duties enthusiasm and energy both for conveying the basic teachings of Christian faith and for establishing practical “rules of conduct for canons, for monks, for priests living in the semi-converted part of the Dane-law, and for all conditions of men.”⁴

As catalogued by Bethurum, for example, the list of Wulfstan's occupations reinforces one's impression of his intensity and devotion in encouraging and enforcing moral regeneration; not only a reforming homilist and lawmaker, Wulfstan was also a prominent statesman, canonist, orator, translator, and collector of books, especially of regulatory works, penitentials, and writings of the Church Fathers.⁵ In seeking to correct the abuses of his days in accord with his vision of an ordered society, he worked to raise the levels of learning and morality among the clergy and to provide clerk and layman alike with livable injunctions formulated in a closely related body of Anglo-Saxon and Christian law.⁶

In eleventh-century England a near union of church and secular power permitted able prelates, such as Dunstan and Wulfstan, to exert considerable influence in affairs of state. Wulfstan's Institutes of Polity, a definition of all classes' social duties, is the only Old English work to deal with the limits of political power and the interrelationship of church and secular authority.⁷ Characteristically Wulfstan conceived of the civil good as dependent on the welfare of the church, for he believed that political facts reflected God's judgment on the nation's moral behavior. Among Wulfstan's legal formulations are the later codes of Ethelred (V-X Ethelred), which sought to enforce moral regeneration by instituting legal punishments for breaches of Christian ethics, the Canons of Edgar, which provided rules for the secular clergy, and the Laws of Edward and Guthrum, which attempted to establish English ecclesiastical practice in the Danelaw. Wulfstan's legislative influence continued during the reign of Cnut; he prepared I-II Cnut, which set penalties for various minor infractions previously unpunished (although known to be disapproved), and the Northumbrian Priests' Law (c. 1021-23) was probably drawn up at his instigation.⁸

This last code, both a priests' law and religious regulations for the laity, reveals that in Wulfstan's day heathen practices still competed with Christian practices in the north:

48. If, then any man is discovered who henceforth carries on any heathen practice, either by sacrifice or divination, or practices witchcraft by any means, or worship of idols, he is to pay, if he is a king's thane, 10 half-marks, half to Christ, half to the king. …

54. If there is on anyone's land a sanctuary round a stone or a tree or a well or any such nonsense, he who made it is then to pay lahslit, half to Christ and half to the lord of the estate.

Twice the code stipulates that “we must all love and honour one God and zealously hold one Christian faith and entirely cast out every heathen practice” (47, 67).⁹ There is no doubt that much of Wulfstan's characteristic concern for social organization and for the proper interrelationship of the various ranks derived from his keen awareness of the social upheavals caused by the Danish invasion. This disruption was especially pronounced in the north, where heathen cults initiated in the tenth century by Norse invaders from Ireland had not been subdued to Christian control. Even earlier than in the Northumbrian Priests' Law, which graduates the fines for heathen practices according to the various social ranks, Wulfstan refers several times to forbidden activities such as idola wurðinge. The Latin text of VI Ethelred refers to idolorum cultores and idolatrie, Napier X (Bethurum X C) includes ne ænig man idola weorðie æfre, and a Latin addition to this text in mss. C and E mentions idolatria.¹⁰ Wulfstan's attacks against the laxity of marriage practices in his province, both from the pulpit and in legal writings, were probably provoked by the Danish reintroduction of such easy divorce settlements as had formerly been common in parts of England.¹¹

The Danish presence posed a clear threat to English Christianity. Wulfstan hoped not only to prevent apostasy among his own people, but also to Romanize and modernize the English church and to reform ecclesiastical practices according to the best models. He expected bishops to undertake an active role in the reformation of English morals. In his attempts to define ecclesiastical power and obligations Wulfstan “takes … [bishops'] rights for granted and emphasizes their duties … the section of Polity headed ‘Be Deod-witan’ is devoted to directing bishops to study and teach diligently, rather than to defending the episcopal position.”¹² The evidence remaining of Wulfstan's own studies reflect his faith in the ability of moral regeneration to cure social and political ills, his faith that peace and order will reign when there is no longer a discrepancy between Christian teaching and individual behavior. Wulfstan seeks to define the meaning of Christian life and to teach it to his flock, 7 utan God lufian 7 Godes lagum fylgean, thereby repairing wrongs, ending the present sufferings under God's ire, avoiding eternal damnation, and attaining to heavenly glory.¹³ Wulfstan would have the knowledge of God translated into direct action.

For all the range of his activities, however, Wulfstan is remembered primarily as a homilist and orator. Wulfstan frequently insisted on the episcopal responsibility to preach against the sins of the people. The Sermo Lupi is an especially apt example of his contribution to medieval pulpit oratory, as it shows so clearly the interrelationship of his sociolegal and religious concerns. Those catalogues of sins and crimes which make up such a large part of the Sermo (included by Wulfstan as evidence that the English deserved the providential punishment then afflicting them) illustrate those very breaches of faith and loyalty between members of a society that Wulfstan's laws attempted to regulate and reduce. Even more than his law codes, the Sermo exhibits Wulfstan's intense reforming impulse: as law sets forth practical rules of conduct, the sermon sets forth the Christian imperative for moral action, the underlying reason for an individual's accepting and following a law enjoined both by state and church.

In framing his imperatives for moral action Wulfstan drew his rhetorical inspiration and tactics from the tradition represented by Cicero, Augustine (especially), Boethius, and the later manuals based on their theories, such as those of Alcuin, Isidore, and Rabanus.¹⁴ This Christian rhetorical tradition applied the devices of eloquence to moral purposes, to the teaching of virtue. In considering the major tenets of the Augustinian rhetorical tradition and Wulfstan's application of them, my evaluation of the Sermo Lupi and of its relation to the other homilies of Wulfstan's canon will differ somewhat from Bethurum's. The topicality of the Sermo does not provide sufficient grounds to separate it significantly from the rest of the canon, nor do its rhetorical methods violate the decencies of public address, at least as these decorums might be construed by a Christian preacher. The style departs only in degree, not in kind, from Wulfstan's usual practice, while the actual subject does not depart at all from “the central concern of life”—moral regeneration. The details of style, large and small, are those characteristic of his work in general, and the specific topic is a near epitome of his political and religious concerns.

St. Augustine's De doctrina christiana defines for the medieval Christian teacher the rules and attitudes of the new, anti-Sophistic rhetoric.¹⁵ Based on Ciceronian principles, this manual emphasizes above all the responsibility of the Christian orator to persuade his listeners to act virtuously. So much more important is content than style that a teacher incapable of eloquence “dicat sapienter, quod non dicit eloquenter, potius quam dicat eloquenter, quod dicit insipienter” (IV.28.61; Corpus Christionorum, Series Latina (CCL) 32, p. 165).¹⁶ Three styles—subdued, moderate, and grand—serve the three ends of Christian oratory: teaching, pleasing in such a way as to encourage willingness, and obedience, or action. Augustine does not insist, however, that one of the three styles be attributed exclusively to one of the three ends,

ut ad submissum intellegenter, ad temperatum libenter, ad grande pertineat oboedienter audiri … ut haec tria semper intendat et quantum potest agat, etiam cum in illorum singulo quoque versatur.

(IV.26.56; CCL 32, p. 161)¹⁷

Above all the orator must succeed in persuading his audience to act on his words:

Cum vero id docetur, quod agendum est, et ideo docetur ut agatur, frustra persuadetur verum esse, quod dicitur, frustra placet modus ipse, quo dicitur, si non ita dicitur, ut agatur. Oportet igitur eloquentem ecclesiasticum, quando suadet aliquid, quod agendum est, non solum docere, ut instruat, et delectare, ut teneat, verum etiam flectere, ut vincat.

(IV.13.29; CCL 32, pp. 136-37)¹⁸

Effective ecclesiastical oratory adjusts itself to the needs and accomplishments of each specific audience. In preaching, as in study of Scripture,

… sciamus alia omnibus communiter praecipi, alia singulis quibusque generibus personarum, ut non solum ad universum statum valetudinis, sed etiam ad suam cuiusque membri propriam infirmitatem medicina perveniat.

(III.17.25; CCL 32, p. 93)¹⁹

A preacher should never speak so as to force his audience to attempt an interpretation of his words, but rather he should willingly sacrifice eloquence to clarity in any situation where felicity of style may obstruct meaning for an unsubtle audience (IV.22.8). In order to maintain the interest and attention of his audience a speaker generally needs to vary his style, choosing now one, now another of the three manners of address (IV.22.51). If, however, the audience appears reluctant to accept and act upon his words, the preacher may justifiably heighten his tone throughout, in an effort to provoke spiritual reform:

… cum vero aliquid agendum est et ad eos loquimur, qui hoc agere debent nec tamen volunt, tunc ea quae magna sunt, dicenda sunt granditer et ad flectendos animos congruenter.

(IV.19.38; CCL 32, p. 144)²⁰

In evaluating the Sermo Lupi one must keep in mind St. Augustine's definition of this grand persuasive style, for it emphasizes that the subject-matter of a sermon determines its style and implicitly reiterates the primary importance of content in Christian rhetoric:

Grande autem dicendi genus hoc maxime distat ab isto genere temperato, quod non tam verborum ornatibus comptum est, quam violentum animi affectibus. Nam capit etiam illa ornamenta paene omnia, sed ea si non habuerit, non requirit. Fertur quippe impetu suo et elocutionis pulchritudinem, si occurrerit, vi rerum rapit, non cura decoris adsumit. Satis enim est ei propter quod agitur, ut verba congruentia, non oris eligantur industria, sed pectoris sequantur ardorem.

(IV.20.42; CCL 32, pp. 148-49)²¹

In all cases Augustine would have content establish style, and in all cases he would have eloquence, in any of the three styles, serve the moral end of persuasion. In actual practice he makes little distinction between the three, for they do not function separately, but rather work in concert, and at a given moment any one of them may simultaneously instruct, delight, and persuade, as in the case of the grand style:

Iam vero ubi movere et flectere grandi genere opus est auditorem (quod tunc est opus, quando et veraciter dici et suaviter confitetur et tamen non vult facere, quod dicitur), dicendum est procul dubio granditer. Sed quis movetur, si nescit, quod dicitur? aut quis tenetur, ut audiat, si non delectatur? Unde et in isto genere, ubi ad oboedientiam cor durum dictionis granditate flectendum est, nisi et intellegenter et libenter qui dici, audiatur, non potest oboedienter audiri.

(IV.26.58; CCL 32 p. 163)²²

In sum, Christian rhetoric aims at inducing virtuous action and at provoking moral regeneration. It adjusts its style and tone to the immediate needs and abilities of its audience and allows the subject to determine form rather than delighting in displays of stylistic accomplishment for their own sake. Since the details of style derive from the specific subject, this subject is itself the arbiter of the decorum of public address. A preacher must use whatever rhetorical means he can in order to persuade his listeners to live in accord with Christian moral teaching.

Wulfstan's application of Augustinian-inspired rhetoric appears in both the larger structural characteristics and smaller verbal details of his sermons and homilies. All aspects of his style contribute to the end of convincing his audience to act rightly, as the following consideration of the Sermo Lupi will illustrate. So little does the Sermo differ from the rhetorical patterns characteristic of Wulfstan's work that it serves admirably as representative of his canon. His sermons, prepared for public delivery, abound in features of style that contribute to clarity and show a conscious and deliberate adjustment of style to particular purposes and occasions in their use of all three manners of address suggested by Augustine.²³ As Augustine notes, some occasions demand a consistently heightened manner (p. 145). At least three of Wulfstan's works other than the Sermo are composed almost entirely in an impassioned style, “Homilies III,” “V,” “XXI.” Conspicuously absent from Wulfstan's works are most figurae sententiarum, such as metaphor and simile, as well as analogical interpretations of Scripture. This absence is a clear indication of his careful adjustment of style to his audience:

This rejection of poetic imagery, of the subtle play of thought over an idea, enriching but often confusing it, is only what is to be expected from a practical moralist, whose gifts, by no means slight, were turned to forceful and clear preaching to a not very subtle audience whose capacities for abstruse thought he did not overestimate.²⁴

As noted above, conditions in York during Wulfstan's episcopate demanded fundamental Christian moral teaching rather than generalized philosophical or religious speculation. Christianity in the north held in those days a most precarious supremacy.

Among the small, verbal details of style that reinforce the comprehensibility and persuasiveness of those works Wulfstan composed for oral presentation are: rephrasing, as with an explanatory þæt is …, repetition, alliteration, assonance, rhyme, the use of reiterated intensives and tags, and the joining of nouns into pairs, often linked by alliteration. Larger verbal or structural units which serve the same rhetorical aims of clarity and persuasion include sentence and word parallelism, rhetorical questions, a reflective pause in the latter part of a sermon to consider an ethical or religious truth. Significantly for the Sermo Lupi, which would otherwise seem inexplicably imbalanced because of the preponderance of criticism over positive moral injunction,

the conclusion of Wulfstan's sermons varies in length from a sentence to several paragraphs, but it nearly always takes the same form, Uton don swa us micel pearf is, followed by a short recapitulation of the theme of the sermon, with the promise of eternal bliss to the faithful.²⁵

Wulfstan's sermones communes share a particular structure: all begin with introductory general admonitions, establish their specific subject, and then develop it through divisions dictated by the chosen material.²⁶

Throughout the Sermo Lupi these large and small stylistic details promote a consistent and coherent rhetorical strategy. Nearly all of Wulfstan's characteristic devices appear in order to reinforce his message and to urge his audience (however dull or reluctant) to renounce its sins and regain God's blessings for England. A thematic emphasis on the knowledge both of guilt and of its consequences runs through the sermon, which falls into a pattern of alternating cause and effect to explain the nation's trials. In its overall arrangements it conforms to the standard outline of the sermones communes. It opens with a general admonition to understand that worldly conditions deteriorate as the Apocalypse approaches:

Leofan men, gecnawað þæt soð is: ðeos worold is on ofste, 7 hit nealaecð þam ende, 7 þy hit is on worolde aa swa leng swa wyrse, 7 swa hit sceal nyde for folces synnan ær Antecristes tocyme yfelian swyþe, 7 huru hit wyrð þænne egeslic 7 grimlic wide on worolde.

(4-8)

The specific topic (8-21), so closely related to this eschatological consideration, arises out of Wulfstan's belief that the English sufferings represent deliberate punishment for their sins, especially for sins of social and religious faithlessness:

Understandað eac georne þæt deofol þas þeode nu fela geara dwelode to swyþe, 7 þæt lytle getreowþa wæran mid mannum, þeah hy wel spæcan, 7 unrihta to fela ricsode on lande. …

(8-11)

7 we eac forþam habbað fela byrsta 7 bysmara gebiden, 7, gif we ænige bote gebidan scylan, þonne mote we þæs to Gode ernian bet þonne we ær þysan dydan. Forþam mid miclan earnungan we geearnedan þa yrmða þe us on sittað, 7 mid swyþe micelan earnungan we þa bote motan æt Gode geræcan, gif hit sceal heonan forð godiende weorðan.

(15-21)

There is a certain tension between the introductory admonition and the specific lesson. Wulfstan develops this tension: although a general decline inevitably accompanies the approach of Antichrist and the end of days, his listeners can improve their worsening physical and political situation (as well as gain eternal spiritual salvation) by earning worldly rewards from God. Wulfstan does not preach apocalypse, although he does place contemporary events into an ultimately apocalyptic context; indeed, he uses this foremost example of the operation of God's judgment in the world as frame and as evidence that God's providence at that very moment justly afflicts the English.²⁷

As transition to the main body of the sermon (21-36), Wulfstan reiterates that great wrong requires great remedy, in this case the eager and correct fulfillment of God's laws and appropriate payment of God's dues for the support of the church. He reinforces the general exhortation with a specific comparison of the English failure to support their church and to protect its servants with the Danes' scrupulous attendance to their heathen religious sites and priests. In so doing Wulfstan blames the English for lacking even so much religious devotion as the misguided pagan invaders, much as the Apostle Paul blames Israel in his Epistle to the Romans:

What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.

But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

(Romans 9:30-32)²⁸

By no means, however, does this comparison imply sympathy for the Danes; the Sermo Lupi amply documents the role these invaders played in scourging and afflicting the English. If anything they represent an actual, historical embodiment of God's ire.

By extensive example the body of the sermon elaborates on the main topic of providential retribution for sin with frequent emphasis on the audience's knowledge of sin and on Wulfstan's conviction that the only remedy rests in appeasing God's anger by “doing what is needful.” This portion of the sermon, as in all the other sermons communes, divides into sections dictated by its subject, in this case into alternating enumerations of the causes for God's anger and the visible manifestations of His judgment. Perhaps because Wulfstan wished to impress his listeners with the extent of their provocation of the Lord, he speaks more fully of the sins than of the sufferings which they have earned for the nation. In spite of this imbalance, through its larger structural pattern the sermon gives even now a vivid impression of the chaotic social conditions in the north during the years of Viking raids and devastation. Lines 37-52 reiterate the need for a remedy and describe the decline of public law, the desecration of churches, and various sorts of injustice involving the deprivation of individual rights. For these things, all indications that God's law is despised, the people in common suffer frequent disgraces from which only God can save them. The next section (53-60) asserts that clearly the English have done more evil than good, and therefore nothing has prospered for them for a long time. Providence has visited on them multiple disasters, among them war, pestilence, famine, oppressive taxes, storms, and crop failure. Lines 60-101 enumerate at length varieties of injustice and personal disloyalty. Wulfstan seems to me most dismayed by this sort of crime, by the failures of faith between men that have allowed them to betray their kinsmen, their kings, their fellow Christians. Broken vows and perjured oaths have only increased God's ire. The following passage (102-32) opens and closes with rhetorical questions, the first emphasizing the weight of punishment for sin and the second underscoring the fact that such punishment represents undeniable proof of God's dissatisfaction:

7 la, hu mæg mare scamu þurh Godes yrre mannum gelimpan þonne us deð gelome for agenum gewyrhtum? …

7 la, hwæt is ænig oðer on eallum þam gelimpum butan Godes yrre ofer þas þeode swutol 7 gesæne?

Many of the intervening illustrations of shames endured by the English people appear to be references to notorious incidents with which Wulfstan expected his audience to be familiar, for example, the routing of Christian bands by only two or three Vikings, “to the public shame of us all,” or the enslaving of a thane by his former thrall, “through God's anger.”

Lines 133-83 turn again to enumerating the causes for punishment, the ways in which the English have earned their sufferings. Evil days are no wonder, because “we witan ful georne þæt nu fela geara mænn na ne rohtan foroft hwæt hy worhtan wordes oððe dæde” (133-35). A staggering list of specific crimes follows, among them murder, betrayal, the selling of men into slavery, heathen vices, sexual crimes, perjuries, nonobservance of church responsibilities, apostasy, scoffing at God's laws. Men now despise good deeds and are shamed by them, while evildoers receive praise:

hy scamað þæt hy betan heora misdæda swa swa bec tæcan, gelice þam dwæsan þe for heora prytan lewe nellað beorgan ær hy na ne magan, þeh hy eal willan”.

(163-65)

Lines 166-83 reiterate the variety and countless number of evil deeds and crimes, the ease with which any man could call them to mind, the reluctance to undertake a remedy, and finally Wulfstan calls on the individual listener to consider his own deeds and ultimate fate, urges each one to do what is necessary, “þe æs we ætgædere ealle forweorðan” (182-83). A short historical parallel (184-94) introduces the concluding exhortation, as Wulfstan repeats the citation from Gildas that Alcuin had used to point out the similarly providential nature of the Anglo-Saxon conquest of the native Britons and the contemporary Viking raids on England.²⁹ In consequence of the Britons' sins, an enraged God allowed the English to win the country and destroy the inhabitants. The conclusion proper (195-211) draws the obvious moral:

Ac wutan don swa us þearf is, warnian us be swilcan; 7 soð is þæt ic secge, wyrsan dæda we witan mid Englum þonne we mid Bryttan ahwar gehyrdan; 7 þy us is þearf micel þæt we us beþencan 7 wið God sylfne þingian georne.

(195-99)

Wulfstan speaks in the first person plural throughout this final section, joining all of the audience to himself in his plea that all do as is needful, turn to the right, at least somewhat abandon evil, keep faith with one another, and anticipate the great judgment, so that we may save ourselves from hellfire and enjoy the glory “þe God hæfð gegearwod þam þe his willan on worolde gewyrcað” (210-11).

Several of the larger verbal and structural devices characteristic of Wulfstan's prose enhance the clarity and persuasiveness of the Sermo Lupi. Wulfstan reinforces his concluding plea for all listeners to turn to the right and to forsake sin by repeating over and over the exhortation “utan don” (or a parallel phrase) in the last forty lines: “utan don swa us neod is” (181), “Ac wutan don swa us þearf is” (195), “7 utan don swa us þearf is” (199), “7 utan God lufian” (201), “7 utan word 7 weorc rihtlice fadian” (204-05), “7 utan gelome understandan” (207). Examples of word parallelism (the repetition of the same or a similar word or short phrase) occur frequently. In the passage comparing Christian Englishmen to heathen Danes, for instance, the reiteration of “inne … ute” serves to underscore the seriousness of the English failing:

7 ne dear man gewanian on hæþenum þeodum inne ne ute ænig þæra þinga þe gedwolgodan broht bið 7 to lacum betæht bið; 7 we habbað Godes hus inne 7 ute clæne berypte.

(28-31)

Wulfstan achieves a similar effect in the first part of this same comparison by twice employing the verb “forhealdan” (26, 28). To promote the theme of his listeners' certain knowledge of guilt and its consequences Wulfstan emphasizes throughout the sermon the truth and obviousness of his statements with words and phrases such as “gecnawað þæt soð is” (4), “understandað” (8), “we witan ful georne” (21), “gecnawe se þe cunne” (50-51), “þeh man swa ne wene” (51-52), “understande se þe wille” (97), “swa hit þincan mæg” (166).³⁰ Should anyone fail to believe that God in his anger has chosen to punish England, the failure lies in his own will (e.g., 97), for “soð is þæt ic secge” (195-96). At least twice in this sermon Wulfstan employs a particular pair of synonyms to support the thematic emphasis on the truth of his matter, “swutal 7 gesæne” (53, 132).

Wulfstan insists on the fact of God's anger (101-03, 109, 114, 121, 123, 130-32). Two rhetorical questions frame illustrations of the disgraces suffered by the English in order to enforce this very point (102-03, 130-32). Sentences based on structural parallels also serve to increase the emotional impact of Wulfstan's words, so that he may move as well as teach (e.g., 71-74 “her syn … her syn,” 188-94 “þurh … þurh … þurh …” etc.).

The Sermo Lupi contains those smaller details of style typical of Wulfstan's work, and these devices, as well as the large structural ones, contribute to the total effectiveness of the sermon. Long accummulations of nouns in lists of crimes or punishments create a clear sense of both the weight of sin and the weight of suffering (167-73, 137-52, 53-60). Nearly all the intensives and tags favored by Wulfstan appear: “mid ealle” (188), “ealles to swyðe” (39, 155), “georne” (9, 12, 21, 25, 94, 134, 199, 201, 202, 205, 209), “ealles to wide” (14), “ealles to gelome” (28, 66, 156), “mid rihte” (25), “oft 7 gelome” (112-12, 146). Alliteration, assonance, and rhyme are prominent in the Sermo Lupi as elsewhere in Wulfstan's canon, as in lists or noun-pairs linked by these devices of sound, for example, 55-58, 137-46, 167-73.

In its style and expression the Sermo stands well within the bounds of Wulfstan's characteristic mannerisms, while it also exemplifies the archbishop's commitment to the moral purposes of rhetoric. As St. Augustine prescribes, his subject determines his method; in the case of the Sermo, the gravity of the subject has determined his choice of the various stylistic details, large and small. All of these details, structural and verbal, contribute to the end of convincing Wulfstan's listeners both of the fact of providential judgment and of the necessity to act virtuously. For a preacher, subject matter is all: eloquence cannot redeem the emptiness of speech that does not embody Christian truth.

The specific content of the Sermo epitomizes Wulfstan's major concern, moral regeneration, and expresses his understanding of the way in which Christian eschatology impinges upon daily existence. As Bethurum observes, Wulfstan's sermon, in its treatment of sin and reform, expresses an “ideal of conduct against which he indicts the English of his day.” The Sermo dwells on the sorts of abuses against which Wulfstan labored as legislator and inveighed as preacher—lapses of faith between men, apostasy, desecration of churches, indifference or hostility toward Christianity and its priests. These crimes, violations of interdependent secular and ecclesiastical prohibitions, provoke direct punishment by God. Belief in the manifest operation of divine providence in the world of men was of course typical of Wulfstan's age. Although many of Wulfstan's writings reflect this conviction that national calamities represent divine retribution, the Sermo is his best, fullest exposition of the close relationship between Christian eschatology and human action.³¹ Indeed, sensitivity to this relationship underlies Wulfstan's efforts as lawmaker and preacher, for it is this very fact of present and future judgment according to divine standards that requires men to live well and virtuously.

Placing too much emphasis on the Sermo's unique use of realistic topical detail clouds the more important similarities between this sermon and the others in Wulfstan's canon. In its large structural patterns, its various stylistic details, its eschatological theme and ending, above all its subject matter, the Sermo exhibits most of those elements characteristic of Wulfstan's rhetorical manner. Most of the sources of this sermon, moreover, may be found within the Wulfstan canon:

To a fair amount of material from Ethelred's codes Wulfstan added an introductory passage made up of phrases from his eschatological sermons, especially “XIII,” and this homily supplied also his passage of the decay of kinship and some isolated phrases elsewhere. There is also a general similarity between the list of calamities in the Sermo ad Anglos and that in “XXVIII,” a free translation and expansion of Leviticus XXVI.³²

Thus only the topical references are untypical of his style, and even these do not detract from the consistent purposes of Wulfstan's work, namely, to teach virute and to motivate its pursuit. These topical allusions, especially the ones which seem to refer to some specific notorious events, contribute to the Christian rhetorical ends of this sermon. They support the thematic emphasis on the undeniable truth of Wulfstan's accusations by destroying the excuse of ignorance: no one could deny the notoriety and authority of such examples as the betrayal of Edward (78-79) or the exile of Ethelred (79-80), and several other examples seem, even today, to carry the same weight (e.g., 93-96, 116-21, 123-26). However impassioned, the Sermo Lupi ad Anglos exemplifies the controlled application of rhetorical skill to the moral ends of Christian faith, the translation of emotional ardor into Christian persuasion.

Notes

1. Dorothy Bethurum [Loomis], ed., The Homilies of Wulfstan (Oxford 1957), pp. 355, 356.

2. Dorothy Whitelock, “Archbishop Wulfstan, Homilist and Statesman,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society s. 4, 24 (1942): 43n.

3. Dorothy Whitelock, ed., Sermo Lupi ad Anglos, 4th ed. (London, 1942), p. 24 (citing Bethurum).

4. Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, p. 70.

5. Ibid., pp. 61, 69; Whitelock, Sermo, p. 31.

6. R. R. Darlington, “Ecclesiastical Reform in the later Old English Period,” English Historical Review 51 (1936): 392; Whitelock, “Archbishop Wulfstan,” p. 42.

7. Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, p. 76.

8. Ibid., p. 78; Whitelock, “Archbishop Wulfstan,” 40-41; D. Whitelock, ed., English Historical Documents, v. I (London, 1953), pp. 434-435.

9. Whitelock, English Historical Documents, pp. 434-39.

10. Dorothy Whitelock, “Wulfstan at York,” in Franciplegius: Medieval and Linguistic Studies in Honor of Francis Peabody Magoun, Jr., ed. Jess B. Bessinger, Jr., and Robert P. Creed (New York, 1965), p. 225.

11. Dorothy Whitelock, The Beginnings of English Society (Baltimore, 1952), p. 150.

12. Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, p. 81.

13. Ibid., p. 162; Whitelock, Sermo, lines 201-202. All following citations from the Sermo will indicate line numbers in parentheses.

14. Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, pp. 87-89.

15. Augustine, De doctrina christiana CCL 32 (Turnholti, 1962), ed. J. Martin. The translation I cite is St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, tr. D. W. Robertson, Jr. (New York, 1958).

16. Tr. Robertson, p. 166: “should say wisely what he cannot say eloquently rather than say eloquently what he says foolishly.”

17. Tr. Robertson, p. 162: “so that the subdued style pertains to understanding, the moderate style to willingness, and the grand style to obedience; rather, … that the orator always attends to all three and fulfills them all as much as he can, even when he is using a single style.”

18. Tr. Robertson, p. 138: “But when that which is taught must be put into practice and is taught for that reason, the truth of what is said is acknowledged in vain and the eloquence of the discourse pleases in vain unless that which is learned is implemented in action. It is necessary therefore for the ecclesiastical orator, when he urges that something be done, not only to teach that he may instruct and to please that he may hold attention, but also to persuade that he may be victorious.”

19. Tr. Robertson, p. 94: “some things are taught for everyone in general; others are directed toward particular classes of people, in order that the medicine of instruction may be applicable not only to the general state of health but also to the special infirmities of each member. For what cannot be elevated to a higher class must be cared for in its own class.”

20. Tr. Robertson, p. 145: “But when something is to be done and he is speaking to those who ought to do it but do not wish to do it, then those great things should be spoken in the grand manner in a way appropriate to the persuasion of their minds.”

21. Tr. Robertson, p. 150; “The grand style differs from the moderate style not so much in that it is adorned with verbal ornaments but in that it is forceful with emotions of the spirit. Although it uses almost all of the ornaments, it does not seek them if it does not need them. It is carried along by its own impetus, and if the beauties of eloquence occur they are caught up by the force of the things discussed and not deliberately assumed for decoration. It is enough for the matter being discussed that the appropriateness of the words be determined by the arbor of the heart rather than by careful choice.”

22. Tr. Robertson, p. 164: “Now when it is necessary to move and bend the listener by means of the grand style (which is necessary when he will confess that the speech is true and agreeable, but will not do what it says should be done), one must undoubtedly speak grandly. But who is moved if he does not know what is being said? Or who is held attentive that he may hear if he is not delighted? Whence also in this style, where the hard heart is to be bent to obedience through the grandness of the diction, if what is heard is not heard intelligently and willingly, it cannot be heard obediently.”

23. My analysis is indebted to the works of Bethurum (Homilies, especially pp. 28-29, 87-98) and Whitelock (“Archbishop Wulfstan,” Sermo), and to a lesser degree to those of Greenfield (Critical History) and Funke (“Some Remarks on Wulfstan's Prose Rhythm,” English Studies 43 (1962): 311-318). See also A. McIntosh, “Wulfstan's Prose,” Proceedings of the British Academy 35 (1949): 109-142, concerning Wulfstan's characteristic rhythmic patterns.

24. Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, pp. 91-92.

25. Ibid., p. 96.

26. Ibid., p. 97.

27. Dorothy Bethurum comments in her edition on the reluctance of Wulfstan's ecclesiastical contemporaries to presume to predict the exact date of the expected apocalypse. For Wulfstan, deciding on a precise prediction of this sort would be less important than convincing his listeners of their immediate and ultimate accountability to God. See pp. 278-82.

28. Similarly, Romans 10:20-21, which refers back to Isaiah 65:1.

29. Whitelock, “Archbiship Wulfstan,” p. 43.

30. See also 37, 53, 86, 101, 110, 126-27, 136.

31. Dorothy Whitelock points out that divine retribution is the theme of an ordiance written by Wulfstan as well as a number of his homilies. See Whitelock, “Archbiship Wulfstan,” p. 41.

32. Whitelock, Sermo, p. 17.