Sunday, September 16, 2007

Less by As Much As a Maiden’s Strength

Within a page of each other, Beowulf provides us with two of the most important female characters in the story, Wealhtheow, wife of Hrothgar, and Grendel’s mother. As women are typically othered in history, the moment any woman is mentioned she instantly bears further examination. It seems intentional that these two women are mentioned in such close proximity to the mention of the other, and that it was done so to emphasize their similarities and contrasts. The problem is that they seem to be more alike than different.

Wealhtheow presents Beowulf with a neck-ring that, according to legend, once belonged to Freya, goddess of fertility, and in some traditions warfare as well. Freya, a name that means “lady,” was in many ways the equivalent of the Greek queen of the gods. Hera was responsible for childbearing women and the home, and was fierce, even warlike, in her duties protecting both the individuals and the institutions. This connection helps those less familiar with Norse mythology make a connection which is vital, linking Wealhtheow to these goddesses in power and intention. She bestows her powerful emblem to the warrior Beowulf, who has rightly earned it with the maiming and murdering of the monster, Grendel, and in doing so gives her sons over to his keeping. Beowulf is now charged with being “mild in counsel,” “kind in…deeds,” and responsible for “keeping them in joys” (Ln. 1219-1226). Wealhtheow is acknowledging that she owes Beowulf the lives of her children, and her people, and makes that clear by publicly, and even ritualistically, entrusting him with their welfare. This is both a token of thanks as well as a continued duty, as now that Beowulf has proven his worth, he is being encouraged to continue to do so. This queen and mother wants the best for her offspring, to give them the best she can provide, and right now it appears that the best teacher and protector is epitomized by Beowulf. She is letting her children go, actively pushing them towards manhood and independence even though it may lessen her relationship with them. Any mother would do the same.

Grendel’s mother must have done the same for her son. She raised him, taught him all she could, sent him out into the world to find his own way, and still kept her duties as a mother intact with the implied promise that should her even need her protection, he would have it. When Grendel left Heorot mortally wounded from his encounter with Beowulf, he retreated to the woods, to safety, to his mother. Now that he is gone, she has come for revenge. Her origins are mysterious, dwelling “in those dreadful waters, the cold streams, ever since Cain” (Ln.1260-1). This mention links her to a race of cursed beings, children of the first murderer, and it is difficult to conceive of a group more othered than those who are descended from that line. Grendel’s mother is vicious in her sorrow, attacking with vigor, and before she leaves, retrieving the arm of her son which had been placed as a talisman or trophy in the great hall. Grendel is dead, but still she seeks to honor and protect him, make him intact and punish those who took her from him. The mention of these actions so close to those of Wealhtheow’s towards her own children unites these two women, and suddenly we realize that the lady-like and beautiful Wealhtheow would seek the same brutal justice for her own children. Though perhaps those actions are the more monstrous part of a woman’s nature, as represented by Grendel’s mother, they are no less true to human nature. It almost seems that despite being grotesque, women are honored by this society just as much for their strength and passion as they are for their beauty and kindness.

4 comments:

Annie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Annie said...

Sorry, I think I posted too soon and now it will say there are 2 posts...oy I am bad with computers!

After reading this post, I couldn't help but wonder if the maternal protectiveness of these two female characters went further. Not only do these two have the instincts of taking care of their offspring, but they are determined to keep their "kind" alive. This is more pertinent to Grendel's mother, who only has Grendel as her heir. Nonetheless, Wealtheow is concerned for the same, insofar as keeping an heir to the throne for the Danes. Not only that, but a good amount of the population keep on getting devoured by one monster or another, leading to a weakening of King Hrothgar's army.
The end is dismal for both female characters, since Grendel's mother discovers her son's death and end to their line. For Wealtheow, there are many foreshadowings in the story of a later fall of Heorot (as stated in the 4th footnote on p. 55). It is also discussed in the introduction that there are a couple of insinuations textually to the future tracheries (p. 38, 39). The maternal quest for preservation of each race seems to not bear fruit.

Mike said...

As well, the interesting comparisons you draw between Wealhtheow and Grendel's mother raise questions about just how estranged the Grendelkin are from humankind and human society. As has often been noted, Grendel's mother's attack on Aeschere seems to be in keeping with traditions of vengeance for bloodguilt--it's far from clear that she would have continued her son's pattern of repeated predations after exacting the toll of one other man's death in payment for her son's demise.

Jolie said...

A few further points about the neck ring.

It's generally assumed that Freya's neck-ring is the Brisingamen necklace, a necklace she won after spending the night with a troupe of dwarves. Aside from ladyship, what does it say that Wealhtheow hands Beowulf a symbol of intense sexuality that he seems to want nothing to do with? What is she insisting on there, exactly?

It's also worth noting that in the interactions between Beowulf and Mother Grendel, she is the one behaving honorably. She seems only to want to put her son back together and bury him, but Beowulf takes it upon himself to defile Grendel's corpse (huge no no).

For some reason, however, we're still supposed to be cheering for him.