Intl Journal of Public Administration

ISSN: 0190-0692 (Print) 1532-4265 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpad20

Beowulf: The Heroic, The Monstrous, and Anglo-

Saxon Concepts of Leadership

Thomas J. Napierkowski

To cite this article: Thomas J. Napierkowski (2005) Beowulf: The Heroic, The Monstrous, and
Anglo-Saxon Concepts of Leadership, Intl Journal of Public Administration, 28:5-6, 503-516,
DOI: 10.1081/PAD-200055208

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-200055208

Published online: 07 Feb 2007.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2599

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lpad20
Intl Journal of Public Administration, 28: 503–516, 2005
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN 0190-0692 print / 1532-4265 online
DOI: 10.1081/PAD-200055208

Beowulf: The Heroic, The Monstrous,

Intl
285-6Taylor
Taylor
LPAD
2
1
2005
10.1081/PAD-200055208
55208
Beowulf:
Napierkowski
8 Journal
& Francis
Concepts
of&Public
FrancisTaylor
Inc.
ofAdministration
Leadership
and Francis 325 Chestnut StreetPhiladelphiaPA191060190-06921532-4265

and Anglo-Saxon Concepts of Leadership

Thomas J. Napierkowski
Professor of English, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs,
Colorado Springs, CO, USA

Abstract: The poem Beowulf highlights the leader’s heroic role, and is one of the pre-
mier examples of literature as a form of leadership instruction. The heroic ideal is one
in which leaders are defined by their ability to live in harmony with both the laws and
noble norms of society, to overcome opposition, and to demonstrate the acquisition of
virtue by the way the live. They are readily recognized as a contrast to the evils they
oppose. At the same time, heroic leaders are exemplars for their followers, and receive
much of their power by personifying the virtues to which both they and their followers
are committed. Leadership thus unfolds in a net of shared expectations, well-defined
and noble ideals, and demonstrated accomplishments. In this, the medieval and
Anglo-Saxon ideals are wondrously modern.

He led them to the right of the dancing trees—whether they were still
dancing nobody knew, for Lucy had her eyes on the Lion and the rest
had their eyes on Lucy.[1]

The simple quotation above, taken from C.S. Lewis’s Prince Caspian, goes a
long way toward defining not only this notable author and literary critic’s
ideas about leadership but also about the manner in which literature itself—
and medieval literature in particular—addresses the discussion and promotion
of leadership. This paper will analyze one particular ideal of leadership which
dominates early medieval literature and will suggest a significant way in
which that ideal differs from many contemporary theories.
All societies and cultures in the history of the world, even in their earliest
stages, have, to the best of our knowledge, produced literature. The reasons
for this are both simple and profound: literature gives pleasure while it
instructs. In every society, but perhaps most importantly in early societies, the
instruction provided by literature ranges from information on the planting and

Correspondence: Thomas J. Napierkowski, English Department, University of Colo-

rado at Colorado Springs, 1420 Austin Bluffs Parkway, Colorado Springs, CO 80933,
USA; E-mail: tnapierk@uccs.edu
504 Napierkowski

harvesting of crops to a reiteration of the history and values of the society.

Almost exclusively this function of literature is achieved through storytelling
and example, a form of instruction which, even today, is more powerful and
pervasive than most realize; indeed, most of our behavior is a form of model-
ing. Some of the most fundamental lessons of literature address the concepts
of leadership and responsibility in society. In stories of prose and poetry, liter-
ature defines, models, and fosters the concepts of leaders and followers for
readers and listeners alike. A study of medieval examples of such literature
can provide valuable insights into the praxis between literature and leadership
and into concepts of leadership that have been neglected or lost in the recent
centuries. In other words, such a study rewards one with a better understand-
ing of the content of the literature under review and with an alterity of vision
on theories of leadership.
In the early Middle Ages of northwestern Europe, literary discussions of
leadership are found primarily within the context of the heroic tradition. The
Germanic tribesmen who occupied these regions had limited contact with
Mediterranean civilization and were, first and foremost, warriors. They wor-
shipped rugged and often angry war gods like Woden and Thor; and their reli-
gion was marked by a cold gloom. The virtues promoted by this religion were
military in nature, stressing bravery, strength, and obedience; and whatever
hope there was for even a brief life after death was reserved for those killed in
battle. Such heroes, it was believed, were carried away to Valhalla, the palace
of Woden, where they feasted with the gods, who were themselves mortal,
until the Gotterdammerung, or the twilight of the gods.
These Germanic warriors were organized into tribe-like units, which the
Roman historian Tacitus in his study of the people and region, the
Germania,termed the comitatus. The leader of the comitatus was the group’s
most accomplished warrior, the cyning (the source of the English word
“king”). Chosen exclusively for his prowess as a leader and warrior, the cyn-
ing had two great responsibilities. Put as simply as possible, in times of war,
he was expected to lead his warriors into battle regardless of dangers or odds.
Tacitus says: “When the battlefield is reached it is a reproach for a chief to be
surpassed in prowess.”[2] In times of peace, the cyning was to care for his peo-
ple, especially his warriors or thanes, generously and wisely. The locus of the
cyning’s authority was his mead hall. Here, he provided his band of followers
with food and drink, bestowed various gifts upon them, and administered justice.
For their part, the warriors of the comitatus, the thanes, repaid the cyning’s
generosity with unwavering loyalty. Here again, Tacitus accurately describes
the nature of the relationship:

. . . it is a reproach for his [the cyning’s] retinue not to equal the prowess
of its chief: but to have left the field and survived one’s chief, this
means lifelong infamy and shame: to protect and defend him, to devote
one’s own feats even to his glorification, this is the gist of their alle-
giance: the chief fights for victory, but the retainers for the chief.[3]
Beowulf: Concepts of Leadership 505

The cyning’s bestowal of gifts on his thanes and his feasting with them
acknowledged their worth and his own generosity; the thanes’ acceptance of
the cyning’s graciousness constituted their pledge of loyalty to him. Thus, the
ties of the comitatus were presented and understood primarily in martial
terms; but, in truth, the bonds established within the comitatus not only
extended into times of peace; they were aimed at insuring peace, tranquility,
and well-being.
Perhaps no other piece of early medieval literature illustrates the Anglo-
Saxon ideal of the comitatus and, consequently, of leadership, better than
Beowulf, the Old English epic composed about the year 725. So great is the
power of this poem that even today it commands the attention of readers.
When Seamus Heaney, the Irish Nobel Laureate, recently translated the poem
into Modern English, his version climbed into the best sellers list on both
sides of the Atlantic. It further shocked both the public and the literary estab-
lishment by winning the coveted Whitbread Prize, one of the longest running
and most coveted book awards in the United Kingdom, outstripping even the
enormously popular and best-selling Harry Potter novels.
For the purpose of these remarks, Beowulf is a particularly illuminating
piece of literature for several reasons. For one thing, it illustrates not only the
Anglo-Saxon ideal of leadership as embodied in a legendary hero, Beowulf; it
also models, in the person of Beowulf as a thane, the duties of the ideal Anglo-
Saxon follower. This in itself is an important consideration; for the medieval
world seems to have believed that leadership could not even be discussed
intelligently without addressing in the same breath the obligations, duties, and
privileges of followers. Surely, the achievements of leaders are best measured
by the responses of their followers; and these achievements, in turn, are clari-
fied by a better appreciation of the expectations and rewards of their follow-
ers. At another level, Beowulf is also ideal for a study of one of the important
ideas of leadership in the Middle Ages because, unlike most works of litera-
ture, it also defines, in the adversaries that Beowulf must conquer, the Anglo-
Saxon understanding of the monstrous—the model of the anti-hero and the
antithesis of the good leader. Such presentations of the monstrous are embod-
ied primarily in Grendel and Grendel’s dam, Beowulf’s chief opponents in the
first half of the poem who are at least quasi-supernatural in nature and origin;
but they also are revealed in allusions to bad cynings such as Heremod.
A closer examination of the poem should clarify these points.
First, however, a brief synopsis of the poem is in order. The story of the
poem is simple enough. A Geatish (the area of southern Scandinavia) hero
named Beowulf takes on three mortal challenges. Although a thane of the
Geatish court, Beowulf seeks out the first two adventures in order to rescue
the Danish king Hrothgar and his people from the unrelenting attacks of the
troll-like monster Grendel. After repulsing Grendel’s attack on the Danish
court and mortally wounding Grendel in battle, Beowulf then delivers the
Danes from the revenge of Grendel’s dam. Years later, an elderly Beowulf,
now himself king of the Geats, defends his own people from the attacks of a
506 Napierkowski

fire-breathing dragon; and although successful in killing the dragon, Beowulf

is himself fatally wounded in the encounter. Here, it would seem, is the matter
of fairy tales, not epic poetry and sophisticated culture; yet the experience of
the poem throughout the centuries—its organic, indeed synergistic, union of
theme, style, and language (what Seamus Heaney has described as the “the
cadence and force of earned wisdom”)—belies such a conclusion.
As the above summary suggests, structurally Beowulf consists of two sec-
tions. The first section of the poem, approximately up to line 2200, presents
Beowulf the young man—Beowulf the thane—in his first two adventures. The
remainder of the poem presents Beowulf the old man, Beowulf the cyning.
Thus, the poem models for its audience in its hero, Beowulf, both sides of the
comitatus ideal: the identity and duties of the thane and the identity and duties
of the cyning, plus the general responsibilities of youth versus those of old
age. This, however, does not do justice to the complexity and sophistication of
the work.
In the first section of the poem, other contrasts are also presented to rein-
force the message of the poem, the heroic ideal, and the Anglo-Saxon model
of leadership. Thus, for example, although the primary focus of the poem in
this section is on Beowulf the thane, the concept of kingship is addressed in
the persons of Hrothgar, the good but ineffective elderly king of the Danes,
and of Hygelac, Beowulf’s lord and king of the Geats. Thus, we find examples
of kings who build great halls in which they host and reward their thanes and
where they dispense their God-given goods to their thanes as an indication of
the merit and worthiness of these followers:

The fortunes of war favored Hrothgar.

Friends and kinsmen flocked to his ranks,
young followers, a force that grew
to be a mighty army. So his mind turned
to hall-building: he handed down orders
for men to work on a great mead-hall
meant to be a wonder of the world forever;
it would be his throne-room and there he would dispense
his God-given goods to young and old—
but not the common land or people’s lives.[4]

Such kings treat thanes with great respect and keep their promises. In
these ways, they inspire their thanes and produce loyal followers like Beowulf
the young retainer. Early in the poem, the idea is stated quite succinctly:
“Behavior that’s admired / is the path to power among people everywhere.”[5]
In this same section of the poem, negative examples also define the heroic
ideal. At the level of the thane, we find in Hrothgar’s court a thane named
Unferth who, before the confrontation of Beowulf with Grendel, attacks the
achievements of Bewoulf’s youth but who himself does not dare to face Gren-
del. As Beowulf points out in his response to Unferth:
Beowulf: Concepts of Leadership 507

“The fact is, Unferth, if you were truly

as keen or courageous as you claim to be
Grendel would never have got away with
such unchecked atrocity, attacks on your king,
havoc in Heorot and horrors everywhere.”[6]

Even more disgraceful is Unferth’s conduct toward his own companions:

You killed your own kith and kin,

so for all your cleverness and quick tongue,
you will suffer damnation in the depths of hell.[7]

Although the Anglo-Saxons lived in a warrior society, frivolous bloodshed

was not heroic; and in many respects, the wanton killing of one’s own blood
was the ultimate taboo within the comitatus.
Such conduct contrasts markedly with that of Beowulf, who models the
perfect thane. The description of his determination to assist Hrothgar estab-
lishes both Beowulf’s motive and his credentials:

When he heard about Grendel, Hygelac’s thane

was on home ground, over in Geatland.
There was no one else like him alive.
In his days, he was the mightiest man on earth,
highborn and powerful. He ordered a boat
that would ply the waves. He announced his plan:
to sail the swan’s road and seek out that king,
the famous prince who needed defenders.[8]

As one might expect, Beowulf is mighty and powerful; but such gifts are not
enough to qualify him as a hero. Even gifts of might and power must be employed,
as they are in this case, to assist others and in the service of good. As Beowulf con-
cludes his trip to the Hrothgar’s court, the poet stresses this point again:

Thus Beowulf bore himself with valour;

he was formidable in battle yet behaved with honour
and took no advantage; never cut down
a comrade who was drunk, kept his temper
and, warrior that he was, watched and controlled
his God-sent strength and his outstanding
natural powers.[9]

Additionally, Beowulf undertakes the challenge of Grendel not for his

own glory but “to heighten Hylgelac’s fame.”[10] Perhaps the clearest descrip-
tion of Beowulf’s heroic credentials comes from Hrothgar himself in response
to Beowulf’s offer of continued assistance if it is needed:
508 Napierkowski

“The Lord in his wisdom sent you those words

and they came from the heart. I have never heard
so young a man make truer observations.
You are strong in body and mature in mind,
impressive in speech.”[11]

It is, however, in contrast to the monstrous that the fullest sense of Beowulf’s
heroic stature is established.
In a speech of gratitude and guidance, Hrothgar presents a negative lesson
on the heroic by comparing and contrasting Beowulf with Heremod, a Dane
who betrayed the gifts with which he was blessed:

Forever you will be

your people’s mainstay and your own warriors’
helping hand.
Heremod was different,
the way he behaved to Ecgwela’s sons.
His rise in the world brought little joy
to the Danish people, only death and destruction.
He vented his rage on men he caroused with,
killed his own comrades, a pariah king
who cut himself off from his own kind,
even though Almighty God had made him
eminent and powerful and marked him from the start
for a happy life. But a change happened,
he grew bloodthirsty, gave no more rings
to honor the Danes. He suffered in the end
for having plagued his people for so long:
his life lost happiness.
So learn from this
and understand true values.[12]

Heremod, like Beowulf, has been blessed by God with all the gifts necessary
to become a hero; but, unlike Beowulf, he misuses these gifts and becomes,
instead, an anti-hero and a failure as a leader. He not only fails to bring joy to
his people; he is a source of “death and destruction.” Furthermore, he has
hoarded his treasure, neglecting or refusing to give rings (i.e., ringed armor)
“to honor the Danes.” Finally, like Unferth, Heremod has killed his own com-
rades and, as result, has “cut himself off from his own kind.” Beowulf, on the
other hand, will be a “mainstay” to his people and a “helping hand” to his war-
riors. Thus, talents are not enough; it is the use to which one’s talents are put
which establishes one’s identity as a hero.
The most dramatic contrast, however, between the heroic and the mon-
strous is that between Beowulf and Grendel. In a series of subtle but telling
contrasts between the Geatish thane and the creature that terrorizes the Danes,
Beowulf: Concepts of Leadership 509

the poet gives concrete examples of the differences between the heroic and the
monstrous and further defines both. One fundamental contrast between the
two is their fathers. When Beowulf and his followers land on the coast of the
Shield Danes, they are accosted by one of Hrothgar’s guards, who demands to
know their identity and mission: “What kind of men are you who arrive /
rigged out for combat in your coats of mail . . . ?”[13] In his response, Beowulf
announces that he and his men are Geats who serve Hygelac and identifies his
own father as Ecgtheow, in his day “a famous man” and “noble warrior-
lord.”[14] This is not the boast of a son basking in his father’s glory, but a war-
rior’s identification of his father in an effort to demonstrate that he has nothing
to hide and that he has a history of service to uphold. In contrast, Grendel and
his dam are “fatherless creatures,” and “their whole ancestry is hidden in a
past / of demons and ghosts.”[15] All that can be said with certainty is that they
are descended from Cain. The heroic is open and candid; the monstrous is hid-
den and deceptive.
As a result of their separate histories and actions, Beowulf and Grendel
also live very differently. Beowulf is an honored retainer of Hygelac, the
Geatish king; and, once he has identified himself, he is welcomed with enthu-
siasm at the court of Hrothgar, the king of the Shield Danes. Indeed, during
his stay among the Danes, Beowulf is honored three times with feasts in
Heorot hall, Hrothgar’s mead hall. Grendel, on the other hand, lives apart
“among wolves on the hills, on windswept crags / and treacherous keshes,
where cold streams / pour down the mountain and disappear under mist and
moorland.”[16] Furthermore, Grendel’s visits to Heorot hall, the place where
he stages his attacks on the Danes, are the occasions for mayhem and death.
In a related matter, it is significant that Beowulf and his companions arrive
openly during the light of day; they have no need of stealth or disguise.
The Danish guard who inquires as to their business in Hrothgar’s lands
comments:

I have been stationed

as lookout on this coast for a long time.
My job is to watch the waves for raiders,
any danger to the Danish shore.
Never before has a force under arms
disembarked so openly . . . [17]

Grendel, on the other hand, is known as a “prowler through the dark”[18]

because he only approaches Heorot hall at night. His attack during Beowulf’s
visit is typical: “Then out of the night / came the shadow-stalker, stealthy and
swift.”[19] Here again, the contrast is clear. The heroic stands up to the light of
day; it has nothing to hide. The monstrous cloaks its deeds in darkness and
deceptions.
At a different level, the contrast between Beowulf and Grendel extends to
other credentials of the heroic. Beowulf, unlike Grendel, is not only articulate;
510 Napierkowski

he is eloquent. On more than one occasion, Beowulf’s addresses elicit the

admiration of others (we have already seen Hrothgar’s comment that Beowulf
is “impressive in speech” and that his words are wise and come “from the
heart”) and demonstrate his skills as speaker. In a wonderful metaphor, the
poet refers to Beowulf’s speech as his “word-hord.” Grendel, for his part,
never utters a word. Indeed, there is no evidence that he even knows how to
speak; he is devoid of the ability to communicate with people, thus reinforcing
the separation between him and not only the world of the heroic but the human
community. All this seems to suggest that the hero or leader must be articulate
and that the anti-hero or monster either is unable or refuses to speak. Articu-
late speech, however, is not enough. As with all of his other gifts, Beowulf
employs his speech in the service of others—another credential of the heroic.
On the same level, another quality worth noting is Beowulf’s demeanor. He
observes the decorum of Hrothgar’s court and behaves in a respectful manner
even when challenged. The poet simply comments that “he knew all the courte-
sies.”[20] Again, Grendel underscores this quality of the heroic through contrast.
We are told directly that “he would never / parley or make peace with any Dane
/ nor stop his death-dealing nor pay the death-price.”[21] This latter point, the
refusal to use Germanic law to settle feuds peacefully, underscores Grendel’s
defiant separation, and hence that of the monstrous, from the human community.
Finally in this series of contrasts between Beowulf and Grendel, one other
feature is so obvious that it is frequently overlooked. The death of Beowulf, in
the second half of the poem, is the occasion of great sorrow, gloom, and fear
that because the hero is gone, new threats and dangers will arise. Beowulf’s
warriors are not only disconsolate; they “wailed aloud for their lord’s
decease,”[22] and the description of Beowulf’s funeral ritual reveals the pain of
the Geatish people:

Then twelve warriors rode around the tomb,

chieftain’s sons, champions in battle,
all of them distraught, chanting in dirges,
mourning his loss as a man and a king.
They extolled his heroic nature and exploits
and gave thanks for his greatness; which was the proper thing,
for a man should praise a prince whom he holds dear
and cherish his memory when the moment comes
when he has to be convoyed from his bodily home.
So the Geat people, his hearth companions,
sorrowed for the lord who had been laid low.[23]

The death of Grendel is another matter. The poet reports in typical Anglo-
Saxon understatement that Grendel’s “fatal departure / was regretted by no
one.”[24] The contrast with the heroic could not be stronger. Grendel dies
alone, mourned only by his dam; and his death becomes an occasion of great
celebration at Heorot hall, the site of his infamous attacks.
Beowulf: Concepts of Leadership 511

In the second section of the poem, Beowulf is an old man; and the pri-
mary focus is on the heroic ideal presented in the person of Beowulf the cyn-
ing. This ideal is presented and defined in both the words and deeds of the
aged hero. Beowulf has ruled the Geats for fifty years and has brought his
people peace and prosperity. Now, however, a fire-breathing dragon has
begun to terrorize his land because an intruder has disturbed the treasure
which the dragon has long guarded. King Beowulf takes on the task of rescu-
ing his people from this menace, which is, of course, his duty as king:
“I risked my life / often when I was young. Now I am old, / but as king of the
people I shall pursue this fight.”[25] So committed is the old king to the comi-
tatus ideal that he regards this battle solely as his responsibility and insists on
undertaking this challenge alone:

“Men-at-arms, remain here on the barrow,

safe in your armor, to see which one of us
is better in the end at bearing wounds
in a deadly fray. This fight is not yours,
nor is it up to any man except me
to measure his strength against the monster
or to prove his worth. I shall win the gold
by my courage, or else mortal combat,
doom of battle, will bear your lord away.”[26]

Age has not diminished Beowulf’s commitment to his role as leader or to the
range of duties which that role requires.
In the course of his battle with the dragon, Beowulf is mortally wounded
and needs assistance. All but one of his thanes, Wiglaf, run “for their lives / to
the safety of the wood,”[27] thus betraying their duty and providing yet another
example of the anti-heroic or monstrous. Beowulf, nonetheless, with the help
of Wiglaf, slays the dragon. As he lies dying, Beowulf’s assessment of his
reign provides valuable insights into the Anglo-Saxon definition of the heroic
and of the role of the leader. In the first section of his speech, Beowulf places
a high premium on protecting his people; but he also treasures peace and
shows a respect for human life:

“For fifty years

I ruled this nation. No king
of any neighboring clan would dare
face me with troops, none had the power
to intimidate me. I took what came
cared for and stood by things in my keeping,
never fomented quarrels, never
swore to a lie. All this consoles me,
doomed as I am and sickening for death;
because of my right ways, the Ruler of mankind
512 Napierkowski

need never blame me when the breath leaves my body

for murder of kinsmen.”[28]

Speaking to Wiglaf, his loyal thane, Beowulf also insists the treasure guarded
by the dragon be used for the benefit of the Geatish people:

“To the everlasting Lord of all

to the King of Glory, I give thanks
that I behold this treasure here in front of me,
that I have been allowed to leave my people
so well endowed on the day I die.
Now that I have bartered my last breath
to own this fortune, it is up to you
to look after their needs.”[29]

It seems that Beowulf regards peace and prosperity as his greatest legacy. As
in the first section of the poem, although one side of the comitatus relation is
emphasized, the other side is also presented.
The failure of all of Beowulf’s thanes but Wiglaf to come to his aid
allows the poet to address the thane side of the comitatus bond in both a nega-
tive and positive manner. The fleeing thanes are monstrous in their disloyalty,
and Wiglaf exemplifies the role of a heroic retainer. Furthermore, his speech
of admonition to his cowardly companions defines the duties of loyal thanes,
documents the conduct of a good cyning, and demonstrates that eloquence is a
virtue prized by both sides in the comitatus relationship. As the poet himself
comments, Wiglaf’s words are “wise and fluent”:

“I remember that time when mead was flowing,

how we pledged loyalty to our lord in the hall,
promised our ring-giver we would be worth our price,
make good the gift of the war-gear,
those swords and helmets, as and when
his need required it. He picked us out
from the army deliberately, honoured us and judged us
fit for this action, made me these lavish gifts—
and all because he considered us the best
of his arms-bearing thanes. And now, although
he wanted this challenge to be one he’d face
by himself alone—the shepherd of our land,
a man unequalled in the quest for glory
and a name for daring—now the day has come
when this lord we serve needs sound men
to give him their support. Let us go to him,
help our leader through the hot flame
and dread of the fire. As God is my witness,
Beowulf: Concepts of Leadership 513

I would rather my body were robed in the same

burning blaze as my gold-giver’s body
than go back home bearing arms.
That is unthinkable, unless we have first
slain the foe and defended the life
of the prince of the Weather-Geats. I well know
the things he has done for us deserve better.
Why should he alone be left exposed
to fall in battle? We must bond together,
shield and helmet, mail-shirt and sword.”[30]

Wiglaf’s remarks directly define the thane’s role in the comitatus relationship
and indirectly sketch the role of the cyning. In a subsequent speech, he warns
of dire consequences which will follow as a result of the behavior of his com-
panions:

“So it is good-bye now to all you know and love

on your home ground, the open-handedness,
and giving of war-swords. Every one of you
with freeholds of land, our whole nation,
will be dispossessed, once princes from beyond
get tidings of how you turned and fled
and disgraced yourselves. A warrior will sooner
die than live a life of shame.”[31]

The speeches of Beowulf and Wiglaf establish the intimate and synergistic link
which binds not only the cyning and his thanes but any leader and his follow-
ers; the former cannot exist without an ethic on the part of the latter which
binds them to the leader.
Finally, no analysis of Beowulf for Anglo-Saxon ideals of the heroic and
of leadership would be complete without an examination of the religious
dimensions of the poem; and it is this aspect of the piece that provides the
most significant source of alterity between medieval concepts of leadership
and, incidentally, of government and modern theories.
Although the religious dimensions of Beowulf are subtle and require some
background, they are central to the work and to an understanding of medieval
views of leadership. The author of the poem was almost certainly a well-educated
Christian monk writing in the early part of the eighth century in the Anglo-
Saxon kingdom of Mercia. The poem, on the other hand, is set in a pagan time
and place, approximately the year 525 in Southern Sweden and the Danish
Peninsula; and none of characters is a Christian or seems to know of Chris-
tianity. Despite its setting, the world of Beowulf has been modified to reflect a
Christian perspective. For one the thing, both the narrator and the characters
speak of "God" in the singular, whereas the original Anglo-Saxon religion, as
noted above, was polytheistic. Beyond that, God is regularly presented as a
514 Napierkowski

creator, a guardian, and a judge—also Christian accommodations. Further-

more, there is at least one Biblical reference, the identification of Grendel as a
descendant of Cain, which is unequivocal. Other major actions and incidental
details also create associations between Beowulf and Christ: Beowulf’s will-
ingness to sacrifice himself for others, even for strangers; the loss of one of his
followers during the Danish expedition; his visit to the underworld to battle
Grendel’s dam; the twelve riders who circle his pyre; and the lone Geatish
woman who bewails Beowulf’s death.
For the sake of these remarks, however, it is the insistence that the heroic
resides in the correct use of God-given gifts that is most important. That the
attributes of the heroic—not just strength, power, rank, and goods, but also
eloquence and wisdom—are from God should be clear from the many of the
passages already cited. What bears reiteration here is that the poet insists that
these gifts are to be shared and used for the benefit of one’s followers and peo-
ple. Uncharacteristically, Beowulf falls into turmoil as he worries that the
dragon’s attack is the result of his failure to conduct himself properly and to
use his gifts well: “It threw the hero / into deep anguish and darkened his
mood: / the wise man thought he must have thwarted / ancient ordinance of
the eternal Lord, / broken His commandment.”[32] On the other hand, as we
have also seen, his greatest consolation as he lies dying is that he is at peace
with God: “because of my right ways, the Ruler of mankind / need never
blame me when the breath leaves my body.”[33] As is typical in the poem, the
poet also stresses this with negative examples, human and monstrous, that
have failed to use their gifts well. Heremod is one example: “Almighty God
had made him / eminent and powerful and marked him from the start / for a
happy life.”[34] Unlike Beowulf, however, Heremod betrays these gifts by sur-
rendering to violence and hoarding his treasure: “But a change happened, / he
grew bloodthirsty, gave no more rings / to honor the Danes.”[35] In a similar
fashion, Grendel and other monsters face the curse of exile because they
“strove with God.”[36]
Such an understanding, commonplace though it seems, signals a profound
difference from many modern approaches to the heroic, to leadership, and
even to government. There is nothing “absolute” about any of these concepts
in the Anglo-Saxon world. They do not enjoy the prerogative to act as they
please, and they are most emphatically not above the law. In a striking differ-
ence from modern assumptions, none of the above is even free to legislate as it
pleases—not even, one might add, a democratic state or popularly chosen
leaders. In the Anglo-Saxon view, indeed in the medieval view in general and
is that of most of the classical world, leaders and governments must “adminis-
ter pre-existing law.” Such law is variously understood as the law of God,
eternal verities, natural law, or even custom (in the American legal system, we
would say “precedent”). The hero, the leader, and the government do not create
such laws; they are created by them. Expanding the words of C.S. Lewis, the
author and critic whose words opened these comments, from the medieval con-
cept of sovereignty to medieval understandings of the heroic and of leadership,
Beowulf: Concepts of Leadership 515

we encounter a different vision of these topics: “Its business is to enforce

something that is already there, something given in the divine reason or in the
existing custom. By its fidelity in reproducing that model it is to be judged. If
it tries to be original, to produce new wrongs and rights in independence of the
archetype, it becomes unjust and forfeits its claim to obedience.”[37] Such an
understanding will, no doubt, resonate with some moderns and appall others;
its alterity is certainly provocative.
Less challenging is the touching final tribute of the Geatish people to
their fallen leader Beowulf:

They said that of all the kings upon earth

he was the man most gracious and fair-minded,
kindest to his people and keenest to win fame.[38]

Here is perhaps the poem’s ultimate test for the heroic and for leadership, one
by which all leaders, medieval and modern, can be measured.

REFERENCES

1. Lewis, C.S. Prince Caspian; Collier/Macmillan: New York, 1970, 144.

2. Tacitus. Germania. Hutton, M., Trans. In Tacitus: Dialogus, Agricola,
Germania; Page, T., Capps, E., Ruse, W., Post, L., Warmington, E., Eds.,
Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1963; 283, 285.
3. Ibid., 285.
4. Beowulf. Heaney, S., Trans. Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York, 2000;
7, ll. 64–73.
5. Ibid., 7, ll. 24–25.
6. Ibid., 41, ll. 590–594.
7. Ibid., 41, ll. 587–589.
8. Ibid., 14, ll. 194–201.
9. Ibid., 149, ll. 2177–2183.
10. Ibid., 3, l. 435.
11. Ibid., 127, ll. 1841–1845.
12. Ibid., 117, 119, ll. 1707–1723.
13. Ibid., 17, ll. 237–238.
14. Ibid., 19, ll. 262, 263.
15. Ibid., 95, ll. 1355–1357.
16. Ibid., 95, ll. 1358–1361.
17. Ibid., 17, 19, ll. 240–245.
18. Ibid., 9, l. 86.
19. Ibid., 47, ll. 702–703.
20. Ibid., 25, l. 359.
21. Ibid., 13, ll. 154–156.
22. Ibid., 211, l. 3149.
516 Napierkowski

23. Ibid., 213, ll. 3169–3179.

24. Ibid., 57, ll. 840–841.
25. Ibid., 169, 171, ll. 2511–2513.
26. Ibid., 171, ll. 2529–2537.
27. Ibid., 175, ll. 2598–2599.
28. Ibid., 185, ll. 2732–2743.
29. Ibid., 189, ll. 2794–2801.
30. Ibid., 177, 179, ll. 2633–2660.
31. Ibid., 195, ll. 2884–2890.
32. Ibid., 159, ll. 2327–2331.
33. Ibid., 185, ll. 2741–2742.
34. Ibid., 119, ll. 1716–1718.
35. Ibid., ll. 1718–1720.
36. Ibid., 9, l. 113.
37. Lewis, C.S. English Literature in the Sixteenth Century Excluding
Drama; Oxford University Press: New York, 1954; 48.
38. Beowulf, 213, ll. 3180–3182.