Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Wyrd ðe Warnung . . . or God: The Question of Absolute Sovereignty in Solomon and Saturn II

Wyrd ðe Warnung . . . or God: The Question of Absolute Sovereignty in Solomon and Saturn II Abstract: The Old English word wyrd has a long and contentious history in Anglo-Saxon studies. Early scholars translated this word as “fate” and considered it a rare preservation of pre-Christian belief in the extant corpus. More recently, the scholarly consensus has agreed that all extant Old English literature was written in a completely Christian context that would not have been willing to preserve pagan conceits. Thus, the word is now almost universally translated as “lot” or “event” with the caveat that all events are under the direction of divine providence according to a Christian view. This essay argues that the use of the word wyrd in The Second Dialogue of Solomon and Saturn problematizes the neat dichotomy between Christianity and paganism that has been used to characterize Anglo-Saxon religious identity. This text is entirely and unequivocally Christian; in fact it is acutely focused on establishing the validity of Christian belief. But the questions this text poses, particularly about the nature of wyrd , reveal a level of doubt about the authority of the Christian God that challenges the view that wyrd is entirely benign in a Christian context. I argue that this doubt regarding wyrd ’s relationship to the Christian God in The Second Dialogue of Solomon and Saturn represents a particular challenge to Christianity in the Anglo-Saxon religious imagination, a challenge to which Christianity had to respond if it was to remain relevant in early medieval England. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Studies in Philology University of North Carolina Press

Wyrd ðe Warnung . . . or God: The Question of Absolute Sovereignty in Solomon and Saturn II

Studies in Philology , Volume 113 (4) – Nov 11, 2016

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-north-carolina-press/wyrd-e-warnung-or-god-the-question-of-absolute-sovereignty-in-solomon-i6P1T2p2W0

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of North Carolina Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 The University of North Carolina Press.
ISSN
1543-0383
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: The Old English word wyrd has a long and contentious history in Anglo-Saxon studies. Early scholars translated this word as “fate” and considered it a rare preservation of pre-Christian belief in the extant corpus. More recently, the scholarly consensus has agreed that all extant Old English literature was written in a completely Christian context that would not have been willing to preserve pagan conceits. Thus, the word is now almost universally translated as “lot” or “event” with the caveat that all events are under the direction of divine providence according to a Christian view. This essay argues that the use of the word wyrd in The Second Dialogue of Solomon and Saturn problematizes the neat dichotomy between Christianity and paganism that has been used to characterize Anglo-Saxon religious identity. This text is entirely and unequivocally Christian; in fact it is acutely focused on establishing the validity of Christian belief. But the questions this text poses, particularly about the nature of wyrd , reveal a level of doubt about the authority of the Christian God that challenges the view that wyrd is entirely benign in a Christian context. I argue that this doubt regarding wyrd ’s relationship to the Christian God in The Second Dialogue of Solomon and Saturn represents a particular challenge to Christianity in the Anglo-Saxon religious imagination, a challenge to which Christianity had to respond if it was to remain relevant in early medieval England.

Journal

Studies in PhilologyUniversity of North Carolina Press

Published: Nov 11, 2016

There are no references for this article.