Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T05:38:32.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patristic Psychology in the Old English ‘Vainglory’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Catharine A. Regan
Catharine A. Regan*
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the Old English poem Vainglory is generally considered mediocre, and since no source has been found, critics usually dismiss it with terms such as ‘homiletic,’ ‘didactic,’ and ‘reflective.’ Because the poem is an admonition against pride and related sins, these terms are all applicable, but they do little to explain the nature of the tradition in which the poet writes. In both its content and form Vainglory bears a striking resemblance to specific teachings of the Church Fathers. Though an analysis of Vainglory in the light of these patristic writings will not transform the poem into an artistic work, it will illustrate the degree to which the poet depends on the teachings of the Church Fathers; moreover, I believe that this analysis may suggest an approach to the understanding of other Old English poems. When I cite passages from the Fathers I am not suggesting that they are the poet's conscious source, but rather that they are representative of the teachings which he knew and by which he was influenced.

Type
Miscellany
Information
Traditio , Volume 26 , 1970 , pp. 324 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Van Kirk Dobbie, Elliott, The Exeter Book, The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, 3, ed. Krapp, George Philip and Dobbie, (New York 1936) xl and Greenfield, Stanley B., A Critical History of Old English Literature (New York 1965) 203 are surely correct when they reject Isaiah 28.1–4 as the source by arguing that the resemblance in theme between the poem and the Scriptural passage is too general to indicate borrowing. If the poem reflects any Scriptural passage, I think it likely to be 1 John 3. In Vainglory the poet draws a contrast between the child of the devil and the child of God in the same way that John does.Google Scholar

2 This lack of critical attention has been due in part to the absence of lexical studies on the relationship between patristic Latin vocabulary and Old English vocabulary, a point which Kaske, R. E. makes in his review (Speculum 41 [1966] 763–4) of the first such lexical study: Schabram, Hans, Superbia: Studien zum altenglischen Wortschatz, I: Die dialektale und zeitliche Verbreitung des Wortguts. Few previous literary studies have considered the relationship between patristic psychology and Old English poetry. Abbetmeyer, C., in Old English Poetical Motives Derived from the Doctrine of Sin (Diss., University of Minnesota 1900; Minneapolis 1903) 35ff., applies Gregory the Great's doctrine of fallen man to Old English poetry, but merely records instances of possible influence on vocabulary and theme; he makes no attempt to analyze the poetry in the light of Gregory's psychology. Only in part of one study is a selection of Old English poetry really interpreted in terms of patristic psychology: Professor Kaske, in ‘Sapientia et Fortitudo as the Controlling Theme of Beowulf,’ (Studies in Philology 55 [1958] 432–5), sees Hrothgar's sermon in terms of the psychology of Gregory and Augustine concerning the loss of sapientia. Google Scholar

3 Cassian and Valerian not only contrast superbia with humilitas but indicate the importance of such contrast. Cassian, , De institutis coenobiorum 12.8 (ed. Petschenig, M., CSEL 17; Vienna 1888) 210–1: ‘Ideoque uniuersitatis creator et medicus deus causam principiumque morborum superbiam esse cognoscens contrariis sanare contraria procurauit, ut ea scilicet, quae per superbiam conruerant, per humilitatem resurgerent.’ Valerian, , Horn. 14 (PL 52.735): ‘Duae igitur causae in unum veniunt, humilitas et superbia, quarum exponi alteram sine alterius verecundia rerum natura non patitur, quia una suis actibus, altera erubescit alienis. Dicendum igitur est quantum humilitas utilitatis habeat, ut possitis intelligere quantum superbiae infelicitatis incumbat; et exponendum quantum superbia odiorum pariat, ut discatis quantum amoris gratia humilitatis acquirat; quo facilius unusquisque agnoscat vestrum quid in se debeat emendare, vel quid possit eligere.’ See Augustine, , Enarr. in Ps. 33. Serm. 2.5 (CCL 38.284–5) and Gregory, , Mor. in Iob 34.23.56 (PL 76.750).Google Scholar

4 Medieval Rhetoric and Poetic (New York 1928) 18.Google Scholar

5 Hom. de statuis 1 (PG 49.22) and 2 (PG 49.40).Google Scholar

6 Hom. in Ps. 33 (PG 29.355–8) and Horn. 2 in Ps. 14 (PG 29.271–4). The rhetorical qualities of several early Christian homilists have been analyzed in volumes of The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies, Washington, D. C. See Campbell, James Marshall, The Influence of the Second Sophistic on the Style of the Sermons of St. Basil the Great 2 (1922) 128–45 and Burns, Sister Mary Albania, St. John Chrysostom's Homilies on the Statues: A Study of their Rhetorical Qualities and Form 22 (1930) 106–16 for analyses of ecphrasis. The examples of this figure in the text are cited in these studies. See also Rev. Ameringer, Thomas E., The Stylistic Influence of the Second Sophistic on the Panegyrical Sermons of St. John Chrysostom: A Study in Greek Rhetoric 5 (1921) 86–100 and Inviolata Barry, Sister M., St. Augustine, The Orator: A Study of the Rhetorical Qualities of St. Augustine's Sermons ad Populum 6 (1924) 246–7, 257.Google Scholar

7 29 (CSEL 17.228): ‘inest primitus in loquella eius clamor, in taciturnitate amaritudo, excelsus et effusus in laetitia risus, inrationabilis in serietate tristitia, in responsione rancor, facilitas in sermone, uerba passim sine ulla cordis grauitate erumpentia. expers patientiae est, caritatis aliena, audax ad contumelias inrogandas, ad tolerandas pusillanimis, ad oboediendum difficilis, nisi in quo eam desiderium suum uoluntasque praeuenerit, ad recipiendam exhortationem inplacabilis, ad resecandas uoluntates suas infirma, ad succumbendum alienis durissima, semperque suas definitiones statuere contendens, ipsa uero nequaquam cedere alterius adquiescens: et ita fit ut etiam incapax consilii salutaris effecta in omnibus suo potius credat quam seniorum iudicio.’ Also 27 (CSEL 17.225–7).Google Scholar

8 5.45.79 and 5.46.85 (PL 75.724–5, 728).Google Scholar

9 3.8–10 (PL 59.484–90).Google Scholar

10 3.8.1 (PL 59.484).Google Scholar

11 12.29 (CSEL 17.227–8): ‘Et ut breuius ea quae dicta sunt de hoc superbiae genere praestringamus, quaedam signa eius in quantum possumus colligentes, ut his, qui de perfectione sitiunt erudiri, quodammodo characteres eius de exterioris hominis motibus exprimamus, necessarium puto paucis eadem replicari, ut conpendiosius agnoscamus quibus earn discernere ac deprehendere ualeamus indiciis, quo nudatae atque in superficiem productae passionis huius radices et oculatim deprehensae atque perspectae uel conuelli facilius ualeant uel uitari…. de exterioris namque sicut praediximus hominis motu status interioris agnoscitur.’ This statement precedes the passage quoted in n. 7 supra. Google Scholar

12 All references to Old English poetry are to the A(nglo)-S(axon) P(oetic) R(ecords), ed. Krapp, and Dobbie, (New York 1931–53), 6 vols. The text of Vainglory appears in ASPR 3.147–9.Google Scholar

13 Kennedy, , The Earliest English Poetry (London 1943) 321; Dobbie, ASPR 3. xl; Greenfield, , A Critical History, 202; Wrenn, , A Study of Old English Literature (London 1967) 157.Google Scholar

14 In form, these lines (19b–25) bear some resemblance to specific passages in The Gifts of Men 1–7 (ASPR 3.137), The Fortunes of Men 64–71, 93–6 (ASPR 3.155, 156), Christ 659–85 (ASPR 3.21–2), and to the sum construction which appears in all three poems. In these passages God has distributed either gifts or adversity differently to different men; however, in Vainglory, God does not distribute, but dispositions — by their very nature — are distributed differently to different men.Google Scholar

15 The Seven Deadly Sins ([East Lansing, Michigan] 1952) 109.Google Scholar

16 Evagrius (in Antirrheticus), from whom Cassian borrowed his list of cardinal sins (in De institutis 5–12 [CSEL 17.78–231] and Collationes patrum 5 [ed. Petschenig, M., CSEL 13; Vienna 1886] 119–51), does not call the vices sins, but states of the soul which lead to sin. Although Cassian treats them as sins, he regards them as rising from these impulses and realizes that the impulse itself can lead to good as well as evil. See Strong, Thomas B., Christian Ethics (London 1896) 260; Chadwick, Owen, John Cassian: A Study in Primitive Monasticism (Cambridge 1950) 94; Lea, Henry Charles, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church 2 (Philadelphia 1896) 239.Google Scholar

17 Collationes 5.13 (CSEL 13.136–7). In what appears to be a borrowing from Cassian, Eutropius makes essentially the same statement in De octo vitiis (PL 80.12).Google Scholar

18 De institute 12.27 (CSEL 17.226). See also 29 (CSEL 17.227–8).Google Scholar

19 Mor. in Iob 34.23.48 (PL 76.745). Gregory also lists boasting of what one does not have as one of the four marks of pride in 23.6.13 (PL 76.258). Boasting is regularly listed as one of the offshoots of vainglory. See Cassian, , Collationes 5.16 (CSEL 13.143); Gregory, , Mor. in Iob 31.45.88 (PL 76.621); Eutropius, , De octo vitiis (PL 80.12); Ambrosius Autpertus (ps. Ambrose), Oratio contra septies septem vitia (PL 17.756); Isidore, , Quaestiones in Vet. Test. (PL 83.366).Google Scholar

20 De virtutibus et vitiis 27 (PL 101.633).Google Scholar

21 See Cassian, , De institutis 11.10 (CSEL 17.198); Gregory, , Mor. in lob 33.6.13 (PL 76. 679); Alcuin, , De virtutibus et vitiis 34 (PL 101.636); Aldhelm, , De laudibus virginitatis 16 (PL 89.114); Martin of Braga, De superbia (PL 72.37). See also ‘De vana gloria’ in a poem De acerbissimis malis , ed. Giles, J. A., Anecdota Bedae, Lanfranci, et aliorum: Inedited Tracts, Letters, Poems, &c of Venerable Bede, Lanfranc, Tatwin, and Others (Caxton Society Publications 12; London 1851) 44.Google Scholar

22 ‘De superbia,’ ed. Giles, , op. cit. , 41.Google Scholar

23 See Collationes 5.16 (CSEL 13.143); Mor. in Iob 31.45.88 (PL 76.621).Google Scholar

24 3.178 (ed. Green, W., CSEL 74; Vienna 1956) 133. See also 2.170 (CSEL 74.79). Gregory describes the consequences of sin in similar terms in Mor. in Iob 8.10.19 (PL 75.813); also 11.42.58 (PL 75.979).Google Scholar

25 Enarr. in Ps. 100.9 (CCL 39.1414). See also De sancta virginitate 31.31 (PL 40.413); Gregory, , Mor. in Iob 18.32.51 (PL 76.65); Pomerius, , De vita contemplativa. 3.9.1 (PL59. 486).Google Scholar

26 The Fathers often describe sin, the devil, or temptation in images involving fortifications. Gregory, , Hom. in Evang. 7 (PL 76.1100): ‘Quisquis ergo in superbiam mentem elevat, quisquis avaritiae aestibus anhelat, quisquis se luxuriae inquinationibus polluit, cordis ostium contra veritatem claudit; et ne ad se Dominus veniat, claustra animi seris vitiorum damnat.’ Cassian emphasizes the gravity of pride by portraying it as destruction to not one virtue but to the entire citadel of virtues. See De institutis 12.3 (CSEL 17.207–8). In Mor. in Iob 26.45.82 (PL 76.397) Gregory speaks of temptation as an attack on an unsuspecting city. Cyprian compares the devil's technique to an enemy attempting to enter fortified walls in De zelo et livore 2 (PL 4.639).Google Scholar

27 The compound inwitflan, which appears only in this passage, is defined by Grein, C. W. M. (Sprachschatz der angelsächsischen Dichter, rev. Kôhler, J. J. [Heidelberg 1912] 391) as telum malitiae ; Bosworth, Joseph (An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary , rev. Toller, T. N. [Oxford 1898] 597) and Clark, John R. Hall (A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, rev. Meritt, Herbert D. [Cambridge 1962] 207) define it as ‘treacherous shaft.’ Google Scholar

28 ThLL 8.188.Google Scholar

29 Comm. in Epist. ad Ephesios 3 (PL 26.517); see also Ambrose, , De fuga saeculi 7.43 (PL 14.589).Google Scholar

30 De Cain et Abel 2.4.16 (PL 14.348).Google Scholar

31 Sermo 31 (PL 52.287); see also Ambrose, , Expos. Ps. 118.15.25 (ed. Petschenig, M., CSEL 62; Vienna 1913) 343; Gregory, , Regula pastoralis 3.9 (PL 77.61).Google Scholar

32 Etymologiae 10.176, ed. Lindsay, W. M. (Oxford 1911).Google Scholar

33 Enarr. in Ps. 34. Serm 1.11 (CCL 38.307–8).Google Scholar

34 See Judith 111–7 (ASPR 4.102); Christ 1620–2, 1628–9 (ASPR 3.48); Elene 949, (ASPR 2.92.); Christ and Satan 101–3, 135 (ASPR 1.138–9, 140). Following B. Thorpe's suggestion, Clubb, M. D. (Christ and Satan [New Haven 1925] 12) emends winnað (line 136) to windað, citing the similar image in Vainglory and Judith .Google Scholar

35 These Scriptural references are cited by Abbetmeyer, , 16.Google Scholar

36 Accepting Dobbie's punctuation means that the direct quotation will include the pseudo-Biblical passage, the description of the fall of the angels, the portrait of the humble man, and a final contrast between the proud and humble man. Dobbie is no doubt influenced to extend the quote to 77a by the shift to direct address to the reader at this point (77b), but since the poet had shifted to direct address at the end of the portrait of the proud man (44b), it is not surprising that he should do so at the end of the portrait of the humble man. There remains the meaning of witega in 81b. It is likely that Dobbie identifies this word with witga of line 50. I agree that the witega of 81b is ‘prophet,’ i.e., a writer of Scripture, but I believe that the reference is to a specific Scriptural writer. My suggestion in n. 1 supra that the poet may have had in mind 1 John 3 gains further support from the poet's description of the humble man in 67–72a. &03F7;onne bið &03F8;am o&03F8;rum ungelice se &03F8;e her on eorðan eaðmod leofað, ond wi&03F8; gesibbra gehwone simle healdeð freode on folce ond his freond lufað, &03F8;eah &03F8;e he him abylgnesse oft gefremede willum in &03F8;isse worulde. The details in these lines (and in 79b–81a) resemble John's description of the child of God (3.10–24). Both virtuous men love their neighbor (I have retained the MS freond in 70b) and are united with Christ. Dobbie emends the MS freond to feond with the note that the ‘sense requires’ the change (ASPR 3.300). (W. S. Mackie, however, retains the MS reading in his edition of the poem, ‘A Warning against Pride,’ The Exeter Book 2 EETS, O.S. 194 [London 1934] 11–15). But when these lines are read in the light of 1 John 3.10–24, there is no need to emend. In these verses John stresses the obligation of the child of God to love his brother. He recognizes that such love is not always easy to give but says that in charity the child of God cannot reject his brother. The poet is making the same point in 70b–71a. The poet's use of words such as witega, wita, ar, and boda does pose a problem, but my reading of the poem suggests these distinctions: frod wita and snottor ar (1–2) I take as the patristic writer; witgan larum and bodan ærcwide (3–4) as the teachings of Scriptural writers; witga, gearowyrdig guma, and gyd (50–51) as the Scriptural writer and his verse; and witega (81) as a specific reference to John, whom the poet has just paraphrased.Google Scholar

37 Two exceptions to this generalization are the virtues of humility (De institutis 4.39 [CSEL 17.75–76]) and patience (Collationes 18.13 [CSEL 13.519–20]) which receive special attention from Cassian. His account of the humble man is a detailed description; however, there is no similarity between it and the description of the humble man in Vainglory. See Chadwick, , 103–4, 107.Google Scholar

38 Cassian uses battle imagery throughout both De institutis and Collationes. See also Gregory, , Mor. in Iob 31.45.87–91 (PL 76.620–3); Alcuin, , De virtutibus et vitiis 27–34 (PL 101. 632–7); Aldhelm, , De laudibus virginitatis 11–12 (PL 89.110–2). The most vivid description of the conflict between virtue and vice is found in the Psychomachia of Prudentius (ed. Bergman, J., CSEL 61; Vienna 1926) 165–211.Google Scholar

39 Mor. in Iob 4.11.18 (PL 75.647).Google Scholar