Beowulf Pastiche

So it was fate that had brought Grendel down

and future-cast at work in man’s victory.

But the hell homed demon was not alone and the only

a victim of fate for all are given such an affliction

as breath-cease serves both the hero and the horn rigged monster.

Soon it will be our hero’s duty and turn to submit to death;

forced by fate to give up glorious victory.

The warrior who breathes heavily one morn

will only rot in the earth the rest, reason to their notorious names “earth-dwellers”,

men and women descend to the very dust-slime they ascend from.

What great shield-clash there must be between mortals

two warriors fight to enjoy life’s honey-taste for a while longer,

they only postpone a day doomed to come, pointless to avoid.

In a battle’s fierce-cry frenzy any man may believe, even if for a moment

he is beyond the long-grasp of fate, an immortal god.

Almighty God surely determines who dies and lives,

who takes a seat in victory or stands in shameful loss,

a man’s worth is only determined after gracious God determines his end.

Vengeance is justice-made mourning, an exchange considered:

blood for tears, blades for pyres, war-galleys for burial ships.

Man’s fate must play out, it must eventually bring him to breath-cease,

vengeance troubles the wicked wyrd, tears only fulfill its desire.

Each glorious victory only means the earth-dweller one thing,

a glorious death escaped once is a humiliating death to be expected.

Beowulf Response Question: Warrior Code

What evidence do you see in the Beowulf poem regarding the presence of a "warrior code"? How would you describe that code? Which characters do you see exemplifying this code (give textual evidence) and which characters do you see breaking this code?

The warrior code in Beowulf can be articulated in a few common and significant virtues. I have picked up on courage and bravery as two major virtues expected of the warrior. Also the warrior is expected to be loyal to figure in leadership and understand his fate determined by following the other virtues. These traits are demonstrated in the battle scene between Beowulf and his men and Grendle in the mead hall. Prior to the fight, Beowulf promises the lady Wealhtheow that he "shall fulfil that purpose, prove [him]self with a proud deed or meet [his] death in the mead-hall." (l. 636-639). This shows that Beowulf holds fast to a standard of loyalty and bravery in facing Grendle. Beowulf's bravery and courage is again exemplified when Beowulf removes his armour to fight Grendle. Unferth, holding the opposite values to Beowulf, seems to disregard this code completely. The characteristics shown through Beowulf's actions reflect the general standards of the warrior in the poet's culture.

Seamus Heaneyʼs Introduction and Notes on the Translation Discussion

1. Consider Heaneyʼs comment, “...the poem possesses a mythic potency” (Introduction, xii). Based on your reading of his introduction what do you think Heaney means by this phrase? What is “mythic potency”? Do you agree with Heaney?

I think one heavy implication Heaney makes with describing Beowulf with potency due to its mythological nature is that mythology itself has an advantage over more realistic styles of literature. Mythology allows two human characteristics to flourish within the literature: creativity (or imagination) and belief. 
Creativity and imagination, both on part of the author and the audience allows for a much more eccentric form of a story arise without completely distorting the events that happened. The poet of Beowulf accounts for the intersection of the histories of the Geats and the Danes. In reality, their encounter probably was more like two parties of neanderthalic peoples meeting together in harmony, exchanging bear pelts for roast venison. However, this tale lacks a certain excitement for poetry and retelling. The mythology behind Beowulf contributes to its longevity through oral tradition.
The poet, understanding the culture in which he was writing well, is well acquainted with the norse mythology. By using and referencing this mythology in his work, he escapes excessive side-stories and superfluous background information. Beowulf and norse mythology work in synergy, both supporting and further exemplifying each other. The intended audience not only understands the story, but also believes it, looking to it as source of moral code. For the modern reader, it is not quite as easy to relate to it, forcing the reader to be even more aware of this factor.

SWB's History of the Medieval World: Chapter 16 Response Question

5. What was the "Robber Council"? What was the result of the Robber Council?

The Robber Council was a sudden church council that took place in Ephesus in 449 AD. Dioscorus, the bishop of Alexandria at the time, called this for one major reason: to climb the political and religious ladders of power in the Christian world. His main competor, Leo, bishop of Rome, differed on one theological idea, Dioscorus used this to try to turn other religious figures against him. Both Leo and Dioscorus believe in "Monophysitism", the idea that God and Christ were of one nature, being both divine and human. Dioscorus, however, believes in a more extreme version which also says that Christ was of two natures until the moment of incarnation, strongly implying that Christ was not as much human as he was God. This view is considered common heresy at this time. By calling this council, Dioscorus tries to convince as many religious leaders as he could to condemn Leo's version of Monophysitism, and promoting his own as orthodoxy. He went as far as to pressure these various religious figures to sign blank pages, filling in the theological agreements retrospectively. For these reasons, this "council" was termed the Robber Council, also called Latrocinium, due to its deceptive nature, and his council then, is considered illegitimate. This leads to a trail of liberal excommunications, starting with Dioscorus, enraged by his council being deemed illegitimate. He tries to excommunicate both the bishops of Constantinople and Rome, another final attempt to transfer power to his own seat in Alexandria. As these harsh internal struggles play out, these cities receivied many threats from the Huns externally. 

Augustine's City of God: Book I Chapter 19 Summary and Reflection

Augustine speaks about the justification of a rape victim's innocence prior to Chapter 19 and continues to that of suicide shortly following it. In Chapter 19, he uses Lucretia as an example of a suicide because of the shame she felt caused by rape, also serving as a bridge between these two heavy topics. 
Augustine had already established that in the case of rape, in definition, "involves no blame to the sufferer"(Bk.1, Ch. 16). However in the case of Lucretia's rape, it is commonly contested among literary scholars of antiquity whether it provided her some degree of pleasure to which she submitted to her perpetrator's actions or was a genuine act of resistance on her part, and thus considered rape through and through. This then leads to the question of the justification of her suicide. Was the shame that drove her to suicide derived from her submission, and even perhaps, enjoyment of her "rape", or from the humiliation of being raped? Had she submitted, being overwhelmed by sensual experiences and therefore found a degree of pleasure in it, her suicide would have been a self-inflicted capital punishment. This might seem like a good justification, however, Augustine argues that capital punishment in solely reserved for a position of governmental authority. If it were of only humiliation, her suicide would be considered murder of one's self, and biblically considered a sin. As far as the innocence of her rape, Augustine once again cites this to her deepest and genuine intentions and motives. Was she raped due to submission of the senses, or was it due to her body being physically unable to resist? Augustine finds no guilt in the act of being raped, assuming it was true rape and no physical nor mental submission was given, only God can determine this. But suicide on the other hand, is no morally correct answer to anything.
As this relates to the City of God, Augustine is making the direct connection between Lucretia's body and the city of Rome. He notes that it is not fault of Rome that it was invaded, nor was it a divine punishment. Rome was simply a victim of man's greed and lust for domination, as Lucretia was for King Tarquin's son's lust.

Augustine's Confessions: Book X Response Questions

6. What does Augustine tell us in book X that helps us understand the structure of the Confessions as a whole, including the non--narrative books?

Books I-IX serve as the narrative of his life describing the events leading to his conversion. In book X however, Augustine justifies the validity of this narrative through the power of narrative as he compels the audience to reexperience the events of his past with him in order to further understand the relationship between man and God. Memory, Augustine claims in book X, is the mode of recalling events and reexpereicing the feeling and senses that came with it. Doing this in Augustine's life allows him to analise the difference between his human-centered motives prior to his conversion compared with his God-filled attitude after it. The change Augustine observes, which he clearly points out to his audience, was extremely provocative in explaining the relationship between man and God, using his Memory to employ himself as a humble example. Reading Augustine May cause some Christians some spiritually nostalgic feelings in recalling their personal experiences after reading Augustine's.

Augustine's Confessions: Book IX Response Question

2. What can we infer about Augustine as a father from what he tells us about his son in this book?

Although Augustine is shamed by the circumstances under which Adeodatus was born, he still shows immense love toward his child and vast grief at his death. In Book IX, Augustine must not only cope with the death of his son, but also his mother. Augustine's relationship with his son was filled with respect and companionship. He describes his own spiritual maturity being at a similar level with that of his son's. They were both baptised together and had very similar timing in their spiritual growth. The parallel nature of their lives comes to a disruptive stop at Adeodatus's untimely death, and Augustine loses not only his son, but also a spiritual companion.