How true does Seamus Heaney's translation of Beowulf remain to the text?
Beowulf was written around the start of the 7th century, by an unknown poet. Chronicling the life of its eponymous hero, Beowulf is one if the earliest known non-classical epic poems in existence. Classical epics, such as The Iliad and The Odyssey, and The Aeneid, were written primarily to be heard rather than read, Virgil himself reading the Aeneid to the Emperor Augustus. Beowulf follows in this mould.
Translations of Beowulf have tended to ignore this fundamental aspect of epic poetry, choosing instead to interpret Beowulf as a text to be studied rather than a work in the oral tradition. As Kevin Crossley-Holland says in the introduction to his 1968 translation: "scholars and critics regard Beowulf as a museum for the antiquarian, a sourcebook for the historian, a treatise for the student of Christian thought". Owing to this trend, translators have striven to convey the meaning as accurately as they are able, rather than the sound effects of the verse.
Seamus Heaney's translation of 1999 does not follow this drift toward the transformation of the poem into an academic exercise. He does not shy away from what he calls in his introduction a ` `shield-wall' of opaque references', nor from the `word-hoard' of the poem. For example, the Crossley-Holland translation on line 156 transcribes the word `wergild' lit. man-price leaving it there, supplying instead a footnote explaining that it is the monetary compensation paid by a murderer to the family of their victim. Heaney, however, offers `death-price'. This seems self-explanatory to the first-time reader, especially since the context also helps to explain the concept of wergild. It is an adventurous and novel use of language to create a compound noun where English has few such.
The most notable examples of Heaney's reversion to the oral tradition are his treatment of the two `episodes' in the poem. The `digressions' in the poem run from 883-914 and 1070-158. They are poems within the poem, sung by minstrels at banquets. In the latter section the metre shortens. These have been treated no differently from the rest of poem, with only inverted commas to denote song rather than narration. The Old English itself only acknowledges the minstrels with opening and closing semi-colons or colons. Heaney treats each part slightly differently, both from their former versions and from each other. Heaney's writing becomes more stylised, and the passages in question are italicised. There is in the first song a visible hiatus where each line's caesura falls, and in the second there is a line break there, rendering the physical appearance of the passage much more like a song than prose. The end result in each part is both to bring out the ballad-like nature of the sections and, by raising their profile in the poem to emphasise their thematic importance: the first prefigures Beowulf's last battle with the wyrm, and the second depicts the cyclical wars ravaging the region that are a part of the Danes' culture.
These two sections, especially the first, are analogous to the customary prophecies and warnings of classical epics, like Jupiter's prophecy in The Aeneid. So standard is the use of prophecy in the epic that Alexander Pope's 18th Century mock-epic The Rape of the Lock includes a lengthy caution to Belinda from Ariel on the perils in store from `Man'. Thus, Heaney's accentuation of the two `digressions' helps to highlight the epic nature of Beowulf.
Heaney's use of alliteration is both effective and faithful to the original. In Anglo-Saxon poetry the alliterations are notionally divided by a caesura in the line. For example, `þone deorestan deadne wisse' (1309) of the original alliterates across the caesura with `deorestan' and `deadne'. Heaney's supplied translation for this is: `his dearest companion, was dead and gone'. Heaney is especially fortunate here in that the same words alliterate in both languages. Elsewhere, he is less fortunate, but his skill as translator allows him to overcome the problem. For example, `fela feorhcynna forð onsended!' (2267) is full of lyrical alliteration, but there is not such a convenient transcription available to Heaney as there is in line 1309. His version is `have emptied the earth of entire peoples.' Not only does Heaney keep the caesura and the rhythm of the line, he manages to include a triple alliteration as in the original where no direct derivatives exist. Occasionally, however, it is impossible to be so faithful to the Old English and avoid contrivance. In such circumstances Heaney allows himself to deviate from the rule that the alliteration must fall on the first stressed syllable, without which flexibility Heaney would have used an `artificial ... or unusual word choice just for the sake of correctness', as he says in his introduction. In line 1068, `be Finnes eaferum, ða hie se fær begeat,' in Heaney's version is `the tale of the fierce attack in Friesland.' Although this caesura falls naturally, the alliteration is not authentically placed. To do so would require a forced choice of words, and Heaney here favours content over style. In line 681:' Nat he þara goda þæt he me ongean slea,' Heaney gives: `He (Grendel) has no idea of the arts of war'. He does not alliterate, saying in his introduction that he often prefers to let the `natural sound of sense' prevail over convention.
It is interesting to note that in writing about Beowulf, many critics veer towards the use, whether conscious or otherwise, of the compound noun, virtually obsolete in Modern English. In his Translator's Note, Crossley-Holland thanks his wife for `weathering the word-storm', and Heaney in his introduction says that he considers Beowulf to be `part of my voice-right', both of which sound peculiarly Anglo-Saxon in tone. Old English itself is descended from German, and thus shares some linguistic rules, one of which is the ability to construct compound nouns or adjectives to suit any purpose or metaphor. The Beowulf poet makes extended use of kennings, conjuring strange images with the combinations used. Other translators make relatively sparing use of this linguistic device, fearing perhaps that it might alienate readers with its over-rich feel. Crossley-Holland seems to use it only with occasional poetic license or when forced to. He translates `helrunan' (lit. `hell-witches') as the more sinister `hell-whisperers' where Heaney has the less Germanic but equally gothic `reavers from hell'. However, Heaney tends in his translation to stick with a compound from the original to preserve the oral effect, as when `wergild' becomes `death-price'. He is able to incorporate this into his alliteration, and the whole line reads: `nor stop his death-dealing, nor pay the death-price.' The 1968 option of leaving `wergild' and supplying an explanation disrupts the rhythm of the lines, and the word becomes a blot on the aural landscape of the poem.
Heaney uses compounds both to move closer and further away from the text. One of my favourite images is `But the Lord was weaving / a victory on his war-loom for the Weather-Geats' (696-7). This is only a figurative translation, but the analogy is powerful. The Geats' vessel almost invariably has a `ring-whorled' prow and at 32 it is `ice-clad'. He says in his introduction: `I try to match the poet's analogy-seeking habit at its most original', and to do so he must have at his disposal the same linguistic tools as the Beowulf poet. He uses the same plethora of terms for `ruler' as the original, from `ring-giver' to `gold-giver' to `his people's shield'. Heaney also recognises that it is not the precise translation of the compound that matters; it is the use of a compound there to preserve the rhythm. The presence of the kennings is one of the most enjoyable things about the poem: `death-qualms', `wound-slurry' and `sea-brutes' amongst them. The adherence to this archaic style of writing brings the poem more powerfully to life and the presence of alien syntax makes the reader aware in turn that an alien culture is being described. This glimpse of