Skip to main content

Hildeburh's Conflict // Jackson Riddle

Marriage, or as the priest in the movie The Princess Bride says, "Mawwiage", is a beautiful thing. The joining of two people in love (hopefully) so they can happily live the rest of their lives out together. Marriage in Beowulf is, well, interesting. I bring up marriage in reference to the bard's saga that he sings in lines 1070 to 1158 about the attack in Friesland, where Hnaef, king of the Danes, met his demise. In this tale of vengeance and despair, Hildeburh, a Danish princess, is married to the Frisian king Finn in a marriage meant to bring peace between the feuding countries. I found this tale particularly interesting because the bard explains that among the Danish and Frisian casualties were Hildeburh's Frisian son and her Danish brother Hnaef. Hildeburh had losses on both sides of the battle, both of them blood-kin, and yet she remained impartial to the battle because what else was she to do?

I bring this up because I'm unsure as to where I stand on the whole concept of marriages used as a tool of peace between countries. On the one hand, it makes sense; I give you my daughter, and you basically give me your son, it's a mutual exchange of something held dear to the rulers of each kingdom. But in such cases, are the prince and princesses' opinions on the matter simply ignored? What if the princess had a strong distaste for her newly-wed husband that was then reflected through the exchanges between countries? And in Hildeburh's situation, it must have pained her deeply to see her brother and son clash on the battlefield, a situation that I'm sure was not that uncommon in that era. After experiencing such loss, Hildeburh handled the situation with perfect execution in lines 1115 through 1118: "Then Hildeburh ordered her own son's body be burnt with Hnaef's, the flesh on his bones to sputter and blaze beside his uncle's." By ordering the two bodies be burnt alongside eachother, Hildeburh essentially gave the leaders of the Danish and the Frisian an example of how their alliance should be; side by side, not sword through side (ha that was clever).    

All that to say, such marriages that are solely officiated to bring forth union between nations cause problems like Hildeburh's that could surely be avoided were there a different method of showing peace.


PS: I commented on Kaitlyn Terry and Clabo's posts.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Aristotle Might Not Like Me...Or Jesus//Haylee Lynd

      Aristotle says that the man who does not get angry at the things he should be angry at "is thought unlikely to defend himself; and to endure being insulted and put up with insult to one's friends is slavish" (Aristotle 41). While he states that passivity is preferred to excessive anger, he still gives great criticism to it.  In contrast to Aristotle, the man who Christians believe to be the most just is Jesus who states in Matthew 5:39-40, "...do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Essentially, arguing that one is not to respond in anger when insulted or hurt, to not defend one's self. Most individual's are unable to achieve this. Our natural instinct is to defend ourselves, especially in physical cases. However, Christians strive to be like Jesus in this way. I would also argue that it is a very admirable wa...
2 comments
Read more

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.
3 comments
Read more

Overanalyzing Everyone's Intentions Here-Rachael Gregson

 First off, I'd like to say this is going to be a two part blog post, because a lot of things happened in this reading assignment that demands to be discussed.  As with any war I've realized, it's tricky not to fall into the initial perspective I am given. I began this book skeptical of Hector because I was bias toward the movie Troy, which was told mostly through the eyes of Achilles, but neither were what I was expecting. It's actually funny that they both hold values completely opposite from one another. Hector represented everything related to city-state pride, honor, and humility whereas Achilles was everything wild, reckless, and unpredictable solitary. This isn't to say that Hector is all good and Achilles all bad. Both had instances where I rooted for the other more or less. I just thought it was interesting how their two personalities represented something that basically causes all wars: the clash between civilization and savagery.  Secondly, I'm not de...
2 comments
Read more