this, Hygelac rewards him with precious weapons and
a large grant of land.
The kingdom passes into Beowulf’s hand (ll. 2207–
08), and he rules 50 years. At this point someone dis-
turbs the treasure guarded by a dragon, who responds
enraged with an attack on the Geats (ll. 2210–20).
The section of the manuscript that describes the his-
tory, acquisition, and robbing of the dragon’s hoard is
severely damaged. Many speculate that the dragon,
like others in Germanic myth, was originally a man
who changed into a dragon because of greed. The tale
resumes as the dragon burns down Beowulf’s hall (ll.
2325–27). Beowulf has an iron shield made and pre-
pares to meet this threat. He ignores Hrothgar’s exam-
ple to put matters in God’s hands. Furthermore, the
poet says he “disdained” (oferhogode, l. 2345, the ver-
bal form of the oferhygd he was warned about earlier)
to go with a troop because he had done this sort of
thing alone before when he cleansed Heorot (ll. 2348–
54). Beowulf does take a troop of 12 men with him,
but they are to keep their distance.
This time the fi ght does not go well. The dragon
attacks with fi re, and Beowulf has to retreat. One of the
men standing by, Wiglaf, cannot bear this and rushes
to help him. Together they kill the dragon, but Beowulf
is mortally wounded. He laments that he has no son
(ll. 2729–32) and sends Wiglaf to examine the treasure
and show him some of it. When Wiglaf returns,
Beowulf thanks God for the treasure he is now able to
leave to his people (ll. 2794–98), gives instructions for
where his barrow is to be built, bids Wiglaf farewell,
and dies.
The retainers now cautiously approach and are given
a tongue-lashing by Wiglaf (ll. 2864–91). The news is
carried to the people, and the messenger adds to the
report his fears that the Geats will now be subject to
the depredations of both the Franks and the Swedes
(ll. 2910–3007). The treasure is loaded onto a wagon
and taken to the place where Beowulf’s barrow is to be.
Beowulf’s funeral pyre is lit, and it is watched by a
Geatish woman who is apprehensive about the future,
fearing the impending hostilities because for her it will
mean humiliation and captivity (ll. 3150–55). The
poem ends with the Geats mourning their lord and
praising him for being the mildest of individuals and
the most courteous, the most gracious to his people
and the most eager for fame (ll. 3178–82).
Exactly how to interpret the fi nal word, lofgeor-
nost—and with it the poem—is a matter of some con-
troversy. Is it to be understood positively, or does it
have the negative connotations that characterize its
usage elsewhere in Old English, where it has overtones
of boasting and vainglory? It can be argued that the
word is appropriate for the young Beowulf when he is
making a name for himself, but it is inappropriate
when he becomes a king. The poem asks Beowulf’s
behavior as king to be compared with that of Hrothgar,
a king whose behavior is exemplary, who trusts in God
and not in his own might. It is this very Christian por-
trayal of Hrothgar and the way it permeates the poem
that is perhaps the strongest argument for a late dating.
For this reason, the poem is not a heroic poem or an
EPIC in any conventional way, and this helps account
for what many have noted as the elegiac tone of the
verse, especially in the last third of the poem.
The scholarship on Beowulf is enormous and so het-
erogeneous that there is no possible way to character-
ize it in general. The most infl uential essay ever written
on the poem, and one that remains the starting point
for all modern criticism, is J. R. R. Tolkien’s 1937
“Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics.” Tolkien’s
essay insists upon seeing the poem as a complete and
coherent unit that needs to be evaluated as a whole in
its present form and not atomized in the search for
materials on extraneous matters such as Germanic pre-
Christian religion. The codicology, or study of the
original manuscript, of the Beowulf text has been
another area involving basic research. The most promi-
nent of those working in this area has been Kevin Kier-
nan, whose 1981 book Beowulf and the Beowulf
Manuscript (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University
Press) initiated the controversy on dating, which con-
tinues to reverberate into the present. Even more con-
troversial have been readings of the dragon as being
the metamorphosis of the evil Danish king, Heremod.
Other readings have examined the audience (or audi-
ences) of the poem, as well as the meter, rhyme, and
other poetic conventions.
More recently, studies have concentrated on the
poem’s women, carefully examining present and absentBEOWULF 79