Wulf and Eadwacer: a Note on Ungelic

The short Old English poem known as Wulf and Eadwacer is unusual in that it contains a refrain in lines 2-3 and 7-8. I quote from Klinck's edition (92):

Willað hy hine apecgan gif he on preat cymeð. Ungelic(e) is us

In both instances, the final half-line stands alone with no corresponding bverse, and the effect of this is to draw attention to the key term ungelic (line 3) or ungelice (line 8). I shall argue that the interpretation of this word is crucial to an understanding of the poem.

The primary meaning of ungelic(e) is not in doubt. It occurs elsewhere in Old English with the meaning "different, unlike"; being recorded forty-six times in the adjectival form ungelic, and fifty-one times in the adverbial form ungelice (Healey and Venezky). Kavros interprets the movement from adjective to adverb in Wulf and Eadwacer as a device aimed at heightening the sense of oppression, but I would agree with Klinck (170) that the final e is "probably a scribal variant without semantic significance." Lines 3 and 8 of Wulf and Eadwacer are therefore usually translated, "It is different with us." Interpretation of this phrase is problematic, and scholars disagree as to the antecedents of "us" and the way in which they are different. Klinck (170-71) provides a summary of the various readings that have been put forward, none of which has gained universal acceptance.

However, the prefix un- in Old English -- particularly in poetry -- does not always have a negative force. It may act as an intensifier, as in Beowulf, line 357, where Hrothgar is described as eald ond unhar ( Wrenn112). This can only be taken to mean "old and very grey." Unhar is a nonce occurrence, and so it is impossible to determine: whether or not it may have had an alternative meaning in other contexts. Better scope for analysis is offered by the adjective unforht. This is recorded thirty-one times in the extant corpus of Old English, with eighteen occurrences of unforhte (Healey and Venezky). As with ungelic(e), the prefix usually has a negative sense; and the primary meaning of unforht is "unafraid." Nevertheless, there is an isolated occurrence where the prefix must be understood as an intensifier. The Dream of the Rood, line 117, reads as follows ( Swanton95):

Ne Þearf ðr Þonne ænig unforht wesan "There no-one need he very afraid"

-3-

This seems to be a unique usage of unforht, apparently intended to contrast with the more usual sense of the word in line 110 (ibid.):

Ne mæg Þær ænig unforht wesan "There no-one may be unafraid"

The rhetorical effect of this "parallel antithesis" is discussed by Swanton (130).

These and other intensive uses of the un- prefix are difficult to trace from published editions or dictionaries, since they tend to disappear through emendation. Krapp and Dobbie (4:12; 2:64) substitute the prefix an- in both instances quoted above; and it is anhar, not unhar, which is recorded in A Microfiche Concordance to Old English (Healey and Venezky) and will presumably be included in the new Dictionary of Old English ( Amos and Healey). Although Swanton draws attention to other occurrences of un- as an intensifier, both in the Vercelli Book and elsewhere (131), these are commonly emended to an- or otherwise explained away. The most recent edition of the Vercelli Homilies, for instance, retains untrywan in the text of Homily I ( Scragg18); but the glossary refers the reader to antrywe "faithful," itself an unattested form. Similarly, the text of Homily XII includes the word untimbrum ( Scragg228); but this has no separate entry in the glossary and can only be found under the headform antimber. The verb unhirwan, "to speak very ill of," recorded in one manuscript of Wulfstan's homilies, is among the examples cited by Swanton (131) and also appears in Toller Dictionary (1128). Unfortunately though, it is omitted from the Microfiche Concordance, which uses an alternative version of the text.

As Kastovsky (381) demonstrates in his discussion of the un- prefix, the movement from a negative to an intensive sense is a logical one: "From this basic meaning [negativity] there stems a development to a pejorative meaning, i.e. 'bad(ly), excessive(ly).' This is found both with adjectives, e.g. unforht 'afraid,' unhar 'very grey,' and nouns, e.g. unæt 'gluttony,' undæd 'wicked deed,' unlæce 'bad physician,' unlagu 'bad law, injustice.'" A detailed study of unlaguby Styles confirms that the prefix cannot be ...