Grendel’s Shapeshifting: From Shadow Monster to Human Warrior

Of all the horrifying scenes, which activate what Michael Lapidge has termed the psychology of terror in Beowulf,[1] none are more terrifying than the scene of Grendelโ€™s approach from the night, through the marsh and to the hall. Translations and adaptations of Beowulf approach Grendel in a variety of waysโ€”from emphasizing his monsterization as a eoten โ€œgiantโ€ (761) and รพyrs โ€œtrollโ€ (426) to more humanizing treatments that focus on his status as a wonsaeli wer โ€œunfortunate manโ€ (105).

Monster from the Nowell Codex’s ‘Wonders of the East’, British Library, Cotton Vittelius a.xv, f101v.

This Halloween, in continuing our series on Monsters & Magic, I offer a translation and recitation of the monsterโ€™s haunting journey to Heorot. This scene has been well-treated in the scholarship, and Katherine Oโ€™ Brien Oโ€™Keeffe has noted that once the monster finally enters the hall, there is a potential โ€œhorror of recognitionโ€ by the audience who is then able to identify Grendel as human.[2] 

This blog will focus closely on the Old English poetic language and how Grendel shape-shifts as he draws nearer to Heorot, seemingly coming ever better into focus and transforming to match the space in which he inhabits. I will consider three major sections of his approach, signaled by the thrice repeated verb com โ€œhe cameโ€ (703, 710, 720), and I will reflect on the ways in which Grendel is described in each leg of his journey.

Image of Grendel as a Shadow Monster from Gareth Hind’s graphic novel adaptation of Beowulf (1999)

In the first passage, Grendel com on wanre niht โ€œcame in the dark nightโ€ (702), and he is characterized as sceadugenga โ€œshadow-walkerโ€ (703): either a โ€œgoing shadowโ€ or โ€œone who goes in the shadowsโ€ (both at available options based on the poetic compound). His movement is described as scriรฐan โ€œslitheringโ€ or โ€œglidingโ€ (703), further emphasizing his portrayal as a shadow monster. Later, when Grendel is named a synscaรฐa: either a โ€œrelentlessโ€ or a โ€œsinful ravagerโ€ (707), depending on how one interprets the polysemous Old English syn in the compound,[3] the monster is described as pulling men under shadow, characterizing Grendel as a night terror shrouded in darkness.  Indeed, when Grendel comes from the dark night, he is represented by the narrator as a shadow monster that hunts and haunts after sundown.

Image of Grendel by J. R. Skelton from “Stories of Beowulf” (1908).

In the second passage, when Grendel รฐa com of more under misthleoรพum โ€œthen came from the marsh under misty-slopesโ€ (710), the monster emerges from the swamp and is addressed by his name: Grendel (711). I imagine the silhouette of the monster taking shape in the mistโ€”perhaps a human shapeโ€”corresponding to his characterization as manscaรฐa, which likewise plays on polysemous Old English man in the compound, (either mฤn meaning โ€œcriminalโ€ or man meaning โ€œhumanโ€).[4] The alliteration in line 712 seems to stress the possibility of monstrous manscaรฐa as โ€œravager of humansโ€ or a โ€œhuman-shaped ravagerโ€ since manscaรฐa alliterates with the monsterโ€™s intended prey, manna cynn โ€œthe kin of humansโ€ or โ€œmankindโ€ (712).

The mist rising from the marsh continues to obscure the audienceโ€™s view as Grendel wod under wolcnum โ€œwent under the cloudโ€ (714) maintaining the suspense generated in the scene by suspending knowledge of Grendelโ€™s ontology. Nevertheless, in this second leg of his journey, Grendelโ€™s form seems to come into focus as he shifts from sceadugenga โ€œa shadow-walkerโ€ (703) into manscaรฐa โ€œa mean, man-shaped, ravager of menโ€ (712).

Grendel portrayed as human in Sturla Gunnarsson’s ‘Beowulf & Grendel’ (2005)

In the third passage, Grendel finally arrived at the hall and the audience learns at long last what Grendel is: rinc dreamum bedรฆled โ€œmany bereft of joyโ€ (720-21). During the last leg of his journey, Grendelโ€™s humanity is laid bare leading to the ultimate realization identified by Oโ€™Brien Oโ€™Keeffe, when Beowulf appears to recognize Grendelโ€™s humanity after the monster bursts open the door of the hall.

Throughout the next twenty lines, in addition to Grendel (720), the term rinc โ€œhuman warriorโ€ is repeated: twice in reference to the Geatish troop as a whole (728, 730), once in reference to the sleeping man Grendel cannibalizes when he arrives, who the audience later learns is Hondscio (741), and once in reference to Beowulf himself (747). This repeated use of rinc โ€œhuman warriorโ€ highlights how Grendel is a mirror for the hero and the Geatish warriors, characterized in identical terms.

Grendel killing Hondscio in Sturla Gunnarsson’s ‘Beowulf & Grendel’ (2005)

Similarly, when Grendel approaches from the shadows, Beowulf is described as bolgenmod โ€œswollen-mindedโ€ and angrily awaiting battle (709); however, once the monster arrives at the hall, Grendel becomes gebolgen โ€œswollen (with rage)โ€ as he enters the hall ready to glut himself upon the men sleeping inside (723). This parallel description interweaves the respective emotions and behaviors of both hero and monster in Beowulf.

The interplay between hero and monster continues when Beowulf and Grendel struggle together, both called reรพe renweardas โ€œferocious hall-guardians (770) and heaรฐodeore โ€œbattle-brave onesโ€ (772) during their epic battle that nearly destroys the hall. The fusion of hero and monster together into a shared plural subject and object respectively helps to underscore their mutual affinity: the hall must contend against the fury of both warriors and each is a fearsomeโ€”yet overconfidentโ€”conqueror, who intends to overcome any enemy he encounters.

Grendel from the cover of John Gardner’s novel, ‘Grendel’ (1980).

We know that this is Grendelโ€™s final chance to haunt the hall, and the monster is at least able to feast on one last human, this time a Geat and one of Beowulfโ€™s own warriors (Hondscio). Sadly for Grendel, once Beowulf finally decides to enter the fray, and after a relatively brief struggle, the monster is fatally disarmed and retreats to die at home in the marshes.

Naturally, vengeance follows. Unfortunately for the Danes, and especially Hroรฐgarโ€™s best thane ร†schere, the audience soon learns that Grendel has a mommy, and anyone who messes with her baby boy, will have to answer to her.

Richard Fahey
PhD in English
University of Notre Dame

Further Reading:

Brodeur, Arthur G. The Art of Beowulf. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1959.

Fahey, Richard. โ€œMedieval Trolls: Monsters from Scandinavian Myth and Legend.โ€ Medieval Studies Research Blog. Medieval Institute: University of Notre Dame (March 20, 2020).

โ€”. “Enigmatic Design & Psychomachic Monstrosity in Beowulf.” University of Notre Dame: Dissertation, 2020.

โ€”. โ€œMearcstapan: Monsters Across the Border.โ€ Medieval Studies Research Blog. Medieval Institute: University of Notre Dame (July 20, 2018).

Gwara, Scott. Heroic Identity in the World of Beowulf. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2009.

Johansen, J. G. โ€œGrendel the Brave? Beowulf, Line 834.โ€ English Studies 63 (1982): 193-97.

Joy, Eileen, Mary K. Ramsey, and Bruce D. Gilchrist, editors. The Postmodern Beowulf: A Critical Casebook. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press, 2006.

Kim, Dorothy. “The Question of Race in Beowulf.” JSTOR Daily (September 25, 2019).

Kรถberl, Johann. The Indeterminacy of Beowulf. Lanham, MD: University of America Press, 2002.

Lapidge, Michael. โ€œBeowulf and the Psychology of Terror.โ€ In Heroic Poetry in the Anglo-Saxon Period: Studies in Honor of Jess B. Bessinger, edited by Helen Damico and John Leyerle, Studies in Medieval Culture 32, 373-402. Kalamazoo, MI: Medieval Institute Publications, Western Michigan University, 1993.

Oโ€™Brien Oโ€™Keeffe, Katherine. โ€œBeowulf, Lines 702b-836: Transformations and the Limits of the Human.โ€ Texas Studies in Literature and Language 23.4 (1981): 484-94.

Orchard, Andy. Pride and Prodigies: Studies in the Monsters of the Beowulf-Manuscript. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 1995.

Sharma, Manish. โ€œMetalepsis and Monstrosity: The Boundaries of Narrative in Beowulf.โ€ Studies in Philology 102 (2005): 247-79.

Ringler, Richard N. โ€œHim Sฤ“o Wฤ“n Gelฤ“ah: The Design for Irony in Grendelโ€™s Last Visit to Heorot.โ€ Speculum 41.1 (1966): 49-67.


[1] Michael Lapidge, โ€œBeowulf and the Psychology of Terror,โ€ 373-402.

[2] Katherine Oโ€™Brien Oโ€™Keeffe, โ€œTransformations and the Limits of the Human,โ€ 492.

[3] Andy Orchard raises the possibility of polysemy in synscaรฐa, see Pride and Prodigies, 38.

[4] Orchard also raises the possibility of polysemy in manscaรฐa, see Pride and Prodigies, 31.

The Lay of Sigemund

Having recently posted a blog on dragonomics in Beowulf and Tolkienโ€™s Hobbit, I decided to follow up by offering a complementary poetic translation of the Sigemund-episode in Beowulf.

I have chosen to isolate the Sigemund-episode (874-902) and translate this passage as a discrete poem, in part because the episode operates as a poem within a poem, delivered as one of three songs by the Danish court poet and recited in celebration of Beowulfโ€™s victory over Grendel. Numerous scholars have tried to identify its literary function in Beowulf, and the episode has traditionally been regarded as a heroic exemplum, honoring Beowulf and foreshadowing his fight with the dragon. I wish to challenge this reading of the passage.

“The Sigurรฐr Portal” from Hylestad Stave Church, Setesdal, Norway; now housed at the Oldsaksamlingen of the University of Oslo.

The Sigemund-episode in Beowulf is the earliest known account of the Vวซlsung legend, and this tale is alluded to in both the anonymous Poetic Edda and the Prose Edda of Snorri Sturluson as well as in Njรกls saga, รžiรฐreks saga and the Vวซlsunga saga. Christine Rauer notes in her study of the Beowulf-dragon and analogous medieval dragon-fights, โ€œThe more extensive accounts of the Vวซlsung dragon-fight, such as those found in Fรกfnismรกl (Poetic Edda) and Vวซlsunga saga, date from the thirteenth century, although the subject matter can be presumed to be of an earlier dateโ€ (42). However, in these later Old Norse-Icelandic versions of the legend, it is Sigurรฐr, Sigmundrโ€™s son, who is credited with slaying the hoard-guarding dragon, Fรกfnirโ€”not his father.

I would note that, in the section in Beowulf describing Sigemundโ€™s slaying of the dragon, there appears to be an alliterative formula that features also in the Old English Maxims II. This poemย characterizes the behavior, function and stereotypical nature of various thingsโ€”including references to cyning “a king” (1, 28), wulf “wolf” (18) and รพyrs “giant” (42), in addition to geological features such as ea “a river” (30), wudu “woods” (33) and brim “sea” (45), as well as material objects and structures such as daroรฐ “a spear” (21), beorh “barrow” (34) and duruย “doors” (36).ย Maxims II describes sweord “a sword” (25) before shifting focus onto the stereotypical image of a gold-proud and barrow-dwelling dragon. The line reads drihtlic isern. Draca sceal on hlรฆwe โ€œlordly iron. The dragon shall be in a barrowโ€ (26). This closely parallels a similar line in Beowulf, which reads dryhtlic iren. Draca morรฐre swealt โ€œlordly iron. The dragon died by murderโ€ (892). Although the ending of the line is altered, the commonalities are nevertheless striking, especially since in both cases the alliteration stretches across two discrete semantic units.

I have also tried in my translation and recitation to emphasize the poetics of this episode, especially the two rhyming b-verse half-lines, which emphasize the dragonโ€™s demise. The first, draca morรฐre swealt โ€œthe dragon died by murderโ€ (892), characterizes Sigemundโ€™s killing of the monster as a crime, in its description of the slaying as morรฐor โ€œmurderโ€ (892). The second, wyrm hat gemealt โ€œthe hot worm meltedโ€ (897), reiterates the dragonโ€™s death at the hand of the hero, and emphasizes also the element of heatโ€”otherwise absent from the characterization of the dragon in the Sigmeund-episodeโ€”though explicitly linked to the Beowulf-dragon, described as fyrdraca โ€œfire-dragonโ€ (2689) and ligdraca โ€œflame dragonโ€ (2334, 3040).

Vวซlsung Legend runestone discovered at Drรคvle (U 1163), relocated in 1878 to the courtyard of the manor house Gรถksbo, containing image of Sigurรฐr who thrusts his sword through the serpent.

The Sigemund-episode is also enveloped by references to his ellendรฆdum โ€œvalorous deedsโ€ (876, 900), a compound that appears at both the beginning and end of the passage. However, Mark Griffith has provided a detailed commentary of the episode, and he concludes that โ€œThe episode of Sigemund is more highly enigmatic, and its central figure much more problematic than received opinion has itโ€ (40). Griffith observes the numerous pejorative terms used to describe the hero, perhaps most famously his characterization as aglรฆca โ€œfearsome marauderโ€ (893), a term used to characterize each monster in the poem, Grendel (159, 425, 433, 591, 646, 732, 739, 816, 989, 1000, 1269), Grendelโ€™s mother (1259), and the dragon (2520, 2534, 2592, 2907, 3061), though notably also Beowulf at two key moments (1512, 2592). As Griffith points out, โ€œif the term does have pejorative meaning, then this applies to both Sigemund and Beowulfโ€ (35).

This calls into question the merits of his heroism, and makes the reader wonder about the nature of his ellendรฆdum, uncuรพes fela โ€œvalorous deeds, much knownโ€ (876). The mystery introduced in this line is resolved when the Danish poet reports that รพara รพeย gumena bearn gearwe ne wiston,/ fรฆhรฐe ond fyrena, buton Fitela mid hine โ€œfeuds and crimes, of which the sons of men did not readily know, except Fitela with himโ€ (878-79). Indeed we learn that his valorous deeds are characterized specifically as fรฆhรฐe โ€œfeudsโ€ (879), a term associated with the Grendelkinโ€™s feud with God (109), and especially Grendelโ€™s motherโ€™s vengeance (1333, 1340, 1380, 1537) as well as the dragons wrath (2403, 2513, 2525, 2689). We learn also that these deeds are explicitly fyrena โ€œcrimesโ€ (879)โ€”a term repeatedly associated with Grendel (101, 164, 639, 750, 811, 1001, 1669)โ€”who likewise performs fรฆhรฐe ond fyrene (137, 153).

Moreover, the reference to Fitela, Griffith argues, may call to mind information for the Vวซlsunga saga, which โ€œrecords how Signy changes shape with a sorceress, visits her brother and sleeps with him, whilst in this disguise, in order to beget a son to further the Vวซlsung feud with her husbandโ€ (25). In other words, Sigmundr (Sigemund) is both father and uncle to Sinflวซtli (Fitela), as a result of his incestuous relations with his twin sister. This seems further emphasized by the reference to the secrets shared eam his nefan โ€œuncle to nephewโ€ (881), which focuses the readerโ€™s attentions on Sigemundโ€™s incest and role as eam, an Old English term which indicates specifically โ€œmaternal uncle.โ€

Indeed, troubling descriptions of the hero persist, as Sigemund becomes characterized as wreccena wide mรฆrost โ€œthe most famous of exilesโ€(898), which calls to mind the exiled Grendel, described as mรฆre mearcstapa โ€œfamous border-crosserโ€ (103), depicting the hero once again in pejorative terms. I would argue that this bears especially on the final reference to Sigemundโ€™s ellendรฆdum โ€œvalorous deedsโ€ (900), and specifically the parenthetical half-line at the end of the episode, which indicates that he รพรฆs รฆr onรฐah โ€œhe prospered before by theseโ€ (900).

Vวซlsung legend runestone located at Gรถk (Sรถ 327), containing a runic text on two serpents that surround much of the Vวซlsung imagery, including a depiction of Sigurรฐr stabbing the serpent from below (photo from 1922).

If Sigemund prospers through fรฆhรฐe ond fyrena “feuds and crimes” (879), what does this say about the warrior ethics displayed in the poem? Indeed, I would suggest that the parenthetical half-line he รพรฆs รฆr onรฐahย “he prospered before by these” (900) highlights how in the heroic world of Beowulf, the only way to thrive is by imitating monsters and engaging readily in fรฆhรฐe ond fyrena. In Beowulf, feuds and crimes result in the protagonistโ€™s death and the subsequent genocide of the Geatish peopleโ€”which mirrors Sigemundโ€™s (and Fitelaโ€™s) annihilation of ealfela eotena cynnes โ€œan entire race of giantsโ€ (883)โ€”perhaps in part because Beowulf seems to adopt Sigemund as a role model and seeks to emulate the ellendรฆda of this aglรฆca.

Richard Fahey
PhD Candidate in English
University of Notre Dame

Further Reading:

Abram, Christopher. “Bee-wolf and the Hand of Victory: Identifying the Heroes of Beowulf and Vวซlsunga saga.The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 116.4 (2017): 387-414.

Bonjour, Adrien. The Digressions in Beowulf.ย Basil Blackwell. 1950.

Kaske, Robert.ย  “The Sigemund-Heremod and Hama-Hygelac Passages in Beowulf.” Publications of the Modern Language Association 74 (1959): 489-94.

Griffith, Mark. “Some difficulties in Beowulf, lines 874-902: Sigemund reconsidered.” Anglo-Saxon England 24 (1995): 11-41.

Rauer, Christine. Beowulf and the Dragon. D. S. Brewer. 2000.

The Lay of Ludwig

Jake Coen‘s translation of the Old High Germanย Ludwigslied marks an expansion of the Medieval Institute’s Medieval Poetry Project, formerly the Old English Poetry Project, which now welcomes contributions that translateย into modern English any verse composed in a medieval language.

Manuscript illumination of Frankish cavalry taken from the so-called โ€œStuttgart Psalterโ€ (fol. 3v), a Psalm codex produced c. 820 at the monastery of Saint-Germain-des-Prรฉs (Paris), now Wรผrttembergische Landesbibliothek Stuttgart, Cod.bibl.fol.23.


Translator’s Preface:

In August 881, the West Frankish King Louis III successfully routed an invading force of Vikings at Saucourt-en-Vimeu. Within a year, a poet tied to the court celebrated this seminal triumph in verse, creating one of the monuments of Old High German literature: the Ludwigslied.

Presented below is a new transcription, translation, and recitation of this early vernacular masterpiece from its sole surviving attestation in Cod. 150, fol. 141v-143r of the Bibliothรจque municipale de Valenciennes. Its inclusion in Notre Dameโ€™s ongoing digital collection of Old English translations marks the beginning of a new phase of this project which will now expand beyond the bounds of one language. If Old High German still retains many similarities to Old English, the Ludwigslied already demonstrates a series of changes within the former that led to the birth of a language unique and clearly distinct from its sister tongues. The text, therefore, serves as a fruitful tool for philological comparison and poetic analysis while capturing the readerโ€™s attention with its driving rhythm, its presentation of divine intervention (as well as punishment), and its heroic protagonist.

Transcription Note: In past editions of this text, the words รฐugidi and gunรฐfanon have been transcribed with d instead of รฐ. I believe, however, that the forms of these letters in the manuscript are different enoughโ€”their ascenders are curved and rather short while elsewhere the letter d is marked by a longer, straight, and almost spatulate ascenderโ€”to require a different transcription. Furthermore, given that the text is composed in a Rhenish-Franconian dialect (closer to โ€œMiddleโ€ German), it is entirely possible that the High German shift /รฐ/ > /d/ (and further /d/ > /t/ in some positions) was not yet complete or was at least not yet distinguished in writing.

Jake Coen
PhD Candidate in Medieval Studies
Medieval Institute
University of Notre Dame