{"id":4568,"date":"2018-10-31T14:15:49","date_gmt":"2018-10-31T18:15:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/?p=4568"},"modified":"2021-01-21T11:54:07","modified_gmt":"2021-01-21T16:54:07","slug":"feond-mancynnes-the-enemy-of-the-people","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/2018\/10\/31\/feond-mancynnes-the-enemy-of-the-people\/","title":{"rendered":"Feond Mancynnes: The Enemy of the People"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the Medieval Institute or the University of Notre Dame.<\/pre>\n
For Halloween this year, we continue our discussion of rhetorical representations of the monstrous in Beowulf<\/em> by framing the poem in our current political climate and historical context. In my previous blog, “Mearcstapan: Monsters Across the Border”<\/a> (July 20, 2018), I explored various interpretations of the Old English compound mearcstapan<\/em>, used to describe the Grendelkin in Beowulf<\/em>, and discussed the rhetorical implications of translating the compound as \u201cborder-crosser\u201d when teaching or reading the poem in the United States in 2018. Placing the term mearcstapan<\/em> in conversation with the current administration\u2019s immigration policies (and President Trump’s rhetoric on immigration) emphasizes the othering force of being categorized as immigrant, foreign, or alien. These labels encourage an emotional response due in part to the in-group and out-group dynamics encoded in the language of migration, and the ramifications for certain immigrant groups living in the United States are dire.<\/p>\n
Mexican emigrants crossing the Rio Grande near El Paso, Texas. Image by Danny Lehman\/Corbis.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
In Beowulf<\/em>, Grendel is repeatedly described as the enemy of the Danish people and is characterized as the arch-nemesis of the heroic protagonist. Beowulf describes the monster as\u00a0feorhgeni\u00f0la<\/a>\u00a0<\/em>“mortal enemy” (969) to the Danish king, Hro\u00f0gar, whose hall was the focus of Grendel’s wrath and terror for twelve years.\u00a0Hro\u00f0gar later refers to Grendel as ealdgewinna<\/em><\/a> “old enemy” (1776), a satanic epithet and translation of the Latin hostis antiquus<\/em> “old enemy.” Although the monster is\u00a0Hro\u00f0gar’s long-time foe, in this description, the Danish king ominously characterized Grendel as something demonic\u2014intuitively or unwittingly reinforcing the narrator’s designation of the Grendelkin as the monstrous progeny of Cain (102-114). This spiritual overlay frames the narrative, and Grendel’s dual characterization as the respective enemy of both the Danes and<\/em> God is twice corroborated by the narrator’s explicit references to the monster as\u00a0Godes\u00a0ondsaca<\/em> “adversary of God” (786, 1682).<\/p>\n
Today, I will consider the Old English satanic epithet feond mancynnes<\/em> \u201cenemy of the people,\u201d used by the narrator in Beowulf<\/em> to describe Grendel and modeled on hostis publicus<\/em> \u201cpublic enemy\u201d in Latin. The term<\/a> dates back to Roman antiquity, and the senate famously pronounced emperor Nero a hostis publicus<\/em>\u00a0in 68 CE. This epithet has since been leveled against political opponents throughout history and in many languages. The term emphasizes animosity and frames whomever is designated\u00a0hostis publicus\u00a0<\/em>as working against both the will of the people and the greater good. Embedded in this description are pathetical appeals to both fear-mongering and tribalism. Feond mancynnes<\/em> stresses the majority group (mancynn<\/em>\u00a0“mankind” or \u201cthe people\u201d) as in a position of moral superiority and opposed to a hostile minority group (feond<\/em> \u201cthe enemy\u201d). This adversarial aspect simultaneously encourages in-group and out-group mentality and emphasizes the danger inherent in hostility.<\/p>\n
“The Roll Call of the Last Victims of the Reign of Terror” by Charles Louis Lucien Muller (1860), housed at the University of Notre Dame’s Snite Museum.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
The epithet ennemi du peuple<\/em> \u201cenemy of the people” was employed by\u00a0Maximilien de\u00a0Robespierre<\/a> during the French Revolution, and referred to a legally punishable group of socio-political opponents charged with moral depravity and disseminating false news. The epithet vrag naroda<\/em><\/a> [\u0432\u0440\u0430\u0433 \u043d\u0430\u0440\u043e\u0434\u0430] \u201cenemy of the people\u201d also gained traction in the Soviet Union because it highlighted economic disparity and social class, emphasizing both the strength of a unified public and the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and proletariat. Once in power, Vladimir Lenin used this epithet to characterize the political leadership of the Constitutional Democratic Party as public enemies in the decree of 1917. Other similar epithets featured prominently in Soviet rhetoric aimed at demonizing socio-political opponents include vrag trudyashchikhsya<\/em> [\u0432\u0440\u0430\u0433 \u0442\u0440\u0443\u0434\u044f\u0449\u0438\u0445\u0441\u044f] \u201cenemy of the workers,\u201d vrag proletariata <\/em>[\u0432\u0440\u0430\u0433 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u043b\u0435\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0438\u0430\u0442\u0430] \u201cenemy of the proletariat,\u201d and klassovyi vrag<\/em> [\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0441\u043e\u0432\u044b\u0439 \u0432\u0440\u0430\u0433] \u201cclass enemy.\u201d<\/p>\n
‘Enemies of the 5-Year Plan’ by Viktor Deni 1931, Soviet propaganda targeting landlords, kulaks (wealthy farmers), journalists, capitalists, White Russians (anti-communists), Mensheviks (moderate socialists), priests, and alcoholics.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
As during the French Revolution, the term became legally formalized in Stalin’s Soviet Union, and similar articles codified versions of the term in other Soviet Republics. Mao Zedong also referred to dissenters as \u201cenemies of the people\u201d in his 1957 speech, On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People<\/em><\/a>. In each appropriation of this epithet, both moral and political animosity is linked to social otherness. The rhetoric of hostis publicus<\/em> may have been used to depose a tyrant in Roman antiquity, but modern dictators have consistently used the epithet to target their political rivals.\u00a0More recently, after the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom, the Daily Mail<\/em><\/a> labeled the presiding judges<\/a> \u201cenemies of the people” for ruling that consent from British Parliament was necessary for departure from the European Union.<\/p>\n
Image of Lord Chief Judge John Thomas featured in the Daily Mail’s article headlined “Enemies of the people” (November 3rd, 2016).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
The epithet is famously the title of Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen\u2019s En folkefiende,<\/em>\u00a0“An Enemy of the People<\/a>”\u00a0<\/em>(1882), and Shakespeare appeals repeatedly to this Roman designation in Coriolanus<\/em><\/a>, when Caius Marcius Corliolanus is charged as \u201cchief enemy to the people\u201d (I.I.5), \u201cenemy to the people and his country\u201d (III.III.119) and \u201c[The] people\u2019s enemy\u201d (III.III.138). However, Beowulf<\/em><\/a> and the Old English Juliana<\/em><\/a> also participate in the epithet’s rhetorical tradition and appropriate the Latin political designation by transforming it into a satanic epithet.\u00a0The Old English feond mancynnes<\/em> represents an Anglo-Saxon appropriation of the Roman designation, which frames the antagonism in spiritual rather than political terms. In this way, Christian morality is emphasized and opponents are represented as demonic.<\/p>\n
“Hell” by Hans Memling, Right Hand Panel from the Triptych of Earthly Vanity and Divine Salvation (ca. 1485).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
This shift reflects the semantic evolution of the Old English feond<\/em><\/a> “enemy” into the modern English “fiend<\/a>,” which the Oxford English Dictionary<\/a> defines primarily as “An evil spirit or demon.” In Juliana<\/em><\/a>, the demon who visits the saint is designated a public enemy, thrice referred to as feond moncynnes <\/em>(317, 523, 630).<\/em> The demon comes disguised as an angel to deceive the protagonist and tempt her into sin, but Juliana conquers the monster with her saintly virtue. Once she identifies her visitor as demonic, she commands him to disclose his plot: \u00feu scealt fur\u00feor gen, feond moncynnes,\/\u00a0si\u00fef\u00e6t secgan, hwa \u00feec sende to me<\/em> “you must still say further of your journey here, enemy of mankind,\u00a0<\/span>and of who sent you to me” (317). The demon boasts how he successfully overcame Nero,<\/span>\u00a0Ne\u00fede ic nearobregdum \u00fe\u00e6r ic Neron bisweac<\/em> “I dared venture with wicked tricks when I deceived Nero”(302), but laments that he cannot overpower Juliana:<\/span><\/p>\n
\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0N\u00e6s \u00e6nig \u00feara
\n<\/em>\u00fe\u00e6t mec \u00feus bealdlice\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 bennum bilegde,
\n<\/em>\u00feream for\u00ferycte,\u00a0\u00a0 \u00e6r \u00feu nu \u00fea
\n<\/em>\u00fea miclan meaht\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 mine oferswi\u00f0dest,
\n<\/em>f\u00e6ste forfenge,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00fee me f\u00e6der sealde,
\n<\/em>feond moncynnes, \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00fea he mec feran het,
\n<\/em>\u00feeoden of \u00feystrum,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00fe\u00e6t ic \u00fee sceolde
\n<\/em>synne swetan.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n
\u201cThere were not any [others] who have so boldly laden me with bonds or overcame me with rebuke, before now when you seized me firmly and overpowered my great strength, which my father gave me, the enemy of mankind, when he commanded me to journey forth, a prince from the darkness, so that I should sweeten your sins for you\u201d (520-525).<\/p>\n
\"This
St. Juliana defeating a demon, in “Jerusalem Psalter,” The Hague, KB, 76 F 5, f. 32, (ca. 1190-1200).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
Eventually, seeing that he is no match for Juliana, the demon flees from the saint:<\/p>\n
\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00fea seo eadge biseah<\/em>
\nongean gramum,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Iuliana,<\/em>
\ngehyrde heo hearm galan\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 helle deofol.<\/em>
\nFeond moncynnes\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 ongon \u00fea on fleam sceacan,<\/em>
\nwita neosan,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 ond \u00fe\u00e6t word acw\u00e6\u00f0:<\/em>
\n“Wa me forworhtum!\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Nu is wen micel<\/em>
\n\u00fe\u00e6t heo mec eft wille\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 earmne gehynan<\/em>
\nyflum yrm\u00feum,\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 swa heo mec \u00e6r dyde.<\/em><\/p>\n
\u201cThen blessed Juliana gazed at the angry one, she heard the devil from hell sing his torment. The enemy of mankind began then to retreat in flight, seeking punishments, and spoke these words: \u201cWoe to me, forwrought! There is now a great expectation that she will again humiliate wretched me with evil calamities, as she did to me before\u201d (627-34).<\/p>\n
In the first and third instances, the satanic epithet feond moncynnes<\/em> is used to describe not the demon\u2019s father (i.e. Satan), but rather the demon himself. These references to devils as \u201cenemies of the people\u201d elevate the Roman epithet hostis publicus<\/em> by presenting the term in a spiritual context, thereby shifting the focus from political opponents to moral adversaries.<\/p>\n
\"This
“Hellmouth,” image from Hours of Catherine of Cleves, Morgan Library & Museum, MS M.945, f. 107r (ca. 1440).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\u00c6lfric refers to the devil as mancynnes feond<\/em> in two of his Catholic homilies. In one homily, he makes a direct appositive association linking mancynnes feond<\/em> with awyrigeda deofol<\/em> \u201caccursed devil\u201d (II.31-32), and in the other \u00c6lfric positions awyrigeda engel<\/em> \u201caccursed angel\u201d (II.38) in apposition with the satanic epithet. Moreover, mancynnes feond <\/em>appears in two anonymous Old English homilies. In one of these homilies (contained in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Junius 121), the Latin political epithet hostis publicus<\/em> is combined with a Latin satanic epithet, hostis antiquus<\/em> \u201cthe old enemy,\u201d and expanded into the Old English epithet se ealda feond mancynnes<\/em> \u201cthe old enemy of mankind.\u201d Additionally, mancynnes feond <\/em> is used as a satanic epithet in Old English prose hagiographies, twice in a\u00a0vita<\/em> of St. Giles and once in two\u00a0vitae<\/em> of St. Guthlac.<\/p>\n
This demonic epithet also features in Beowulf<\/em><\/a> and is twice used to describe Grendel, marking him as demonic. The narrator characterizes Grendel as feond mancynnes<\/em> in his initial description of the monster’s carnage wreaked in Denmark:<\/p>\n
\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 se \u00e6gl\u00e6ca\u00a0\u00a0 ehtende w\u00e6s,<\/em>
\ndeorc dea\u00fescua,\u00a0\u00a0 dugu\u00fee ond geogo\u00fee,<\/em>
\nseomade ond syrede,\u00a0\u00a0 sinnihte heold<\/em>
\nmistige moras;\u00a0\u00a0 men ne cunnon<\/em>
\nhwyder helrunan\u00a0\u00a0 hwyrftum scri\u00fea\u00f0.<\/em>
\nSwa fela fyrena\u00a0\u00a0 feond mancynnes,<\/em>
\natol angengea,\u00a0\u00a0 oft gefremede,<\/em>
\nheardra hyn\u00f0a<\/em><\/p>\n
\u201cThe fearsome marauder was attacking the veterans and young warriors, the dark death-shadow lied in waiting and plotted. In the endless night, he ruled the misty marshes. Men did not know whither the hell-wonders glide in turns. So the enemy of mankind, the terrible lone-goer, often performed many crimes, hard humiliations\u201d (159-66).<\/p>\n
\"\"
Saturno devorando a su hijo, “Saturn eating his son,” by Francis Goya (1819-23).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
The narrator\u2019s second reference to Grendel as mancynnes feond<\/em> comes over a thousand lines later, during his description of Grendel\u2019s defeat:<\/p>\n
\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 he \u00feone feond ofercwom,<\/em>
\ngehn\u00e6gde helle gast.\u00a0\u00a0 \u00dea he hean gewat,<\/em>
\ndreame bed\u00e6led,\u00a0\u00a0 dea\u00fewic seon,<\/em>
\nmancynnes feond.<\/em><\/p>\n
\u201cHe (Beowulf) overcame the enemy, humbled the hellish ghost. Then he, the enemy of mankind, departed humiliated to see his death-place, bereft of joy\u201d (1273-76).<\/p>\n
In both these descriptions of Grendel, hel<\/em> \u201chell\u201d is directly referenced (163, 1274), which both reinforces the satanic undertones implied by feond manncynnes<\/em> and further signals Grendel\u2019s affiliation with the demonic. By characterizing the monster as \u201cenemy of mankind\u201d (164, 1276), the narrator emphasizes both the existential threat posed by Grendel to the Danish people as well as the spiritual doom which awaits them. The\u00a0Danes are explicitly condemned as\u00a0h\u00e6\u00f0en<\/em>“heathen” by the narrator (179), especially for offering worship to the devil, described as gastbona<\/em> \u201csoul-slayer\u201d (177). In this way, physical and spiritual devastation are fused\u2014uniting the political and moral implications of hostis<\/em> publicus<\/em> or feond mancynnes<\/em> represented as a terrifying monster in Beowulf<\/em>.<\/p>\n
Of course, in Trump\u2019s America,\u00a0 the phrase \u201cenemy of the people\u201d calls to mind the president\u2019s repeated use of the term to demonize the media<\/a>.<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n
President Donald Trump, photo by Carlo Allegri\/Reuters.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
President Trump regularly resorts to scare tactics\u2014portending doom\u2014such as when he threatened an economic depression<\/a> if he were to be impeached. However, the president has especially targeted the media as political and moral adversaries,<\/a> and their designation as public enemies has resulted in threats of physical violence<\/a>.<\/p>\n
On February 17, 2017, Trump\u2019s rhetorical appropriation of this epithet erupted on Twitter, when the president declared<\/a>: \u201cThe FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!\u201d<\/p>\n
Trump repeated his designation<\/a> of the press as \u201cthe enemy of the people\u201d on February 24, 2018: “A few days ago I called the fake news the enemy of the people and they are. They are the enemy of the people.\u201d On June 25, 2018, the president condemned journalists<\/a>\u00a0as “fake newsers” and “the enemy of the people”during a rally. After his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland (July 15, 2018), in his response to criticism by the press, Trump tweeted<\/a> on July 19,\u00a02018: “The Summit with Russia was a great success, except with the real enemy of the people, the Fake News Media.”<\/p>\n
Trump and Putin hold a joint news conference after their meeting in Helsinki (July 16th, 2018), photo by Grigory Dukor\/Reuters.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
Trump has drawn criticism<\/a> from international organizations such as the United Nations<\/a> and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights<\/a> for his targeting of journalists and the institution of the free press. Still, the president\u2019s attacks on the media have continued, despite that his administration is investigating the abduction and apparent murder<\/a> of Jamal Khashoggi, a journalist for The<\/em> Washington Post<\/em>. Turkish media reports that he was tortured, executed and dismembered shortly after entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2,\u00a02018. Despite political pressure, the president has not toned down his rhetoric, and Trump praised Montana Republican Rep. Greg Gianforte for assaulting a reporter<\/a>\u00a0on October 19, 2018. The president applauded Gianforte\u2019s violence and complimented the GOP Congressman saying, \u201cany guy who can do a body slam, he\u2019s my kind of\u2026 he’s my guy.”<\/p>\n
Trump supporting Greg Gianforte after “body-slamming” a reporter, photo by Carolyn Kaster\/AP Images.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
While rhetorical demonization of political opponents<\/a> as “enemies of the people” is by no means new, in the past it has proven effective in arousing fear and hatred, paving the way in many cases for atrocities. By painting the free press as a public enemy, Trump has appropriated this political designation (and satanic epithet), applying it to those who would criticize him and sanctioning violence against them<\/a>. The president uses the term as a rhetorical weapon\u2014a tool which both challenges the credibility of his dissenters and conjures the specter of conspiracy against him. Even this past week, after pipe-bombs were sent to some of his most prominent political targets<\/a> (including CNN and members of the previous administration), Trump persisted in his rhetoric against the media<\/a>. Despite the ongoing manhunt for a serial bomber (which apprehended the alleged perpetrator<\/a>, Cesar Soyac), the president tweeted<\/a> on October 25, 2018: “A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News. It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!”<\/p>\n
Trump followed this up a few days later with another tweet<\/a>, again designating the media as enemies of the people and blaming the free press<\/a>\u00a0for the recent surge in politically motivated violence, declaring on October 29, 2018: “There is great anger in our Country caused in part by inaccurate, and even fraudulent, reporting of the news. The Fake News Media, the true Enemy of the People, must stop the open & obvious hostility & report the news accurately & fairly. That will do much to put out the flame…”<\/p>\n
Until Trump\u2019s presidency, attacks against the free press were primarily associated with the Nazi regime, which appropriated the 19th <\/sup>century political term l\u00fcgenpresse<\/em><\/a> \u201clying press\u201d for their propaganda efforts against the free press in Germany. However, the alt-right movement in the United States has more recently appropriated this Nazi epithe<\/a>t to attack the media as pathological liars, and the president has adopted this rhetorical position. The New York Times<\/em> <\/a>has pointed out that the president\u2019s demonization of the media frequently follows moments of crisis and criticism<\/a>, comparable to the propagandizing use of l\u00fcgenpresse<\/em> by Nazis<\/a> and vrag naroda<\/em> by Soviets<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Nazi propaganda poster “We Workers Have Awakened” for the 1930 election in Germany, targeting political opponents including communists and the l\u00fcgenpresse (lying press).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
When Trump designates the free press as \u201cthe enemy of the people,\u201d he appeals to the political tradition of hostis publicus<\/em>, but invokes also a moral\u2014even spiritual\u2014component emphasized in the satanic epithet feond mancynnes <\/em>used for the demon in Juliana<\/em> and Grendel in Beowulf<\/em>. The president has weaponized<\/a> the rhetoric of monstrosity against his most vocal critics and whistleblowers, those who might hold him accountable for his actions through their reporting or political opposition. In placing Old English literature (such as Beowulf<\/em> and Juliana<\/em>) in conversation with global trends<\/a> in political rhetoric, we find that the epithet\u00a0feond mancynnes<\/em> resonates with Trump\u2019s ethical appeals and demonization of the media as \u201cthe enemy of the people.\u201d In this way, the rhetoric of monstrosity displayed in these medieval poems can speak to the current crisis of credibility<\/a> plaguing American politics. The narrator’s designation of Grendel as feond mancynnes<\/em> sanctions vengeance against him in Beowulf<\/em>, and similarly the president’s rhetoric both condones and encourages violence<\/a> against the free press and his political adversaries.<\/p>\n
Richard Fahey
\nPhD Candidate in English
\nUniversity of Notre Dame<\/p>\n
Further Reading<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n
Feldman, Thalia Phillies. \u201cA Comparative Study of\u00a0Feond<\/span><\/em>,\u00a0Deofl<\/span><\/em>,\u00a0Syn<\/span><\/em>, and\u00a0Hel<\/span><\/em>\u00a0in\u00a0Beowulf<\/span><\/em>.\u201d\u00a0Neuphilologische Mitteilungen<\/span><\/em>\u00a088 (1987): 159-74.<\/p>\n
\u2014. \u201cGrendel and Cain\u2019s Descendents.\u201d\u00a0Literary Onomastics Studies<\/span>\u00a0<\/em>8 (1981): 71-87.<\/p>\n
Orchard, Andy. Pride and Prodigies: Studies in the Monsters of the ‘Beowulf’-Manuscript.<\/em> Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1995.<\/p>\n
\u2014. A Critical Companion to A Critical Companion to ‘Beowulf’.<\/em> Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2003.<\/p>\n
Vinsonhaler, Chris. \u201cThe Hearmsca\u00dea and the Handshake: Desire and Disruption in the Grendel Episode.\u201d Comitatus<\/em> 47 (2016): 1-36.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the Medieval Institute or the University of Notre Dame. For Halloween this year, we continue our discussion of rhetorical representations of the monstrous in Beowulf by framing the poem in our current political climate … <\/p>\n
Continue reading “Feond Mancynnes: The Enemy of the People”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1886,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[264204,56012,483881,73957],"tags":[73961,73968,73920,264346,264347,324651,10580,76025,246728,156,76077,324654,12],"class_list":["post-4568","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-disciplines","category-english","category-monsters-wonders","category-north-seas","tag-anglo-saxon","tag-aelfric","tag-beowulf","tag-foreigner","tag-grendel","tag-juliana","tag-media","tag-medieval-literature","tag-monsters","tag-news","tag-old-english","tag-public-enemy","tag-social-media"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4568","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1886"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4568"}],"version-history":[{"count":100,"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4568\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7203,"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4568\/revisions\/7203"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4568"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4568"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.nd.edu\/manuscript-studies\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4568"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}