Now the time had come to explore the poetic qualities of the poem without having to consider its “Sitz im Leben”, its cultural context or even worse, come to grips with the complicated evidence presented by the linguistic, philological, phonological, palaeographical or metrical experts, who had for a long time plodded ahead trying to understand this enigmatic and beautiful poem in its cultural and historical context.
Instead the time had arrived for New Critics to “own the field”.
Its importance lies in a thorough review of the evidence, copious references to earlier work, wide coverage of the types of evidence used to decide the issue, and ahigh level ofargumentation.
The Dating of Beowulf Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1981. .50 Consultations beginning in 1978 and culminating in a conference at Toronto 20- 3 April 1980 have produced an exceptionally important volume: The Dating of Beowulf.
Judgments on the proper dating range over three centuries, from the eighth to the tenth, but are usually tempered with much caution and uncertainty.
Chase was a busy supporting player, especially with Fox, and he had no trouble adjusting to talkies. A former cartoonist for a Chicago paper and veteran vaudevillian, he often listed 'expert horsemanship' among his accomplishments.
'It is rare to have so much information on a crucial issue in medieval literature concentrated in one place, and there is no doubt that these proceedings will become a standard reference work for several decades.'Theodore M.
It is rare to have so much information on acrucial issue in medieval literature concentrated in one place, and there is no doubt that these proceedings will become a standard reference work for several decades. Batchelor (no later than ca 700), Ritchie Girvan (second half of the seventh century), Sune Lindqvist (ca 700), c. Wrenn (700-50), Kenneth Sisam (later eighth century), Gosta Langenfelt (beginning of the ninth century), Robert L.
Reviews of such collaborative volumes are generally confined to a few sentences on each contribution, but this volume deserves more. Grundtvig (no earlier than the mid-sixth century), joseph Bachlechner (before 752), Levin Schiicking (last decade of the ninth century at the earliest), Alois Brandl (ca 700), Karl Miillenhoff (earlier than Caedmon), Bernhard ten Brink (fmal redaction in the eighth century), A.j. Reynolds and Norman Blake (late ninth or tenth UNIVERSIl Y OF TORONTO QUARTERLY, VOLUME 52, NUMBER 3, SPRINC 1983 0042M0147/83/osoo-0288-0301$ol. This chaos provides in itself ample justification for the Toronto conference, but Chase adds an interesting note suggesting that opinion has not been quite so random as it might appear: 80 per cent of the editions and translations since 1815 concur on a date in the period 650-Boo. Kiernan, 'The Eleventh-Century Origin of Beowulf and the Beowulf Manuscript' (pp 9-21), summarizes the results of his recent book Beowulf and the Beowulf Manuscript (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press 19B1) and argues that the palaeographical and codicological features of the Beowulf manuscript consistently suggest that Beowulf is contemporary with its extant manuscript' (p 9).