- Rubric by Jackie Velez
1. PERIOD:
2. LANGUAGE:
3. TEXT(S) AND DATES:
Beowulf - sometime between 700 AD & 1000 AD, but wasn’t written until 975-1025 AD.
4. COLONIAL INFLUENCE:
Beowulf is not often thought of as a postcolonial text, but the truth of the matter is that the story was written shortly after the Roman conquest and colonization of England, so it is, by definition, postcolonial.
There are a few mentions of Roman architecture styles within the text, most notably the mosaic art pieces, but the fact of the matter is that there is very little regarding the Roman colonization within the text. It can be argued that the lack of visible Roman influence there is within the story is in fact intentional: a response to Roman invasion. The Anglo-Saxon English who wrote Beowulf likely chose to keep it without as much influence as possible in order to preserve the culture as it was before invasion and colonization. In this way, Beowulf can be considered a postcolonial text for the simple fact that it reacts to colonization.
Even though there is very little in-text proof of colonization, the lack thereof for a work written after colonization is telling in and of itself, and we can only assume that that lack is intentional, a way of ignoring the Roman colonizers and celebrating their own culture before it was altered by outside invaders.
5. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
The Roman conquest of Britain was a slow process, beginning in 43 AD under orders of emperor Claudius, who sought to expand his empire. They began on the southeast side of the island and then expanded from there. The Romans were far better equipped and trained than the Anglo-Saxons that would stand against them, and obtained their victory relatively quickly. In addition, at the time, Britain was divided into several smaller Lords and Kings, rather than remaining together, making them easy targets for the Romans to defeat.
6. RESPONSE/RESISTANCE TO COLONIAL INFLUENCE:
If we accept the idea that Beowulf, written about a time far before Roman conquest of Britain, then it is possible that the story was in itself a bit of resistance. The writer was remembering fondly the culture before it was warped beyond recognition by the Romans, remembering the epic heroes that came before the Romans and the ideals of strength and power, as well as virtue, that were valued in that society. In a way, the ignoring of the Roman influence was in and itself resistance to colonial influence, an attempt to preserve what once was.
7. CRITICAL AND THEORETICAL DISCOURSE:
