Talk:Grendel's mother/Archive 1

message: Should the information contained in this page be better placed on a separate page that covers the historical problems translating the word?  Putting the information on the page for Grendel's mother, when it also relates to Grendel, Beowulf, and (if I'm not mistaken) the fire-dragon, simply doesn't make sense.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I don't agree - the entire discussion about the nature of Grendel's Mother in this article is dependent upon the ambiguity surrounding the word "aglæc". A separate page on "aglæc" which goes indepth into the scholarship of this term is fair - I don't see the need, however, to remove the discussion of "aglæc" from the "Grendel's Mother" page as the articles listed in the reference area all discuss "Grendel's Mother" in terms of this word.
----------------------------------------------------------
:I'm not an Anglo-Saxon philologist, but the discussion about "aglæc" on this page is interesting to me because it seems entirely to be attempting to derive the meaning of the word from its context in this one line out of Beowulf. Is there no other occurrance of this word in any known document?  If not, is it even possible to do anything other than to equate it to whatever one wants to think or feel about Grendel's Mother? -- Jfruh 23:37, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''On the term "aglæc"''' 

message: what about some content on what she does in the story. GraemeLeggett 09:21, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You raise some very good points. If you are really interested in these issues, you might consider exploring a version of the text in the original Old English language (there are guides listed which can help you through it). Translations vary on the points you raise above (there are numerous translations to look at as well) so exploring the Old English might help you think through some of these ideas. -Classicfilms 02:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  content 

message: Why is there such interpretations in the article when the only sources(2 sources) are recent and are composed of three individuals whose interpretations "show" the link between the mythical Cain and Beowulf? or even Jesus and Beowulf, those interpretation seem to be subjectives or deliberated.
The use of weasel word "some scholars", makes think about being a large number of literary interpreters and scholars, are or were on debate about the matter, when it's only three individuals doing their subjective studies being exposed as facts about the interpretation.
# ^ a b c Chance, Jane (1990). Helen Damico and Alexandra Hennessey Olsen. ed. The Structural Unity of Beowulf: The Problem of Grendel's Mother. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press. p. 248. 
# ^ Williams, David. Cain and Beowulf: A Study in Secular Allegory. Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1982
These interpretations should be removed, or if they shown to be true, add more reliable sources than three "recent" studies made by "some" scholars.--201.247.28.7 (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biblical references and sources and weasel words 

message: ¶  I have always been baffled by the way the Vikings in the Beowulf story are so quick and confident to identify the second monster as Grendel's mother.  Grendel himself/itself was scarcely humanoid, what identified Grendel as male?  What identified this second monster as the mother of the first, or even as a female? (In some movies this acquires some significance by giving this second monster the ability to temporarily appear as a seductive young woman.) These questions are never answered. Sussmanbern (talk) 22:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  her part in Beowulf 

message: I think perhaps the Angles were actually "āglæca," and that anglo-saxon was actually "āglæca-Sahsen," or warrior Saxons. Sea Captain Cormac 15:10, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have WP:RS?-Classicfilms (talk) 16:14, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Idea