Bailey 1 Comparative Analysis of Wulfstans and Alfreds Persuasive Rhetoric Wulfstans Sermo Lupi ad Anglos and Alfreds Preface

to the Pastoral Care are intended to motivate and inspire their audiences to action. Through an analysis of Wulfstans and Alfreds rhetoric, it will become clear that Wulfstan is more successful at achieving that goal. A thorough examination of their argument, imagery and emotional appeal will reveal that Sermo Lupi ad Anglos is clear, direct, organized, and passionate whereas the Preface to Pastoral Care is simple, underdeveloped and weak. Wulfstan is systematic in his treatment of his arguments structure and techniques while Alfred is tentative and inconsistent. Moreover, Alfred lacks the passionate emotional appeals and vivid imagery that are so bountiful in Wulfstans text. The structure of Wulfstans argument is methodical and coherent. Each claim Wulfstan makes is supported by evidence through the use of examples. For instance, Wulfstan argues that there are great disloyalties towards God and towards the state and many who betray their lords (Wulfstan 151) throughout England. To back up his assertion, Wulfstan applies a powerful example of Edwards death. By employing many strong and shocking examples to reinforce his statements, Wulfstans argument is more convincing and compelling for the audience. Alfred does not utilize examples to the same effect as Wulfstan or as much as him. The primary example Alfred discusses is about how the bible was copied into many different languages. Although the example is logical and a good transition into his main point, it does not have the emotional sway of Wulfstans examples. Furthermore, Wulfstans argument structurally is more organized and formal than Alfreds. The argument in Sermo Lupi ad Anglos follows a deductive reasoning pattern. Wulfstan makes generalized statements and then proceeds to explain the specifics. This technique imparts clarity and coherency to his argument that Alfreds text lacks.

Bailey 2 The superior effectiveness of Wulfstans argument is most evident through a side-by-side comparison of both authors main appeals to the audiences. And let us do what is necessary for us bow to justice, and in some measure abandon injustice, and repair carefully what we have broken; and let us love God and follow Gods lawsand cleanse our conscience thoroughly, and carefully keep our oaths and pledges, and have some faith between ourselves without deceit. (Wulfstan 152) In this statement, Wulfstan adopts a hortatory rhetoric, imploring his audience to change. Wulfstans tone becomes authoritative and resolute. He makes it apparent exactly what he wants from his listeners. In contrast, Alfreds declaration is ineffectual because it does not have these elements. Therefore it seems better to me, if it seems so to you, that we also turn certain books which are most necessary for all people to know into that language that we all can understand, and bring it aboutapply themselves to it, be set to learninguntil the time when they know well how to read English writing (Alfred 129) The opening line to his argument, it seems better to me, if it seems so to you (Alfred 129), is weakly worded in comparison to Wulfstans bold statement, let us do what is necessary (Wulfstan 152). Alfred is politely requesting the audiences participation in this task instead of demanding it like Wulfstan. The latter demonstrations more confidence and is more influential. Additionally, Alfred is more inexplicit in his appeal to the bishops whereas Wulfstans instructions are direct and concise.

Bailey 3 The conclusions of these works also reinforce the claim that Wulfstan is more persuasive in his argument. Wulfstan concludes on a strong note with the juxtaposition of hell and heaven: defend ourselves against the surging fires of the torments of hell, and earn for ourselves the glories and delights which God has prepared (Wulfstan 152). Conversely, Alfred wraps up his argument by instructing the bishops how to care for the books so as a persuasive piece of work, it falls flat at the end. These two authors implement rhetorical techniques to their arguments to emphasize their messages and to sway the audiences toward their agenda. Ultimately, Wulfstan employs more devices and with more consistency and effectiveness than Alfred does. He appeals to the audiences sense of fear and attempts to shock them out of complacency. Sermo Lupi ad Anglos opens with an attention-grabbing line: Dear people, recognize what is true: this world is in haste and it draws near its end (Wulfstan 150). In addition, Wulfstan often presents his opinions as facts: it is evident in this nation that Gods anger violently oppresses us (Wulfstan 151). Presenting his argument in this manner makes Wulfstan sound assertive in his beliefs. Similarly, Wulfstans sentences are mostly direct statements, as opposed to Alfreds constant use of the first-person in his sentences. First-person reminds the audience that Alfred is presenting them with his opinions rather than facts, making his assertions appear more tentative. As a rhetorical device, Alfred repeats the phrase: Then when I remembered (Alfred 128). However, the repetition is applied as a transitional element instead of a persuasive technique. Wulfstans repetition is used persuasively and with more frequency. Wulfstan reiterates strategic phrases such as Gods anger and what I say is true (Wulfstan 150) as a way to push his views into the audiences mind. Furthermore, the vocabulary in Sermo Lupi ad Angloss is a great deal more extensive than the Preface. Wulfstans strong vocabulary is more descriptive compared to

Bailey 4 Alfreds casual language. Wulfstans powerful words are an effective tactic to subtly influence his audience. Wulfstans evocative words are effectual for the emotional appeal of his rhetoric. His use of language successfully conveys his passion and anger. The following are some instances where the emotions behind his illustrative words are apparent: stains of sin, evil intentions and wicked deeds, and sorely betrayed and cruelly defrauded (Wulfstan 150, 152). The audience is able to detect the emotive energy in his words. In contrast, Alfreds emotional appeal is not as evident through his conversational-styled rhetoric, which diminishes the persuasive power of his writings. Wulfstan and Alfred use appeals to invoke particular emotional responses from their audiences such as fear or shock. An example is Wulfstans plea: But lo! In Gods name, let us do what is necessary for uslest we all perish together (Wulfstan 152). This type of warning emotionally captures the listeners interest in his argument. In this particular plea, Wulfstan puts himself in the same situation as the audience by using first person plural, creating a bond between him and the listeners. Moreover, he is consistently using shock and fear as methods to emotionally engage the audience. Alfred employs these techniques a few times as well, but not with Wulfstans intensity. Alfred makes an appeal to elicit a sense of worry in his audience: Consider what punishments befell us in this world when we neither loved it [wisdom] ourselves, nor left it to others (Alfred 128). Although his plea serves to advance his argument, it is missing the passion of Wulfstans appeals. The emotional appeals of these works are often tied in with the imagery because the effectiveness of imagery is dependent upon the audiences emotional response to them.

Bailey 5 Wulfstans and Alfreds imagery contrast significantly, and the imagery in Sermo Lupi ad Anglos is more compelling. The foundations of Wulfstans argument are based on the imagery he creates. He simultaneously uses the imagery to support his claims and to prompt an emotional response from the audience. Wulfstan paints a portrait of a brutal society that has been debased by sin. He describes in detail some of the horrific acts committed by the citizens of England, like slavery and prostitution. Wulfstan portrays a kingdom on the verge of collapse: there has been plunder and famine, burning and bloodshed plague and pestilence (Wulfstan 150). The imagery in Sermo Lupi ad Anglos is bold, shocking, and plentiful. Conversely, Alfred only utilizes imagery a few times in his Preface. He depicts the destructive aftermath of the Viking raids as burnt and ravaged (Alfred 128), but he does not elaborate on it further. His imagery is brief and simple, and lacks the vividness of Wulfstans imagery. Alfred uses the imagery of the elders footprints as a metaphor: we can still see their tracks, but we cannot follow after thembecause we would not bend down to their trackers with our minds (Alfred 128). In these lines, the imagery is subtle, and does not have the powerful emotion that pulls the audience into the scene. It is important to note the reasons behind Wulfstans more successful persuasive rhetoric. Wulfstan needs to be more persuasive than Alfred because he is merely a bishop and Alfred is a king. Wulfstan is unable to order his audience to comply with his wishes like Alfred can. Therefore, he only has persuasion to rely on to convince his listeners. In addition, there is a need to be more persuasive because of the intensive reform that he is proposing. Wulfstan asks his audience for immense spiritual and political change.

Bailey 6 Works Cited Alfred the Great. Preface to the Old English Version of Gregory the Greats Pastoral Care. Trans. R. M. Liuzza. The Broadview Anthology of British Literature. Vol. 1: The Medieval Period. 2nd ed. Ed. Joseph Black et al. Peterborough, ONT: Broadview P, 2009. 12730. Print. Wulfstan the Homilist. Sermo Lupi ad Anglos. Trans. Trans. R. M. Liuzza. The Broadview Anthology of British Literature. Vol. 1: The Medieval Period. 2nd ed. Ed. Joseph Black et al. Peterborough, ONT: Broadview P, 2009. 14953. Print.