Bailey

Comparative Analysis of Wulfstan’s and Alfred’s Persuasive Rhetoric

Wulfstan’s Sermo Lupi ad Anglos and Alfred’s Preface to the Pastoral Care are intended

to motivate and inspire their audiences to action. Through an analysis of Wulfstan’s and Alfred’s

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 argument’s structure

and techniques while Alfred is tentative and inconsistent. Moreover, Alfred lacks the passionate

emotional appeals and vivid imagery that are so bountiful in Wulfstan’s text.

The structure of Wulfstan’s 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 Edward’s death. By employing many strong and shocking examples to

reinforce his statements, Wulfstan’s 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 Wulfstan’s examples. Furthermore, Wulfstan’s argument structurally

is more organized and formal than Alfred’s. 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 Alfred’s

text lacks.

1

Bailey 2

The superior effectiveness of Wulfstan’s argument is most evident through a side-by-side

comparison of both author’s 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 God’s laws…and 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.

Wulfstan’s tone becomes authoritative and resolute. He makes it apparent exactly what he wants

from his listeners. In contrast, Alfred’s 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 about…apply themselves to it, be set to learning…

until 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 Wulfstan’s bold statement, “let us do what is necessary”

(Wulfstan 152). Alfred is politely requesting the audience’s 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 Wulfstan’s

instructions are direct and concise.

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:

Bailey 3

“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

audience’s 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 God’s anger violently oppresses us” (Wulfstan 151).

Presenting his argument in this manner makes Wulfstan sound assertive in his beliefs. Similarly,

Wulfstan’s sentences are mostly direct statements, as opposed to Alfred’s 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. Wulfstan’s

repetition is used persuasively and with more frequency. Wulfstan reiterates strategic phrases

such as “God’s anger” and “what I say is true” (Wulfstan 150) as a way to push his views into

the audience’s mind. Furthermore, the vocabulary in Sermo Lupi ad Anglos’s is a great deal more

extensive than the “Preface”. Wulfstan’s strong vocabulary is more descriptive compared to

Alfred’s casual language. Wulfstan’s powerful words are an effective tactic to subtly influence

his audience.

Bailey 4

Wulfstan’s 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, Alfred’s 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 Wulfstan’s plea: “But lo! In God’s name, let us

do what is necessary for us…lest we all perish together” (Wulfstan 152). This type of warning

emotionally captures the listener’s 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 Wulfstan’s 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 Wulfstan’s appeals. The emotional appeals of these works are often tied

in with the imagery because the effectiveness of imagery is dependent upon the audience’s

emotional response to them.

Wulfstan’s and Alfred’s imagery contrast significantly, and the imagery in Sermo Lupi ad

Anglos is more compelling. The foundations of Wulfstan’s argument are based on the imagery he

creates. He simultaneously uses the imagery to support his claims and to prompt an emotional

Bailey 5

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 Wulfstan’s imagery. Alfred uses the imagery of the

elder’s footprints as a metaphor: “we can still see their tracks, but we cannot follow after them…

because 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 Wulfstan’s 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 Great’s 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. 127–30. 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. 149–53. Print.