The Dream of the Cross is a poem dealing with puzzles and paradoxes, but a sense of unity pervades the piece. It is iconic for its depiction of the actual crucifixion of Jesus, told by the crucifix himself through the poet's use of prosopopoeia: the assignment of a voice to an inanimate object. The language of the piece draws on both a Christian lexicon and arguably the “heroic code,” reflected in the relationship between Christ and the Cross as that of a servant and lord. Additionally, the passive language used to describe the former, and the active language used to describe the latter, reflects a dichotomy of femininity and masculinity, perhaps indicating sexual undertones within the piece. However, despite the use of paradoxical language and binaries, an attempt to unify the Cross and Christ with the external world pervades the passage, as the crucifixion and the natural world are shown to be linguistically and thematically connected. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Through the use of language indicative of the heroic code, the poet links the relationship between Christ and the Cross to that between a warrior and his servant. Jesus is called both “geong hæleð” (39) and “beorn” (42), common names used to describe lords and heroes, but this is juxtaposed with the Christian lexicon of “heofona Hlaford” (45). The events of the crucifixion are referred to as “miclan gewinne,” conflating the religious with the militaristic, which is further reflected in the violent language of the passage. Furthermore, the repetition of the negative “Ne dorste Ic” in lines 43, 45 and 47, for example “ne dorste Ic hwæðre bugan to eorðan”, reinforces the sense of duty between the Cross and Christ. This sense of loyalty can be conceived as a satisfactory representation of the relationship between lord and servant. The fusion of a culture derived from pagan tradition with a Christian vocabulary is paradoxical in itself, yet it is a conflict that pervades much of Old English literature. What distinguishes the Dream of the Cross is its perversion of the very ideals of the heroic code. While it may appear that the cross is a faithful servant of Christ, it is ultimately also the instrument used to bring about his death: a perversion of the fundamental principle of the heroic code, namely the protection of one's lord. Rather than focus on the suffering of Jesus himself, the cross laments its scars “me syndon þa dolg gesiene,” with the transition to the present emphasizing the lasting physical toll of the crucifixion. Basically, despite being the hero of the poem, the reader or listener is denied the perspective of Christ. Furthermore, the repetition of “ne dorste Ic”, particularly in the verse “ne dorste Ic hira nænigum sceððan” (47), also has the implicit suggestion that the cross had the power to protect or even save its Lord but did not dare to do so . It. By perverting the norms of the heroic code, the poet reinforces the idea that Christ's death was a necessity to cleanse humanity of its sins. Furthermore, the depiction of the suffering of the Cross, rather than diminishing that of Christ, can be seen as a projection of his own pain onto the object, suggesting a strong unity between the two despite the paradoxical nature of their relationship. This unity is consolidated in the verse “Bysmeredon hie unc butu ætgædere” (48) with the somewhat foreign plural pronoun “butu” placed next to the adverb “ætgædere” to emphasize the unity of both the cross and Christ. The emotional and physical are also fused in this unity, as the cross repeats a section of line 20, crying out "sare ic wæs mid sorghum gedrefed" (59): yet at this point in the poem the cross is.