Old English was verbally based, Beowulf, etc was mostly recited by bards, as with most, Old English was the sound, and voice of the illiterate.
To translate these sounds into writing is nigh on impossible, without hearing the dialects in which they were heard. Most of the surviving early manuscripts were written by educated Monks etc who understood Latin, which they mostly translated.
Today it will be impossible to understand the full understanding of these old English records unless you hear how they were originally spoken, many of the old records and Anglo Saxon words are understandable if they are spoken in the right enviroment, or regions, where dialects still retain and recognise many sounds and meanings which are seeminly unfamiliar to people outside of the area, same with the early translations, Shakespear uses a middle English Dialect I believe, but even he at that time would have difficulty understanding a lot of the Accents further North or away from his area.
An example of a similar problem is todays subtitles, They are not recording what is actually spoken, they reflect the writers understanding of what is being said and heard, and often much is missed, just as the early Anglo Saxon translations no doubt had been effected by the Latin educated Monks who mainly were the ones doing the translating, and interpretations.
The English Language is more Germanic, but English itself needs to be understood, to understand this
Another prime example is the wording on the famous 'Alfred jewel' Translated by academics as 'Alfred ordered me to be made' but where I live in the North East of England, we still use the very similar sounds it seems to state, which gives a very different meaning to, AElfred Mec Heht Gewyrcan .
In my dialect Heht and Gewyrcan, are similar to our todays use of Hed/Het, Worken/Wirken. ( 'Ge' of gewyrcan as used today in modern German, is silent in English now ) which translates in my dialect as ' Alfred had me working". We still use a long 'A' sound, as in the 'AE' of AElfred/Alfred and 'en' for ing etc, these are just two of thousands of dialect differences we have.
,
A very different translation from the recognised statement. Although it is very difficult for me to translate my sounds, they are identical/recognisable as the very same sounds as Heht , and Wyrcan, Heaht/Hed/Het (had )Worken/Wirken ( working ). If you heard me say that phrase you would imediately recognise they are the same.
This reads to me, "Alfred had me working", meaning the jewel/Aestle itself was made to work, ie point to read, or write, as in teaching etc. ie 'had me working' would mean exactly that.
The Jewel,s purpose supports exactly that, as used in reading,teaching, or writing, and at least in my own opinion was not meant to read ' Alfred had me made'. Although he orderd his bishops to receive them, this may be his personal one due to where it was found and his associated history there at the time. If this view was accepted it would represent, a more realistic voice from the past,from Alfred and I believe this is why it was made.
If he had ordered it to be 'made' In my opinion it would of used a word such as Macht/Macken, modern German Made/Makes, to reflect this, as Gewyrcan means to work , and use. its not a static term. In my dialect these would be Mak/Maken/Mad, not Make/Making/Made.
It then would possibly of read, AELFRED MEC HEHT MACHEN/MACHT, or the similar A/S regional word for Made/make.
Incidently the more I look at the image on the Aelfred Jewel. I believe he could be holding two complete Aestels, as they look like ties with bows, ( shoelace knots ), rather in my opinion mistakenly, in the form of Blossening branches. They could either way both, indicate meaning spreading, teaching learning, and may actually depict the image of Alfred himself, Anglo Saxon artwork nearly always had hidden meanings )
Even today for me an Englishman, I have to write English very differently, and it is very different to what and the way I speak, this is because of our UK education system.