Cambridge Archaeological and Ethnological Series
THE HEROIC AGE
[Illustration: MAP OF CENTRAL EUROPE
illustrating the Heroic Age of the Teutonic Peoples
Where the same name occurs both in capitals and italics the former
denote a position occupied in the early part of the Heroic Age, while
the latter mark a change or extension of territories.]
THE HEROIC AGE
BY
H. MUNRO CHADWICK
Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge
Cambridge:
at the University Press
1912
Reprinted
1967
Published by the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press
Bentley House, 200 Euston Road, London, N.W. 1
American Branch: 32 East 57th Street, New York, N.Y. 10022
PUBLISHER'S NOTE
Cambridge University Press Library Editions are reissues of
out-of-print standard works from the Cambridge catalogue. The texts
are unrevised and, apart from minor corrections, reproduce the latest
published edition.
First published 1912
Reprinted 1967
First printed in Great Britain at the University Printing
House, Cambridge
Reprinted in the United States of America
Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 13-13081
PREFACE
The type of poetry commonly known as heroic is one which makes its
appearance in various nations and in various periods of history. No
one can fail to observe that certain similar features are to be found
in poems of this type which are widely separated from one another both
in date and place of origin. In view of this fact it has seemed worth
while to attempt a comparative study of two groups of such poems with
the object of determining the nature of the resemblances between them
and the causes to which they are due. Occasional illustrations have
been taken from other groups of poems belonging to the same type.
The first part of the book deals with the early heroic poetry and
traditions of the Teutonic peoples, more especially with those stories
which were the common property of various Teutonic peoples. It is
pointed out that these stories all relate to a period with definite
limits--a period for which a considerable amount of information is
available from external sources. The subjects discussed include
the distribution of the stories and the relationship between the
various versions of them, the antiquity of the earliest poems and the
conditions under which they were produced. Lastly, an attempt has been
made to estimate the significance of the various elements, historical,
mythical and fictitious, of which the stories are composed.
The second part deals with Greek heroic poetry and traditions. These
relate to a period for which little or no external evidence is
available; and consequently they present many problems, the bearings
of which can hardly be estimated without reference to the existence
of similar phenomena elsewhere. In general I have followed the same
plan as in the first part, and made use throughout of the results
obtained there. If some excuse is necessary for dealing with so well
worn a theme I may plead that, so far as my knowledge goes, it has not
hitherto been approached from this point of view.
In the third part attention has been called to the existence of a
number of somewhat striking characteristics common to the two groups
of poems and an attempt made to account for them. The conclusion to
which I have been brought is that the resemblances in the poems are
due primarily to resemblances in the ages to which they relate and to
which they ultimately owe their origin. The comparative study of heroic
poetry therefore involves the comparative study of 'Heroic Ages'; and
the problems which it presents are essentially problems of anthropology.
In this conclusion I am glad to find myself in agreement with Dr
Haddon, who suggested to me that a comparative study of this kind would
be a suitable subject for the Cambridge Archaeological and Ethnological
Series. I take this opportunity of thanking him for bringing the matter
before the Syndics of the University Press and for the interest which
he has kindly taken in the progress of the work.
Owing to the pressure of teaching and other duties a considerable time
has unfortunately elapsed since the earlier portions of the book were
printed. I would therefore respectfully call the reader's attention
to the list of Addenda at the end, where references will be found to
several important works which have appeared in the meantime.
In a work, such as this, which deals with records preserved in a number
of different languages, difficulties necessarily arise with regard to
the spelling of proper names. In the representation of Teutonic names
the system adopted in my previous books has in general been retained.
Any such system is of course open to objections, of the cogency of
which I am quite aware; and consequently I have not felt inclined to
carry out my scheme with rigid consistency. The same remarks apply to
the representation of Greek names--which will doubtless displease many
critics. South Slavonic names and words are given according to the
usual Croatian orthography.
I cannot attempt here to enumerate the various scholars to whose
writings I am indebted. It will be seen that they are many and that
much of what I have had to do is in the nature of criticism. One name
however, that of Professor Ridgeway, I cannot leave unmentioned, since
it is largely to his inspiring influence--by no means through his
writings alone--that my interest in these subjects is due.
It remains for me to record my obligations to a number of friends who
have generously responded to my requests for information or criticism
on various points. In particular I must mention Miss A. C. Paues, Mr
A. B. Cook, Dr W. H. R. Rivers, Mr S. A. Cook, Professor J. W. H.
Atkins, Professor A. Mawer, Mr E. H. Minns and Mr F. W. Green. Above
all I am indebted to Mr E. C. Quiggin and Mr F. G. M. Beck, who have
most kindly read through a considerable part of the book in proof
and several chapters even in manuscript. It is scarcely necessary to
add that in the sections dealing with Celtic history and poetry Mr
Quiggin's criticism has been of the greatest value to me. My thanks
are due, further, to my pupils, Mr C. A. Scutt, of Clare College, and
Mr Bruce Dickins, of Magdalene College, for similar kind services in
the proofs of the later chapters. From the staff of the University
Library--in particular I must mention Mr A. Rogers and Mr O. Johnson--I
have received the same unfailing and courteous attention as in the
past. Lastly, I have to thank the Syndics of the University Press for
undertaking the publication of the book and the staff for the efficient
and obliging way in which the printing and corrections have been
carried out.
H. M. C.
_December, 1911._
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE EARLY NARRATIVE POETRY OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES 1
II. THE HEROIC AGE OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES 19
III. SCENE AND NATIONALITY IN THE HEROIC STORIES 30
IV. THE ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE HEROIC POEMS 41
V. THE POETRY AND MINSTRELSY OF EARLY TIMES 77
VI. SUPERNATURAL ELEMENTS IN THE HEROIC STORIES 110
VII. MYTHICAL ELEMENTS IN THE HEROIC POEMS 131
VIII. THE USE OF FICTION IN THE HEROIC POEMS 151
IX. THE HEROIC AGE OF GREECE 168
X. THE HOMERIC POEMS 193
XI. EARLY GREEK POETRY AND MINSTRELSY 221
XII. SUPERNATURAL ELEMENTS IN THE HOMERIC POEMS 249
XIII. MYTH IN THE HOMERIC POEMS 263
XIV. FICTION IN THE HOMERIC POEMS 292
XV. THE COMMON CHARACTERISTICS OF TEUTONIC AND GREEK
HEROIC POETRY 320
XVI. SOCIETY IN THE HEROIC AGE 344
XVII. GOVERNMENT IN THE HEROIC AGE 366
XVIII. RELIGION IN THE HEROIC AGE 393
XIX. THE CAUSES AND ANTECEDENT CONDITIONS OF THE
HEROIC AGE 432
NOTES.
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE USE OF HEROIC NAMES IN ENGLAND 64
II. ON THE DATING OF CERTAIN SOUND-CHANGES IN ANGLO-SAXON 66
III. LITERARY INFLUENCE IN BEOWULF 73
IV. ON THE HEROIC POETRY OF THE SLAVONIC PEOPLES 101
V. THE HEROIC POETRY OF THE CELTIC PEOPLES 105
VI. THE TROJAN CATALOGUE 244
VII. THE BATTLE OF KOSSOVO IN SERVIAN POETRY 313
VIII. THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE CELTIC AND SLAVONIC HEROIC AGES 427
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 464
INDEX 469
MAPS.
CENTRAL EUROPE, ILLUSTRATING THE HEROIC AGE
OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES _To face Title-page_
GREECE, ILLUSTRATING THE CATALOGUE OF SHIPS }
} _between pp._ 288
GREECE, SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE DIALECTS } _and_ 289
IN HISTORICAL TIMES }
TO
JAMES RENDEL HARRIS
IN GRATITUDE AND FRIENDSHIP
CHAPTER I.
THE EARLY NARRATIVE POETRY OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES.
The remains of English poetry which have come down to us from times
anterior to the Norman conquest are mainly of a religious character and
deal with the lives of saints or with subjects derived from the Bible
or ecclesiastical tradition. The secular poems are comparatively few
in number and, with one exception, of inconsiderable length. Most of
them are narrative poems, and admit of a very obvious classification
according to the choice of subjects with which they are concerned. One
group deals with the exploits of English kings and noblemen of the
tenth century, the other with the exploits and adventures of persons
who did not belong to this country. We will take the second group of
poems first, as it is admitted by all authorities to be the earlier of
the two.
The longest poem of this class is Beowulf, an epic of 3183 verses, the
subject of which briefly is as follows: Hrothgar, king of the Danes,
has built a splendid hall, but is unable to enjoy the use of it on
account of the ravages of a monster named Grendel, who attacks the
hall by night and devours all whom he finds there. Beowulf, a nephew
of Hygelac, king of the Geatas, hearing of Hrothgar's distress comes
to his help and destroys first the monster himself and then his mother
who had come to exact vengeance. He is thanked and rewarded for his
exploits by Hrothgar, and returns to his own home. After this a long
period is supposed to elapse. Hygelac has perished in an expedition
against the Frisians, and his son Heardred has been slain by the
Swedes. Beowulf has succeeded to the throne and reigned many years. In
his old age he resolves to attack a dragon which is ravaging the land,
and in spite of the cowardice of his followers, of whom all except one
forsake him, he eventually succeeds in destroying it, though not before
he has himself received a mortal wound. The poem ends with an account
of his funeral.
The action is interrupted a good many times by references to incidents
in the history of the royal families of the Danes and the Geatas,
particularly to Hygelac's fatal expedition and to the dealings of his
family with the Swedish kings Ongentheow, Onela and Eadgils. We find
also a number of allusions to heroes of the past such as Sigemund,
Eormenric, Finn and Offa, who are known to us from other sources.
To the same class of poetry belong some fragments dealing with the
stories of Finn and Waldhere. The fragment relating to Finn is very
obscure and indeed would be quite unintelligible were it not for a
passage in Beowulf (vv. 1068-1159) where the same story is introduced
as the subject of a recitation by Hrothgar's minstrel. A certain Hnaef,
represented as a vassal of Healfdene, Hrothgar's father, was slain in
a fortress belonging to Finn, king of the Frisians. His followers made
so brave a defence that Finn was compelled to come to terms with them.
Subsequently, when an opportunity presented itself they took vengeance
upon Finn and slew him. The fragment gives an account of the fighting
which took place, probably in the encounter immediately after Hnaef's
death.
The story of Waldhere is well known from German sources which we
shall have to mention presently. One of the fragments is taken up by
an altercation between Waldhere and the Burgundian king Guthhere,
before they begin to fight, while the other contains an exhortation to
Waldhere by the lady to acquit himself bravely.
Widsith, though not an epic poem itself, refers to a large number of
the characters which figure in Beowulf, Finn and Waldhere. It is stated
that the poet was in the service of a certain Eadgils, prince of the
Myrgingas, and that in company with Ealhhild, apparently a princess of
the same family, he visited the court of the Gothic king Eormenric. The
greater part of the poem is taken up with lists of peoples which he
had visited and of famous princes whom he knew personally or by report.
The elegy of Deor consists of a number of brief notices of misfortunes
which had befallen various persons, Weland and Beaduhild, Geat,
Theodric and the subjects of Eormenric. Each notice ends with a refrain
expressing the belief or hope that the poet will be able to survive his
misfortunes as they did. At the end he says that he had been the bard
of the Heodeningas, but that his office had been taken away from him
and given to a skilful minstrel named Heorrenda.
In a later chapter we shall have to discuss the question when these
poems were composed. At present it will be enough to remark that though
the MSS. in which they are preserved date only from the tenth or
eleventh centuries almost all scholars agree that the poems themselves
cannot be later than the eighth century, while probably the majority
would refer their composition, in part at least to the seventh. In
their present form they cannot be earlier than this, for with the
exception of the Finn-fragment all of them contain Christian allusions.
The later group of secular narrative poems may best be described as
historical. The earliest of them celebrates the battle of Brunanburh
won by Aethelstan in 937 over the Scottish king Constantine II and
his Scandinavian allies. Others describe Edmund's conquest of the
Five Boroughs, the coronation of Edgar, the glories of his reign, the
troubles which followed, and lastly the death of Edward the Confessor.
The longest of all is a detailed account of the disastrous battle of
Maldon, in which Byrhtnoth, earl of Essex, lost his life. All these
pieces except the last are found inserted in texts of the Saxon
Chronicle and all without exception appear to have been composed soon
after the events which they commemorate.
In addition to the above there are a number of other short poems which
are not essentially of a religious character. The most important of
these are the Wanderer, the Wife's Complaint, the Husband's Message and
the Ruin--to which we may perhaps add the first half of the Seafarer.
They are probably all of fairly early date, but they differ from the
poems we have been discussing in the fact that they contain no proper
names. Those of them which can be called narrative deal apparently
with typical characters or situations. A certain amount of magical and
gnomic poetry has also survived, while metrical riddles are numerous,
but these need not concern us here.
It is scarcely open to doubt that a large amount of Anglo-Saxon
narrative poetry has perished. Several historical poems and ballads
of the tenth and eleventh centuries, now lost, can be traced in texts
of the Saxon Chronicle and in Latin works[1]. Attempts have been made
also to show that narrative poems were used by the compilers of the
early part of the Chronicle and by several Latin histories referring
to the same period, but the evidence adduced is very doubtful. Perhaps
the most likely case is the story of Hengest and Horsa, especially
in the form in which it appears in the Historia Brittonum. On the
other hand it is probable that parts of the Vitae Duorum Offarum, a
St Albans work dating from the beginning of the thirteenth century,
are derived ultimately from poems which described Offa's single combat
and marriage--incidents to which we find brief references in Widsith
and Beowulf respectively. A similar origin may perhaps be claimed for
Walter Map's story (_De Nugis Curialium_, II 17) of Gado (Wada). A few
corrupt verses of a poem on this subject, obviously of late date, have
been preserved in a Latin homily[2].
The earlier and later groups of narrative poems have in general[3] the
same metrical form and on the whole a very similar terminology. The
love of battle-scenes is also common to both. In other respects however
they differ greatly. Here we need only notice the entire difference
in subject-matter; the poems of the second group contain no allusion
to the subjects of the first. Much greater changes however, both in
form and matter, are noticeable when English poetry reappears in the
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The majority of these poems are
of French origin. But even when the scene is laid in England, the
subjects are usually drawn from written sources--which is certainly
not the case with the historical poems of the tenth century. To the
subjects of the earlier group of Anglo-Saxon poems there is scarcely a
reference.
The period of German literature which corresponds chronologically to
the Anglo-Saxon period in England is far inferior to the latter in
remains of secular narrative poetry. We possess only one fragment of a
poem somewhat similar to the Finn-fragment, preserved in a MS. dating
from about 800, and one poem of somewhat later date, celebrating a
victory of Ludwig III, king of the West Franks. To these we may add
three or four very short metrical charms, similar to the Anglo-Saxon
magical pieces mentioned above.
The subject of the first of these poems is as follows: Hildebrand
(_Hiltibrant_) is an old warrior who has left his country with Dietrich
(_Theotrih_) and served with the Huns. On his return from exile, thirty
years later, he is challenged by a young warrior named Hadubrand. In
the altercation with which the piece opens Hildebrand discovers that
his opponent is his own son, acquaints him with the fact and tries to
dissuade him from the combat with offers of rich presents. But the
young man refuses to believe him, and taunts him with cowardice and
guile in trying to put him off his guard. Hildebrand is therefore
obliged to fight, and the fragment comes to an end in the midst of the
encounter.
The Ludwigslied is a poem of fifty-nine verses celebrating the praises
of Ludwig III, with special reference to his victory over the Northmen
at Saucourt in 881, and seems to have been composed before the king's
death in the following year. It is not in the old Teutonic alliterative
metre which we find in Anglo-Saxon poetry and in the Hildebrandslied,
but in the later rhyming verse. The religious element is prominent
throughout.
There is no doubt that a considerable amount of secular narrative
poetry once existed in German. Einhard in his Life of Charlemagne
(cap. 29) states that the emperor collected native and very ancient
poems in which were related the deeds and battles of kings of former
times[4]. But during the following centuries poetry of this kind seems
to have gone entirely out of favour among the higher classes. We do
indeed find occasional references to such poems in later Latin works.
In particular the Annals of Quedlinburg have incorporated from them a
number of notices relating to Eormenric, Theodric (_Thideric de Berne_)
and other heroes of antiquity. But here it is expressly stated that it
was among the peasants (_rustici_) that these poems were known. Other
Latin chronicles cite lost poems relating to persons and events of the
tenth century, which may have been somewhat similar to the contemporary
Anglo-Saxon poems, though generally they appear to have been of a less
serious character.
Some compensation for the loss of early German poetry is afforded by
the preservation of a few Latin poems, of which the most important is
_Waltharius manu fortis_, composed probably about 930 by Ekkehard of
St Gall. The subject is the same as that of the Anglo-Saxon Waldhere
fragments. Waltharius and Hiltgund, the son and daughter respectively
of two princes in Gaul, were betrothed in their childhood, but had
to be given up as hostages to Attila, king of the Huns. After many
years they escaped and carried off with them much treasure. Hearing of
this, King Guntharius, who dwelt at Worms, determined to waylay them
and set out with twelve warriors, among them the brave Hagano who had
formerly shared Waltharius' exile. Waltharius is overtaken in a defile
of the Vosges and slays eleven of the warriors in single combat. In
his final encounter with Hagano and Guntharius all three are crippled,
but Waltharius is able to make his way home with Hiltgund. There are
other poems, one of which combines German with Latin in each verse,
celebrating the deeds of the contemporary Saxon emperors and their
relatives.
The second period of German literature, beginning in the twelfth
century, is incomparably superior to the first in the amount of
secular narrative poetry which it has left behind. Here we need only
concern ourselves with those poems which draw their subjects from
ancient native traditions. These are mostly anonymous and come from the
southern districts, especially Austria and Bavaria. Their metrical form
is modern and similar to that of other poetry of the same period. The
best known of these poems is the Nibelungenlied, which dates from the
beginning of the thirteenth century. Only a very brief résumé of its
contents can be given here.
Siegfried (_Sîvrit_), the son of Siegmund, comes from Xanten to Worms
and asks for the hand of Kriemhild, the sister of the Burgundian
king Gunther. He joins Gunther in his campaigns and by magical arts
enables him to win the amazon Brünhild (_Prünhilt_) for his bride.
The two wives quarrel, and Brünhild learns from Kriemhild of the part
played by Siegfried towards her. On hearing this she begins to long
for his death, and eventually he is murdered at a hunting party by
Hagen (_Hagene_), the chief of Gunther's knights. Hagen also deprives
Kriemhild of Siegfried's treasure (_der Nibelunge hort_) and sinks it
in the Rhine. Kriemhild is afterwards married to Etzel, king of the
Huns and, burning for vengeance, persuades him to invite Gunther on a
visit, together with his brothers Gernot and Giselher and also Hagen.
Soon after their arrival she brings about a quarrel, and after a huge
slaughter on both sides, Gunther and Hagen, who have lost all their
men, are captured by Dietrich von Bern, Etzel's vassal. Kriemhild puts
them to death, violating the oath which she had given to spare them,
and in anger at this treachery Hildebrand, Dietrich's old retainer,
slays her.
Closely connected in subject with the Nibelungenlied is the Klage,
which describes the funeral of those slain in the fighting with Gunther
and the lamentation over them. Here too we may notice the Seyfridslied,
though in the form in which it has come down to us it belongs to a
much later period. In reality it is clearly a combination of two
different ballads, both of which deal with Siegfried's early years. The
first relates how he was brought up by a smith and slew a dragon. The
second gives an account of another similar adventure--this time with a
fiery dragon which had carried off Kriemhild from her father's home.
Siegfried kills the dragon and at the same time takes possession of the
treasure of certain dwarfs, the sons of Nybling.
A number of other medieval poems deal with the adventures of Dietrich
von Bern and his knights. Alpharts Tod tells the story of the young
knight Alphart, Hildebrand's nephew, and his encounter with two of
Ermenrich's warriors named Witege and Heime, by the former of whom
he was treacherously slain. Dietrichs Flucht relates how Ermenrich
(_Ermrich_) was instigated by an evil counseller named Sibeche to plot
destruction for his nephew Dietrich. Though the plot fails, Hildebrand
and several of Dietrich's other knights are captured and imprisoned,
and in order to obtain their release Dietrich is forced to go into
exile. In the Rabenschlacht we are told how Dietrich with the help
of Etzel set out to recover his inheritance. While he is engaged in
battle with Ermenrich, his brother Diether and two young sons of Etzel
are slain by Witege. Dietrich rides after Witege to exact vengeance,
but Witege disappears in the sea. Virginal describes how Dietrich
was imprisoned by a giant in a castle called Muter and rescued by
Hildebrand, Witege, Heime and others. Further adventures with giants
and dwarfs are related in the Eckenlied, Sigenot and Laurin. In the
Rosengarten Dietrich is made to fight with Siegfried.
The story of Wolfdietrich and Ortnit has come down to us in several
different forms, but the outline may be given briefly as follows.
Wolfdietrich, the son of king Hugdietrich, is kept out of his
inheritance by his brothers or their guardian Saben on the ground of
illegitimacy. He betakes himself to a faithful old knight, Berchtung of
Meran, who raises an army to help him. But in the battle that ensues
Berchtung and his sons are all slain or captured, and Wolfdietrich has
to go into exile. He then marries the widow of a king named Ortnit and
destroys the dragon which had killed him. Eventually he succeeds in
winning his father's kingdom and releasing his faithful followers. Some
elements of this story appear to have been incorporated in the romance
of King Rother.
The story of the poem Kûdrûn falls naturally into two parts. In the
first Hetel (_Hetele_), king of Denmark, hears of Hilde, a princess of
Ireland and desires to marry her. As her father, the fierce Hagen, will
not consent, Hetel's warriors Wate, Fruote and Hôrand carry her off.
Hagen pursues them to Denmark, but in the fight which follows he is
nearly killed by Wate. Finally a reconciliation takes place and Hilde
is allowed to marry Hetel. In the second part Hartmuot and Herwig are
suitors for Kûdrûn, the daughter of Hetel and Hilde. The latter is at
length accepted, but Kûdrûn is carried off by Hartmuot and his father
Ludwig (_Ludewîc_). A pursuit follows and Hetel is killed by Ludwig.
Kûdrûn is kept at Hartmuot's home for seven years, harshly treated by
his mother Gerlind, because she will not consent to become his wife. At
last Herwig and her brother Ortwîn with the warriors Wate, Fruote and
Hôrand come and rescue her. Ludwig is killed but Hartmuot is spared at
Kûdrûn's intercession.
In conclusion mention must be made of some fragments of a poem dealing
with Walther and Hildegund. The subject seems to have been identical
with that of Ekkehard's Waltharius. Reminiscences of other ancient
stories are occasionally to be found in poems of a romantic character.
Among these we may note especially the poem Herzog Friedrich von
Schwaben, a portion of which seems to be derived from the story of
Weland.
The North German dialects have no poetry of this type, except a few
ballads dating from much later times, of which the most important is
one on Eormenric's death. But a great mass of legend, derived chiefly
from North German sources, is preserved in the Norse work Thiðreks
Saga af Bern, which dates from about the middle of the thirteenth
century. The characters are for the most part identical with those
which figure in the High German epics, Dietrich von Bern, Ermenrich,
Witege, Walther, Siegfried etc. Traces of poems of much earlier date
have been sought in several Latin chronicles. Besides the references in
the Annals of Quedlinburg, to which we have already alluded, mention
may be made of the Saxon stories given by Widukind and the Translatio
S. Alexandri, especially that of the victory over the Thuringian king
Irminfrith.
The vernacular poetry of the Langobardi has entirely perished, but a
number of stories given by the Latin historians are thought to be
based on early poems. The first and most striking of these is the
account of the battle with the Vandals, in which the two armies appeal
for victory to Wodan and Fria respectively[5]. A similar origin has
been claimed for several other narratives, such as that of Alboin's
visit to Turisind, king of the Gepidae, and more especially the story
of Authari and Theudelinda[6].
The Gothic historian Jordanes states (cap. 5) that his compatriots
were wont to celebrate the deeds of their famous men in poetry, and it
is probable that many of the legends which he gives were ultimately
derived from such poems. Among them we may include not only the story
of Filimer and the migration to the Black Sea (cap. 4)--in which
case ancient poems are expressly mentioned--but also perhaps that of
the first migration under Berig (_ib._) and some part of the account
of Ostrogotha (cap. 16 f.), as well as the incidental reference to
Vidigoia's death (cap. 34). In the story of Hermanaricus also several
incidents, notably the death of Sunilda and the vengeance subsequently
exacted by her brothers Sarus and Ammius (cap. 24), suggest a tradition
preserved in poetic form.
No Scandinavian country except Iceland[7] has preserved any early poems
in its native language. The ancient literature of Iceland however
is peculiarly rich in secular narrative poetry. Moreover though the
earliest of these poems are probably quite two centuries later than
Beowulf, they are entirely free from Christian influence. Indeed it
can hardly be doubted that a considerable proportion of them date from
heathen times.
It will be convenient to begin with the collection of poems usually
known as the Older Edda. These are all anonymous; but most of them are
generally believed to belong to the tenth century, while a few may
really have been composed in Norway at a still earlier date. Eleven of
these poems deal exclusively, or almost exclusively, with gods, giants
and other supernatural beings, and hence stand quite apart from the
class of poetry with which we are concerned. But since we shall have to
refer to them occasionally in the following pages it will be convenient
here to give a brief synopsis of their contents.
Völuspá is a mythological poem in the form of a speech delivered to the
god Othin by a sibyl whom he is consulting. It deals with the origin
of the world, the history of the gods and their coming fate. Hávamál
is a collection of proverbial wisdom and moral precepts of the heathen
age, with occasional references to myth and ritual. Vafþrúðnismál
describes how Othin visited the giant Vafþrúðnir and entered into
a contest with him in mythological lore. The subject of Grímnismál
is a visit paid by Othin in disguise to a king named Geirröðr, who
tortures him. Othin gives a long discourse on mythological matters
and finally reveals himself, whereupon the king stumbles over his
sword and dies. Skírnismál relates how Skírnir, the servant of the
god Frey, was sent to obtain for his master the hand of the giantess
Gerðr, of whom he had become passionately enamoured. Hárbarðslióð is
taken up with an altercation between the god Thor and a ferryman called
Hárbarðr (generally supposed to be Othin), who refuses to take him over
a strait. Hýmiskviða gives an account of Thor's adventures when he
went to visit the giant Hýmir. Lokasenna is occupied with a number of
scandalous charges brought by Loki against various gods and goddesses
who have been invited to a feast by Aegir. Thrymskviða relates how the
giant Thrymr, having obtained possession of Thor's hammer, demanded
the goddess Freyia as his bride, and how Thor came disguised as Freyia
and slew the giant. Alvíssmál is a dialogue between Thor and the dwarf
Alvíss, who is a suitor for his daughter. Thor detains the dwarf with
questions on the various names of natural objects and phenomena until
the fatal moment of daybreak. Vegtamskviða describes how Othin went to
consult a sibyl on the impending fate of Balder.
In addition to these pieces, all of which probably come from one
collection, there are two semi-mythical poems contained in other
works. Rígsmál or Rígsþula relates how a certain Rígr (identified in
the introduction with the god Heimdallr) became the progenitor of
the three classes of men--the characteristics of which are described
at length. Hyndlulióð is mainly a genealogical poem, narrating how
Freyia went to consult the giantess Hyndla as to the ancestry of her
devotee, Óttarr the son of Innsteinn. It contains also some purely
mythological matter which is generally supposed to have come from a
separate poem. Here also we may mention two pieces known as Grógaldr
and Fiölsvinnsmál, which clearly belong together. In the former
Svipdagr calls up the spirit of Gróa, his mother; in the latter he
comes to the enchanted abode of Menglöð and, after many questions with
the gatekeeper, is at length recognised as her destined lover. In much
later times we find Swedish and Danish versions of the same story, and
there can be little doubt that it is really a folk-tale.
The purely mythological poems of the Edda are followed by
Völundarkviða, which gives a fairly full account of the story of
Völundr (Weland). It describes how Völundr and his brothers obtained
as their wives three swan-maidens, who after eight years deserted
them. Then Völundr is captured by a king named Níðuðr, hamstrung and
compelled to work as his smith. Völundr executes vengeance on the
king's sons and daughter (Böðvildr) and then flies away.
The next poem, Helgakviða Hiörvarðssonar, gives in dialogue form a
somewhat complicated story of the adventures of a king named Hiörvarðr
and his son Helgi. A different Helgi, the son of Sigmundr, is the
subject of the two following poems, Helgakviður Hundingsbana. Both
poems relate how the hero overthrew a king named Hundingr and how he
was afterwards summoned by Sigrún, the daughter of Högni, to save her
from marriage to a prince named Höðbroddr, whom she detested. The first
poem ends with Helgi's victory over Högni and Höðbroddr; but the second
goes on to describe how Dagr, the son of Högni, subsequently slew Helgi
in revenge for his father. Sinfiötli, the son of Sigmundr, figures in
both poems, but Sigurðr is not mentioned.
The next poem, Grípisspá, probably a late work, gives a summary of the
adventures of Sigurðr, the son of Sigmundr, in the form of a dialogue
between the hero and his uncle Grípir, who is endowed with prophecy.
This is followed by three pieces which may really be parts of one
original poem. The first (commonly called Reginsmál) relates how three
of the gods, Othin, Hoenir and Loki, killed a certain Otr, the son of
Hreiðmarr. Having to pay compensation to the father, Loki robbed a
dwarf, named Andvari, of his gold. Andvari laid a curse on the gold,
and Hreiðmarr was soon killed by his own son Fáfnir, who subsequently
turned into a serpent.[8] Reginn, Fáfnir's brother, betook himself to
Sigurðr and became his attendant. The poem then goes on to describe
how a certain Hnikarr (Othin) guided Sigurðr on an expedition he
undertook against the sons of Hundingr. In the next piece (Fáfnismál)
Sigurðr at Reginn's instigation attacks and kills Fáfnir. Then, finding
that Reginn is plotting treachery, he slays him also and carries off
Fáfnir's gold. In the third (Sigrdrífumál) Sigurðr finds and wakens a
maid named Sigrdrífa, a valkyrie who has been punished by Othin with an
enchanted sleep. She imparts to him much magical lore; but the close of
the poem is lost owing to a lacuna in the MS.
Of the following nine poems six--Sigurðarkviða I (a fragment),
Guðrúnarkviða I, Sigurðarkviða II (_hin skamma_), Guðrúnarkviða II
(_hin forna_), Atlakviða and Atlamál--deal with practically the same
events as the Nibelungenlied. But unfortunately, owing to the lacuna in
the MS. several poems at the beginning of the series have been lost.
Hence in order to obtain a full account of the story it is necessary to
refer to the Völsunga Saga (see below), which used the lost poems as
well as the others.
The chief variations from the German version of the story are as
follows: (i) Sigmundr has been killed before the birth of Sigurðr
(Siegfried) by the sons of Hundingr. (ii) The wife of Sigurðr is called
Guðrún, Grímhildr being the name of her mother and Giúki that of her
father. (iii) Brynhildr is the sister of Atli (Etzel). In several
authorities[9] she is identified with the valkyrie of Sigrdrífumál,
and it is stated that she and Sigurðr had exchanged vows of love; but
Sigurðr's love was subsequently turned to Guðrún through a magic potion
given him by Grímhildr. (iv) Högni (Hagen) is the brother of Gunnarr
(Gunther); and in place of Gernôt and Gîselher there is another brother
named Guthormr. It is the last-named who actually kills Sigurðr, and
he is himself killed by the dying man. Brynhildr then puts herself to
death and is burned with Sigurðr. (v) The death of Gunnarr and Högni
is attributed to Atli. Guðrún on the other hand warns her brothers of
the treachery awaiting them, and subsequently avenges their deaths by
killing Atli and the children he had had by her.
Interspersed among these poems are three others connected with
the same story, but dealing with incidents unknown to the German
version. The Helreið Brynhildar describes how Brynhildr on her way
to Hell encounters a giantess, to whom she tells the story of her
life. Guðrúnarkviða III relates how Guðrún was accused to Atli of
adultery with Thióðrekr, but established her innocence by the ordeal.
In Oddrúnargrátr a sister of Atli named Oddrún comes to Borgný, the
daughter of a certain Heiðrekr, to relieve her in her travail, and
gives an account of the relations between herself, Brynhildr and
Gunnarr.
The last two poems--Guðrúnarhvöt and Hamðismál--are concerned with
the story of the attack upon Iörmunrekr (Hermanaricus), to Jordanes'
account of which we have already alluded (p. 10). Here the story is
connected with the preceding poems[10] by the fact that Svanhildr
(Sunilda) is represented as the daughter of Guðrún and Sigurðr, while
Hamðir and Sörli (Ammius and Sarus) are said to be the sons of Guðrún
and a certain Iónakr, whom she had married after Atli's death. In the
first poem Guðrún incites her sons to avenge their sister and then
bewails her many misfortunes. The second describes the actual fighting,
preceded however by the account of a quarrel in which Erpr, a stepson
of Guðrún, is killed by his half-brothers. To his death is attributed
the fact that Iörmunrekr, was able to survive the onslaught, though he
lost both hands and both feet.
The prose Edda (Skaldskaparmál, cap. 43) contains a poem, Grottasöngr,
which gives the story of two giant maidens who had to grind gold and
peace for the Danish king Fróði. At the end there is an allusion to
Halfdan and Hrólfr Kraki (see below). Besides this we have, both in
the prose Edda and elsewhere, a number of fragments of poems, some
of which refer to Sigurðr and his family and some to other stories.
Among the latter mention may be made especially of a poem Biarkamál,
which celebrated the achievements of the Danish king Hrólfr Kraki and
the heroism of his retinue in the battle wherein he lost his life. In
Hervarar Saga large portions of an early poem relating to the Goths and
Huns have been preserved.
In addition to the poems enumerated above, all of which are anonymous,
we have also a number of works by known poets. Most of these deal
either wholly or in part with contemporary persons and events. The
earliest date from the ninth century and are of Norwegian origin.
Probably the oldest of all are the fragments of Bragi Boddason, the
chief of which is a description of his shield (Ragnarsdrápa). From
the reign of Harold the Fair-haired several poems are known, though
nearly all of them are in a very fragmentary condition. Among them
may be mentioned especially the Ynglingatal of Thióðolfr of Hvín, a
genealogical poem which traces the descent of Rögnvaldr, a cousin
of Harold, from the ancient kings of the Swedes and the god Frey.
Another famous work by the same poet was the Haustlöng, which dealt
with mythological subjects. Next perhaps in importance to Thióðolfr
was Thórbiörn Hornklofi, from whom we have fragments of two poems
(Hrafnsmál and Glymdrápa), celebrating the exploits of Harold. Somewhat
later we hear of a poet named Goððormr Sindri, who is known chiefly
from the remains of a work (Hákonardrápa) in honour of Haakon I. A
famous fragment (Eireksmál) by an unknown poet, dating from shortly
after the middle of the tenth century, celebrates the death of King
Eiríkr Blóðöx and his reception by Othin in Valhalla. From this is
copied the Hákonarmál of Eyvindr Skaldaspillir, celebrating the death
of Haakon I at the battle of Fitje (A.D. 961). The same poet also
composed a genealogical poem (Háleygiatal) in imitation of Ynglingatal.
In it he traced the ancestry of Haakon, earl of Lade, who ruled Norway
from about 975 to 995, back through the kings of Hálogaland to Othin
and Skaði.
From this time onwards the cultivation of poetry seems to have been
almost entirely limited to Icelanders, many of whom resided largely
at the courts of various Scandinavian kings. Among them the most
noteworthy and almost the earliest was Egill Skallagrímsson, who
lived from about 900 to 982. He is known chiefly from the Höfuðlausn,
composed for Eiríkr Blóðöx in England, the Arinbiarnardrápa, in honour
of his friend Arinbiörn, and the Sonatorrek, an elegy over one of his
sons. Of his younger contemporaries perhaps the best known are Kormakr
Ögmundarson and Einarr Helgason. The latter is famous chiefly for his
poem Vellekla, in which he celebrated the exploits of Earl Haakon.
Many other distinguished poets flourished during the following half
century--down to the time of Harold III (Harðráði)--but it is not
necessary here to discuss their works.
By the time of Harold III the composition of prose narratives or sagas
(sögur) had already begun to be cultivated by Icelanders, though it
was not until towards the end of the following century that they were
first committed to writing. Many sagas are based on old narrative
poems; as for instance Ynglinga Saga, which is largely a paraphrase and
expansion of Ynglingatal. Völsunga Saga, which gives the stories of
Helgi, Sigurðr, Guðrún and Svanhildr, is derived mainly from the poems
of the Edda, though it has used other materials. The earlier part,
dealing with Sigmundr and his ancestors seems to have drawn upon some
lost poems. In Sörla Tháttr[11] we meet with a story--found also in the
prose Edda (Skaldsk. 50) and alluded to in Bragi's Ragnarsdrápa--which
is clearly connected with that of the first part of the German poem
Kûdrûn. Hildr, the daughter of Högni, is carried off in her father's
absence by his friend Heðinn. They are overtaken and a battle follows,
in which all the combatants are killed. Hildr by magic spells rouses
the slain each night to renew the battle. In Hrólfs Saga Kraka we have
an account of the Danish kings Helgi and Hróarr, the sons of Halfdan,
and of Helgi's son, Hrólfr Kraki, which seems to be derived ultimately
from old poems like Biarkamál. Certain incidents in the story, such
as Hrólfr's dealings with the Swedish king Aðils, are related also in
other sagas. The same characters figured prominently in Skiöldunga
Saga, of which we have little except an abridged Latin translation.
This saga also related at length the stories of Haraldr Hilditönn,
Sigurðr Hringr and Ragnarr Loðbrók, parts of which are known also from
other sources, especially Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar and the Tháttr af
Loðbrókar sonum.
Among Latin authorities the most important is the great Danish History
(_Gesta Danorum_) of Saxo Grammaticus, which dates from the end of
the twelfth century and contains metrical translations or paraphrases
of many old poems. Of these perhaps the most noteworthy are the
Biarkamál and some of the poems attributed to Starkaðr (Starcatherus),
particularly those addressed to Ingialdr (Ingellus). Here also we find
a detailed account of the tragic story of Hagbarðr and Signý, which is
very frequently alluded to in Old Norse poetry. Hagbarðr belonged to a
family which was involved in vendetta with the Danish king Sigarr. But
having fallen in love with Signý, the king's daughter, he visited her
disguised as a woman--an adventure which ended in his being discovered
and condemned to death. Signý and all her maidens destroyed themselves
when he was led to the gallows. Many other stories are given entirely
in prose, among them those of Heðinn and Högni, Iörmunrekr and Helgi
Hundingsbani, though no mention is made of Sigmundr or Sigurðr. The
adventures also of Haraldr Hilditönn and Ragnarr Loðbrók are related
at considerable length. Lastly, we may mention a story which is not
recorded by any Icelandic authority, namely that of the single combat
fought by Uffo the son of Wermundus. It deserves notice here on account
of its obvious identity with the English story of Offa.
In the course of this chapter we have reviewed briefly the secular
narrative poetry produced by the various Teutonic peoples down to the
end of the tenth century. In the case of works by historical Norwegian
and Icelandic poets, owing to the abundance of material, we have
restricted ourselves to mentioning only the leading names. Elsewhere we
have endeavoured to give a more or less complete summary. On the other
hand, among works dating from later than the tenth century, we have
taken into consideration only those which are concerned with stories
of ancient times. The stories themselves will be discussed in the
following chapters.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Cf. Brandl in Paul's _Grundriss d. germ. Philol._², II pp. 1083
ff., 1087 f.
[2] Academy, 1896, I 137; cf. Brandl, _op. cit._, p. 1085.
[3] This remark applies more especially to the poems on Brunanburh and
Maldon in the later group.
[4] Saxo Poeta, who wrote about 890, speaks of _uulgaria carmina_ which
celebrated _Pippinos Carolos Hludowicos et Theodricos et Carlomannos
Hlothariosque_ (Mon. Germ., Script. I 268). But it is usually held that
these words are due to a mistaken inference from Einhard, whose work he
was using.
[5] Origo Gentis Langobardorum (Mon. Germ., Script. Rerum Langobard.,
p. 2 f.); Paulus Diaconus, _Hist. Lang._ I 8.
[6] Cf. Kögel, _Geschichte d. deutschen Litteratur_, I p. 115 ff.
[7] The poems were not all composed in Iceland. Many of the earliest
doubtless came from Norway, others perhaps from the British Isles,
while others again are referred to Greenland.
[8] Called a dragon (_dreki_) in Völsunga Saga.
[9] Helreið Brynh. (str. 7 ff.) and the prose versions (Skaldsk.
41, Völs. S. 20). It is a much debated question whether the two are
identified also in Fáfnismál, str. 40 ff. In Grípisspá they seem
clearly to be separated.
[10] The death of Svanhildr is mentioned also in Sigurðarkviða II,
where it is attributed (as in the prose authorities) to the evil
counsel of a certain Bikki, an adviser of Iörmunrekr.
[11] Fornaldar Sögur Norðrlanda, I p. 391 ff.
CHAPTER II.
THE HEROIC AGE OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES.
It will not have escaped notice that a large proportion of the stories
described or alluded to in the preceding chapter are found in the
literature of more than one nation. The most casual reader could not
fail to observe the identity of the story of Sigurðr and Guðrún,
as given in the Edda and Völsunga Saga, with that of Siegfried and
Kriemhild related in the Nibelungenlied. Equally obvious is the
connection between the story of Iörmunrekr and Svanhildr in the same
Scandinavian authorities and that of Hermanaricus and Sunilda given by
Jordanes. A still closer resemblance is furnished by the Anglo-Saxon
poem Waldhere and the German-Latin Waltharius. The connection between
the German poem Kûdrûn and the Scandinavian story of Heðinn and
Högni is perhaps less striking, but not open to question. The brief
references to the story of Weland and Beaduhild in the Anglo-Saxon poem
Deor are quite sufficient to prove its substantial identity with that
told in Völundarkviða.
In other cases the same characters appear, though the incidents
related are different. Eormenric (Ermenrich) is a prominent figure in
Anglo-Saxon and German poetry, as well as in Scandinavian and Gothic
records. The Wudga and Hama of Widsith (Waldhere and Beowulf) and the
Theodric of Waldhere are clearly identical with the Witege, Heime and
Dietrich von Bern of the German epics, while Theodric figures also,
though not prominently, in the Edda. Of all the Edda poems[12] those
which show the least connection with non-Scandinavian poetry are the
three Helgakviður. Yet Sinfiötli, as well as Sigmundr, is mentioned in
Beowulf (under the form Fitela) and there are traces that his name was
once known in Germany.
We may observe that in Beowulf it is only the persons mentioned in
casual references and in episodes lying outside the main action of
the story, such as Sigemund, Eormenric, Hama and Weland, to whom we
find allusions in German poetry. On the other hand most of the chief
characters of the poem are well known from Scandinavian records,
though not in connection with precisely the same incidents. There is
no doubt as to the identity of the Danish kings Healfdene, his sons
Hrothgar and Halga, and Hrothwulf the nephew and colleague of Hrothgar,
with Halfdan, his sons Hróarr and Helgi and Helgi's son, the famous
Hrólfr Kraki--all likewise kings of the Danes. Equally obvious is the
identity of the Swedish prince Eadgils the son of Ohthere with Aðils
the son of Óttarr in Ynglingatal, while his uncle and opponent Onela
is clearly the same person as Aðils' opponent Áli, although the latter
is represented as a Norwegian in Old Norse literature. Further, the
episode in which Ingeld is incited by an old warrior to avenge his
father Froda is evidently to be connected with certain poems given by
Saxo, in which the old warrior Starcatherus rouses Ingellus to avenge
his father Frotho. Among other persons mentioned in the poem Scyld is
doubtless to be identified with the Skiöldr of Scandinavian tradition;
probably also Heremod with the Hermóðr of Hyndlulióð and Weoxtan with
the Vésteinn of the Kalfsvísa[13]. To the identification of Beowulf
himself with the Biarki of Scandinavian tradition, which is doubted by
some scholars, we shall have to return later.
The characters of the Finn fragment are much less easy to trace
elsewhere. Two of Hnaef's warriors named Ordlaf and Guthlaf are
probably to be identified with two Danish princes, Oddlevus and
Gunnlevus, mentioned in Skiöldunga Saga; but there is nothing to show
that Sigeferth is identical with Sigurðr the son of Sigmundr. In
Widsith however we find a large number of persons who are well known
from Continental and Scandinavian authorities. Besides Eormenric,
Wudga, Hama, Offa, Hrothgar, Hrothwulf and Ingeld, of whom we have
already spoken, we hear of Aetla, king of the Huns (Atli, Etzel),
Guthhere and Gifeca, kings of the Burgundians (i.e. the Gunnarr and
Giúki of the Edda), and Sigehere, king of the Danes (i.e. probably
Sigarr, the father of Signý), as well as the Goths Eastgota the father
of Unwine (i.e. Jordanes' Ostrogotha the father of Hunwil), Becca
(probably Bikki, the evil counsellor of Iörmunrekr) and the Herelingas,
Emerca and Fridla, who are doubtless to be identified with the
Embrica and Fritla, nephews of Eormenric, mentioned in the Annals of
Quedlinburg and elsewhere. It is more than probable also that in v. 21:
"Hagena ruled the Holmryge and Heoden (MS. _Henden_) the Glommas," we
have an allusion to the story of Heðinn and Högni (the Hetel and Hagen
of Kûdrûn). We may compare a passage of Deor (v. 35 ff.) which tells of
a skilful minstrel of the Heodeningas named Heorrenda, presumably the
Hôrand of the German poem.
These instances, though far from exhaustive, will be sufficient to show
that the same characters recur again and again in the early narrative
poetry of the various Teutonic peoples. In the last nineteen poems of
the Older Edda (viz. those which deal with human beings) there is but
one (Helgakviða Hiörvarðssonar) which introduces no characters known
elsewhere. Among the early Anglo-Saxon poems treated on p. 1 ff. we
find no such case, and the same is probably true of the German poems
discussed on pp. 5, 7 ff. With the later Anglo-Saxon poems (p. 3) and
the German historical poems of the ninth and following centuries the
case is quite otherwise. The exploits of Aethelstan and Byrhtnoth are
celebrated only in English poems, those of Ludwig III and other German
princes only in the poetry of their own country. So also with the
skaldic poems of the North. If these introduce any personal names known
in the poetry of England or Germany they are names, like Sigmundr and
Hermóðr, derived from earlier poems and not belonging to contemporary
persons. Similarly neither English nor German poetry celebrates the
deeds of Eiríkr Blóðöx or Haakon the Good.
The phenomena noted above seem to indicate that the poetic cycles with
which we have been dealing have a common origin or at least that there
was a considerable amount of borrowing between poets of different
nations. In order however to be able to form an opinion on this point
it is necessary first to consider the following questions: (i) how
far the characters and incidents of these poems are to be regarded as
historical, (ii) to what period or periods of history they belong.
We may note in passing that no doubt need be entertained as to the
historical basis of the later group of Anglo-Saxon poems, of German
poems such as the Ludwigslied or of the Northern skaldic poems--however
much the true facts may be obscured by poetic embellishments.
It is clear enough that some of the characters of the common cycles
are historical persons. Thus there can be no doubt that Aetla (Atli,
Etzel), king of the Huns, is the famous Hunnish king Attila who died in
453. Again the Burgundian king Guthhere (Gunnarr, Gunther), who plays
so prominent a part in the stories of Waldhere and Sigurðr-Siegfried,
is clearly identical with the historical Burgundian king Gundicarius
(Gundaharius), whose defeat in 435 by the Roman general Aetius is
recorded by contemporary writers. Of his end Prosper says only that the
Huns destroyed him together with his family and nation[14], and some
scholars have denied that Attila had any part in this event[15]. But
our knowledge of the course of events on or beyond the Roman frontier
at this period is too slight to justify any confident statement on such
a point. Of the other members of the Burgundian royal family Gifeca
(Giúki) and Gislhere (Giselher) are mentioned in the laws of King
Gundobad who died in the year 516[16].
The Gothic king Eormenric (Hermanaricus, Iörmunrekr) is another
doubtless historical character. The account of him given by Jordanes
seems indeed to be derived from tradition, handed down probably in
poetic form; but the statement that he took his own life through fear
of the Huns is confirmed by the strictly contemporary writer Ammianus
Marcellinus (xxxi. 3. 1), from whom we gather that the event took place
shortly after 370. He also states that Eormenric was a most warlike
king and feared by the surrounding nations on account of his many brave
deeds.
In Dietrich von Bern (the Theodric of Waldhere and the Thióðrekr of the
Edda) we certainly have reminiscences of the Ostrogothic king Theodoric
who ruled Italy from 489 to 526. The statement in the Hildebrandslied
that he fled from the hostility of Ottachar and the story of the
Rabenschlacht recall his campaigns with Odoacer, which culminated in
the surrender of Ravenna in 493. But it cannot possibly be true that
he was present at Attila's court, where we find him in the Edda and in
German poetry, much less that he had any dealings with Eormenric. The
former mistake is generally attributed to confusion between Dietrich
and his father Dietmar (Thiudemer), who is known to have been with
Attila. The other error however is more difficult to account for and
will require to be discussed later.
It is commonly held that in the poems dealing with Wolfdietrich[17] the
hero and his father Hugdietrich represent a confusion of the Frankish
kings Theodberht (r. 534-548) and his father Theodric I (r. 511-534).
In this case however it must be confessed that the resemblances are
extremely slight. The application of the name Hugo Theodoricus to
Theodric I in the Annals of Quedlinburg cannot at best prove more than
that the chronicler identified the two.
The identification of characters which figure in stories relating to
the northern kingdoms is naturally more difficult, since references to
such persons by contemporary Roman historians are extremely rare. One
safe instance however is furnished by the incident, referred to several
times in Beowulf, of Hygelac's disastrous expedition against the Franks
and Frisians. Gregory of Tours (III 3) and the Gesta Francorum (cap.
19) mention a very serious raid on the lower Rhine by a king of the
Danes named Chocilaicus, which ended in his defeat and death through
the arrival of an army under Theodberht. The Liber Monstrorum (I, cap.
3[18]), a work of perhaps the seventh century, states that the bones of
a certain _Getarum rex Huiglaucus_, who had been slain by the Franks,
were preserved on an island at the mouth of the Rhine. There can be no
question that the person referred to in these passages is the Hygelac
of Beowulf. The date of the expedition, though not precisely fixed by
any authority, may safely be placed within a few years of 520.
Most of the Danish and Swedish princes common to Beowulf and the
Northern authorities are now generally regarded as historical
characters, though we have no reference to them in contemporary
documents. It is to be noted in the first place that though the persons
themselves are common to the two traditions, English and Northern, they
are not as a rule mentioned in connection with the same incidents.
Further, there is no evidence for communication between England and
the Baltic during the seventh and eighth centuries. This renders it
probable that the two records go back independently to a time at which
persons who remembered Hygelac's younger contemporaries might still be
alive.
Lastly a few words must be said with regard to the stories of Haraldr
Hilditönn, Sigurðr Hringr and Ragnarr Loðbrók. The sons of Loðbrók
are well known from contemporary historical documents through their
piratical expeditions, more especially the great invasion of England in
866. Moreover, though the references to Loðbrók himself are rare and
doubtful, it is clear enough that the king Ella who is said to have
put him to death was the Northumbrian usurper Aella, who reigned from
863 to 867. Loðbrók's father Sigurðr Hringr has been identified with a
certain Sigifridus whose conflict with another Danish king named Anulo
is recorded in a number of Latin chronicles under the year 812, and
Anulo himself with that Óli who is represented as Sigurðr's ally at the
battle of Brávík. Lastly, it has been suggested that a reference to
Haraldr Hilditönn may quite possibly be preserved in the description of
Anulo as _nepos Herioldi quondam regis_[19]; for according to Saxo (p.
250) Óli was the son of Haraldr's sister and eventually succeeded him
on the Danish throne.
The above identifications[20] are sufficient to show that historical
characters are introduced into most of the stories with which we have
been dealing. Further--and this is a very remarkable fact--apart from
the last cycles embracing Haraldr Hilditönn and Ragnarr Loðbrók, which
are entirely confined to Northern literature, all the historical
personages whom we have been able to identify belong to a period
extending over barely two centuries. Eormenric flourished in the latter
half of the fourth century, Attila and the Burgundian kings in the
first half of the fifth; Theodric towards the end of the same century
and in the first quarter of the sixth. Hygelac again was a contemporary
of Theodric; while Wolfdietrich, if he is rightly identified with
Theodberht, died in 548. In the stories which form the common themes of
English, German and Scandinavian poets we find no mention of historical
persons who lived after the middle of the sixth century.
Now it will be clear that the cycles of stories dealing with Ragnarr
Loðbrók and his ancestors are really, like the skaldic poems, to
be compared with German and English works such as the Ludwigslied
and the poem on the battle of Brunanburh. The difference in tone is
sufficiently accounted for by the social conditions of the Viking Age,
which were wholly different from those which prevailed in the Christian
kingdoms.
The statement that the common cycles of tradition mention no historical
characters later than about 550 ought perhaps to be qualified in one
case. Paulus Diaconus (_Hist. Lang._ I 27) says that the praises of
Alboin, king of the Langobardi, who died in 572 (or 573), were sung
by the Saxons, Bavarians and other peoples; and it has been suggested
that his account of certain incidents in Alboin's career is derived
from poetic sources. Further, we find the generosity of the same king
celebrated in the Anglo-Saxon poem Widsith, where he is apparently the
latest person mentioned. Hence there is some ground for including him
among the characters of common Teutonic poetry--which will involve our
extending the lower of the chronological limits fixed above by about
twenty years. Yet it is not clear that Alboin figured in any poems
which can properly be called narrative, except perhaps among his own
people.
On the other hand some of the Gothic heroes recorded by Jordanes,
if we are to trust his chronology at all, must be referred to times
long anterior to the middle of the fourth century. Apart from Gothic
tradition the only mention of any of these persons occurs in a brief
passage in Widsith (v. 113 f.): "(I have visited) Eastgota, the wise
and good father of Unwine." Now Ostrogotha is brought by Jordanes into
connection with the Emperor Philip (v. 244-249). He is mentioned also
by Cassiodorus (_Var._ XI 1) as one of the ancestors of Amalasuintha
and as a prince renowned for forbearance (_patientia_). In spite of his
suspicious name what is said of him by Jordanes seems to point to a
genuine tradition. But if so, even setting aside both the reference to
Philip and the genealogy given by Jordanes in cap. 5, he is probably to
be referred to a time anterior to the upper limit fixed above. Into the
story of Filimer and the migration we need not enter, as there is no
reason for supposing it to be anything but a purely Gothic tradition.
The story of the Langobardic victory over the Vandals (cf. p. 10) is
probably of a similar character.
There remain of course a number of stories which contain no names
of persons mentioned in contemporary records. The story of Finn is
in Beowulf connected, rather loosely, with Healfdene, Hrothgar's
father. Hence if the incidents which it relates are to be regarded as
historical, they must be dated somewhat earlier, though certainly not
more than a century earlier, than Hygelac's expedition. The story of
Offa and his father Wermund must be referred to a still earlier period
if we are to trust the evidence of the Mercian genealogy in which these
persons figure. I have tried elsewhere[21] to show that the Athislus,
who in Saxo's version of the story appears as Wermund's enemy, is
probably to be identified with the Eadgils prince of the Myrgingas
mentioned in Widsith. The latter is represented as the contemporary of
Eormenric, and the date thus obtained agrees with that given by the
genealogy. The story of Weland, if it contains any historical element,
should be placed perhaps slightly further back; for in Waldhere, as
well as in many German authorities, including Thiðreks Saga, Weland is
said to be the father of Widia (Wudga, Witege). The latter is often
associated with Eormenric[22], and there can be little doubt that he is
to be identified with the Gothic Vidigoia who is mentioned as a hero
of the past by Jordanes (cap. 34) in a quotation from Priscus[23]. For
the story of Hagbarðr and Signý a date is afforded by a poem attributed
by Saxo (p. 214) to Starkaðr. The poet, who in his old age served
Ingellus, i.e. Ingeld, the son-in-law of Hrothgar, says that he had
followed Haki, the brother of Hagbarðr, in his early youth. In Ynglinga
Saga (cap. 23) Haki is made to fight with the Swedish king Iörundr,
four generations above Aðils, but this genealogy cannot be entirely
correct.
The only important stories which remain are those of Fróði the Peaceful
and Heðinn and Högni. In Saxo's history (p. 158 ff.) the two are
brought into connection with one another, and it is certainly to be
noted that a Fruote von Tenemarke plays rather a prominent part in
Kûdrûn, especially the first portion. But Fróði is associated with
different sets of persons in different works, and his resemblance
to the god Frey rather suggests that he was regarded as the typical
representative of a Golden Age in the past. The story of Heðinn and
Högni is very difficult to locate, both in regard to time and scene.
Widsith however, which is our earliest authority for it, represents
Hagena (Högni) as king of the Holmryge, who appear to have dwelt in
eastern Pomerania. Since the whole of the south coast of the Baltic had
probably become Slavonic by the end of the fifth century, it is at all
events unlikely that the story refers to any period after this.
We shall have to discuss later how far these stories are to be regarded
as historical and to what extent the characters and incidents with
which they deal are to be attributed to myth or fiction. Here it is
sufficient to point out that with the exception of the story of Heðinn
and Högni, the connections of which are obscure, all the stories
which we have just been discussing are referred by our authorities to
generations anterior to the characters of Beowulf. Hence we may safely
conclude that the period embraced by the common poetry and traditions
of the various Teutonic peoples--what we may call the Heroic Age of
these peoples--had come to an end by the middle of the sixth century or
at least by the death of Alboin. Its upper limit must in view of the
evidence given above be set from two to three centuries back--probably
three centuries if we include the story of Ostrogotha.
These limitations are clearly such as to call for some attempt at
explanation. Why do the cycles of story which are common to the various
Teutonic peoples mention no historical character later than Alboin?
Before we can hope to give a satisfactory answer to this question, a
number of other phenomena will have to be taken into account. One or
two observations however will not be out of place here.
The period extending backwards from two to three centuries before the
reign of Alboin coincides with what is generally known as the Age of
National Migrations (Völkerwanderungszeit). It was during this period
that many of the Teutonic nations broke through the frontiers of the
Roman empire and carved out for themselves extensive kingdoms within
its territories. Among these were the realms of Guthhere and Theodric,
and in part also that of Attila. There is no doubt that in all these
cases the conquest of the Roman provinces brought with it a great
accession of wealth and profoundly affected the life of the invaders.
The same period witnessed the conversion of most of the continental
Teutonic peoples to Christianity, another change which produced
far-reaching effects upon them. Yet it is not clear at first sight
how this change is connected with the chronological limitation of the
stories, for while some of the chief characters, Attila for instance
and doubtless Eormenric, were heathens, others such as Theodric were
certainly Christians. The change of faith is not a motive which plays
any part in the stories themselves.
Whatever weight we may be disposed to attach to these observations,
it should be noted that they do not seem to apply to every case. Thus
we shall see in the course of the next chapter that Danish characters
figure more prominently than those of any other nation, not only
in Scandinavian but also in English records, throughout the period
ending with Hrólfr Kraki. Yet the Danes took no part, collectively at
least, in the movements against the Roman Empire, nor did Christianity
penetrate to them before the ninth century. It is worth remarking
therefore that stories relating to Denmark stop where they do, and that
for centuries after the time of Hrólfr we can scarcely give the name of
a single Danish prince.
In the following chapters it will be convenient to speak of the period
which we have been discussing simply as the Heroic Age. The term
'heroic poetry,' as a translation of Heldendichtung or Heltedigtning,
may of course be applied in a sense to such works as Hákonarmál or
the poem on the battle of Maldon, just as well as to Beowulf or the
Hildebrandslied. But no ambiguity will arise if we limit the term
'heroic' here to what may be called the 'Teutonic' Heroic Age (das
germanische Heldenalter), i.e. to the period embraced by the common
poetry and traditions of the various Teutonic peoples.
FOOTNOTES:
[12] Except of course those which deal only with supernatural beings
(p. 11 f.).
[13] Quoted in the prose Edda (Skaldskaparmál, cap. 66).
[14] Theodosio XV et Valentiniano IV coss. (A.D. 435): _pax facta cum
Vandalis.... eodem tempore Gundicarium Burgundionum regem intra Gallias
habitantem Aetius bello obtriuit, pacemque ei supplicanti dedit, qua
non diu potitus est. siquidem illum Hunni cum populo atque stirpe sua
deleuerunt._
[15] The overthrow of Guthhere is ascribed to Attila by Paulus Diaconus
in his _Gesta episc. Mettensium_ (Mon. Germ., Scr. II p. 262), _Hist.
Misc._ XIV (Muratori, Scr. I p. 97); but he is a late authority. On the
other hand an anonymous Gaulish chronicle, which ends in the year 452,
attributes the whole of the Burgundian disasters to Aetius: _bellum
contra Burgundionum gentem memorabile exarsit quo uniuersa pene gens
cum rege per Aetium deleta_ (Mon. Germ., Chron. Min. I 660). But this
seems to be due to the confusion of two events which Prosper clearly
distinguishes (cf. Idatius, _Chron._, Theodosii ann. XII, XIII).
[16] Liber Legum Gundebati, cap. 3 (Mon. Germ., Leg., Vol. III p.
533): _si quos apud regiae memoriae auctores nostros, id est Gebicam,
Godomarem, Gislaharium, Gundaharium, patrem quoque nostrum et patruum,
liberos liberasue fuisse constiterit, in eadem libertate permaneant._
[17] This cycle is supposed to have been known in England at one time,
owing to the juxtaposition of the names Seafola (Saben) and Theodric in
Widsith, v. 115. Theodric, king of the Franks, is mentioned in the same
poem (v. 24).
[18] Cf. Berger de Xivrey, _Traditions Tératologiques_, p. 12.
[19] Einhardi Ann., 812 (Mon. Germ., Scr. I p. 199). Prof. Olrik
(_Nordisches Geistesleben_, p. 44) apparently rejects this
identification, as he places Haraldr Hilditönn not long after the time
of Hrólfr Kraki.
[20] The list makes no claim to completeness. Thus several of the
characters in Hervarar Saga (probably mentioned also in Widsith, v. 116
ff.) have been identified with historical persons of the fifth century.
But the evidence is far from satisfactory.
[21] _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 134 f.
[22] But also with Theodric. This is a question to which we shall have
to refer later.
[23] _Venimus in illum locum ubi dudum Vidigoia, Gothorum fortissimus,
Sarmatum dolo occubuit_ (cf. also cap. 5).
CHAPTER III.
SCENE AND NATIONALITY IN THE HEROIC STORIES.
In the last chapter it was pointed out that the age covered by the
heroic poetry and traditions of the Teutonic peoples coincides with a
clearly marked period of history, extending over about two or possibly
three hundred years, and coming to an end in the latter half of the
sixth century. Something must now be said regarding the geographical
and ethnographical limitations of the stories--the localities in
which the scenes are laid and the nationalities to which the various
characters belonged. The scenes are distributed over a considerable
part of Europe, extending from Italy to Sweden and from western Russia
to the Vosges and the Netherlands. The British Isles however seem to
have lain outside the area, though in the late form in which some of
the stories have come down to us, we do occasionally find references
to them--generally to Scotland or Ireland--which are probably due to
confusion with stories of the Viking Age. Indeed it is remarkable that
the early Anglo-Saxon poems contain no reference to persons or events
connected with this country. Further, except possibly in the case of
the story of Hengest and Horsa, we have no evidence worth consideration
that poems dealing with such subjects ever existed. Norway also is
not made the scene of any of the main stories, though it is mentioned
incidentally in English and German as well as Scandinavian poems.
The Balkan peninsula figures only in the later German poems, while
references to places in Italy are limited practically to the Dietrich
(Theodric) and Wolfdietrich cycles.
Turning to the question of nationality we find the following peoples
represented: (i) to the Goths belong Eormenric, Theodric, Wudga
(Witege) and probably most of the heroes associated with them; (ii)
to the Huns Attila; (iii) to the Burgundians Guthhere and his family;
(iv) to the Rugii apparently Hagena (Högni), the father of Hild; (v)
to the Franks Hugdietrich and Wolfdietrich, if the identifications are
correct; (vi) to the Frisians Finn; (vii) to the Angli Wermund and
Offa; (viii) to the Danes (_a_) Fróði the Peaceful, (_b_) Sigarr and
his family, together probably with Hagbarðr and Haki, (_c_) Hrólfr
Kraki and his family, perhaps also Froda (Frotho IV) and Ingeld; (ix)
to the Götar Hygelac, Beowulf and their relatives; (x) to the Swedes
(Svear) Aðils and his family.
It is somewhat remarkable that we have no stories dealing with
Alamannic or Bavarian heroes, since the German poems which have come
down to us are almost entirely derived from the territories of these
peoples[24]. The Vandals too are unrepresented, and probably also the
Visigoths, while the evidence for Frankish heroes is slight and rather
unsatisfactory. Frankish nationality is claimed by most scholars for
Siegfried, chiefly on the ground that Xanten is represented as his home
in the Nibelungenlied[25]. Yet he is never called a Frank, and it is
not clear that Xanten was in the possession of the Franks at the time
to which the story refers. The same nationality may perhaps be claimed
for Waldhere. In several German poems Langres is said to be his home,
though he is also called a Spaniard, while Ekkehard makes his father
king of Aquitaine[26]. To this question we shall have to return later.
In any case both stories refer to a period considerably anterior to the
real conquest of Gaul by the Franks, and it is certainly a curious fact
that Clovis and his great achievements seem to be entirely unnoticed in
poetry.
It appears then that though most of the principal Teutonic nations are
represented in our stories the relative prominence assigned to them
does not at all correspond to what we should expect. Most remarkable is
the fact that in stories relating to the Continent nearly all the chief
characters (Eormenric, Theodric, Guthhere, Attila, etc.) belong to
nations which had passed out of existence before the end of the sixth
century. From Jordanes (cap. 5) we gather that the preservation of the
early Gothic traditions was very largely due to the pride taken by that
people in its own heroes of the past. Yet it is not easy to see how the
survival of the stories which have come down to us can be ascribed to
any such feeling.
Let us first examine the Anglo-Saxon poems. In Beowulf the scene is
laid first in the land of the Danes and later in that of the Götar. The
hero himself belongs to the latter nation, but in the earlier part of
the poem the former are decidedly the more prominent. Taking it as a
whole the interest is divided between the royal families of these two
nations; the only other dynasty which comes in for any considerable
share of attention is that of the Swedes. In the story of Finn the
interest is centred in a prince and his followers who according to
Beowulf were of Danish nationality and involved in hostilities with the
Frisians. In Waldhere the hero and heroine, whatever their nationality,
belong to Gaul, while their opponents are Burgundians. In Deor the
interests are mainly, perhaps exclusively, Gothic. In Widsith the
foremost characters are Eadgils, prince of the Myrgingas (a dynasty
hostile to the Angli), and the Gothic king Eormenric; after them the
English king Offa, the Danish kings Hrothgar and Hrothwulf, Guthhere,
king of the Burgundians, Aelfwine (Alboin, king of the Langobardi) and
several Gothic heroes. In all these poems there is no reference, as far
as we know, to any person of English nationality except Offa and his
relatives (Beow. 1944 ff.), nor except in Widsith is the name of the
Angli even mentioned.
If we turn now to the Scandinavian records, which are entirely
Norse (Norwegian-Icelandic), so far as the vernacular literature is
concerned, the phenomena which confront us are on the whole very
similar. As we might expect from the comparative lateness of our
authorities the nationality of the various characters is not very
clearly indicated. It is remembered that Atli (Attila) belonged to the
Huns and Iörmunrekr (Eormenric) to the Goths, but Gunnarr (Guthhere)
is only once called lord of the Burgundians. As for Sigurðr, his later
adventures are uniformly located in the Rhineland, but the history
of his family is generally connected with Denmark, which is also the
scene of Helgi's exploits. Most noteworthy however is the fact that
Norway is only mentioned once in the Older Edda, namely in the prose of
Helgakviða Hiörvarðssonar. In the sagas it is somewhat more prominent,
e.g. in the account of Biarki's origin in Hrólfs Saga Kraka; but these
passages are usually regarded as accretions to the original stories.
Of course there are numerous other sagas which deal exclusively with
Norwegian history and legend. These stories however are peculiar to
Norwegian-Icelandic literature, and the earliest persons who figure in
them, if we may regard them as historical, cannot have lived before
the seventh century. In stories relating to earlier times the scene is
practically always laid in Denmark or southern Sweden or in the lands
south of the Baltic.
Even in the German poems national feeling has influenced the choice
of subjects comparatively little. The poems in their present form are
mainly Austrian or Bavarian. Yet except in the second half of the
Nibelungenlied this region does not figure prominently[27], and even
there the Bavarian characters that occur are generally believed to
be rather late additions to the story. The chief characters of the
story in its original form were clearly Burgundians and Huns, to whom
the Goths may have been added at a fairly early date. The stories
which deal with the Rhineland--those of Siegfried and Walther--may
be derived ultimately from early Frankish poems; but this cannot be
proved. Most of the others are concerned with Gothic heroes, the true
scene of whose adventures is to be sought in Poland, Hungary, Italy
and other countries which had ceased to be Teutonic before the time of
our authorities. Theodric, it is true, seems to have become a national
hero in the south-east, but this feature is prominent only in the
latest poems, and even here it is clearly remembered that he belonged
to Italy. But the most remarkable case is that of Kûdrûn. The poem
itself is probably Austrian, but the names which it contains show that
the story is derived from Frisian sources. The scene is laid first in
Ireland, then in Denmark and lastly in Normandy. Yet if we take into
account the various Scandinavian versions and the references to the
story in Anglo-Saxon poetry, there is every probability that it came
originally from the Baltic.
This short discussion will suffice to show how singularly free the
poems we have been discussing are from anything in the nature of
national interest or sentiment. They are certainly national in the
sense that the characters are drawn entirely, or almost entirely, from
within the Teutonic world--for even Attila can hardly be regarded as an
exception. But nationalism in the narrower sense, i.e. in the interests
of the poet's own nation or tribe, seems to be altogether wanting. The
interest is centred in one or more individual characters and in the
various adventures that befall them. Sometimes, as in Beowulf, it does
also embrace the history of the family to which these persons belonged,
but the nation, apart from the royal family, is practically disregarded.
The contrast afforded by the historical poems of the ninth and tenth
centuries[28] is sufficiently obvious. We have seen that these poems,
whether English or German, uniformly deal with the poet's own nation.
The poem on the battle of Brunanburh is an expression of national
triumph. It is not concerned with the personal adventures of the king
or his brother, but with the prowess of the English army as a whole.
The bravery of the princes is certainly noticed, but they appear to
be regarded as the champions and representatives of the nation. The
Ludwigslied breathes on the whole a similar spirit, in spite of its
strongly religious tone. Even in the skaldic poetry of the North traces
of national pride are clearly discernible, as in Hákonarmál (v. 3),
where Haakon, at the head of his Norwegian troops, is described as the
terror of the Danes.
It may perhaps be urged that, though the poems which have come down to
us have no national interest, they may be derived from older poems
which originated in the hero's own land. Thus many scholars believe
Beowulf to be of Scandinavian origin in one sense or another, though
the linguistic arguments which have been brought forward in favour of
this view are not generally admitted. But there is a curious lack of
uniformity in the national interests of the poem, as we have already
seen. If it had been the chief intention of the original poet to
glorify the Danish nation, he would not have ignored it as he has done
in the latter part of the poem. On the other hand if his intention
was to glorify the Götar he would hardly have begun with an account
of the early kings of the Danes. The difficulty has been got over by
supposing that the poem as we have it is of composite formation, and it
may very well be that the second part of the poem is a later addition.
But it is to be observed that somewhat similar phenomena occur in other
cases. Thus the stories of Siegfried and Attila are connected both in
the Nibelungenlied and the Edda, and there can be no doubt that the
connection is of considerable antiquity. Yet the only common element
in the two stories is supplied by the Burgundians, and the portraiture
of their princes, especially that of the king, is hardly of such a
character as to suggest its derivation from a poem composed for the
glorification of the Burgundian nation.
The evidence then of Beowulf alone is scarcely sufficient to justify
us in assuming more than that its author or authors were interested in
the royal families of the North, and that they possessed a considerable
amount of information regarding them. The account of the early kings of
the Danes seems to be in the nature of a tribal or family tradition--to
be compared with the early stories given by Jordanes, Paulus Diaconus
and Widukind. Traditions of this kind are no doubt generally of a
mythical character, and consequently their origin is to be sought in
the particular locality or family with which they are concerned. We
have no evidence that such traditions formed the main theme of stories
which were common to the poetry of the various Teutonic peoples. But
it is natural enough that a poet who was well acquainted with some
royal family, whether that of his own nation or not, would also know
its traditions, and that he would utilise them incidentally or by way
of introduction in a poem largely concerned with the fortunes of that
family.
The main story of the poem stands on a different footing. Of course if
it could be shown that the Danish princes who figure both in Beowulf
and the various Scandinavian records were fictitious persons, who never
really existed, we should be bound to hold that they were derived from
a common story, probably of Scandinavian origin. But few scholars would
now be willing to admit such a proposition. Certain incidents, such as
the exhortation of Ingeld (Ingellus) by the old warrior (Starcatherus),
may be held to point to a common origin in poem or saga; but most of
the events narrated appear to have been either preserved by memory or
invented independently.
With the stories of Sigurðr (Siegfried) and Waldhere the case is
somewhat different. It is the opinion of the great majority of scholars
that both these heroes are mythical or fictitious, in spite of the
fact that they are associated with undoubtedly historical characters.
If this view is correct--a question which we shall have to discuss
later--we may conclude at once that the different versions of the two
stories, Scandinavian and German in the one case, English and German in
the other, have sprung from a common source, whether in poem or saga.
But even if we take the opposite view, viz. that Sigurðr and Waldhere
were real persons and that their adventures are founded on fact, it
does not by any means follow that the different versions of their
stories must have originated independently. Neither hero seems to have
belonged to a family of outstanding position, nor were their exploits
such as to influence the destiny of nations.[29] In the age of Hunnish
supremacy scores of petty princes must have undergone somewhat similar
adventures and distinguished themselves by similar deeds of heroism.
Hence it can hardly be due to accident that the handful whose names we
know were celebrated far and wide in the Teutonic world.
The story of Eormenric is again rather a different case. There can be
no question that this king was a historical person, but the earliest
detailed account which we possess of his doings, viz. that given by
Jordanes, dates from nearly two centuries after his death. Now we find
what is perhaps the most striking episode in Eormenric's story, namely
the account of Swanhild and the vengeance attempted by her brothers,
both in Jordanes and the Older Edda (Guðrúnarhvöt and Hamðismál) with
comparatively slight variations. The chief feature wanting in Jordanes'
account is supplied by the Annals of Quedlinburg.[30] How much truth
the story contains we are not in a position to decide. But even if
we grant that the main features are historical, the event can hardly
have been of the first importance, since the attack seems really to
have failed in its object. Ammianus Marcellinus says that Eormenric
committed suicide owing to despair at the impending Hunnish invasion,
and Jordanes recognises that his death was partly due to this cause.
But in the later (Scandinavian and German) accounts it is entirely
forgotten. Hence if we bear in mind the close agreement between the
Gothic and Scandinavian versions of the story, not only in the names
of the characters but also in the description of Swanhild's death, we
can hardly help inferring that they are derived from a common narrative
source.
In conclusion mention may be made of a story which appears to be
definitely at variance with historical truth, namely the account of
Attila's death given in the Edda poems Atlakviða and Atlamál. It is
there stated that Attila was murdered with his two children by his wife
Guðrún in revenge for her brothers (Gunnarr and Högni), whom he had
treacherously put to death. Now Jordanes (cap. 49) says that Attila
died from the bursting of a blood-vessel on the night of his marriage
with a girl named Ildico. As his account is derived from Priscus, a
contemporary and trustworthy writer, there can be little doubt that
it is correct. Yet it should be observed that the Roman chronicler
Marcellinus Comes, who wrote apparently a few years before Jordanes,
says that Attila died by the hand of a woman.[31] The account given in
the Edda therefore is no invention of an Icelandic or Norwegian poet,
but founded on a story which was current among the Romans within a
century after Attila's death. Indeed considering the circumstances it
is by no means unlikely that the story originated immediately after the
event.
These examples will be sufficient to show that the subjects of many
of our poems are derived from stories which passed from one Teutonic
people to another and some of which were of great antiquity. Further,
it is a proof of the popularity of these stories that they were
preserved until comparatively late in the Middle Ages, in spite of
the fact that they did not appeal to national interests. The question
how they were preserved and transmitted is one which we shall have to
discuss in the following chapters. We may note at once however that the
most obvious means of preservation, namely by means of writing, was
almost certainly not used to any great extent. Had that been the case
the divergencies between the different versions of the stories would
be far less noticeable than they are. Even in the case of Waldhere,
which shows probably the least amount of variation, the Anglo-Saxon
fragments show a treatment of the subject totally different from that
which appears in Ekkehard's poem. Again, there is no evidence that
the Roman alphabet was used in the North, except possibly by a few
foreigners here and there, before the end of the tenth century, while
the Runic alphabet, though it had been known for many centuries, seems
not to have been employed for literary purposes until very late times.
But, as we have already mentioned, some of the Edda poems date probably
from the ninth century, and the story of Heðinn and Högni is used by
the poet Bragi who lived apparently in the early part of that century.
On the Continent of course the case is somewhat different. We have
seen that Charlemagne did have a number of ancient poems written down;
but there is nothing to show that his collection had any permanent
influence. When the Quedlinburg annalist or his authority quotes the
heroic stories, perhaps some two centuries later, he refers not to any
written works but to songs formerly current among the country people.
It is doubtless by oral tradition therefore, whether in verse or prose,
that the stories of the Heroic Age have mainly been preserved.
There can be no question that a large number of similar stories
have perished. A glance through the catalogues of Widsith will show
many names which otherwise are entirely unknown to us, and also an
appreciable number which are not mentioned elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon
literature, though they figure in German and Scandinavian records. It
would scarcely be wise however to assume that all the stories of the
Heroic Age were common Teutonic property. Thus we have no evidence
for the story of Waldhere in the North[32], while stories dealing
with Danish heroes seem to have been little known in Germany. The
latter observation deserves notice all the more in view of the obvious
popularity of such stories in England--a fact proved not merely by
Beowulf and Finn, but still more by the prominence assigned to Danish
characters in Widsith.
It will be convenient now to summarise briefly the results of our
discussion. We have seen that the scenes of the heroic stories are
distributed over most of the lands formerly occupied by the Teutonic
peoples. Norway and England however, as well as the distant kingdoms
of the Visigoths and Vandals, seem to lie outside the area. The heroes
also are drawn from many nations, though not in the proportion which
we should expect. Thus the Frankish nation, which ultimately became
dominant, is but poorly represented, while the most prominent places
are taken by peoples such as the Ostrogoths and Burgundians, which lost
their nationality in the course of the sixth century.
We have further seen that a very large proportion of the characters of
the heroic stories figure in the literature of two or more nations, and
that frequently the same stories are told of them. In the latter case
it is probable, indeed often practically certain, that the different
versions of the story are ultimately derived from a common narrative.
On the other hand, where the same characters are known but only in
connection with different events, such derivation can be proved only
if it can be shown that the characters themselves are fictitious. This
remark applies especially to a number of characters common to Beowulf
and Scandinavian stories relating to Hrólfr Kraki and his times.
It is fully in accord with these facts that the heroic poems are not
concerned at all--or at least only to a very slight degree--with local
or tribal interests. Their tone indeed may be described as in a sense
international, though with the restriction that characters and scenes
alike are drawn exclusively from within the Teutonic world.
FOOTNOTES:
[24] These poems do introduce Bavarian characters, such as the Markgraf
Rüdiger; but they are not found elsewhere in heroic poetry.
[25] In the prose piece _Frá dauði Sinfiötla_ (in the Older Edda)
Sigmundr is said to have held territories in the land of the Franks.
[26] Hence many scholars regard him as a Visigoth.
[27] Tyrol is the scene of several of Dietrich's and Wolfdietrich's
adventures; but generally it is the southern (Italian) part of that
country.
[28] The poem on the battle of Maldon approximates much more closely
than any other of this age to the spirit of the old poetry.
[29] The victories over the Saxons and Danes described in the
Nibelungenlied and the Tháttr af Nornagesti have little in common and
are scarcely to be regarded as an essential feature in the story of
Sigurðr.
[30] _Anastasius annos_ XXVII.... _Ermanrici regis Gothorum a
fratribus Hemido et Serilo et Adaccaro, quorum patrem interfecerat,
amputatis manibus et pedibus turpiter, ut dignus erat, occisio_ (Mon.
Germ., Scr. III p. 31).
[31] Ind. VII. Aetio et Studio coss. (A.D. 454): _Attila rex Hunnorum
Europae orbator prouinciae noctu mulieris manu cultroque confoditur.
quidam uero sanguinis reiectione necatum perhibent._
[32] Excluding of course Thiðreks S. af Bern.
CHAPTER IV.
THE ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE HEROIC POEMS.
In an earlier chapter (p. 3) it was mentioned that the English heroic
poems are usually ascribed to the seventh or eighth centuries. We
must now try to see whether any means are to be found of dating their
composition more precisely.
Unfortunately very few references to the poems or their subjects occur
in works which can be dated with anything like certainty. The most
important is contained in a letter from Alcuin to Hygebald, bishop of
Lindisfarne, written in the year 797: "When priests dine together let
the words of God be read. It is fitting on such occasions to listen
to a reader, not to a harpist, to the discourses of the fathers,
not to the poems of the heathen. What has Ingeld to do with Christ?
Strait is the house; it will not be able to hold them both. The king
of heaven will have no part with so-called kings who are heathen and
damned; for the one king reigns eternally in heaven, the other, the
heathen, is damned and groans in hell. In your houses the voices of
those who read should be heard, not a rabble of those who make merry
in the streets[33]." From this passage it is clear that at the end of
the eighth century there were current in Northumbria certain poems,
probably well known poems, dealing with a heathen king named Ingeld,
whom we need not hesitate to identify with Ingeld the son of Froda,
who figures in Beowulf. Of course it is not at all likely that the
reference is to Beowulf itself, for the part played by Ingeld in that
poem is insignificant.
Acquaintance with the subjects of the heroic poems is shown also by a
mistake in the Historia Brittonum, 31, which dates probably from about
the same period. This passage contains a genealogy, tracing the descent
of Hengest and Horsa from Woden and of Woden from Geat. The latter part
is known also from many other texts, in which it regularly runs as
follows: _Woden Frealafing, Frealaf Frithuwulfing, Frithuwulf Finning,
Finn Godwulfing, Godwulf Geating_. In the Historia Brittonum however
in place of _Finn Godwulfing_ we find _Finn qui fuit Folcwald_--which
is clearly due to confusion with Finn the son of Folcwalda (_Finn
Folcwalding_), a Frisian king mentioned in Beowulf and Widsith, as well
as in the fragment which bears his name.
Further evidence is afforded by names of persons and places. There
can be no doubt that even in the seventh century it was customary to
take the names of famous men of the past or present. Danihel, bishop
of Winchester (d. 745), and Iohannes, bishop of Hexham (d. 721), are
instances which no one will dispute. In the Durham Liber Vitae we meet
with the names Aethan and Cundigeorn. It must not be assumed that
persons bearing such names were necessarily of Celtic blood. Indeed the
spelling suggests rather that they were Englishmen called after Aidan
and Kentigern. Deusdedit, archbishop of Canterbury (655-664), doubtless
derived his name from Pope Deusdedit (615-618), while the West Saxon
king Ceadwalla (685-688) was in all probability called after the
British king of the same name, who died in 642. It is extremely likely
that Hlothhere, king of Kent (673-685), obtained his name from one of
the Frankish kings, Lothair II (584-628) or Lothair III (656-670), for
the element _hloth-_ is not used elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon names. Even
in the sixth century we hear of English princes who seem to be called
after Frankish or Gothic kings of the same period. Thus Tytla, the name
of the father of the East Anglian king Redwald, is probably taken from
the Gothic king Totila; it is not of an English type. Two sons of
the Northumbrian king Ida were called Theodric and Aethelric, perhaps
after the Gothic king Theodric and his successor Athalaric. As the
element _theod-_ is somewhat rare in England, it is not unlikely that
the Northumbrian prince Theodbald, a son of Aethelric, derived his name
from the Frankish king Theodbald.
The occurrence of such names as Widsith and Beowulf (_Biuulf_) in the
Liber Vitae shows that names were taken not only from contemporary
persons and from books but also from native poems and traditions.
Indeed researches which have been made in this direction have
demonstrated that names of the latter type were extremely popular. But
it has not been sufficiently pointed out that such names occur most
frequently in the earliest times and gradually become more rare--a fact
which is of considerable importance for our purpose. The total number
of personal names found in the five poems Beowulf, Finn, Waldhere,
Widsith and Deor is 132[34], and of these altogether 57 recur as names
of persons mentioned in English historical documents. Over forty of
these names belonged to persons who appear to have lived, or at any
rate to have been born, before the end of the seventh century[35],
while at least thirteen of them are unknown after the same period. To
the latter class belong the important names Widsith and Beowulf.
In local nomenclature it is possible to trace at least 51 of the 132
names mentioned above. In some cases these names may have been taken
direct from the story, e.g. when we find in Kent two localities close
together called _Hokes clif_ and _Hengstes earas_ (Birch, _Cart.
Sax._, III 1000). A similar case, very frequently cited[36], is that
of _Beowanhammes hecgan_ and _Grendeles mere_ in Wiltshire (_ib._ II
677), though neither of these names is included in our list. But in the
majority of cases it is more probable that the place-name is taken in
the first instance from that of a previous landowner, and consequently
that the connection with the story is only secondary. Hence it is
important to notice that out of the 51 place-names no less than 19
contain names which are not borne by persons in historical documents.
The explanation of this lies doubtless in the fact that the place-names
for the most part became fixed at a very early period, and consequently
that they exhibit an earlier stratum of personal nomenclature.
If we add the place-names to the personal names the total number of
heroic names found in England in historical documents seems to be
76. Out of this number only seven apparently are limited to persons
born after the end of the seventh century, and of these again almost
all occur in the course of the eighth century. These statistics show
clearly that such names were most popular during the sixth and seventh
centuries, especially if we bear in mind that the materials for this
period are incomparably less than those for the following three
centuries. Hence, if we are justified in drawing any conclusions from
nomenclature, the popularity of the heroic stories was distinctly on
the wane in Alcuin's time.
The argument from nomenclature holds good of course only for showing
the popularity of the stories; it cannot prove the existence of the
poems which we now possess. In one case however we may probably make an
exception. The name _Widsith_ is obviously fictitious[37] and based on
the travels with which the minstrel is credited. The introduction, in
which alone the name occurs, is in all probability a later composition
than the rest of the poem[38] and designed to explain what follows. It
is of importance therefore to note that, if we may judge from the place
in which this name occurs in the Liber Vitae, it must have been borne
by a person of the seventh century.
We must next turn to the internal evidence. The linguistic criteria
are of a somewhat unsatisfactory nature and investigations in this
field have led to few definite results. It is clear that the heroic
poems do not exhibit any dialect in its purity--a remark which is
true of Anglo-Saxon poetry in general. West Saxon forms predominate
and there is no doubt that the final recension of the text is due to
scribes who employed this dialect. Yet at the same time there are a
sufficient number of Midland or Northumbrian characteristics[39] to
render it highly probable that the poems were not only composed but
also originally written down in one of these dialects. Beyond this
however no safe conclusions can be attained owing to the lateness of
the MSS.
In regard to syntax the heroic poems are at least as archaic as any
other remains of Anglo-Saxon poetry which have come down to us. We may
notice especially the use of the definite article, which in reality
is still a demonstrative pronoun in the heroic poems. It occurs
comparatively seldom in connection with a weak adjective followed by a
substantive--a usage which is nearly universal in most of the Christian
poems. Thus in Cynewulf's works the proportion of examples with and
without the article varies from 7:1 to 9:1, and even in the first part
of Guthlac, which is believed to date from soon after the middle of
the eighth century, the proportion is 7:1[40]; but in Beowulf it is
only 1:5. If the Dream of the Cross, in which the proportion is 2:1,
is rightly attributed to the early years of the eighth century[41],
it seems reasonable to date the composition of Beowulf quite half a
century further back. The nearest approach to the usage of Beowulf is
shown by Exodus, in which the proportion is over 2:3. Unfortunately
we have no certain means of dating this work, though it is generally
believed to be one of the earliest of the Christian poems. Its archaic
character would be natural enough if it is really the work of Caedmon,
who flourished while Hild was abbess at Whitby (658-680) and who
according to Bede[42] did compose a poem or poems on this subject.
The metrical characteristics of the heroic poems differ but little from
those of Anglo-Saxon poetry in general. Cases of absence of contraction
after the loss of intervocalic _-h-_ (e.g. in the half-verse _hean
huses_) can be paralleled in poems dating from the close of the eighth
century or even later, where they are doubtless to be regarded as
poetic archaisms. On the other hand importance is generally attached
to the absence of any evidence for the retention of _-u_ after a long
syllable and to the shortening of syllables containing _-r-_ which
was originally followed by antevocalic _-h-_. Thus it is contended
that such combinations as _to widan feore_ in the latter half of a
verse cannot go back to the middle of the seventh century[43], since
the form in use at that time would be _feorha_, which would offend
against the metre. As a matter of fact half-verses of the condemned
type do occur in Anglo-Saxon poetry, Beowulf itself containing at least
eight examples. But even if we were to admit all these statements
and emend the offending verses the argument would be conclusive only
on the assumption that the poems were written down from the very
beginning[44]. Poems which are preserved by oral tradition alone are
manifestly liable to small verbal changes, especially in a metre so
flexible as that of the Teutonic alliterative verse. Thus in place of
the expression _to widan feore_ we find occasionally _widan feore_ in
the same sense, and even in Beowulf we meet with _widan feorh_ which
is not improbably the oldest form of the phrase. Before the loss
of final _-u_ it would be a perfectly regular half-verse, but the
operation of this change would render it impossible and necessitate the
substitution of a synonymous expression. In principle, it should be
observed, the assumption of such substitutions seems to be absolutely
necessary, unless we are prepared to deny that any old poems or even
verses survived the period of apocope. Yet there is a sufficient amount
of resemblance between English and German poetry, not merely in the
general metrical scheme but also in the construction of individual
verses[45], to render such a conclusion extremely improbable.
Consequently I am very much inclined to doubt whether any safe
conclusions as to the date of the poems can be obtained from metrical
considerations, except of course as regards their final form.
Of far greater importance is the fact that with the exception of the
Finn-fragment, which consists of only fifty verses, all our poems
contain passages or references of a religious (Christian) character.
In Beowulf alone there are about seventy such passages of which the
significance is not open to question, and seven or eight others which
may belong to the same category. Out of the total number thirty-three
are limited to single verses or half-verses[46], while another sixteen
affect not more than two verses in each case[47]. The longest passage
of all (v. 1724 ff.) contains at least 37 verses, the next longest (v.
175 ff.) fourteen. The rest vary from three to nine verses[48]. The
theology which appears in these passages is of a singularly vague type.
There are four distinct references to incidents in the early part of
Genesis, viz. one (v. 90 ff.) to the Creation, two (vv. 107 ff., 1261
ff.) to the story of Cain and Abel and one (v. 1688 ff.) to the Flood.
Apart from these there appears to be no reference to any passage in
the Bible except perhaps in v. 1745 ff., which are thought by some to
be based on Ephes. vi. 16, and in v. 3069, which contains the phrase
'day of judgment.' We find also a few references to rewards and
punishments in a future life[49]. The word _god_ is of very frequent
occurrence and always used in the Christian sense. The other epithets
of the Deity are 'lord' (_frea_, _dryhten_), 'father' (_faeder_),
'creator' (_scyppend_), 'ruler' (_waldend_), 'almighty' (_alwalda_,
_aelmihtiga_), 'ruler of men' (_ylda_ or _fira waldend_), 'ruler of
glory' (_wuldres waldend_), 'shepherd of glory' (_wuldres hyrde_),
'king of glory' (_wuldurcyning_), 'guider of the heavens' (_rodera
raedend_), 'helm of the heavens' (_heofena helm_), 'ruler of victories'
(_sigora waldend_), 'king of victories' (_sigora soðcyning_). On the
other hand there is no example of the word _gast_ in a religious sense
(Holy Ghost), nor of the name _Crist_, nor of any epithet denoting
'Saviour' (_nergend_, _haelend_ etc.). Hardly less curious is the total
absence of the word _engel_, for expressions such as 'lord of angels'
(_engla dryhten_[50]) are among the most frequent epithets of the Deity
in Anglo-Saxon religious poems. Lastly, there are no references to the
saints, to the cross or to the church, nor to any Christian rites or
ceremonies.
It appears then that the religious utterances of the poem are of a
singularly one-sided character. Indeed it has been observed[51] that,
with the exception perhaps of vv. 977-9, "their theology is covered
by the Old Testament, and a pious Jew would have no difficulty in
assenting to them all." Certainly the facts are such as to call for
some explanation, especially since the religious poems are pervaded by
a wholly different tone.
One suggestion is that Beowulf was composed under the influence of
the missionaries from Iona; but it is extremely doubtful whether
the influence of Irish Christianity would tend in this direction at
all[52]. Another is that the poet had little direct knowledge of the
Christian religion, but that he was acquainted with some religious
poems. This explanation certainly seems to fit the case much better
than the other. Moreover there is one piece of positive evidence in its
favour. In Beow. v. 89 ff. we hear of recitation to the accompaniment
of the harp in Hrothgar's hall, and the subject of the recitation is
the creation of the world. It appears to me highly probable that we
have here an allusion to Caedmon's poem or poems on Genesis, which may
very well have been among the earliest of that poet's productions. At
all events it was by his hymn on the Creation that he first became
known. The inference is strengthened by the rather close resemblance
which the hymn bears to the phraseology of Beowulf. If the two poets
were contemporary the author of Beowulf would have no other Christian
poet on whom to draw, and the limitations of his theological equipment
might be satisfactorily accounted for on the hypothesis that he knew
only a few of Caedmon's works. As a matter of fact two or three out of
the list given by Bede[53] would have been quite sufficient to provide
him with all the statements and terms that he uses.
There is another question however with regard to the composition of
Beowulf which has aroused more controversy than this, namely whether
the Christian passages formed an original part of the poem or not. In
the former case of course the poem cannot have been composed before the
second quarter of the seventh century. Indeed, if we grant the use of
Caedmon's poetry the earliest possible date would be about 660. On the
other hand if the Christian passages are due to interpolation the upper
limit for the dating of the poem vanishes into air.
As to the possibility of such interpolation in principle we need
scarcely entertain any doubt. It is true that the Christian passages
or references cannot as a rule be removed without breaking into the
rhythm. Consequently, if interpolation has taken place we must assume
it to be the work of poets or minstrels, and not of scribes. But
have we any reason for doubting that the minstrels of that period
were capable of such 'interpolation.' Wherever poetry--at all events
anonymous narrative poetry--is preserved exclusively by oral tradition,
it is usually the case that the minstrel is allowed a certain amount
of freedom in the presentation of his subject.[54] Now probably no one
will suggest that it was only after their conversion to Christianity
that the English began to compose poems about 'heathen kings.' But,
if we grant that such poems were already in existence, does it really
involve a greater amount of effort on the part of the minstrels to
bring these poems up to date--by removing objectionable matter and
introducing expressions in accordance with the new religion--than to
compose an entirely new set of poems on the same subjects. I cannot
think that such a view will be seriously maintained. Therefore we must
consider the case of Beowulf--the only narrative poem which has come
down to us entire--without prejudice on the general question; and we
must endeavour to see whether it bears the stamp of a new composition
or that of an old work which has been brought into conformity with new
ideas. The probability or improbability of the latter view will of
course depend largely on the amount of inconsistency which the poem is
found to contain.
Until within the last few years the majority of scholars believed that
Beowulf was a composite work. This theory was most fully developed in
the writings of Müllenhoff and ten Brink. According to the former[55]
the poem was made up from four separate lays, though in its present
form nearly half of it is the work of interpolators. The latter[56]
likewise traced the origin of the poem to lays, but explained its
inconsistencies as being due not to extensive interpolations but to
the combination of two parallel versions. In regard to the relative
antiquity of the various parts of the poem there was great divergence
of opinion both between these scholars and generally. It is perhaps
partly on this account that in recent years there has been a reaction
in favour of believing that the poem as we have it is practically
the work of one man, though it is allowed that he may have made use
of earlier lays. But those who have adopted this view seem to agree
that the author, whatever his precise date, belonged to the Christian
period, and consequently that the religious passages are not due to
interpolation.
Now in the first place it is clear that the story of Beowulf is derived
from the Baltic, and the first question which we have to settle is as
to the time at which the information on which it is based became known
in England. The Angli themselves were originally a Baltic people, as I
have tried elsewhere to show, and there is no doubt that down to the
time of the invasion of Britain they were thoroughly familiar with all
the surrounding regions. But we have no evidence whatever for believing
that such was the case within the historical period. By the end of the
sixth century, when the first missionaries arrived in this country,
they had apparently ceased to be a seafaring people, and we have no
record of any voyage made by an Englishman across the North Sea for
several centuries. Again, the Danes became familiar to the west of
Europe during the sixth century; but from about 580 onwards we hear
no more of their presence on the North Sea for fully two centuries.
During the whole of this period their name is heard of only in
connection with the missionary expeditions of St Willibrord, early in
the eighth century. I have suggested elsewhere[57] that their temporary
disappearance was due to the maritime supremacy held by the Frisians.
At all events we have archaeological evidence for a considerable amount
of communication between southern Norway and the Frisian coasts during
this period, while for the Baltic such evidence is almost wholly
wanting.
Bearing these facts in mind we can hardly doubt that the information
used by Beowulf was acquired before the end of the sixth century--in
all probability we may say considerably before that date.[58] Next we
have to notice that we have practically no trustworthy information
regarding the history of the English kingdoms before the middle of the
sixth century, and I think it will be the opinion of any attentive
student of early English history that even the best informed persons of
Bede's time were not much better off in this respect than we ourselves
are. How then are we to account for the preservation of detailed
information regarding the early kings of the Danes and Swedes? The only
answer to this question, so far as I can see, is that the doings of
such persons must have become embodied in stories which were preserved
by recitation in a more or less fixed form of words. Such recitative
pieces may have consisted of poetry alone or of poetry mixed with
prose, like some of the pieces contained in the Older Edda. If we
may trust the analogy of what appear to be the oldest pieces in this
collection, such as Völundarkviða or Helgakviða Hundingsbana II, the
speeches would be given in metre, while the connecting narrative might
be partly or wholly in prose and quite brief. We have no evidence for
believing that the early Teutonic peoples ever used entirely prose
narratives, like the Icelandic and Irish sagas, for such purposes.
At all events it seems to me that if Beowulf is no older than the
middle of the seventh century we are bound to assume the existence of
earlier poems or narratives on the same subject. Such pieces may of
course have been quite short, and it is likely enough that our epic
has made use of more than one of them. One perhaps may have dealt
with the hero's exploits at the Danish court and another with his
last adventure, while in the scene between Beowulf and Hygelac it
is possible that an older poem has been incorporated, more or less
complete, in the text.[59]
But we have yet to take account of what is perhaps the most striking
feature of the poem, namely the fact that, though it abounds in
expressions of Christian sentiment, yet the customs and ceremonies to
which it alludes are uniformly heathen. Among these we may mention
the funeral ship in v. 27 ff., the offerings at the shrines in v. 175
f., the observation of the omens in v. 204 and the curious reference
to hanging in v. 2444 ff. (cf. v. 2939 ff.), probably also the use
of the boar on helmets (vv. 303 f., 1111 f., 1286, 1451 ff., 2152)
and the burial of the treasure (v. 2233 ff.), together with the curse
imprecated on the person who should disturb it (v. 3069 ff.). But most
important of all are the descriptions of the disposal of the dead by
cremation in vv. 1108 ff., 2124 ff., 3137 ff. In the long account
of Beowulf's obsequies--beginning with the dying king's injunction
(v. 2802 ff.) to construct for him a lofty barrow on the edge of the
cliff, and ending with the scene of the twelve princes riding round the
barrow, proclaiming the dead man's exploits--we have the most detailed
description of an early Teutonic funeral which has come down to us, and
one of which the accuracy is confirmed in every point by archaeological
or contemporary literary evidence[60]. Such an account must have been
composed within living memory of a time when ceremonies of this kind
were still actually in use.
The significance of these passages seems to me to have been altogether
misapprehended by recent writers. If the poem preserves its original
form and is the work of a Christian, it is difficult to see why the
poet should go out of his way in v. 175 ff. to represent the Danes as
offering heathen sacrifices; for not long before he has introduced a
song of the Creation at the Danish court, and in the sequel Hrothgar is
constantly giving utterance to Christian sentiments. Again why should
he lay Beowulf himself to rest with heathen obsequies, described in
all possible detail, when in his dying speeches (vv. 2739 ff., 2794
ff.[61]) the hero has been made to express his faith and gratitude to
the Almighty? On the other hand if the poem was originally a heathen
work these inconsistencies are perfectly natural. If it was to retain
its place after the change of faith and to be recited in the presence
of bishops or clergy, all references to actual heathen worship or
belief would of necessity have to be either accompanied by censure--as
is the case in the homiletic verses following v. 175 ff.--or else
suppressed altogether, and their place taken by expressions in
accordance with Christian doctrine. Hence it seems to me probable that
such expressions are frequently in the nature of substitutions for
objectionable matter, rather than gratuitous additions; and in the same
way I would account for the occasional survival of ideas which appear
to be essentially heathen[62], though they are cloaked in Christian
phraseology. But references to practices such as cremation which,
though heathen, had long ago passed out of use, would not excite the
same repugnance and consequently might be allowed to stand.
It may be urged[63] that cremation seems to have lingered on among the
Old Saxons of the Continent until late in the eighth century. True:
but it is quite incredible that a Christian poet should borrow from
this quarter a method of funeral for his Christianised heroes. If the
description of Beowulf's obsequies stood alone a bare possibility might
be conceded to the suggestion that it had once formed a poem by itself,
unconnected with Beowulf, and based upon a traveller's story. But
cremation is clearly regarded as the normal rite throughout the poem,
apart from the legendary story of Scyld. We have another description of
it in the episode dealing with Finn (v. 1108 ff.), and above all there
is the purely incidental reference in v. 2124 ff.: "Yet when morning
came the knights of the Danes could not burn his (Aeschere's) lifeless
form with fire, nor lay the man they loved on the pyre. She had carried
the body away," etc. Here the poet realises the significance[64] of the
rite quite clearly and consequently notes that the inability of the
Danes to carry it out added materially to their sorrow. In such a case
the possibility of Christian authorship seems to me to be definitely
excluded.
On the hypothesis that these descriptions had come down from the days
of English heathenism all is easily explicable. At the time when the
poem was Christianised it may very well not have been known that
the rite of cremation was still practised among the heathen of the
Continent, and in later days the verses of the old poet would be
handed on in parrot fashion without their significance being generally
understood. Well informed persons however, like Alcuin, who had
travelled abroad, perceived clearly enough that, however much coated
over with Christian phraseology, the heroic poems were in reality of an
essentially heathen character.
Now cremation was widely prevalent in this country during the early
days of the Saxon invasion--a fact attested by numerous cemeteries
especially in the northern and midland counties, including the valley
of the Thames. But it appears to have become a thing of the past when
the Roman missionaries arrived here; otherwise it is difficult to
account for the absence of any reference to the custom in the records
which have come down to us. Indeed we may say with safety that it had
passed out of general use, at least in the southern half of England,
quite a generation before this time; for there are scarcely any traces
of it to be found in those western districts which appear to have been
conquered during the latter half of the sixth century. Consequently,
if we are justified in believing that the descriptions of cremation
ceremonies contained in Beowulf date from a time when the practice was
still remembered, we must conclude that they were composed not later
than the third or fourth decade of the seventh century[65].
But it is not contended, so far as I am aware, by any scholar that the
account of Beowulf's obsequies belongs to the earlier parts of the
poem. It is the final scene of the story, it is not contained in any
speech, and further it is of a thoroughly epic character and would
be quite out of place in a short lay. Hence, if the line of argument
which we have been following is legitimate, we shall be forced to admit
that though the poem has undergone a fairly thorough revision in early
Christian times, it must in the main have been in existence some time
before the conversion. I do not mean to suggest that the 'revision' was
entirely limited to the religious element. Other changes and additions
may have been made about the same time[66]. What I do mean is that
the great bulk of the poem must have been in existence--not merely as
a collection of lays or stories, but in full epic form--an appreciable
time before the middle of the seventh century.
* * * * *
The other heroic poems do not furnish us with any similar criteria for
estimating the date of their composition, but there seems to be no
valid reason for doubting that they are quite as early. Two of them,
Deor and Widsith, are expressed in the first person and lay claim to
being of a remote antiquity. Deor says that he had been the bard of
the Heodeningas and that he had been displaced by a skilful minstrel
named Heorrenda. Since in old Norse literature _Hiaðningar_ (i.e.
_Heodeningas_) means 'Heðinn and his men,'[67] and since Heorrenda can
hardly be separated from the minstrel Hôrand in Kûdrûn, it would seem
that the poet claims to have been a contemporary of Heðinn and Högni,
with whose story we have dealt briefly above (pp. 8 f., 16).
Widsith is still more explicit. The poet states that he visited the
Gothic king Eormenric, who as we know died about 370. It is true
that incidentally he mentions that he had met with a number of other
princes, some of whom lived in the fifth and sixth centuries; but the
visit to Eormenric is his main theme. Eormenric is of course one of
the most prominent figures of the Heroic Age, and it may be for this
reason--as the type of a powerful king--that he is chosen for the
poet's host and patron. But then it is by no means so easy to see why
he is associated with such an obscure person as Eadgils, prince of the
Myrgingas. The suggestion that the poem is founded upon a tradition
that this Eadgils possessed a famous minstrel breaks down upon the
name _Widsith_, which is obviously fictitious as we have seen (p. 44).
It appears to me that considerably less difficulty is involved in the
hypothesis that the kernel of the poem[68] is really the work of an
unknown bard of the fourth century, and that successive minstrels from
time to time have added the names of famous heroes with which they were
acquainted[69]--a process to which the original plan of the poem may
well have offered inducement.
However this may be neither of the poems shows any characteristics
which suggest a later date than Beowulf. Both appear to be constructed
in strophic form, a feature rare elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon poetry, while
Deor also has a refrain, which is almost without parallel. Lastly, we
have seen that _Widsith_ occurs as a personal name, apparently in the
seventh century, and that this presupposes the existence not only of
the poem itself but also of the introduction, which is clearly later.
The case of Waldhere stands somewhat apart from the others, since it
has been suggested that this is really a translation of a lost German
poem, on which Ekkehard's Waltharius is also based. That the story
came from the Continent may of course be granted; but we have also to
consider when and in what form it was brought. The linguistic arguments
which have been adduced in favour of the German origin of the poem
are not now generally maintained. But it is further to be noticed
that the poet seems to have treated his subject very differently from
Ekkehard. The speeches, with which the fragments are entirely taken
up, have nothing corresponding to them in the Latin poem, while the
characterisation of the heroine is as unlike as it well could be.
Ekkehard represents her as a timid creature, but in the fragments she
displays a spirit which may fairly be called martial. It is unwise to
lay stress on agreements between Ekkehard and the fragments as against
the version of the story given in Thiðreks Saga af Bern. The less
complicated form of the latter--in which Guthhere is omitted and Hagena
represented as an officer of Attila, pursuing the fugitives--may be
due either to imperfect acquaintance with the story or, perhaps more
probably, to the conditions under which it had been preserved. We shall
see later that for a considerable period heroic poetry appears to have
been entirely neglected by the higher classes in Germany; and it may
be accepted as generally true that when stories are preserved only by
the peasants complex situations tend to become simplified, while all
except the most prominent characters drop out. As for the date at which
the story became known in England we may note that besides _Aetla_ and
_Hagena_, which may come from other sources, _Waldhere_, _Hildegyth_
and _Hereric_ were all names current during the seventh century. There
seems therefore to be no adequate reason for believing Waldhere to have
had a different history from the other heroic poems.
On the whole, taking all the poems, including Beowulf, together, we may
conclude with probability that they assumed substantially their present
form[70] in the course of the seventh century. But if our reasoning
with regard to the composition of Beowulf is correct we shall have to
refer the first treatment of the subject to the sixth century, i.e.
almost if not quite to the Heroic Age itself. Deor and Widsith may
quite possibly contain still older elements.
* * * * *
We may now turn to the Old Norse poems. Here the data at our disposal
are of a very different character, for the metrical evidence is said to
preclude the possibility that any of the extant poems date from before
the ninth century. It may perhaps be questioned whether all of them are
necessarily new compositions since that time--whether certain of them
may not be old poems somewhat recast. To this question however we can
hardly hope to obtain a satisfactory answer.
The fragmentary Ragnarsdrápa of Bragi Boddason, who seems to have lived
in the first half of the ninth century, is probably the earliest extant
piece which refers to stories of the Heroic Age. In this poem we find
allusions both to the story of Heðinn and Högni and to the attack made
upon Iörmunrekr by Hamðir and Sörli. Thiódolfr's Ynglingatal, perhaps
half a century later, contains references to the story of Hagbarðr and
Signý, as well as brief accounts of the Swedish kings Óttarr and Aðils,
who are mentioned in Beowulf (cf. p. 20). All these stories, except
that of Óttarr, are told also by Saxo, but in a somewhat different
form, which points to their derivation from Danish rather than Norse
sources[71].
On the other hand the stories of the Völsungar, Sigmundr and Sigurðr,
are not mentioned by any early Danish authority. The story of Sigurðr
is generally supposed to have been introduced into Norway from Germany;
and in some sense or other this would seem necessarily to be true,
since in the Northern version, as well as in the German, the scene
is laid chiefly in the Rhineland. But it is apparently impossible
to determine when and in what form the story was transmitted. We
have already noticed that there is archaeological evidence for a
considerable amount of communication between Norway (not Denmark) and
the southern (Frisian) coasts of the North Sea during the seventh
and eighth centuries, and this is clearly a factor which deserves to
be taken into account. Further, it is worth noting that, with the
exception perhaps of _Atli_[72], the names all appear in regular
Northern form[73], as if they had been known from the earliest times,
e.g. _Gunnarr_, _Högni_, _Giúki_, _Buðli_. This consideration, as far
as it goes, certainly favours a very early date; but it is hardly
conclusive[74].
The story of Sigmundr stands on a somewhat different footing. In the
first place Sigemund (Sigmundr) himself is little more than a name in
German tradition, while though _Welsung_ and _Sintarfizzilo_ occur
as personal names, they are not connected in any way with the story
of Siegfried. Again, in the Helgi poems, which contain no reference
to Sigurðr, Sigmundr is connected with the Baltic, and this is still
more clearly the case with his son Helgi, who is unknown to the German
story. Thirdly, in Beowulf, which knows Sigemund and Fitela, though
not Sigurðr, the former is brought into juxtaposition, and apparently
also into comparison, with a Danish prince named Heremod. The same two
persons are brought together also in the Old Norse poem Hyndlulióð,
while the Hákonarmál likewise seems to imply some connection between
them, as I have tried to show elsewhere[75]. Apart from the passages
specified this Hermóðr (Heremod) is apparently not mentioned in
Scandinavian literature, but the facts noted seem to indicate that
the two characters were connected in poetry before English and Danish
tradition became separated, i.e. presumably in the sixth century.
We have seen that many of the persons mentioned in the main narrative
of Beowulf were remembered also in Scandinavian tradition. But since
these persons are in all probability to be regarded as historical, it
is hardly safe to infer the existence of ancient Scandinavian poems,
unless the same incidents are related of them, which is generally not
the case. There is a rather striking verbal resemblance[76] between
the first speech of Wiglaf (Beow. 2633-60) and certain passages in
Biarkamál (especially Saxo's version), where Hialti is addressing
Biarki; and this fact is the more noteworthy if Biarki is really to be
identified with Beowulf. But the words themselves are of a somewhat
general character and might have been used on other occasions. Again
there is a certain affinity[77] between the account of the dragon-fight
in Beowulf and that of a similar incident related of Frotho I by Saxo
(p. 38 f.); and here again a connection can be traced indirectly
between the two heroes. But the story of Frotho seems really rather to
resemble the account given in Beowulf of Sigemund's dragon-fight; so it
may be questioned whether the points of affinity between the two did
not originally form part of a standard description of incidents of this
kind.
A clearer case is that of the poems attributed by Saxo to Starcatherus,
in which that warrior exhorts Ingellus to avenge his father. These
are clearly to be connected with the speech of the old warrior to
Ingeld in Beowulf (vv. 2047-2056), though there is little verbal
resemblance. Moreover we have seen (p. 41 f.) that in Alcuin's time
poems dealing with Ingeld were known and probably popular in England.
The relationship of the passage in Beowulf to these may be compared
with that of another passage (vv. 1068-1159) to the fragment dealing
with Finn. The poems on Ingeld given by Saxo are traced by Prof.
Olrik[78] to a Danish source; and there can be little doubt that his
view is correct, as they share the characteristics exhibited by other
stories which appear to come from the same quarter (cf. p. 111). Thus
the queen's name is not given and her brothers are described simply
as sons of Suertingus. Further, the story is cut right away from the
surroundings in which we find it in Beowulf, and it may be that for
a time it survived in Denmark only in ballad form. Yet, however much
change it had undergone before it came under Saxo's treatment, there
can be little doubt, in view of the English evidence, that its origin
is ultimately to be sought in heroic poetry, or at all events heroic
narrative, dating from the sixth century.
Lastly we must mention the story of Uffo's single combat, though,
strictly speaking, this is probably not of Danish origin. It was
certainly well known in England and there is good reason for believing
that its home is to be found in the district to which it refers,
i.e. the neighbourhood of Angel, Slesvig and Rendsburg. I have tried
elsewhere[79] to show that this story also rests on historical
foundations. But the details of the combat, as given by Saxo and Svend
Aagesen, and certain legendary features, such as the dumbness or
silence of the hero, which are present in both the Danish and English
versions of the story, strongly favour the view that it was embodied
in poetic form at a very early period. On the other hand there is
nothing to show that such poems survived till Saxo's time. The story is
apparently unknown to all Norse authorities.
* * * * *
Many of the German poems which have come down to us are known to be
derived, directly or indirectly, from earlier ones, but regarding the
antiquity of the latter nothing can be stated with certainty. The
Hildebrandslied, which is the only extant piece of early poetry, goes
back at all events to the eighth century. Further, the language[80]
used by Einhard in describing the poems collected by Charlemagne (cf.
p. 5 f.) would scarcely be appropriate unless they were believed to be
more than a century old by that time. We may probably therefore refer
them at least to the seventh century.
It seems likely that some of the lost poems of the Langobardi were of
still greater antiquity. In the poem which celebrated their victory
over the Vandals (cf. p. 10), a story with which we shall have to
deal more fully in a later chapter, a very prominent part appears to
have been played by the heathen gods. Such a piece can hardly have
been composed after the end of the fifth century, at which time the
Langobardi were already Christians.
Regarding the antiquity of Gothic heroic poetry there can be no
question, for Jordanes, our chief authority on this subject, wrote
about the middle of the sixth century, i.e. during the Heroic Age
itself. We have already noticed (p. 37) that his account of Eormenric
appears to be coloured by poetic tradition. But of the heroes whom
he enumerates (cap. 5) as celebrated in poetry, the only one of whom
we know anything, Vidigoia, is described as _Gothorum fortissimus_
in a quotation (cap. 34) from Priscus, who lived about a century
earlier[81]. There is good reason therefore for believing that the
Goths possessed heroic poems as early as the first half of the fifth
century.
We may now sum up briefly the results of our discussion. The heroic
poetry of the Goths certainly belonged to the Heroic Age itself, and it
is more than likely that certain Langobardic poems were nearly as old.
Some heroic poems belonging to other German peoples may probably be
referred at least to the seventh century. The chief monument of English
heroic poetry must be ascribed to the first half of that century, while
some of the other poems claim to be of greater antiquity. The lost
heroic poetry of the Danes seems to have been occupied largely with the
same subjects as the English poems, and since the stories generally
refer to the Baltic we may reasonably infer that heroic poetry
flourished in that region during the sixth century. On the whole then
it seems probable that the development of heroic poetry began in the
Heroic Age itself, not only among the Goths but throughout the greater
part of the Teutonic world.
FOOTNOTES:
[33] _Verba Dei legantur in sacerdotali conuiuio. ibi decet lectorem
audiri, non citharistam; sermones patrum, non carmina gentilium. quid
Hinieldus cum Christo? angusta est domus; utrosque tenere non poterit.
non uult rex coelestis cum paganis et perditis nominetenus regibus
communionem habere, quia rex ille aeternus regnat in coelo, ille
paganus perditus plangit in inferno. uoces legentium audiri in domibus
tuis, non ridentium turuam in plateis._ Mon. Germ., Epist. Carol. II
124; cf. O. Jänicke, ZfdA. XV 314.
[34] The names Grendel, Cain, Abel, Alexandreas and Casere are not
included.
[35] For the figures and the method of calculation see Note I.
[36] But open to very serious objections, as has been shown by Prof. W.
W. Lawrence in the _Publications of the Modern Language Association of
America_, XXIV 251 ff.
[37] Compound names containing _wīd-_ or _-sīþ_ (_-sinþ-_) are used in
other Teutonic languages; but the latter apparently does not occur in
England, while the former is extremely rare.
[38] In contrast with the body of the poem (vv. 10-134) it is
non-strophic, after the general fashion of Anglo-Saxon poetry.
Originally when the poem was recited it may have been introduced with
a short explanation in prose, such as we find e.g. in Rígsmál or
Atlakviða. The epilogue (vv. 135-143), which is likewise non-strophic,
may belong to the same stratum.
[39] Especially the regular use of unsyncopated forms such as 3 sg.
_onwindeð_, past part. _onsended_.
[40] The statistics for these poems are as follows: Juliana 27:3,
Christ (II) 28:3, Elene 66:9, Guthlac (A) 42:6, Dream of the Cross
10:5, Exodus 10:14, Beowulf 13:65; see Brandl, _S.-B. d. Akad. der
Wiss. zu Berlin_, 1905, p. 718 f.
[41] Cf. Brandl, _l.c._ (p. 721 ff.).
[42] Hist. Eccl., IV 24: _canebat autem de creatione mundi et origine
humani generis et tota genesis historia, de egressu Israel ex Aegypto
et ingressu in terram repromissionis, de aliis plurimis sacrae
scripturae historiis, de incarnatione dominica, passione, resurrectione
et ascensione in caelum, de Spiritus Sancti aduentu et apostolorum
doctrina. item de terrore futuri iudicii et horrore poenae gehennalis
ac dulcedine regni caelestis multa carmina faciebat; sed et perplura de
beneficiis et iudiciis diuinis, etc._ Prof. Brandl (_Grundr._, II 1028)
holds that the reference is to lyric poems throughout. But is this
interpretation really necessary?
[43] On this date see Note II.
[44] For a brief discussion of this question see Note III.
[45] A few examples are given in the following chapter.
[46] vv. 27, 72, 101, 570, 670, 706, 711, 756 (?), 786, 788, 790, 801,
806, 811, 852, 940, 967, 975, 986 (?), 1201, 1255, 1379, 1626, 1658,
1680, 1682, 2088, 2182, 2216 (?), 2276 (?), 2469, 2650, 3083 (?).
[47] vv. 168 f. (?), 227 f., 440 f., 478 f., 588 f., 625 f., 945 f.,
955 f., 1314 f., 1397 f., 1778 f., 1841 f., 1997 f., 2819 f., 2874 f.,
3108 f.
[48] vv. 13-17, 90-8, 106-14, 316-8, 381-4, 665-7 (?), 685-7, 696-702,
928-31, 977-9, 1056-62, 1261-5, 1271-6, 1553-6, 1609-11, 1661-4,
1688-93, 1716-8, 2291-3, 2329-31, 2341-3 (?), 2741-3, 2794-7, 2855-9,
3054-7, 3069-73.
[49] vv. 588 f., 977-9. 2741-3. 2819 f.
[50] It is perhaps worth noting that in v. 2186 the expression _dryhten
wereda_ is used of Hygelac. Elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon poetry this phrase
is applied only to the Deity.
[51] Clark Hall, _Beowulf_, p. xxviii.
[52] If there is Celtic influence at all it is more probably Welsh.
[53] Cf. p. 46, note, where the passage is quoted in full.
[54] The amount of freedom differs of course greatly from case to case
(cf. Note IV, p. 101 ff.); but it is only in communities which have
elaborated the art of minstrelsy to a very high degree that the form of
words can become absolutely stereotyped.
[55] _Beowulf_ (1889), pp. 110-160.
[56] _Quellen und Forschungen_, LXII (1888); summarised p. 242 ff.
[57] _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 93, note.
[58] The references quoted on p. 41 ff. preclude the possibility that
these stories were first acquired from the Danes, when the latter again
became known in this country about the close of the eighth century.
[59] A different view is taken by Schücking, _Beowulfs Rückkehr_
(Studien zur engl. Philologie, XXI), p. 65 ff.
[60] We may refer especially to the account of Attila's funeral given
by Jordanes, cap. 49 (from Priscus).
[61] Apart from certain expressions the general tone of these speeches,
especially the last words of all (v. 2813 ff.), is scarcely Christian;
but they contain nothing which is obviously opposed to Christian
doctrine.
[62] E.g. in the imprecation, v. 3069 ff. The imprecatory formulae of
charters can scarcely be regarded as analogous.
[63] Cf. Brandl, _op. cit._, p. 1003.
[64] The same idea is frequently expressed in the Homeric poems, e.g.
Il. VII 79 f., XXII 342 f., XXIII 75 f., XXIV 37 f., Od. XI 71 ff., etc.
[65] This date does not depend in any way on the question where the
poem originated. Cremation may possibly have lingered in Northumbria
longer than elsewhere; but that kingdom seems to have become entirely
Christian between 626 and 642.
[66] E.g. possibly some of the elegiac passages (e.g. vv. 2236-2270,
2450-2464), which show a certain resemblance to such poems as the Ruin
and the Wanderer.
[67] The name _Hegelinge_ in Kûdrûn is probably a corruption of
_Hetelinge_ (i.e. _Heodeningas_).
[68] Presumably including vv. 88-108; but I am not prepared to suggest
an elaborate analysis of the poem.
[69] These lists are perhaps derived in part from mnemonic
catalogues--'inventories' of the stories known to the minstrels who
composed them. Metrical catalogues of this kind are said to be in use
among Servian minstrels at the present day; cf. Krauss, _Slavische
Volkforschungen_, p. 186 ff., where a specimen is given.
[70] Waldhere, Deor and Widsith all contain 'Christian' passages,
like Beowulf. The interpolations in Widsith (e.g. vv. 15 f., 82 ff.)
appear to have been made by some one who possessed a certain amount of
erudition; but there is no need to attribute them to a different period.
[71] Cf. Olrik, _Kilderne til Sakses Oldhistorie_, p. 132.
[72] The name appears to have been quite common in the North during the
Viking Age; yet the apparent absence of umlaut suggests derivation from
a (Frisian?) form corresponding to the Ang.-Sax. _Aetla_ (cf. _Aecci_,
_Aeddi_ beside _Acca_, _Adda_).
[73] In contrast (e.g.) with _Kûdrûn_, which clearly shows its foreign
origin (cf. p. 34).
[74] Such names may have been current before, though their frequent
occurrence is no proof of this and may be due to the popularity of the
heroic poems. It is perhaps worth noting that alliteration is shown by
certain names which are generally believed to have been introduced into
the story in Norway or Iceland, e.g. _Oddrún_, _Erpr_, _Eitill_ with
_Atli_, _Giaflaug_, _Gullrönd_ (_Guðrún_?) with _Giuki_ and _Gunnarr_.
If we may judge from the genealogies in Landnámabók and elsewhere the
principle of alliteration seems to have been generally given up in
family names before the ninth century.
[75] _The Cult of Othin_, p. 51 f.
[76] Cf. Bugge, _Beiträge_, XII 45 ff.
[77] Cf. Sievers, _Ges. d. Wiss. zu Leipzig, Ber._ 1895, p. 180 ff.
[78] _Kilderne til Sakses Oldhistorie_, pp. 18 ff., 132.
[79] _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 118 ff.
[80] _Item barbara et antiquissima carmina, quibus ueterum regum actus
et bella canebantur, scripsit memoriaeque mandauit_ (Vita Caroli Magni,
cap. 29).
[81] Cassiodorus (_Var._ VIII 9) states that the Gothic king
Gensimundus, who according to Jordanes (cap. 48) reigned shortly
after Eormenric's death, was widely celebrated in poetry (_toto orbe
cantabilis_); but his name is preserved only in Gothic records.
NOTE I. THE USE OF HEROIC NAMES IN ENGLAND.
The distribution of heroic names in English historical documents is
as follows. The Liber Vitae contains 35 (37), of which nine (eleven)
are peculiar to that work[82]. Of those which occur in other documents
29[83] belong to persons born apparently before 700, six to such
persons only, 14 or 15[84] to persons born between 700 and 800, two to
such persons only, and 22[85] to persons born after 800, four to such
persons only. It must be remembered that, apart from the Liber Vitae,
the materials for the ninth and tenth centuries are much more abundant
than those for earlier times.
In the Liber Vitae itself it is possible within certain limits to
distinguish between persons of early and later date. Investigations in
the lists of kings, queens and abbots have shown that they are arranged
chronologically, and it is only reasonable therefore to expect that the
same is true of the much longer lists of clerics and monks. A brief
examination of the names will make it clear that such is actually the
case. Some modernisms of language, such as _-ferth_ for _-frith_, or
of orthography, such as _-ht-_ for _-ct-_, are practically confined
to the last parts of the lists, which may be by later hands[86]. But
even within the parts certainly written by the first scribe archaic
forms such as _-iu-_ for _-io-_ are more frequent at the beginning of
the lists than later; so also occasional _-b-_ for _-f-_. Above all
we may note the uncompounded names in _-i_, a type common in early
Anglo-Saxon, but practically extinct after the eighth century. Fol. 24,
the first in the clerics' list, contains eleven such names, while fol.
30 contains none; fol. 34, the first in the monks' list, has eight,
while fol. 38 has only one.
Now we shall probably be well within the mark if we assume that one
fifth of the names in each list[87] belong to persons born in the
seventh century. On this basis we find that of the 35 (37) heroic
names which occur in the Liber Vitae nine (ten) are limited to persons
of the seventh century[88], and twelve (thirteen) to persons of the
eighth[89]. The total number of names in each century (cf. p. 43) may
be obtained by comparing the evidence of the Liber Vitae with that of
the other documents[90].
The fact that so many heroic names occur in the Liber Vitae has led
several writers to conclude that the true home of English heroic
poetry was in the north. But no such inference is really justified
by the evidence. The number of personal names recorded for the south
of England during the sixth and seventh centuries is very small; yet
it is only here that we meet with persons called Eormenric, Hoc and
Hagena--names which belong to quite different cycles of story. Moreover
out of the 37 heroic names preserved in the Liber Vitae no less than
28 occur in place-names in various parts of England. The frequence
therefore of heroic names in the Liber Vitae is to be attributed
in part to the great abundance of the material and in part to its
comparatively early date.
Including the evidence of the Liber Vitae there are fifteen heroic
names which seem to be borne only by persons of the eighth century or
later times. Eight of these however occur also in place names[91]. Of
the remaining seven[92] all except one or possibly two[93] make their
appearance during the eighth century. On the other hand it has already
been mentioned that not less than nineteen heroic names[94] occur only
in local nomenclature.
We have still to mention a few heroic names which are not found in the
extant remains of Anglo-Saxon poetry. Theodhere (Diether) is known only
from the sixth century, Hild, Herding, Iuring, Omoling only from the
seventh, Hildegyth and Blaedla from the seventh and eighth, Wulfheard
from all periods, Ecga only from the eighth century, Ecgheard from
the eighth and ninth, Sigesteb only from the ninth. Hild, Wulfheard
and Ecga are found also in place-names. In some of these cases, e.g.
in that of Hildegyth, the non-occurrence of the name in the poems is
clearly due to mere accident; but it would scarcely be safe to assume
that all these characters were celebrated in Anglo-Saxon poetry.
FOOTNOTES:
[82] 37 (eleven), if we admit the emendation of the corrupt forms
_Vychga_ and _Vurmeri_ to _Wydiga_ (Widia, Wudga) and _Vyrmheri_
(Wyrmhere). See the Addenda.
[83] Ecglaf, Eadgils, Eomaer, *Eormenric, Frod(a), Hereric, *Hoc,
*Hrothmund, Ingeld, Offa, Oslaf, Sigemund, *Aehha, Sigeferth, Aetla,
*Hagena, Theodric, Waldhere, Becca, Witta, Wada, Oswine, Sigehere,
*Sceafthere, Alewih, Aelfwine, Eadwine, Wulfhere, Frithuric; perhaps
also Herebald. The asterisk denotes names limited to persons of the
sixth and seventh centuries.
[84] Eadgils, Eanmund, Heardred, Hygelac, Ingeld, Offa, Wermund,
Weohstan, Wiglaf, Wada, *Scilling, Oswine, Sigehere, *Gislhere (perhaps
Eomaer).
[85] *Aelfhere, Ecglaf, Eanmund, Heremod, Offa, Sigemund, Wermund,
Weohstan, Wiglaf, Wulfgar, Garwulf, *Ordlaf, Sigeferth, Waldhere,
Becca, Wada, *Hun, *Hringwald, Aelfwine, Eadwine, Wulfhere, Frithuric
(possibly also Deor).
[86] Only the earlier lists, those printed in Sweet's _Oldest English
Texts_, p. 154 ff., are taken into account.
[87] Lines 159-192 and 332-362 in Sweet's text.
[88] †Beowulf, †Billing, †Folcwald, Frod, Heremod, Hereric, Oslaf,
†Widsith, Alewih (†Widia?). Names marked with a dagger are confined to
the Liber Vitae.
[89] Eadgils, †Hildeburg, †Hrothwulf, Wiglaf, Wulfgar, Garwulf, Aetla,
Witta, †Heathuric, Sigeferth, Wulfhere, Frithuric (†Wyrmhere?). The
following names are found both in the early and late parts of the
lists: Eanmund, †Hama, Heardred, Hygelac, Ingeld, Offa, Sigemund,
Wermund, Theodric, Wada, Aelfwine, Eadwine, †Aegelmund; perhaps also
Herebald, if the abbot of this name is to be identified with the one
mentioned by Bede (_H. E._ V 6).
[90] For the details see the preceding notes.
[91] Hildeburg, Hrothwulf, Wiglaf, Wulfgar, Ordlaf, Hun, Hringwald,
Gislhere.
[92] Aelfhere, Weohstan, Garwulf, Scilling, Heathuric, Wyrmhere (?),
Dior.
[93] Aelfhere and Dior. The latter (in the form _Diar_) occurs only
once (Birch, _Cart. Sax._ 497) and may be a mistake for Diara (_ib._
507). The name Diora need not be of heroic origin; it may be an
abbreviation from such names as Diorwald, Diornoth.
[94] Breca, Finn, Fitela, Hengest, Hnaef, Hrethel, Scyld, Weland,
Guthhere, Geat, Gifeca, Heoden, Helm, Wald, Beaduca, Frithla, Secca,
Gifeca--to which we may add Waelse in Walsingaham. Widia is also to
be added, if it is not allowed for the Liber Vitae. For the list of
place-names (not the personal names) I am dependent upon Binz, _Beitr._
XX 141-223.
NOTE II. ON THE DATING OF CERTAIN SOUND-CHANGES IN ANGLO-SAXON.
In my _Studies in Old English_[95], published in 1899, I endeavoured
to formulate a scheme for dating approximately the chief sound-changes
which took place in English during the first few centuries after the
invasion of Britain. In the course of these investigations I was led
to the following conclusions (pp. 117, 253 ff.): i. that 'palatal
umlaut' in Northumbrian and the dialect of the Vespasian Psalter took
place before 650; ii. that the change from _ǣ_ to _ē_ (in all dialects
except West Saxon) was in operation about 650-680; iii. that the loss
of intersonantal _h_ (in all dialects) belongs to the same period or a
little later; iv. that contraction through loss of intervocalic _h_ may
be dated roughly between 680-710; v. that the loss of final _-u_ after
long syllables and in words of the form ⏑⏑⏑ took place in all dialects
at a time approximately contemporaneous with the operation of palatal
umlaut in Northumbrian (i.e. before 650).
Prof. Morsbach in his paper _Zur Datierung des Beowulfepos_[96] has
dealt with several of the same problems and come to conclusions which
differ widely from those at which I arrived. The chief differences are
as follows: i. that after a long syllable which bore the chief accent
_-u_ was not lost before the end of the seventh century, though after
a long 'nebentonig' syllable the loss was somewhat earlier (p. 261
f.); ii. that intervocalic _h_ was lost in Kentish by about 680, but
in Mercian and Northumbrian the same change cannot be shown to have
taken place before about 700 (p. 264); iii. that postconsonantal _h_
(before vowels) was retained in Kentish in 679; its loss, at least in
Mercian and Northumbrian, may be dated about 700, but after the loss of
_-u_ (p. 265). In summarising the results of his discussion (p. 273)
he gives "about 700" for the loss of postconsonantal _h_ and "shortly
before 700" for the loss of _-u_. Incidentally he follows Bülbring
(_Elementarbuch_, §§ 146, 528) in dating the origin of _ē_ (from 'West
Germ.' _ā_) before the breaking, and in placing the loss of _h_ before
_l_ (in _neolaecan_) anterior to the operation of 'palatal umlaut'
(monophthongisation).
The importance of this discussion for our present purpose[97] lies
in the dates proposed for the loss of _-u_ and of postconsonantal _h_.
Prof. Morsbach concludes that Beowulf cannot have been composed before
700, since it contains a number of half-verses which would have been
metrically impossible before the operation of these changes, e.g.
_ofer fealone flod(u)_, _to widan feor(h)e_. I have already expressed
scepticism as to whether such inferences are really justifiable. This
applies more particularly to the verses affected by the question of
postconsonantal _h_, which are quite few in number. The date which
Prof. Morsbach himself (p. 274) proposes for the composition of Beowulf
is 700-730. He finds no difficulty in reconciling this with the
statistics (given above, p. 45) for the use of the article. This seems
to me rather strange; yet the opinion of a scholar who stands in such
deservedly high estimation cannot lightly be disregarded.
Now let us examine the evidence on which these conclusions are based.
First it will be convenient to take the loss of _h_. Prof. Morsbach
holds that in Kentish intervocalic _h_ was lost before postconsonantal
_h_. The evidence is derived from a single charter issued by King
Hlothhere in 679 (Birch, _Cart. Sax._ 45), which contains the
place-name _Vuestan ae_ beside the personal name _Velhisci_ (Latin
Gen.). But surely conclusions of this kind are admissible only when
a number of examples can be adduced. On the same principle we might
argue from the name _Irminredi_ (in the same charter) that the change
_ǣ_ > _ē_ had taken place and also from the name _Aedilmaeri_ (again
in the same charter) that it had not. And what should we do with the
earliest East Saxon charter (Birch, 81), in which the grantor is called
both _Oedelraedus_ and _Ho(di)lredus_? Again, it is clear that Bede
wrote his own name _Baeda_; but will anyone venture to hold that this
represents the current pronunciation of his name in 731--or indeed for
some half a century earlier? In personal names we must clearly allow
for traditional orthography. The form _Irminredi_ may no doubt be used
as evidence for the change _ǣ_ > _ē_, and similarly the form _Vuestan
ae_ may be used as evidence for the loss of _h_. But forms, especially
personal names, like _Velhisci_ and _Aedilmaeri_, which must long
have been in use, may very well show an antiquated orthography--one
which correctly represented the pronunciation of thirty or forty years
previously. A single instance of such a kind is totally insufficient
ground for supposing that the Kentish dialect treated postconsonantal
and intervocalic _h_ differently.
Next we must consider the date given for the loss of _h_ in Mercian
and Northumbrian (p. 263 f.). I find some difficulty here in
following Prof. Morsbach's line of argument. In Northumbrian there
is, admittedly, no evidence at all for the preservation of _h_, while
cases of its omission are numerous in Bede's History (written in 731),
in addition to one or two instances in probably earlier authorities.
For Mercian[98] we are dependent on the Epinal, Erfurt and Corpus
glossaries, the archetype of which is placed before 700 by Prof.
Morsbach. In my _Studies_, p. 232, I came to the conclusion that
in this archetype the cases of retention and omission of _h_ were
probably about equal in number. Prof. Morsbach replies that there is
no necessity for such a conclusion, since all the extant glossaries
themselves date from times when _h_ was already lost. He himself
decides[99] against the loss of _h_ in the archetype for two reasons:
(1) because postconsonantal and intervocalic _h_ are treated alike in
the glossaries and the former was still retained in Kentish when the
archetype was written[100]; (2) because the assumption of such an early
date for the loss of _h_ would be incompatible with his own date for
the loss of _-u_. The first of these arguments, it will be seen, rests
upon the dating of the loss of postconsonantal _h_ in Kentish, on which
enough has been said above. The second depends upon a hypothesis which
we shall have to consider presently.
My reason for concluding that the loss of _h_ occurred in the archetype
was that in at least eight entries (probably several more) all three
glossaries agree in showing forms without _h_. It is to be remembered
that in these glossaries we are dealing not with independent documents
but with copies made, more or less mechanically, from one original.
This remark applies of course much more to Epinal and Erfurt than to
Corpus; for in the latter the materials have been rearranged, as well
as augmented from other sources, while incidentally the forms have been
modernised to a considerable extent. In Epinal such modernisation is
not unknown, but it is restricted within very narrow limits, as may be
seen from the use of _b_ and _f_[101]. Further, it is to be remarked
that we have no ground for assuming the language of the archetype
itself to have been consistent. The occurrence of numerous Dative
forms and of expressions containing more than one word (e.g. _per
anticipationem_--_þorch obst_) shows that the materials were derived
largely from glosses in books, just as in the Leiden glossary[102].
Many of these glosses may have been written a generation or more
earlier than the compilation of the archetype glossary. Whoever bears
these facts in mind and at the same time compares the evidence for
forms with and without _h_ with that for _f_ and _b_ will, I think,
be forced to the conclusion that the forms with _h_ do not represent
the pronunciation of the compiler of the archetype, but that they were
taken over by him from earlier sources.
Now we may take the evidence for the proposed date of the loss of
_-u_. After enumerating (p. 253 ff.) a list of cases which have been
suggested by various scholars Prof. Morsbach comes to the conclusion
that the only certain example of a form in which _-u_ is retained[103]
is the word _flodu_ in the inscription on the Franks casket. As the
whole theory largely depends on the value attached to this form we must
consider it carefully. In my _Studies_, p. 156, I suggested that it
should be regarded as an archaism and at the same time pointed out that
_-u_ is lost in another word (_unneg_) in the same inscription. Prof.
Morsbach rejects this explanation of _unneg_, which he connects,
rightly, I think now, with O. Sax. _nah_. But this form can come
perfectly well from *_nāh(w)u_ (earlier *_nēhwō_), if not from *_nāhwa_
(cf. Goth. _nehwa_, _nehw_). That Ang.-Sax. _neah_, _neh_ has lost
an _u_-sound is, I contend, shown not only by the Gothic forms, but
also by _neolaecan_ and _neowest_ (cf. Lind, _genehwaþ_, etc.). Prof.
Morsbach rejects my explanation of these forms also and adopts that
of Prof. Bülbring, as stated above. But the latter is untenable; for
if _ē_ (from _ā_) had come into existence before the operation of
breaking, we should never find forms with _ae_, which as a matter
of fact are fairly common in the earliest texts of all dialects. In
particular we may note that the three extant coins of the Mercian king
Aethelred (675-704) all have _-ræd_. Hence the change _ǣ_ > _ē_ can
hardly have taken place much before 650.
Apart from _unneg_[104], there are three forms on the recently
discovered right side of the casket which may show loss of _-u_. Prof.
Napier (_An English Miscellany_, p. 375 f.) is inclined to regard the
forms _sær_ and _dœn_ (?), if not also _hos_, as Nom. sg. fem. But the
interpretation of this part of the inscription is still uncertain in
many details.
I confess that since the discovery of the new side I am less inclined
to regard the form _flodu_ as an archaism than as a mere blunder. Even
in the more intelligible parts of the inscription we find a number of
forms which present serious difficulty: _Romwalus_, _Reumwalus_[105],
_gasric_, _Giuþeasu_. The last of these still seems to me to present
the best illustration of _flodu_. If the one is due to the loss of
some letters--e.g. _su_ for _su(mæ)_--the same may be the case with
the other[106]. At all events an inscription which presents so many
difficulties cannot be regarded as a safe authority on which to base a
scheme for the chronology of sound-changes.
The only other instance of _-u_ on which Prof. Morsbach lays any
weight is the form _aetgaru_ in the Erfurt glossary. He speaks of
it as 'nicht unwahrscheinlich' (p. 257), though 'fraglich' (p. 264).
Many scholars cite it as an example of_-u_ without reserve. Now in
order to form a just estimate of the value of any form which occurs
in the glossaries it is obviously necessary to take it in connection
with the forms which the other texts show in the same entry. The entry
in question (_framea_--_aetgaru_) occurs in the Epinal and Corpus
glossaries, as well as in that of Erfurt, though the two former have
_aetgaeru_ (_ætgaeru_) for _aetgaru_. There can be no doubt that the
relationship between the three glossaries is as follows:
x (Arch. I)
|
|--------------------|
| |
y (Arch. II) |
| |
|--------------| |
| | |
Epinal Erfurt Corpus
though we do not know exactly how many intermediate stages lie between
the extant texts and the original archetype. It will be seen that the
question at issue is whether the Erfurt glossary or the other two have
kept the original form--for if the archetype had contained both forms
we may assume that some trace of the double entry would have been
preserved (as in other cases). Now the Erfurt glossary is the latest of
the three, it is the work of a foreign scribe and it is very carelessly
copied. Moreover, no letter or combination of letters has suffered more
than _ae_. Most usually this combination has been reduced to _e_; but
the loss of _e_ is not infrequent, e.g. _smal_, _hrad_, _nacthegelae_.
In view of these facts it is unintelligible to me how anyone can
uphold the evidence of the Erfurt glossary against the other two. But
in this case it is used to prove the existence of an archaic form for
which none of the glossaries elsewhere present a parallel. Lastly, we
may remark that though it is frequently assumed that the word _gar_
was an _u_-stem (*_gaizu-_) no evidence worth consideration has ever
been adduced to prove it[107]. On all grounds therefore we are brought
to the conclusion that the evidence for the preservation of _-u_ in
_aetgaru_ is not merely open to question but entirely worthless.
We must now notice certain early documents in which _-u_ is clearly
lost. Prof. Morsbach mentions the form _felt_ in the earliest East
Saxon charter (Birch, 81), which dates from 692-3. Here then _-u_ was
lost before the date in question[108]. But we can get back further
than this, for the place mentioned is called _Vuidmundes felt_. Some
considerable time must have elapsed after the loss of _-u_ before a
noun, even a proper name, could change its inflection and adopt the
endings of _a_-stems.
Next let us take the Northumbrian evidence. The form _-gar_ on the
Bewcastle column can prove nothing. In the same inscription however we
may find an example in _Cyniburug_; for in view of _hnutu_ etc. it is
probable that consonantal stems used what was originally the Accus.
sg. form also for the Nom. sg. (as in Old Norse). I cannot see any
probability in the suggestion that this monument may date from some
considerable time after 670[109], if it has been rightly interpreted.
More important is the fact that no example of _-u_ after a long
syllable is preserved in Bede's Ecclesiastical History. It is to
be observed that Bede seems to have scrupulously followed the
orthographical peculiarities of the documents which he used. Thus
in Papal letters dating from the first half of the seventh century
we find such forms as _Adilbercto_, _Audubaldi_ which are not used
elsewhere in the work[110]. Now in the record of the proceedings at
the Council of Hertford in 673, which is quoted in IV 5, we find the
forms _Herutford_, _Vilfrid_, _Vynfrid_, _Hrofaescaestir_; and in the
similar record for the Council of Hatfield in 680, quoted in IV 17,
we find the form _Haethfelth_. If_-u_ had not been lost by this time
the forms used must have been _-fordu_ or _-fordus_, _Vilfridu(s)_,
etc., and it is most unlikely, in view of Bede's practice elsewhere,
that he would have altered them. As a matter of fact the latter of
these documents contains two forms--_Hymbronensium_ (or _Humbr-_) and
_Estranglorum_--which are not used elsewhere by Bede. Again, the same
author almost always writes the name of the Northumbrian king Ecgfrith
(r. 671-685) as _Ecgfrid_ (in the Nom.). That this represents the
contemporary orthography is shown by a coin of that king which bears
the legend _Ecgfrid rex_.
But further, there is a whole series of names, much used in
Northumbria, which have as their second element _-haeþ_ from earlier
_-haþu_ (e.g. _Eadhaed_). At the time when _-u_ was lost here the
change _a_ > _æ_ was clearly still operative. Will anyone suggest that
this was the case after the middle of the seventh century? Again, it
can hardly be doubted that the form _Osuiu_, if not also _Osuald_,
represents the pronunciation[111] current in the time of that king. In
Bede's History, III 29, we have extracts from a Papal letter addressed
to _Osuiu_ (v. l. _Osuio_) _regi Saxonum_. The form _os-_ can scarcely
have become current in compounds before _-u_ was lost in the Nom.,
Accus. sg.
It is surely unnecessary to enter into further details. We have seen
that practically the whole evidence for the proposed chronology
consists of two forms, _Velhisci_ and _flodu_, one of which is
incapable of proving what it is meant to prove, while the other is of
exceedingly doubtful value; and on the other hand that this chronology
has opposed to it a large number of forms in the glossaries, in
charters and in early Northumbrian authorities of various kinds. Now
let us consider the various sound-changes in relation to one another.
It is admitted, and necessarily so, that the loss of _-u_ took place
before the loss of _h_. For the sake of convenience we may apply the
terms 'Period I' to times anterior to the loss of _-u_ and 'Period
II' to the interval between the two changes. From neither of these
periods have we any texts surviving, unless we are to reckon the
inscription on the Franks casket to Period I. Our earliest charters,
and apparently also the lost archetype of the glossaries, were composed
at a later time ('Period III') when _h_ was no longer pronounced,
though doubtless often written. But before the date of the earliest
extant glossary (Epinal) a further change or changes had taken place
which brought about the confusion of original _ƀ_ and _f_. It is clear
from a comparison of the glossaries that this confusion was later than
the loss of _h_ and also that it was almost, if not entirely, unknown
to the archetype. So also in Northumbrian. In Bede's History we have
no instance of _h_ preserved in an English word, whereas examples of
its omission are numerous. On the other hand it is clear that Bede
usually retained the distinction between _b_ (i.e. _ƀ_) and _f_,
although the latter has already largely encroached on the former in
the Moore MS.[112] We may therefore constitute two subdivisions of the
period subsequent to the loss of _h_, namely 'Period III' prior to the
confusion of _ƀ_ and _f_ and 'Period IV' subsequent to this confusion.
Now we can see clearly where to date the Franks casket, for it shows
confusion of _ƀ_ and _f_ in _wylif_--according to Prof. Morsbach also
in _sefu_. It belongs therefore not to Period I but to Period IV.
Any attempt to fix an absolute chronology is of course rendered
difficult by the absence of very early texts. We may probably assume
that Period IV begins more or less about 700. The Kentish charter
of 679 falls in Period III. Now when _-u_ was lost, _h_ (whether
intervocalic or postconsonantal) must have been a spirant--a fact which
Prof. Morsbach seems to have entirely ignored. It is quite incredible
that only a few years should elapse between that stage and the total
loss of intervocalic _h_ seen in the charter. The corresponding period
in Germany lasted centuries, and I cannot conceive how the transition
can have been accomplished anywhere in less than half a century. I
conclude therefore that the dates which I gave in my Studies were
approximately correct. If there was an error it was in putting some
of the changes slightly too late. I have little hesitation now in
expressing my opinion that the loss of _-u_ took place not later than
the second or third decade of the seventh century.
FOOTNOTES:
[95] _Transactions of the Cambridge Philological Society_, Vol. IV,
Part II. The page-references are to the figures in the outer corners.
[96] _Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu
Göttingen_, 1906, pp. 251-277.
[97] Prof. Morsbach's paper raises a number of questions besides those
mentioned above. But I am obliged here to confine my attention to those
which have a bearing on the dating of Beowulf.
[98] The application of this term to the Epinal and Erfurt glossaries
(or the archetype) seems to me to be open to grave objection.
[99] If I have interpreted his meaning correctly. But I admit that I
have had great difficulty in understanding the argument in paragraph 5
of p. 263 (especially the "mit _-h-_" of line 12).
[100] Prof. Morsbach seems to regard Kentish as exceptional in its
treatment of intervocalic _h_, rather than in that of postconsonantal
_h_. I am not quite clear as to his reason for this.
[101] Cf. _Studies in Old English_, p. 240.
[102] This text represents a more primitive type of glossary than the
others and, though it is not an ancestor of theirs, it has without
doubt used a considerable number of the same glosses (especially in
Sweet's § XLV) which were incorporated in their archetype.
[103] The form _scanomodu_ on the solidus need not be taken into
account. It is improbable that coins of this type were minted after the
sixth century.
[104] Prof. Morsbach further argues that even if my interpretation of
_unneg_ was correct it would prove nothing, since _-u_ was probably
lost after a long 'nebentonig' syllable earlier than after a long
'haupttonig' syllable. But neither the _-gar_ of the Bewcastle
inscription (cf. p. 70) nor the _felt_ of the East Saxon charter can be
admitted as evidence for this hypothesis.
[105] In spite of what is said by Prof. Morsbach (p. 264 f.) these
forms are scarcely intelligible unless _h_ was already lost.
[106] E.g. perhaps _flod u(p)ahof_.
[107] The place-name _Wihtgarabyrg_ in the Saxon Chronicle, ann. 530
(B, C), 544 (A, B, C) is more probably to be regarded as a corruption
of _Wihtwara-_ through the influence of the personal name _Wihtgar_.
[108] Prof. Morsbach's explanation is that _felt_ here is a long
nebentonig syllable. But we have no evidence that the influence of
'sentence-accent' made itself felt in this way.
[109] Prof. Morsbach would assign the monument to the time of Aldfrith,
who reigned 685-705 (not 725, a printer's error in Vietor's book).
[110] In his own narrative of course he often uses forms which must
have been antiquated in his time (e.g. _Vurtigerno_, _Aeduini_,
_Aeodbaldo_) and also foreign forms in the names of persons of
Continental origin (e.g. _Agilberctus_). But it may safely be assumed
that all these cases are derived from earlier documents.
[111] I.e. Oswiu (Oswald); cf. _Baduuini_, i.e. Baduwini. I have not
taken account of the possibility that _-uiu_ originally contained
an _-h-_. If that could be proved the present discussion would be
practically superfluous.
[112] Cf. my Studies, p. 247. It will be seen that the number of cases
in which M, B and C agree in _f_ (for _ƀ_) is very small.
NOTE III. LITERARY INFLUENCE IN BEOWULF.
I am not aware that any serious argument has been brought forward
to show that Beowulf was a literary production. It is customary
indeed, especially among English scholars, to use the word 'write'
with reference to its composition; but this is frequently due to
mere carelessness. Nevertheless there is undoubtedly a widespread
reluctance to admit that the poem came into existence without the
use of writing--partly on account of its length and partly because
its technique is of rather an advanced order. The first of these
difficulties has now been definitely settled by the Servian poems, as
we shall see in the next Note. Here we need concern ourselves only with
the second.
The most definite pronouncement on this subject known to me is
contained in Prof. Ker's book, _The Dark Ages_, p. 250. "_Beowulf_
and _Waldere_," he says, "are the work of educated men, and they were
intended, no doubt, as books to read. They are not, like the _Elder
Edda_, a collection of traditional oral poems." Here we have three
distinct statements. That Beowulf and Waldhere are not a collection of
poems, like the Edda, is manifest. Whether they are traditional oral
poems at all is a different question, the answer to which depends in
the first place on our attitude to Prof. Ker's second statement--that
they were intended as books to read. But this statement surely requires
some evidence. The only argument brought forward is that "the _Beowulf_
MS ... is intended as a book to be read, and is got up with some care.
From the look of it, one places it naturally in the library of a great
house or a monastic school; and the contents of it have the same sort
of association; they do not belong to the unlearned in their present
form." But, so far as the earlier part of this passage goes, the
argument applies only to the tenth century. No one will deny that the
earlier Anglo-Saxon poems were studied at that time; indeed they had
probably come to be regarded as, in a sense, classical. But have we
any right to assume that scholars of the seventh or eighth centuries
viewed these poems or their subjects in a similar light? If so how are
we to account for the total absence of references to such subjects in
the works of Bede? And what about Alcuin? _Quid Hinieldus cum Christo?_
Is it likely that Alcuin would have regarded these _pagani et perditi
reges_ as suitable subjects for the attention of scholars? The natural
presumption from his language is that he knew of them not from literary
works, but only from street-minstrels whom he looked upon with disgust.
Yet Bede and Alcuin can hardly have been ignorant of any important
literary activity during their times, and it would be unfair to regard
them merely as religious bigots. In view of their silence it seems
to me a precarious hypothesis even that the poems were committed to
writing much before the end of the eighth century.
There is no doubt of course that the writing of English was in common
use during the early part of the ninth century. But the paucity of
earlier evidence renders it probable that this was a recent innovation;
and the orthographical characteristics of eighth century documents
point to the same conclusion. Laws were written in English from the
beginning; but we may safely assume that this was done by professional
scribes, in all probability ecclesiastics. Otherwise there is little
definite evidence for the writing of the vernacular, except of course
in glosses. The more learned clergy clearly preferred to use Latin;
for the less learned Bede states (_Ep. ad Ecgb._, cap. 5) that he had
himself had to make translations even of the Creed and the Lord's
Prayer, for them to learn by heart. Where was a reading public to be
looked for in such a period[113]?
But we have yet to discuss the statement that "_Beowulf_ and _Waldere_
are the work of educated men." The question here is what is meant by
the word 'educated.' Nowadays the expression 'educated Chinese' is
used in more than one sense. Sometimes it is applied to those who have
received a good education according to the traditional standard of
that nation. Sometimes however, especially in newspaper language, it
is used only of those Chinese who have received a Western education.
We need not doubt that the poets of Beowulf and Waldhere were among
the best educated men of their day according to the traditional native
standard. If they were court minstrels--a question we shall have to
discuss in the next chapter--they could hardly be otherwise. But this
is not what Prof. Ker means. The education which he has in view is of
foreign (Roman) type, as may be seen by the latter part of the second
of the quotations given above. Again (p. 252) he says: "The English
epic is possibly due to Virgil and Statius; possibly to Juvencus
and other Christian poets, to the authors studied by Aldhelm and
Bede." If so[114], is it not remarkable that no obvious trace of such
influence can be pointed out? It must not be assumed that the poets
responsible for the composition or preservation of Beowulf would have
any inclination to disguise their knowledge of foreign poetry. The use
which they have made of incidents derived from the Bible is decisive
evidence to the contrary, although their knowledge of this subject
seems to have been of a most elementary description. In Widsith we
actually have at least one reference to a classical character (v. 15
ff.). But Beowulf is entirely free from anything of the kind.
Prof. Brandl[115] has likewise been attracted by the idea that the
growth of Anglo-Saxon epic poetry may have been due to Latin models.
As a probable source of such influence he has fixed upon the Aeneid
and even indicated a number of passages in this poem which may have
suggested certain scenes and incidents in Beowulf. Thus he notes that
both poems begin with the story of a wanderer (Scyld, Aeneas) who came
over the sea (_feasceaft_, _primus et profugus_) and founded a great
dynasty or empire. Then he suggests a connection between the song of
Hrothgar's minstrel on the Creation (Beow. 90 ff.) and a passage (Aen.
I 742 ff.) which describes how Dido's minstrel Iopas sang of the origin
of men and beasts, among other cosmological subjects. Further, he
compares the whole of the scene which contains the latter passage with
the account of Beowulf's reception at Heorot, noting the various stages
in the arrival of the two heroes from their disembarkation to the feast
with which they are welcomed in the palaces. Incidentally, he remarks
that at the feast Wealhtheow hands the cup to Hrothgar and then to the
visitors (Beow. 615 ff.), while Dido pays the same honour to Bitias
(Aen. I 738). Lastly, he compares the racing after Grendel's overthrow
(Beow. 864 ff.) with the rowing contest in memory of Anchises (Aen. V
104 ff.).
I confess that, coming as they do towards the close of an admirable
discussion of the subject, which no attentive student of Beowulf
can fail to appreciate, the comparisons suggested by Prof. Brandl
strike me as surprising beyond measure. The resemblances between the
athletic contests, so far as they have any existence at all, are due to
practices which are worldwide. Is there any reason for supposing that
the act of courtesy ascribed to Wealhtheow was not in full accordance
with early Teutonic custom? Parallels may be found, easily enough, in
Old Norse literature. The arrival of the wanderer (Scyld, not Beowulf)
has nothing in common with that of Aeneas. The one is a baby and
probably alone; the other is the commander of a fleet. Then, as to
the resemblance between Beowulf's visit to Hrothgar and Aeneas' visit
to Dido, I can only say that I fail to detect its existence. Prof.
Brandl seems to lay most stress on this incident and points out certain
parallelisms in the language: _corripuere uiam qua semita monstrat_
(Aen. I 418) with _stig wisode gumum aetgaedere_ (Beow. 320 f.),
and _coram quem quaeritis adsum Troius Aeneas_ (Aen. I 595 f.) with
_Beowulf is min nama_ (Beow. 343). But are these not purely accidental
coincidences, such as one could find between almost any two narrative
poems? When Prof. Brandl speaks of Aeneas' "Verhandlung mit Dido zuerst
durch eine etikettegemässe Mittelsperson", I do not understand what is
meant. Certainly this description applies to the entry of Beowulf. But
Aeneas is present beforehand, shrouded in a cloud with which Venus has
covered him. In the midst of the scene the cloud is suddenly parted and
Aeneas disclosed to Dido's eyes. It seems to me that no meeting could
well be more different. There remains then only the fact that the two
minstrels treat a somewhat similar theme (though in Beowulf this does
not take place on the occasion of the hero's arrival). It is no doubt a
curious coincidence; but the introduction of such a subject in Beowulf
may be accounted for quite satisfactorily without the hypothesis of any
acquaintance with Virgil.
I cannot quit this subject without remarking how much more plausible
a case could be made out for deriving Beowulf from the Homeric poems,
especially the Odyssey. Here there are striking parallels both in
diction and terminology, as we shall see in a later chapter. We may
note especially the epithets applied to princes and the formulae with
which speeches are introduced. If we wish to find a real parallel to
the reception of Beowulf by Hrothgar, it is provided by the account of
Telemachos' visit to Menelaos. Similar parallels are to be obtained
for the minstrel's lays and many other incidents. Are we then to
suppose that Beowulf is based upon the Odyssey? That is a hypothesis
which I will gladly leave for others to work out. For my own part I
prefer the explanation that similar poetry is the outcome, or rather
the expression, of similar social conditions. But in Beowulf and
the Homeric poems, as against the Aeneid, we have additional common
elements in the fact that the interest is centred in the actual
characters--not in the destiny of their descendants--and in the
vividness and reality of the narratives, in spite of Grendel, Scylla
and the rest. The latter of these two common features seems to me to
indicate that both the Greek and English poets were depicting types
of life with which they were themselves familiar, whereas no one will
dispute that the Aeneid is a product of the library.
Half a century ago, when the study of Teutonic antiquity was still
young, there was a general eagerness to refer every institution and
belief to a native origin. To-day we see the inevitable reaction--a
hypercritical attitude towards every explanation of this character,
coupled with a readiness to accept theories of biblical or classical
influence on the slightest possible evidence. It is this intellectual
atmosphere which, naturally enough, has given birth to the chimaera of
a literary Beowulf--a creature which, if I am not mistaken, belongs to
the same genus as certain well-known theories in Northern mythology.
FOOTNOTES:
[113] The case of King Aldfrith shows that educated laymen were not
entirely unknown; but it is extremely unlikely that they were common.
In one charter (Birch, 99) Wihtred, king of Kent, is made to say:
_signum sanctae crucis pro ignorantia litterarum expressi_. This
document exists only in a late copy; but at all events it suggests that
the practice of making the cross, instead of signing, was due to a
widespread inability to write.
[114] I confess that I am strongly inclined to suspect that anyone
imbued with Latin learning would have lacked not only the inclination
but also the ability to compose such a poem as Beowulf. This however is
an opinion which could only be substantiated by a wider knowledge of
the history of poetry in various parts of the world than I can make any
claim to possess.
[115] _Grundriss d. germ. Philol._, II 1008.
CHAPTER V.
THE POETRY AND MINSTRELSY OF EARLY TIMES.
In the preceding chapters we have seen that the persons and events
celebrated in the heroic poems apparently all belonged to the
fourth, fifth or sixth centuries, and further that heroic poetry was
flourishing among the Goths during the same period. For the existence
of English, Scandinavian or German heroic poetry at this time we have
no absolutely conclusive evidence. But the materials from which our
poems are formed must largely be referred to the sixth century. This
may be seen most clearly in cases where the poems of two or more
nations not merely treat an identical theme but also agree in the
motif or in comparatively small details, as in the stories of Ingeld,
Waldhere and Svanhildr. A like age is probably to be attributed
to resemblances in language, such as those shown by the hortatory
addresses and the accounts of dragon-fights cited in the last chapter
(p. 60 f.). The fact that these resemblances sometimes occur in stories
relating to entirely different characters need not prevent us from
believing that they spring ultimately from a common origin.
It cannot of course be proved that the materials from which the heroic
poems are derived were themselves always in poetic (metrical) form. In
principle we must admit the possibility that they were transmitted from
one generation to another in a more or less stereotyped form of prose
narrative, such as we find later in the sagas of Iceland and Ireland.
But in point of fact we have no evidence whatever for the cultivation
of such traditional prose narratives among any of the early Teutonic
peoples, whereas there is good reason, as we shall see shortly, for
believing that narrative poetry was both ancient and widely cultivated.
In the first place we may note that English and German poetry down
to the ninth century shared a common system of metre and that the
Fornyrðislag, which is used in most of the Edda poems, differed but
little from this type, except of course that it was always arranged in
strophes. The application of this common metre to narrative purposes
can scarcely be regarded as a recent innovation, for English and
German poems frequently exhibit verses and half-verses of very similar
construction. Thus in the Hildebrandslied speeches are generally
introduced with the formula: _Hadubrant gimahalta, Hiltibrantes sunu_,
which is almost identical with a formula used in Beowulf: _Wiglaf
maðelode, Weohstanes sunu_. In the same German poem (v. 42) we find the
verse: _dat sagetun mi seolidante_ ('it has been told me by mariners'),
with which we may compare Beow. 377: _þonne saegdon þaet saeliðende_.
Note should also be taken of such phrases as (v. 55) _ibu dir din
ellen taoc_ ('if thy prowess is sufficient') and definitely poetical
expressions like (v. 43) _inan wic furnam_ ('war carried him off'),
as compared with Beow. 572 _ðonne his ellen deah_ and 1080 _wig ealle
fornam Finnes þegnas_. The number of such parallels might be greatly
increased if we were to take into account passages from religious
poems, especially the Old Saxon Heliand.
For a very much earlier period direct evidence is furnished by the
Roman historian Tacitus, who says (_Germ._ 2) that the Germani
possessed ancient poems or songs (_carmina_) even in his time and adds
expressly that they had no other means of preserving a historical
record[116]. That these poems were partly of what may be called a
'heroic' character is clear from another passage (_Ann._ II 88),
where it is stated that Arminius was still a subject of poetry among
barbarian nations (_canitur ... adhuc barbaras apud gentes_). In both
cases the reference is in all probability to the peoples of western
Germany rather than to the Goths.
On the whole then we need not doubt that the heroic poetry which we
find in England and Germany during the seventh and eighth centuries
had a long history behind it. Of course as to the form of the poetry
current in the first century we are entirely without information. Many
scholars hold that it was exclusively choric, not only in Tacitus' time
but for four or five centuries later. This is one of the questions
which we shall have to bear in mind in the course of our discussion.
* * * * *
The earliest historical reference to the cultivation of poetry, or
rather perhaps minstrelsy, in England occurs in Bede's account of the
poet Caedmon (_Hist. Eccl._ IV 24). In this story we are told that
it was the custom that, when the villagers met together to drink and
amuse themselves, everyone should take his turn in singing to the harp.
Caedmon, who had never been able to learn a song, used to leave the
festivities and make his way home as soon as he saw the harp coming
in his direction[117]. No information is given as to the character of
these songs. Probably they would as a rule be quite short--perhaps not
much longer than the hymn learned by Caedmon from the angel, which
contains only nine verses. It is not unlikely that they resembled
some of the metrical riddles more than any other form of Anglo-Saxon
poetry which has come down to us. Longer songs, of a narrative type,
may of course have been known. But it is a question whether such songs
would deal with heroic themes or with folk-tales. We may think of the
Scandinavian story of Svipdagr and Menglöð, which is preserved in a
number of different versions, ranging in date probably from the tenth
century to the seventeenth or later.
But we have already seen (p. 41 f.) that in the eighth century at
least the recitation of heroic poetry was by no means unknown. Indeed
we may infer from the language used by Alcuin (_ridentium turuam in
plateis_) that it enjoyed a good deal of favour with the general
public. Another of his letters[118] speaks to much the same effect.
We may gather from the use of the word _citharista_ that these
recitations also were accompanied by the harp. But the language of the
letters seems rather to suggest that the performers in such cases were
persons who made minstrelsy more or less of a profession. A century
earlier the existence of professional minstrels may be inferred from
the well-known story of Aldhelm[119]--that he used to take up his
position on a bridge, like a professional minstrel (_quasi artem
cantitandi professum_), and sing to the people in order to call them
back to church. We are not informed as to the character of the poems
he recited, but clearly they were of a type calculated to attract the
country people.
On the Continent we find very similar evidence. A passage in the Annals
of Quedlinburg, to which we have already alluded and which dates
perhaps ultimately from the tenth century, states that the country
people used to sing of Dietrich von Bern[120]. From a much earlier
period we have an interesting reference to a Frisian minstrel named
Bernlef, who became a disciple of St Liudger. He had been blind for
three years, when he was brought to the missionary, but "he was greatly
loved by his neighbours because of his geniality and his skill in
reciting to the accompaniment of the harp stories of the deeds of the
ancients and the wars of kings[121]." This incident appears to have
taken place before 785. That minstrelsy was definitely recognised as a
profession among the Frisians is shown by the last clause in the Lex
Frisonum, which fixes a special compensation for injury to the hand of
a harpist[122].
From all this we gather that in the eighth century there existed both
in England and Germany a class of minstrels whose practice it was to
play the harp and recite heroic poetry in the village-streets or on
bridges or wherever they could gather an audience. Now if we turn to
the poems themselves we find that they also contain references to
professional minstrels; but these appear to have been quite a different
class of persons from those with whom we have been dealing.
At the close of his elegy (v. 35 ff.) Deor gives the following account
of himself: "With regard to myself I will say that formerly I was the
bard (_scop_) of the Heodeningas and dear to my lord. My name is Deor.
For many years I have had a good office and a gracious master. But now
Heorrenda, a skilful poet, has received the domain which the king had
before given to me." There may be some difference of opinion as to the
precise meaning of the word _londryht_[123], but it is clear enough
that the poet had been a court-minstrel and that he had been supplanted
in the king's favour by a rival. In Beowulf also we find mention of a
person who seems to hold a similar position. The word _scop_ occurs
three times in this poem (vv. 90, 496, 1066)--always perhaps with
reference to the same man. In each case he is represented as singing or
reciting, and twice mention is made of the harp. On the last occasion,
when he recites the story of Finn and Hnaef at the banquet (cf. p. 2),
he is called _Hroðgares scop_, which seems to imply a sort of official
position.
The case of Widsith is somewhat different. The poet is a traveller
who prides himself on the large number of nations he has visited. He
states also that he served under various princes by whom he had been
handsomely rewarded. The poem ends with some reflections on the life
of wandering minstrels; but these verses may be a later addition, like
the introduction. At all events in v. 94 the poet speaks of his return
home, when he presented to his lord, Eadgils prince of the Myrgingas,
a valuable 'ring' which had been given him by Eormenric. This present
was a reward to Eadgils for his kindness in granting the poet the
land formerly held by his father. It would seem then that the poet is
represented as a man of good position. Whether we describe him as a
wandering minstrel or not, his occupation is clearly to be regarded as
court-minstrelsy and different therefore from that of Bernlef and the
harpists mentioned by Alcuin.
Apart from these personal notices there can be little doubt that
the heroic poems which have come down to us were of courtly and not
of popular origin. In the first place we may note their strongly
aristocratic tone. This may be appreciated from the fact that all the
women mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon poems are of royal birth, while the
men are either princes or persons, apparently of noble or knightly
rank, attached to the retinues of princes. On the rare occasions when
persons of humbler rank are referred to, their names are not mentioned.
In Beowulf no name is given even to the court-minstrel. Again the poems
frequently refer to details of court etiquette, with which they seem
to be well acquainted. In the later German poems this feature must of
course be attributed to the conditions of the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries, when the poems were composed. But it is quite as marked even
in Beowulf. We may note especially the long and detailed account of
Beowulf's arrival at the Danish king's hall and the conversation which
the chamberlain holds with the king on the one hand and the visitor on
the other, before the latter is invited to enter. The chamberlain's
exact position is remarked, when he approaches the king and it is added
that "he knew the custom of knighthood[124]." Other members of the
court also have their position or duties described (vv. 500 f., 1161
f., 1165 f., 1794 ff.); but most of all the poet loves to picture the
movements of the king and queen (vv. 612 ff., 920 ff., 1162 f.).
Then again it should be observed that persons of royal rank are very
seldom spoken of with disrespect. The rare exceptions to this rule
probably all refer to persons of a remote past, Eormenric, Thrytho
and Heremod, and in the last two cases the reprobation is qualified
in a very marked way. Moreover the ground of censure is invariably
violence, cruelty or treachery. Of immoral or unseemly conduct we have
no mention. Indeed, except in the story of Weland--which stands by
itself in many ways, as we shall see later--such subjects seem to be
studiously avoided. More than this the Anglo-Saxon heroic poems are
entirely free from coarseness of language, such as we frequently find
in Saxo's history, and indeed from references of any kind which could
offend even the most fastidious taste. In general the same remarks are
true also of the German and Scandinavian heroic poems, though not in
the same degree. But the gnomic and theological poems of the Edda show
a wholly different tone, which at its worst (e.g. in Lokasenna) verges
on bestiality.
Lastly, we must not overlook the fact that in dignity and polish of
style the heroic poems far surpass any narrative works which the
English language has to offer for many centuries later. It has been
remarked that the composition of epic poetry requires a more or less
professional training, and in the case of such poems as Beowulf this
is doubtless true, not only on account of its length but also because
a very large vocabulary is needed for the constant interchange of
epithets which is one of its chief characteristics, while the allusions
with which it abounds point to the possession of much historical or
traditional lore[125]. At the time when it was produced the knowledge
and leisure necessary for such composition is scarcely likely to have
been found outside the entourages of kings.
On the other hand we have seen that minstrelsy of some kind was
cultivated even by peasants in Caedmon's time. We can hardly doubt
that such was the case to a higher degree in court circles. In Beow.
867 ff. we find a 'king's thegn' composing an account of the hero's
adventure immediately after its occurrence, and utilising apparently
by way of illustration the story of Sigemund. This person may be the
court minstrel; but the identity of the two is scarcely certain. In
a later passage (v. 2105 ff.), referring to the banquet after the
fight with Grendel, we hear of the king himself taking his turn with
the harp: "There we had poetry and music. The old Scylding (Hrothgar)
related stories of old time out of his great store of information.
Now the martial[126] hero would lay his hands on the joyous harp,
the instrument that makes good cheer; now he would recite a poem,
true but sad; now a story of marvel would be related in due course by
the magnanimous king. Now again, bowed with age as he was, the old
warrior would begin to lament that he had lost the martial vigour of
youth. His heart surged within him as he called to mind the manifold
experiences of a long life." It is held that the reference here is
to lyrical effusions rather than to anything in the nature of epic
narrative[127]; but I am inclined to doubt if we are justified in
totally excluding the latter. I would rather favour the view that the
cultivation of minstrelsy, including narrative as well as lyric poetry,
was a general accomplishment in royal households, and that the office
of court-minstrel was an honour given to that member of the court who
had attained the greatest proficiency in his art.
* * * * *
The statements of the poems as to the prevalence of court-minstrelsy
during the Heroic Age are fully confirmed by the testimony of
contemporary Roman writers. Perhaps the most important reference is
a passage in Priscus' account of his visit to Attila in the year
448. After describing the banquet given by the king to his guests he
proceeds as follows[128]: "When evening came on torches were lighted
and two barbarians stepped forth in front of Attila and recited poems
which they had composed, recounting his victories and his valiant deeds
in war. The banqueters fixed their eyes upon them, some being charmed
with the poems, while others were roused in spirit, as the recollection
of their wars came back to them. Others again burst into tears, because
their bodies were enfeebled by age and their martial ardour had
perforce to remain unsatisfied."
It will be noticed that this account bears a curious resemblance to the
passage from Beowulf which we have just quoted. Nothing is said as to
the language in which the poems were composed[129], but at all events
we need hardly doubt that in this as in other respects Attila was
following Gothic custom. For the duet we find an interesting parallel
in a passage of Widsith (v. 103 ff.): "Then Scilling and I began to
sing with clear voices before our victorious lord; loudly rang out
our music as we played the harp. Then it was openly confessed by many
brave-hearted and experienced men that they had never heard a better
song."
Evidence for the cultivation of minstrelsy at Teutonic courts in Gaul
is furnished by letters of Cassiodorus (_Variarum_ II, 40 f.) and
Sidonius Apollinaris (_Ep._ I, 2). The former document is an answer
from the Ostrogothic king Theodric to a request from Clovis, king of
the Franks (d. 511), who had asked him to send him a skilled minstrel.
Sidonius' letter is a very full account of Theodric II, king of the
Visigoths, who reigned from 453 to 466. He states that the king seldom
admitted jesters when he was dining, and that he took no pleasure in
music except when it encouraged manliness of spirit as well as pleased
the ear. In neither of these cases however is it certain that the
performers were Goths.
A clearer case of Teutonic minstrelsy, dating from the same period,
occurs in one of Sidonius' poems (_Carm._ 12[130]), in which the
author complains that he has to live among troops of longhaired and
greedy Burgundians, listening with polite attention, in spite of his
disgust, to their songs. More than a century later we hear of Frankish
court-minstrelsy in a neighbouring district. In a poem addressed to
Lupus, duke of Aquitaine, about the year 580, Venantius Fortunatus
(_Carm._ VII 8. 61) says: "Let the Roman sound your praise with his
lyre and the barbarian with his harp[131]"; and again: "Let us frame
verses for you, while barbarian poets compose their lays; thus the hero
will be greeted with like honour, though in diverse strains[132]."
In the introduction to his poems the same author complains of the
constant buzzing of the harp, as it resounds to the barbarian lays[133].
A curious case of royal minstrelsy is recorded by Procopius (_Vand._
II 6) in his account of the siege of Mount Pappua (A.D. 534). Gelimer,
king of the Vandals, wrote a letter to Faras, the Herulian chief who
commanded the besieging army, begging him to send him a harp, a loaf
and a sponge. The explanation given by the messenger was that the king
had composed a song upon his misfortunes and as he was a good minstrel
he was anxious to accompany it with a mournful tune on the harp as he
bewailed his fate[134]. We are again reminded of Hrothgar, but perhaps
still more of Hrethel's dirge over his son (Beow. 2460 f.).
These examples are sufficient to show that minstrelsy was widely
cultivated in the courts of the Teutonic princes who had established
themselves in Roman territory. Taken together with the references
in Anglo-Saxon poetry, which deals of course with the more northern
peoples, they leave no doubt that the prevalence of court-minstrelsy
was one of the characteristics of the Heroic Age. For the existence of
professional minstrels the Roman evidence is not so clear, though we
may regard in this light the two 'barbarians' mentioned by Priscus (p.
84). On the whole the impression which we gain from our authorities
is that the cultivation of the art was more or less general as in the
north.
But it must certainly not be assumed that the poems of the period were
always of an ephemeral character. Jordanes (cap. 5), in a passage to
which we have already referred, says that the Goths "used to sing
to the strains of the harp ancient poetry dealing with the deeds of
their ancestors, Eterparmara, Hanala, Fridigernus, Vidigoia and others
who are very famous in this nation[135]." Again, when he mentions
the migration of the Goths to the Black Sea (cap. 4), he refers
to "their ancient poems," where this event is commonly related in
almost historical style[136]. From such expressions we must conclude
that Jordanes knew, directly or indirectly, of Gothic poems which he
believed to have been in existence for a considerable time.
Jordanes' language may be compared with Einhard's reference to the
'barbarous and very ancient poems' collected by Charlemagne (cf. p.
62). But in reality there appears to be an essential difference between
the minstrelsy of the Heroic Age and that of Charlemagne's time. In the
latter period we hear only of 'very ancient poems' or of poems dealing
with 'the deeds of the ancients,' as in the story of Bernlef. The two
expressions may really be more or less equivalent, for there is nothing
to show that Bernlef was an original composer. For the existence in
his time of court-minstrelsy, or indeed of any poetry dealing with
contemporary persons and events, we have no evidence which can be
called satisfactory[137].
In the Heroic Age on the other hand we have references not only to
'ancient poems' but also to original compositions, dealing with the
praise or fortunes of living men. The exploits of Attila, one of the
leading figures of that age, were sung in his own presence, as we know
from an eye-witness. We need scarcely doubt therefore that Beowulf
truly reflects the spirit of the times when it makes one of the Danish
king's thegns compose a poem on the hero's exploit immediately after
the event. It is to such compositions that heroic poetry--indeed in a
sense we may say the Heroic Age itself--owes its origin.
The beginning of the process may be seen from a few passages in
Widsith. At the end of the poem we are told that "he who wins praise
(_lof_) shall have his glory (_dom_) established on high beneath the
sky." The meaning of the first expression is explained by another
passage (v. 70 ff.): "I have been in Italy with Alboin. No human being,
as far as my knowledge goes, had a readier hand than had Audoin's
son for the winning of praise, nor a heart more ungrudging in the
distribution of rings and shining bracelets." We may compare also what
the poet says of his patroness, the princess Ealhhild (v. 99 ff.):
"Her praise spread through many lands, when I set myself to declare
in song where under heaven it was that I knew of a gold-adorned queen
who lavished presents in the noblest fashion." The chief object which
the characters of the Heroic Age set before themselves is to 'win
glory'--to have their fame celebrated for all time. Thus in Beow. 1387
ff. the hero says: "Let him, who can, win for himself glory before he
dies; that is the best thing which can come to a knight in after times,
when he is no more." Such glory may be won by brave deeds, as when
Beowulf says to Hrothgar before his second adventure (_ib._ 1490 f.):
"I will win for myself glory with Hrunting (a sword), or death shall
take me," or again when the queen says to Beowulf (_ib._ 1221 ff.):
"Thou hast brought it about that men shall esteem thee far and near
and for all eternity, wheresoever the sea encircleth its wind-swept
barriers." But the same object can be attained by generosity, which
will ensure one's praise being sounded from court to court.
Now perhaps we are in a better position to understand why the Heroic
Age ends when it does. The latest person mentioned in the heroic poems
is Alboin who died about 572. The last Roman author who mentions
Teutonic court-minstrelsy is Venantius Fortunatus, who wrote apparently
about ten years later. Is there a connection between these two facts?
It should be remembered that we have felt some hesitation in including
Alboin among the characters of the Heroic Age, for though his praises
were sung among the Saxons and Bavarians, as well as in England, he
does not figure in any widely known story. We may reasonably expect
that such stories would as a rule--not necessarily--require a certain
time in which to be elaborated. Is it possible that in Alboin's time
the conditions favourable to such elaboration were no longer in
existence--that court-minstrelsy was dying out or had lost its creative
power?
It will perhaps be urged that the absence of reference to
court-minstrelsy after Venantius' time may be due to mere accident.
But a short consideration of the political position will show that
there is good reason for thinking otherwise. During the period which
had elapsed since the time of Priscus and Sidonius--we may say roughly
about a century and a quarter--the Teutonic world had undergone great
changes. Many kingdoms had disappeared, among them those of the
Huns, Rugii, Heruli, Alamanni, Thuringians, Burgundians, Vandals and
Ostrogoths, and probably also the Warni and Gepidae. Of the nations
which survived the Visigoths and Langobardi, and to a large extent
the Franks also, were settled among alien peoples and thus exposed to
denationalising influences. This is partly true also of the Bavarians,
and they moreover had become subject to the Franks before the middle
of the sixth century. Probably the only other Teutonic kingdoms which
remained on the Continent were those of the Frisians and the Danes, for
there is no evidence that the Old Saxons were under kingly government
at this time[138]. Moreover the Danes were almost cut off from the
western peoples by the irruption of the Slavs who now occupied the
greater part of ancient Germany. Hence we may conclude that even if
court-minstrelsy survived in a few places the poems had now no longer
any chance of obtaining a wide international circulation.
The change of faith is of course another consideration which must be
taken into account. One of its effects was to cut off the Christian
kingdoms from those of the Frisians and Danes. Probably also it had an
adverse influence on the cultivation of court-minstrelsy, for there can
be little doubt that this was originally permeated by heathen ideas.
At all events we find in later times surprisingly few traces of heroic
poetry in the territories of the Franks, Visigoths and Langobardi.
Of the purely Teutonic kingdoms, excluding Denmark, that of the
Frisians was the last to retain both its independence and its religion.
It can hardly be due to accident therefore that some of the most
important of the heroic poems, such as Kûdrûn (cf. p. 34) and probably
also the Norse version of the story of Sigurðr (cf. p. 59), appear to
be derived from Frisian sources, though this region was not their
original home. Further, we have noticed that in Frisian law a special
compensation was fixed for injury done to the hand of a harpist. Still
more significant is the fact that in the passage quoted above (p.
80) from the Vita Liudgeri, describing Bernlef's skill in reciting
heroic poetry, one text adds the words _more gentis suae_. It would
seem then that minstrelsy of this type was regarded as a distinctive
characteristic of the Frisians and that heroic poetry retained its hold
upon them at a time when it was little known elsewhere.
In England the conditions appear to have been quite different from
those with which we have been dealing, for at the end of the sixth
century this country probably contained more Teutonic kingdoms than
did the whole of western and central Europe. We have seen reason for
believing that Beowulf was composed within about half a century of
Venantius' time and that the other heroic poems may date from the same
period. From the evidence which we have discussed above we should
naturally conclude that court-minstrelsy lasted somewhat longer in
England than elsewhere, although it dealt entirely with stories derived
from abroad. It is true that there is no external evidence for such
minstrelsy; but that is fully explained by the fact that we have
practically no literature of any kind before the last decades of the
seventh century. Most probably its extinction was due to that wave of
religious fervour which was started by the Kentish king Erconberht
and which in the course of the following half century seems to have
succeeded in enforcing conformity to the new faith throughout the whole
country.
* * * * *
It will be convenient now to consider briefly the court-poetry of the
Viking Age. The history of heroic poetry in the North unfortunately
cannot be traced in its entire course. We have seen that there is a
long gap, extending over some two centuries and a half, in Danish
tradition, and also that the poems which have come down to us are
probably all of Norse (Norwegian-Icelandic) origin. Yet the social
conditions of the Viking Age were very different from those which
prevailed on the Continent during the same period and unquestionably
nearer than the latter to those of the Heroic Age. It is not
unreasonable therefore to expect that the court-poetry of the Viking
Age may throw light on the earlier period.
We saw in an earlier chapter (p. 15 f.) that, apart from the Edda, Old
Norse literature is rich in narrative poems of the ninth and tenth
centuries. These are usually the work of known authors and deal for the
most part with contemporary persons and events, though they contain
frequent references to characters of the Heroic Age, as well as to the
ancestors of reigning princes. Many of the authors, such as Thióðolfr
of Hvín, Thórbiörn Hornklofi and Goððormr Sindri, were what we may
call court-minstrels--or rather court-poets, for the harp seems not
to have been used by such persons, at least in the latter part of the
Viking Age. But they can scarcely be regarded as professionals in any
strict sense of the term. As a rule they appear to have been men of
good family. Thióðolfr was a familiar friend of Harold the Fair-haired,
who entrusted him with the education of one of his sons. Goððormr
Sindri, who composed poems for the same king, refused to receive any
reward and had sufficient influence with Harold to insist on his being
reconciled with his son Halfdan Svarti. Another poet of the same
period, Einarr[139], commonly called Torf-Einarr, was earl of Orkney
and practically an independent prince. Eyvindr Skaldaspillir, who was
attached to the service of Haakon I and Haakon, earl of Lade, was
himself a descendant of Harold the Fair-haired.
It has been mentioned that from the middle of the tenth century onwards
most of the poems quoted in the sagas are of Icelandic authorship.
A considerable number of them may be regarded as court-poems, since
they were composed in honour of princes whom the authors were visiting
at the time. As an example we may take a verse quoted by Gunnlaugs
Saga Ormstungu (cap. 7) from the poem composed by the hero, when he
visited London in 1001: "The whole nation reveres England's generous
ruler as a god; all ranks, warrior prince and people alike, bow
down to Aethelred." Such poems were often handsomely rewarded.
Aethelred presented Gunnlaugr with a scarlet cloak, lined with fur and
embroidered with lace, while Sigtryggr, king of Dublin, gave him a
fur-lined cloak, a lace-embroidered tunic and a gold ring which weighed
a mark. It happened very frequently that men like Gunnlaugr would
enter a king's retinue and remain with him for months and even years.
But they would seldom consent to recognise any lordship permanently,
since as a rule they had lands of their own in Iceland, to which they
eventually returned.
It is hardly probable that any class of persons exactly corresponding
to this existed in the Heroic Age itself, for with the somewhat
doubtful exception of the Old Saxons we have no evidence for
independent commonwealths during that period. In Widsith, it is true,
we have the case of a minstrel who claims to have wandered far and
wide and to have visited many princes by whom, like Gunnlaugr, he
was handsomely rewarded. But Widsith had a lord at home to whom he
subsequently returned. Indeed the introduction, if we may use it as an
authority, seems to make him set out at first on a definite commission
from that prince. The permanent lordless state was probably altogether
foreign to the conditions of the Heroic Age. The lordless man in the
poems is either one who has lost his lord, as in the Wanderer, or one
who has been dismissed from his lord's service, like Deor. Until he
finds another lord he has neither home nor security, and his condition
is pitiable in the extreme.
But it is by no means so clear how the court-minstrels of the Heroic
Age differed from the Norwegian poets of the Viking Age. In Kûdrûn the
minstrel Hôrant (Heorrenda) seems to hold a position quite comparable
with that of Thióðolfr or Goððormr Sindri; indeed he is even described
as a relative (_mâc_) of the king[140]. Again, we may take the case of
Starkaðr. He is commonly regarded as the type of a roving poet-warrior
of the Viking Age. But in reality he seems to belong to the Heroic Age;
for however late the poems attributed to him may be in their final
form, they had their counterparts in England probably as early as the
sixth century. There is no conclusive evidence for denying either that
he was the foster-father of Ingialdr (Ingeld) or that he entered the
service of a number of different kings.
The story of Starkaðr is bound up with the history of heroic poetry in
the Viking Age--a difficult problem, to which we shall have to refer
again shortly. We may note here however that the poems of Thióðolfr
and Hornklofi must have been preserved for some three centuries by
oral tradition before they were committed to writing. There seems to
be no reason therefore for denying in principle the possibility that
poems may have survived even from the Heroic Age. It is to be observed
that court-poets were expected to be able to recite old poems, as well
as works of their own composition. Thus on the morning of the battle
of Stiklestad (A.D. 1030) St Olaf ordered the Icelander Thórmóðr
Kolbrúnarskald to recite the old Biarkamál. This story is interesting
as it shows that the love of the heroic poems was strong enough to
assert itself in an hour of supreme danger and under a most religious
king.
* * * * *
In the course of this chapter we have seen that one of the
characteristics of the Heroic Age was the prevalence of
court-minstrelsy of a certain type, namely the recitation of metrical
speeches accompanied by the harp. The cultivation of such minstrelsy
seems to have been more or less general, and it is certain that princes
had their praises and exploits celebrated in poems of this kind during
their lifetime and even in their presence. But with the close of the
Heroic Age the evidence for minstrelsy of this type apparently ceases
altogether. In the eighth century we hear only of wandering minstrels
who are invited into houses or perform in the streets. The minstrelsy
of this period seems not to have been creative. At all events it deals
only with characters belonging to former times, Ingeld or Alboin or
ancient kings in general. Between these two periods we have to set the
composition of the English heroic poems and probably also those German
poems which were regarded as ancient in Charlemagne's time. Lastly,
we find in Germany a series of poems dating from the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries in which the old stories are treated again but in
a new form.
It appears then that the history of heroic poetry falls naturally
into four stages. To Stage I belong the court-poems of the Heroic Age
itself; to Stage II the epic and narrative poems based on these; to
Stage III the popular poetry of the eighth and following centuries;
to Stage IV the German poems of the twelfth and following centuries,
composed at a time when heroic subjects had again come into favour with
the higher classes.
To Stage I we may assign not only laudatory poems dealing with the
victories and valour of living princes, but also such compositions
as Gelimer's dirge and choric songs like the funeral chant over
Attila[141]. From this stage probably nothing has come down to
us--though it would be difficult to point out any essential difference
between Gelimer's dirge and the Elegy of Deor. We can form an idea
however of these earliest poems from the poetry of the Viking Age,
which seems to have been composed under very similar conditions. As
instances we may cite Gunnlaugr's poem on Aethelred II (cf. p. 91 f.)
and Eyvindr's poem on the death of Haakon I, which we shall have to
discuss later.
Stage II is represented by the Anglo-Saxon poems, which are clearly
products of court-life, as we have seen (p. 81 ff.). From its general
resemblance to these it seems probable that the Hildebrandslied belongs
to the same class. Some writers draw a distinction between Beowulf and
Waldhere on the one hand and Finn and the Hildebrandslied on the other,
classifying the former as epics and the latter as lays (Lieder). It
may be granted that the style of the two latter poems appears to be
more rapid and less diffuse than that of the others. Still I should
prefer to speak of short and long epics, or rather perhaps of short
and long narrative poems. Very probably the earliest narrative poems
were comparatively short. It may be that poems on the scale of Beowulf
were first composed in England--though this can hardly be proved.
But the difference between the two classes seems to me to be one of
degree and not of kind. At all events no one will suggest that the
Hildebrandslied is even approximately contemporaneous with the events
which it professes to describe. One would expect it to be at least as
remote from them as is the case with Beowulf.
Stage III is directly represented only by certain ballads such as the
Seyfridslied, which in their present form date from a time considerably
later than the poems belonging to Stage IV. Much indirect evidence
however can be obtained from various sources of earlier date, e.g. from
Thiðreks Saga af Bern, which is largely based on the popular heroic
poetry of northern Germany, and from parts of Saxo's History which seem
to be derived from Danish ballads. So far as we can judge from our
authorities the popular poems seem to have differed in many ways from
those which we have been discussing. They tended to simplify complex
stories by the loss of minor characters and to amalgamate stories
which were originally quite unconnected. Again, they appear to have
had a preference for biographical sketches, whereas the court poems
are usually occupied with accounts of adventures which lasted only a
few days. We may add also the absence of any detailed acquaintance
with court-life and a general approximation to the characteristics of
folk-tales, e.g. in the introduction of nameless characters and persons
of humble station.
It must be remembered of course that our authorities knew the popular
poems only as they existed in the twelfth century[142]. We cannot
say with any confidence that Bernlef's poems possessed the same
characteristics. There is nothing to show that the Hildebrandslied was
written down before his time, and it may be to persons of his type
that we owe its preservation. The Anglo-Saxon poems may not have been
committed to writing till a still later period. All that we can say is
that they show no obvious signs of popular corruption and that their
diction is much more archaic than that of poems which were composed
in the eighth century. We have seen that in Iceland poems of a rather
elaborate type could be preserved by oral tradition for over three
centuries. This however was in a community which was largely given up
to the cultivation of poetry. A knowledge of the old poems would be a
necessary part of the training of those who hoped to win rewards for
their art in foreign courts. Such favourable conditions can hardly have
existed either in England or Germany. The process of disintegration
which the poems underwent in the latter country points to their being
preserved only by village minstrels, who as time went on became less
and less expert in their profession.
Stage IV is represented by the Middle High German epic poems, which
both in form and spirit show all the characteristics of the age in
which they were composed. In England this stage was never reached.
There may have been a revival of interest in heroic poetry during the
ninth and tenth centuries, but we have no evidence for the composition
of new poems on these subjects.
There can be no doubt that the poems of Stage IV are derived from
those of Stage III. But the question may be raised whether the latter
were necessarily derived from poems of Stages I and II--whether some
heroic poems may not have been entirely of popular origin. It may be
freely granted that the poetry of Stage II was constantly exposed to
popular influence, especially in the form of folk-tales. Most scholars
indeed hold that some of the best known heroic stories, such as those
of Sigurðr-Siegfried and Weland, are derived from popular mythology.
With this problem we shall have to deal later. On the whole however I
am inclined to doubt whether we possess a single heroic story which has
not been treated in court-poetry at an earlier stage in its career.
Again, the relationship between Stage I and Stage II is not so simple
as the bare statement given above might seem to imply. In the first
place it is only as a class that poems of Stage I can be regarded as
the earlier. Individual poems may very well be later than others which
belong to Stage II. Thus it is extremely probable that Gothic princes
were listening to laudatory poems about themselves at a time when
other Gothic poems, of a definitely narrative type, were coming to be
regarded as ancient. Then again, poems of a more or less narrative type
may have been composed quite soon after the events which they treat.
Hornklofi's Hrafnsmál and the poem on the battle of Brunanburh must
be regarded as analogous to poems of Stage I, but it is only a short
step from such works to purely narrative pieces. Indeed, in a sense,
we may almost class among narrative poems Eyvindr's Hákonarmál, which
describes the fall of Haakon I at the battle of Fitje. Yet the author
was himself present at the battle. It is by no means clear then that
poems belonging to Stage II necessarily presuppose the existence of
earlier poems or indeed of materials of any kind beyond the author's
personal knowledge and imagination.
But, more than this, we are scarcely justified in denying the
possibility that even epics may have been composed upon quite recent
events. Few will deny that the poem on the battle of Maldon has a good
claim to that title, whatever its original length may have been. The
extant portion contains nine speeches, by seven different persons.
Twenty-two warriors in the English army are mentioned by name, and in
about a dozen cases the names of their fathers or other relatives are
also given. The poem differs from the heroic type in the fact that it
does not record the name of a single person among the enemy; but that
need not prevent us from regarding it as an epic. Yet there can be no
reasonable doubt that it was composed within a few years, possibly even
months, of the battle[143].
It is likely enough that the author of this poem was well acquainted
with heroic poetry and that his treatment of the subject was affected
thereby. But is that any objection to supposing that poems of this type
may have been composed within the Heroic Age itself? We have no reason
whatever for denying that this age was capable of such compositions.
Indeed there is one piece of evidence which points very much to the
contrary.
This is a passage which occurs in Procopius' History of the Gothic
War (IV 20). After describing the embassy sent to Justinian by the
Utiguri in the year 551, the author goes on to state that 'about this
time' hostilities broke out between the nation of the Warni and the
Angli (Ἀγγίλοι) who inhabit the island of Britain (Βριττία). Not long
before the Warni had been ruled by a king named Hermegisklos who,
being anxious to establish his throne on a secure foundation, sought
and obtained in marriage a sister of Theodberht, king of the Franks.
By a previous wife he had an only son named Radiger, who at this time
was betrothed to a sister of the king of the Angli and had paid her a
large sum of money in furtherance of his suit[144]. One day, when the
king was riding in a certain place with the chief men of his nation, he
saw a bird sitting on a tree and croaking loudly. Now, whether it was
that he really understood what the bird said, or whether he had some
other source of information but pretended that the bird was uttering a
prophecy which he understood--at all events he declared on the spot to
his companions that he would die forty days later, for this had been
clearly foretold to him by the bird[145]. Thereupon he gives advice
as to what should be done after his death, namely that Radiger should
marry his widow, in accordance with national custom, and dissolve
his engagement with the English princess. On the fortieth day the
king died, and Radiger proceeds to carry out his injunctions. But the
princess, infuriated at his conduct, gathers together a fleet of four
hundred vessels and invades the land of the Warni with 100,000 men.
Radiger's army is completely defeated, and he takes refuge in a dense
forest. The princess insists on his being taken alive at all costs, and
eventually he is captured and brought before her. He expects to be put
to death, but after explaining the cause of his action, he is pardoned
on condition that he returns to his former engagement.
This story contains a number of features, such as the prophecy of the
bird, the payment of the 'bride-fee' and Radiger's marriage with his
stepmother, which show clearly that it was derived from someone who
was well acquainted with the peoples of northern Europe. There is no
ground for disputing that it has a historical basis; but at the same
time it is obviously much more than a mere record of facts. Apart from
the incident of the bird and the gross exaggeration apparent in certain
details[146], the pictorial character of the narrative, especially
in its earlier part, indicates a close affinity with heroic poetry.
Un-heroic features are not wanting--the introduction of nameless
persons and the political reflections of Irmingisl--but they may with
probability be attributed to Procopius himself. I do not mean to
suggest that his source of information was an epic poem, but I do think
that the intellectual atmosphere which could produce such a story must
have been exactly of the kind most favourable to the growth of such
compositions.
Procopius, as we have seen, places this war in or about the year 551,
and we can certainly understand the course of events more easily if
it took place after Theodberht's death (A.D. 548). Therefore, since
Procopius' work appears to have been written within the next seven or
eight years, the story had had little time to develop before it came
to his ears. On the other hand we must remember that it refers to a
distant region--a fact I think not without significance for the history
of contemporary narrative poetry. To persons who had themselves taken
part in the events poems like that on the battle of Brunanburh would
appeal much more strongly than purely narrative pieces. It is for
persons who were either ignorant of the events or knew them only by
hearsay that the latter would seem to be primarily intended.
* * * * *
In this discussion we have taken no account of the heroic poems of the
Edda. There can be little doubt that these poems must be assigned to
Stage IV of our scheme; for though some of them are probably three or
four centuries older than the German poems of this class, they bear
fairly obvious marks of the disintegrating process which seems to
characterise popular poetry[147]. It may be asked how such an opinion
is compatible with the view that the story of Sigurðr was derived
from the Continent during the seventh century (cf. p. 59). The true
explanation is, I believe, that heroic poetry passed through Stage III
after it became known in Norway.
We noted in an earlier chapter (pp. 30, 33) that Norway plays no part
in stories of the Heroic Age. On the other hand it has what we may call
a Heroic Age of its own--namely the Viking Age. We have no poems--and
few stories of any kind--dealing with persons of Norwegian nationality
who lived before that period. The remoteness, poverty and mountainous
nature of the country doubtless retarded its development, not only
politically but also in the cultivation of poetry. The strophic
character of all Norse poetry is generally held to point to a choric
origin, and it may very well be that this primitive type of poetry
was the only one used in Norway when the heroic stories first became
known there. Possibly it was to Frisian and Danish minstrels that the
change was due[148]. But the conditions suitable for a flourishing
court-poetry, like that of the Heroic Age, scarcely existed before the
last years of the eighth century, when Norwegian princes had begun to
enrich themselves with maritime enterprises.
FOOTNOTES:
[116] _celebrant carminibus antiquis, quod unum apud illos memoriae et
annalium genus est, etc._
[117] _nil carminum aliquando didicerat. unde nonnunquam in conuiuio
cum esset laetitiae causa decretum ut omnes per ordinem cantare
deberent, ille ubi adpropinquare sibi citharam cernebat surgebat a
media caena et egressus ad suam domum repedebat._
[118] Mon. Germ., Epist. Carol. Aeui, II 21 (ad Hygbaldum episc.
Lindisfarnensem): _lectionis studium exercete. audiantur in domibus
uestris legentes, non ludentes in platea_.
[119] William of Malmesbury, _Gesta Pontif._, V § 190 (from King
Alfred's _Handboc_).
[120] _Amulung Theoderic dicitur ... et iste fuit Thideric de Berne di
quo cantabant rustici olim_ (Mon. Germ., Scr. III p. 31).
[121] _Et ecce illo discumbente cum discipulis suis oblatus est cecus
uocabulo Bernlef qui a uicinis suis ualde diligebatur eo quod esset
affabilis et antiquorum actus regumque certamina bene nouerat psallendo
promere, etc._ Vita S. Liudgeri, II 1 (Mon. Germ., Scr. II p. 412).
[122] _Qui harpatorem qui cum circulo harpare potest in manum
percusserit componat illud quarta parte maiore compositione quam alteri
eiusdem conditionis homini, etc._ (Mon. Germ., Leg. III 699 f.).
[123] Cf. my _Studies on Anglo-Saxon Institutions_, p. 369.
[124] _Cuðe he duguðe þeaw_ (v. 359).
[125] Cf. Brandl, _op. cit._, p. 981 f.
[126] It is generally thought that all these sentences refer to the
king.
[127] Cf. Brandl, _loc. cit._
[128] K. Müller, _Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum_, IV p. 92.
ἐπιγενομένης δὲ ἑσπέρας δᾷδες ἀνήφθησαν, δύο δὲ ἀντικρὺ τοῦ Ἀττήλα
παρελθόντες βάρβαροι ᾄσματα πεποιημένα ἔλεγον, νίκας αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰς κατὰ
πόλεμον ᾄδοντες ἀρετάς· ἐς οὓς οἱ τῆς εὐωχίας ἀπέβλεπον, καὶ οἱ μὲν
ἥδοντο τοῖς ποιήμασιν, οἱ δὲ τῶν πολέμων ἀναμιμνησκόμενοι διηγείροντο
τοῖς φρονήμασιν, ἄλλοι δὲ ἐχώρουν ἐς δάκρυα, ὧν ὑπὸ τοῦ χρόνου ἠσθένει
τὸ σῶμα καὶ ἡσυχάζειν ὁ θυμὸς ἠναγκάζετο.
[129] The performers who followed are said to have used Gothic, Hunnish
and Latin.
[130] Freely translated by Hodgkin, _Italy and her Invaders_, Vol. II,
p. 363. That the songs were in the national language appears from the
phrases _Germanica uerba_ (v. 4), _barbaricis abacta plectris ... Thalia_
(v. 9 f.).
[131] _Romanusque lyra plaudat tibi barbarus harpa._
[132] v. 67 f.
_nos tibi uersiculos, dent barbara carmina leudos:
sic uariante tropo laus sonet una uiro._
The word _leudos_ is generally interpreted as in the next passage
(Ang.-Sax. _leoð_); but is it not possible that here it is an error for
_leudes_ (N. pl.)?
[133] _sola saepe bombicans barbaros leudos arpa relidens_ (Mon. Germ.,
Auct. Antiquiss. Tom. IV i p. 2).
[134] κιθαριστῇ δὲ ἀγαθῷ ὄντι ᾠδή τις αὐτῷ ἐς ξυμφορὰν τὴν παροῦσαν
πεποίηται, ἣν δὴ πρὸς κιθάραν θρηνῆσαί τε καὶ ἀποκλαῦσαι ἐπείγεται.
[135] _antiquo etiam cantu maiorum facta modulationibus citharisque
canebant, Respamarae, Hanalae, Fridigerni, Vidigoiae et aliorum quorum
in hac gente magna opinio est, quales uix heroas fuisse miranda iactat
antiquitas._
[136] _quemadmodum et in priscis eorum carminibus pene historico ritu
in commune recolitur._
[137] For a passage in Saxo Poeta which seems to indicate the existence
of such poems cf. p. 6, note.
[138] At all events they had no kings when we first obtain definite
information about them, towards the close of the following century.
[139] Son of Rögnvaldr, earl of Möre, and half-brother of Gönguhrólfr
(Rollo), first earl of Normandy.
[140] In the Norse form of the story Hiarrandi is the name of Heðinn's
father.
[141] Jordanes, cap. 49; cf. Beow. 3170 ff.
[142] Ekkehard's Waltharius of course belongs to a much earlier period,
but it is not always clear what has been added by Ekkehard himself.
[143] Cf. Liebermann, _Arch._ CI, p. 15 ff.; Brandl, _Grundriss_, II p.
106.
[144] χρήματα μεγάλα τῷ τῆς μνηστείας αὐτῇ δεδωκὼς λόγῳ.
[145] οὗτος ἀνὴρ ξὺν Οὐάρνων τοῖς λογιμωτάτοις ἐν χωρίῳ τῳ ἱππευόμενος
ὄρνιν τινὰ ἐπὶ δένδρου τε καθημένην εἶδε καὶ πολλὰ κρώζουσαν. εἴτε δὲ
τῆς ὄρνιθος τῆς φωνῆς ξυνεὶς εἴτε ἄλλο μέν τι ἐξεπιστάμενος, ξυνεῖναι
δὲ τῆς ὄρνιθος μαντευομένης τερατευσάμενος, τοῖς παροῦσιν εὐθὺς ἔφασκεν
ὡς τεθνήξεται τεσσαράκοντα ἡμέραις ὕστερον. τοῦτο γὰρ αὐτῷ τὴν τῆς
ὄρνιθος δηλοῦν πρόρρησιν.
[146] It is not clear whether the marvellous account of Britain which
follows this story comes from the same source or not.
[147] They certainly resemble poems of Stage II both in form and spirit
much more closely than their German counterparts do. But this may be
due partly to the fact that Stage III was of much shorter duration in
their case.
[148] A reminiscence of such minstrels may perhaps be preserved in the
story of the unfortunate Heimir, who fled to Norway with the child
Áslaug concealed in a harp and was murdered there by a peasant from
whom he had sought hospitality (_Völs. Saga_, cap. 43).
NOTE IV. ON THE HEROIC POETRY OF THE SLAVONIC PEOPLES.
The nearest modern analogy, at least in Europe, to the types of poetry
which we have been discussing is probably to be found among the various
peoples of Serbo-Croatian nationality. As an example we may take the
poetry current among the Mohammedan population of Bosnia[149]. Since
the occupation of that province a large number of narrative poems have
been collected and published, though only a few are as yet accessible
in translations. These poems afford an interesting illustration of our
subject, not only because they deal with similar themes--heroism in
battle, single combats, love and revenge--and often in quite as full
detail, but also since the events with which they are concerned and
the conditions they reflect belong to a well-marked historical period,
which we may regard as a kind of Heroic Age. The period in question
embraces the greater part of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
more especially the latter, a time when the Turkish Empire was at the
height of its power, and when its armies were frequently engaged in
hostilities with the Austrians in Hungary and Croatia. Many of the
characters mentioned in the poems are well known historical persons.
But beyond all this the value of the illustration lies largely in the
fact that we have here what may be called a living heroic poetry,
such as we hear of among the Teutonic peoples only through occasional
notices in ancient records. As among the latter it is customary for the
minstrel (_pivač_, dial. for _pjevač_) to accompany his recitation on a
musical instrument, the _tambura_, a kind of guitar with only two metal
strings. Among the Christian population the _gusle_, a primitive type
of fiddle, is in use.
The poems vary greatly in length. Out of 320 pieces collected by
Dr Marjanović thirty contained less than 100 verses, while fifteen
exceeded 2000, the longest of all amounting to over 4000. The average
length of the pieces described as epic is given at 873 verses; a
hundred and three vary from 600 to 1000, and sixty-two from 1000 to
1500. These figures are especially important in view of their bearing
on certain prevalent ideas as to the limits of oral poetry. It is to be
observed that the ordinary Servian metre is decasyllabic, the verse not
being appreciably shorter than the average Teutonic alliterative verse.
The minstrel begins his recitation quite slowly, but after about a
hundred verses he attains such a speed that not even a shorthand writer
can keep pace with him. Such recitations are extremely fatiguing, and
in the longer poems it is customary to allow intervals of rest for
refreshments, questions and criticism. It will be seen that if carried
out on these principles the recitation of a Teutonic poem of 2000, or
even 3000, verses would be nothing impossible in the course of a long
evening's entertainment.
In the 'recitation' great freedom is allowed. A minstrel need only hear
a poem two or three times (once, if it is sung) in order to reproduce
it; but the reproduction is by no means given in the same words. To
a certain degree, says Prof. Murko, every minstrel is a more or less
creative poet ('Nachdichter'). But even by the same man a poem is never
repeated in exactly the same words. In the course of years changes may
be introduced which apparently render it almost unrecognisable. Some
minstrels are experts in particular lines, special popularity being
enjoyed by those who know best how to describe a girl's dress or the
trappings of a horse. The faculty for expansion and compression is
also very marked. Cases are known of minstrels who have doubled and
even trebled the length of poems which they had heard. In one instance
two variants of a poem are known, of which one contains 1284 verses,
the other barely 300. Such cases, as Prof. Murko remarks, supply
interesting evidence for the origin of different recensions of epic
poems--particularly, we may add, for the relationship of lays and epics.
From what has been said it will be clear enough that the poems are
preserved by oral tradition. Vague rumours of written texts are heard
of from time to time and, though none have yet been discovered, it
seems probable that some poems have been committed to writing in the
past. But the minstrels of the present day are invariably unable to
read or write. As to the age and origin of the poems nothing is known
for certain, though most of them are believed to be about two centuries
old. Four minstrels knew of an authoress--a certain 'pale-cheeked Ajka'
from the Lika (in Croatia); but regarding her little or no information
seems to have been obtained. The other minstrels could only give the
names of those from whom they had themselves heard the poems.
The minstrels belong to various stations of life. Some are men of good
family, but the majority are peasant proprietors or workmen. Not many
carry on minstrelsy as a regular profession, except when they have
fallen on bad times. The recitations are given in coffee-houses or at
any holiday gathering. Very often too the minstrels are invited to the
residences of the Begs[150]. The case is recorded of one minstrel who
recited over a hundred poems for a certain Beg within six weeks. The
Mohammedan ladies are especially fond of such recitations. For his
services the minstrel receives payment, sometimes in money, sometimes
in corn or livestock, sometimes only in coffee and cigarettes.
It will not escape notice that a good deal of what is said here
might be applied with considerable probability to the Frisian
minstrel Bernlef or the English minstrels mentioned by Alcuin.
Indeed, apart from the coffee and cigarettes, there is scarcely a
single feature in the description given above for which we should
not expect to find parallels in Teutonic minstrelsy towards the
close of the eighth century. We may therefore reasonably look for
traces of those characteristics which distinguish Stage III in
the history of Teutonic heroic poetry, and in point of fact there
seems to be abundant evidence in this direction[151]. The action is
usually spread over a considerable time. The characters mentioned
by name are few in number and recur again and again in different
stories, each district apparently having a favourite hero who is
introduced as its representative on many different occasions[152].
Geographical indications are very frequently erroneous, while
historical persons figure in quite unhistorical relationships. The
unsympathetic characters are often guilty of atrocious brutality.
Moreover, we constantly find repetitions of the same words or formulae
in consecutive verses after the manner of ballads. Indeed the
characteristics of the poems generally--their merits as well as their
faults--are to a large extent those of popular rather than court poetry.
But, though the poems show the characteristics which we associate with
Stage III, it is questionable whether we are justified in including
them in this category; for there is no evidence that they have passed
through anything corresponding to Stages I and II. Practically the
only court which they know at all is that of Stamboul, and of this
their knowledge is naturally slight and remote. The highest personages
with whom they are really acquainted are the Begs. It is not unlikely
that in the days of Turkish supremacy--the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries--the provincial nobility were much more wealthy and
influential than they now are; and it may be that some Begs then had
minstrels attached to their own personal following. But their position
can never have been comparable with that of even petty Teutonic
princes. Hence, if we are entitled to suggest the previous existence of
court-poetry at all, it can only be in a very restricted sense--so far
at least as the extant poems are concerned.
On the other hand Servian poetry has without doubt had a long history,
and even heroic poems are by no means the exclusive property of the
Mohammedan population. Indeed some of the Christian poems[153] seem to
exhibit the characteristics of Stage III to a far less degree than the
Mohammedan ones; and they frequently deal with much earlier events.
It is likely enough that the beginnings of heroic poetry go back to
the fourteenth or fifteenth centuries[154], at which time its growth
may have been fostered by conditions much more similar to those of the
Teutonic Heroic Age. To this question we shall have to refer again.
The subject as a whole however is one which must be left to experts.
In order to form a sound opinion one would have to take account of
the history of narrative poetry among the neighbouring peoples, more
especially the Bulgarians and Slovenians[155]. The total change of
subjects in the Mohammedan poems would be a necessary consequence of
the change of faith; that heroic poetry survived such a change at all
is probably to be attributed to the fact that a large proportion of the
nobility in Bosnia embraced Islam.
Before we leave the subject however note must be taken of one more
important feature in the poems. The Mohammedan Bosnians were religious
fanatics, and the spirit of religious war is generally present. It
is not absolutely universal; some poems even represent Moslems and
Christians in sworn brotherhood. As a rule however the world is
regarded as divided into two hostile camps, one under the Sultan
(Car), the other under the Emperor (Ćesar). In this respect, as in
several others, Bosnian poetry shows affinity with the Old French
epics, whereas in early Teutonic poetry differences of creed, and even
nationality, are scarcely recognised.
* * * * *
In the north of Russia numerous ballads are still current which seem to
be based on events much more remote than anything treated in Servian
poetry. Many of them deal with stories relating to the time of Vladimir
I, who ruled over Kiev about 980-1015, and their antiquity is rendered
highly probable by the fact that the same king, together with his chief
hero, Ilja of Murom, figures in Thiðreks Saga af Bern. In their present
form these ballads show the characteristics of popular poetry to such
an extent that they are scarcely distinguishable from folk-tales. Yet
it is possible that they are in part descended from poems which might
fairly be brought under Stages I and II of our scheme.
At all events there is some reason for suspecting that in early times
court-poetry was not unknown in Russia. Evidence to this effect is
supplied by the Slovo o polku Igorevě ('Story of Igor's expedition'),
which may be described as an epic, though it has no fixed metrical
form. The subject is a disastrous expedition undertaken by Igor, the
son of Svjatoslav, against the Polovtses on the Don in the year 1185.
It is believed to be an absolutely contemporary work, composed within
two years of the event. Both in language and spirit it shows rather
a striking resemblance to Anglo-Saxon heroic poetry. "Igor leads his
soldiers to the Don: the birds in the thicket forebode his misfortune;
the wolves bristle up and howl a storm in the mountain clefts; the
eagles screech and call the beasts to a feast of bones; the foxes bark
for the crimson shields.... The Russians bar the long fields with
their crimson shields, seeking honour for themselves and glory for the
Prince[156]." There are frequent references also to mythical beings.
It is held by many that this work was composed by a bard who belonged
to the družina or military following of the prince and that it is the
last relic of what may once have been a considerable body of poetry.
Certainly we may note that the author repeatedly refers to a certain
'Bojan the Wise, nightingale of ancient time,' a poet who is unknown
from other sources, but who apparently lived nearly a century before
the composition of the Slovo. This carries us back practically to what
we may call the Russian Heroic Age, for Bojan is represented as singing
the praises of the sons of Vladimir I. In their time the Russian courts
still maintained intimate relations with the Scandinavian kingdoms.
Vladimir indeed appears to have had Norwegians in his service, and
Olafr Tryggvason is said to have been brought up at his court. It is
scarcely impossible therefore that this early poetry may have been due,
in part at least, to Scandinavian influence.
FOOTNOTES:
[149] The first part of this note is mainly derived from an interesting
paper by Prof. M. Murko in the _Zeitschrift des Vereins für Volkskunde_
(Berlin), 1909, p. 13 ff., to which the reader is referred for further
information and authorities. The collections of poems published by
Marjanović and Hörmann have not been accessible to me.
[150] Some interesting remarks relating to the prevalence of
minstrelsy--apparently among the Christian population--during the
eighteenth century are to be found in Fortis' _Travels into Dalmatia_
(London, 1778). "A Morlacco travels along the desert mountains singing,
especially in the night time, the actions of ancient _Slavi_ kings and
barons or some tragic event.... Although the Morlacchi usually sing
their ancient songs, yet other poetry is not altogether extinguished
among them; and their musicians, after singing an ancient piece,
accompanied with the _guzla_, sometimes finish it with some extempore
verses, in praise of the personage by whom they are employed" (_ib._,
p. 85).
[151] The following observations are based on the poems published in
Krauss' _Slavische Volkforschungen_.
[152] Thus in a number of poems the Beg Ljubović appears as the
representative of Hercegovina.
[153] Especially several of those dealing with the battle of Kossovo
(1389), to which we shall have to refer in a later note.
[154] There are references to the existence of heroic poetry in the
neighbourhood of Spalato and Sebenico as far back as the sixteenth
century; cf. Murko, _Arch. f. slav. Philol._, XXVIII 378. A much
earlier reference has been traced in Nicephorus Gregoras' account
(_Hist. Byz._, VIII 14) of his mission to the court of Stephan Uroš
in the year 1326, where it is stated of his followers: φωναῖς ἐχρῶντο
καὶ μέλεσι τραγικοῖς· ᾖδον δ' ἄρα κλέα ἀνδρῶν ὧν οἷον κλέος ἀκούομεν
οὐδέ τοι ἴδμεν. But it is extremely doubtful whether these persons were
Servians.
[155] In the middle of the sixteenth century the Slovenians of Tolmino
used to sing "di Mattia re d' Ungheria e di altri celebri personaggi di
quella nazione" (Murko, _Zeitschr. d. Vereins f. Volksk._, 1909, p. 14,
note). Matthias Hunyadi died in 1490.
[156] Wiener, _Anthology of Russian Literature_, I p. 84.
NOTE V. THE HEROIC POETRY OF THE CELTIC PEOPLES.
In the history of the various Celtic peoples there is evidence for
the existence of more than one Heroic Age. In the first place we
have some traces of heroic poetry among the ancient Gauls, though
unfortunately it has entirely perished, together with all their
vernacular records. Then again Ireland has preserved a great body of
heroic literature, referring to a remote period. But, whatever may
have been their original form, these stories have come down to us for
the most part only in prose. Moreover, the subject is beset with so
many difficulties, both historical and linguistic, that it cannot be
approached with safety except by an expert. We shall have to confine
our attention therefore to the heroic poetry of the Cymry.
Even here the difficulties to be encountered are sufficiently serious.
Yet it is fairly clear that many of these poems deal with events which
are referred by the chronicles to the sixth century and the first half
of the seventh. We may note especially four groups of poems: (1) a few
concerned with the exploits of Arthur and his heroes; (2) a somewhat
larger number referring to princes named Gwallawg, Urien and Rhydderch;
(3) certain poems dealing with _Gododin_ and _Catraeth_; (4) a few
relating to Cadwallon. There are also two or three others, such as the
elegy over Cynddylan, which seem to refer to the same period, though
they cannot be classed under any of these headings. A number of the
above poems, especially those included in the second and third groups,
are attributed to two poets named Taliessin and Aneirin.
There is no doubt that Cadwallon is the well known Welsh king who
overthrew the Northumbrian king Edwin in 633 and was himself destroyed
by Oswald in the following year. But the poems of the second group seem
also to have a historical basis. In the Historia Brittonum (Harleian
text), § 63, we hear of four kings, _Urbgen et Riderch Hen et Guallanc
et Morcant_, who fought against the Northumbrian king Theodric and
his successors, Frithuwald and Hussa. Urbgen is said to have besieged
his opponents for three days in Lindisfarne (_Metcaud_), and to have
perished eventually through the jealousy of Morcant. In another passage
(§ 62) we hear of _Neirin et Taliessin_ among other poets who composed
British poetry in the time of a king named Dutigirn[157], who is made
contemporary with Ida, the father of Theodric. The origin of these
entries is unfortunately obscure. They are incorporated with an English
genealogical document, dating apparently from the end of the eighth
century; but they may quite possibly be derived from earlier sources.
In any case they cannot well be later than the first quarter of the
ninth century.
All the four kings mentioned in § 63 are known to us also from
genealogies of the tenth century. But one of them, Riderch Hen, is
named in Adamnan's Life of St Columba, which is of course altogether
independent of Welsh tradition. It is there stated (I 15[158]) that
Rodercus, king of Dumbarton, consulted St Columba as to his fate and
received the answer that he would die a peaceful death in his house--a
prophecy which was subsequently fulfilled. As St Columba died probably
in 597, the date given for Riderch Hen agrees well enough with what is
stated in the Historia Brittonum; for according to the most trustworthy
records Theodric and his two immediate successors reigned from about
572 to 592 or 593. We have no ground for doubting that the references
to Urbgen and the rest are based on equally good tradition.
For the characters mentioned in the Gododin poems no such evidence is
available. The poems themselves however contain references to the death
of _Dyvynwal Vrych_--doubtless the Dalriadic king Domnall Brecc, who
according to the Irish annals was killed by the Britons three years
after the fall of Oswald, i.e. about the year 645. Unfortunately it
is not made clear in what relationship this event stands to the main
action of the poems[159]. The few identifications which can be made
from the genealogies seem to be compatible with a date somewhere about
this time.
There can scarcely be any doubt that we are justified in regarding
the period covered by the poems as a kind of Heroic Age. The story of
Arthur was the one most elaborated in later times--a process which
must have begun before the ninth century, when it was incorporated in
the Historia Brittonum (§ 56). How much historical truth this story
contains we do not know, though the chronicles refer Arthur to the
early part of the sixth century, i.e. the beginning of our period. To
a certain extent however the other stories have experienced the same
process; for, apart from the question when the poems under discussion
were composed, there are others of undoubtedly later date, such as the
Englynion y Beddau, in which the same heroes are mentioned. Moreover it
must not be assumed that these were the only persons of the same period
whose praises were celebrated in poetry. Maelgwn, king of Gwynedd, who
died about 548, figures prominently in traditions of later times, and
it is likely enough that the beginnings of these stories were due to a
similar cause. On the other hand there is apparently no evidence for
the composition of poems dealing with the exploits of princes who lived
in the latter part of the seventh century or for several centuries
later.
As to the origin of the poems discussed above we have no evidence which
can be called conclusive. Some of the poems themselves claim to be the
work of the poets Aneirin and Taliessin. At the present time however
it seems to be generally held[160] that they are scholastic products
of a later age, based upon chronicles and composed with the intention
of glorifying the ancestry of some distinguished Welsh families. In
support of this view it is contended that the language of the poems
cannot possibly represent the form of Welsh spoken in the sixth or
seventh centuries. But this argument is scarcely decisive; for it
is clear that parts of the poems have undergone a certain amount of
modernisation, and it is by no means incredible that the same process
may have been in operation for centuries. I find it difficult to
believe that in order to celebrate the ancestry of certain families
poems would be composed recording an action which is represented as an
overwhelming disaster for the British forces, such as that described in
the Gododin poems. And can it really be proved that many of the heroes
celebrated in these poems were claimed as ancestors by families in
Wales?
At all events it is clear that the author of the entries in the
Historia Brittonum knew of ancient British poets. _Neirin_ and
_Taliessin_ are only two out of five names recorded by him, the rest
apparently being altogether unknown from other sources[161]. It is
true that he places all these persons about a generation before Urien
and Rhydderch Hen, but chronological accuracy is hardly to be expected
in references to such a remote period. Certainly we should note that
the last British king mentioned in these entries is a certain Cadafael
(_Catgabail Catguommed_), who is said to have escaped alone from the
battle in which Penda was killed (A.D. 655). The wording of this
passage (§ 65) seems rather to suggest acquaintance with a poem on the
subject.
We have seen now that the persons and events celebrated in the poems
belong to a period extending roughly from 500 to 650 and that there
are ancient records of famous British poets, who are referred to
the earlier part of this period and of whom two are traditionally
associated with the poems. Next we must notice that the poems
themselves, even in the corrupt and often unintelligible form in
which they are preserved, plainly show all the marks of Stage I of
our scheme. Their characteristics are those of court-poetry, but they
never attain to true narrative. For analogies to the poems which deal
with Urien we can hardly do better than turn to the court-poetry of
the Viking Age (cf. pp. 15 f., 91); for the Gododin poems perhaps the
best parallels are to be found in the Battle of Maldon and the Story
of Igor's Expedition, though in both the latter the narrative element
is much more fully developed. Taking all the evidence into account,
it seems to me that the choice lies between two alternatives: either
the poems really are works of Stage I, which have survived from the
Heroic Age itself, or they are exceedingly clever imitations of such
works, composed at a time when the latter were still in existence.
The decision between these two alternatives must of course be left to
experts. In the meantime we shall be ready to admit that the poems are
extremely corrupt, and that in some cases perhaps we have nothing more
than disjecta membra of earlier pieces. But until conclusive evidence
is brought forward it seems to me highly improbable that the original
poems have been entirely lost[162].
The history of Cumbrian heroic poetry is easily intelligible when
taken in connection with the national history. It is probable enough
that on the withdrawal of the legions large portions of the country
were occupied by northern Britons from beyond the Wall--who are
represented in tradition by Cunedda and his sons[163]. These were
doubtless affected by Roman influence to a very much less degree
than the inhabitants of the province; and the growth of heroic poetry
during the sixth century may be satisfactorily accounted for by the
wealth and prosperity which would naturally accrue to their princely
families during the early days of their dominion. It was probably not
until the time of Aethelfrith that their power was really broken.
But the following half century was a most disastrous period, ending
in the permanent obliteration of their nationality--in a political
sense--throughout the whole region between the Dee and the Clyde. Any
records which survived must owe their preservation, ultimately at
least, to refugees who escaped into the Welsh highlands.
Now we can see why so many place-names (Reged, Catraeth and dozens of
others) are incapable of identification. But further, the conditions in
Wales, the poorest and probably the most backward part of the province,
were doubtless highly unfavourable to the development of heroic poetry.
Under such conditions we should expect that narrative poems would
rapidly disintegrate into the semblance of folk-tales; and it may be
that here we have the explanation of the medieval stories of Arthur. At
all events they show a certain resemblance to the Russian stories of
Vladimir and his heroes. But Arthur, as we have seen, belongs to the
beginning of the Heroic Age. We have no evidence for the composition
of poems, which can properly be called narrative, dealing with the
later heroes. Here the original type of poem seems to have become
stereotyped--presumably because conditions favourable to development
were no longer present. The only marvel is that so much has been
preserved.
FOOTNOTES:
[157] _Tunc Dutigirn in illo tempore fortiter dimicabat contra gentem
Anglorum, tunc Talhaern Tataguen in poemate claruit, et Neirin et
Taliessin et Bluchbard et Cian, qui uocatur Gueinth Guaut, simul uno
tempore in poemate Britannico claruerunt._
[158] _De rege Roderco, filio Tothail, qui in Petra Cloithe regnauit._
[159] It is possibly worth noting that the Irish annals record a battle
between Oswio and the Britons in the same year as Domnall Brecc's
death; cf. Skene, _Chronicles of the Picts and Scots_, pp. 70, 348.
[160] This view is favoured by Prof. Anwyl in his _Prolegomena to the
Study of Old Welsh Poetry_ (Trans. of the Hon. Soc. of Cymmrodorion,
1903-4), p. 7 f.
[161] It has been suggested that _Bluchbard_ (cf. p. 106, note) may be
a corruption of the name _Llywarch_. Certainly the form _Neirin_ (which
is thought to be due to a misunderstanding of _aneirin_ as _et neirin_)
seems to show that the scribe himself had no knowledge of Aneirin.
[162] The question of the antiquity of the poems must of course be
distinguished from that of their authorship. If they are, even in part,
the work of Taliessin and Aneirin, we must conclude that these poets
are wrongly dated in the Historia Brittonum.
[163] In dealing with such traditions it is essential to remember that
our authorities date from times when (apart from Strathclyde) the Cymry
had long been confined to Wales and that they represent the point of
view of writers living in Wales. If the kings of Gwynedd were really
descended from the 'men of the north' their settlement in that region
is probably to be regarded as part of a much larger movement, of which
the traces elsewhere were obliterated by the English conquest.
CHAPTER VI.
SUPERNATURAL ELEMENTS IN THE HEROIC STORIES.
Most of the heroic poems and stories which have come down to us contain
elements generally comprehended under the term 'folk-tale' (Märchen),
and it will be convenient at once to distinguish tales of this class
from popular tales in general. Under the latter term we may include
all stories which are frequently repeated without being committed to
writing. It is on such foundations probably that all the surviving
heroic poems are built. The lapse of time between the events narrated
and the composition of the poem may amount to weeks or to generations;
in certain cases the story may be wholly fictitious--but this does not
affect our definition. When a story is put into metrical form by a
skilful poet it becomes more or less crystallised and has a good chance
of being preserved. In fact the result is somewhat similar to that of
committing it to writing. Stories which are not put into poetic form
are more liable to become obscured and forgotten.
The term 'folk-tale[164]' is of less wide application. Probably
different scholars would define it in different ways; but in this
book it is applied only to stories dealing with anonymous characters.
The hero or heroine (villain etc.) is described either (1) as 'the
man,' 'the girl,' etc., or (2) by some common name such as Jack or
Hans, which conveys no means of identification, or (3) by a name
which is obviously made to suit his or her special circumstances or
characteristics, such as Aschenbrödel or Sneewitchen. It will be seen
that this limitation would not prevent us from regarding stories about
the gods as folk-tales in origin; for most of the gods bear descriptive
names, e.g. Thunor, Frig, Balder, Frey. Yet by the time of our earliest
authorities these names had come to denote definite personalities; and
consequently we must classify such stories in a separate category,
namely as myths. On the other hand it must not be assumed that the
presence of supernatural features, in some form or other, is a
necessary characteristic of folk-tales. Such features do indeed occur
very frequently; but that is due merely to the fact that in illiterate
societies the marvellous has a special attraction for men's minds.
Into the origin of folk-tales in general we need not enter here. Some
apparently spring from attempts to account for natural phenomena,
social customs or religious rites. Others are probably founded on
adventures, real or fictitious, of individuals whose names have been
forgotten. Thus, to take an instance, the story of Alfred and the
cakes is not a folk-tale according to our standard; but if the king's
name had been forgotten we should have no hesitation in regarding it
as such. Again, there can be no doubt that many modern folk-tales are
derived ultimately from literary sources. In the same way we must
regard it as possible that in earlier times many folk-tales were
descended from heroic poems.
Prof. Olrik[165] has pointed out that it is possible very often to
distinguish between the Danish and Norse sources followed by Saxo in
his History. One of the safest criteria is the presence or absence of
characters whose names are not given. In stories of Norse origin, as in
Old Norse literature generally, it is customary for every character to
have a name--a characteristic which also distinguishes the old heroic
poetry. In stories derived from Danish sources on the other hand the
characters mentioned by name are few in number. A good instance is
to be found in the story of Ingellus (Ingeld), which in consequence
of the loss of proper names has been torn right away from its true
connections--as may be seen by a comparison with Beowulf. Yet there
can be little doubt, as we have seen, that this story is ultimately
derived from heroic poems. It would appear then that Danish tradition
tended to approximate to the folk-tale.
If heroic stories sometimes passed into folk-tales it is still clearer
that the latter tended to make their way into heroic stories. We
shall see shortly that even the early heroic poems relate a number of
incidents which seem to be derived from folk-tales, while in the later
forms of the stories such incidents become more and more frequent, most
commonly in connection with the childhood or ancestry of the hero.
The same phenomenon occurs of course in stories of famous men which
have nothing to do with heroic poetry. Thus there is a widely spread
folk-tale (told of the god Thor in Old Norse literature), which relates
how some animal, a goat, reindeer or calf, is killed and eaten, but
care is taken not to break any of its bones. Then on the following day
the hero restores the animal to life. In the Historia Brittonum (cap.
32) this story is related of St Germain, the well known bishop of
Auxerre.
It is a more difficult question and one which we shall have to discuss
later whether any of the heroic stories are wholly derived from
folk-tales. The story of Balder bears the stamp of a folk-tale, for
the chief characters (Balder, Höðr, Nanna) have names with an obvious
meaning. But it is only in Saxo's History that this story appears in
a heroic setting; and though his account seems to be more primitive
in several respects than that given by the Norse authorities, there
is some reason for suspecting that either he himself or one of his
(comparatively recent) predecessors was responsible for the setting.
It should be observed however that the occurrence of one or more names
with obvious meanings does not in itself prove that a story is derived
from a folk-tale. Thus in the story of Heðinn and Högni the fact that
the heroine (in contrast with the other characters) bears a name which
means 'war' does not of necessity involve her origin in a folk-tale any
more than that of her namesake, the abbess of Whitby.
Apart from the distinguishing feature with which we have been dealing
folk-tales as a class have certain general characteristics which may be
appreciated by a comparison with those of heroic poetry. In the last
chapter (p. 82 f.) we gave a short list of the characteristics by
which the latter is specially distinguished. To all these the typical
folk-tale presents a marked contrast. Some of the leading characters,
including either the hero or the heroine or both, are usually persons
of humble birth. The opponents of the hero or heroine tend to be
represented as monsters of cruelty or vice, even when they are of royal
rank, as is often the case. There is no inclination to avoid horrible
or coarse subjects. Above all we miss those detailed descriptions of
court life upon which the heroic poems are so fond of dwelling. The
life and thought which we find reflected in folk-tales is that not of
the court but of the village.
It would of course be rash to assume that folk-tales formed the
sole intellectual pabulum of the peasantry in early times. No doubt
we have to add 'popular tales,' similar to those which formed the
foundation of the heroic poems. But since these tales were not put
into poetic form--i.e. not into such poetic form as would ensure their
preservation[166]--they were always liable to disintegration and thus
were constantly approximating to folk-tales. Hence, though we must make
allowance for influence of the one upon the other, it is probably not
so very far from the truth that what heroic stories were to the courts
folk-tales were to the rest of the population.
In Norway court poetry flourished down to Christian times, though in
the generation before the conversion it had come mainly into the hands
of Icelanders. But practically nothing is known as to the existence
of court poets in Denmark; and here we have, I think, the explanation
of the peculiar character of the Danish sources used by Saxo. The
old heroic poems had been largely forgotten, and what remained was
preserved only in the form of ballads and popular tales--which in some
cases practically amounted to folk-tales.
Lastly, we must note that the existence of a folk-tale may sometimes be
inferred when we have no knowledge of it in its uncontaminated form.
Such is the case (e.g.) when we find the same adventure, especially
if it be of a supernatural character, related of several different
and unconnected persons, whose historical existence may be quite
satisfactorily authenticated. But such inferences must be used with
caution, for it is not necessary to suppose that supernatural incidents
in heroic stories are always due to the influence of folk-tales. They
may often truly reflect the belief of an age which did not clearly
distinguish between natural and supernatural. That the supernatural is
less prominent in heroic poetry than in folk-tales is due doubtless to
the fact that the courts of that period possessed a far higher degree
of culture than the rest of the population. The same phenomenon is
still more noticeable in Welsh literature than in Teutonic. In the
early court poems the supernatural is comparatively little in evidence,
whereas in the Mabinogion, which are largely made up of folk-tales, it
is developed to a most astounding degree.
* * * * *
Various kinds of supernatural beings are brought before our notice in
heroic stories. In the Northern versions the god Othin is introduced
not unfrequently. Thus, to give a few instances, the Völsunga Saga
brings him into contact with Sigmundr on two occasions: first when he
enters Völsungr's hall at the wedding feast and plants in the tree a
sword which Sigmundr alone is able to draw out (cap. 3), and again in
his last battle when the hero's sword is shattered at the touch of
Othin's javelin (cap. 11). Twice also the same saga makes him meet
with Sigurðr: first when he chooses for him the horse Grani (cap.
13), and later when he accompanies him on his way to attack the sons
of Hundingr (cap. 17; cf. also cap. 18). In all these cases alike the
god's identity is not suspected, at least until after his departure. In
the poem Reginsmál, from which the last of these incidents is taken,
we find also a story of quite a different character and laid wholly in
the realm of the supernatural, namely the adventures of the gods Othin,
Hoenir and Loki with the otter and the dwarf Andvari. Of other divine
or semi-divine beings we may mention Hlióð, the daughter of Hrímnir and
adopted daughter of Frigg, who became the wife of Völsungr and mother
of Sigmundr. As a last instance reference may be made to a passage from
the lost Biarkamál (Saxo, p. 66), where the hero suspects that Othin is
present among the enemy and expresses his desire to attack him.
In the German heroic poems, which are entirely Christian, we find no
mention of the gods. Note should be taken however of an incident in the
Rabenschlacht (v. 964 ff.), where Witege in his flight from Dietrich
gallops into the sea and is rescued by the mermaid Wâchilt. If we were
dealing with a Greek story we should regard this person as a goddess
without hesitation.
In much earlier times a very good instance is furnished by the
legendary history of the Langobardi. According to the story (cf. p. 9
f.) the Langobardi, who were then called Winniles, soon after their
emigration from Scandinavia came into conflict with the Vandals. The
Origo Gentis Langobardorum, an anonymous tract dating from the latter
part of the seventh century, gives the following account of what
happened: Ambri and Assi, the leaders of the Vandals, asked Wodan
(_Godan_) that he should give them victory over the Winniles. Wodan
replied, saying: "Whomsoever I shall first look upon, when the sun
rises, to them will I give victory." Then Gambara with her two sons
Ibor and Aio, who were chiefs over the Winniles, asked Fria (_Frea_),
the wife of Wodan, that she should be gracious to the Winniles. Fria
then gave counsel that the Winniles should come when the sun rose and
that their women should let down their hair about their faces after the
fashion of a beard and should come with their husbands. Then, as it
became light, while the sun was rising, Fria turned the bed, on which
Wodan lay, and put his face to the east and wakened him. And he looked
and saw the Winniles and their women with their hair let down about
their faces and said: "Who are those long-beards?" And Fria said to
Wodan: "As thou hast given them a name, give them also victory." And he
gave them victory, etc.
Woden is mentioned also in the Anglo-Saxon poem on the magic herbs,
and Ing in the Runic poem. In strictly heroic pieces however the only
possible case is the reference to the passionate love of Geat in the
Elegy of Deor (v. 15)[167]. Indeed, were it not for the Langobardic
story we might perhaps suspect that the introduction of the gods in
heroic poetry was a Scandinavian innovation. But as the case stands,
although this story cannot properly be regarded as heroic, it is more
likely that their non-appearance in the English heroic poems is due to
a process of expurgation or elimination. From such passages as Beow.
175 ff. we may infer with probability that no definite reference to the
gods would be tolerated after the courts had become Christian (cf. p.
53 f.).
* * * * *
In the poems which have come down to us the supernatural element is
represented chiefly by what we may call monsters. This is especially
the case in Beowulf, the main part of which is devoted to encounters
with such beings. We can hardly obtain a better example than the hero's
adventures in the first part of the poem. But it will be well at the
outset to guard against the assumption that the story of Beowulf was in
any way typical of early heroic poetry. Thus we have no satisfactory
evidence that either the story of Waldhere or that of Finn contained
supernatural elements of any kind, while even in that of Siegfried they
are comparatively unimportant.
The story of Beowulf's adventures with the monsters seems to be derived
from a folk-tale. In the Icelandic Grettis Saga, cap. 64-66, the famous
outlaw Grettir, who died in 1031, is credited with performing almost
the same exploits. The resemblance between the two stories indeed
descends in some cases even to small points of detail. These, as well
as the points of difference, may best be seen by giving an analysis of
the two side by side.
Hrothgar's hall has been attacked Grettir learns that Steinvör
by night for twelve years and has lost her husband and
many of his warriors carried a trusted servant at two
off and devoured by the monster successive Christmases through
Grendel. He comes and offers his mysterious nightly attacks on
services. her house. He comes to her and
claims hospitality at the third
Christmas.
He is left in charge of the He is left alone in charge of the
hall at night with his fourteen hall at night.
companions.
Grendel (a male monster) attacks He is attacked by a huge female
the hall, devours one warrior and monster and a desperate wrestling
engages in a desperate wrestling struggle takes place.
struggle with Beowulf.
Grendel finds Beowulf too strong Grettir is dragged out of the
and eventually escapes, but with house to a precipice over the
the loss of an arm which Beowulf river, where he eventually
tears off. succeeds in chopping off one of
the monsters arms. She falls over
the edge.
Grendel's mother attacks the There is no further attack, but
hall and carries off a Danish Grettir determines to examine the
knight. Beowulf goes to the river from curiosity.
lake where the monsters were
believed to dwell, in order to
exact punishment.
Beowulf dives into the lake and Grettir dives off the cliff
is seized by Grendel's mother who into the river, just below a
drags him into her cave, where waterfall. He climbs up beneath
there is a bright fire. Beowulf's the waterfall and finds a cave
followers and the Danes remain there with a fire in it. The
above on the bank. priest Steinn waits for him on
the cliff.
The monster overthrows Beowulf Grettir on reaching the cave is
and attacks him with a dirk attacked by a huge male monster
(_seax_); but he succeeds in armed with a _heptisax_[168].
chopping her asunder with a huge This snaps at the first thrust;
sword which he finds in the cave. and as the monster reaches back
After slaying her he comes upon for a sword which is hanging
the dead Grendel and cuts off his behind him, Grettir slashes him
head. He also sees a quantity of down the front. Afterwards he
treasure. finds the remains of the two
missing men in the cave.
The lake is stained with the The river is stained with the
monster's blood. All think that monster's blood, and Steinn,
Beowulf has perished, and the thinking that Grettir has
Danes return home; but Beowulf's perished, leaves the cliff.
followers remain on the bank.
There can scarcely be any doubt that these two stories are connected in
some way. Some scholars indeed hold that the Icelandic story is derived
from the other; but the discrepancies seem to me to be too great for
this to be probable. Moreover there is another Scandinavian story
which has to be taken into account. This is contained in Orms Tháttr
Storolfssonar[169], a document which dates from the fourteenth century,
and also in later ballads from Sweden and the Faroes. According to the
story Ormr was an Icelander who lived towards the end of the tenth
century. Like Beowulf and Grettir he had a reputation for laziness in
his youth. In his time an island called Sauðey off the coast of Norway
was inhabited by the monster Brusi and his mother who had the form of
a black cat. One of Ormr's friends, a Dane named Asbiörn, lost his
life in an attack upon them. Ormr then set out to avenge him. When he
reached the monster's den the cat assailed him fiercely with her claws,
but he ultimately succeeded in destroying her. Then he had an encounter
with Brusi, whose head he tore open with his hands, afterwards cutting
the 'blood-eagle' upon his back. In the den he found a large amount
of gold and silver. The later forms of the story add several features
which recall the adventures of Beowulf, especially in regard to the
situation of the den and the cannibalistic propensities of the monsters.
Here again we have in all probability only another form of the same
story. But it is to be observed that there is no special affinity
between the two Scandinavian versions, while the setting and the names
of the characters are entirely different in all three. Yet if one
version was really the source of the others it is difficult to believe
that every trace of its original connections could have vanished.
With far more probability we may conclude that the story once existed
independently, i.e. in the form of a folk-tale, and as a matter of fact
we possess an Icelandic folk-tale which contains most of the principal
features, though the hero has been split up into five brothers[170].
In its original form the tale was probably only a specialised variety
of the type familiar to us through Jack the Giant-killer. Stories of
this kind seem to have been particularly popular in Norway--a fact due
perhaps in part to the survival of isolated savage communities among
whom cannibalism may not have been entirely unknown[171]. We meet with
them sometimes in quite unexpected places. Thus in the account of
Thóroddr Snorrason's mission to Jemtland in St Olaf's Saga (Heimskr.),
cap. 151, we find a graphic and circumstantial story of a female
monster who killed and devoured eleven merchants in the inn where the
envoy was resting. Thor too, the chief Norwegian deity, came to be
regarded essentially as a giant-killer, his origin in the thunder being
entirely, or almost entirely, forgotten.
It is no serious objection to our view that Grettir seems to be a
perfectly historical character; for no one will contend that the story
of his doings at Sandhaugar is true, any more than a number of other
exploits with which he is credited. The same remark applies to the
story of Thóroddr, whose father, the magistrate Snorri (Grettir's
contemporary), was perhaps the best known and most influential man
in Iceland. We have seen that in the true folk-tale the hero is
nameless; but his adventures are liable to become linked with the
names of historical characters--just as in our own day everyone knows
of remarkable persons who have had associated with them stories
which really were in existence before their time. In Grettir's case
exceptionally favourable conditions for such association were provided
by the man's great strength, by the unruly disposition which he showed
from his childhood and by the many thrilling adventures which he
doubtless did experience during his long outlawry. Indeed, though the
saga in its present form was not composed until nearly three centuries
after his time, we might naturally expect that many untrue stories
about such a person would be in circulation even before his death.
Just as the folk-tale became attached to the historical Grettir, so
it may have been associated with another person in earlier times.
Now the only character in Northern tradition who has been identified
with Beowulf is a certain Boðvarr Biarki, a warrior in the service
of Hrólfr Kraki. The identification is denied by many scholars, but
there are two points in the story of Biarki which seem to me to lend
great probability to it. In the first place as Beowulf goes from the
land of the Geatas (Gautar), where his uncle is king, to the court
of the Danish king Hrothgar, so Biarki goes from the land of the
Gautar, where his brother is king, to the court of Hrólfr Kraki, i.e.
Hrothwulf, Hrothgar's nephew and colleague. Secondly, at a later time
Biarki, like Beowulf, assists the Swedish prince Aðils (Eadgils) in his
victorious campaign against Áli (Onela), though he is represented not
as king of the Gautar but as Hrólfr Kraki's emissary.
On the other hand it is true that no resemblance to the story of
Beowulf is shown by the Scandinavian accounts of Biarki's origin and
death. In Hrólfs Saga Kraka[172], which dates only from the fourteenth
century, Biarki is said to have been born in Norway. His father was
called Biörn ('bear') and his mother Bera ('she-bear'). The former
indeed was actually turned into a bear by witchcraft. Further, from the
time of his arrival in Denmark Biarki remained in the service of Hrólfr
till the end and lost his life in the final attack made upon that king.
A reminiscence of his ursine antecedents appears in the last scene.
When the enemy are attacking the king's hall Biarki cannot be roused
out of slumber, but a huge bear (the warrior's spirit) is seen fighting
among the king's knights.
Saxo says nothing about Biarki's origin and it may be that the story
given in the saga was unknown in his time. At all events it is
doubtless derived from a folk-tale. In the twelfth century Vita et
Passio Waldevi[173] almost the same story is told of the father of
Siward, the famous earl of Northumbria, who died in 1055, while a
further parallel is to be found in the De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis[174],
another work of the same period. Both stories contain indications
of Scandinavian origin and we can hardly doubt that the motif was a
popular one in the folk-tales of the North. Indeed for the version of
the story found in Hrólfs Saga, transformation into animal form through
the agency of a wicked stepmother, analogies are to be found in many
parts of the world.
In his account of the last fight Saxo quotes at great length from
the lost Biarkamál; but here again no reference is made to the bear
motif[175]. We may note however that in this version no explanation
is given of Biarki's behaviour in refusing to rise from his bed in
response to the exhortations of his colleague[176]. It is scarcely
safe therefore, I think, to assume that Saxo's account--apart from the
quotations which consist entirely of speeches--necessarily represents
an earlier form of the story than that given in the saga; for in the
latter Biarki's conduct is quite satisfactorily explained. There is
surely at least as much to be said for supposing that the incident
of the bear--or something which gave rise to it--has been ignored or
forgotten by Saxo.
Now Beowulf is represented as an enormously strong man, but his
strength is not altogether of a natural order. We are told that he
was fated not to gain victory with the sword. It is not only the
struggle with Grendel which he wins by wrestling; in v. 2506 f. we hear
that he hugged or crushed to death the Frisian champion Daeghrefn--a
method of warfare appropriate to a bear rather than to a man. The
explanation is perhaps to be found in the curious phenomenon called
_berserksgangr_[177], which is so frequently mentioned in sagas and
even in legal works. It is to be remembered that in popular belief this
form of madness was connected with the werwolf idea, of which the bear
form was a common variety. The transition therefore to the story found
in Hrólfs Saga is nothing very strange.
In conclusion mention must be made of an incident which has been
brought into connection with the fight between Beowulf and Grendel.
In Hrólfs Saga, cap. 23, it is stated that shortly after his arrival
at the Danish court Biarki encountered and slew an animal demon which
at two successive Yules had ravaged the livestock in the king's farm.
Saxo alludes clearly to the same story when he states that Biarki won
great fame by killing a huge bear[178]. Now it should be observed that
the representation of Grendel is by no means clearly anthropomorphic,
though the human element is much more apparent in the cave scene. The
various accounts may, I think, be satisfactorily reconciled on the
hypothesis that in the original story the hero killed a monster or
demon (_iötunn_) in the form of a bear (_biarnar hamr_). In England
this story must have been expanded and modified by the influence of the
folk-tale of the two cannibal monsters which we have discussed above.
In Scandinavian tradition however no such intrusion took place, though
a totally different folk-tale became attached to the early history of
the same hero.
* * * * *
Two adventures with dragons are recorded in Beowulf. The first, that of
Sigemund, is related quite briefly (vv. 884-900), but the second forms
the subject of the latter part of the poem. The Older Edda (Fáfnismál),
followed by the prose Edda and Völsunga Saga, gives an account of
the killing of Fáfnir by Sigurðr; and in the late Seyfridslied two
adventures of the same kind are narrated in connection with the same
hero. Dragons figure also occasionally in the German epics, especially
in the story of Wolfdietrich. Here too we must mention Saxo's accounts
of the dragons slain by the Danish kings Frotho I and Fridleuus II. The
two stories are almost identical, but the former (p. 38) contains a
description of the dragon and of the means to be used in attacking him,
which is given in Latin verse and may very well be derived from an old
poem.
There are certain resemblances between Saxo's stories and the great
dragon fight in Beowulf, and many scholars are inclined to the view
that they have a common origin. The former however in both cases
ended successfully. Moreover in two points at least they agree rather
with the adventure ascribed to Sigemund in Beowulf, namely (i) that
the hero attacks and kills the dragon alone and (ii) that he carries
away the treasure in a boat. On the other hand it is generally agreed
that the stories of Sigemund and Sigurðr must be connected, though
opinion is divided as to whether the adventure was first ascribed to
the father or the son. Beowulf is at all events by far the earliest of
the authorities. Against this stands the fact that both Scandinavian
and German tradition names Sigurðr (Siegfried) as the hero. But this
argument could have weight only if there was reason for thinking that
the story was known in the North before the composition of Beowulf.
Fáfnir is called _dreki_ in Völsunga Saga, but he seems always to
be represented rather as a reptile than a dragon. It is not at all
clear that he is a being of the same kind as the dragon encountered
by Beowulf, which is said to fly and breathe fire. This is perhaps to
be noticed, since the flying dragon is also known in the North; we
find it mentioned even in old poems such as Völuspá. The description
of Sigemund's dragon is too brief to enable us to determine its
character. It is once called _draca_ and thrice _wyrm_; but the latter
word is used also of the flying dragon. On the other hand it is not
certain that the word _draca_ always denotes a supernatural being. The
_saedracan_ and _niceras_ mentioned in Beowulf 1425 ff. would seem from
the description to be animals of the seal-class.
One feature however is common to all the English and Northern dragons,
namely that they are represented as guarding hoards of gold. In the
North this idea must have been very widespread, since expressions such
as 'bed of the dragon' (or 'snake') are among the commonest terms for
gold in Old Norse poetry. In Anglo-Saxon poetry also it is generally
recognised[179].
It has been mentioned above that many scholars connect the story of
Beowulf's dragon-fight with that related of Frotho I by Saxo. To me the
affinities of the latter seem rather to lie with Sigemund's dragon;
but the truth may be that for adventures of this kind there was a
standard poetic description which could be applied to any number of
cases. More important perhaps is the fact that genealogically Saxo's
Frotho I corresponds to Beowulf the son of Scyld[180]. In common with
practically all Scandinavian genealogical texts Saxo has the series
Frotho[181]--Haldanus--Ro (Hróarr) and Helgo corresponding to the
Beowulf--Healfdene--Hrothgar and Halga of the poem[182]. Quite possibly
therefore it is not without significance that this person is credited
with having killed a dragon.
We have seen that the two stories differ essentially in regard to
the outcome of the adventure. Frotho's death is recorded by Saxo in
quite a different connection and apparently long afterwards. But here
we may turn to the story of the other Frotho, Saxo's Frotho III (the
Peaceful), for there can be little doubt that the two characters were
originally identical. According to Saxo this latter king was killed
in his old age by a sorceress who had taken the form of a 'sea-cow'
(_marituma bos_), though the author does not make clear what kind of
creature he means by that term. It is at least a question whether this
story does not belong to the same class as the others; for whatever
differences there may be in other respects between a 'sea-cow' and a
dragon, it may be observed that nearly all the dragons of Northern
legends make their home by the sea.
If there is a connection between the two stories--the dragon-fight
of Frotho I and the death of Frotho III--their origin must surely be
sought in myth. Fróði the Peaceful (Frotho III) is the central figure
of Danish legend and his fame became proverbial even in Germany.
Moreover, though there is no evidence that he was regarded as a god, it
is clear that he was the Danish counterpart of the god Frey.
It may not be out of place here to cite one more of Saxo's stories
(p. 29 f.). Hadingus, the father of Frotho I, while bathing in the
sea off the coast of Helsingland encountered and killed a sea-monster
of unknown species. As he was having it carried to his camp he met a
woman who uttered a prophecy of dire woe, saying that he had killed
one of the deities who was wandering about in a form not his own[183].
In order to propitiate the gods he instituted a sacrifice to Frey,
which was to be repeated at regular intervals and which the Swedes call
Fröblod. This story seems to take us back to the days of theriomorphic
religion--or perhaps one should say to a time when certain marine
animals were regarded as divine. But is it not also connected somehow
with the story of Frotho's death?
We need not enter here into a discussion of these mythical stories,
though it may be remarked in passing that theriomorphism plays a
very prominent part in the religious practices and conceptions of
primitive peoples, and, what is more, that we hear not unfrequently
of a struggle between a god or national hero and some theriomorphic
being whose sanctuary or attributes he appears to have taken over[184].
But it is perhaps worth noting that in Beowulf also the hero is
repeatedly involved in adventures with water-monsters. This feature
is entirely absent from the story of Biarki and can hardly have a
historical basis. What I would suggest is that it is derived, in part
at least, from the same group of legends which in Danish tradition are
centred round the names Hadingus and Frotho. But in that case there
is considerable probability that these stories have been transferred
to the hero from his namesake, the son of Scyld, who belongs
genealogically to the same group of persons.
This explanation will at all events account for the discrepancy between
the English and Scandinavian accounts of the hero's death[185]. Only
the latter properly comes into consideration for Beowulf the son of
Ecgtheow. For the suggested transference we have a certain analogy in
the various incidents which are connected sometimes with one Frotho,
sometimes with the other. A much better case however occurs in an
English work of later date, the Vitae Duorum Offarum. In that work
Drida, the wife of Offa II (the Mercian king), is represented as a
most desperate character, and incidents are related of her which seem
to be totally incompatible with what we know of this queen--whose real
name was Cynethryth--from contemporary sources. On the other hand they
agree very well with the brief account given in Beowulf of Thrytho
the wife of Offa I (king of Angel). We may compare too the hopeless
confusion which prevails in the chronicles with regard to Anlaf the
son of Sihtric (Olafr Kvaran) and Anlaf the son of Guthfrith. It can
scarcely be doubted that heroic poetry was liable to mistakes of the
same character, although the question has scarcely received as much
attention as it deserves.
In the explanation put forward above I do not mean of course to suggest
that the dragon of northern heroic poetry is always a distorted form
of some marine animal. My view is that this is one of the elements
which have contributed to the formation of the stories--playing a part
similar to that of the crocodile in the legends of southern lands[186].
Dragons endowed with supernatural or at least unnatural characteristics
figure in the folk-tales of many nations throughout the world; and
such stories are by no means restricted to maritime populations. Very
frequently no doubt they are handed on from one people to another, and
their currency is perhaps assisted by works of art. We have to remember
that the word _draca_ is derived from Latin. Yet the conception itself
is probably much older; at all events the association of such monsters
with hoards of gold can be traced back in northern regions to a very
remote antiquity[187].
As regards the origin of this association--which is clearly unnatural
and not due in any way to the influence of marine animals--it may be
noted that the dragon's lair is often a tomb or barrow[188], as in
the case of the one encountered by Beowulf. An explanation of this
phenomenon seems to be afforded by a story relating to the tomb of
Charles Martel, which is found in a number of medieval chronicles. St
Eucherius, bishop of Orleans, in a vision saw Charles in hell, and on
coming to himself begged St Boniface and others to go and inspect the
prince's burial place. On opening the tomb they saw a dragon dart out
suddenly and found the grave all blackened as though it had been burnt
up. Here it would seem that the dragon--a fiery dragon, like the one in
Beowulf--was nothing else than the spirit of the dead prince, and it is
permissible to suspect that such was the case elsewhere. At all events
the fact that dragons are represented as inhabiting tombs is clearly to
be taken in connection with their character as guardians of gold; for
in early times it was customary to bury with the dead a considerable
amount of treasure.
But there is another feature which deserves notice in the story of
Charles Martel's grave. The earliest document[189] in which it is found
dates from the year 858, i.e. about a century after the incident is
said to have taken place. But the closing words of the account[190]
state quite definitely that the writer or writers had known persons
who were present at the opening of the tomb. We have thus to deal with
evidence which is strictly second-hand, as in the case of more than
one remarkable story told by Bede. The explanation lies no doubt in
the fact that the men of that age did not clearly distinguish between
the supernatural and that which is merely unusual. At such a time if a
person asserted that he had seen a fiery dragon, his statement would be
received doubtless with wonder but not necessarily with incredulity. As
a matter of fact we find it stated in the Saxon Chronicle[191], _sub
anno_ 793, that in that year fiery dragons were seen flying in the air.
It cannot therefore be assumed with safety either that the killer of a
dragon must be a fictitious person or that the adventure itself must
have been invented long after the hero's time.
* * * * *
In conclusion we have to take account of supernatural properties
possessed by beings which in themselves are natural. As an instance we
may take the speeches of the birds (nuthatches) which in Fáfnismál 32
ff. warn Sigurðr of the treachery prepared for him by Reginn. Similar
stories occur elsewhere in Old Norse literature. Absurd as this belief
may seem we have good contemporary evidence for its existence in
Procopius' account of the Warni, which we discussed in the last chapter
(p. 97 f.).
Under the same head may be mentioned the faculty ascribed to various
persons of being able to change into wolves or bears. As instances
we may mention the case of Sigmundr and Sinfiötli given in Völsunga
Saga, cap. 8, and the story of Biarki discussed above. For the latter
we have already suggested an explanation. But though the motif may
not have been a common one in heroic poetry--as compared with sagas
relating to the Viking Age--there can be no doubt that the belief in
shape-changing goes back to a remote antiquity. It is of frequent
occurrence in poems and stories dealing with the gods, while similar
ideas are widely prevalent among primitive peoples at the present day.
Among other supernatural characteristics may be mentioned that of
invulnerability, through the use of magic which rendered all weapons
harmless--a feature found in Beowulf (in the case of Grendel) as well
as in later works. Often too heroes are capable of superhuman powers
of strength or endurance, as in Beow. 377 ff., 544 ff.[192], though
many of these cases may be set down to mere exaggeration. On the whole
however such characteristics are scarcely as prominent as they are in
the heroic stories of other nations.
The love of the marvellous is more strikingly displayed in Procopius'
account of Britain (_Goth._ IV 20) than in any of the poems which have
come down to us. In the first place he says that the whole country
beyond the great wall (i.e. the Roman Wall) was inhabited only by
snakes and wild beasts, and that if any man ventured there he would
die at once from the pestilential atmosphere. Then he goes on to say
that Britain was the dwelling place of the spirits of the dead, and
describes in detail how certain people who dwelt on the Frankish coast
ferried the souls across. As to the truth of this story Procopius
himself expresses scepticism; yet he states that he had heard it
from numerous witnesses. It is scarcely permissible therefore to
suppose that he had been victimised by a humorist. More probably he is
reporting stories actually current among the Teutonic soldiery in the
Roman army, which doubtless contained adventurers from many distant
lands. In short we have here to do with folk-tales[193] which had
been localised in Britain and were believed to represent its condition
truly at the very time when Procopius was writing. It is exceedingly
remarkable that such stories should obtain credence at a time when,
as we know from more than one source, there was quite a considerable
amount of communication between Britain and the Continent. Indeed
Procopius himself says that large numbers of English emigrants had
recently settled within the Frankish dominions.
* * * * *
In the course of this chapter we have seen that many of
the heroic stories contain elements derived from myth and
folk-tale. The distinction which we have drawn between the two
categories is that only the former deals with definite--though
unhistorical--personalities[194]. It is commonly held that myth is
a necessary element in heroic stories; but this is a question which
we must reserve for discussion in the next chapter. Further, we have
seen that the presence of supernatural elements does not necessarily
mean that the stories in which they occur were composed or modified
long after the events which they relate; that, on the contrary, such
elements are to be found in contemporary or almost contemporary
narratives. They must be taken as faithful reflections of the beliefs
and ideas of an uncritical age. But it is scarcely correct to regard
these elements as the distinctive characteristics of heroic poetry.
Their chief domain in reality is the folk-tale, a far more primitive
form of composition, which without doubt was in existence during the
same period. The truly distinctive characteristics of heroic poetry are
rather those which differentiate it from the folk-tale.
FOOTNOTES:
[164] Under this heading we may include metrical compositions. The term
'folk-song' cannot conveniently be used here, as it has acquired a
wider signification.
[165] _Kilderne til Sakses Oldhistorie_, p. 18 ff.
[166] Ballads on heroic subjects may of course have begun quite early.
[167] Elsewhere this name occurs only in the genealogies, where it is
borne by an ancestor of Woden. It is possible however that in the Elegy
some unknown hero of the Geatas may be meant (cf. Beow. 640, 1785 etc.).
[168] This word is said to occur only here and in a following verse.
From the description the weapon seems to have been a kind of dirk with
a long wooden shaft.
[169] Fornmanna Sögur, III p. 204 ff. (especially p. 223 ff.).
[170] Cf. Brandl, _Grundriss d. germ. Philol._², II p. 993 f. The
following pages (995 f.) contain an admirable summary of the whole
question.
[171] Cf. Hansen, _Landnåm i Norge_, p. 160. For stories of monsters
which suggest savages, cf. Ketils S. Haengs, cap. 2 f., and Gríms S.
Loðinkinna, cap. 1.
[172] A somewhat similar account of Biarki's origin is given in the
(fifteenth century) Biarkarímur.
[173] _Tradunt relaciones antiquorum quod uir quidam nobilis, quem
Dominus permisit, contra solitum ordinem humane propaginis, ex quodam
albo urso patre, muliere generosa matre, procreari, Ursus genuit
Spratlingum; Spratlingus Ulsium; Ulsius Beorn, cognomento Beresune,
hoc est filius ursi. Hic Beorn Dacus fuit natione, comes egregius et
miles illustris. In signum autem illius diversitatis speciei ex parte
generantium produxerat ei natura paternas auriculas, sive ursi etc._
Michel, _Chroniques Anglo-normandes_, p. 104.
[174] _Illum maximum ursum ... cuius pater in silvis fertur puellam
rapuisse et ex ea Biernum regem Norweye genuisse._ ib. p. 7 f. A
similar story is told by Saxo (p. 345 f.) of the ancestry of Svend
Estrithson.
[175] Yet Hialti's third speech (p. 61) contains the words _igne ursos
arcere licet_, the significance of which is obscure. It is curious, as
Prof. Olrik (_Danmarks Heltedigtning_, p. 51) has pointed out, that
Hrólfs Saga (cap. 33) refers to bears in a corresponding place, though
the context is quite different.
[176] Prof. Olrik (_op. cit._, p. 45) says that Biarki's sleep is
certainly of a supernatural character and suggests that it is due to
magical arts on the part of the enemy.
[177] Cf. especially Yngl. S. 6: Othin's men went to battle without
mail-coats and were frenzied like dogs or wolves. They bit into their
shields and were as strong as bears or bulls. They made slaughter of
other men; but neither fire nor iron took effect upon them. This is
called _berserksgangr_.
[178] The identity of the two stories is shown by the fact that in both
cases Hialti is made to drink the creature's blood--a custom known in
Norway in comparatively recent times (cf. Olrik, _op. cit._, p. 118).
The Biarkarímur tell of two encounters, the first with a she-wolf, the
second between Hialti and a bear.
[179] Cf. the Cott. Gnomic Verses, 26 f.: _draca sceal on hlaewe frod
fraetwum wlanc_.
[180] It is generally held that this person's original name was Beowa
or Beaw. The latter is the form given in the genealogy in the Chronicle
(_ad ann._ 855); but in view of the many corruptions which this
genealogy has suffered it may very well be due to a scribal error for
_Beowa_. This again may be a hypocoristic form for _Beowulf_, though on
the other hand it is by no means impossible that the name of the son
of Scyld has been assimilated to that of the hero of the poem. But in
any case there does not seem to be any adequate ground for the commonly
accepted view that the adventure with Grendel originally belonged to
this person.
[181] In Skiöldunga Saga, Langfeðgatal etc. Halfdan's father is not
Friðfróði (Saxo's Frotho I) but Fróði hinn froekni (Saxo's Frotho IV),
the Froda of Beowulf.
[182] As regards Frotho's parentage--Saxo makes him son of Hadingus,
son of Gram, son of Scioldus. In Skiöldunga Saga, Langfeðgatal etc.
Friðfróði is son of Friðleifr, son of Skiöldr; while Fróði hinn froekni
is son of Friðleifr, son of Danr.
[183]
_Tantum pene uis celica pensat.
quippe unum e superis alieno corpore tectum
sacrilege necuere manus: sic numinis almi
interfector ades._
[184] We may compare the case of Apollo and the Python at Delphi, and
possibly the story of Thor (Miðgarðs véurr) and Miðgarðsormr. Note
should also be taken of the existence of a local tradition--going back
apparently to the Middle Ages--to the effect that the Isefjord was
formerly haunted by a monster which demanded a human victim from every
ship that passed. It was finally expelled by the arrival of the relics
of St Lucius, to whom Roeskilde cathedral is dedicated (cf. Sarrazin,
_Beowulf-Studien_, p. 10 ff.). The traditional burial-place of Fróði
the Peaceful is on the shore of the Roeskilde Fjord; but the two fjords
have a common entrance.
[185] It does not of course remove all difficulties. The chief of these
perhaps is the presence of Wiglaf, who seems clearly to belong to
Beowulf, the son of Ecgtheow. The discrepancy between the names Beowulf
and Fróði is of minor account, since the latter may very well have
originated in a title (cf. Beow. v. 2928). On the other hand if this
person is really a mythical national hero the name _Beowa_ (perhaps for
an earlier form _Biowi_) would seem more natural than _Beowulf_. Yet
there may have been intermediate stages between the original hero and
the person finally credited with the exploit.
[186] Thus upon some of these legends a good deal of light seems to be
thrown by certain usages cited by Mr Frazer in his _Lectures on the
Early History of the Kingship_, p. 180.
[187] Herodotus (III 116, IV 13, 27) speaks of a region in the extreme
north of Europe or Asia which was said to be inhabited by gold-guarding
griffins (χρυσοφύλακες γρύπες, cf. _goldweard_, Beow. 3082).
[188] Cf. the reference to the Gnomic verses quoted on p. 123, note.
[189] Epistola Synodi Carisiacensis ad Hludowicum regem Germaniae
directa (Mon. Germ., Legum Sect. II, Capit. Reg. Franc., Tom. II, p.
432 f.).
[190] _nos autem illos uidimus qui usque ad nostram aetatem durauerunt,
qui huic rei interfuerunt et nobis uiua uoce ueraciter sunt testati
quae audierunt atque uiderunt._
[191] Texts D, E, F. This entry seems to come from the Northumbrian
_Gesta_, which were probably composed not very long afterwards. The
last entry which we can trace is for the year 806.
[192] A curious light on the enormous strength ascribed to Beowulf is
thrown by a passage in the Liber Monstrorum (cf. p. 24). It is there
stated that Hygelac (Beowulf's uncle) was of such immense size that no
horse could carry him after he reached the age of twelve. His bones
were shown as a marvel to visitors.
[193] The folk-tale represented by the second story may of course be
derived ultimately from some ancient custom; cf. Beow. 26-52.
[194] Not, of course, personalities consciously invented by an
individual brain; these must be classed under fiction. On the other
hand myth must be held to include personifications of the heavenly
bodies and natural phenomena--as (e.g.) in Gylfaginning, cap. 10
ff. (from Vafþrúðnismál, etc.), and certain Lithuanian folk-songs
('Dainos')--in so far at least as such personifications are of popular
origin.
CHAPTER VII.
MYTHICAL ELEMENTS IN THE HEROIC POEMS.
We have now to consider the question whether myth is a necessary
element in the formation of heroic poetry. It has been noticed that
historical persons figure in many stories of the Heroic Age, while
others do not contain a single character whose historical existence
can be authenticated. These latter stories are believed to be wholly
mythical in origin, though they may not show any supernatural features
in their final form. But even in stories of the former type it is held
that some of the characters are almost always of mythical origin,
and that their association with historical characters is a secondary
development--due to confusion or to poetic imagination.
In the last chapter we put forward the view that Beowulf, the hero
of the poem, has been confused with a mythical character of the same
name, and that the adventure with the dragon originally belonged to the
latter. It can scarcely be doubted that Scyld Scefing, the father of
this earlier Beowulf, was also a mythical character. The only element
in his story common to English and Scandinavian tradition is that he is
regarded as the ancestor of the Scyldungas or Skiöldungar, the Danish
royal family, and all analogies suggest that he came into existence
as their eponymus. The brief account of him given in the poem might,
except in two particulars, be applied to almost any successful king of
the Heroic Age. One exception relates to the story of the funeral ship,
on which the dead king's body is sent out to sea. In spite of Prof.
Olrik's doubts[195] I cannot but think that this is a reminiscence of
ancient custom. The other is the reference to his arrival as an infant,
likewise by sea--a story told more fully of Sceaf in certain English
chronicles. The only question here is between myth and folk-tale. The
story may fairly be classed under the latter head, though I think
its origin is ultimately to be sought in a ritual myth. Scandinavian
authorities, apart from Saxo[196], record nothing distinctive of
Skiöldr, except that he was a son of Othin and the husband of the
goddess Gefion[197]--which again points to myth.
In Scyld-Skiöldr we have the case of an eponymous ancestor appearing in
the introduction to a poem which deals largely with the fortunes of his
descendants. But there is no evidence that his own deeds ever formed
the subject of an independent heroic poem. It would be somewhat hasty
therefore to use this case as an argument for the origin of characters
who are brought before us in the main action of heroic poems.
Next we may take the story of Weland, as to the mythical origin of
which nearly all scholars seem to be agreed. It has indeed a historical
or semi-historical connection in the fact that Weland is represented
as the father of Widia (Wudga), i.e. the early Gothic hero Vidigoia
mentioned by Jordanes (cf. p. 27); but this is held to be a secondary
element in the story. In its original form the story is believed to
have dealt only with the incidents related in Völundarkviða, viz. (i)
the adventure with the swan-maidens, (ii) Weland's imprisonment by
Nithhad and his revenge[198]. Behind the story itself however there
lies a widespread belief in the existence of a supernatural smith of
this name. Several places in Germany (Westphalia and Holstein) are
reputed to be the scene of his operations, while in this country he
is connected with the cromlech called Wayland Smith, near Ashdown in
Berkshire. In its ultimate origin this belief is traced to the myth of
a fire-demon. Certainly it is to be noted that the name _Weland_ is of
a very exceptional type--apparently participial in form. One can hardly
help suspecting that it once had a definite meaning, though this cannot
now be determined with certainty[199].
Now there can be little doubt that the adventure with the swan-maidens
is derived from a folk-tale. In this part of the story there is no
indication of a fire-demon, or even of a smith, while analogies for
the incident are fairly common both in Teutonic lands and much farther
afield. We may confine our attention therefore to the second and better
known part--that which deals with Weland's imprisonment and revenge.
It is manifest that this story departs very decidedly from the ordinary
standard of heroic poetry--firstly in the fact that the hero is here
clearly represented as a smith, and secondly in the cruelty, treachery
and vindictiveness ascribed to the chief characters. These are features
which would be in place either in myth or folk-tale. But we may note
further that there are analogies for part of this story, just as much
as for the incident of the swan-maidens. As an example we may take
Saxo's account of the robbing of Mimingus by Hotherus (p. 70 f.).
Mimingus is a _satyrus_, i.e. clearly either an elf or dwarf, who
dwells in a cave in an almost inaccessible forest. Hotherus surprises
and binds him and then takes away his sword and a magical ring. A
connection between the two stories is shown even in the name, for
Weland's most famous sword is called Mimming[200]. For a more remote
parallel we may compare the story of Loki and Andvari. Indeed the
spoiling of a dwarf is quite a common motif in Northern tales, while at
the same time such beings are constantly credited with extraordinary
skill in metallurgy. The distinctive feature in the story of Weland,
apart from the revenge, is that sympathy is on the side of the smith.
It is the end of the story--where Weland (Völundr) rises into the air
and flies away--that is supposed to point most clearly to a fire-myth.
But this feature cannot be traced except in the Norse version[201].
Moreover here we have also the adventure with the flying swan-maidens,
in whose case there is no suspicion of such a myth. Setting aside this
incident the story is perfectly explicable as a folk-tale founded on
actual experience. There can be no doubt that in the Heroic Age--and
indeed in much earlier times--princes were especially anxious to obtain
slaves, whether foreigners or not, who were skilled in metallurgy. And
it is by no means incredible that such slaves were sometimes lamed in
order to prevent any attempt at escape--although, quite apart from this
explanation, smith's work may be regarded as a vocation natural to the
lame man, just as minstrelsy to the blind. Further, it is likely enough
that servile smiths, when cruelly treated, would take any opportunity
that presented itself of avenging themselves on their masters. For
the murder of Nithhad's sons we have a somewhat striking historical
parallel in Eugippus' Life of St Severinus (cap. 8). Feletheus, king of
the Rugii, who were settled on the Danube in the time of Odoacer, had a
young son who one day was entrapped by some goldsmiths in the queen's
service. They threatened to take his life; but the saint intervened and
rescued the boy on condition of the smiths obtaining their freedom[202].
What seems to me to be really the most remarkable feature in the
story is that a person in this position should come to be made the
subject of heroic or semi-heroic poetry; for it is plain enough from
many sources, especially Saxo's History, that smiths were generally
regarded with deep aversion. In Deor's Elegy Weland is said to be a
more distinguished man than Nithhad; in Völundarkviða he is called a
chief of the elves, while the introduction makes him the son of a king
of the Finns. Yet, except in the late Thiðreks Saga, his father's name
is never given, and none of our authorities credit him with possessing
a following of his own.
Now is there any real necessity for the assumption that Weland's
relationship to Widia is a secondary development? It is found in two
of the three national versions of the story[203], and hence dates back
in all probability at least to the sixth century. It is not found in
the Völundarkviða; but then Widia is altogether forgotten or unknown in
Northern tradition. Moreover there is a distinct reference to offspring
of Weland and Beaduhild at the end of the poem. Once grant that the
relationship is old and the reason for the heroic treatment of the
story becomes obvious. It is merely the reflection of the son's fame
upon the father. As Widia is never said to be the son of anyone else
the probability is that he was supposed to be illegitimate, and that a
story was soon current as to his being the offspring of a union between
a princess and a bondsmith. In such a case there would be a natural
tendency to the accumulation of material from folk-tales about his
parentage.
If this view is correct the story must of course come originally
from the Goths or some neighbouring people. I cannot see that the
Westphalian traditions are any more conclusive than the Berkshire
cromlech as to its original home. If Weland was a character of
folk-tale and his name had at one time a definite meaning, these
local traditions may have been quite independent of the heroic story.
The real difficulty seems to me to lie in determining the amount of
material from folk-tale contained in the latter. We need not entertain
any doubt as to the adventure with the swan-maidens. But what about
Nithhad and Beaduhild? The latter name is not obviously framed to suit
the character or circumstances of the unfortunate princess. _Nithhad_
might be explained more easily in this way; yet a Gothic prince of
that name is recorded by Jordanes (cap. 22). At all events there is
no conclusive evidence in either case that these characters did not
originally belong to the story of Widia.
Another story which is believed to be of wholly mythical origin is
that of Heðinn and Högni. In Kûdrûn it appears as the introduction to
a much longer story, from which point of view it bears a superficial
resemblance to the story of Scyld and possibly to that of Weland. But
since this feature is peculiar to the German poem and the second story
seems to be entirely unknown from other sources, we can hardly do
otherwise than treat the story of Heðinn and Högni as an independent
narrative.
This must have been one of the most popular stories of the Heroic
Age, since it can be traced in England, as well as in Germany and the
North. None of the characters however can be traced in any historical
work[204], and the time to which it refers is quite uncertain. The
Northern version of the story contains a supernatural element in the
endless battle which forms its conclusion. It is generally held that
this is the oldest element in the story and that Hild, whose name means
'war,' was really a valkyrie. The whole story then is to be regarded
as a myth of 'unceasing strife between conflicting powers[205].' But
we may naturally ask whether it is truly scientific, when dealing
with a story known from three separate national traditions, to regard
as the original element a feature found in only one of the three. It
may be urged of course that the reconciliation, which in Kûdrûn[206]
takes the place of the tragic ending found in the Northern version,
rendered it necessary to drop the mythical element; and again that we
have extremely little information about the English form of the story.
The latter remark is certainly true; but the little that we do know
practically precludes the possibility of a mythical interpretation.
Strictly speaking the passage in Deor's Elegy (cf. p. 56) is not a
reference to the story at all, but a matter of fact statement by the
poet that he had been in the service of the Heodeningas. Hence, in
view of the fact that this passage--together with Widsith, v. 21--is
probably by far the earliest reference to the story which we possess,
I cannot regard the mythical interpretation as anything more than an
extremely doubtful hypothesis[207].
* * * * *
Thus far we have been dealing with stories which are supposed to be
of entirely mythical origin. Now we have to consider certain cases in
which elements undoubtedly historical are believed to be blended with
myth. As examples of this type we may take the stories of Waldhere and
Sigurðr. In both cases the historical elements are practically the same.
In the former case it should be mentioned that the mythical theory is
by no means universally accepted. Those scholars however who do adopt
this interpretation base their view upon a supposed connection between
the story of Waldhere and that of Heðinn and Högni. The chief points of
resemblance between the two are as follows: (i) The heroine is called
in the one case Hiltgund (Hildegyth), in the other Hildr (Hild). (ii)
Both stories deal with abduction (so-called) and then with fighting.
(iii) The man (Waldhere, Heðinn) who carries off the girl has in both
cases to fight with a man called Hagen or Högni. (iv) In both cases the
combatants have previously been friends--though strictly this feature
applies only to the Northern version of the Heðinn story. Now the
first consideration carries no weight at all; for half the feminine
names which occur in Anglo-Saxon heroic poetry contain the element
_-hild-_ (e.g. _Beaduhild_, _Hildeburg_), while in the Continental and
Scandinavian authorities also they are extremely common. Again, the
last consideration obviously has little validity, except when taken
in conjunction with the other two. But these (the second and third)
points of resemblance are, it seems to me, altogether misleading.
To begin with it is hardly correct to apply the term 'abduction' to
an escape of hostages, such as the story of Waldhere relates; at
all events the conditions have nothing in common. Then the fight
which follows is not, as in the case of Heðinn and Högni, with an
aggrieved father, or indeed with a pursuing force of any kind; it is an
unprovoked attack made by a third party in the hope of plunder. Lastly,
the part played by the person called Hagen (Högni) is quite different
in the two cases. In one he is the injured father who is wholly
responsible for the fight; in the other he is a vassal of Gunther
(Guthhere), who is only drawn into it, with great reluctance, through
the obligation of avenging his nephew (Patufrit), who has already been
slain.
It is true that a different version of the story appears in Thiðreks
Saga af Bern[208]. Here Högni (Hagen) is represented as pursuing the
fugitives on behalf of Attila, while Guthhere does not appear. Now it
has been widely assumed that this version is an independent and more
original form of the story than that contained in Ekkehard's work, in
spite of the fact that it does not make its appearance till nearly
three centuries after the latter--and probably nearly six centuries
after the composition of the Anglo-Saxon poem. But the lapse of time in
itself provides a perfectly adequate explanation of such divergencies,
especially if we bear in mind the unfavourable conditions under which
the heroic stories were preserved in Germany during the early Middle
Ages. As the stories gradually became forgotten two tendencies are
constantly observable: (i) to connect stories or incidents which
originally were quite distinct, (ii) within the individual story to
lose sight of all except the outstanding characters and incidents.
Hence it is only in accordance with what we might expect that two
different sets of opponents of the hero should be confused. For a
parallel we may compare the late North German ballad on Eormenric's
death (cf. p. 9), which describes how Theodric with eleven companions
broke into the king's castle and slew him. It is generally agreed that
this ballad is due to confusion of some kind with the story of Hamðir
and Sörli[209], who were likewise enemies of Eormenric, though not
connected in any way with Theodric.
The saga itself really contains evidence which points to an earlier
form of the story agreeing with that given by Ekkehard. For the hero
is called Valtari af Vaskasteini[210], and there can be no doubt that
this expression is to be explained by the rocky defile mentioned by
Ekkehard (v. 490 ff.) in the Vosges (_saltus Vosagus_)--on the confines
of Guthhere's dominions. Further it is to be noted that the story is
introduced as an episode in the relations of Theodric and Eormenric,
and that the hero is represented as a nephew of the last named. All
scholars are agreed that this is due to late combination--and no doubt
rightly. Yet Waldhere is associated with Theodric and Eormenric also in
a number of German poems which are quite independent of the saga, and
consequently it is by no means improbable that these combinations both
preceded and helped to bring about the disappearance of Guthhere from
the story.
In its earlier form the affinities of the story with that of Heðinn and
Högni are, as we have seen, scarcely worth consideration. Yet apart
from this supposed connection there is no case for believing it to have
a mythical foundation--except the assumption that myth is a necessary
ingredient in every heroic story. Whether it is to be regarded as
history or fiction is of course quite a different question and one
which we shall have to consider later.
Of all the stories of the Heroic Age probably none has been more
frequently referred to a mythical origin than that which deals with
Sigurðr (Siegfried). It is held by the great majority of scholars
that the Nibelungenlied and the corresponding Edda poems--or rather
the earlier poems or legends on which both were based--came into
existence through the amalgamation of an essentially mythical story
with historical traditions of Attila and the fall of the Burgundian
kingdom[211]. The original elements of the former are believed to have
been as follows: A young prince is brought up by a cunning smith in
a forest, away from his father's home. On reaching manhood he gains
an immense treasure by killing a dragon; also he releases a maiden
by overcoming difficulties and dangers, by fire or water, which were
insurmountable to any other person. These two adventures are connected
by many scholars. Later, the hero falls into the hands of foes, who
slay him and take for themselves his wife and treasure.
It is held that this story was originally a myth of light and
darkness--applying however to the course of the year as well as to
that of the day. Sigurðr himself is a 'light-hero' and Brynhildr
a 'sun-maiden' whom he releases at the dawn, while the treasure
represents the blossoms of summer which the light-hero likewise wins
by destroying the dragon of winter. Then, in the evening or autumn, he
has to yield to the powers of darkness or winter. The original name
of these powers was Niflungar or Nibelunge, a name connected with Old
Norse _nifl_, 'mist,' _Niflheimr_, 'Hades.' Their chief representative
is Högni or Hagen, who, like Sigurðr and Brynhildr, belongs to the
mythical elements of the story. Many scholars also hold that the
powers which destroyed the hero and appropriated his wife and treasure
were originally identical with those from which he had won them at
the beginning; and this view seems to be more or less involved by the
interpretation given above, since day and night, winter and summer are
constantly alternating with one another.
Now it will be obvious at once that the story as thus reconstructed
differs greatly from both the forms in which it has come down to us.
Indeed the only original feature preserved in both versions is the
slaying of the dragon by Sigurðr. But it is only in the Norse version
that the hero gains the treasure thereby; in the Nibelungenlied this
is obtained by a different encounter, with two princes named Schilbung
and Nibelung, while in the Seyfridslied it really belonged to certain
dwarfs, the sons of Nybling[212]. Again, only the Norse version
records that Sigurðr released Brynhildr--from a perpetual sleep with
which she had been punished; the incident is not connected with the
dragon adventure. The Seyfridslied does relate that the hero rescued
a maiden from a dragon; but here the maiden is Kriemhild, whom the
dragon has carried off from her home. Further, it is only in the German
version that Hagen kills the hero. In the Norse version the actual
perpetrator of the deed is Gutthormr, but the instigator is Brynhildr
herself. Lastly, neither version of the story makes Brynhildr or the
treasure return to their former owners, although--in the German version
only--the first owners of the treasure bear the same name as those into
whose possession it comes after the hero's death.
It appears then that the original form of this story has been greatly
obscured in both versions. The explanation given is that, through
confusion with a historical tradition, the Burgundian kings, Gunnarr
(Gunther) and his brothers, have taken the place (as well as the name)
of the Niflungar. Hence, in order to form a just estimate of the theory
it is necessary to examine the various mythical characters separately.
These are--in addition to the dragon--Brynhildr, Sigurðr and the
Niflungar, including Högni.
The evidence for believing that Brynhildr was originally a mythical
character lies chiefly[213] in the identification of her with the
valkyrie Sigrdrífa (cf. p. 13), who is mentioned only in the Norse
version. The identity of the two characters is clearly recognised in
the Helreið Brynhildar and also in the prose authorities. On the other
hand it is not recognised in Grípisspá, which is supposed to be a late
work, while the other poems leave it uncertain. The evidence therefore
on the whole is not very strong.
In the case of Sigurðr the evidence, apart from the valkyrie incident,
rests upon his being the slayer of the dragon. But it is agreed that
this part of the story must be connected with the similar adventure
attributed by Beowulf to Sigemund (Sigmundr); so that the question at
issue is whether the exploit was first related of the father or the
son. We have already seen (p. 123) that the argument in favour of the
latter based on the agreement of the Norse and German authorities is
in reality misleading. Hence the balance of probability is in favour
of believing that the incident has been transferred to Sigurðr from
Sigemund.
In the case of the Niflungar the evidence depends upon the
interpretation of the name. The use of the name is certainly somewhat
curious. In the Seyfridslied (Part II) the dwarfs are called sons
of Nybling. In the first half of the Nibelungenlied Nibelung is the
name of one of the brothers slain by Siegfried in his youth, while
the people who become subject to him, together with the treasure,
on the death of the brothers, are collectively called Nibelunge. In
the latter half of the poem however the same name is applied to the
Burgundians. In the Norse version _Niflungar_ always means Gunnarr and
his people (i.e. the Burgundians), except perhaps in the expressions
_arfi Niflunga_, _hodd Niflunga_ (in Atlakviða), by which the prose
authorities at all events understood the treasure which Sigurðr had
taken from Fáfnir. The explanation given for this double use of the
name is as follows. Originally it belonged to the mythical enemies of
Sigurðr, i.e. Högni and his people--whether these were identical with
the former owners of the treasure or not. Later, when Högni became
associated with the historical Burgundian kings (Gunnarr etc.), the
use of the term was extended so as to embrace them also. But it is
to be observed that the interpretation of the name _Niflungar_ as
'children of mist' or 'darkness' is not free from difficulty. In the
Edda it is twice written _Hniflung-_[214], and on both occasions the
_H-_ alliterates, whereas alliteration with _n-_ is never found. This
fact suggests that the original form of the name was _Hniflungar_ and
that the form without _H-_ is due to later influence--presumably on the
part of scribes--from German sources, where of course the _H-_ (before
_-n-_) would regularly be lost at a much earlier date. If so the name
cannot originally have had any connection with O. Norse _nifl_, etc.
In all these three cases then the evidence for the mythological
interpretation of the story seems to be at best inconclusive. But
we have yet to consider the case of Högni; and here it must be
remarked that the demonic character of Högni is quite essential
to the mythological theory. In the Norse version Gutthormr is a
mere instrument and the person really responsible for the murder
is Brynhildr herself--a feature obviously incompatible with the
interpretation which we are discussing. Högni's mythical origin is as
necessary for this interpretation as that of Sigurðr or Brynhildr. In
order to maintain the theory the mythical character must be vindicated
in all three cases alike.
Now it has been remarked that Hagen (_Haguno_, _Hagano_ etc.) is
not uncommon as a personal name even in quite early times. This is
a curious fact if the name had such associations[215]. But there
is a much more serious difficulty. It is altogether contrary to
reason or probability to separate Hagen the vassal of Gunther in
the Nibelungenlied from Hagen the vassal of the same Gunther in the
story of Waldhere. His character in the two cases is certainly quite
different. He is brave in both; but in the former he is both faithless
and cruel, whereas in the latter he is an honourable man who is
reluctantly drawn by circumstances into a course of action of which
he heartily disapproves. But this is precisely the character borne by
Högni in the Norse version of the story of Sigurðr--a fact which is
the more remarkable since this type of character is extremely rare in
heroic poetry. The agreement between the story of Waldhere and the
Norse version seem to me to render it overwhelmingly probable that the
character which they ascribe to Högni was that which he originally bore.
I am not arguing now to prove that Högni was a historical person. He
may be of fictitious origin or even mythical (though the latter seems
to me extremely improbable). But if so clearly he must have been taken
either from the story of Sigurðr into that of Waldhere, or from the
story of Waldhere into that of Sigurðr. Which of the two he belonged
to originally is a question of minor importance. The essential point
is that an earlier German form of the story of Sigurðr must be the
link between the Norse version and the story of Waldhere; for there is
no evidence that the story of Waldhere itself was ever known in the
North. The conclusion to which we are naturally brought is that in this
earlier German form of the story Högni bore the same character which is
attributed to him in the Norse version. This character however is of
course totally incompatible with a demonic origin; and here, it seems
to me, the interpretation which we are discussing hopelessly breaks
down.
I cannot help thinking that the investigation of the whole story has
been greatly prejudiced by the application of wrong methods. There
can be no doubt that a story of some kind--in which the adventures of
Sigurðr were already combined with those of the historical Burgundian
princes--was in existence long before the date of the earliest
extant records, and that from this story, whether it was embodied in
a single poem or consisted only of a mass of lays or legends, both
the Norse and German versions are ultimately derived. It seems to me
that, before trying to ascertain the origin of the various elements
contained in the story, the object should be to determine the main
features of this common foundation. The way to achieve this end is
surely not by arbitrarily selecting one feature from the Norse version
and another from the German, but by bringing together all the various
features which the two have in common. To carry out such a process
systematically would be quite beyond the scope of this book, but a
brief outline of the scheme may not be out of place here.
First then we will take the part of the story relating to the hero's
early adventures, which is preserved mainly in a different set of
authorities from the rest. The chief German authority is the late
Seyfridslied which, as we have seen, is really made up of two
different ballads, inconsistent with one another. The Nibelungenlied
contains only allusions to this part of the story, the action proper
beginning shortly before the hero's arrival at Worms. The Norse version
is given in the trilogy, Reginsmál, Fáfnismál and Sigrdrífumál, as well
as in Völsunga Saga, which is derived from these poems. The account
given in Thiðreks Saga is mainly a combination of the German and Norse
versions, though it has one or two features peculiar to itself.
In this part of the story the common elements are very few in number.
(1) Sigurðr kills a dragon; (2) Sigurðr gains a great treasure.
In the Norse version the two adventures are combined, but in the
Nibelungenlied the treasure belonged to Nibelung and his brother
who had quarrelled and who are both killed by the hero. It may be
noticed that Reginn and Fáfnir are also brothers who have quarrelled
over a treasure, and they too are both killed by Sigurðr; but Fáfnir
has become a dragon--or perhaps a reptile. The Seyfridslied, Part I
mentions only the killing of a dragon (serpent), while Part II unites
the acquisition of the treasure with the killing of a dragon--a fiery
dragon--but states that the hero erroneously thought that the treasure
belonged to the dragon. Really it belonged to the three sons of the
dwarf-king Nybling, who are friendly to the hero and not killed by
him. As a further common element we may mention (3) that Sigurðr
is brought up by a smith. This story is found in the Seyfridslied,
Part I, and in Thiðreks Saga--practically also in the Edda, since
Reginn is represented as a smith. Again, (4) both in the ballad
and in Norse prose authorities Sigurðr breaks the smith's anvil,
though the circumstances are quite different. It is doubtful whether
we should connect the eating of Fáfnir's heart, which enabled the
hero to understand the birds, with the German story that he became
invulnerable by bathing in the dragon's blood. Further, we have seen
that the awakening of the valkyrie in Sigrdrífumál has practically
nothing in common with the rescue of the maiden (Kriemhild) from the
dragon related in the ballad (Part II). Lastly, it is to be observed
that though the hero's father has the same name (Sigemund) in all
authorities, there is great discrepancy as to his childhood. In the
Edda he is posthumous but knows his parentage, in the Nibelungenlied
he is brought up at his father's court, in the ballad, Part I, he
leaves his home and goes to the smithy, in Part II and Thiðreks Saga
he does not know his parentage--in the latter indeed he is a foundling
and suckled by a hind. It will be seen that this part of the story is
permeated throughout by the supernatural and marvellous.
From the time of the hero's arrival at the Burgundian court we may
take the Nibelungenlied for the German version, while the Norse one is
best represented by the poems from the fragmentary Sigurðarkviða I to
Atlamál. For the earlier portion we have also to use Völsunga Saga and
the prose Edda in place of certain poems which are lost (cf. p. 13). In
this part of the story the elements common to the two versions are far
more numerous and striking. (1) Sigurðr comes to the Rhineland (Worms
in the German version) and marries a sister (Guðrún, Kriemhild) of King
Gunnarr (Gunther). (2) Sigurðr in supernatural disguise wins Brynhildr
for Gunnarr. (3) Sigurðr again in supernatural disguise sleeps with
Brynhildr and takes from her a ring[216]. (4) Brynhildr quarrels with
Sigurðr's wife, and the latter shows her the ring[216]. (5) Brynhildr
bitterly resents the treatment she has received and devises the hero's
death. (6) Sigurðr is killed by treachery; but the versions differ in
regard to the perpetrator of the deed. (7) The hero's widow is for a
long time irreconcilable, but eventually is married to Atli (Etzel).
(8) Gunnarr with Högni and many others are invited to Atli's home. (9)
The gold is sunk in the Rhine. (10) Gunnarr and Högni are captured
alive and the rest killed in Atli's land. (11) A demand for the gold is
made and refused. (12) Gunnarr and Högni are killed.
It will be seen that the supernatural is here confined to (2) and (3);
indeed these are almost the only incidents in which it occurs in this
part of the story. There is a difference between the two versions in
regard to the character of the supernatural disguise. In the Norse
version, where the two incidents are combined, Sigurðr and Gunnarr have
exchanged forms; in the German Gunther is present in both cases, though
Siegfried, who has rendered himself invisible, is the real actor.
Several other important differences between the two versions have
already been noted (p. 13 f.). In addition to these each version has of
course many characters and incidents peculiar to itself.
Of the discrepancies enumerated on p. 13 f. the fifth is by far the
most important, since Kriemhild's revenge for Siegfried forms the
central motif of the second half of the Nibelungenlied. In the Norse
version no such central motif is to be found. In the prose piece
Dráp Niflunga Atli's conduct is attributed to revenge for the death
of Brynhildr, while in Völsunga Saga it is ascribed to his lust for
Sigurðr's gold. But in the poems themselves no real explanation is
given, and the connection between this part of the story and that
relating to Sigurðr is scarcely more than a personal one--viz. that
Guðrún, Gunnarr and Högni figure in both. This however is a phenomenon
for which parallels are to be found in other heroic stories, e.g.
those of Beowulf and Weland. It is now held--and doubtless rightly--by
the majority of scholars that the unity of interest imparted to
the Nibelungenlied by the motif of Kriemhild's revenge is a later
improvement on the somewhat disconnected story given in the Edda. For
our present purpose however the question is immaterial, since it is not
contended that this part of the story is of mythical origin.
In spite of the discrepancies noted above it cannot be denied that
the two versions contain a remarkable number of identical features in
this part of the story--a fact which renders all the more striking the
very slight amount of agreement in the part dealing with the hero's
early adventures. Unless all analogies are misleading the conclusion to
which we are driven is that the original story began more or less where
the Nibelungenlied begins, and that the hero's youthful adventures
are later accretions, such as we see gathering round the childhood or
ancestry of other heroes, e.g. Biarki (cf. p. 120). We may add also the
cases of Starkaðr, Hagen in Kûdrûn and perhaps Witege (cf. p. 135).
They appear to be derived, in part at least, from folk-tales. One of
these--affecting probably only the Norse version--may be identified
with the Scandinavian story of Svipdagr and Menglöð (cf. p. 12), a
variety perhaps of that of the Sleeping Beauty. Another is that of the
forest dwarf who forges or preserves a magical sword. We may note
that in Thiðreks Saga the smith is called Mimir, a name which recalls
Saxo's Mimingus (cf. p. 133)[217]. The story of the treasure-guarding
dragon may also be included in this category, though strictly perhaps
it belongs rather to popular belief than to folk-tale. From the fact
that some of these elements are common to both versions we may probably
infer that the process of accretion had begun before the story reached
the North. Yet there do seem to be some indications of a reflex
influence[218]--from the North or some region exposed to Northern
influence--upon the development of the story in Germany.
In addition to folk-tales we must take into consideration also a
tendency which is often associated with them--the desire to account for
an obscure name. This seems to be the most reasonable explanation of
the names _Nibelung_ and _Nibelunge_ in the first part of the German
epic and _Nybling_ in the ballad--all denoting the original owners of
the treasure. We have seen that in the Norse version, as well as in the
latter half of the Nibelungenlied, _Niflungar_ means the Burgundians.
May we not suppose that it was really a dynastic name[219] like
_Scyldungas_, _Uffingas_, _Merewioingas_? In that case of course _hodd
Niflunga_ (_hort der Nibelunge_) ought to mean the family treasure of
the Burgundian kings. But is it quite certain that Atlakviða does not
use it in this sense? That it is identified with Fáfnir's treasure in
later authorities may be due to subsequent German influence. As for
the fact that the name _Nibelunge_ is used for the Burgundians only
in the second half of the German epic, may not this spring from some
stylistic peculiarities of the 'common foundation'? It is not necessary
to suppose that the latter was all the work of one author or even of
one generation.
In dealing with questions such as these we cannot hope to get beyond a
reasonable hypothesis, since the paucity of common features between
the two versions admits of few definite conclusions. But from the
time when the hero arrives at the Burgundian court the case is quite
different. In spite of certain discrepancies there is no difficulty in
determining the main outline of the story. Even in the most important
point of all--the true cause of the hero's death--the two versions are
really in full agreement. Gutthormr does the deed in one version, Hagen
in the other; but in both alike it arises out of the bitter resentment
cherished by Brynhildr, owing to the deception which has been practised
upon her. We have seen that this motif is incompatible with the current
mythological interpretation of the story. But more than this, it is
plainly not a motif derived from mythology at all, but from real life.
It must not be overlooked that the Brynhildr and Högni of the Norse
version are in the nature of character-studies. Both appeal to our
sympathies, though we do not approve of the actions which they commit
or allow. Here we are in a region of thought as alien as possible to
that of the folk-tale. But it is also alien to that period of thought,
which was most open to the influence of folk-tales, the period which we
have called Stage III in the history of German poetry. In such a period
the person who destroyed the hero must necessarily be a villain as
black as Hell. Between the instigator of the deed and the perpetrator,
who by this time was Hagen--whether this was so originally or not is
immaterial--the choice was made, not unnaturally in the circumstances,
in favour of the latter, while the former was allowed, awkwardly
enough, to drop out of the story. Thus the peculiarities of the German
version may be explained quite naturally as modifications of an earlier
form similar to the other--modifications necessitated by the conditions
under which heroic poetry was preserved in Germany. The effect produced
is somewhat similar to that which would be obtained by converting a
modern problem play into a popular melodrama.
The conclusion then to which we are brought is that the supposed
traces of myth, so far as they have any foundation at all, are due
to late accretions to the story, while the central motif in both
versions alike is by no means of a mythical character, but essentially
human. Consequently the story of Sigurðr stands quite on a line with
the other stories of the Heroic Age. Most of them contain elements
which may be interpreted as mythical; but these elements are always
most prominent in the latest forms of the story. It must not escape
notice that those scholars who most strongly uphold the mythical
interpretation base their arguments chiefly on such works as the
Seyfridslied and Thiðreks Saga af Bern. The explanation is that
myth is a growth which requires time to develop. Even Beowulf is no
real exception to the general rule, for in the latter part the hero
is probably confused with a namesake whose story may have been of
considerable antiquity, while the only character in the poem who is
quite clearly of mythical origin is the first ancestor of the Danish
royal family[220].
FOOTNOTES:
[195] _Danmarks Heltedigtning_, p. 248 ff. With this subject I have
already dealt in _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 287 f.
[196] Saxo (p. 11 f.) records several incidents of which we know
nothing from other sources. He represents Skiöldr (_Scioldus_) as a
reformer of the laws, but not as the first king.
[197] This is stated only in Ynglinga Saga (cap. 5); but the question
to be asked is whether it is likely that such a combination would be
invented in late times.
[198] From Deor's Elegy and the picture on the Franks casket in the
British Museum it is clear that almost all the main features of the
second part of the story were known in England. Reminiscences of the
first part occur in the medieval German poem _Herzog Friedrich von
Schwaben_.
[199] It is usually connected with O. Norse _vél_, 'contrivance,'
'artifice.'
[200] Waldhere, I 2 f.; Thiðreks Saga, cap. 23 etc.
[201] In Thiðreks Saga, cap. 30, Weland flies away in a garment which
he has made from feathers collected for him by his brother Egill. It
is thought by some that the engraver of the Franks casket had the same
story in mind, since a figure catching birds is represented behind the
form of Beaduhild.
[202] It is commonly held that this account has been influenced
somehow by the story of Weland. If so it is a valuable illustration of
the process discussed in p. 119 ff. above. But the view seems to me
somewhat far-fetched.
[203] Waldhere is the only English poem which mentions Weland as the
father of Widia; but I cannot admit that there is any ground for
supposing this poem to have had a different origin from the rest (cf.
p. 57 f.). The variant forms _Widia_--_Wudga_ may be explained by
English sound-laws, while _Niðhad_, whatever its explanation, occurs
also in Deor's Elegy.
[204] Saxo (p. 158 ff.) connects the story with the reign of Frotho III
(Fróði the Peaceful), and this may be an ancient feature, as Fruote von
Tenemarke appears as one of Hetel's chief men in Kûdrûn.
[205] "Ein Bild des unaufhörlichen, allgemeinen, aber nie entschiedenen
Kampfes entgegengesetzter Mächte, des Aufgangs und des Niedergangs,
des Entstehens und Vergehens, des Seins und Nichtseins" (Müllenhoff,
_ZfdA._ XXX 229). Prof. Sijmons (_Grundriss_, III 711, where
this interpretation is quoted with approval) regards the story
as 'tiefsinnig.' I confess the interpretation is too deep for
my comprehension. A totally different view is taken in Panzer's
_Hilde-Gudrun_, where the origin of the story is traced to a folk-tale
(p. 250 ff.). It seems to me that this theory is open to somewhat the
same objection as the other, namely that it is founded too much upon
features peculiar to one or other version. At the same time I doubt
whether Wate's original connection with the story can be properly
inferred from Wids. 21 f. The influence of folk-tales is clear enough
in both versions of the story, but I think it is secondary.
[206] From a passage in Lamprecht's _Alexander_ (v. 1321), a work of
the twelfth century, it appears that Hagen (Högni) was killed in the
earlier German version of the story.
[207] For the endless battle there are a number of parallels; cf.
Panzer, _op. cit._, p. 327 ff. (also Pausanias, I 32. 3, with Mr
Frazer's note).
[208] There is also a Polish version which has several peculiarities of
its own but shows no special affinity with the form of the story found
in Thiðreks Saga.
[209] The early North German version of this story, represented by the
Annals of Quedlinburg (cf. p. 37, note), apparently made Eormenric
perish in the fight.
[210] It is held by many that this name was originally connected with
_Wascono lant_, an early German name for Aquitaine (Gascony) and that
the introduction of the Vosges (_Wasgunberg_) was later and due to
the confusion of two similar names. But, if there has been any such
confusion at all, chronological considerations render it far more
probable that the transference was in the reverse direction.
[211] Among the exceptions mention may be made especially of an
interesting paper by Prof. Mogk in _Neue Jahrbücher_, I pp. 68-80.
[212] It is stated however that Seyfrid thought that it belonged to the
dragon. Hence this story is often connected with the Norse version.
[213] The only German evidence worth consideration is the fact that
certain rocks in the Taunus and the Palatinate are called the 'bed'
or 'chair of Brynhildr' (_lectulus Brunnihilde_, _Brinholdestul_) in
medieval documents. But I do not see how these names can prove anything
more than the popularity of the story. In all lands it is customary to
adopt such names from remarkable characters, whatever their origin may
be. We may think of the cave of Frederic Barbarossa at Berchtesgaden or
the numerous places called after Robin Hood in England.
[214] Helgakv. Hund. I 48, Atlamál 88. In the former case the name is
used quite generally, like _Ylfingar_ in the same poem. In the latter
_Hniflungr_ is the name of Högni's son.
[215] There was of course another heroic character of the same name;
but this does not meet the objection.
[216] On both these occasions the Nibelungenlied mentions also a girdle.
[217] It seems likely that Mímir was the dwarf's original name and that
Saxo has given him a name which properly belonged to his sword; cf. the
phrase _Hoddmímis holt_ (Vafðr. 45), etc.
[218] E.g. the name Schilbung and the references to Norway. The story
of Sigemund and the dragon also belongs to a maritime region.
[219] Cf. Skaldsk. 42: "Gunnarr and Högni are called Niflungar and
Giúkungar."
[220] Cf. Schütte, _Oldsagn om Godtjod_, pp. 35-38, where it is well
pointed out that all the clearest cases of myth in early Teutonic
records belong to stories dealing with the origin of nations or
dynasties. "Den eneste udtrykkelige Myte, der udenfor specielt
religiøse Gøremål har været episk frugtbar i Folkevandringstiden er
Ophavsmyten."