_Weapons_

For weapons in general see Lehmann (H.), _Ueber die Waffen im

angelsaechsischen Beowulfliede_, in _Germania_, XXXI, 486-97; Keller

(May L.), _The Anglo-Saxon weapon names treated archaeologically and

etymologically_, Heidelberg, 1906 (_Anglistische Forschungen_, XV: cf.

Holthausen, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XVIII, 65-9, Binz, _Litteraturblatt_,

XXXI, 98-100); ++Wagner (R.), _Die Angriffswaffen der

Angelsaechsischen_, Diss., Koenigsberg; and especially Falk (H.),

_Altnordische Waffenkunde_, in _Videnskapsselskapets Skrifter,

Hist.-Filos. Klasse_, 1914, Kristiania.

THE SWORD. The sword of the Anglo-Saxon pagan period (from the fifth to the

seventh century) "is deficient in quality as a blade, and also ... in the

character of its hilt[763]." In this it contrasts with the sword found in

the peat-bogs of Schleswig from an earlier period: "these swords of the

Schleswig moss-finds are much better weapons[764]," as well as with the

later Viking sword of the ninth or tenth century, which "is a remarkably

effective and well-considered implement[765]." It has been suggested that

both the earlier Schleswig swords and the later Viking swords (which bear a

considerable likeness to each other, as against the inferior Anglo-Saxon

sword) are the product of intercourse with Romanized peoples[766], whilst

the typical Anglo-Saxon sword "may represent an independent Germanic effort

at sword making[767]." However this may be, it is noteworthy that nowhere

in _Beowulf_ do we have any hint of the skill of any sword-smith who is

regarded as contemporary. A good sword is always "an old heirloom," "an

ancient treasure[768]." The sword of Wiglaf, which had belonged to Eanmund,

or the sword with which Eofor slays Ongentheow, are {358} described by the

phrase _ealdsweord eotenisc_, as if they were weapons of which the secret

and origin had been lost--indeed the same phrase is applied to the magic

sword which Beowulf finds in the hall of Grendel's mother.

The blade of these ancestral swords was sometimes damascened or adorned

with wave-like patterns[769]. The swords of the Schleswig moss-finds are

almost all thus adorned with a variegated surface, as often are the later

Viking swords; but those of the Anglo-Saxon graves are _not_. Is it

fanciful to suggest that the reference to damascening is a tradition coming

down from the time of the earlier sword as found in the Nydam moss? A few

early swords might have been preserved among the invaders as family

heirlooms, too precious to be buried with the owner, as the product of the

local weapon-smith was.

See, for a full discussion of the sword in _Beowulf_, Stjerna, _Hjaelmar

och svaerd i Beovulf_ (_Studier tillaegnade O. Montelius_, Stockholm, pp.

99-120 = _Essays_, transl. Clark Hall, pp. 1-32). The standard treatise on

the sword, _Den Yngre Jernalders Svaerd_, Bergen, 1889, by A. L. Lorange,

deals mainly with a rather later period.

THE HELMET. The helmet found at Benty Grange in Derbyshire in 1848 is now

in the Sheffield Museum[770]: little remains except the boar-crest, the

nose-piece, and the framework of iron ribs radiating from the crown, and

fixed to a circle of iron surrounding the brow (perhaps the

_fr[=e]awr[=a]sn_ of _Beowulf_, 1451). Mr Bateman, the discoverer,

described the helmet as "coated with narrow plates of horn, running in a

diagonal direction from the ribs, so as to form a herring-bone pattern; the

ends were secured by strips of horn, radiating in like manner as the iron

ribs, to which they were riveted at intervals of about an inch and a half:

all the rivets had ornamented heads of silver on the outside, and on the

front rib is a small cross of the same metal. Upon the top or crown of the

helmet, is an elongated oval brass plate, upon which stands the figure of

an animal, carved in iron, now much rusted, but still a very good

representation of a pig: it has bronze eyes[771]." Helmets of very similar

construction, but without the boar, have been found on the Continent and in

Scandinavia (Vendel, Grave 14, late seventh century). The continental

helmets often {359} stand higher[772] than the Benty Grange or Vendel

specimens, being sometimes quite conical (cf. the epithet "war-steep,"

_headho-st[=e]ap_, _Beowulf_). Many of the continental helmets are provided

with cheek-protections, and these also appear in the Scandinavian

representations of warriors on the Torslunda plates and elsewhere. These

side pieces have become detached from the magnificent Vendel helmet, which

is often shown in engravings without them[773], but they can be seen in the

Stockholm Museum[774]. If it ever possessed them, the Benty Grange helmet

has lost these side pieces. Such cheek-protections are, however,

represented, together with the nose-protection, on the head of one of the

warriors depicted on the Franks Casket. In the Vendel helms, the

nose-pieces were connected under the eyes with the rim of the helmet, so as

to form a mask[774]; the helmet in _Beowulf_ is frequently spoken of as the

battle-mask[775].

Both helmet and boar-crest were sometimes gold-adorned[776]: the golden

boar was a symbol of the god Freyr: some magic protective power is still,

in _Beowulf_[777], felt to adhere to these swine-likenesses, as it was in

the days of Tacitus[778].

In Scandinavia, the Torslunda plates show the helmet with a boar-crest: the

Vendel helmet has representations of warriors whose crests have an animal's

head tailing off to a mere rim or roll: this may be the _walu_ or _wala_

which keeps watch over the head in _Beowulf_[779]. The helmet was bound

fast to the head[780]; exactly how, we do not know.

See Lehmann (H.), _Bruenne und Helm im ags. Beowulfliede_ (Goettingen

Diss., Leipzig; cf. Wuelker, _Anglia_, VIII, _Anzeiger_, 167-70; Schulz,

_Engl. Stud._, IX, 471); Hoops' _Reallexikon_, s.v. _Helm_; Baldwin Brown,

III, 194-6; Falk, _Altnord. Waffenkunde_, 155-73; Stjerna, _Hjaelmar och

svaerd_, 1907, as above: but the attempt of Stjerna to arrange the helmets

he depicts in a {360} chronological series is perilous, and depends on a

dating of the Benty Grange helmet which is by no means generally accepted.

THE CORSLET. This in _Beowulf_ is made of rings[781], twisted and

interlaced by hand[782]. As stated above, the fragments of the only known

Anglo-Saxon byrnie were not of this type, but rather intended to have been

sewn "upon a doublet of strong cloth[783]." Byrnies were of various

lengths, the longer ones reaching to the middle of the thigh (_byrnan

s[=i]de_, _Beow._ 1291, cf. _loricae longae, s['i]dhar brynjur_).

See Falk, 179; Baldwin Brown, III. 194.

THE SPEAR. Spear and shield were the essential Germanic weapons in the days

of Tacitus, and they are the weapons most commonly found in Old English

tombs. The spear-shaft has generally decayed, analysis of fragments

surviving show that it was frequently of ash[784]. The butt-end of the

spear was frequently furnished with an iron tip, and the distance of this

from the spear-head, and the size of the socket, show the spear-shaft to

have been six or seven feet long, and three-quarters of an inch to one inch

in diameter.

See Falk, 66-90; Baldwin Brown, III, 234-41.

THE SHIELD. Several round shields were preserved on the Gokstad ship, and

in the deposits of an earlier period at Thorsbjerg and Nydam. These are

formed of boards fastened together, often only a quarter of an inch thick,

and not strengthened or braced in any way, bearing out the contemptuous

description of the painted German shield which Tacitus puts into the mouth

of Germanicus[785]. It was, however, intended that the shield should be

light. It was easily pierced, but, by a rapid twist, the foe's sword could

be broken or wrenched from his hand. Thus we are told how Gunnar gave his

shield a twist, as his adversary thrust his sword through it, and so

snapped off his sword at the hilt[786]. The shield was held by a bar,

crossing a hole some four inches wide cut in the middle. The hand was

protected by a hollow conical boss or umbo, fixed to the wood by its brim,

but projecting considerably. In England the wood of the shield has always

perished, but a large number of bosses have been preserved. The boss seems

to have been called _rond_, a word which is also used for the shield as a

whole. In _Beowulf_, 2673, _Gifts of Men_, 65, the meaning "boss" suits

_rond_ best, also in _rand sceal on scylde, faest fingra gebeorh_ (_Cotton.

Gnomic Verses_, 37-8). But the original meaning of _rand_ must have been

the circular rim round the edge, and this {361} meaning it retains in

Icelandic (Falk, 131). The linden wood was sometimes bound with bast,

whence _scyld (sceal) gebunden, l[=e]oht linden bord_ (_Exeter Gnomic

Verses_, 94-5).

See Falk (126-54); Baldwin Brown, III, 196-204; Pfannkuche (K.), _Der

Schild bei den Angelsachsen_, Halle Dissertation, 1908.

THE BOW is a weapon of much less importance in _Beowulf_ than the spear.

Few traces of the bow have survived from Anglo-Saxon England, though many

wooden long-bows have been preserved in the moss-finds in a remarkably fine

state. They are of yew, some over six feet long, and in at least one

instance tipped with horn. The bow entirely of horn was, of course, well

known in the East, and in classical antiquity, but I do not think traces of

any horn-bow have been discovered in the North. It was a difficult weapon

to manage, as the suitors of Penelope found to their cost. Possibly that is

why Haethcyn is represented as killing his brother Herebeald accidentally

with a horn-bow: he could not manage the exotic weapon.

See Falk, 91-103; Baldwin Brown, III, 241.

_The Hall_

It may perhaps be the fact that in the church of Sta. Maria de Naranco, in

the north of Spain, we have the hall of a Visigothic king driven north by

the Mohammedan invasion. But, even if this surmise[787] be correct, the

structure of a stone hall of about 750 A.D. gives us little information as

to the wooden halls of early Anglo-Saxon times. Heorot is clearly built of

timber, held together by iron clamps[788]. These halls were oblong, and a

famous passage in Bede[789] makes it clear that, at any rate at the time of

the Conversion, the hall had a door at both ends, and the fire burnt in the

middle. (The smoke escaped through a hole in the roof, through which

probably most of the light came, for windows were few or none.) The

_Finnsburg Fragment_ also implies two doors. Further indications can be

drawn from references to the halls of Norse chiefs. The Scandinavian hall

was divided by rows of wooden pillars into a central nave and side aisles.

The pillars in the centre were known as the "high-seat pillars." Rows of

seats ran down the length of the hall on each side. The central position,

facing the high-seat pillars and the fire, was the most honourable. The

place of honour for the chief guest was opposite: and it is quite clear

that in _Beowulf_ also the guest did not sit next his host[790].

Other points we may note about Heorot, are the tapestry with which its

walls are draped[791], and the paved and variegated floor[792]. Unlike so

{362} many later halls, Heorot has a floor little, if anything, raised

above the ground: horses can be brought in[793].

In later times, in Iceland, the arrangement of the hall was changed, and

the house consisted of many rooms; but these were formed, not by

partitioning the hall, but by building several such halls side by side: the

_stufa_ or hall proper, the _sk['a]li_ or sleeping hall, _etc._

See M. Heyne, _Ueber die Lage und Construction der Halle Heorot_,

Paderborn, 1864, where the scanty information about Heorot is collected,

and supplemented with some information about Anglo-Saxon building. For the

Icelandic hall see Valtyr Gudhmundsson, _Privatboligen p[oa] Island i

Sagatiden_, Koebenhavn, 1889. This has been summarized, in a more popular

form, in a chapter on _Den islandske Bolig i Fristatstiden_, contributed by

Gudhmundsson to Rosenberg's _Traek af Livet paa Island i Fristatstiden_,

1894 (pp. 251-74). Here occurs the picture of an Icelandic hall which has

been so often reproduced--by Olrik, Holthausen, and in

_Beowulf_-translations. But it is a conjectural picture, and we can by no

means assume all its details for Heorot. Rhamm's colossal work is only for

the initiated, but is useful for consultation on special points

(_Ethnographische Beitraege zur Germanischslawischen Altertumskunde_, von

K. Rhamm, 1905-8. I. _Die Grosshufen der Nordgermanen_; II. _Urzeitliche

Bauernhoefe_). For various details see Hoops' _Reallexikon_, s.v. _flett_;

Neckel in _P.B.B._ XLI, 1916, 163-70 (_under edoras_); Meiringer in _I.F._,

especially XVIII, 257 (_under eoderas_); Kaufmann in _Z.f.d.Ph._ XXXIX,

282-92.

_Ships_

In a tumulus near Snape in Suffolk, opened in 1862, there were discovered,

with burnt bones and remains thought to be of Anglo-Saxon date, a large

number of rivets which, from the positions in which they were found, seemed

to give evidence of a boat 48 feet long by over nine feet wide[794]. A

boat, similar in dimensions, but better preserved, was unearthed near

Bruges in 1899, and the ribs, mast and rudder removed to the Gruuthuuse

Museum[795].

Three boats were discovered in the peat-moss at Nydam in Schleswig in 1863,

by Engelhardt. The most important is the "Nydam boat," clinker-built (i.e.

with overlapping planks), of oak, 77 feet [23.5 m.] long, by some 11 [3.4

m.] broad, with rowlocks for fourteen oars down each side. There was no

trace of any mast. Planks and framework had been held together, partly by

iron bolts, and partly by ropes of bast. The boat had fallen to pieces, and

had to be laboriously put together in the museum at Flensborg. Another boat

was quite fragmentary, but a third boat, of fir, was found tolerably

complete. Then the war of 1864 ended Engelhardt's labours at Nydam.

[Illustration: THE GOKSTAD SHIP]

[Illustration: THE OSEBERG SHIP]

{363}

The oak-boat was removed to Kiel, where it now is.

The fir-boat was allowed to decay: many of the pieces of the oak-boat had

been rotten and had of necessity been restored in facsimile, and it is much

less complete than might be supposed from the numerous reproductions, based

upon the fine engraving by Magnus Petersen. The rustic with a spade, there

depicted as gazing at the boat, is apt to give a wrong impression that it

was dug out intact[796].

Such was, however, actually the case with regard to the ship excavated from

the big mound at Gokstad, near Christiania, by Nicolaysen, in 1880. This

was fitted both as a rowing and sailing ship; it was 66 feet [20.1 m.] long

on the keel, 78 feet [23.8 m.] from fore to aft and nearly 17 feet [5.1 m.]

broad, and was clinker-built, out of a much larger number of oaken planks

than the Nydam ship. It had rowlocks for sixteen oars down each side, the

gunwale was lined with shields, some of them well preserved, which had been

originally painted alternately black and yellow. The find owed its

extraordinary preservation to the blue clay in which it was embedded. Its

discoverer wrote, with pardonable pride: "Certain it is that we shall not

disinter any craft which, in respect of model and workmanship, will

outrival that of Gokstad[797]."

Yet the prophecy was destined to prove false: for on Aug. 8, 1903, a farmer

came into the National Museum at Christiania to tell the curator, Prof.

Gustafson, that he had discovered traces of a boat on his farm at Oseberg.

Gustafson found that the task was too great to be begun so late in the

year: the digging out of the ship, and its removal to Christiania, occupied

from just before Midsummer to just before Christmas of 1904. The potter's

clay in which the ship was buried had preserved it, if possible, better

than the Gokstad ship: but the movement of the soft subsoil had squeezed

and broken both ship and contents. The ship was taken out of the earth in

nearly two thousand fragments. These were carefully numbered and marked:

each piece was treated, bent back into its right shape, and the ship was

put together again plank by plank, as when it was first built. With the

exception of a piece about half a yard long, five or six little bits let

in, and one of the beams, the ship as it stands now consists of the

original woodwork. Two-thirds of the rivets are the old ones. Till his

death in 1915 Gustafson was occupied in treating and preparing for

exhibition first the ship, and then its extraordinarily rich contents: a

waggon and sledges beautifully carved, beds, chests, kitchen utensils which

had been buried with the princess who had owned them. A full account of the

find is only now being published[798].

{364}

The Oseberg ship is the pleasure boat of a royal lady: clinker-built,

of oak, exquisitely carved, intended not for long voyages but for the

land-locked waters of the fiord, 70-1/2 feet [21.5 m.] long by some

16-1/2 feet [5 m.] broad. There are holes for fifteen oars down each

side, and the ship carried mast and sail.

The upper part of the prow had been destroyed, but sufficient fragments

have been found to show that it ended in the head of a snake-like

creature, bent round in a coil. This explains the words

_hringed-stefna_[799], _hring-naca_[800], _wunden-stefna_[801], used of

the ship in _Beowulf_. A similar ringed prow is depicted on an engraved

stone from Tjaengvide, now in the National Historical Museum at

Stockholm. This is supposed to date from about the year 1000[802].

The Gokstad and Oseberg ships, together with the ship of Tune, a much

less complete specimen (unearthed in 1867, and found like the others on

the shore of the Christiania fiord) owe their preservation to the clay,

and the skill of Scandinavian antiquaries. Yet they are but three out

of thousands of ship- or boat-burials. Schetelig enumerates 552 known

instances from Norway alone. Often traces of the iron rivets are all

that remain.

Ships preserved from the Baltic coast of Germany can be seen at

Koenigsberg, Danzig and Stettin; they are smaller and apparently later;

the best, that of Broesen, was destroyed.

The seamanship of _Beowulf_ is removed by centuries from that of the (?

fourth or fifth century) Nydam boat, which not only has no mast or

proper keel, but is so built as to be little suited for sailing. In

_Beowulf_ the sea is a "sail-road," the word "to row" occurs only in

the sense of "swim," sailing is assumed as the means by which Beowulf

travels between the land of the Geatas and that of the Danes. Though he

voyages with but fourteen companions, the ship is big enough to carry

back four horses. How the sail may have been arranged is shown in many

inscribed stones of the eighth to the tenth centuries: notably those of

Stenkyrka[803], Hoegbro[804], and Tjaengvide[805].

The Oseberg and Gokstad ships are no doubt later than the composition

of _Beowulf_. But it is when looking at the Oseberg ship, especially if

we picture the great prow like the neck of a swan ending in a serpent's

coil, that we can best understand the words of _Beowulf_

flota f[=a]m[=i]-heals fugle gel[=i]cost,

wunden-stefna,

well rendered by Earle "The foamy-necked floater, most like to a

bird--the coily-stemmed."

{365}

See Boehmer (G. H.), _Prehistoric Naval Architecture of the North of

Europe, Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1891_ (now rather out of

date); Gudhmundsson (V.), _Nordboernes Skibe i Vikinge- og Sagatiden_,

Koebenhavn, 1900; [*]Schnepper, _Die Namen der Schiffe u. Schiffsteile im

Altenglischen_ (Kiel Diss.), 1908; Falk (H.), _Altnordisches Seewesen_

(_Woerter u. Sachen_, IV, Heidelberg, 1912); Hoops' _Reallexikon_, s.v.

_Schiff_.

* * * * *

G. LEIRE BEFORE ROLF KRAKI

That Leire was the royal town, not merely of Rolf Kraki, but of Rolf's

predecessors as well, is stated in the _Skjoldunga Saga_, extant in the

Latin abstract of Arngrim Jonsson: _Scioldus in arce Selandiae Hledro sedes

posuit, quae et sequentium plurimorum regum regia fuit_ (ed. Olrik,

Koebenhavn, 1894, p. 23 [105]). Similarly we are told in the _Ynglinga

Saga_, concerning Gefion, _Hennar fekk Skj[o,]ldr, sonr ['O]dhins; thau

bjoggu at Hleidhru_ (_Heimskringla_, udgivne ved F. J['o]nsson, Koebenhavn,

I, 15 [cap. V]).

Above all, it is clear from the _Annales Lundenses_ that, in the twelfth

century, Dan, Ro (Hrothgar) and Haldan (Healfdene) were traditionally

connected with Leire, and three of the grave mounds there were associated

with these three kings. See the extract given above, pp. 204-5, and cf. p.

17.

* * * * *

H. BEE-WOLF AND BEAR'S SON

The obvious interpretation of the name _B[=e]owulf_ is that suggested by

Grimm[806], that it means "wolf, or foe, of the bee." Grimm's suggestion

was repeated independently by Skeat[807], and further reasons for the

interpretation "bee-foe" have been found by Sweet[808] (who had been

anticipated by Simrock[809] in some of his points), by Cosijn[810],

Sievers[811], von Grienberger[812], Panzer[813] and Bjoerkman[814].

From the phonological point of view the etymology is a {366} perfect one,

but many of those who were convinced that "Beowulf" meant "bee-foe" had no

satisfactory explanation of "bee-foe" to offer[815]. Others, like Bugge,

whilst admitting that, so far as the form of the words goes, the etymology

is satisfactory, rejected "bee-foe" because it seemed to them

meaningless[816].

Yet it is very far from meaningless. "Bee-foe" means "bear." The bear has

got a name, or nickname, in many northern languages from his habit of

raiding the hives for honey. The Finnish name for bear is said to be

"honey-hand": he is certainly called "sweet-foot," _soetfot_, in Sweden,

and the Old Slavonic name, "honey-eater," has come to be accepted in

Russian, not merely as a nickname, but as the regular term for "bear."

And "bear" is an excellent name for a hero of story. The O.E. _beorn_,

"warrior, hero, prince" seems originally to have meant simply "bear." The

bear, says Grimm, "is regarded, in the belief of the Old Norse, Slavonic,

Finnish and Lapp peoples, as an exalted and holy being, endowed with human

understanding and the strength of twelve men. He is called 'forest-king,'

'gold-foot,' 'sweet-foot,' 'honey-hand,' 'honey-paw,' 'honey-eater,' but

also 'the great,' 'the old,' 'the old grandsire[817].'" "Bee-hunter" is

then a satisfactory explanation of _B[=e]owulf_: while the alternative

explanations are none of them satisfactory.

Many scholars have been led off the track by the assumption that Beow and

Beowulf are to be identified, and that we must therefore assume that the

first element in Beowulf's name is _B[=e]ow_--that we must divide not

_B[=e]o-wulf_ but _B[=e]ow-ulf_, "a warrior after the manner of Beow[818]."

But there is no ground {367} for any such assumption. It is true that in

ll. 18, 53, "Beowulf" is written where we should have expected "Beowa."

But, even if two words of similar sound have been confused, this fact

affords no reason for supposing that they must necessarily have been in the

first instance connected etymologically. And against the "warrior of Beow"

interpretation is the fact that the name is recorded in the early

Northumbrian _Liber Vitae_ under the form "Biuuulf[819]." This name, which

is that of an early monk of Durham, is presumably the same as that of the

hero of our poem, though it does not, of course, follow that the bearer of

it was named with any special reference to the slayer of Grendel. Now

_Biuuulf_ is correct Northumbrian for "bee-wolf," but the first element in

the word cannot stand for _B[=e]ow_[820], unless the {368} affinities and

forms of that word are quite different from all that the evidence has

hitherto led us to believe. So much at least seems certain. Besides, we

have seen that Byggvir is taunted by Loki precisely with the fact that he

_is_ no warrior. If we can estimate the characteristics of the O.E. Beow

from those of the Scandinavian Byggvir, the name "Warrior after the manner

of Beow" would be meaningless, if not absurd. Bugge[821], relying upon the

parallel O.N. form _Bj['o]lfr_[822], which is recorded as the name of one

of the early settlers in Iceland[823], tried to interpret the word as

_Boej['o]lfr_ "the wolf of the farmstead," quoting as parallels _Heimulf_,

_Gardulf_. But _Bj['o]lfr_ itself is best interpreted as "Bee-wolf[824]."

And admittedly Bugge's explanation does not suit the O.E. _B[=e]owulf_, and

necessitates the assumption that the word in English is a mere meaningless

borrowing from the Scandinavian: for _B[=e]owulf_ assuredly does not mean

"wolf of the farmstead[825]."

Neither can we take very seriously the explanation of Sarrazin and

Ferguson[826] that _B[=e]owulf_ is an abbreviation of _Beadu-wulf_, "wolf

of war." Our business is to interpret the name _B[=e]owulf_, or, if we

cannot, to admit that we cannot; not to substitute some quite distinct name

for it, and interpret that. Such theories merely show to what straits we

may be reduced, if we reject the obvious etymology of the word.

And there are two further considerations, which confirm, almost to a

certainty, this obvious interpretation of "Beowulf" as "Bee-wolf" or

"Bear." The first is that it agrees excellently with Beowulf's bear-like

habit of hugging his adversaries to death--a feature which surely belongs

to the original kernel of our story, since it is incompatible with the

chivalrous, {369} weapon-loving trappings in which that story has been

dressed[827]. The second is that, as I have tried to show, the evidence is

strongly in favour of Bjarki and Beowulf being originally the same

figure[828]: and Bjarki is certainly a bear-hero[829]. His name signifies

as much, and in the _Saga of Rolf Kraki_ we are told at length how the

father of Bjarki was a prince who had been turned by enchantment into a

bear[830].

If, then, Beowulf is a bear-hero[831], the next step is to enquire whether

there is any real likeness between his adventures at Heorot and under the

mere, and the adventures of the hero of the widely-spread "Bear's Son"

folk-tale. This investigation has, as we have seen above[832], been carried

out by Panzer in his monumental work, which marks an epoch in the study of

_Beowulf_.

Panzer's arguments in favour of such connection would, I think, have been

strengthened if he had either quoted textually a number of the more

important and less generally accessible folk-tales, or, since this would

have proved cumbersome, if he had at least given abstracts of them. The

method which Panzer follows, is to enumerate over two hundred tales, and

from them to construct a story which is a compound of them all. This is

obviously a method which is liable to abuse, though I do not say that

Panzer has abused it. But we must not let a story so constructed usurp in

our minds the place of the actual recorded folk-tales. Folk-tales, as

Andrew Lang wrote long ago, "consist of but few incidents, grouped together

in a kaleidoscopic variety of arrangements." A collection of over two

hundred cognate tales offers a wide field for the selection therefrom of a

composite story. Further, some geographical discrimination is necessary:

these tales are scattered over Europe and Asia, and it is important to keep

constantly in mind whether a given type of tale belongs, for example, to

Greece or to Scandinavia.

{370}

A typical example of the Bear's son tale is _Der Starke Hans_ in

Grimm[833]. Hans is brought up in a robber's den: but quite apart from any

of the theories we are now considering, it has long been recognized that

this is a mere toning down of the original incredible story, which makes a

bear's den the nursery of the strong youth[834]. Hans overcomes in an empty

castle the foe (a mannikin of magic powers) who has already worsted his

comrades Fir-twister and Stone-splitter. He pursues this foe to his hole,

is let down by his companions in a basket by a rope, slays the foe with his

club and rescues a princess. He sends up the princess in the basket; but

when his own turn comes to be pulled up his associates intentionally drop

the basket when halfway up. But Hans, suspecting treason, has only sent up

his club. He escapes by magic help, takes vengeance on the traitors, and

weds the princess.

In another story in Grimm[835], the antagonist whom the hero overcomes, but

does not in this case slay, is called the Earthman, _Dat Erdmaenneken_.

This type begins with the disappearance of the princesses, who are to the

orthodox number of three; otherwise it does not differ materially from the

abstract given above. Grimm records four distinct versions, all from

Western Germany.

The versions of this widespread story which are most easily accessible to

English readers are likely to prejudice such readers against Panzer's view.

The two versions in Campbell's _Popular Tales of the West Highlands_[836],

or the version in Kennedy's _Legendary Fictions of the Irish Celts_[837]

are not of a kind to remind any unprejudiced reader strongly of _Beowulf_,

or of the _Grettir_-story either. Indeed, I believe that from countries so

remote as North Italy or Russia parallels can be found which are closer

than any so far quoted from the Celtic portions of the British Isles.

Possibly more Celtic parallels may be forthcoming in the future: some

striking ones at any rate are promised[838].

{371}

So, too, the story of the "Great Bird Dan" (_Fugl Dam_[839]), which is

accessible to English readers in Dasent's translation[840], is one in which

the typical features have been overlaid by a mass of detail.

A much more normal specimen of the "Bear's son" story is found, for

example, in a folk-tale from Lombardy--the story of _Giovanni dell'

Orso_[841]. Giovanni is brought up in a bear's den, whither his mother has

been carried off. At five, he has the growth of a man and the strength of a

giant. At sixteen, he is able to remove the stone from the door of the den

and escape, with his mother. Going on his adventures with two comrades, he

comes to an empty palace. The comrades are defeated: it becomes the turn of

Giovanni to be alone. An old man comes in and "grows, grows till his head

touched the roof[842]." Giovanni mortally wounds the giant, who however

escapes. They all go in search of him, and find a hole in the ground. His

comrades let Giovanni down by a rope. He finds a great hall, full of rich

clothes and provision of every kind: in a second hall he finds three girls,

each one more beautiful than the other: in a third hall he finds the giant

himself, drawing up his will[843]. Giovanni kills the giant, rescues the

damsels, and, in spite of his comrades deserting the rope, he escapes,

pardons them, himself weds the youngest princess and marries his comrades

to the elder ones.

I cannot find in this version any mention of the hero smiting the giant

below with a magic sword which he finds there, as suggested by Panzer[844].

But even without this, the first part of the story has resemblances to

_Beowulf_, and still more to the _Grettir_-story.

There are many Slavonic variants. The South Russian story of the Norka[845]

begins with the attack of the Norka upon the King's park. The King offers

half his kingdom to whomsoever will destroy the beast. The youngest prince

of three watches, {372} after the failure of his two elder brothers, chases

and wounds the monster, who in the end pulls up a stone and disappears into

the earth. The prince is let down by his brothers, and, with the help of a

sword specially given him in the underworld, and a draught of the water of

strength, he slays the foe, and wins the princesses. In order to have these

for themselves, the elder brothers drop what they suppose to be their

youngest brother, as they are drawing him up: but it is only a stone he has

cautiously tied to the rope in place of himself. The prince's miraculous

return in disguise, his feats, recognition by the youngest princess, the

exposure of the traitors, and marriage of the hero, all follow in due

course[846].

A closer Russian parallel is that of _Ivashko Medvedko_[847]. "John

Honey-eater" or "Bear." John grows up, not by years, but by hours: nearly

every hour he gains an inch in height. At fifteen, there are complaints of

his rough play with other village boys, and John Bear has to go out into

the world, after his grandfather has provided him with a weapon, an iron

staff of immense weight. He meets a champion who is drinking up a river:

"Good morning, John Bear, whither art going?" "I know not whither; I just

go, not knowing where to go." "If so, take me with you." The same happens

with a second champion whose hobby is to carry mountains on his shoulder,

and with a third, who plucks up oaks or pushes them into the ground. They

come to a revolving house in a dark forest, which at John's word stands

with its back door to the forest and its front door to them: all its doors

and windows open of their own accord. Though the yard is full of poultry,

the house is empty. Whilst the three companions go hunting, the

river-swallower stays in the house to cook dinner: this done, he washes his

head, and sits at the window to comb his locks. Suddenly the earth shakes,

then stands still: a stone is lifted, and from under it appears Baba Yaga

driving in her mortar with a pestle: behind her comes barking a little dog.

A short dialogue ensues, and the champion, at her request, gives her food;

but the second helping she throws to her dog, and thereupon beats the

champion with {373} her pestle till he becomes unconscious; then she cuts a

strip of skin from his back, and after eating all the food, vanishes. The

victim recovers his senses, ties up his head with a handkerchief, and, when

his companions return, apologizes for the ill-success of his cooking: "He

had been nearly suffocated by the fumes of the charcoal, and had had his

work cut out to get the room clear." Exactly the same happens to the other

champions. On the fourth day it is the turn of John Bear, and here again

the same formulas are repeated. John does the cooking, washes his head,

sits down at the window and begins to comb his curly locks. Baba Yaga

appears with the usual phenomena, and the usual dialogue follows, till she

begins to belabour the hero with her pestle. But he wrests it from her,

beats her almost to death, cuts three strips from her skin, and imprisons

her in a closet. When his companions return, they are astonished to find

dinner ready. After dinner they have a bath, and the companions try not to

show their mutilated backs, but at last have to confess. "Now I see why you

all suffered from suffocation," says John Bear. He goes to the closet,

takes the three strips cut from his friends, and reinserts them: they heal

at once. Then he ties up Baba Yaga by a cord fastened to one foot, and they

all shoot at the cord in turn. John Bear hits it, and cuts the string in

two; Baba Yaga falls to the earth, but rises, runs to the stone from under

which she had appeared, lifts it, and vanishes. Each of the companions

tries in turn to lift the stone, but only John can accomplish it, and only

he is willing to go down. His comrades let him down by a rope, which

however is too short, and John has to eke it out by the three strips

previously cut from the back of Baba Yaga. At the bottom he sees a path,

follows it, and reaches a palace where are three beautiful maidens, who

welcome him, but warn him against their mother, who is Baba Yaga herself:

"She is asleep now, but she keeps at her head a sword. Do not touch it, but

take two golden apples lying on a silver tray, wake her gently, and offer

them to her. As soon as she begins to eat, seize the sword, and cut her

head off at one blow." John Bear carries out these instructions, and sends

up the maidens, two to be wives to his companions, and the youngest to be

his own wife. This leaves the third companion wifeless {374} and, in

indignation, he cuts the rope when the turn comes to pull John up. The hero

falls and is badly hurt. [John has forgotten, in this version, to put his

iron club into the basket instead of himself--indeed he has up to now made

no use of his staff.] In time the hero sees an underground passage, and

makes his way out into the white world. Here he finds the youngest maiden,

who is tending cattle, after refusing to marry the false companion. John

Bear follows her home, slays his former comrades with his staff, and throws

their bodies on the field for the wild beasts to devour. He then takes his

sweetheart home to his people, and weds her.

The abstract given above is from a translation made by one of my students,

Miss M. Steine, who tells me that she had heard the tale in this form many

times from her old nurse "when we were being sent to sleep, or sitting

round her in the evening." I have given it at this length because I do not

know of any accessible translation into any Western language.

Panzer enumerates two hundred and two variants of the story: and there are

others[848]. But there is reason in the criticism that what is important

for us is the form the folk-tale may have taken in those countries where we

must look for the original home of the _Beowulf_-story[849]. The Mantuan

folk-tale may have been carried down to North Italy from Scandinavia by the

Longobards: who can say? But Panzer's theory must stand or fall by the

parallels which can be drawn between the _Beowulf-Grettir_-story on the one

hand, and the folk-tales as they have been collected in the countries where

this story is native: the lands, that is to say, adjoining the North Sea.

Now it is precisely here that we do find the most remarkable resemblances:

in Iceland, the Faroes, Norway, Denmark, Jutland, Schleswig, and the Low

German lands as far as the Scheldt.

An Icelandic version exists in an unprinted MS at Reykjavik[850] which can

be consulted in a German translation[851]. In this {375} version a bear,

who is really an enchanted prince, carries off a princess. He resumes his

human form and weds the princess, but must still at times take the bear's

form. His child, the Bear-boy (Bjarndreingur), is to be kept in the house

during the long periods when the enchanted husband is away. But at twelve

years old the Bear-boy is too strong and unmanageable, bursts out, and

slays a bear who turns out to be his father. His mother's heart is broken,

but Bear-boy goes on his adventures, and associates with himself three

companions, one of whom is Stein. They build a house in the wood, which is

attacked by a giant, and, as usual, the companions are unable to withstand

the attacks. Bear-boy does so, ties the giant's hands behind his back, and

fastens him by his beard. But the giant tears himself free. As in

_Beowulf_, Bear-boy and his companions follow the track by the drops of

blood, and come to a hole. Stein is let some way down, the other companions

further, but only Bear-boy dares to go to the bottom. There he finds a

weeping princess, and learns that she, and her two sisters, have been

carried off by three giants, one of whom is his former assailant. He slays

all three, and sends their heads up, together with the maidens and other

treasures. But his companions desert the rope, and he has to climb up

unaided. In the end he weds the youngest princess.

The story from the Faroe Islands runs thus:

Three brothers lived together and took turns, two to go out fishing, and

one to be at home. For two days, when the two elder brothers were at home,

came a giant with a long beard (Skeggjatussi) and ate and drank all the

food. Then comes the turn of the despised youngest brother, who is called

in one version Oeskud['o]lgur--"the one who sits and rakes in the ashes"--a

kind of male Cinderella. This brother routs the giant, either by catching

his long beard in a cleft tree-trunk, or by branding him in the nose with a

hot iron. In either case the mutilated giant escapes down a hole: in one

version, after the other brothers come home, they follow him to this hole

by the track of his blood. The two elder brothers leave the task of

plunging down to the youngest one, who finds below a girl (in the second

version, two kidnapped princesses). He finds also a magic sword hanging

{376} on the wall, which he is only able to lift when he has drunk a magic

potion. He then slays the giant, rescues the maiden or maidens, is betrayed

in the usual way by his brothers: in the one version they deliberately

refuse to draw him up: in the other they cut the rope as they are doing so:

but he is discreetly sending up only a big stone. The hero is helped out,

however, by a giant, "Skraeddi Kj['a]lki" or "Snerkti risi," and in the end

marries the princess[852].

In the Norwegian folk-tale the three adventurers are called respectively

the Captain, the Lieutenant and the Soldier. They search for the three

princesses, and watch in a castle, where the Captain and Lieutenant are in

turn worsted by a strange visitor--who in this version is not identical

with the troll below ground who guards the princesses[853]. When the turn

of the Soldier comes, he seizes the intruder (the man, as he is called).

"Ah no, Ah no, spare my life," said the man, "and you shall know all.

East of the castle is a great sandheap, and down in it a winch, with

which you can lower yourself. But if you are afraid, and do not dare to

go right down, you only need to pull the bell rope which you will find

there, and up you will come again. But if you dare venture so far as to

come to the bottom, there stands a flask on a shelf over the door: you

must drink what is in it: so will you become so strong that you can

strike the head off the troll of the mountain. And by the door there

hangs a Troll-sword, which also you must take, for no other steel will

bite on his body."

When he had learnt this, he let the man go. When the Captain and the

Lieutenant came home, they were not a little surprised to find the

Soldier alive. "How have you escaped a drubbing," said they, "has not

the man been {377} here?" "Oh yes, he is quite a good fellow, he is,"

said the Soldier, "I have learnt from him where the princesses are,"

and he told them all. They were glad when they heard that, and when

they had eaten, they went all three to the sandheap.

As usual, the Captain and the Lieutenant do not dare to go to the bottom:

the hero accomplishes the adventure, is (as usual) betrayed by his

comrades, but is saved because he has put a stone in the basket instead of

himself, and in the end is rescued by the interposition of "Kloeverhans."

What is the explanation of the "sandheap" (_sandhaug_) I do not know. But

one cannot forget that Grettir's adventure in the house, followed by his

adventure with the troll under the earth, is localized at Sandhaugar. This

may be a mere accident; but it is worth noting that in following up the

track indicated by Panzer we come across startling coincidences of this

kind. As stated above, it can hardly be due to any influence of the

_Grettis Saga_ upon the folk-tale[854]. The likeness between the two is too

remote to have suggested a transference of such details from the one story

to the other.

We find the story in its normal form in Jutland[855]. The hero, a

foundling, is named Bjoernoere (Bear-ears). There is no explanation offered

of this name, but we know that in other versions of the story, where the

hero is half bear and half man, his bear nature is shown by his bear's

ears. "Bear-ears" comes with his companions to an empty house, worsts the

foe (the old man, _den gamle_) who has put his companions to shame, and

fixes him by his beard in a cloven tree. The foe escapes nevertheless; they

follow him to his hole: the companions are afraid, but "Bear-ears" is let

down, finds the enemy on his bed, and slays him. The rest of the story

follows the usual pattern. "Bear-ears" rescues and sends up the princesses,

his comrades detach the rope, which however is hauling up only the hero's

iron club. He escapes miraculously from his confinement below, and returns

to marry the youngest princess. In another Danish version, from the South

of Zealand[856], the hero, "Strong Hans" (nothing is said {378} about his

bear-origin), comes with his companions to a magnificent but empty castle.

The old witch worsts his comrades and imprisons them under the trap-door:

but Hans beats her and rescues them, though the witch herself escapes. Hans

is let down, rescues the princesses, is betrayed by his comrades (who,

thinking to drop him in drawing him up, only drop his iron club), and

finally weds the third princess.

A little further South we have three versions of the same tale recorded for

Schleswig-Holstein[857]. The hero wins his victory below by means of "a

great iron sword" (_en grotes ysernes Schwaeert_) which he can only wield

after drinking of the magic potion.

From Hanover comes the story of Peter Baer[858], which shows all the

familiar features: from the same district came some of Grimm's variants.

Others were from the Rhine provinces: but the fullest version of all comes

from the Scheldt, just over the Flemish border. The hero, Jean l'Ourson, is

recovered as a child from a bear's den, is despised in his youth[859], but

gives early proof of his strength. He defends an empty castle _un superbe

ch[^a]teau_, when his companion has failed, strikes off an arm[860] of his

assailant _Petit-P[`e]re-Bidoux_, chases him to his hole, _un puits vaste

et profond_. He is let down by his companion, but finding the rope too

short, plunges, and arrives battered at the bottom. There he perceives _une

lumi[`e]re qui brillait au bout d'une longue galerie_[861]. At the end of

the gallery he sees his former assailant, attended by _une vieille femme

[`a] cheveux blancs, qui semblait [^a]g['e]e de plus de cent ans_, who is

salving his wounded arm. The hero quenches the light (which is a magic one)

smites his foe on the head and kills him, and then rekindles the lamp[862].

His companion above seeks to rob him of the two princesses he has won, by

detaching the rope. Nevertheless, he escapes, weds the good princess, and

punishes his faithless companion by making him wed the bad one.

The white-haired old woman is not spoken of as the mother {379} of the foe

she is nursing, and it may be doubted whether she is in any way parallel to

Grendel's mother. The hero does not fight her: indeed it is she who, in the

end, enables him to escape. Still the parallels between Jean l'Ourson and

Beowulf are striking enough. Nine distinct features recur, in the same

order, in the _Beowulf_-story and in this folk-tale. It needs a more robust

faith than I possess to attribute this solely to chance.

Unfortunately, this French-Flemish tale is found in a somewhat

sophisticated collection. Its recorder, as Sainte-Beuve points out in his

letter introductory to the series[863], uses literary touches which

diminish the value of his folk-tales to the student of origins. Any

contamination from the _Beowulf_-story or the _Grettir_-story is surely

improbable enough in this case: nevertheless, one would have liked the tale

taken down verbatim from the lips of some simple-minded narrator as it used

to be told at Cond['e] on the Scheldt.

But if we take together the different versions enumerated above, the result

is, I think, convincing. Here are eight versions of one folk-tale taken as

representatives from a much larger number current in the countries in touch

with the North Sea: from Iceland, the Faroes, Norway, Jutland, Zealand,

Schleswig, Hanover, and the Scheldt. The champion is a bear-hero (as

Beowulf almost certainly is, and as Bjarki quite certainly is); he is

called, in Iceland, _Bjarndreingur_, in Jutland, _Bjoernoere_, in Hanover,

_Peter Baer_, on the Scheldt _Jean l'Ourson_. Like Beowulf, he is despised

in his youth (Faroe, Scheldt). In all versions he resists his adversary in

an empty house or castle, after his comrades have failed. In most versions

of the folk-tale this is the third attack, as it is in the case of Grettir

at Sandhaugar and of Bjarki: in _Beowulf_, on the contrary, we gather that

Heorot has been raided many times. The adversary, though vanquished,

escapes; in one version after the loss of an arm (Scheldt): they follow his

track to the hole into which he has vanished, sometimes, as in _Beowulf_,

marking traces of his blood (Iceland, Faroe, Schleswig). The hero always

ventures down alone, and gets into {380} an underworld of magic, which has

left traces of its mysteriousness in _Beowulf_. In one tale (Scheldt) the

hero sees a magic lamp burning below, just as he sees the fire in _Beowulf_

or the _Grettis Saga_. He overcomes either his original foe, or new ones,

often by the use of a magic sword (Faroe, Norway, Schleswig); this sword

hangs by the door (Norway) or on the wall (Faroe) as in _Beowulf_. After

slaying his foe, the hero rekindles the magic lamp, in the Scheldt fairy

tale, just as he kindles a light in the _Grettis Saga_, and as the light

flashes up in _Beowulf_ after the hero has smitten Grendel's mother. The

hero is in each case deserted by his companions: a feature which, while it

is marked in the _Grettis Saga_, can obviously be allowed to survive in

_Beowulf_ only in a much softened form. The chosen retainers whom Beowulf

has taken with him on his journey could not be represented as unfaithful,

because the poet is reserving the episode of the faithless retainers for

the death of Beowulf. To have twice represented the escort as cowardly

would have made the poem a satire upon the _comitatus_, and would have

assured it a hostile reception in every hall from Canterbury to Edinburgh.

But there is no doubt as to the faithlessness of the comrade Stein in the

_Grettis Saga_. And in Zealand, one of the faithless companions is called

_Stenhuggeren_ (the Stone-hewer), in Schleswig _Steenkloewer_, in Hanover

_Steinspieler_, whilst in Iceland he has the same name, _Stein_, which he

has in the _Grettis Saga_.

The fact that the departure home of the Danes in _Beowulf_ is due to the

same cause as that which accounts for the betrayal of his trust by Stein,

shows that in the original _Beowulf_-story also this feature must have

occurred, however much it may have become worn down in the existing epic.

I think enough has been said to show that there is a real likeness between

a large number of recorded folk-tales and the _Beowulf-Grettir_ story. The

parallel is not merely with an artificial, theoretical composite put

together by Panzer. But it becomes equally clear that _Beowulf_ cannot be

spoken of as a version of these folk-tales. At most it is a version of a

portion of them. The omission of the princesses in _Beowulf_ and the

_Grettis Saga_ is fundamental. With the princesses much else falls away.

There is no longer any motive for the betrayal of trust {381} by the

watchers. The disguise of the hero and his vengeance are now no longer

necessary to the tale.

It might be argued that there was something about the three princesses

which made them unsatisfactory as subjects of story. It has been thought

that in the oldest version the hero married all three: an awkward episode

where a _scop_ had to compose a poem for an audience certainly monogamous

and most probably Christian. The rather tragic and sombre atmosphere of the

stories of Beowulf and Grettir fits in better with a version from which the

princesses, and the living happily ever afterwards, have been dropped. On

the other hand, it might be argued that the folk-tale is composite, and

that the source from which the _Beowulf-Grettir_-story drew was a simpler

tale to which the princesses had not yet been added.

And there are additions as well as subtractions. Alike in _Beowulf_ and in

the _Grettis Saga_, the fight in the house and the fight below are

associated with struggles with monsters of different sex. The association

of "The Devil and his Dam" has only few and remote parallels in the

"Bear's-son" folk-tale.

But Panzer has, I think, proved that the struggle of Beowulf in the hall,

and his plunging down into the deep, is simply an epic glorification of a

folk-tale motive.

* * * * *

I. THE DATE OF THE DEATH OF HYGELAC.

Gregory of Tours mentions the defeat of Chochilaicus (Hygelac) as an event

of the reign of Theudoric. Now Theudoric succeeded his father Chlodoweg,

who died 27 Nov. 511. Theudoric died in 534. This, then, gives the extreme

limits of time; but as Gregory mentions the event among the first

occurrences of the reign, the period 512-520 has generally been suggested,

or in round numbers about 515 or 516.

Nevertheless, we cannot attach much importance to the mere order followed

by Gregory[864]. He may well have had no means of dating the event exactly.

Of much more importance than the order, is the fact he records, that

Theudoric did not {382} defeat Chochilaicus in person, but sent his son

Theudobert to repel the invaders.

Now Theudobert was born before the death of his grandfather Chlodoweg. For

Gregory tells us that Chlodoweg left not only four sons, but a grandson

Theudobert, _elegantem atque utilem_[865]: _utilem_ cannot mean that, at

the time of the death of Chlodoweg, Theudobert was of age to conduct

affairs of state, for Chlodoweg was only 45 at death[866]. The Merovingians

were a precocious race; but if we are to allow Theudobert to have been at

least fifteen before being placed in charge of a very important expedition,

and Chlodoweg to have been at least forty before becoming a grandfather,

the defeat of Hygelac cannot be put before 521; and probability would

favour a date five or ten years later.

There is confirmation for this. When Theudobert died, in 548, he left one

son only, quite a child and still under tutelage[867]; probably therefore

not more than twelve or thirteen at most. We know the circumstances of the

child's birth. Theudobert had been betrothed by his father Theudoric to a

Longobardic princess, Wisigardis[868]. In the meantime he fell in love with

the lady Deoteria[869], and married her[870]. The Franks were shocked at

this fickleness (_valde scandalizabantur_), and Theudobert had ultimately

to put away Deoteria[871], although they had this young son (_parvulum

filium_), who, as we have seen, could hardly have been born before 535, and

possibly was born years later. Theudobert then married the Longobardic

princess, in the seventh year after their betrothal. So it cannot have been

much before 530 that Theudobert's father was first arranging the

Longobardic match. A king is not likely to have waited to find a wife for a

son, upon whom his dynasty was to depend, till fifteen years after that son

was of age to win a memorable victory[872].

* * * * *

{383}

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF _BEOWULF_ AND _FINNSBURG_

I remember it was with extreme difficulty that I could bring my master

to understand the meaning of the word _opinion_, or how a point could

be disputable; because reason taught us to affirm or deny only where we

are certain; and beyond our knowledge we cannot do either. So that

controversies, wranglings, disputes, and positiveness in false or

dubious propositions are evils unknown among the _Houyhnhnms_.... He

would laugh that a creature pretending to reason should value itself

upon the knowledge of other people's conjectures, and in things, where

that knowledge, if it were certain, could be of no use....

I have often since reflected what destruction such a doctrine would

make in the libraries of Europe.

_Gulliver's Travels._

The following items are (except in special cases) not included in this

bibliography:

(_a_) Articles dealing with single passages in _Beowulf_, or two

passages only, in cases where they have already been recorded under the

appropriate passage in the footnotes to the text, or in the glossary,

of my revision of Wyatt's edition.

(_b_) Articles dealing with the emendation or interpretation of single

passages, in cases where such emendations have been withdrawn by their

author himself.

(_c_) Purely popular paraphrases or summaries.

(_d_) Purely personal protests (e.g., _P.B.B._ XXI, 436), however well

founded, in which no point of scholarship is any longer involved.

Books dealing with other subjects, but illustrating _Beowulf_, present a

difficulty. Such books may have a value for _Beowulf_ students, even though

the author may never refer to our poem, and have occasionally been included

in previous bibliographies. But, unless _Beowulf_ is closely concerned,

these books are not usually mentioned below: such enumeration, if carried

out consistently, would clog a bibliography already all too bulky. Thus,

Siecke's _Drachenkaempfe_ does not seem to come within the scope of this

bibliography, because the author is not concerned with Beowulf's dragon.

Obviously every general discussion of Old English metre must concern itself

largely with _Beowulf_: for such treatises the student is referred to the

section _Metrik_ of Brandl's Bibliography (_Pauls Grdr._); and, for Old

English heroic legend in general, to the Bibliography of my edition of

_Widsith_.

Many scholars, e.g. Heinzel, have put into their reviews of the books of

others, much original work which might well have formed the material for

independent articles. Such reviews are noted as "weighty," but it must not

be supposed that the reviews not so marked are negligible; unless of some

value to scholarship, reviews are not usually mentioned below.

The title of any book, article or review which I have not seen and verified

is denoted by the sign ++. {384}

SUMMARY

s. 1. Periodicals.

s. 2. Bibliographies.

s. 3. The MS and its transcripts.

s. 4. Editions.

s. 5. Concordances, _etc._

s. 6. Translations (including early summaries).

s. 7. Textual criticism and interpretation.

s. 8. Questions of literary history, date and authorship. _Beowulf_ in the

light of history, archaeology[873], heroic legend, mythology and folk-lore.

s. 9. Style and Grammar.

s. 10. Metre.

s. 1. PERIODICALS

The periodicals most frequently quoted are:

_A.f.d.A._ = Anzeiger fuer deutsches Alterthum. Berlin, 1876 _etc._

_A.f.n.F._ = Arkiv foer nordisk Filologi. Christiania, Lund, 1883 _etc._

_Quoted according to the original numbering._

_Anglia._ Halle, 1878 _etc._

_Archiv_ = Herrigs Archiv fuer das Studium der neueren Sprachen und

Litteraturen. Elberfeld, Braunschweig, 1846 _etc._ _Quoted according to the

original numbering._

_D.L.Z._ = Deutsche Literatur-Zeitung. Berlin, 1880 _etc._

_Engl. Stud._ = Englische Studien. Heilbronn, Leipzig, 1877 _etc._

_Germania._ Wien, 1856-92.

_I.F._ = Indogermanische Forschungen. Strassburg, 1892 _etc._

_J.(E.)G.Ph._ = Journal of (English and) Germanic Philology. Bloomington,

Urbana, 1897 _etc._

_Lit. Cbl._ = Literarisches Centralblatt. Leipzig, 1851 _etc._

_Literaturblatt_ fuer germanische und romanische Philologie. Heilbronn,

Leipzig, 1880 _etc._

_M.L.N._ = Modern Language Notes. Baltimore, 1886 _etc._ _Quoted by the

page, not the column._

_M.L.R._ = The Modern Language Review. Cambridge, 1906 _etc._

_Mod. Phil._ = Modern Philology. Chicago, 1903 _etc._

_Morsbachs Studien_ zur englischen Philologie. Halle, 1897 _etc._

_P.B.B._ = Beitraege zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache u. Litteratur.

Halle, 1874 _etc._

_Pub. Mod. Lang. Assoc. Amer._ = Publications of the Modern Language

Association of America. Baltimore, 1889 _etc._

_Z.f.d.A._ = Zeitschrift fuer deutsches Alterthum. Leipzig, Berlin, 1841

_etc._

_Z.f.d.Ph._ = Zachers Zeitschrift fuer deutsche Philologie. Halle, 1869

_etc._

_Z.f.oe.G._ = Zeitschrift fuer die oesterreichischen Gymnasien. Wien, 1850

_etc._

The titles of other periodicals are given with sufficient fulness for easy

identification.

{385}

s. 2. BIBLIOGRAPHIES

Bibliographies have been published from time to time as a supplement to

_Anglia_; also in the _Jahresbericht ueber...german. Philologie_; by

Garnett in his _Translation_, 1882 _etc._; and will be found in

Wuelker's _Grundriss_ (with very useful abstracts), 1885, pp. 245

_etc._

Clark Hall's _Translation_, 1901, 1911.

Holthausen's _Beowulf_, 1906, 1909, 1913, 1919.

Brandl's _Englische Literatur_, in _Pauls Grdr._(2), II, 1015-24 (full,

but not so reliable as Holthausen's).

Sedgefield's _Beowulf_, 1910, 1913 (carefully selected).

An excellent critical bibliography of _Beowulf_-translations up to 1903 is

that of Tinker: see under s. 6, _Translations_.

s. 3. THE MS AND ITS TRANSCRIPTS

_Beowulf_ fills ff. 129 (132)_a_ to 198 (201)_b_ of the British Museum MS

_Cotton Vitellius A. XV._

_Beowulf_ is written in two hands, the first of which goes to l. 1939. This

hand was identified by Prof. Sedgefield (_Beowulf_, _Introduction_, p. xiv,

footnote) with that of the piece immediately preceding _Beowulf_ in the MS,

and by Mr Kenneth Sisam, in 1916, with that of all three immediately

preceding pieces: the _Christopher_ fragment, the _Wonders of the East_,

and the _Letter of Alexander on the Wonders of India_. The pieces preceding

these, however (the _Soliloquies of S. Augustine_, the _Gospel of

Nicodemus_, _Salomon and Saturn_), are certainly not in the same hand, and

their connection with the _Beowulf_-MS is simply due to the bookbinder.

From l. 1939 to the end, _Beowulf_ is written in a second hand, thicker and

less elegant than the first. This second hand seems to be clearly identical

with that in which the poem of _Judith_, immediately following _Beowulf_,

is written. This was pointed out by Sievers in 1872 (_Z.f.d.A._ XV, 457),

and has never, I think, been disputed (cf. Sisam, p. 337; Foerster, p. 31).

Nevertheless the two poems have probably not always formed one book. For

the last page of _Beowulf_ was apparently once the last page of the volume,

to judge from its battered condition, whilst _Judith_ is imperfect at the

beginning. And there are trifling differences, e.g. in the frequency of the

use of contractions, and the form of the capital H.

This identity of the scribe of the second portion of _Beowulf_ and the

_Judith_ scribe, together with the identity (pointed out by Mr Sisam) of

the scribe of the first portion of _Beowulf_ and the scribe of the three

preceding works, is important. A detailed comparison of these texts will

throw light upon the characteristics of the scribes.

That the three preceding works are in the same hand as that of the first

_Beowulf_ scribe was again announced, independently of Mr Sisam, by Prof.

Max Foerster, in 1919. Sievers had already in 1871 arrived at the same

result (see Foerster, p. 35, note) but had not published it.

It seems to me in the highest degree improbable that the _Beowulf_-MS has

lost its ending, as Prof. Foerster thinks (pp. 82, 88). Surely nothing

could be better than the conclusion of the poem as it stands in the MS:

that the {386} casual loss of a number of leaves could have resulted in so

satisfactory a conclusion is, I think, not conceivable. Moreover, the

scribe has crammed as much material as possible into the last leaf of

_Beowulf_, making his lines abnormally long, and using contractions in a

way he does not use them elsewhere. The only reason for this must be to

avoid running over into a new leaf or quire: there could be no motive for

this crowded page if the poem had ever run on beyond it.

There is pretty general agreement that the date of the _Beowulf_-MS is

about the year 1000, and that it is somewhat more likely to be before that

date than after.

The _Beowulf_-MS was injured in the great Cottonian fire of 1731, and the

edges of the parchment have since chipped away owing to the damage then

sustained. Valuable assistance can therefore be derived from the two

transcripts now preserved in the Royal Library of Copenhagen, made in 1787,

when the MS was much less damaged.

A. Poema anglosaxonicum de rebus gestis Danorum ... fecit exscribi

Londini A.D. MDCCLXXXVII Grimus Johannis Thorkelin.

B. Poema anglosaxonicum de Danorum rebus gestis ... exscripsit Grimus

Johannis Thorkelin. Londini MDCCLXXXVII.

The first description of the _Beowulf_-MS is in 1705 by H. WANLEY

(_Librorum Septentrionalium ... Catalogus_, pp. 218--19, Oxoniae, forming

vol. II of Hickes' _Thesaurus_). Two short extracts from the MS are given

by Wanley. He describes the poem as telling of the wars _quae Beowulfus

quidam Danus, ex regio Scyldingorum stirpe ortus, gessit contra Sueciae

regulos_. The text was printed by THORKELIN in 1815, and the MS was

collated by CONYBEARE, who in his _Illustrations_ (1826) issued 19 pages of

corrections of Thorkelin. These corrections were further corrected by J. M.

KEMBLE in 1837 (Letter to M. Francisque Michel, in Michel's

_Biblioth[`e]que Anglo-Saxonne_, pp. 20, 51-8). Meantime Kemble's text had

been issued in 1833, based upon his examination of the MS. The MS was also

seen by THORPE (in 1830: Thorpe's text was not published till 1855) and by

GRUNDTVIG (pub. 1861). A further collation was that of E. KOELBING in 1876

(Zur Be['o]vulf-handschrift, _Archiv_, LVI, 91-118). Koelbing's collation

proves the superiority of Kemble's text to Grundtvig's. Line for line

transcripts of the MS were those of Holder, Wuelker and Zupitza:

1881 HOLDER, A. Beowulf. Bd. I. Abdruck der Handschrift. Freiburg u.

Tuebingen. (++1881, from collation made in 1875.) Reviews: Koelbing,

_Engl. Stud._ VII, 488; Kluge, _Literaturblatt_, 1883, 178; Wuelker,

_Lit. Cbl._ 1882, 1035-6.

1882. 2 Aufl.

1895. 3 Aufl. Reviews: Dieter, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, VI, 260-1;

Brandl, _Z.f.d.A._ XL, 90.

1881 WUELKER, R. P. Beowulf: Text nach der handschrift, in Grein's

_Bibliothek_, I, 18-148.

1882 ZUPITZA, J. Beowulf. Autotypes of the unique Cotton MS. Vitellius

A XV; with a transliteration and notes. _Early English Text Society_,

London. Reviews: Trautmann, _Anglia_, VII, _Anzeiger_, 41; Koelbing,

_Engl. Stud._ VII, 482 _etc._; Varnhagen, _A.f.d.A._ X, 304; Sievers,

_Lit. Cbl._ 1884, 124.

{387}

Further discussion of the MS by

1890 DAVIDSON, C. Differences between the scribes of Beowulf. _M.L.N._

V, 43-4; MCCLUMPHA, C., criticizes the above, _M.L.N._ V, 123; reply by

DAVIDSON, _M.L.N._ V, 189-90.

1910 LAMB, EVELYN H. "Beowulf": Hemming of Worcester. _Notes and

Queries_, Ser. XI, vol. I, p. 26. (Worthless. An assertion, unsupported

by any evidence, that _both_ the hands of the Beowulf MS are those of

Hemming of Worcester, who flourished c. 1096.)

1916 SISAM, K. The Beowulf Manuscript. _M.L.R._ XI, 335-7. (Very

important. Gives results of a scrutiny of the other treatises in _MS

Vitellius A. XV_ (see above) and shows, among other things, that the

Beowulf MS, before reaching the hands of Sir Robert Cotton, was (in

1563) in those of Lawrence Nowell, the Elizabethan Anglo-Saxon

scholar.)

1919 FOERSTER, MAX. Die Beowulf-Handschrift, Leipzig, _Berichte der

Saechs_. _Akad. der Wissenschaften_, Bd. 71. (An excellent and detailed

discussion of the problems of the MS, quite independent of that of Mr

Sisam, whose results it confirms.) Review: Schroeder, _Z.f.d.A._ LVIII,

85-6.

1920 RYPINS, S. I. The Beowulf Codex. _Mod. Phil._ XVII, 541-8

(promising further treatment of the problems of the MS).

The MS of Finnsburg has been lost. See above, p. 245.

s. 4. EDITIONS OF BEOWULF AND FINNSBURG

1705 HICKES, G. Linguarum Vett. Septentrionalium Thesaurus. Oxoniae.

(Vol. I, 192-3, text of Finnsburg Fragment.)

1814 CONYBEARE, J. J. The Battle of Finsborough, in Brydges' _British

Bibliographer_, vol. IV, pp. 261-7; No. XV (Text, Latin translation,

and free verse paraphrase in English: some brief notes).

1815 THORKELIN, G. J. De Danorum rebus gestis secul. III et IV. Poema

Danicum dialecto Anglo-Saxonica. (Copenhagen, with Lat. transl.)

Reviews: See s. 7, _Textual Criticism_, 1815, Grundtvig; also _Dansk

Litteratur-Tidende_, 1815, 401-32, 437-46, 461-2 (defending Thorkelin

against Grundtvig); _Iduna_, vii, 1817, 133-59; _Monthly Review_,

LXXXI, 1816, 516-23; ++_Jenaische Literatur-Zeitung_, 1816,

_Ergaenzungsblaetter_, 353-65 (summary in Wuelker's _Grundriss_, p.

252); Outzen in _Kieler Blaetter_, 1816, see s. 8, below.

1817 RASK, R. K. Angelsaksisk sproglaere. Stockholm (pp. 163-6 contain

Beowulf, ll. 53-114, with commentary).

1820 Text of Finnsburg, given by GRUNDTVIG in _Bjowulfs Drape,_ pp.

xl-xlv.

1826 Text of Finnsburg, and of large portions of Beowulf, given in

CONYBEARE'S _Illustrations_. See s. 5, _Translations_.

1833 KEMBLE, J. M. Beowulf, the Travellers Song, and the Battle of

Finnesburh, edited with a glossary ... and an historical preface.

London.

1835. Second edit.

1847 SCHALDEMOSE, F. Beo-wulf og Scopes Widsidh ... med Oversaettelse.

Kjoebenhavn. (Follows Kemble's text of 1835: Text and transl. of

Finnsburg also given, pp. 161-4.) 1851, Reprinted.

1849 KLIPSTEIN, L. F. Analecta Anglo-Saxonica. New York. (Selections

from Beowulf, II, 227-61: Text of Finnsburg, 426-7.)

1850 ETTMUELLER, L. Engla and Seaxna scopas and b[=o]ceras. Quedlinburg

u. Leipzig. (Text of large portions of Beowulf, with Finnsburg, pp.

95-131.)

1855 THORPE, B. The A.S. poems of Beowulf, the scop or gleeman's tale,

and Finnesburg, with a literal translation ... Oxford. ++1875,

Reprinted.

{388}

1857 GREIN, C. W. M. Bibliothek der angelsaechsischen Poesie, I.

Goettingen (pp. 255--343, Be['o]vulf, Ueberfall in Finnsburg).

1861-4. Bd. III, IV. Sprachschatz.

1861 RIEGER, M. Alt- u. angelsaechsisches Lesebuch. Giessen. (Der Kampf

zu Finnsburg, pp. 61-3: aus dem Beovulf, 63-82.)

1861 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Beowulfes Beorh eller Bjovulfs-Drapen.

Kioebenhavn, London. (The Finnsburg Fragment is inserted in the text of

Beowulf, after l. 1106.)

1863 HEYNE, M. Beovulf, mit ausfuehrlichem Glossar. Paderborn. (Anhang:

Der Ueberfall in Finnsburg.) Reviews: Grein, _Lit. Cbl._ 1864, 137--8;

Holtzmann, _Germania_, VIII, 506-7.

1868. ++2 Aufl. Review: Rieger, _Z.f.d.Ph._ II, 371-4.

1873. 3 Aufl. Review: Sievers, _Lit. Cbl._ 1873, 662-3, brief but

severe.

1879. 4 Aufl. [in this, Koelbing's collation of 1876 was utilized;

see p. 82]. Reviews: Brenner, _Engl. Stud._ IV, 135-9; Gering,

_Z.f.d.Ph._ XII, 122-5.

1867 GREIN, C. W. M. Beovulf, nebst den Fragmenten Finnsburg u.

Valdere. Cassel u. Goettingen.

1875 ETTMUELLER, L. Carmen de Be['o]vulfi, Gautarum regis, rebus

praeclare gestis atque interitu, quale fuerit antequam in manus

interpolatoris, monachi Vestsaxonici, inciderat. (Zuerich. University

Programme. The additions of the "interpolator" being omitted, the

edition contains 2896 lines only.) Reviews: Schoenbach, _A.f.d.A._ III,

36-46; ++Suchier, _Jenaer Literatur-Zeitung_, XLVII, 1876, 732.

1876 ARNOLD, T. Beowulf, with a translation, notes and appendix.

London. Reviews (unfavourable): Sweet, _Academy_, X, 1876, 588;

Wuelker, _Lit. Cbl._ 1877, 665-6, and _Anglia_, I, 177-86.

1879 WUELKER, R. P. Kleinere angelsaechsische Dichtungen. Halle,

Leipzig. (Finnsburg, pp. 6-7.)

1883 MOELLER, H. Das altenglische Volksepos in der urspruenglichen

strophischen Form. I. Abhandlungen. II. Texte. Kiel. (Containing only

those parts of the Finn-story and of Beowulf which Moeller regarded as

"genuine," in strophic form.) Reviews: Heinzel, _A.f.d.A._ X, 215-33

(important); Schoenbach, _Z.f.oe.G._ XXXV, 37-46.

1883 WUELKER, R. P. Das Beowulfslied, nebst den kleineren epischen ...

stuecken. Kassel. (In the second edit. of Grein's _Bibliothek der ags.

Poesie._) Review: Koelbing, _Engl. Stud._ VII, 482 _etc._

1883 HARRISON, J. A. and SHARP, R. Beowulf. Boston, U.S.A. (++1883, on

the basis of Heyne's edition; with Finnsburg.) Reviews: York Powell,

_Academy_, XXVI, 1884, 220-1; reply by Harrison, 308-9; by York Powell,

327; Koelbing, _Engl. Stud._ VII, 482; Bright, _Literaturblatt_, 1884,

221--3.

1892. Third edit.

1894. Fourth edit. Reviews: Wuelker, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, V, 65-7;

Gloede, _Engl. Stud._ XX, 417-18.

1884 HOLDER, A. Beowulf, II. Berichtigter Text u. Woerterbuch. Freiburg

u. Tuebingen. Reviews: York Powell, _Academy_, XXVI, 1884, 220-1;

Wuelker, _Lit. Cbl._ 1885, 1008-9; Krueger, _Literaturblatt_, 1884,

468-70.

1899. 2 Aufl. [with suggestions of Kluge and Cosijn]. Reviews:

Trautmann, _Anglia, Beiblatt,_ X, 257; Wuelfing, _Engl. Stud._

XXIX, 278-9; Holthausen, _Literaturblatt_, 1900, 60-2 (important

corrections).

1888 HEYNE, M. and SOCIN, A. [Fifth edit. of Heyne's text.] Paderborn

u. Muenster. Reviews: Koeppel, _Engl. Stud._ XIII, 466-72; Heinzel,

_A.f.d.A._ XV, 189-94; Sievers, _Z.f.d.Ph._ XXI, 354-65 (very important

corrections); Schroeer, _Literaturblatt_, 1889, 170-1.

{389}

1898. 6 Aufl. Reviews: Trautmann, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, X, 257;

Holthausen, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, X, 265; Sarrazin, _Engl. Stud._

XXVIII, 408-10; Jantzen, _Archiv_, CIII, 175-6.

1903. 7 Aufl. Reviews: Holthausen, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XVIII,

193-4; Klaeber, the same, 289-91; Kruisinga, _Engl. Stud._ XXXV,

401-2; v. Grienberger, _Z.f.oe.G._ LVI, 744-61 (very full); E.

Kock, _A.f.n.F._ XXII, 215 (brief).

1894 WYATT, A. J. Beowulf, edited with textual footnotes, index of

proper names, and glossary. (Text of Finnsburg.) Cambridge. Reviews:

Bradley, _Academy_, XLVI, 1894, 69-70; Wuelker, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, V,

65-7; Brenner, _Engl. Stud._ XX, 296; Zupitza, _Archiv_, XCIV, 326-9.

1898. Second edit. Reviews: Trautmann, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, X, 257;

Sarrazin, _Engl. Stud._ XXVIII, 407-8.

1902 KLUGE, F. Angelsaechsisches Lesebuch. 3 Aufl. Halle. (XXX. Der

Ueberfall von Finnsburuh, pp. 127-8.)

1903 TRAUTMANN, M. Finn u. Hildebrand. _Bonner Beitraege_, VII. (Text,

translation and comment on the Episode and Fragment.) Reviews: Binz,

_Z.f.d.Ph._ XXXVII, 529-36; Jantzen, _Die Neueren Sprachen_, XI, 543-8;

_Neue philol. Rundschau_, 1903, 619-21 (signed -tz- ? Jantzen). Some

additional notes by Trautmann, "Nachtraegliches zu Finn u. Hildebrand"

appeared in _Bonner Beitraege_, XVII, 122.

1904 TRAUTMANN, M. Das Beowulflied ... das Finn-Bruchstueck u. die

Waldhere-Bruchstuecke. Bearbeiteter Text u. deutsche Uebersetzung.

_Bonner Beitraege_, XVI. Reviews: Klaeber, _M.L.N._ XX, 83-7 (weighty);

Eckhardt, _Engl. Stud._ XXXVII, 401-3; Schuecking, _Archiv_, CXV,

417-21; Barnouw, _Museum_, XIV, 96-8; _Neue philologische Rundschau_ (?

by Jantzen), 1905, 549-50.

1905-6 HOLTHAUSEN, F. Beowulf nebst dem Finnsburg-Bruchstueck. I.

Texte. II. Einleitung, Glossar u. Anmerkungen. Heidelberg. Reviews:

Lawrence, _J.E.G.Ph._ VII, 125-9; Klaeber, _M.L.N._ XXIV, 94-5;

Schuecking, _Engl. Stud._ XXXIX, 94-111 (weighty); Deutschbein,

_Archiv_, CXXI, 162-4; v. Grienberger, _Z.f.oe.G._ 1908, LIX, 333-46

(giving an elaborate list of etymological parallels); Barnouw,

_Museum_, XIV, 169-70; Wuelker, _D.L.Z._ 1906, 285-6; ++Jantzen, _Neue

philologische Rundschau_, 1907, 18.

1908-9. 2 Aufl., nebst den kleineren Denkmaelern der Heldensage,

Finnsburg, Waldere, Deor, Widsith, Hildebrand. Reviews: Eichler,

_Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXI, 129-33; XXII, 161-5; Schuecking, _Engl.

Stud._ XLII, 108-11; Brandl, _Archiv_, CXXI, 473, CXXIV, 210; Binz,

_Literaturblatt_, XXXII, 1911, 53-5: see also Koeppel, _Anglia,

Beiblatt_, XXIII, 297.

1912-13. 3 Aufl.

1914-19. 4 Aufl. Reviews: Binz, _Literaturblatt_, XLI, 1920,

316-17; Fischer, _Engl. Stud._ LIV, 404-6.

1908 SCHUECKING, L. L. Beowulf [8th edit. of Heyne's text]. Paderborn.

Reviews: Lawrence, _M.L.N._ XXV, 155-7; Klaeber, _Engl. Stud._ XXXIX,

425-33 (weighty); Imelmann, _D.L.Z._ 1909, 995 (contains important

original contributions); v. Grienberger, _Z.f.oe.G._ LX, 1089; Boer,

_Museum_, XVI, 139 (brief).

1910. 9 Aufl. Reviews: Sedgefield, _Engl. Stud._ XLIII, 267-9; F.

Wild, _Z.f.oe.G._ LXIV, 153-5.

1913. 10 Aufl. Reviews: Klaeber, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXIV, 289-91;

_Engl. Stud._ XLIX, 424; ++Degenhart, _Blaetter f.

gymnasialschulwesen_, LI, 130; E. A. Kock, _A.f.n.F._ XXXII, 222-3;

Holthausen, _Z.f.d.Ph._ XLVIII, 127-31 (weighty).

1918. 11, 12 Aufl. Reviews: Bjoerkman, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXX,

121-2, 180; Fischer, _Engl. Stud._ LIII, 338-9.

{390}

1910 SEDGEFIELD, W. J. Beowulf, edited with Introduction, Bibliography,

Notes, Glossary and Appendices. Manchester. Reviews: Thomas, _M.L.R._

VI, 266-8; Lawrence, _J.E.G.Ph._ X, 633-40; Wild, _Anglia, Beiblatt_,

XXIII, 253-60; Klaeber, _Engl. Stud._ XLIV, 119-26; Brandl, _Archiv_,

CXXVI, 279.

1913. Second edit. Reviews: _M.L.R._ IX, 429; Lawrence, _J.E.G.Ph._

XIV, 609-13; Klaeber, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXV, 166-8.

1912 Text of the Finn episode given in MEYER, W., Beitraege zur

Geschichte der Eroberung Englands durch die Angelsachsen.

1914 CHAMBERS, R. W. Beowulf with the Finnsburg Fragment, ed. by A. J.

WYATT. New edition, revised. Cambridge. Reviews: Jones, _M.L.R._ XI,

230-1: Lawrence, _J.E.G.Ph._ XIV, 609-13; Bright, _M.L.N._ XXXI, 188-9;

Schuecking, _Engl. Stud._ LV, 88-100.

1915 DICKINS, B. Runic and Heroic Poems (Text of Finnsburg with Notes).

Cambridge. Review: Mawer, _M.L.R._ XII, 82-4.

1917 MACKIE, W. L. The Fight at Finnsburg (Introduction, Text and

Notes). _J.E.G.Ph._ XVI, 250-73.

1919 SCHUECKING, L. L. Kleines angelsaechsisches Dichterbuch. [Includes

Finnsburg Fragment, Finnsburg Episode and "Beowulf's Return" (ll.

1888-2199).] Reviews: Binz, _Literaturblatt_, XLI, 1920, pp. 315-16;

Imelmann, _D.L.Z._ XL, 1919, 423-5; Fischer, _Engl. Stud._ LIV, 1920,

302-3.

1920 Text of Finnsburg Fragment and Episode, with commentary, in

IMELMANN'S "Forschungen zur altenglischen Poesie."

An edition of Beowulf by Prof. F. KLAEBER is in the press.

s. 5. CONCORDANCES, etc.

1896 HOLDER, A. Beowulf, vol. II_b_, Wortschatz. Freiburg. Review:

Brandl, _A.f.d.A._ XXIII, 107.

1911 COOK, A. S. Concordance to Beowulf. Halle. Reviews: Klaeber,

_J.E.G.Ph._ XI, 277-9; Garnett, _Amer. Jnl. Philol._ XXXIII, 86-7.

s. 6. TRANSLATIONS (INCLUDING EARLY SUMMARIES)

1881 WUELKER, R. P. Besprechung der Beowulfuebersetzungen, _Anglia_,

IV, _Anzeiger_, 69-80.

1886 GUMMERE, F. B. The translation of Beowulf, and the relations of

ancient and modern English verse, _Amer. Jour. of Phil._ VII, 46-78. (A

weighty argument for translation into "the original metre.")

1891 GARNETT, J. M. The translation of A.S. poetry, _Pub. Mod. Lang.

Assoc. Amer._ VI, 95-105. (Agreeing in the main with Gummere.)

1897 FRYE, P. H. The translation of Beowulf, _M.L.N._ XII, 79-82.

(Advocating blank verse.)

1898 FULTON, E. On translating A.S. poetry, _Pub. Mod. Lang. Assoc.

Amer._ XIII, 286-96. (Recommending an irregular four-accent line.)

1903 GARNETT, J. M. Recent translations of O.E. poetry, _Pub. Mod.

Lang. Assoc. Amer._ XVIII, 445-58.

1903 TINKER, C. B. The translations of Beowulf. A critical

bibliography. _Yale Studies in English_. New York. Reviews: Klaeber,

_J.E.G.Ph._ V, 116-8; Binz, _Anglia, Beiblatt,_ XVI, 291-2.

1909 CHILD, G. C. "Gummere's Oldest English Epic," _M.L.N._ XXIV,

253-4. (A criticism advocating prose translation.)

1910 GUMMERE, F. B. Translation of Old English Verse, _M.L.N._ XXV,

61-3. (Advocating alliterative verse.) Reply by CHILD, _M.L.N._ XXV,

157-8. See also reviews of Gummere, under year 1909, below.

{391}

1918 LEONARD, W. E. Beowulf and the Niebelungen couplet, _Univ. of

Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature_, II, 99-152.

1805 TURNER, SHARON. History of the manners ... poetry ... and language

of the Anglo-Saxons. London. (From p. 398 to p. 408 is a summary, with

translations, of Beowulf, Prol.-VIII. Turner was misled as to the

subject of the poem, because a leaf had been misplaced in the MS, so

that the account of the fighting between Grendel and Beowulf (ll.

740-82) occurred immediately after l. 91. The struggle between Beowulf

and an (unnamed) adversary being thus made to follow the account of

Hrothgar's court at Heorot, Turner was led to suppose that the poem

narrated the attempt of Beowulf to avenge _on Hrothgar_ the feud for a

homicide he had committed. "The transition," Turner not unreasonably

complains, "is rather violent." The correct placing of the shifted leaf

is due to Thorkelin.)

1815 THORKELIN, G. J. [Latin version in his edition, q.v.] The

reviewers gave summaries of the poem, with translations of portions of

it: English in the _Monthly Review_, LXXXI, 1816, 516-23 (less

inaccurate than Turner's summary); Danish in the _Dansk

Litteratur-Tidende_, 1815, 401-32, 437-46, and by Grundtvig in the

_Nyeste Skilderie_ (see below, s. 7); Swedish in _Iduna_, VII, 1817,

133-59.

1819 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Stykker af Skjoldung-Kvadet eller Bjovulfs

Minde, _Dannevirke_, IV, 234-62.

1820 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Bjowulfs Drape, Kjoebenhavn. (Free rhymed

translation of Beowulf: Finnsburg rendered into short lines, unrhymed:

Introduction and most important critical notes.) Review: J. Grimm in

_Goett. Anzeigen_, 1823 = _Kleinere Schriften_, IV, 178-86. For second

edit., see 1865.

1820 TURNER, SHARON. History of the Anglo-Saxons ... third edit.

London. (Vol. III, pp. 325-48, contains a summary, with translations,

of the earlier part of the poem, much less inaccurate than that of

1805.)

1826 CONYBEARE, J. J. Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon poetry. London. (Pp.

35-136 contain a summary of Beowulf, with blank verse transl. and the

corresponding text in A.S. and Latin; pp. 175-82, Finnsburg, text with

transl. into Latin and into English verse.)

1832 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Nordens mythologi. Anden Udgave. Kioebenhavn.

(Pp. 571-94 give a summary of the Beowulf-stories. This was, of course,

wanting in the first edit. of 1808.)

1837 KEMBLE, J. M. Translation ... with ... glossary, preface and

notes. London. (The "postscript to the preface" in which Kemble

supplemented and corrected the "Historical Preface" to his edition of

1833, is the basis of the mythological explanations of Beowulf as an

Anglian god, Beowa.)

1839 LEO, H. [Summary with translation of extracts.] See s. 8, below.

1840 ETTMUELLER, L. Beowulf, stabreimend uebersetzt, mit Einleitung und

Anmerkungen (Finnsburg, pp. 36-8). Zuerich.

1845 LONGFELLOW, H. W. The Poets and Poetry of Europe. Philadelphia.

(Pp. 8-10 contain transl. of extracts from Beowulf.)

1847 SCHALDEMOSE, F. [Danish transl. of Beowulf and Finnsburg, in his

edit., q.v.]

1849 WACKERBARTH, A. D. Beowulf, translated into English verse. London.

(Imitation of Scott's metre.)

1855 THORPE, B. [In his edit., q.v.]

1857 UHLAND, L. [Prose transl. of Finnsburg.] _Germania_, II, 354-5.

{392}

1857 GREIN, C. W. M. Dichtungen der Angelsachsen, stabreimend

uebersetzt. Goettingen. (Vol. I, pp. 222--308, Beowulf, trans. into

alliterative verse.)

1883. 2 Aufl. [Incorporating Grein's manuscript corrections, seen

through the press by Wuelker.] Cassel. Review: Krueger, _Engl.

Stud._ VIII, 139--42.

1859 SIMROCK, K. Beowulf uebersetzt u. erlaeutert. Stuttgart u.

Augsburg. (Alliterative verse: Finnsburg Fragment inserted after l.

1124.)

1859 SANDRAS, G. S. De carminibus anglo-saxonicis Caedmoni adjudicatis.

Paris. (Pp. 8--10 contain extract from Beowulf and Latin transl.)

1861 HAIGH, D. H. (Prose transl. of Finnsburg.) In _Anglo-Saxon Sagas,_

pp. 32--3, q.v.

1863 HEYNE, M. Beowulf uebersetzt. Paderborn. (Blank verse.) Review:

Holtzmann, _Germania_, VIII, 506--7.

1897--8. 2 Aufl. Paderborn. Reviews: Holthausen, _Archiv_, CIII,

373--6; Wuelker, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, IX, 1; Jantzen,_ Engl.

Stud._ XXV,

271--3; Loehner, _Z.f.oe.G._ XLIX, 563.

1915. 3 Aufl. Paderborn.

1865 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Bjovulfs-Drapen. Anden Udgave.

1872 VON WOLZOGEN, H. Beovulf aus dem ags. Leipzig. (Verse.)

1876 ARNOLD, T. [In his edit., q.v.]

1877 BOTKINE, L. Beowulf traduite en francais. Havre. (Prose: some

omissions.) Review: Koerner, _Engl. Stud._ II, 248--51.

1881 ZINSSER, G. Der Kampf Beowulfs mit Grendel [vv. 1--836] als Probe

einer metrischen Uebersetzung. Saarbruecken. Reviews: _Archiv_, LXVIII,

446; Krueger, _Engl. Stud_. VII, 370--2.

1881 LUMSDEN, H. W. Beowulf ... transl. into modern rhymes. London.

(Some omissions.) Reviews: _Athenaeum_, April 1881, p. 587; Garnett,

_Amer. Jour. of Phil._ II, 355--61; Wuelker, _Anglia_, IV, _Anzeiger_,

69--80.

1883. ++Second edit. Review: York Powell, _Academy_, XXVI, 1884,

pp. 220--1.

1882 SCHUHMANN, G. Beovulf, antichissimo poema epico de' popoli

germanici. _Giornale Napoletano di filosofia e lettere_. Anno IV, vol.

7, 25--36, 175--190. (A summary only.)

1882 GARNETT, J. M. Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg, translated.

Boston, U.S.A. Reviews: _Nation_ (New York), No. 919, 1883; Harrison,

_Amer. Jour. of Phil._ IV, 84--6, reply by Garnett, 243--6; Schipper,

_Anglia_, VI, _Anzeiger_, 120--4; Krueger, _Engl. Stud_. VIII, 133--8,

and (second edit.) IX, 151; Bright, _Literaturblatt_, 1883, 386--7.

1885. Second edit., revised.

1900. Fourth edit.

1883 GRION, GIUSTO. Beovulf, poema epico angl[`o]sassone del VII

secolo, tradotto e illustrato. In the _Atti della reale Accademia

Lucchese_, XXII. (First Italian translation.) Review: Krueger, _Engl.

Stud._ IX, 64--77.

1889 ++WICKBERG, R. Beowulf, en fornengelsk hjaeltedikt oeversatt.

Westervik.

1914. ++Second edit. Upsala. Review: Kock, _A.f.n.F._ XXXII,

223--4.

1892 HALL, JOHN LESSLIE. Beowulf translated. (Verse, with notes.)

Boston, U.S.A. Reviews: _M.L.N._ VII, 128, 1892 (brief mention);

Miller, _Viking Club Year Book_, I, 91--2; Holthausen, _Anglia,

Beiblatt_, IV, 33--6; Gloede, _Engl. Stud._ XIX, 257--60.

1893. ++Student's edit.

1892 (1891) EARLE, JOHN. The deeds of Beowulf. Oxford. (Prose

translation, somewhat spoilt by its artificial and sometimes grotesque

vocabulary; very valuable introduction, with summary of the controversy

to date, {393} and notes.) Reviews: _Athenaeum_, 1 Oct. 1892; Koeppel,

_Engl. Stud._ XVIII, 93-5 (fair, though rather severe).

1893 HOFFMANN, P. Be['o]wulf ... aus dem angelsaechsischen uebertragen.

Zuellichau. (In the measure of the Nibelungenlied; ind. Finnsburg.)

Reviews (mostly unfavourable): Shipley, _M.L.N._ IX, 121-3, 1894;

Wuelker, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, V, 67; Wuelker, _Lit. Cbl._ 1894, p. 1930;

Gloede, _Engl. Stud._ XIX, 412-5; ++Detter, _Oester. Literaturblatt_,

V, 9; ++Marold, _Deut. Literaturblatt_, XXIII, 332.

1900. ++Second edit. Hannover.

1895 MORRIS, W. and WYATT, A. J. The Tale of Beowulf. Kelmscott Press,

Hammersmith. (Verse: archaic vocabulary.)

1898. New edit. Review: Hulme, _M.L.N._ XV, 22-6, 1900.

1896 SIMONS, L. Be['o]wulf ... vertaald in stafrijm en met inleiding en

aanteekeningen. Gent (_Koninklijke vlaamsche Academie_). Reviews:

Gloede, _Engl. Stud._ XXV, 270-1; Uhlenbeck, _Museum_ (Groningen), V,

217-8.

1898 STEINECK, H. Altenglische Dichtungen (Beowulf, Elene, u.a.) in

wortgetreuer Uebersetzung. Leipzig. (Prose, line for line.) Reviews:

Binz, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, IX, 220-2; Holthausen, _Archiv_, CIII, 376-8

(both very unfavourable).

1901 HALL, J. R. CLARK. Beowulf and the fight at Finnsburg. A

translation into modern English prose. London. Reviews: _Athenaeum_,

1901, July, p. 56; _Academy_, LX, 1901, 342; Stedman, _Viking Club Year

Book_, III, 72-4; Tinker, _J.E.G.Ph._ IV, 379-81; Holthausen, _Anglia,

Beiblatt_, XIII, 225-8; Dibelius, _Archiv_, CIX, 403-4; Vietor, _Die

neueren Sprachen_, XI, 439; Wuelker, _Lit. Cbl._ 1902, 30-1 ("sehr zu

empfehlen").

1911 (q.v.). New edit., with considerable additions.

1902 TINKER, C. B. Beowulf translated out of the Old English. New York.

(Prose.) Reviews: Klaeber, _J.E.G.Ph._ V, 91-3; Holthausen, _Anglia,

Beiblatt_, XIV, 7.

1903 ++BJOERKMAN, E. Swedish transl. (prose) of Beowulf, Part II (in

Schueck's _Vaerldslitteraturen_, with introd. by Schueck).

1903-4 TRAUTMANN, M., in his editions, q.v.

1904 CHILD, C. G. Beowulf and the Finnesburh Fragment translated.

London and Boston. Reviews: Grattan, _M.L.R._ III, 303-4 ("a good prose

translation which steers an even course between pseudo-archaisms and

modern colloquialisms"); Miller, _Viking Club Year Book_, I, 91-2;

Klaeber, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XVI, 225-7; Brandl, _Archiv_, CXXI, 473.

1904 ++HANSEN, A. Transl. into Danish of Beowulf, ll. 491-924, _Danske

Tidsskrift_.

1905 VOGT, P. Beowulf ... uebersetzt. Halle. (Text rearranged according

to theories of interpolation: Finnsburg Fragment translated, following

Moeller's text.) Reviews: Binz, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXI, 289-91;

Eichler, _Z.f.oe.G._ LVII, 908-10; Klaeber, _Archiv_, CXVII, 408-10:

Jantzen, _Lit. Cbl._ 1906, 257-8.

1906 GERING, H. Beowulf nebst dem Finnsburg-Bruchstueck uebersetzt.

Heidelberg. (Verse.) Reviews: Lawrence, _J.E.G.Ph._ VII, 129-33

("thoroughly scholarly"); Jantzen, _Lit. Cbl._ 1907, 64-5; Ries,

_A.f.d.A._ XXXIII, 143-7; Binz, _Literaturblatt_, XXXI, 397-8

("Fliessend und ungezwungen, sinngetreu ..."); ++Zehme,

_Monatsschrift_, XIV, 597-600; v. Grienberger, _Z.f.oe.G._ 1908, LIX,

423-8.

1914. 2 Aufl.

1907 HUYSHE, W. Beowulf ... translated into ... prose ("Appendix: The

Fight at Finn's burgh"). London. ("Translation," to quote Clark Hall,

"apparently such as might have been compiled from previous translations

by a person ignorant of Ags. Some original mistakes.") Reviews:

_Athenaeum_, 1907, II, 96 ("Mr Huyshe displays sad ignorance of Old

{394} English ... but an assiduous study of the work of his

predecessors has preserved him from misrepresenting seriously the

general sense of the text"); _Notes and Queries_, Ser. X, vol. VIII,

58; Garnett, _Amer. Jnl. Philol._ XXIX, 344-6; Klaeber, _Anglia,

Beiblatt_, XIX, 257.

1909 GUMMERE, F. B. The oldest English Epic. Beowulf, Finnsburg,

Waldere, Deor and the German Hildebrand, translated in the original

metres. New York. Reviews: _Athenaeum_, 1909, II, 151; Trautmann,

_Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXXIII, 353-60 (metrical debate); Sedgefield,

_Engl. Stud._ XLI, 402-3 (discussing possibility of reproducing in Mod.

Eng. the Old Eng. alliterative verse-rhythm); Derocquigny, _Revue

Germanique_, VI, 356-7; see also above, p. 390.

1910 HANSEN, ADOLF. Bjovulf, oversat af A. Hansen, og efter hans doed

g[oa]et efter og fuldfoert samt forsynet med en inledning og en

oversaettelse af brudstykket om kampen i Finsborg, af Viggo Julius von

Holstein Rathlou; udgivet ved Oskar Hansen. Koebenhavn og Kristiania.

An account of this translation, by v. Holstein Rathlou, in

_Tilskueren_, June, 1910, pp. 557-62; Review: Olrik, _Danske Studier_,

1910, 112-13.

1911 CLARK HALL, J. R. Beowulf and the Finnsburg Fragment. A

translation into Modern English Prose. London. Reviews: Mawer, _M.L.R._

VI, 542 ("probably the best working translation that we have, enriched

by a valuable introduction and excellent appendices"); _Academy_, 1911,

I, 225-6; Bjoerkman, _Engl. Stud._ XLIV, 127-8; _Archiv_, CXXVI, 492-3;

Binz, _Literaturblatt_, XXXII, 232.

1912 PIERQUIN, H. Le po[`e]me Anglo-Saxon de Beowulf. (An extraordinary

piece of work; the version mainly follows Kemble's text, which is

reproduced, but with many misprints: Kemble's _Saxons in England_ is

translated by way of introduction. The Finnsburg Fragment is included.)

Reviews: _Academy_, 1912, II, 509-10 (seems to regard Pierquin as

author of _Les Saxons en Angleterre_); Sedgefield, _M.L.R._ VIII,

550-2; Klaeber, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXIV, 138-9; Imelmann, _D.L.Z._

XXXIV (1913), 1062-3 (very unfavourable); ++Luick, _Mitt. d. inst. f.

oesterr. gesch.-forsch._ XXXVI, 401; ++Barat, _Moyen [^A]ge_, XXVI

(see. ser. XVII), 298-302.

1913 KIRTLAN, E. J. The Story of Beowulf. London. (A fair specimen of

the less scholarly translations; nicely got up and not exceedingly

incorrect.) Reviews: _Athenaeum_, 1914, II, 71; Klaeber, _Anglia,

Beiblatt_, XXVII, 129-31.

1914 CLARK HALL, J. R. Beowulf: a metrical translation. Cambridge. (Not

so successful as the same writer's prose translation.) Reviews:

Sedgefield, _M.L.R._ X, 387-9 (discussing the principles of metrical

translation); Klaeber, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXVI, 170-2.

1915 OLIVERO, F. Traduzioni dalla Poesia Anglo-sassone. Bari. (Pp.

73-119, extracts from Beowulf.) Review: _M.L.R._ XI, 509.

1916 ++BENEDETTI, A. La canzone di Beowulf, poema epico anglo-sassone

del VI secolo. Versione italiana, con introduzione e note. Palermo.

1918 LEONARD, W. E. [Specimen, Passus IX, of forthcoming transl., in

the measure of the Nibelungenlied.] In _Univ. of Wisconsin Studies_,

II, 149-52; see above.

A translation of Beowulf into the Norwegian "landsmaal," by H.

RYTTER, will appear shortly.

Popular paraphrases of Beowulf are not included in the above list. An

account will be found in Tinker's _Translations_ of those of E. H. Jones

(in COX'S _Popular Romances_, 1871); J. Gibb, 1881-4; Waegner-MacDowall,

1883 _etc._; Miss Z. A. Ragozin, 1898, 1900; A. J. Church, 1898; Miss C. L.

Thomson, 1899, 1904. Mention may also be made of those of ++F. A. Turner,

1894; H. E. Marshall, 1908; T. Cartwright, 1908; Prof. J. H. Cox, 1910. An

illustrated summary of {395} the _Beowulf_ story was issued by Mr W. T.

Stead in his penny "Books for the Bairns." The versions of Miss Thomson and

Prof. Cox are both good. The paraphrase in the _Canadian Monthly_, II, 83

(1872), attributed in several bibliographies to Earle, is assuredly not the

work of that scholar: it is an inaccurate version based upon Jones. An

account will be found in Tinker of the German paraphrase of Therese Dahn,

1883 _etc._; mention may also be made of those of J. Arnheim, 1871; ++ F.

Baessler, sec. edit. 1875 (praised highly by Klaeber in _J.E.G.Ph._ V,

118).

s. 7. TEXTUAL CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION

1815 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Et Par Ord om det nys udkomne angelsaxiske

Digt. _Nyeste Skilderie af Kjoebenhavn_, No. 60 _etc._, cols. 945, 998,

1009, 1025, 1045; Nok et Par Ord om Bjovulfs Drape, 1106, 1121, 1139

(comment upon Thorkelin's text and translation).

1815 THORKELIN, G. J. Reply to Grundtvig in _Nyeste Skilderie_, cols.

1057, 1073. (There were further articles in the same magazine, but they

were purely personal.)

1820 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Emendations to Thorkelin's text, added to

_Bjowulfs Drape_, 267-312.

1826 CONYBEARE, J. J. Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon poetry. London.

(Beowulf and "Finnsborough," pp. 30-182.)

1859 BOUTERWEK, K. W. Zur Kritik des Beowulfliedes, _Z.f.d.A._ XI,

59-113.

1859 DIETRICH, F. Rettungen, _Z.f.d.A._ XI, 409-20.

1863 HOLTZMANN, A. Zu Beowulf, _Germania_, VIII, 489-97. (Incl.

Finnsburg.)

1865 GREIN, C. W. M. Zur Textkritik der angelsaechsischen Dichter:

Finnsburg, _Germania_, X, 422.

1868-9 BUGGE, SOPHUS. Spredte iagttagelser vedkommende de oldengelske

digte om Be['o]wulf og Waldere; _Tidskrift for Philologi og

Paedagogik_, VIII, 40-78 and 287-307 (incl. Finnsburg, 304-5).

Important.

1871 RIEGER, M. Zum Beowulf, _Z.f.d.Ph._ III, 381-416.

1873 BUGGE, S. Zum Beowulf, _Z.f.d.Ph._ IV, 192-224.

1880 KOELBING, E. Kleine Beitraege (Beowulf, 168, 169), _Engl. Stud._

III, 92 _etc._

1882 KLUGE, F. Sprachhistorische Miscellen (Beowulf, 63, 1027, 1235,

1267), _P.B.B._ VIII, 532-5.

1882 COSIJN, P. J. Zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ VIII, 568-74.

1883 SIEVERS, E. Zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ IX, 135-44, 370.

1883 KLUGE, F. Zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ IX, 187-92.

1883 KRUEGER, TH. Zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ IX, 571-8.

1889 MILLER, T. The position of Grendel's arm in Heorot, _Anglia_, XII,

396-400.

1890 JOSEPH, E. Zwei Versversetzungen im Beowulf, _Z.f.d.Ph._ XXII,

385-97.

1891 SCHROEER, A. Zur texterklaerung des Beowulf, _Anglia_, XIII,

333-48.

1891-2 COSIJN, P. J. Aanteekeningen op den Beowulf. Leiden.

(Important.) Reviews: Luebke, _A.f.d.A._ XIX, 341-2; Holthausen,

_Literaturblatt_, 1895, p. 82.

1892 SIEVERS, E. Zur texterklaerung des Beowulf, _Anglia_, XIV, 133-46.

1895 BRIGHT, J. W. Notes on the Beowulf (ll. 30, 306, 386-7, 623, 737),

_M.L.N._ X, 43-4.

1899 TRAUTMANN, M. Berichtigungen, Vermutungen und Erklaerungen zum

Beowulf (ll. 1-1215). _Bonner Beitraege zur Anglistik_, II, 121-92.

Reviews: Binz, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XIV, 358-60; Holthausen,

_Literaturblatt_, 1900, 62-4 (important). See Sievers, _P.B.B._ XXVII,

572; XXVIII, 271.

1901 KLAEBER, F. A few Beowulf notes (ll. 459, 847 _etc._, 1206, 3024

_etc._, 3171); _M.L.N._ XVI, 14-18.

{396}

1902 KLAEBER, F. Zum Beowulf (497-8; 1745-7), _Archiv_, CVIII, 368-70.

1902 KLAEBER, F. Beowulf's character, _M.L.N._ XVII, 162.

1903 KRACKOW, O. Zu Beowulf, 1225, 2222, _Archiv_, CXI, 171-2.

1904 BRYANT, F. E. Beowulf, 62, _M.L.N._ XIX, 121-2.

1904 ABBOTT, W. C. Hrothulf, _M.L.N._ XIX, 122-5. (Abbott suggests that

Hrothulf is the name--missing in whole or part from l. 62--of the

husband of the daughter of Healfdene. This suggestion is quite

untenable, for many reasons: Hrothulf (Rolf Kraki) is a Dane, and the

missing husband is a Swede: but the article led to a long controversy

between Bryant and Klaeber; see _M.L.N._ XX, 9-11; XXI, 143, 255; XXII,

96, 160. Klaeber is undoubtedly right.)

1904 KRAPP, G. B. Miscellaneous Notes: _Sc[=u]rheard_; _M.L.N._ XIX,

234.

1904 SIEVERS, E. Zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ XXIX, 305-31. (Criticism of

Trautmann's emendations.)

1904 KOCK, E. A. Interpretations and Emendations of Early English

Texts: III (Beowulf), _Anglia_, XXVII, 218-37.

1904 SIEVERS, E. Zum Beowulf (l. 5, Criticism of Kock), _P.B.B._ XXIX,

560-76. Reply by Kock, _Anglia_, XXVIII (1905), 140-2.

1905 TRAUTMANN, M. Auch zum Beowulf: ein gruss an herren Eduard

Sievers, _Bonner Beitraege zur Anglistik_, XVII, 143-74. (Reply to

Sievers' criticism of Trautmann's conjectural emendations.) Review:

Klaeber, _M.L.N._ XXII, 252.

1905 SWIGGETT, G. L. Notes on the Finnsburg fragment, _M.L.N._ XX,

169-71.

1905 KLAEBER, F. Notizen zur texterklaerung des Beowulf, _Anglia_,

XXVIII, 439-47 (incl. Finnsburg); Zum Beowulf, the same, 448-56.

1905 KLAEBER, F. Bemerkungen zum Beowulf, _Archiv_, CXV, 178-82. (Incl.

Finnsburg.)

1905 HOLTHAUSEN, F. Beitraege zur Erklaerung des altengl. epos. I, Zum

Beowulf; II, Zum Finnsburg-fragment; _Z.f.d.Ph._ XXXVII, 113-25.

1905-6 KLAEBER, F. Studies in the Textual Interpretation of "Beowulf,"

_Mod. Phil._ III, 235-66, 445-65 (Most important).

1906 CHILD, C. G. Beowulf, 30, 53, 132 (i.e. 1323), 2957, _M.L.N._ XXI,

175-7, 198-200.

1906 HORN, W. Textkritische Bemerkungen (Beowulf, 69 _etc._), _Anglia_,

XXIX, 130-1.

1906 KLAEBER, F. Notizen zum Beowulf, _Anglia_, XXIX, 378-82.

1907 KLAEBER, F. Minor Notes on the Beowulf, _J.E.G.Ph._ VI, 190-6.

1908 TINKER, C. B. Notes on Beowulf, _M.L.N._ XXIII, 239-40.

1908 KLAEBER, F. Zum Beowulf, _Engl. Stud._ XXXIX, 463-7.

1909 KLAEBER, F. Textual Notes on Beowulf, _J.E.G.Ph._ VIII, 254-9.

1910 VON GRIENBERGER, T. Bemerkungen zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ XXXVI,

77-101. (Incl. Finnsburg.)

1910 SIEVERS, E. Gegenbemerkungen zum Beowulf, _P.B.B._ XXXVI, 397-434.

(Incl. Finnsburg.)

1910 SEDGEFIELD, W. J. Notes on "Beowulf," _M.L.R._ V, 286-8.

1910 TRAUTMANN, M. Beitraege zu einem kuenftigen "Sprachschatz der

altenglischen Dichter," _Anglia_, XXXIII, 276-9 (_gedraeg_).

1911 BLACKBURN, F. A. Note on Beowulf, 1591-1617, _Mod. Phil._ IX,

555-66. (Argues that a loose leaf has been misplaced and the order of

events thus disturbed.)

1911 KLAEBER, F. Zur Texterklaerung des Beowulf, vv. 767, 1129,

_Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXII, 372-4.

1912 HART, J. M. Beowulf, 168-9, _M.L.N._ XXVII, 198.

{397}

1912-14 GREIN, C. W. M. Sprachschatz der angelsaechsischen dichter.

Unter mitwirkung von F. Holthausen neu herausgegeben von J. J. Koehler.

Heidelberg. Reviews: Trautmann, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXIV, 36-43;

Schuecking, _Engl. Stud._ XLIX, 113-5.

1915 CHAMBERS, R. W. The "Shifted leaf" in Beowulf, _M.L.R._ X, 37-41.

(Points out that the alleged "confused order of events" is that also

followed in the Grettis saga.)

1916 GREEN, A. The opening of the episode of Finn in Beowulf, _Pub.

Mod. Lang. Assoc. Amer._ XXXI, 759-97.

1916 BRIGHT, J. W. Anglo-Saxon _umbor_ and _seld-guma_, _M.L.N._ XXXI,

82-4; Beowulf, 489-90, _M.L.N._ XXXI, 217-23.

1917 GREEN, A. An episode in Ongentheow's fall, _M.L.R._ XII, 340-3.

1917 HOLLANDER, L. M. Beowulf, 33, _M.L.N._ XXXII, 246-7. (Suggests the

reading _[=i]tig_.)

1917 HOLTHAUSEN, F. Zu altenglischen Denkmaelern--Beowulf, 1140, _Engl.

Stud._ LI, 180.

1918 HUBBARD, F. G. Beowulf, 1598, 1996, 2026: uses of the impersonal

verb _geweorthan_, _J.E.G.Ph._ XVII, 119.

1918 KOCK, E. A. Interpretations and emendations of early English

Texts: IV, Beowulf, _Anglia_, XLII, 99-124. (Important.)

1918 ++KOCK, E. A. Jubilee Jaunts and Jottings, in the _Lunds univ.

[oa]rsskrift_, N. F. avd. I, bd. 14, nr. 26 (_Festskrift vid ...

250-[oa]rsjubileum_). Reviews: Holthausen, _Anglia, Beiblatt_, XXX,

1-5; Klaeber, _J.E.G.Ph._ XIX, 409-13.

1919 MOORE, SAMUEL. Beowulf Notes (Textual), _J.E.G.Ph._ XVIII, 205-16.

1919 KLAEBER, F. Concerning the functions of O.E. _geweordhan_,

_J.E.G.Ph._ XVIII, 250-71. (Cf. paper of Prof. Hubbard above, by which

this was suggested.)

1919 KLAEBER, F. Textual notes on "Beowulf," _M.L.N._ XXXIV, 129-34.

1919 BROWN, CARLETON. Beowulf, 1080-1106, _M.L.N._ XXXIV, 181-3.

1919 BRETT, CYRIL. Notes on passages of Old and Middle English,

_M.L.R._ XIV, 1-9.

1919-20 KOCK, E. A. Interpretations and emendations of Early English

Texts: V (Incl. Beowulf, 2030, 2419-24); VI (Incl. Beowulf 24, 154-6,

189-90, 1992-3, 489-90, 581-3, 1745-7, 1820-1, 1931-2, 2164); VII

(Incl. Beowulf, 1230, 1404, 1553-6); _Anglia_, XLIII, 303-4; XLIV, 98

_etc._, 245 _etc._

1920 BRYAN W. F. Beowulf Notes (303-6, 532-4, 867-71), _J.E.G.Ph._ XIX,

84-5.

s. 8. QUESTIONS OF LITERARY HISTORY, DATE AND AUTHORSHIP: BEOWULF IN THE

LIGHT OF HISTORY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HEROIC LEGEND, MYTHOLOGY AND FOLKLORE

See also preceding section.

No attempt is made here to deal with Old English heroic legend in general:

nor to enumerate the references to _Beowulf_ in histories of literature.

Probably the earliest allusion to our poem by a great writer is in Scott's

_Essay on Romance_ (1824):

"The Saxons had, no doubt, Romances, ... and Mr Turner ... has given us

the abridgement of one entitled Caedmon, in which the hero, whose

adventures are told much after the manner of the ancient Norse Sagas,

encounters, defeats and finally slays an evil being called Grendel...."

1816 OUTZEN, N. Das ags. Gedicht Beowulf, _Kieler Blaetter_, III,

307-27. (See above, p. 4, note.) {398}

1816 (Review of Thorkelin in) _Monthly Review_, LXXXI, 516-23. (Beowulf

identified with Beaw Sceldwaing of the West Saxon genealogy; see above,

p. 292.)

1817 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. _Danne-Virke_, II, 207-89. (Identifies

Chochilaicus; see above, p. 4, note.)

1826 GRIMM, W. Einleitung ueber die Elfen, _Kleinere Schriften_, I,

405, esp. p. 467 (extract relating to Grendel's hatred of song). From

++_Irische Elfenmaerchen_.

1829 GRIMM, W. Die deutsche Heldensage. Goettingen. (Pp. 13-17.

Extracts from Beowulf, with translation, relating to Weland, Sigemund,

Hama and Eormenric.)

1836 KEMBLE, J. M. Ueber die Stammtafel der Westsachsen. Muenchen.

Review: J. Grimm, _Goettingische gelehrte Anziegen_, 1836, 649-57, =

_Kleinere Schriften_, V, 240.

1836 MONE, F. J. Zur Kritik des Gedichts von Beowulf (in Untersuchungen

zur Geschichte der teutschen Heldensage). Quedlinburg u. Leipzig. (Pp.

129-36.)

1839 LEO, H. Be['o]wulf ... nach seinem inhalte, und nach seinen

historischen und mythologischen beziehungen betrachtet. Halle.

1841 DISRAELI, I. Amenities of Literature. London. (Beowulf; the

Hero-Life. Vol. I, pp. 80-92.)

1841 GRUNDTVIG, N. F. S. Bjovulfs Drape, _Brage og Idun_, IV, 481-538.

(Discusses the story, with criticism of previous scholars, and

especially of Kemble.)

1843-9 GRIMM, W. Einleitung zur Vorlesung ueber Gudrun [with an

abstract of Beowulf]; see _Kleinere Schriften_, IV, 557-60.

1844 MUELLENHOFF, K. Die deutschen Voelker an Nord- und Ostsee in

aeltester Zeit, _Nordalbingische Studien_, I, 111 _etc._

1845 A brief discussion of Beowulf in _Edinburgh Review_, LXXXII,

309-11.

1845 HAUPT, M. Zum Beowulf, _Z.f.d.A._ V, 10. (Drawing attention to the

reference to Hygelac in the _liber de monstris_; see above, p. 4.)

1848 MUELLENHOFF, K. Die austrasische Dietrichssage, _Z.f.d.A._ VI, 435

_etc._

1849 MUELLENHOFF, K. Sce['a]f u. seine Nachkommen, _Z.f.d.A._ VII,

410-19; Der Mythus von Be['o]vulf, _Z.f.d.A._ VII, 419-41.

1849 GRIMM, J. Ueber das Verbrennen der Leichen, _Abhandl. d. Berl.

Akad._, 1849, 191 _etc._ = _Kleinere Schriften_, II, 211-313 (esp.

261-4).

1849 BACHLECHNER, J. Die Merovinge im Beowulf, _Z.f.d.A._ VII, 524-6.

1851 ZAPPERT, G. Virgil's Fortleben im Mittelalter, _Denkschriften der

k. Akad. Wien, Phil.-Hist. Classe_, Bd. II, Abth. 2, pp. 17-70. (Gives

numerous parallels between Virgil and "Beowulf," somewhat

indiscriminately.)

1852 BRYNJULFSSON, G. Oldengelsk og Oldnordisk, _Antikuarisk

Tidsskrift_, Kjoebenhavn, 1852-4, pp. 81-143. (An important paper which

has been unduly overlooked. Brynjulfsson notes the parallel between

Beowulf and Bjarki (see above, p. 61) and in other respects anticipates

later scholars, e.g., in noting the close relationship between Angles

and Danes (p. 143) and less fortunately (pp. 129-31) in identifying the

Geatas with the Jutes.)

1856 BACHLECHNER, J. Eomaer und Heming (Hamlac), _Germania_, I, 297-303

and 455-61.

1856 BOUTERWEK, K. W. Das Beowulflied: Eine Vorlesung; _Germania_, I,

385-418.

1857 UHLAND, L. Sigemund und Sigeferd, _Germania_, II, 344-63 =

_Schriften_, VIII, 479 _etc._ (Incl. Finnsburg.)

{399}

1858 WEINHOLD, K. Die Riesen des germanischen Mythus, _Sitzungberichte

der K. Akad., Wien, Phil-Hist. Classe_, XXVI, 225-306. (Grendel and his

mother, p. 255.)

1859 RIEGER, M. Ingaevonen, Istaevonen, Herminonen, _Z.f.d.A._ XI,

177-205.

1859 MUELLENHOFF, K. Zur Kritik des angelsaechsischen Volksepos, 2,

Widsith, _Z.f.d.A._ XI, 275-94.

1860 MUELLENHOFF, K. Zeugnisse u. Excurse zur deutschen Heldensage,

_Z.f.d.A._ XII, 253-386. (_This portion_ of vol. XII was published in

1860.)

1861 HAIGH, D. H. The Anglo-Saxon Sagas. London. (An uncritical attempt

to identify the proper names in Beowulf and Finnsburg with sites in

England.)

1862 GREIN, C. W. M. Die historischen Verhaeltnisse des Beowulfliedes,

_Eberts Jahrbuch fuer roman. u. engl. Litt._ IV, 260-85. (Incl.

Finnsburg.)

1864 ++SCHULTZE, M. Ueber das Beowulfslied. _Programm der staedtischen

Realschule zu Elbing._ (Not seen, but contents, including the mythical

interpretations current at the period, noted in _Archiv_, XXXVII, 232.)

1864 HEYNE, M. Ueber die Lage und Construction der Halle Heorot.

Paderborn.

1868 KOEHLER, A. Germanische Alterthuemer im Be['o]vulf, _Germania_,

XIII, 129-58.

1869 MUELLENHOFF, K. Die innere Geschichte des Beovulfs, _Z.f.d.A._

XIV, 193-244. (Reprinted in _Beovulf_, 1889. See above, p. 113 _etc._)

1870 KOEHLER, A. Die Einleitung des Beovulfliedes. Die beiden Episoden

von Heremod, _Z.f.d.Ph._ II, 305-21.

1875 SCHROEDER, L. Om Bjovulfs Drapen. Koebenhavn. (See above, p. 30.)

1876 BOTKINE, L. Beowulf. Analyse historique et g['e]ographique. Havre.

(Material subsequently incorporated in translation, q.v. s. 6.) Review:

Koerner, _Engl. Stud._ I, 495-6.

1877 SKEAT, W. W. The name "Beowulf," _Academy_, XI (Jan.-June), p.

163. (Suggests Beowulf = "woodpecker"; see above, pp. 365-6, _note_.)

1877 TEN BRINK, B. Geschichte der englischen Litteratur. (Beowulf,

Finnsburg, pp. 29-40.)

1877 DEDERICH, H. Historische u. geographische Studien zum ags.

Be['o]vulfliede. Koeln. (Incl. Finnsburg.) Reviews: Koerner, _Engl.

Stud._ I, 481-95; Muellenhoff, _A.f.d.A._ III, 172-82; ++Suchier,

_Jenaer Literatur-Zeitung_, XLVII, 732, 1876.

1877 HORNBURG, J. Die Composition des Beowulf. _Programm des K. Lyceums

in Metz._ Full summary by F. Hummel in _Archiv_, LXII, 231-3. See also

under 1884.

1877 SCHULTZE, M. Alt-heidnisches in der angelsaechsischen Poesie,

speciell im Beowulfsliede. Berlin.

1877 SUCHIER, H. Ueber die Sage von Offa u. Thrydho, _P.B.B._ IV,

500-21.

1878 MUELLER, N. Die Mythen im Be['o]wulf, in ihrem Verhaeltniss zur

germanischen Mythologie betrachtet. Dissertation, Heidelberg. Leipzig.

1879 LAISTNER, L. Nebelsagen. Stuttgart. (See above, p. 46, note.)

1879 SWEET, H. Old English etymologies: I, _Be['o]hata_, _Engl. Stud._

II, 312-14. (See above, p. 365.)

1880 GERING, H. Der Be['o]wulf u. die islaendische Grettissaga,

_Anglia_, III, 74-87. (Important. Gering announced Vigf['u]sson's

discovery to a wider circle of readers, with translation of the

Sandhaugar episode, and useful comment. The discovery was further

announced to American readers by GARNETT in the _American Journal of

Philology_, I, 492 (1880), though its importance was there rather

understated. See above, p. 54.)

{400}

1881 SMITH, C. SPRAGUE. Be['o]wulf Gretti, _New Englander_, XL (N. S.

IV), 49-67. (Translation of corresponding passages in Grettis saga and

Beowulf.)

1882 MARCH, F. A. The World of Beowulf, _Proceedings of Amer. Phil.

Assoc._ pp. xxi-xxiii.

1883 ROENNING, F. Beovulfs-kvadet; en literaer-historisk undersoegelse.

Koebenhavn. Review: Heinzel, _A.f.d.A._ X, 233-9. (Roenning criticises

Muellenhoff's theories of separate lays. His book and Heinzel's review

are both important.)

1883 MERBOT, R. Aesthetische Studien zur Ags. Poesie. Breslau. Reviews:

Koch, _Anglia_, VI, _Anzeiger_, 100-3; Kluge, _Engl. Stud._, VIII,

480-2.

1884 EARLE, J. Anglo-Saxon Literature (The dawn of European

Literature). London. (Pp. 120-39 deal with Beowulf. Earle holds Beowulf

to be "a genuine growth of that junction in time ... when the heathen

tales still kept their traditional interest, and yet the spirit of

Christianity had taken full possession of the Saxon mind.")

1884 FAHLBECK, P. Beowulfs-kvaedet s[oa]som kaella foer nordisk

fornhistoria, _Antikvar. tidskr. foer Sverige_, VIII, 1-87. Review:

_Academy_, XXIX, 1886, p. 12. (See above, pp. 8, 333.)

1884 HARRISON, J. A. Old Teutonic life in Beowulf, _Overland Monthly_,

Sec. Ser. vol. IV, 14-24; 152-61.

1884 HERTZ, W. Beowulf, das aelteste germanische Epos, _Nord und Sued_,

XXIX, 229-53.

1884 HORNBURG, J. Die komposition des Beovulf, _Archiv_, LXXII,

333-404. (Rejects Muellenhoff's "Liedertheorie.")

1884 KRUEGER, TH. Zum Beowulfliede. Bromberg. Reviewed favourably by

Koelbing, _Engl. Stud._ IX, 150; severely by Kluge, _Literaturblatt_,

1884, 428-9. (A useful summary, which had the misfortune to be

superseded next year by the publication of Wuelker's _Grundriss_.)

1884 KRUEGER, TH. UEber Ursprung u. Entwickelung des Beowulfliedes,

_Archiv_, LXXI, 129-52.

1884-5 EARLE, J. Beowulf, in _The Times_, London (Aug. 25, 1884, p. 6

(not signed); Oct. 29, 1885, p. 3; Sept. 30, 1885, p. 3. "The Beowulf

itself is a tale of old folk-lore which, in spite of repeated editing,

has never quite lost the old crust of its outline.... This discovery,

if established, must have the effect of quite excluding the application

of the Wolffian hypothesis to our poem.")

1885 WUELKER, R. Grundriss zur geschichte der angelsaechsischen

Litteratur. Leipzig. 6. Die angelsaechsische Heldendichtung, Beowulf,

Finnsburg, 244-315. (An important and useful summary.)

1885 LEHMANN, H. Bruenne und Helm im angelsaechsischen Beowulfliede.

Dissertation, Goettingen. Leipzig. Reviews: Wuelker, _Anglia_, VIII,

_Anzeiger_, 167-70; Schulz, _Engl. Stud._ IX, 471.

1886 SKEAT, W. W. On the signification of the monster Grendel ... with

a discussion of ll. 2076-2100. Read before the Cambridge Philological

Society. _Journal of Philology_, XV, 120-31. (Not _American Jour. of

Phil._, as frequently quoted.)

1886 SARRAZIN, G. Die Beowulfsage in Daenemark, _Anglia_, IX, 195-9;

Beowa und Boethvar, _Anglia_, IX, 200-4; Beowulf und Kynewulf,

_Anglia_, IX, 515-50; Der Schauplatz des ersten Beowulfliedes und die

Heimat des Dichters, _P.B.B._ XI, 159-83 (see above, p. 101).

1886 SIEVERS, E. Die Heimat des Beowulfdichters, _P.B.B._ XI, 354-62.

1886 SARRAZIN, G. Altnordisches im Beowulfliede, _P.B.B._ XI, 528-41.

(See above, p. 102.)

1886 SIEVERS, E. Altnordisches im Beowulf? _P.B.B._ XII, 168-200.

{401}

1886 SCHILLING, H. Notes on the Finnsaga, _M.L.N._ I, 89-92; 116-17.

1886 LEHMANN, H. Ueber die Waffen im angelsaechsischen Beowulfliede,

_Germania_, XXXI, 486-97.

1887 SCHILLING, H. The Finnsburg-fragment and the Finn-episode,

_M.L.N._ II, 146-50.

1887 MORLEY, H. Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg, in _English

Writers_, vol. I, 276-354. London.

1887 BUGGE, S. Studien ueber das Beowulfepos, _P.B.B._ XII, 1-112,

360-75. Important. (Das Finnsburgfragment, pp. 20-8.)

1887 ++SCHNEIDER, F. Der Kampf mit Grendels Mutter. _Program des

Friedrichs Real-Gymnasiums._ Berlin.

1888 TEN BRINK, B. Beowulf. Untersuchungen. (_Quellen u. Forschungen_,

LXII.) (Important. See above, p. 113.) Strassburg. Reviews: Wuelker,

_Anglia_, XI, 319-21 and _Lit. Cbl._ 1889, 251; Moeller, _Engl. Stud._

XIII, 247-315 (weighty, containing some good remarks on the

Jutes-Geatas); Koeppel, _Z.f.d.Ph._ XXIII, 113-22; Heinzel, _A.f.d.A._

XV, 153-82 (weighty); Liebermann, _Deut. Zeitschr. f.

Geschichtswissenschaft_, II, 1889, 197-9; Kraus, _D.L.Z._ XII, 1891,

1605-7, 1846: reply by ten Brink ("Beowulfkritik und _ABAB_"), _D.L.Z._

1892, 109-12.

1888 SARRAZIN, G. Beowulf-Studien. Berlin. Reviews: Koeppel, _Engl.

Stud._ XIII, 472-80; Sarrazin, Entgegnung, _Engl. Stud._ XIV, 421

_etc._, reply by Koeppel, XIV, 427; Sievers, _Z.f.d.Ph._ XXI, 366;

Dieter, _Archiv_, LXXXIII, 352-3; Heinzel, _A.f.d.A._ XV, 182-9;

Wuelker, _Lit. Cbl._ 1889, 315-16; Wuelker, _Anglia_, XI, 536-41.

Holthausen, _Literaturblatt_, 1890, 14-16; Liebermann, _Deut. Zeitschr.

f. Geschichtswissenschaft_, VI, 1891, 138; Kraus, _D.L.Z._ XII, 1891,

pp. 1822-3. (All these reviews express dissent from Sarrazin's main

conclusions, though many of them show appreciation of details in his

work. See above, p. 101.)

1888 KITTREDGE, G. L. Zu Beowulf, 107 _etc._, _P.B.B._ XIII, 210

(Cain's kin).