De | Danorum | Rebus Gestis Secul III & IV | Poema Danicum Dialecto
Anglosaxonica. | Ex Bibliotheca Cottoniana Musaei Britannici | edidit
versione lat. et indicibus auxit | Grim. Johnson Thorkelin. Dr J V. |
Havniæ Typis Th. E. Rangel. | MDCCXV. 4to, pp. xx, 299, appendix 5.
First Edition. First Translation (Latin).
_Circumstances of Publication._
The words of Wanley cited above[1] did not pass unnoticed in Denmark.
Thorkelin tells us in his introduction that it had long been the desire
of Suhm[2], Langebeck, Magnusen, and other Danish scholars to inspect
the MS. in the British Museum. The following is Thorkelin’s account of
his editorial labors:--
‘Via tandem mihi data fuit ad desideratum nimis diu divini vatis
Danici incomparabile opus. Arcta etenim, quæ nos et Britannos
intercessit amicitia, me allexit, ut, clementissime annuentibus
Augustissimis patriæ patribus CHRISTIANO VII. et FREDERICO VI.
iter in Britanniam anno seculi præteriti LXXXVI. ad thesauros
bibliothecarum Albionensium perscrutandos facerem....
A curatoribus, Musæi Britannici, aliarumque Bibliothecarum,
potestas mihi data [est] inspiciendi, tractandi, et exscribendi
omnia, quæ rebus Danicis lucem affere possent manuscripta. Ad quam
rem conficiendam viri nostro præconio majores Josephus Planta et
Richardus Southgate dicti Musæi Brit. præfecti in me sua officia
humanissime contulerunt. Optimo igitur successu et uberrimo cum
fructu domum reversus sum ...’ (pp. viii, ix).
Thorkelin thus obtained two copies of the poem, one made with his own
hand, the other by a scribe ignorant of Old English. These transcripts
(still preserved in Copenhagen) formed the basis for Thorkelin’s
edition. The account of his studies continues:--
‘Quæcunque igitur possent hoc meum negotium adjuvare, comparare
coepi, magnamque librorum copiam unde quaque congessi, quorum
opera carmen aggrederer. In hoc me sedulum ita gessi, ut opus
totum anno MDCCCVII confecerim, idem brevi editurus ...’ (p. xv).
Just at this time, unfortunately, Copenhagen was stormed by the English
fleet, and Thorkelin’s text and notes were burned with his library. But
the transcripts were saved. Thorkelin renewed his labors under the
patronage of Bülow, and at length published in 1815.
_Thorkelin, and his Interpretation of the Beowulf._
Grimus Johnssen Thorkelin (or Thorkelsson), 1752-1829, is remembered as
a scholar in early Germanic history. He had little beside this knowledge
and his general acquaintance with Old Germanic languages to recommend
him as an editor of the _Beowulf_. Grundtvig said that the transcript of
the _Beowulf_ must have been the work of one wholly ignorant of Old
English[3]. Thorkelin knew nothing of the peculiar style of Old English
poetry; he could recognize neither kenning, metaphor, nor compound. He
was not even fitted to undertake the transcription of the text, as the
following section will make evident.
We have seen how Sharon Turner[4] could describe the _Beowulf_.
Thorkelin seems to have been little better fitted to understand the
poem, to say nothing of editing it. He failed to interpret some of the
simplest events of the story. He did not identify Scyld, nor understand
that his body was given up to the sea, but thought that King Beowulf
‘expeditionem suscipit navalem.’ He failed to identify Breca, and
thought that Hunferth was describing some piratical voyage of Beowulf’s.
He makes Beowulf reply that ‘piratas ubique persequitur et fudit,’ and
‘Finlandiæ arma infert[5].’ He regarded Beowulf as the hero of the
Sigemund episode. He quite misapprehended the Finn episode, ‘Fin, rex
Frisionum, contra Danis pugnat; vincitur; fœdus cum Hrodgaro pangit;
fidem frangit; pugnans cadit[6].’ He regards Beowulf and a son of
Hunferth as participating in that expedition. He failed to identify
Hnæf, or Hengest, or Hrothulf, &c.