procures the assassination of his brother and, to avoid suspicion, has
the assassins put out of the way. In this the Meriadoc story agrees. In
_Meriadoc_, the queen dies of sorrow. No mention is made of the queen in
Saxo's version. In the Hamlet story, the brother slays the king with his
own hand, but secretly, to avoid suspicion. He marries the king's widow.
In the _Hrólfssaga_, the brother attacks the king with an army and slays
him. In _Havelok_, Arthur, likewise, attacks the king with an army and
slays him.[139] The widow is rescued. In the _Hrólfssaga_, as appears at
the end of the story, the widow is not only rescued, but, as in the
Hamlet story, marries the usurper.
In _Meriadoc_, the murdered king's adherents try to rescue the young
prince and princess. This feature is common to both the _Hrólfssaga_ and
Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story. In _Meriadoc_, the usurper gets
the children into his power, but, being appealed to, saves them for the
time being. This feature is found in Saxo's version, where the usurper
agrees to spare the children during good behavior. It is lacking in the
_Hrólfssaga_. In _Meriadoc_, the usurper plans to have the children
hanged in a forest. In Saxo's version, the children having violated the
condition on which they are to be spared, the usurper gathers an army to
attack them. In the _Hrólfssaga_, there is a continuous effort on the
part of the usurper to make away with the children.
In _Havelok_, Grim, a fisherman, rescues the prince, who lives as a
fisherman's son, under the name of Cuaran. In _Meriadoc_, the royal
huntsman, Ivor, rescues the children and they live in a cave in the
woods as a huntsman's children; Ivor is accompanied by his wife and his
dog, Dolfin. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the children live in a cave in the
woods as a shepherd's (Vifil's) children, responding, when necessary, to
the names of dogs. In Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story, the
children are concealed in a hollow tree, food being brought to them
under the pretence that they are dogs, and dogs' names are applied to
them. In the Hamlet story, the rescue is supplied by the insanity
motive, but friends at court are not wanting.
There is no insanity in _Meriadoc_ or _Havelok_; but it is present in
the _Hrólfssaga_ and Saxo's version of the story about the two boys. In
the _Hrólfssaga_, the boys, especially Helgi, cut crazy capers while on
the way with Sævil when he goes to Frothi's hall in response to an
invitation. Helgi rides horseback with his face to the horse's tail,
just as Hamlet does; and the horse is an untamed colt, the idea coming
from the fact that, when Hamlet is thus riding, a wolf appears and one
of the men, to test his sanity, calls the wolf a colt. It would, indeed,
be an untamed colt. In Saxo's version, better use is made of the
insanity motive. Pretended insanity is the only resort left the boys to
save themselves. In the _Hrólfssaga_, it serves no other purpose than to
attract attention to the boys and reveal their identity to Signy and
Sævil.
In _Havelok_, the prince returns home, and, with the aid of a faithful
friend, Sigar, who has remained at court, the usurper is overthrown and
the crown regained. In _Meriadoc_, Arthur and Urien besiege the usurper,
starve him out, and execute him. Meriadoc becomes king. In the Hamlet
story, the prince returns from England, whither the usurper has sent him
in order to get rid of him, sets fire to the hall in which the usurper's
men lie drunk after a feast, and goes to the usurper's chamber and slays
him. Nothing is said about the queen, though the presumption is that she
perishes also. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the boys, aided by their
foster-father and brother-in-law, trusty friends, set fire to the hall
in which the usurper's men lie drunk after a feast; and the usurper's
egress through an underground passage having been blocked, he perishes
in the flames. The queen, the boys' mother, refusing to leave the hall,
perishes also. In Saxo's version, the boys attack the usurper in his
hall and set fire to the building; he hides himself in a secret
underground passage and perishes of smoke and gas.
It is told of Ivor that when he rescues the children he is accompanied
by his dog. Not only that, but the dog's name is given. This looks as if
some use is to be made of the dog; otherwise there is no point in the
statement that a dog is present, whose name is Dolfin. Bruce says, "It
is to be remembered that even this Welsh version, no doubt, passed
through the hands of a French romancer before reaching the author of our
Latin text";[140] and there is reason to suspect that this is one of the
places where the story has suffered. Both Saxo's version of the
Hroar-Helgi story, and the _Hrólfssaga_, show to what use a dog's name
could be put; and this specific reference to the dog in _Meriadac_, and
the use that might have been made of him in an earlier version of the
story, arouse a strong suspicion that here is the source of the
suggestion of using dogs' names in the Hroar-Helgi story to aid in
saving the boys. Even if no such use was ever made of the dog in the
Meriadoc story, such specific reference to him is in itself very
suggestive. That the Hroar-Helgi story employs two dogs' name's is, of
course, due to the fact that there are two boys to which they are to be
applied, although, so far as the plot is concerned, the matter could
have been managed with the use of one dog's name; and the fact that the
dogs' names, in the _Hrólfssaga_, are Hopp and Ho, and that the boys'
later assumed names are Hrani and Hamur, is due to a desire to preserve
the initial letter, "H," of their names, which is in accordance with
Scylding nomenclature.[141]
Furthermore, in the _Hrólfssaga_ it is said that Vifil concealed the
boys in a cave in the woods. Likewise, in _Meriadoc_, Ivor concealed the
boy and the girl in a cave in the forest. But in Saxo's version of the
Hroar-Helgi story, the boys are concealed in a hollow tree. This also
must be an adaptation from _Meriadoc_. The men who were to execute the
prince and princess hanged them on the branch of a large oak-tree
(quercus) and concealed themselves inside the tree, which was hollow.
Ivor, in an attempt to rescue the children,
"Quatuor igitur ingentes focos e quatuor partibus ipsius saltus
accendit, accensisque plurimas quas secum attulerat carnes passim
iniecit ilicemque uicinam cum coniuge et cane ascendens delituit.
Fumo autem ignium per nemoris latitudinem diffuso, ubi lupi in
confinio degentes--quorum inibi ingens habebatur copia--odorem
perceperunt carnium, illo contendere et confluere ilico
coeperunt."[142]
Here we have the idea of a hollow oak with people in it, wolves in the
vicinity, and children at hand who have been hanged, and therefore
presumably dead. Had the cord broken by which they were hanged, they
would certainly have been torn to pieces by the wolves. But especially
striking is the statement that Ivor's dog is concealed in a tree; and
this tree is called "ilex" (holly-oak), the very word used by Saxo to
designate the kind of hollow tree that Hroar and Helgi (he calls them
Harald and Halfdan, as has been stated) are concealed in, under the
pretence that they are dogs. Also, pieces of meat are thrown into the
fires; and Ivor, as soon as the men in the hollow tree beg for mercy,
shoots four wolves and "ceteri omnes lupi in eos qui uulnera pertulerant
irruerunt eosque membratim dilacerantes discerpserunt."[143] Here is
again the idea of meat for wolves and the bodies of animals torn
asunder. The idea of dismembered bodies of children is indeed absent;
but the whole passage in _Meriadoc_ is so suggestive of what we find in
Saxo, even to the hiding of a dog, whose name is given, in an "ilex,"
that it would be remarkable if there was no connection between Saxo's
story and _Meriadoc_.
Again, as has already been stated, Saxo says that Frothi perished in an
underground passage, of smoke and gas. The men who, in _Meriadoc_, were
to execute the prince and princess concealed themselves in a hollow
tree, which had an entrance that was so formed that "depressis humeris,
illam necesse erat subire,"[144] which is suggestive of the stooping
that would probably be necessary in entering an underground passage. But
what is noteworthy in this connection is that, at the entrance to the
tree, Ivor starts a fire "cuius calore fumique uapore inclusos pene
extinxit."[145] Saxo says that Frothi "Vbi dum clausus delitescit,
uapore et fumo strangulatus interiit."[146] Here is the idea of
concealment again, but particularly noteworthy is the suffocation by
"uapore et fumo," the same words that are used in _Meriadoc_. In the
_Hrólfssaga_, the account of the events immediately preceding Frothi's
death resembles more the account of the corresponding events in the
Hamlet story than does Saxo's account; but in the _Hrólfssaga_ also,
Frothi attempts to escape by an underground passage.
The use of wolves' claws and the dismembered bodies of children to
mislead those who might seek to get possession of the boys is the
employment, as Deutschbein has observed, of a form of deceit similar to
that practiced by Joseph's brethren.[147]
In regard to the manner in which the children are saved, it is difficult
to correlate the Hroar-Helgi story with the Meriadoc story as definitely
and simply as one would wish, but the explanation probably lies in the
following idea expressed by Bruce, "In conclusion, as to this division
there seems to be a certain confusion of _motifs_ in the first part of
the _Historia Meriadoci_ with regard to the manner in which the children
are saved from execution."[148] The statement, for instance, that the
children were suspended for half a day is out of all harmony with the
statement that they were to be suspended by slender ropes, easily
broken, that would permit them to fall to the ground unharmed. But
Bruce's statement quoted above, "This Welsh version, no doubt, passed
through the hands of a French romancer before reaching the author of our
Latin text," would account for the "confusion of _motifs_"; and the fact
that we have not now that form of the story with which the Hroar-Helgi
story came in contact would obscure some of the points of relationship
between the two. But the hiding of a dog, whose name is given, in an oak
tree of a particular species (ilex) is so definite and unique a point of
identification that there is no mistaking it.
But even if we had the Meriadoc story in its original form, we should
not expect to find it exactly reproduced in the Hroar-Helgi story.
Various causes would operate to introduce changes. Such features as
mountain-rocks with their eagle-nests would be modified to bring the
topography more into harmony with that of Denmark, so that the caverned
rock would naturally become an earth-cave. Characteristics of
Scandinavian life and history would supplant what was peculiarly Welsh.
Thus the shrewd old shepherd, Vifil, naturally takes the place of the
royal huntsman, Ivor; and Saxo, quite naturally, gives the story a
marked Danish geographical and historical setting, which he does by
introducing such names as Fyen and Seeland, and by connecting the Danish
royal family in the beginning of the story with those of Sweden and
Gautland.
Allowance must also be made for two lines of oral transmission, one
going to Iceland, and the other to Norway and thence to Denmark. This
would result in the modification of details in the two versions, such as
details connected with the insanity motive and the concealment of the
boys, and the omission, in one version, of the dogs' names supposed to
be applied to the boys and the insertion of the names in the other.
But this would not explain why Hroar, Helgi, and their father are given
other names in Saxo's version, and why such a radical change has been
made in the family relationship of Siward and Signy. This, however, as
will be explained later,[149] is due to arbitrary action on the part of
Saxo, in order to conceal the fact that he twice includes the same group
of men in his line of Danish kings.
If the foregoing is substantially correct, much in the Hroar-Helgi story
is accounted for, besides some striking differences between the two
versions. But it is possible to account for more. We have seen how the
Siward story exerted marked influence on the story about Bothvar Bjarki;
hence, we might expect it to have exerted some influence on the
Hroar-Helgi story, which is also a part of the _Hrólfssaga_. And this it
has done. Siward was historically closely associated with the events of
the Macbeth story; but the Macbeth story is of a type that, in one
noteworthy particular at least, resembles the Hroar-Helgi story more
than do any of the stories thus far considered, and that is in the fact
that Duncan has two sons, who flee when their father is murdered. In the
Macbeth story, as in the Hamlet story, it may be said that we have not,
under a strict interpretation of the term, an instance of the
"exile-return" type of story; but Hamlet goes to England and immediately
upon his return avenges his father's murder, and, still nearer the type,
Malcolm and Donaldbane flee and Malcolm returns and avenges his father's
murder. But the matter of type is, in this connection, unessential.
There is no doubt that the Hamlet story exerted an influence on the
Hroar-Helgi story, nor can there be any doubt that the Macbeth story did
the same.
First, attention is called to the fact that in the _Hrólfssaga_ Siward
himself is retained in the story under the name of Sævil.[150] In Saxo's
version of the story about Hroar and Helgi, he is called Siward, but
there his proper relationship to the other characters is obscured.
Siward was related to Duncan by marriage, some versions, Holinshed's for
instance, having it that Duncan was married to Siward's daughter;[151]
similarly, Sævil was married to Halfdan's daughter. Siward aided
Duncan's sons (Donaldbane, however, not being present to take part in
the expedition against Macbeth); similarly, Sævil aided Halfdan's sons,
not by an armed expedition against Frothi, the usurper, but proceeding
against him in such manner as the plot of the story permits. It is said
of Donaldbane, that he fled to Ireland "where he was tenderlie cherished
by the king of that land";[152] similarly, Hroar went to Northumberland,
where he received a hearty welcome and later married King Northri's
daughter, Ögn.[153] Siward was first an earl in Denmark; similarly,
Sævil was an earl in Denmark. Sævil did not, however, become Earl of
Northumberland, as Siward did; but Hroar took his place, so to speak, in
this respect, and, as Siward had done, married the earl's (king's)
daughter[154] and became King of Northumberland.
In the Hroar-Helgi story, the usurper is represented as consulting a
witch in regard to the whereabouts of the young princes. This feature
must also be due to the influence of the Macbeth story; for, though the
purpose for which Frothi and Macbeth consult the witch, or witches, is
not exactly the same, it is the possible future disposition of the
throne that in both instances causes anxiety; and while at first, in
both instances, a prediction, or information, is given that is
favorable, a prediction in both instances is given in conclusion that
is unfavorable. The witches are so conspicuous a feature of the Macbeth
story that they would, of course, attract the attention of the saga-man;
and we naturally expect this feature of the story to leave its impress
on the Hroar-Helgi story. It is a special feature, not found in any of
the other stories considered in this connection, and there can be no
doubt as to whence the Hroar-Helgi story acquired it. The witch in the
saga is called a "seiðkona." Concerning the kind of witchcraft practised
by a "seiðkona," P.A. Munch has the following: "Som den virksomste, men
og som den skjendigste, af al Troldom ansaa vore Forfædre den saakaldte
_Seid_. Hvorledes den udövedes, er ikke ret klart fremstillet ...; den
var forbunden med sang ... Men dette slags Troldom ansaaes ogsaa en Mand
uværdigt, og udövedes derfor sædvanligviis af Kvinder, ligesom dette
ogsaa stedse synes at have gaaet ud paa noget ondt."[155] Thus the
"seiðkona" is exactly the same kind of creature as the witches in the
Macbeth story. Consider, for instance, the disgusting practice in which
Shakespeare represents them as engaging, as they go round the cauldron,
chanting the refrain, "Double, double toil and trouble," etc. W.J. Rolfe
refers to the witches in _Macbeth_ as follows: "Macbeth and his fellow
captain Banquo have performed prodigies of valour in the battle, and are
on their way home from the field when they are met by the three witches,
as Shakespeare calls them, and as they are called in the old chronicle
from which he took the main incidents of his plot. They appear simply to
be the witches of superstition--hags who have gained a measure of
superhuman knowledge and power by a league with Satan, to whom they have
sold their souls and pledged their service."[156] The statements at an
earlier stage of the story in the _Hrólfssaga_, while the boys are still
on the island, that soothsayers and wise men are called in from all over
the land to tell where the boys are, and that wizards, who are also
summoned, warn Frothi to beware of the old man Vifil on the island,
remind us of the statement by Holinshed that Macbeth "had learned of
certeine wizzards, in whose words he put great confidence ... how that
he ought to take heed of Macduffe."[157]
Still another feature may have been acquired from the Macbeth story. It
is said that Hroar and Helgi were transferred to a neighboring island.
Holinshed says that Donaldbane fled to Ireland. The Macbeth story has
been treated by a number of chroniclers, who, though they agree in the
main, occasionally disagree in regard to details. Thus Johannes Fordun
says, "Hi a Machabeo rege expulsi, Donaldus insulas, Malcolmus Cumbriam
adibant."[168] This is evidently one version and would supply the hint
for transferring the young princes to a neighboring island, which would
be a convenient disposition to make of them till the time of their
return to regain their heritage. It would also harmonize topographically
with the coast of Denmark, where there were many islands covered with
trees, the idea of woods as a hiding-place for the boys having been
abundantly supplied by the Meriadoc story.
It may be said that this introduces a conflict with the statement that
Donaldbane fled to Ireland. It is not possible to know, in a case like
this, which variant has influenced the saga, or whether, indeed, both
have not been utilized. But there was ample warrant for transferring
Hroar to Northumberland without such a suggestion as lay in Donaldbane's
flight to Ireland. In any event, imitation of Donaldbane's flight has
not been a necessary consideration in making Hroar King of
Northumberland. A suggestion of the same nature lay in Hamlet's going to
England, where he married the king's daughter; but chiefly, the
Scandinavians were numerous in the north of England and regarded
themselves as the rightful possessors of that part of the country. The
mastery of Northumberland was long an object of contest between
Anglo-Saxons and Scandinavians, and this was the chief point at issue in
the famous battle at Brunanburh, 937. Since Helgi, whom the _Hrólfssaga_
represents as the more forward of the two boys, was made King of
Denmark, no more honorable disposition could be made of Hroar than to
place him on the throne of Northumberland, and events show that he
himself was perfectly satisfied. He thus also became ruler of the land
once governed by Siward, who must have made a powerful impression on his
countrymen in England; and with one of the two princes reigning in
Denmark and the other in England, the glory of the Danes when Canute was
king of both countries would be revived in story, as it was in _Havelok
the Dane_, where Havelok, likewise, reigned both in England and
Denmark.
No attempt has been made to point out all the respects in which the
Hroar-Helgi story resembles the Macbeth story. The Macbeth story has
most of the characteristics of the "exile-return" type, and striking
resemblances that fall in with features of the stories already mentioned
might have been added, but will suggest themselves to the reader. Only
such things as point to special influence exerted by the Macbeth story
on the Hroar-Helgi story have been mentioned.
It may be urged that some of the material, such as the "seiðkona," said
in the foregoing to be derived from foreign sources, is recognized
saga-material. The point, however, is that it is not the material
itself, but the suggestion for the use of it, that in such an instance
is said to be derived from a foreign source.
_The Hroar-Helgi Story in the _SKJỌLDUNGASAGA_ and the _BJARKARÍMUR.
Thus far nothing has been said about the "short and chronicle-like form
in the Icelandic _Skjọldungasaga_, where the fratricide is called
Ingjald, not Frothi."[159] The story is, in substance, as follows.
Fridleif, King of Denmark, abducted Hilda, daughter of Ali, King of the
Uplands in Norway, and by her had a son who was named Ali; by another
woman he had a son who was named Frothi.
Frothi inherited his father's kingdom; but Ali, his half-brother, who
was a great warrior, conquered Sweden. Frothi's men feared Ali and
persuaded Frothi to try to have him put to death. Frothi yielded to
their entreaties, and Starkad, the famous warrior, was dispatched to
perform the deed. When an opportunity presented itself, he stabbed Ali
to death. "My brother has caused this," said Ali, and died laughing.
Later, Frothi defeated Jorund, King of Sweden, and made him a tributary
prince. He also defeated Swelling, a Swedish duke, and treated him in
the same manner. Frothi abducted Jorund's daughter, by whom he had a son
who was called Halfdan. But taking another woman to wife, a legitimate
heir was born to him, and this son was called Ingjald.
Starkad, however, was so filled with remorse for having killed Ali that
he did not wish to remain with Frothi. He went, therefore, soon after to
Russia and later to Sweden, but, disgusted with the idolatry of the
Swedes, returned to Frothi. Ingjald, son of Frothi, had in the meantime
married the daughter of Swerting, thus, as it seemed to all, effecting a
reconciliation with him.
Jorund and Swerting, however, formed a conspiracy against Frothi, and he
was slain one night while sacrificing to the gods. In the meantime,
Starkad was absent in Sweden, where, under the guise of friendship, he
was detained by gifts, in order that the plot against Frothi might be
the more easily executed.
Swerting placated Ingjald, Frothi's son and Swerting's son-in-law; but
Halfdan, Ingjald's half-brother, conquered Skåne and avenged his
father's murder by putting to death Swerting's twelve sons, who had
slain Frothi. At the instigation of Starkad, Ingjald put his wife,
Swerting's daughter, aside. He also granted Halfdan a third of the
kingdom. Swerting's daughter later bore Ingjald a son (Agnar); and by
his wife, Sigrith, Halfdan had a daughter, Signy, and two sons, Hroar
and Helgi.
Ingjald, however, desiring to rule over the whole kingdom, fell upon
Halfdan unexpectedly with an army and slew him. He married Halfdan's
widow, and by her had two sons, Hrörik and Frothi. Signy grew up under
her mother's care, and later Ingjald gave her in marriage to Sævil, an
earl in Seeland. But Hroar and Helgi hid from the king on an island near
Skåne, and when they had arrived at the proper age they slew Ingjald and
thus avenged their father's death.
Hroar and Helgi now became Kings of Denmark. Later Hroar married the
daughter of the King of England. Hrolf, nicknamed Kraki, who was eight
years old when his father, Helgi, died, succeeded him on the throne.
Hroar was soon after slain by his half-brothers, Hrörik and Frothi.
Hrolf then became sole King of Denmark.[160]