The Heroic Age
by H. Munro Chadwick · English · Gutenberg #48426 · 1,164,875 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Heroic Age
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The Heroic Age
Author: H. Munro Chadwick
Release date: March 7, 2015 [eBook #48426]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48426
Credits: Produced by Richard Tonsing, Suzanne Shell, The Internet
Archive/American Libraries and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE HEROIC AGE ***
Cambridge Archaeological and Ethnological Series
THE HEROIC AGE
[Illustration: MAP OF CENTRAL EUROPE
illustrating the Heroic Age of the Teutonic Peoples
Where the same name occurs both in capitals and italics the former
denote a position occupied in the early part of the Heroic Age, while
the latter mark a change or extension of territories.]
THE HEROIC AGE
BY
H. MUNRO CHADWICK
Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge
Cambridge:
at the University Press
1912
Reprinted
1967
Published by the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press
Bentley House, 200 Euston Road, London, N.W. 1
American Branch: 32 East 57th Street, New York, N.Y. 10022
PUBLISHER'S NOTE
Cambridge University Press Library Editions are reissues of
out-of-print standard works from the Cambridge catalogue. The texts
are unrevised and, apart from minor corrections, reproduce the latest
published edition.
First published 1912
Reprinted 1967
First printed in Great Britain at the University Printing
House, Cambridge
Reprinted in the United States of America
Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 13-13081
PREFACE
The type of poetry commonly known as heroic is one which makes its
appearance in various nations and in various periods of history. No
one can fail to observe that certain similar features are to be found
in poems of this type which are widely separated from one another both
in date and place of origin. In view of this fact it has seemed worth
while to attempt a comparative study of two groups of such poems with
the object of determining the nature of the resemblances between them
and the causes to which they are due. Occasional illustrations have
been taken from other groups of poems belonging to the same type.
The first part of the book deals with the early heroic poetry and
traditions of the Teutonic peoples, more especially with those stories
which were the common property of various Teutonic peoples. It is
pointed out that these stories all relate to a period with definite
limits--a period for which a considerable amount of information is
available from external sources. The subjects discussed include
the distribution of the stories and the relationship between the
various versions of them, the antiquity of the earliest poems and the
conditions under which they were produced. Lastly, an attempt has been
made to estimate the significance of the various elements, historical,
mythical and fictitious, of which the stories are composed.
The second part deals with Greek heroic poetry and traditions. These
relate to a period for which little or no external evidence is
available; and consequently they present many problems, the bearings
of which can hardly be estimated without reference to the existence
of similar phenomena elsewhere. In general I have followed the same
plan as in the first part, and made use throughout of the results
obtained there. If some excuse is necessary for dealing with so well
worn a theme I may plead that, so far as my knowledge goes, it has not
hitherto been approached from this point of view.
In the third part attention has been called to the existence of a
number of somewhat striking characteristics common to the two groups
of poems and an attempt made to account for them. The conclusion to
which I have been brought is that the resemblances in the poems are
due primarily to resemblances in the ages to which they relate and to
which they ultimately owe their origin. The comparative study of heroic
poetry therefore involves the comparative study of 'Heroic Ages'; and
the problems which it presents are essentially problems of anthropology.
In this conclusion I am glad to find myself in agreement with Dr
Haddon, who suggested to me that a comparative study of this kind would
be a suitable subject for the Cambridge Archaeological and Ethnological
Series. I take this opportunity of thanking him for bringing the matter
before the Syndics of the University Press and for the interest which
he has kindly taken in the progress of the work.
Owing to the pressure of teaching and other duties a considerable time
has unfortunately elapsed since the earlier portions of the book were
printed. I would therefore respectfully call the reader's attention
to the list of Addenda at the end, where references will be found to
several important works which have appeared in the meantime.
In a work, such as this, which deals with records preserved in a number
of different languages, difficulties necessarily arise with regard to
the spelling of proper names. In the representation of Teutonic names
the system adopted in my previous books has in general been retained.
Any such system is of course open to objections, of the cogency of
which I am quite aware; and consequently I have not felt inclined to
carry out my scheme with rigid consistency. The same remarks apply to
the representation of Greek names--which will doubtless displease many
critics. South Slavonic names and words are given according to the
usual Croatian orthography.
I cannot attempt here to enumerate the various scholars to whose
writings I am indebted. It will be seen that they are many and that
much of what I have had to do is in the nature of criticism. One name
however, that of Professor Ridgeway, I cannot leave unmentioned, since
it is largely to his inspiring influence--by no means through his
writings alone--that my interest in these subjects is due.
It remains for me to record my obligations to a number of friends who
have generously responded to my requests for information or criticism
on various points. In particular I must mention Miss A. C. Paues, Mr
A. B. Cook, Dr W. H. R. Rivers, Mr S. A. Cook, Professor J. W. H.
Atkins, Professor A. Mawer, Mr E. H. Minns and Mr F. W. Green. Above
all I am indebted to Mr E. C. Quiggin and Mr F. G. M. Beck, who have
most kindly read through a considerable part of the book in proof
and several chapters even in manuscript. It is scarcely necessary to
add that in the sections dealing with Celtic history and poetry Mr
Quiggin's criticism has been of the greatest value to me. My thanks
are due, further, to my pupils, Mr C. A. Scutt, of Clare College, and
Mr Bruce Dickins, of Magdalene College, for similar kind services in
the proofs of the later chapters. From the staff of the University
Library--in particular I must mention Mr A. Rogers and Mr O. Johnson--I
have received the same unfailing and courteous attention as in the
past. Lastly, I have to thank the Syndics of the University Press for
undertaking the publication of the book and the staff for the efficient
and obliging way in which the printing and corrections have been
carried out.
H. M. C.
_December, 1911._
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE EARLY NARRATIVE POETRY OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES 1
II. THE HEROIC AGE OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES 19
III. SCENE AND NATIONALITY IN THE HEROIC STORIES 30
IV. THE ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE HEROIC POEMS 41
V. THE POETRY AND MINSTRELSY OF EARLY TIMES 77
VI. SUPERNATURAL ELEMENTS IN THE HEROIC STORIES 110
VII. MYTHICAL ELEMENTS IN THE HEROIC POEMS 131
VIII. THE USE OF FICTION IN THE HEROIC POEMS 151
IX. THE HEROIC AGE OF GREECE 168
X. THE HOMERIC POEMS 193
XI. EARLY GREEK POETRY AND MINSTRELSY 221
XII. SUPERNATURAL ELEMENTS IN THE HOMERIC POEMS 249
XIII. MYTH IN THE HOMERIC POEMS 263
XIV. FICTION IN THE HOMERIC POEMS 292
XV. THE COMMON CHARACTERISTICS OF TEUTONIC AND GREEK
HEROIC POETRY 320
XVI. SOCIETY IN THE HEROIC AGE 344
XVII. GOVERNMENT IN THE HEROIC AGE 366
XVIII. RELIGION IN THE HEROIC AGE 393
XIX. THE CAUSES AND ANTECEDENT CONDITIONS OF THE
HEROIC AGE 432
NOTES.
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE USE OF HEROIC NAMES IN ENGLAND 64
II. ON THE DATING OF CERTAIN SOUND-CHANGES IN ANGLO-SAXON 66
III. LITERARY INFLUENCE IN BEOWULF 73
IV. ON THE HEROIC POETRY OF THE SLAVONIC PEOPLES 101
V. THE HEROIC POETRY OF THE CELTIC PEOPLES 105
VI. THE TROJAN CATALOGUE 244
VII. THE BATTLE OF KOSSOVO IN SERVIAN POETRY 313
VIII. THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE CELTIC AND SLAVONIC HEROIC AGES 427
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 464
INDEX 469
MAPS.
CENTRAL EUROPE, ILLUSTRATING THE HEROIC AGE
OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES _To face Title-page_
GREECE, ILLUSTRATING THE CATALOGUE OF SHIPS }
} _between pp._ 288
GREECE, SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE DIALECTS } _and_ 289
IN HISTORICAL TIMES }
TO
JAMES RENDEL HARRIS
IN GRATITUDE AND FRIENDSHIP
CHAPTER I.
THE EARLY NARRATIVE POETRY OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES.
The remains of English poetry which have come down to us from times
anterior to the Norman conquest are mainly of a religious character and
deal with the lives of saints or with subjects derived from the Bible
or ecclesiastical tradition. The secular poems are comparatively few
in number and, with one exception, of inconsiderable length. Most of
them are narrative poems, and admit of a very obvious classification
according to the choice of subjects with which they are concerned. One
group deals with the exploits of English kings and noblemen of the
tenth century, the other with the exploits and adventures of persons
who did not belong to this country. We will take the second group of
poems first, as it is admitted by all authorities to be the earlier of
the two.
The longest poem of this class is Beowulf, an epic of 3183 verses, the
subject of which briefly is as follows: Hrothgar, king of the Danes,
has built a splendid hall, but is unable to enjoy the use of it on
account of the ravages of a monster named Grendel, who attacks the
hall by night and devours all whom he finds there. Beowulf, a nephew
of Hygelac, king of the Geatas, hearing of Hrothgar's distress comes
to his help and destroys first the monster himself and then his mother
who had come to exact vengeance. He is thanked and rewarded for his
exploits by Hrothgar, and returns to his own home. After this a long
period is supposed to elapse. Hygelac has perished in an expedition
against the Frisians, and his son Heardred has been slain by the
Swedes. Beowulf has succeeded to the throne and reigned many years. In
his old age he resolves to attack a dragon which is ravaging the land,
and in spite of the cowardice of his followers, of whom all except one
forsake him, he eventually succeeds in destroying it, though not before
he has himself received a mortal wound. The poem ends with an account
of his funeral.
The action is interrupted a good many times by references to incidents
in the history of the royal families of the Danes and the Geatas,
particularly to Hygelac's fatal expedition and to the dealings of his
family with the Swedish kings Ongentheow, Onela and Eadgils. We find
also a number of allusions to heroes of the past such as Sigemund,
Eormenric, Finn and Offa, who are known to us from other sources.
To the same class of poetry belong some fragments dealing with the
stories of Finn and Waldhere. The fragment relating to Finn is very
obscure and indeed would be quite unintelligible were it not for a
passage in Beowulf (vv. 1068-1159) where the same story is introduced
as the subject of a recitation by Hrothgar's minstrel. A certain Hnaef,
represented as a vassal of Healfdene, Hrothgar's father, was slain in
a fortress belonging to Finn, king of the Frisians. His followers made
so brave a defence that Finn was compelled to come to terms with them.
Subsequently, when an opportunity presented itself they took vengeance
upon Finn and slew him. The fragment gives an account of the fighting
which took place, probably in the encounter immediately after Hnaef's
death.
The story of Waldhere is well known from German sources which we
shall have to mention presently. One of the fragments is taken up by
an altercation between Waldhere and the Burgundian king Guthhere,
before they begin to fight, while the other contains an exhortation to
Waldhere by the lady to acquit himself bravely.
Widsith, though not an epic poem itself, refers to a large number of
the characters which figure in Beowulf, Finn and Waldhere. It is stated
that the poet was in the service of a certain Eadgils, prince of the
Myrgingas, and that in company with Ealhhild, apparently a princess of
the same family, he visited the court of the Gothic king Eormenric. The
greater part of the poem is taken up with lists of peoples which he
had visited and of famous princes whom he knew personally or by report.
The elegy of Deor consists of a number of brief notices of misfortunes
which had befallen various persons, Weland and Beaduhild, Geat,
Theodric and the subjects of Eormenric. Each notice ends with a refrain
expressing the belief or hope that the poet will be able to survive his
misfortunes as they did. At the end he says that he had been the bard
of the Heodeningas, but that his office had been taken away from him
and given to a skilful minstrel named Heorrenda.
In a later chapter we shall have to discuss the question when these
poems were composed. At present it will be enough to remark that though
the MSS. in which they are preserved date only from the tenth or
eleventh centuries almost all scholars agree that the poems themselves
cannot be later than the eighth century, while probably the majority
would refer their composition, in part at least to the seventh. In
their present form they cannot be earlier than this, for with the
exception of the Finn-fragment all of them contain Christian allusions.
The later group of secular narrative poems may best be described as
historical. The earliest of them celebrates the battle of Brunanburh
won by Aethelstan in 937 over the Scottish king Constantine II and
his Scandinavian allies. Others describe Edmund's conquest of the
Five Boroughs, the coronation of Edgar, the glories of his reign, the
troubles which followed, and lastly the death of Edward the Confessor.
The longest of all is a detailed account of the disastrous battle of
Maldon, in which Byrhtnoth, earl of Essex, lost his life. All these
pieces except the last are found inserted in texts of the Saxon
Chronicle and all without exception appear to have been composed soon
after the events which they commemorate.
In addition to the above there are a number of other short poems which
are not essentially of a religious character. The most important of
these are the Wanderer, the Wife's Complaint, the Husband's Message and
the Ruin--to which we may perhaps add the first half of the Seafarer.
They are probably all of fairly early date, but they differ from the
poems we have been discussing in the fact that they contain no proper
names. Those of them which can be called narrative deal apparently
with typical characters or situations. A certain amount of magical and
gnomic poetry has also survived, while metrical riddles are numerous,
but these need not concern us here.
It is scarcely open to doubt that a large amount of Anglo-Saxon
narrative poetry has perished. Several historical poems and ballads
of the tenth and eleventh centuries, now lost, can be traced in texts
of the Saxon Chronicle and in Latin works[1]. Attempts have been made
also to show that narrative poems were used by the compilers of the
early part of the Chronicle and by several Latin histories referring
to the same period, but the evidence adduced is very doubtful. Perhaps
the most likely case is the story of Hengest and Horsa, especially
in the form in which it appears in the Historia Brittonum. On the
other hand it is probable that parts of the Vitae Duorum Offarum, a
St Albans work dating from the beginning of the thirteenth century,
are derived ultimately from poems which described Offa's single combat
and marriage--incidents to which we find brief references in Widsith
and Beowulf respectively. A similar origin may perhaps be claimed for
Walter Map's story (_De Nugis Curialium_, II 17) of Gado (Wada). A few
corrupt verses of a poem on this subject, obviously of late date, have
been preserved in a Latin homily[2].
The earlier and later groups of narrative poems have in general[3] the
same metrical form and on the whole a very similar terminology. The
love of battle-scenes is also common to both. In other respects however
they differ greatly. Here we need only notice the entire difference
in subject-matter; the poems of the second group contain no allusion
to the subjects of the first. Much greater changes however, both in
form and matter, are noticeable when English poetry reappears in the
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The majority of these poems are
of French origin. But even when the scene is laid in England, the
subjects are usually drawn from written sources--which is certainly
not the case with the historical poems of the tenth century. To the
subjects of the earlier group of Anglo-Saxon poems there is scarcely a
reference.
The period of German literature which corresponds chronologically to
the Anglo-Saxon period in England is far inferior to the latter in
remains of secular narrative poetry. We possess only one fragment of a
poem somewhat similar to the Finn-fragment, preserved in a MS. dating
from about 800, and one poem of somewhat later date, celebrating a
victory of Ludwig III, king of the West Franks. To these we may add
three or four very short metrical charms, similar to the Anglo-Saxon
magical pieces mentioned above.
The subject of the first of these poems is as follows: Hildebrand
(_Hiltibrant_) is an old warrior who has left his country with Dietrich
(_Theotrih_) and served with the Huns. On his return from exile, thirty
years later, he is challenged by a young warrior named Hadubrand. In
the altercation with which the piece opens Hildebrand discovers that
his opponent is his own son, acquaints him with the fact and tries to
dissuade him from the combat with offers of rich presents. But the
young man refuses to believe him, and taunts him with cowardice and
guile in trying to put him off his guard. Hildebrand is therefore
obliged to fight, and the fragment comes to an end in the midst of the
encounter.
The Ludwigslied is a poem of fifty-nine verses celebrating the praises
of Ludwig III, with special reference to his victory over the Northmen
at Saucourt in 881, and seems to have been composed before the king's
death in the following year. It is not in the old Teutonic alliterative
metre which we find in Anglo-Saxon poetry and in the Hildebrandslied,
but in the later rhyming verse. The religious element is prominent
throughout.
There is no doubt that a considerable amount of secular narrative
poetry once existed in German. Einhard in his Life of Charlemagne
(cap. 29) states that the emperor collected native and very ancient
poems in which were related the deeds and battles of kings of former
times[4]. But during the following centuries poetry of this kind seems
to have gone entirely out of favour among the higher classes. We do
indeed find occasional references to such poems in later Latin works.
In particular the Annals of Quedlinburg have incorporated from them a
number of notices relating to Eormenric, Theodric (_Thideric de Berne_)
and other heroes of antiquity. But here it is expressly stated that it
was among the peasants (_rustici_) that these poems were known. Other
Latin chronicles cite lost poems relating to persons and events of the
tenth century, which may have been somewhat similar to the contemporary
Anglo-Saxon poems, though generally they appear to have been of a less
serious character.
Some compensation for the loss of early German poetry is afforded by
the preservation of a few Latin poems, of which the most important is
_Waltharius manu fortis_, composed probably about 930 by Ekkehard of
St Gall. The subject is the same as that of the Anglo-Saxon Waldhere
fragments. Waltharius and Hiltgund, the son and daughter respectively
of two princes in Gaul, were betrothed in their childhood, but had
to be given up as hostages to Attila, king of the Huns. After many
years they escaped and carried off with them much treasure. Hearing of
this, King Guntharius, who dwelt at Worms, determined to waylay them
and set out with twelve warriors, among them the brave Hagano who had
formerly shared Waltharius' exile. Waltharius is overtaken in a defile
of the Vosges and slays eleven of the warriors in single combat. In
his final encounter with Hagano and Guntharius all three are crippled,
but Waltharius is able to make his way home with Hiltgund. There are
other poems, one of which combines German with Latin in each verse,
celebrating the deeds of the contemporary Saxon emperors and their
relatives.
The second period of German literature, beginning in the twelfth
century, is incomparably superior to the first in the amount of
secular narrative poetry which it has left behind. Here we need only
concern ourselves with those poems which draw their subjects from
ancient native traditions. These are mostly anonymous and come from the
southern districts, especially Austria and Bavaria. Their metrical form
is modern and similar to that of other poetry of the same period. The
best known of these poems is the Nibelungenlied, which dates from the
beginning of the thirteenth century. Only a very brief résumé of its
contents can be given here.
Siegfried (_Sîvrit_), the son of Siegmund, comes from Xanten to Worms
and asks for the hand of Kriemhild, the sister of the Burgundian
king Gunther. He joins Gunther in his campaigns and by magical arts
enables him to win the amazon Brünhild (_Prünhilt_) for his bride.
The two wives quarrel, and Brünhild learns from Kriemhild of the part
played by Siegfried towards her. On hearing this she begins to long
for his death, and eventually he is murdered at a hunting party by
Hagen (_Hagene_), the chief of Gunther's knights. Hagen also deprives
Kriemhild of Siegfried's treasure (_der Nibelunge hort_) and sinks it
in the Rhine. Kriemhild is afterwards married to Etzel, king of the
Huns and, burning for vengeance, persuades him to invite Gunther on a
visit, together with his brothers Gernot and Giselher and also Hagen.
Soon after their arrival she brings about a quarrel, and after a huge
slaughter on both sides, Gunther and Hagen, who have lost all their
men, are captured by Dietrich von Bern, Etzel's vassal. Kriemhild puts
them to death, violating the oath which she had given to spare them,
and in anger at this treachery Hildebrand, Dietrich's old retainer,
slays her.
Closely connected in subject with the Nibelungenlied is the Klage,
which describes the funeral of those slain in the fighting with Gunther
and the lamentation over them. Here too we may notice the Seyfridslied,
though in the form in which it has come down to us it belongs to a
much later period. In reality it is clearly a combination of two
different ballads, both of which deal with Siegfried's early years. The
first relates how he was brought up by a smith and slew a dragon. The
second gives an account of another similar adventure--this time with a
fiery dragon which had carried off Kriemhild from her father's home.
Siegfried kills the dragon and at the same time takes possession of the
treasure of certain dwarfs, the sons of Nybling.
A number of other medieval poems deal with the adventures of Dietrich
von Bern and his knights. Alpharts Tod tells the story of the young
knight Alphart, Hildebrand's nephew, and his encounter with two of
Ermenrich's warriors named Witege and Heime, by the former of whom
he was treacherously slain. Dietrichs Flucht relates how Ermenrich
(_Ermrich_) was instigated by an evil counseller named Sibeche to plot
destruction for his nephew Dietrich. Though the plot fails, Hildebrand
and several of Dietrich's other knights are captured and imprisoned,
and in order to obtain their release Dietrich is forced to go into
exile. In the Rabenschlacht we are told how Dietrich with the help
of Etzel set out to recover his inheritance. While he is engaged in
battle with Ermenrich, his brother Diether and two young sons of Etzel
are slain by Witege. Dietrich rides after Witege to exact vengeance,
but Witege disappears in the sea. Virginal describes how Dietrich
was imprisoned by a giant in a castle called Muter and rescued by
Hildebrand, Witege, Heime and others. Further adventures with giants
and dwarfs are related in the Eckenlied, Sigenot and Laurin. In the
Rosengarten Dietrich is made to fight with Siegfried.
The story of Wolfdietrich and Ortnit has come down to us in several
different forms, but the outline may be given briefly as follows.
Wolfdietrich, the son of king Hugdietrich, is kept out of his
inheritance by his brothers or their guardian Saben on the ground of
illegitimacy. He betakes himself to a faithful old knight, Berchtung of
Meran, who raises an army to help him. But in the battle that ensues
Berchtung and his sons are all slain or captured, and Wolfdietrich has
to go into exile. He then marries the widow of a king named Ortnit and
destroys the dragon which had killed him. Eventually he succeeds in
winning his father's kingdom and releasing his faithful followers. Some
elements of this story appear to have been incorporated in the romance
of King Rother.
The story of the poem Kûdrûn falls naturally into two parts. In the
first Hetel (_Hetele_), king of Denmark, hears of Hilde, a princess of
Ireland and desires to marry her. As her father, the fierce Hagen, will
not consent, Hetel's warriors Wate, Fruote and Hôrand carry her off.
Hagen pursues them to Denmark, but in the fight which follows he is
nearly killed by Wate. Finally a reconciliation takes place and Hilde
is allowed to marry Hetel. In the second part Hartmuot and Herwig are
suitors for Kûdrûn, the daughter of Hetel and Hilde. The latter is at
length accepted, but Kûdrûn is carried off by Hartmuot and his father
Ludwig (_Ludewîc_). A pursuit follows and Hetel is killed by Ludwig.
Kûdrûn is kept at Hartmuot's home for seven years, harshly treated by
his mother Gerlind, because she will not consent to become his wife. At
last Herwig and her brother Ortwîn with the warriors Wate, Fruote and
Hôrand come and rescue her. Ludwig is killed but Hartmuot is spared at
Kûdrûn's intercession.
In conclusion mention must be made of some fragments of a poem dealing
with Walther and Hildegund. The subject seems to have been identical
with that of Ekkehard's Waltharius. Reminiscences of other ancient
stories are occasionally to be found in poems of a romantic character.
Among these we may note especially the poem Herzog Friedrich von
Schwaben, a portion of which seems to be derived from the story of
Weland.
The North German dialects have no poetry of this type, except a few
ballads dating from much later times, of which the most important is
one on Eormenric's death. But a great mass of legend, derived chiefly
from North German sources, is preserved in the Norse work Thiðreks
Saga af Bern, which dates from about the middle of the thirteenth
century. The characters are for the most part identical with those
which figure in the High German epics, Dietrich von Bern, Ermenrich,
Witege, Walther, Siegfried etc. Traces of poems of much earlier date
have been sought in several Latin chronicles. Besides the references in
the Annals of Quedlinburg, to which we have already alluded, mention
may be made of the Saxon stories given by Widukind and the Translatio
S. Alexandri, especially that of the victory over the Thuringian king
Irminfrith.
The vernacular poetry of the Langobardi has entirely perished, but a
number of stories given by the Latin historians are thought to be
based on early poems. The first and most striking of these is the
account of the battle with the Vandals, in which the two armies appeal
for victory to Wodan and Fria respectively[5]. A similar origin has
been claimed for several other narratives, such as that of Alboin's
visit to Turisind, king of the Gepidae, and more especially the story
of Authari and Theudelinda[6].
The Gothic historian Jordanes states (cap. 5) that his compatriots
were wont to celebrate the deeds of their famous men in poetry, and it
is probable that many of the legends which he gives were ultimately
derived from such poems. Among them we may include not only the story
of Filimer and the migration to the Black Sea (cap. 4)--in which
case ancient poems are expressly mentioned--but also perhaps that of
the first migration under Berig (_ib._) and some part of the account
of Ostrogotha (cap. 16 f.), as well as the incidental reference to
Vidigoia's death (cap. 34). In the story of Hermanaricus also several
incidents, notably the death of Sunilda and the vengeance subsequently
exacted by her brothers Sarus and Ammius (cap. 24), suggest a tradition
preserved in poetic form.
No Scandinavian country except Iceland[7] has preserved any early poems
in its native language. The ancient literature of Iceland however
is peculiarly rich in secular narrative poetry. Moreover though the
earliest of these poems are probably quite two centuries later than
Beowulf, they are entirely free from Christian influence. Indeed it
can hardly be doubted that a considerable proportion of them date from
heathen times.
It will be convenient to begin with the collection of poems usually
known as the Older Edda. These are all anonymous; but most of them are
generally believed to belong to the tenth century, while a few may
really have been composed in Norway at a still earlier date. Eleven of
these poems deal exclusively, or almost exclusively, with gods, giants
and other supernatural beings, and hence stand quite apart from the
class of poetry with which we are concerned. But since we shall have to
refer to them occasionally in the following pages it will be convenient
here to give a brief synopsis of their contents.
Völuspá is a mythological poem in the form of a speech delivered to the
god Othin by a sibyl whom he is consulting. It deals with the origin
of the world, the history of the gods and their coming fate. Hávamál
is a collection of proverbial wisdom and moral precepts of the heathen
age, with occasional references to myth and ritual. Vafþrúðnismál
describes how Othin visited the giant Vafþrúðnir and entered into
a contest with him in mythological lore. The subject of Grímnismál
is a visit paid by Othin in disguise to a king named Geirröðr, who
tortures him. Othin gives a long discourse on mythological matters
and finally reveals himself, whereupon the king stumbles over his
sword and dies. Skírnismál relates how Skírnir, the servant of the
god Frey, was sent to obtain for his master the hand of the giantess
Gerðr, of whom he had become passionately enamoured. Hárbarðslióð is
taken up with an altercation between the god Thor and a ferryman called
Hárbarðr (generally supposed to be Othin), who refuses to take him over
a strait. Hýmiskviða gives an account of Thor's adventures when he
went to visit the giant Hýmir. Lokasenna is occupied with a number of
scandalous charges brought by Loki against various gods and goddesses
who have been invited to a feast by Aegir. Thrymskviða relates how the
giant Thrymr, having obtained possession of Thor's hammer, demanded
the goddess Freyia as his bride, and how Thor came disguised as Freyia
and slew the giant. Alvíssmál is a dialogue between Thor and the dwarf
Alvíss, who is a suitor for his daughter. Thor detains the dwarf with
questions on the various names of natural objects and phenomena until
the fatal moment of daybreak. Vegtamskviða describes how Othin went to
consult a sibyl on the impending fate of Balder.
In addition to these pieces, all of which probably come from one
collection, there are two semi-mythical poems contained in other
works. Rígsmál or Rígsþula relates how a certain Rígr (identified in
the introduction with the god Heimdallr) became the progenitor of
the three classes of men--the characteristics of which are described
at length. Hyndlulióð is mainly a genealogical poem, narrating how
Freyia went to consult the giantess Hyndla as to the ancestry of her
devotee, Óttarr the son of Innsteinn. It contains also some purely
mythological matter which is generally supposed to have come from a
separate poem. Here also we may mention two pieces known as Grógaldr
and Fiölsvinnsmál, which clearly belong together. In the former
Svipdagr calls up the spirit of Gróa, his mother; in the latter he
comes to the enchanted abode of Menglöð and, after many questions with
the gatekeeper, is at length recognised as her destined lover. In much
later times we find Swedish and Danish versions of the same story, and
there can be little doubt that it is really a folk-tale.
The purely mythological poems of the Edda are followed by
Völundarkviða, which gives a fairly full account of the story of
Völundr (Weland). It describes how Völundr and his brothers obtained
as their wives three swan-maidens, who after eight years deserted
them. Then Völundr is captured by a king named Níðuðr, hamstrung and
compelled to work as his smith. Völundr executes vengeance on the
king's sons and daughter (Böðvildr) and then flies away.
The next poem, Helgakviða Hiörvarðssonar, gives in dialogue form a
somewhat complicated story of the adventures of a king named Hiörvarðr
and his son Helgi. A different Helgi, the son of Sigmundr, is the
subject of the two following poems, Helgakviður Hundingsbana. Both
poems relate how the hero overthrew a king named Hundingr and how he
was afterwards summoned by Sigrún, the daughter of Högni, to save her
from marriage to a prince named Höðbroddr, whom she detested. The first
poem ends with Helgi's victory over Högni and Höðbroddr; but the second
goes on to describe how Dagr, the son of Högni, subsequently slew Helgi
in revenge for his father. Sinfiötli, the son of Sigmundr, figures in
both poems, but Sigurðr is not mentioned.
The next poem, Grípisspá, probably a late work, gives a summary of the
adventures of Sigurðr, the son of Sigmundr, in the form of a dialogue
between the hero and his uncle Grípir, who is endowed with prophecy.
This is followed by three pieces which may really be parts of one
original poem. The first (commonly called Reginsmál) relates how three
of the gods, Othin, Hoenir and Loki, killed a certain Otr, the son of
Hreiðmarr. Having to pay compensation to the father, Loki robbed a
dwarf, named Andvari, of his gold. Andvari laid a curse on the gold,
and Hreiðmarr was soon killed by his own son Fáfnir, who subsequently
turned into a serpent.[8] Reginn, Fáfnir's brother, betook himself to
Sigurðr and became his attendant. The poem then goes on to describe
how a certain Hnikarr (Othin) guided Sigurðr on an expedition he
undertook against the sons of Hundingr. In the next piece (Fáfnismál)
Sigurðr at Reginn's instigation attacks and kills Fáfnir. Then, finding
that Reginn is plotting treachery, he slays him also and carries off
Fáfnir's gold. In the third (Sigrdrífumál) Sigurðr finds and wakens a
maid named Sigrdrífa, a valkyrie who has been punished by Othin with an
enchanted sleep. She imparts to him much magical lore; but the close of
the poem is lost owing to a lacuna in the MS.
Of the following nine poems six--Sigurðarkviða I (a fragment),
Guðrúnarkviða I, Sigurðarkviða II (_hin skamma_), Guðrúnarkviða II
(_hin forna_), Atlakviða and Atlamál--deal with practically the same
events as the Nibelungenlied. But unfortunately, owing to the lacuna in
the MS. several poems at the beginning of the series have been lost.
Hence in order to obtain a full account of the story it is necessary to
refer to the Völsunga Saga (see below), which used the lost poems as
well as the others.
The chief variations from the German version of the story are as
follows: (i) Sigmundr has been killed before the birth of Sigurðr
(Siegfried) by the sons of Hundingr. (ii) The wife of Sigurðr is called
Guðrún, Grímhildr being the name of her mother and Giúki that of her
father. (iii) Brynhildr is the sister of Atli (Etzel). In several
authorities[9] she is identified with the valkyrie of Sigrdrífumál,
and it is stated that she and Sigurðr had exchanged vows of love; but
Sigurðr's love was subsequently turned to Guðrún through a magic potion
given him by Grímhildr. (iv) Högni (Hagen) is the brother of Gunnarr
(Gunther); and in place of Gernôt and Gîselher there is another brother
named Guthormr. It is the last-named who actually kills Sigurðr, and
he is himself killed by the dying man. Brynhildr then puts herself to
death and is burned with Sigurðr. (v) The death of Gunnarr and Högni
is attributed to Atli. Guðrún on the other hand warns her brothers of
the treachery awaiting them, and subsequently avenges their deaths by
killing Atli and the children he had had by her.
Interspersed among these poems are three others connected with
the same story, but dealing with incidents unknown to the German
version. The Helreið Brynhildar describes how Brynhildr on her way
to Hell encounters a giantess, to whom she tells the story of her
life. Guðrúnarkviða III relates how Guðrún was accused to Atli of
adultery with Thióðrekr, but established her innocence by the ordeal.
In Oddrúnargrátr a sister of Atli named Oddrún comes to Borgný, the
daughter of a certain Heiðrekr, to relieve her in her travail, and
gives an account of the relations between herself, Brynhildr and
Gunnarr.
The last two poems--Guðrúnarhvöt and Hamðismál--are concerned with
the story of the attack upon Iörmunrekr (Hermanaricus), to Jordanes'
account of which we have already alluded (p. 10). Here the story is
connected with the preceding poems[10] by the fact that Svanhildr
(Sunilda) is represented as the daughter of Guðrún and Sigurðr, while
Hamðir and Sörli (Ammius and Sarus) are said to be the sons of Guðrún
and a certain Iónakr, whom she had married after Atli's death. In the
first poem Guðrún incites her sons to avenge their sister and then
bewails her many misfortunes. The second describes the actual fighting,
preceded however by the account of a quarrel in which Erpr, a stepson
of Guðrún, is killed by his half-brothers. To his death is attributed
the fact that Iörmunrekr, was able to survive the onslaught, though he
lost both hands and both feet.
The prose Edda (Skaldskaparmál, cap. 43) contains a poem, Grottasöngr,
which gives the story of two giant maidens who had to grind gold and
peace for the Danish king Fróði. At the end there is an allusion to
Halfdan and Hrólfr Kraki (see below). Besides this we have, both in
the prose Edda and elsewhere, a number of fragments of poems, some
of which refer to Sigurðr and his family and some to other stories.
Among the latter mention may be made especially of a poem Biarkamál,
which celebrated the achievements of the Danish king Hrólfr Kraki and
the heroism of his retinue in the battle wherein he lost his life. In
Hervarar Saga large portions of an early poem relating to the Goths and
Huns have been preserved.
In addition to the poems enumerated above, all of which are anonymous,
we have also a number of works by known poets. Most of these deal
either wholly or in part with contemporary persons and events. The
earliest date from the ninth century and are of Norwegian origin.
Probably the oldest of all are the fragments of Bragi Boddason, the
chief of which is a description of his shield (Ragnarsdrápa). From
the reign of Harold the Fair-haired several poems are known, though
nearly all of them are in a very fragmentary condition. Among them
may be mentioned especially the Ynglingatal of Thióðolfr of Hvín, a
genealogical poem which traces the descent of Rögnvaldr, a cousin
of Harold, from the ancient kings of the Swedes and the god Frey.
Another famous work by the same poet was the Haustlöng, which dealt
with mythological subjects. Next perhaps in importance to Thióðolfr
was Thórbiörn Hornklofi, from whom we have fragments of two poems
(Hrafnsmál and Glymdrápa), celebrating the exploits of Harold. Somewhat
later we hear of a poet named Goððormr Sindri, who is known chiefly
from the remains of a work (Hákonardrápa) in honour of Haakon I. A
famous fragment (Eireksmál) by an unknown poet, dating from shortly
after the middle of the tenth century, celebrates the death of King
Eiríkr Blóðöx and his reception by Othin in Valhalla. From this is
copied the Hákonarmál of Eyvindr Skaldaspillir, celebrating the death
of Haakon I at the battle of Fitje (A.D. 961). The same poet also
composed a genealogical poem (Háleygiatal) in imitation of Ynglingatal.
In it he traced the ancestry of Haakon, earl of Lade, who ruled Norway
from about 975 to 995, back through the kings of Hálogaland to Othin
and Skaði.
From this time onwards the cultivation of poetry seems to have been
almost entirely limited to Icelanders, many of whom resided largely
at the courts of various Scandinavian kings. Among them the most
noteworthy and almost the earliest was Egill Skallagrímsson, who
lived from about 900 to 982. He is known chiefly from the Höfuðlausn,
composed for Eiríkr Blóðöx in England, the Arinbiarnardrápa, in honour
of his friend Arinbiörn, and the Sonatorrek, an elegy over one of his
sons. Of his younger contemporaries perhaps the best known are Kormakr
Ögmundarson and Einarr Helgason. The latter is famous chiefly for his
poem Vellekla, in which he celebrated the exploits of Earl Haakon.
Many other distinguished poets flourished during the following half
century--down to the time of Harold III (Harðráði)--but it is not
necessary here to discuss their works.
By the time of Harold III the composition of prose narratives or sagas
(sögur) had already begun to be cultivated by Icelanders, though it
was not until towards the end of the following century that they were
first committed to writing. Many sagas are based on old narrative
poems; as for instance Ynglinga Saga, which is largely a paraphrase and
expansion of Ynglingatal. Völsunga Saga, which gives the stories of
Helgi, Sigurðr, Guðrún and Svanhildr, is derived mainly from the poems
of the Edda, though it has used other materials. The earlier part,
dealing with Sigmundr and his ancestors seems to have drawn upon some
lost poems. In Sörla Tháttr[11] we meet with a story--found also in the
prose Edda (Skaldsk. 50) and alluded to in Bragi's Ragnarsdrápa--which
is clearly connected with that of the first part of the German poem
Kûdrûn. Hildr, the daughter of Högni, is carried off in her father's
absence by his friend Heðinn. They are overtaken and a battle follows,
in which all the combatants are killed. Hildr by magic spells rouses
the slain each night to renew the battle. In Hrólfs Saga Kraka we have
an account of the Danish kings Helgi and Hróarr, the sons of Halfdan,
and of Helgi's son, Hrólfr Kraki, which seems to be derived ultimately
from old poems like Biarkamál. Certain incidents in the story, such
as Hrólfr's dealings with the Swedish king Aðils, are related also in
other sagas. The same characters figured prominently in Skiöldunga
Saga, of which we have little except an abridged Latin translation.
This saga also related at length the stories of Haraldr Hilditönn,
Sigurðr Hringr and Ragnarr Loðbrók, parts of which are known also from
other sources, especially Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar and the Tháttr af
Loðbrókar sonum.
Among Latin authorities the most important is the great Danish History
(_Gesta Danorum_) of Saxo Grammaticus, which dates from the end of
the twelfth century and contains metrical translations or paraphrases
of many old poems. Of these perhaps the most noteworthy are the
Biarkamál and some of the poems attributed to Starkaðr (Starcatherus),
particularly those addressed to Ingialdr (Ingellus). Here also we find
a detailed account of the tragic story of Hagbarðr and Signý, which is
very frequently alluded to in Old Norse poetry. Hagbarðr belonged to a
family which was involved in vendetta with the Danish king Sigarr. But
having fallen in love with Signý, the king's daughter, he visited her
disguised as a woman--an adventure which ended in his being discovered
and condemned to death. Signý and all her maidens destroyed themselves
when he was led to the gallows. Many other stories are given entirely
in prose, among them those of Heðinn and Högni, Iörmunrekr and Helgi
Hundingsbani, though no mention is made of Sigmundr or Sigurðr. The
adventures also of Haraldr Hilditönn and Ragnarr Loðbrók are related
at considerable length. Lastly, we may mention a story which is not
recorded by any Icelandic authority, namely that of the single combat
fought by Uffo the son of Wermundus. It deserves notice here on account
of its obvious identity with the English story of Offa.
In the course of this chapter we have reviewed briefly the secular
narrative poetry produced by the various Teutonic peoples down to the
end of the tenth century. In the case of works by historical Norwegian
and Icelandic poets, owing to the abundance of material, we have
restricted ourselves to mentioning only the leading names. Elsewhere we
have endeavoured to give a more or less complete summary. On the other
hand, among works dating from later than the tenth century, we have
taken into consideration only those which are concerned with stories
of ancient times. The stories themselves will be discussed in the
following chapters.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Cf. Brandl in Paul's _Grundriss d. germ. Philol._², II pp. 1083
ff., 1087 f.
[2] Academy, 1896, I 137; cf. Brandl, _op. cit._, p. 1085.
[3] This remark applies more especially to the poems on Brunanburh and
Maldon in the later group.
[4] Saxo Poeta, who wrote about 890, speaks of _uulgaria carmina_ which
celebrated _Pippinos Carolos Hludowicos et Theodricos et Carlomannos
Hlothariosque_ (Mon. Germ., Script. I 268). But it is usually held that
these words are due to a mistaken inference from Einhard, whose work he
was using.
[5] Origo Gentis Langobardorum (Mon. Germ., Script. Rerum Langobard.,
p. 2 f.); Paulus Diaconus, _Hist. Lang._ I 8.
[6] Cf. Kögel, _Geschichte d. deutschen Litteratur_, I p. 115 ff.
[7] The poems were not all composed in Iceland. Many of the earliest
doubtless came from Norway, others perhaps from the British Isles,
while others again are referred to Greenland.
[8] Called a dragon (_dreki_) in Völsunga Saga.
[9] Helreið Brynh. (str. 7 ff.) and the prose versions (Skaldsk.
41, Völs. S. 20). It is a much debated question whether the two are
identified also in Fáfnismál, str. 40 ff. In Grípisspá they seem
clearly to be separated.
[10] The death of Svanhildr is mentioned also in Sigurðarkviða II,
where it is attributed (as in the prose authorities) to the evil
counsel of a certain Bikki, an adviser of Iörmunrekr.
[11] Fornaldar Sögur Norðrlanda, I p. 391 ff.
CHAPTER II.
THE HEROIC AGE OF THE TEUTONIC PEOPLES.
It will not have escaped notice that a large proportion of the stories
described or alluded to in the preceding chapter are found in the
literature of more than one nation. The most casual reader could not
fail to observe the identity of the story of Sigurðr and Guðrún,
as given in the Edda and Völsunga Saga, with that of Siegfried and
Kriemhild related in the Nibelungenlied. Equally obvious is the
connection between the story of Iörmunrekr and Svanhildr in the same
Scandinavian authorities and that of Hermanaricus and Sunilda given by
Jordanes. A still closer resemblance is furnished by the Anglo-Saxon
poem Waldhere and the German-Latin Waltharius. The connection between
the German poem Kûdrûn and the Scandinavian story of Heðinn and
Högni is perhaps less striking, but not open to question. The brief
references to the story of Weland and Beaduhild in the Anglo-Saxon poem
Deor are quite sufficient to prove its substantial identity with that
told in Völundarkviða.
In other cases the same characters appear, though the incidents
related are different. Eormenric (Ermenrich) is a prominent figure in
Anglo-Saxon and German poetry, as well as in Scandinavian and Gothic
records. The Wudga and Hama of Widsith (Waldhere and Beowulf) and the
Theodric of Waldhere are clearly identical with the Witege, Heime and
Dietrich von Bern of the German epics, while Theodric figures also,
though not prominently, in the Edda. Of all the Edda poems[12] those
which show the least connection with non-Scandinavian poetry are the
three Helgakviður. Yet Sinfiötli, as well as Sigmundr, is mentioned in
Beowulf (under the form Fitela) and there are traces that his name was
once known in Germany.
We may observe that in Beowulf it is only the persons mentioned in
casual references and in episodes lying outside the main action of
the story, such as Sigemund, Eormenric, Hama and Weland, to whom we
find allusions in German poetry. On the other hand most of the chief
characters of the poem are well known from Scandinavian records,
though not in connection with precisely the same incidents. There is
no doubt as to the identity of the Danish kings Healfdene, his sons
Hrothgar and Halga, and Hrothwulf the nephew and colleague of Hrothgar,
with Halfdan, his sons Hróarr and Helgi and Helgi's son, the famous
Hrólfr Kraki--all likewise kings of the Danes. Equally obvious is the
identity of the Swedish prince Eadgils the son of Ohthere with Aðils
the son of Óttarr in Ynglingatal, while his uncle and opponent Onela
is clearly the same person as Aðils' opponent Áli, although the latter
is represented as a Norwegian in Old Norse literature. Further, the
episode in which Ingeld is incited by an old warrior to avenge his
father Froda is evidently to be connected with certain poems given by
Saxo, in which the old warrior Starcatherus rouses Ingellus to avenge
his father Frotho. Among other persons mentioned in the poem Scyld is
doubtless to be identified with the Skiöldr of Scandinavian tradition;
probably also Heremod with the Hermóðr of Hyndlulióð and Weoxtan with
the Vésteinn of the Kalfsvísa[13]. To the identification of Beowulf
himself with the Biarki of Scandinavian tradition, which is doubted by
some scholars, we shall have to return later.
The characters of the Finn fragment are much less easy to trace
elsewhere. Two of Hnaef's warriors named Ordlaf and Guthlaf are
probably to be identified with two Danish princes, Oddlevus and
Gunnlevus, mentioned in Skiöldunga Saga; but there is nothing to show
that Sigeferth is identical with Sigurðr the son of Sigmundr. In
Widsith however we find a large number of persons who are well known
from Continental and Scandinavian authorities. Besides Eormenric,
Wudga, Hama, Offa, Hrothgar, Hrothwulf and Ingeld, of whom we have
already spoken, we hear of Aetla, king of the Huns (Atli, Etzel),
Guthhere and Gifeca, kings of the Burgundians (i.e. the Gunnarr and
Giúki of the Edda), and Sigehere, king of the Danes (i.e. probably
Sigarr, the father of Signý), as well as the Goths Eastgota the father
of Unwine (i.e. Jordanes' Ostrogotha the father of Hunwil), Becca
(probably Bikki, the evil counsellor of Iörmunrekr) and the Herelingas,
Emerca and Fridla, who are doubtless to be identified with the
Embrica and Fritla, nephews of Eormenric, mentioned in the Annals of
Quedlinburg and elsewhere. It is more than probable also that in v. 21:
"Hagena ruled the Holmryge and Heoden (MS. _Henden_) the Glommas," we
have an allusion to the story of Heðinn and Högni (the Hetel and Hagen
of Kûdrûn). We may compare a passage of Deor (v. 35 ff.) which tells of
a skilful minstrel of the Heodeningas named Heorrenda, presumably the
Hôrand of the German poem.
These instances, though far from exhaustive, will be sufficient to show
that the same characters recur again and again in the early narrative
poetry of the various Teutonic peoples. In the last nineteen poems of
the Older Edda (viz. those which deal with human beings) there is but
one (Helgakviða Hiörvarðssonar) which introduces no characters known
elsewhere. Among the early Anglo-Saxon poems treated on p. 1 ff. we
find no such case, and the same is probably true of the German poems
discussed on pp. 5, 7 ff. With the later Anglo-Saxon poems (p. 3) and
the German historical poems of the ninth and following centuries the
case is quite otherwise. The exploits of Aethelstan and Byrhtnoth are
celebrated only in English poems, those of Ludwig III and other German
princes only in the poetry of their own country. So also with the
skaldic poems of the North. If these introduce any personal names known
in the poetry of England or Germany they are names, like Sigmundr and
Hermóðr, derived from earlier poems and not belonging to contemporary
persons. Similarly neither English nor German poetry celebrates the
deeds of Eiríkr Blóðöx or Haakon the Good.
The phenomena noted above seem to indicate that the poetic cycles with
which we have been dealing have a common origin or at least that there
was a considerable amount of borrowing between poets of different
nations. In order however to be able to form an opinion on this point
it is necessary first to consider the following questions: (i) how
far the characters and incidents of these poems are to be regarded as
historical, (ii) to what period or periods of history they belong.
We may note in passing that no doubt need be entertained as to the
historical basis of the later group of Anglo-Saxon poems, of German
poems such as the Ludwigslied or of the Northern skaldic poems--however
much the true facts may be obscured by poetic embellishments.
It is clear enough that some of the characters of the common cycles
are historical persons. Thus there can be no doubt that Aetla (Atli,
Etzel), king of the Huns, is the famous Hunnish king Attila who died in
453. Again the Burgundian king Guthhere (Gunnarr, Gunther), who plays
so prominent a part in the stories of Waldhere and Sigurðr-Siegfried,
is clearly identical with the historical Burgundian king Gundicarius
(Gundaharius), whose defeat in 435 by the Roman general Aetius is
recorded by contemporary writers. Of his end Prosper says only that the
Huns destroyed him together with his family and nation[14], and some
scholars have denied that Attila had any part in this event[15]. But
our knowledge of the course of events on or beyond the Roman frontier
at this period is too slight to justify any confident statement on such
a point. Of the other members of the Burgundian royal family Gifeca
(Giúki) and Gislhere (Giselher) are mentioned in the laws of King
Gundobad who died in the year 516[16].
The Gothic king Eormenric (Hermanaricus, Iörmunrekr) is another
doubtless historical character. The account of him given by Jordanes
seems indeed to be derived from tradition, handed down probably in
poetic form; but the statement that he took his own life through fear
of the Huns is confirmed by the strictly contemporary writer Ammianus
Marcellinus (xxxi. 3. 1), from whom we gather that the event took place
shortly after 370. He also states that Eormenric was a most warlike
king and feared by the surrounding nations on account of his many brave
deeds.
In Dietrich von Bern (the Theodric of Waldhere and the Thióðrekr of the
Edda) we certainly have reminiscences of the Ostrogothic king Theodoric
who ruled Italy from 489 to 526. The statement in the Hildebrandslied
that he fled from the hostility of Ottachar and the story of the
Rabenschlacht recall his campaigns with Odoacer, which culminated in
the surrender of Ravenna in 493. But it cannot possibly be true that
he was present at Attila's court, where we find him in the Edda and in
German poetry, much less that he had any dealings with Eormenric. The
former mistake is generally attributed to confusion between Dietrich
and his father Dietmar (Thiudemer), who is known to have been with
Attila. The other error however is more difficult to account for and
will require to be discussed later.
It is commonly held that in the poems dealing with Wolfdietrich[17] the
hero and his father Hugdietrich represent a confusion of the Frankish
kings Theodberht (r. 534-548) and his father Theodric I (r. 511-534).
In this case however it must be confessed that the resemblances are
extremely slight. The application of the name Hugo Theodoricus to
Theodric I in the Annals of Quedlinburg cannot at best prove more than
that the chronicler identified the two.
The identification of characters which figure in stories relating to
the northern kingdoms is naturally more difficult, since references to
such persons by contemporary Roman historians are extremely rare. One
safe instance however is furnished by the incident, referred to several
times in Beowulf, of Hygelac's disastrous expedition against the Franks
and Frisians. Gregory of Tours (III 3) and the Gesta Francorum (cap.
19) mention a very serious raid on the lower Rhine by a king of the
Danes named Chocilaicus, which ended in his defeat and death through
the arrival of an army under Theodberht. The Liber Monstrorum (I, cap.
3[18]), a work of perhaps the seventh century, states that the bones of
a certain _Getarum rex Huiglaucus_, who had been slain by the Franks,
were preserved on an island at the mouth of the Rhine. There can be no
question that the person referred to in these passages is the Hygelac
of Beowulf. The date of the expedition, though not precisely fixed by
any authority, may safely be placed within a few years of 520.
Most of the Danish and Swedish princes common to Beowulf and the
Northern authorities are now generally regarded as historical
characters, though we have no reference to them in contemporary
documents. It is to be noted in the first place that though the persons
themselves are common to the two traditions, English and Northern, they
are not as a rule mentioned in connection with the same incidents.
Further, there is no evidence for communication between England and
the Baltic during the seventh and eighth centuries. This renders it
probable that the two records go back independently to a time at which
persons who remembered Hygelac's younger contemporaries might still be
alive.
Lastly a few words must be said with regard to the stories of Haraldr
Hilditönn, Sigurðr Hringr and Ragnarr Loðbrók. The sons of Loðbrók
are well known from contemporary historical documents through their
piratical expeditions, more especially the great invasion of England in
866. Moreover, though the references to Loðbrók himself are rare and
doubtful, it is clear enough that the king Ella who is said to have
put him to death was the Northumbrian usurper Aella, who reigned from
863 to 867. Loðbrók's father Sigurðr Hringr has been identified with a
certain Sigifridus whose conflict with another Danish king named Anulo
is recorded in a number of Latin chronicles under the year 812, and
Anulo himself with that Óli who is represented as Sigurðr's ally at the
battle of Brávík. Lastly, it has been suggested that a reference to
Haraldr Hilditönn may quite possibly be preserved in the description of
Anulo as _nepos Herioldi quondam regis_[19]; for according to Saxo (p.
250) Óli was the son of Haraldr's sister and eventually succeeded him
on the Danish throne.
The above identifications[20] are sufficient to show that historical
characters are introduced into most of the stories with which we have
been dealing. Further--and this is a very remarkable fact--apart from
the last cycles embracing Haraldr Hilditönn and Ragnarr Loðbrók, which
are entirely confined to Northern literature, all the historical
personages whom we have been able to identify belong to a period
extending over barely two centuries. Eormenric flourished in the latter
half of the fourth century, Attila and the Burgundian kings in the
first half of the fifth; Theodric towards the end of the same century
and in the first quarter of the sixth. Hygelac again was a contemporary
of Theodric; while Wolfdietrich, if he is rightly identified with
Theodberht, died in 548. In the stories which form the common themes of
English, German and Scandinavian poets we find no mention of historical
persons who lived after the middle of the sixth century.
Now it will be clear that the cycles of stories dealing with Ragnarr
Loðbrók and his ancestors are really, like the skaldic poems, to
be compared with German and English works such as the Ludwigslied
and the poem on the battle of Brunanburh. The difference in tone is
sufficiently accounted for by the social conditions of the Viking Age,
which were wholly different from those which prevailed in the Christian
kingdoms.
The statement that the common cycles of tradition mention no historical
characters later than about 550 ought perhaps to be qualified in one
case. Paulus Diaconus (_Hist. Lang._ I 27) says that the praises of
Alboin, king of the Langobardi, who died in 572 (or 573), were sung
by the Saxons, Bavarians and other peoples; and it has been suggested
that his account of certain incidents in Alboin's career is derived
from poetic sources. Further, we find the generosity of the same king
celebrated in the Anglo-Saxon poem Widsith, where he is apparently the
latest person mentioned. Hence there is some ground for including him
among the characters of common Teutonic poetry--which will involve our
extending the lower of the chronological limits fixed above by about
twenty years. Yet it is not clear that Alboin figured in any poems
which can properly be called narrative, except perhaps among his own
people.
On the other hand some of the Gothic heroes recorded by Jordanes,
if we are to trust his chronology at all, must be referred to times
long anterior to the middle of the fourth century. Apart from Gothic
tradition the only mention of any of these persons occurs in a brief
passage in Widsith (v. 113 f.): "(I have visited) Eastgota, the wise
and good father of Unwine." Now Ostrogotha is brought by Jordanes into
connection with the Emperor Philip (v. 244-249). He is mentioned also
by Cassiodorus (_Var._ XI 1) as one of the ancestors of Amalasuintha
and as a prince renowned for forbearance (_patientia_). In spite of his
suspicious name what is said of him by Jordanes seems to point to a
genuine tradition. But if so, even setting aside both the reference to
Philip and the genealogy given by Jordanes in cap. 5, he is probably to
be referred to a time anterior to the upper limit fixed above. Into the
story of Filimer and the migration we need not enter, as there is no
reason for supposing it to be anything but a purely Gothic tradition.
The story of the Langobardic victory over the Vandals (cf. p. 10) is
probably of a similar character.
There remain of course a number of stories which contain no names
of persons mentioned in contemporary records. The story of Finn is
in Beowulf connected, rather loosely, with Healfdene, Hrothgar's
father. Hence if the incidents which it relates are to be regarded as
historical, they must be dated somewhat earlier, though certainly not
more than a century earlier, than Hygelac's expedition. The story of
Offa and his father Wermund must be referred to a still earlier period
if we are to trust the evidence of the Mercian genealogy in which these
persons figure. I have tried elsewhere[21] to show that the Athislus,
who in Saxo's version of the story appears as Wermund's enemy, is
probably to be identified with the Eadgils prince of the Myrgingas
mentioned in Widsith. The latter is represented as the contemporary of
Eormenric, and the date thus obtained agrees with that given by the
genealogy. The story of Weland, if it contains any historical element,
should be placed perhaps slightly further back; for in Waldhere, as
well as in many German authorities, including Thiðreks Saga, Weland is
said to be the father of Widia (Wudga, Witege). The latter is often
associated with Eormenric[22], and there can be little doubt that he is
to be identified with the Gothic Vidigoia who is mentioned as a hero
of the past by Jordanes (cap. 34) in a quotation from Priscus[23]. For
the story of Hagbarðr and Signý a date is afforded by a poem attributed
by Saxo (p. 214) to Starkaðr. The poet, who in his old age served
Ingellus, i.e. Ingeld, the son-in-law of Hrothgar, says that he had
followed Haki, the brother of Hagbarðr, in his early youth. In Ynglinga
Saga (cap. 23) Haki is made to fight with the Swedish king Iörundr,
four generations above Aðils, but this genealogy cannot be entirely
correct.
The only important stories which remain are those of Fróði the Peaceful
and Heðinn and Högni. In Saxo's history (p. 158 ff.) the two are
brought into connection with one another, and it is certainly to be
noted that a Fruote von Tenemarke plays rather a prominent part in
Kûdrûn, especially the first portion. But Fróði is associated with
different sets of persons in different works, and his resemblance
to the god Frey rather suggests that he was regarded as the typical
representative of a Golden Age in the past. The story of Heðinn and
Högni is very difficult to locate, both in regard to time and scene.
Widsith however, which is our earliest authority for it, represents
Hagena (Högni) as king of the Holmryge, who appear to have dwelt in
eastern Pomerania. Since the whole of the south coast of the Baltic had
probably become Slavonic by the end of the fifth century, it is at all
events unlikely that the story refers to any period after this.
We shall have to discuss later how far these stories are to be regarded
as historical and to what extent the characters and incidents with
which they deal are to be attributed to myth or fiction. Here it is
sufficient to point out that with the exception of the story of Heðinn
and Högni, the connections of which are obscure, all the stories
which we have just been discussing are referred by our authorities to
generations anterior to the characters of Beowulf. Hence we may safely
conclude that the period embraced by the common poetry and traditions
of the various Teutonic peoples--what we may call the Heroic Age of
these peoples--had come to an end by the middle of the sixth century or
at least by the death of Alboin. Its upper limit must in view of the
evidence given above be set from two to three centuries back--probably
three centuries if we include the story of Ostrogotha.
These limitations are clearly such as to call for some attempt at
explanation. Why do the cycles of story which are common to the various
Teutonic peoples mention no historical character later than Alboin?
Before we can hope to give a satisfactory answer to this question, a
number of other phenomena will have to be taken into account. One or
two observations however will not be out of place here.
The period extending backwards from two to three centuries before the
reign of Alboin coincides with what is generally known as the Age of
National Migrations (Völkerwanderungszeit). It was during this period
that many of the Teutonic nations broke through the frontiers of the
Roman empire and carved out for themselves extensive kingdoms within
its territories. Among these were the realms of Guthhere and Theodric,
and in part also that of Attila. There is no doubt that in all these
cases the conquest of the Roman provinces brought with it a great
accession of wealth and profoundly affected the life of the invaders.
The same period witnessed the conversion of most of the continental
Teutonic peoples to Christianity, another change which produced
far-reaching effects upon them. Yet it is not clear at first sight
how this change is connected with the chronological limitation of the
stories, for while some of the chief characters, Attila for instance
and doubtless Eormenric, were heathens, others such as Theodric were
certainly Christians. The change of faith is not a motive which plays
any part in the stories themselves.
Whatever weight we may be disposed to attach to these observations,
it should be noted that they do not seem to apply to every case. Thus
we shall see in the course of the next chapter that Danish characters
figure more prominently than those of any other nation, not only
in Scandinavian but also in English records, throughout the period
ending with Hrólfr Kraki. Yet the Danes took no part, collectively at
least, in the movements against the Roman Empire, nor did Christianity
penetrate to them before the ninth century. It is worth remarking
therefore that stories relating to Denmark stop where they do, and that
for centuries after the time of Hrólfr we can scarcely give the name of
a single Danish prince.
In the following chapters it will be convenient to speak of the period
which we have been discussing simply as the Heroic Age. The term
'heroic poetry,' as a translation of Heldendichtung or Heltedigtning,
may of course be applied in a sense to such works as Hákonarmál or
the poem on the battle of Maldon, just as well as to Beowulf or the
Hildebrandslied. But no ambiguity will arise if we limit the term
'heroic' here to what may be called the 'Teutonic' Heroic Age (das
germanische Heldenalter), i.e. to the period embraced by the common
poetry and traditions of the various Teutonic peoples.
FOOTNOTES:
[12] Except of course those which deal only with supernatural beings
(p. 11 f.).
[13] Quoted in the prose Edda (Skaldskaparmál, cap. 66).
[14] Theodosio XV et Valentiniano IV coss. (A.D. 435): _pax facta cum
Vandalis.... eodem tempore Gundicarium Burgundionum regem intra Gallias
habitantem Aetius bello obtriuit, pacemque ei supplicanti dedit, qua
non diu potitus est. siquidem illum Hunni cum populo atque stirpe sua
deleuerunt._
[15] The overthrow of Guthhere is ascribed to Attila by Paulus Diaconus
in his _Gesta episc. Mettensium_ (Mon. Germ., Scr. II p. 262), _Hist.
Misc._ XIV (Muratori, Scr. I p. 97); but he is a late authority. On the
other hand an anonymous Gaulish chronicle, which ends in the year 452,
attributes the whole of the Burgundian disasters to Aetius: _bellum
contra Burgundionum gentem memorabile exarsit quo uniuersa pene gens
cum rege per Aetium deleta_ (Mon. Germ., Chron. Min. I 660). But this
seems to be due to the confusion of two events which Prosper clearly
distinguishes (cf. Idatius, _Chron._, Theodosii ann. XII, XIII).
[16] Liber Legum Gundebati, cap. 3 (Mon. Germ., Leg., Vol. III p.
533): _si quos apud regiae memoriae auctores nostros, id est Gebicam,
Godomarem, Gislaharium, Gundaharium, patrem quoque nostrum et patruum,
liberos liberasue fuisse constiterit, in eadem libertate permaneant._
[17] This cycle is supposed to have been known in England at one time,
owing to the juxtaposition of the names Seafola (Saben) and Theodric in
Widsith, v. 115. Theodric, king of the Franks, is mentioned in the same
poem (v. 24).
[18] Cf. Berger de Xivrey, _Traditions Tératologiques_, p. 12.
[19] Einhardi Ann., 812 (Mon. Germ., Scr. I p. 199). Prof. Olrik
(_Nordisches Geistesleben_, p. 44) apparently rejects this
identification, as he places Haraldr Hilditönn not long after the time
of Hrólfr Kraki.
[20] The list makes no claim to completeness. Thus several of the
characters in Hervarar Saga (probably mentioned also in Widsith, v. 116
ff.) have been identified with historical persons of the fifth century.
But the evidence is far from satisfactory.
[21] _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 134 f.
[22] But also with Theodric. This is a question to which we shall have
to refer later.
[23] _Venimus in illum locum ubi dudum Vidigoia, Gothorum fortissimus,
Sarmatum dolo occubuit_ (cf. also cap. 5).
CHAPTER III.
SCENE AND NATIONALITY IN THE HEROIC STORIES.
In the last chapter it was pointed out that the age covered by the
heroic poetry and traditions of the Teutonic peoples coincides with a
clearly marked period of history, extending over about two or possibly
three hundred years, and coming to an end in the latter half of the
sixth century. Something must now be said regarding the geographical
and ethnographical limitations of the stories--the localities in
which the scenes are laid and the nationalities to which the various
characters belonged. The scenes are distributed over a considerable
part of Europe, extending from Italy to Sweden and from western Russia
to the Vosges and the Netherlands. The British Isles however seem to
have lain outside the area, though in the late form in which some of
the stories have come down to us, we do occasionally find references
to them--generally to Scotland or Ireland--which are probably due to
confusion with stories of the Viking Age. Indeed it is remarkable that
the early Anglo-Saxon poems contain no reference to persons or events
connected with this country. Further, except possibly in the case of
the story of Hengest and Horsa, we have no evidence worth consideration
that poems dealing with such subjects ever existed. Norway also is
not made the scene of any of the main stories, though it is mentioned
incidentally in English and German as well as Scandinavian poems.
The Balkan peninsula figures only in the later German poems, while
references to places in Italy are limited practically to the Dietrich
(Theodric) and Wolfdietrich cycles.
Turning to the question of nationality we find the following peoples
represented: (i) to the Goths belong Eormenric, Theodric, Wudga
(Witege) and probably most of the heroes associated with them; (ii)
to the Huns Attila; (iii) to the Burgundians Guthhere and his family;
(iv) to the Rugii apparently Hagena (Högni), the father of Hild; (v)
to the Franks Hugdietrich and Wolfdietrich, if the identifications are
correct; (vi) to the Frisians Finn; (vii) to the Angli Wermund and
Offa; (viii) to the Danes (_a_) Fróði the Peaceful, (_b_) Sigarr and
his family, together probably with Hagbarðr and Haki, (_c_) Hrólfr
Kraki and his family, perhaps also Froda (Frotho IV) and Ingeld; (ix)
to the Götar Hygelac, Beowulf and their relatives; (x) to the Swedes
(Svear) Aðils and his family.
It is somewhat remarkable that we have no stories dealing with
Alamannic or Bavarian heroes, since the German poems which have come
down to us are almost entirely derived from the territories of these
peoples[24]. The Vandals too are unrepresented, and probably also the
Visigoths, while the evidence for Frankish heroes is slight and rather
unsatisfactory. Frankish nationality is claimed by most scholars for
Siegfried, chiefly on the ground that Xanten is represented as his home
in the Nibelungenlied[25]. Yet he is never called a Frank, and it is
not clear that Xanten was in the possession of the Franks at the time
to which the story refers. The same nationality may perhaps be claimed
for Waldhere. In several German poems Langres is said to be his home,
though he is also called a Spaniard, while Ekkehard makes his father
king of Aquitaine[26]. To this question we shall have to return later.
In any case both stories refer to a period considerably anterior to the
real conquest of Gaul by the Franks, and it is certainly a curious fact
that Clovis and his great achievements seem to be entirely unnoticed in
poetry.
It appears then that though most of the principal Teutonic nations are
represented in our stories the relative prominence assigned to them
does not at all correspond to what we should expect. Most remarkable is
the fact that in stories relating to the Continent nearly all the chief
characters (Eormenric, Theodric, Guthhere, Attila, etc.) belong to
nations which had passed out of existence before the end of the sixth
century. From Jordanes (cap. 5) we gather that the preservation of the
early Gothic traditions was very largely due to the pride taken by that
people in its own heroes of the past. Yet it is not easy to see how the
survival of the stories which have come down to us can be ascribed to
any such feeling.
Let us first examine the Anglo-Saxon poems. In Beowulf the scene is
laid first in the land of the Danes and later in that of the Götar. The
hero himself belongs to the latter nation, but in the earlier part of
the poem the former are decidedly the more prominent. Taking it as a
whole the interest is divided between the royal families of these two
nations; the only other dynasty which comes in for any considerable
share of attention is that of the Swedes. In the story of Finn the
interest is centred in a prince and his followers who according to
Beowulf were of Danish nationality and involved in hostilities with the
Frisians. In Waldhere the hero and heroine, whatever their nationality,
belong to Gaul, while their opponents are Burgundians. In Deor the
interests are mainly, perhaps exclusively, Gothic. In Widsith the
foremost characters are Eadgils, prince of the Myrgingas (a dynasty
hostile to the Angli), and the Gothic king Eormenric; after them the
English king Offa, the Danish kings Hrothgar and Hrothwulf, Guthhere,
king of the Burgundians, Aelfwine (Alboin, king of the Langobardi) and
several Gothic heroes. In all these poems there is no reference, as far
as we know, to any person of English nationality except Offa and his
relatives (Beow. 1944 ff.), nor except in Widsith is the name of the
Angli even mentioned.
If we turn now to the Scandinavian records, which are entirely
Norse (Norwegian-Icelandic), so far as the vernacular literature is
concerned, the phenomena which confront us are on the whole very
similar. As we might expect from the comparative lateness of our
authorities the nationality of the various characters is not very
clearly indicated. It is remembered that Atli (Attila) belonged to the
Huns and Iörmunrekr (Eormenric) to the Goths, but Gunnarr (Guthhere)
is only once called lord of the Burgundians. As for Sigurðr, his later
adventures are uniformly located in the Rhineland, but the history
of his family is generally connected with Denmark, which is also the
scene of Helgi's exploits. Most noteworthy however is the fact that
Norway is only mentioned once in the Older Edda, namely in the prose of
Helgakviða Hiörvarðssonar. In the sagas it is somewhat more prominent,
e.g. in the account of Biarki's origin in Hrólfs Saga Kraka; but these
passages are usually regarded as accretions to the original stories.
Of course there are numerous other sagas which deal exclusively with
Norwegian history and legend. These stories however are peculiar to
Norwegian-Icelandic literature, and the earliest persons who figure in
them, if we may regard them as historical, cannot have lived before
the seventh century. In stories relating to earlier times the scene is
practically always laid in Denmark or southern Sweden or in the lands
south of the Baltic.
Even in the German poems national feeling has influenced the choice
of subjects comparatively little. The poems in their present form are
mainly Austrian or Bavarian. Yet except in the second half of the
Nibelungenlied this region does not figure prominently[27], and even
there the Bavarian characters that occur are generally believed to
be rather late additions to the story. The chief characters of the
story in its original form were clearly Burgundians and Huns, to whom
the Goths may have been added at a fairly early date. The stories
which deal with the Rhineland--those of Siegfried and Walther--may
be derived ultimately from early Frankish poems; but this cannot be
proved. Most of the others are concerned with Gothic heroes, the true
scene of whose adventures is to be sought in Poland, Hungary, Italy
and other countries which had ceased to be Teutonic before the time of
our authorities. Theodric, it is true, seems to have become a national
hero in the south-east, but this feature is prominent only in the
latest poems, and even here it is clearly remembered that he belonged
to Italy. But the most remarkable case is that of Kûdrûn. The poem
itself is probably Austrian, but the names which it contains show that
the story is derived from Frisian sources. The scene is laid first in
Ireland, then in Denmark and lastly in Normandy. Yet if we take into
account the various Scandinavian versions and the references to the
story in Anglo-Saxon poetry, there is every probability that it came
originally from the Baltic.
This short discussion will suffice to show how singularly free the
poems we have been discussing are from anything in the nature of
national interest or sentiment. They are certainly national in the
sense that the characters are drawn entirely, or almost entirely, from
within the Teutonic world--for even Attila can hardly be regarded as an
exception. But nationalism in the narrower sense, i.e. in the interests
of the poet's own nation or tribe, seems to be altogether wanting. The
interest is centred in one or more individual characters and in the
various adventures that befall them. Sometimes, as in Beowulf, it does
also embrace the history of the family to which these persons belonged,
but the nation, apart from the royal family, is practically disregarded.
The contrast afforded by the historical poems of the ninth and tenth
centuries[28] is sufficiently obvious. We have seen that these poems,
whether English or German, uniformly deal with the poet's own nation.
The poem on the battle of Brunanburh is an expression of national
triumph. It is not concerned with the personal adventures of the king
or his brother, but with the prowess of the English army as a whole.
The bravery of the princes is certainly noticed, but they appear to
be regarded as the champions and representatives of the nation. The
Ludwigslied breathes on the whole a similar spirit, in spite of its
strongly religious tone. Even in the skaldic poetry of the North traces
of national pride are clearly discernible, as in Hákonarmál (v. 3),
where Haakon, at the head of his Norwegian troops, is described as the
terror of the Danes.
It may perhaps be urged that, though the poems which have come down to
us have no national interest, they may be derived from older poems
which originated in the hero's own land. Thus many scholars believe
Beowulf to be of Scandinavian origin in one sense or another, though
the linguistic arguments which have been brought forward in favour of
this view are not generally admitted. But there is a curious lack of
uniformity in the national interests of the poem, as we have already
seen. If it had been the chief intention of the original poet to
glorify the Danish nation, he would not have ignored it as he has done
in the latter part of the poem. On the other hand if his intention
was to glorify the Götar he would hardly have begun with an account
of the early kings of the Danes. The difficulty has been got over by
supposing that the poem as we have it is of composite formation, and it
may very well be that the second part of the poem is a later addition.
But it is to be observed that somewhat similar phenomena occur in other
cases. Thus the stories of Siegfried and Attila are connected both in
the Nibelungenlied and the Edda, and there can be no doubt that the
connection is of considerable antiquity. Yet the only common element
in the two stories is supplied by the Burgundians, and the portraiture
of their princes, especially that of the king, is hardly of such a
character as to suggest its derivation from a poem composed for the
glorification of the Burgundian nation.
The evidence then of Beowulf alone is scarcely sufficient to justify
us in assuming more than that its author or authors were interested in
the royal families of the North, and that they possessed a considerable
amount of information regarding them. The account of the early kings of
the Danes seems to be in the nature of a tribal or family tradition--to
be compared with the early stories given by Jordanes, Paulus Diaconus
and Widukind. Traditions of this kind are no doubt generally of a
mythical character, and consequently their origin is to be sought in
the particular locality or family with which they are concerned. We
have no evidence that such traditions formed the main theme of stories
which were common to the poetry of the various Teutonic peoples. But
it is natural enough that a poet who was well acquainted with some
royal family, whether that of his own nation or not, would also know
its traditions, and that he would utilise them incidentally or by way
of introduction in a poem largely concerned with the fortunes of that
family.
The main story of the poem stands on a different footing. Of course if
it could be shown that the Danish princes who figure both in Beowulf
and the various Scandinavian records were fictitious persons, who never
really existed, we should be bound to hold that they were derived from
a common story, probably of Scandinavian origin. But few scholars would
now be willing to admit such a proposition. Certain incidents, such as
the exhortation of Ingeld (Ingellus) by the old warrior (Starcatherus),
may be held to point to a common origin in poem or saga; but most of
the events narrated appear to have been either preserved by memory or
invented independently.
With the stories of Sigurðr (Siegfried) and Waldhere the case is
somewhat different. It is the opinion of the great majority of scholars
that both these heroes are mythical or fictitious, in spite of the
fact that they are associated with undoubtedly historical characters.
If this view is correct--a question which we shall have to discuss
later--we may conclude at once that the different versions of the two
stories, Scandinavian and German in the one case, English and German in
the other, have sprung from a common source, whether in poem or saga.
But even if we take the opposite view, viz. that Sigurðr and Waldhere
were real persons and that their adventures are founded on fact, it
does not by any means follow that the different versions of their
stories must have originated independently. Neither hero seems to have
belonged to a family of outstanding position, nor were their exploits
such as to influence the destiny of nations.[29] In the age of Hunnish
supremacy scores of petty princes must have undergone somewhat similar
adventures and distinguished themselves by similar deeds of heroism.
Hence it can hardly be due to accident that the handful whose names we
know were celebrated far and wide in the Teutonic world.
The story of Eormenric is again rather a different case. There can be
no question that this king was a historical person, but the earliest
detailed account which we possess of his doings, viz. that given by
Jordanes, dates from nearly two centuries after his death. Now we find
what is perhaps the most striking episode in Eormenric's story, namely
the account of Swanhild and the vengeance attempted by her brothers,
both in Jordanes and the Older Edda (Guðrúnarhvöt and Hamðismál) with
comparatively slight variations. The chief feature wanting in Jordanes'
account is supplied by the Annals of Quedlinburg.[30] How much truth
the story contains we are not in a position to decide. But even if
we grant that the main features are historical, the event can hardly
have been of the first importance, since the attack seems really to
have failed in its object. Ammianus Marcellinus says that Eormenric
committed suicide owing to despair at the impending Hunnish invasion,
and Jordanes recognises that his death was partly due to this cause.
But in the later (Scandinavian and German) accounts it is entirely
forgotten. Hence if we bear in mind the close agreement between the
Gothic and Scandinavian versions of the story, not only in the names
of the characters but also in the description of Swanhild's death, we
can hardly help inferring that they are derived from a common narrative
source.
In conclusion mention may be made of a story which appears to be
definitely at variance with historical truth, namely the account of
Attila's death given in the Edda poems Atlakviða and Atlamál. It is
there stated that Attila was murdered with his two children by his wife
Guðrún in revenge for her brothers (Gunnarr and Högni), whom he had
treacherously put to death. Now Jordanes (cap. 49) says that Attila
died from the bursting of a blood-vessel on the night of his marriage
with a girl named Ildico. As his account is derived from Priscus, a
contemporary and trustworthy writer, there can be little doubt that
it is correct. Yet it should be observed that the Roman chronicler
Marcellinus Comes, who wrote apparently a few years before Jordanes,
says that Attila died by the hand of a woman.[31] The account given in
the Edda therefore is no invention of an Icelandic or Norwegian poet,
but founded on a story which was current among the Romans within a
century after Attila's death. Indeed considering the circumstances it
is by no means unlikely that the story originated immediately after the
event.
These examples will be sufficient to show that the subjects of many
of our poems are derived from stories which passed from one Teutonic
people to another and some of which were of great antiquity. Further,
it is a proof of the popularity of these stories that they were
preserved until comparatively late in the Middle Ages, in spite of
the fact that they did not appeal to national interests. The question
how they were preserved and transmitted is one which we shall have to
discuss in the following chapters. We may note at once however that the
most obvious means of preservation, namely by means of writing, was
almost certainly not used to any great extent. Had that been the case
the divergencies between the different versions of the stories would
be far less noticeable than they are. Even in the case of Waldhere,
which shows probably the least amount of variation, the Anglo-Saxon
fragments show a treatment of the subject totally different from that
which appears in Ekkehard's poem. Again, there is no evidence that
the Roman alphabet was used in the North, except possibly by a few
foreigners here and there, before the end of the tenth century, while
the Runic alphabet, though it had been known for many centuries, seems
not to have been employed for literary purposes until very late times.
But, as we have already mentioned, some of the Edda poems date probably
from the ninth century, and the story of Heðinn and Högni is used by
the poet Bragi who lived apparently in the early part of that century.
On the Continent of course the case is somewhat different. We have
seen that Charlemagne did have a number of ancient poems written down;
but there is nothing to show that his collection had any permanent
influence. When the Quedlinburg annalist or his authority quotes the
heroic stories, perhaps some two centuries later, he refers not to any
written works but to songs formerly current among the country people.
It is doubtless by oral tradition therefore, whether in verse or prose,
that the stories of the Heroic Age have mainly been preserved.
There can be no question that a large number of similar stories
have perished. A glance through the catalogues of Widsith will show
many names which otherwise are entirely unknown to us, and also an
appreciable number which are not mentioned elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon
literature, though they figure in German and Scandinavian records. It
would scarcely be wise however to assume that all the stories of the
Heroic Age were common Teutonic property. Thus we have no evidence
for the story of Waldhere in the North[32], while stories dealing
with Danish heroes seem to have been little known in Germany. The
latter observation deserves notice all the more in view of the obvious
popularity of such stories in England--a fact proved not merely by
Beowulf and Finn, but still more by the prominence assigned to Danish
characters in Widsith.
It will be convenient now to summarise briefly the results of our
discussion. We have seen that the scenes of the heroic stories are
distributed over most of the lands formerly occupied by the Teutonic
peoples. Norway and England however, as well as the distant kingdoms
of the Visigoths and Vandals, seem to lie outside the area. The heroes
also are drawn from many nations, though not in the proportion which
we should expect. Thus the Frankish nation, which ultimately became
dominant, is but poorly represented, while the most prominent places
are taken by peoples such as the Ostrogoths and Burgundians, which lost
their nationality in the course of the sixth century.
We have further seen that a very large proportion of the characters of
the heroic stories figure in the literature of two or more nations, and
that frequently the same stories are told of them. In the latter case
it is probable, indeed often practically certain, that the different
versions of the story are ultimately derived from a common narrative.
On the other hand, where the same characters are known but only in
connection with different events, such derivation can be proved only
if it can be shown that the characters themselves are fictitious. This
remark applies especially to a number of characters common to Beowulf
and Scandinavian stories relating to Hrólfr Kraki and his times.
It is fully in accord with these facts that the heroic poems are not
concerned at all--or at least only to a very slight degree--with local
or tribal interests. Their tone indeed may be described as in a sense
international, though with the restriction that characters and scenes
alike are drawn exclusively from within the Teutonic world.
FOOTNOTES:
[24] These poems do introduce Bavarian characters, such as the Markgraf
Rüdiger; but they are not found elsewhere in heroic poetry.
[25] In the prose piece _Frá dauði Sinfiötla_ (in the Older Edda)
Sigmundr is said to have held territories in the land of the Franks.
[26] Hence many scholars regard him as a Visigoth.
[27] Tyrol is the scene of several of Dietrich's and Wolfdietrich's
adventures; but generally it is the southern (Italian) part of that
country.
[28] The poem on the battle of Maldon approximates much more closely
than any other of this age to the spirit of the old poetry.
[29] The victories over the Saxons and Danes described in the
Nibelungenlied and the Tháttr af Nornagesti have little in common and
are scarcely to be regarded as an essential feature in the story of
Sigurðr.
[30] _Anastasius annos_ XXVII.... _Ermanrici regis Gothorum a
fratribus Hemido et Serilo et Adaccaro, quorum patrem interfecerat,
amputatis manibus et pedibus turpiter, ut dignus erat, occisio_ (Mon.
Germ., Scr. III p. 31).
[31] Ind. VII. Aetio et Studio coss. (A.D. 454): _Attila rex Hunnorum
Europae orbator prouinciae noctu mulieris manu cultroque confoditur.
quidam uero sanguinis reiectione necatum perhibent._
[32] Excluding of course Thiðreks S. af Bern.
CHAPTER IV.
THE ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE HEROIC POEMS.
In an earlier chapter (p. 3) it was mentioned that the English heroic
poems are usually ascribed to the seventh or eighth centuries. We
must now try to see whether any means are to be found of dating their
composition more precisely.
Unfortunately very few references to the poems or their subjects occur
in works which can be dated with anything like certainty. The most
important is contained in a letter from Alcuin to Hygebald, bishop of
Lindisfarne, written in the year 797: "When priests dine together let
the words of God be read. It is fitting on such occasions to listen
to a reader, not to a harpist, to the discourses of the fathers,
not to the poems of the heathen. What has Ingeld to do with Christ?
Strait is the house; it will not be able to hold them both. The king
of heaven will have no part with so-called kings who are heathen and
damned; for the one king reigns eternally in heaven, the other, the
heathen, is damned and groans in hell. In your houses the voices of
those who read should be heard, not a rabble of those who make merry
in the streets[33]." From this passage it is clear that at the end of
the eighth century there were current in Northumbria certain poems,
probably well known poems, dealing with a heathen king named Ingeld,
whom we need not hesitate to identify with Ingeld the son of Froda,
who figures in Beowulf. Of course it is not at all likely that the
reference is to Beowulf itself, for the part played by Ingeld in that
poem is insignificant.
Acquaintance with the subjects of the heroic poems is shown also by a
mistake in the Historia Brittonum, 31, which dates probably from about
the same period. This passage contains a genealogy, tracing the descent
of Hengest and Horsa from Woden and of Woden from Geat. The latter part
is known also from many other texts, in which it regularly runs as
follows: _Woden Frealafing, Frealaf Frithuwulfing, Frithuwulf Finning,
Finn Godwulfing, Godwulf Geating_. In the Historia Brittonum however
in place of _Finn Godwulfing_ we find _Finn qui fuit Folcwald_--which
is clearly due to confusion with Finn the son of Folcwalda (_Finn
Folcwalding_), a Frisian king mentioned in Beowulf and Widsith, as well
as in the fragment which bears his name.
Further evidence is afforded by names of persons and places. There
can be no doubt that even in the seventh century it was customary to
take the names of famous men of the past or present. Danihel, bishop
of Winchester (d. 745), and Iohannes, bishop of Hexham (d. 721), are
instances which no one will dispute. In the Durham Liber Vitae we meet
with the names Aethan and Cundigeorn. It must not be assumed that
persons bearing such names were necessarily of Celtic blood. Indeed the
spelling suggests rather that they were Englishmen called after Aidan
and Kentigern. Deusdedit, archbishop of Canterbury (655-664), doubtless
derived his name from Pope Deusdedit (615-618), while the West Saxon
king Ceadwalla (685-688) was in all probability called after the
British king of the same name, who died in 642. It is extremely likely
that Hlothhere, king of Kent (673-685), obtained his name from one of
the Frankish kings, Lothair II (584-628) or Lothair III (656-670), for
the element _hloth-_ is not used elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon names. Even
in the sixth century we hear of English princes who seem to be called
after Frankish or Gothic kings of the same period. Thus Tytla, the name
of the father of the East Anglian king Redwald, is probably taken from
the Gothic king Totila; it is not of an English type. Two sons of
the Northumbrian king Ida were called Theodric and Aethelric, perhaps
after the Gothic king Theodric and his successor Athalaric. As the
element _theod-_ is somewhat rare in England, it is not unlikely that
the Northumbrian prince Theodbald, a son of Aethelric, derived his name
from the Frankish king Theodbald.
The occurrence of such names as Widsith and Beowulf (_Biuulf_) in the
Liber Vitae shows that names were taken not only from contemporary
persons and from books but also from native poems and traditions.
Indeed researches which have been made in this direction have
demonstrated that names of the latter type were extremely popular. But
it has not been sufficiently pointed out that such names occur most
frequently in the earliest times and gradually become more rare--a fact
which is of considerable importance for our purpose. The total number
of personal names found in the five poems Beowulf, Finn, Waldhere,
Widsith and Deor is 132[34], and of these altogether 57 recur as names
of persons mentioned in English historical documents. Over forty of
these names belonged to persons who appear to have lived, or at any
rate to have been born, before the end of the seventh century[35],
while at least thirteen of them are unknown after the same period. To
the latter class belong the important names Widsith and Beowulf.
In local nomenclature it is possible to trace at least 51 of the 132
names mentioned above. In some cases these names may have been taken
direct from the story, e.g. when we find in Kent two localities close
together called _Hokes clif_ and _Hengstes earas_ (Birch, _Cart.
Sax._, III 1000). A similar case, very frequently cited[36], is that
of _Beowanhammes hecgan_ and _Grendeles mere_ in Wiltshire (_ib._ II
677), though neither of these names is included in our list. But in the
majority of cases it is more probable that the place-name is taken in
the first instance from that of a previous landowner, and consequently
that the connection with the story is only secondary. Hence it is
important to notice that out of the 51 place-names no less than 19
contain names which are not borne by persons in historical documents.
The explanation of this lies doubtless in the fact that the place-names
for the most part became fixed at a very early period, and consequently
that they exhibit an earlier stratum of personal nomenclature.
If we add the place-names to the personal names the total number of
heroic names found in England in historical documents seems to be
76. Out of this number only seven apparently are limited to persons
born after the end of the seventh century, and of these again almost
all occur in the course of the eighth century. These statistics show
clearly that such names were most popular during the sixth and seventh
centuries, especially if we bear in mind that the materials for this
period are incomparably less than those for the following three
centuries. Hence, if we are justified in drawing any conclusions from
nomenclature, the popularity of the heroic stories was distinctly on
the wane in Alcuin's time.
The argument from nomenclature holds good of course only for showing
the popularity of the stories; it cannot prove the existence of the
poems which we now possess. In one case however we may probably make an
exception. The name _Widsith_ is obviously fictitious[37] and based on
the travels with which the minstrel is credited. The introduction, in
which alone the name occurs, is in all probability a later composition
than the rest of the poem[38] and designed to explain what follows. It
is of importance therefore to note that, if we may judge from the place
in which this name occurs in the Liber Vitae, it must have been borne
by a person of the seventh century.
We must next turn to the internal evidence. The linguistic criteria
are of a somewhat unsatisfactory nature and investigations in this
field have led to few definite results. It is clear that the heroic
poems do not exhibit any dialect in its purity--a remark which is
true of Anglo-Saxon poetry in general. West Saxon forms predominate
and there is no doubt that the final recension of the text is due to
scribes who employed this dialect. Yet at the same time there are a
sufficient number of Midland or Northumbrian characteristics[39] to
render it highly probable that the poems were not only composed but
also originally written down in one of these dialects. Beyond this
however no safe conclusions can be attained owing to the lateness of
the MSS.
In regard to syntax the heroic poems are at least as archaic as any
other remains of Anglo-Saxon poetry which have come down to us. We may
notice especially the use of the definite article, which in reality
is still a demonstrative pronoun in the heroic poems. It occurs
comparatively seldom in connection with a weak adjective followed by a
substantive--a usage which is nearly universal in most of the Christian
poems. Thus in Cynewulf's works the proportion of examples with and
without the article varies from 7:1 to 9:1, and even in the first part
of Guthlac, which is believed to date from soon after the middle of
the eighth century, the proportion is 7:1[40]; but in Beowulf it is
only 1:5. If the Dream of the Cross, in which the proportion is 2:1,
is rightly attributed to the early years of the eighth century[41],
it seems reasonable to date the composition of Beowulf quite half a
century further back. The nearest approach to the usage of Beowulf is
shown by Exodus, in which the proportion is over 2:3. Unfortunately
we have no certain means of dating this work, though it is generally
believed to be one of the earliest of the Christian poems. Its archaic
character would be natural enough if it is really the work of Caedmon,
who flourished while Hild was abbess at Whitby (658-680) and who
according to Bede[42] did compose a poem or poems on this subject.
The metrical characteristics of the heroic poems differ but little from
those of Anglo-Saxon poetry in general. Cases of absence of contraction
after the loss of intervocalic _-h-_ (e.g. in the half-verse _hean
huses_) can be paralleled in poems dating from the close of the eighth
century or even later, where they are doubtless to be regarded as
poetic archaisms. On the other hand importance is generally attached
to the absence of any evidence for the retention of _-u_ after a long
syllable and to the shortening of syllables containing _-r-_ which
was originally followed by antevocalic _-h-_. Thus it is contended
that such combinations as _to widan feore_ in the latter half of a
verse cannot go back to the middle of the seventh century[43], since
the form in use at that time would be _feorha_, which would offend
against the metre. As a matter of fact half-verses of the condemned
type do occur in Anglo-Saxon poetry, Beowulf itself containing at least
eight examples. But even if we were to admit all these statements
and emend the offending verses the argument would be conclusive only
on the assumption that the poems were written down from the very
beginning[44]. Poems which are preserved by oral tradition alone are
manifestly liable to small verbal changes, especially in a metre so
flexible as that of the Teutonic alliterative verse. Thus in place of
the expression _to widan feore_ we find occasionally _widan feore_ in
the same sense, and even in Beowulf we meet with _widan feorh_ which
is not improbably the oldest form of the phrase. Before the loss
of final _-u_ it would be a perfectly regular half-verse, but the
operation of this change would render it impossible and necessitate the
substitution of a synonymous expression. In principle, it should be
observed, the assumption of such substitutions seems to be absolutely
necessary, unless we are prepared to deny that any old poems or even
verses survived the period of apocope. Yet there is a sufficient amount
of resemblance between English and German poetry, not merely in the
general metrical scheme but also in the construction of individual
verses[45], to render such a conclusion extremely improbable.
Consequently I am very much inclined to doubt whether any safe
conclusions as to the date of the poems can be obtained from metrical
considerations, except of course as regards their final form.
Of far greater importance is the fact that with the exception of the
Finn-fragment, which consists of only fifty verses, all our poems
contain passages or references of a religious (Christian) character.
In Beowulf alone there are about seventy such passages of which the
significance is not open to question, and seven or eight others which
may belong to the same category. Out of the total number thirty-three
are limited to single verses or half-verses[46], while another sixteen
affect not more than two verses in each case[47]. The longest passage
of all (v. 1724 ff.) contains at least 37 verses, the next longest (v.
175 ff.) fourteen. The rest vary from three to nine verses[48]. The
theology which appears in these passages is of a singularly vague type.
There are four distinct references to incidents in the early part of
Genesis, viz. one (v. 90 ff.) to the Creation, two (vv. 107 ff., 1261
ff.) to the story of Cain and Abel and one (v. 1688 ff.) to the Flood.
Apart from these there appears to be no reference to any passage in
the Bible except perhaps in v. 1745 ff., which are thought by some to
be based on Ephes. vi. 16, and in v. 3069, which contains the phrase
'day of judgment.' We find also a few references to rewards and
punishments in a future life[49]. The word _god_ is of very frequent
occurrence and always used in the Christian sense. The other epithets
of the Deity are 'lord' (_frea_, _dryhten_), 'father' (_faeder_),
'creator' (_scyppend_), 'ruler' (_waldend_), 'almighty' (_alwalda_,
_aelmihtiga_), 'ruler of men' (_ylda_ or _fira waldend_), 'ruler of
glory' (_wuldres waldend_), 'shepherd of glory' (_wuldres hyrde_),
'king of glory' (_wuldurcyning_), 'guider of the heavens' (_rodera
raedend_), 'helm of the heavens' (_heofena helm_), 'ruler of victories'
(_sigora waldend_), 'king of victories' (_sigora soðcyning_). On the
other hand there is no example of the word _gast_ in a religious sense
(Holy Ghost), nor of the name _Crist_, nor of any epithet denoting
'Saviour' (_nergend_, _haelend_ etc.). Hardly less curious is the total
absence of the word _engel_, for expressions such as 'lord of angels'
(_engla dryhten_[50]) are among the most frequent epithets of the Deity
in Anglo-Saxon religious poems. Lastly, there are no references to the
saints, to the cross or to the church, nor to any Christian rites or
ceremonies.
It appears then that the religious utterances of the poem are of a
singularly one-sided character. Indeed it has been observed[51] that,
with the exception perhaps of vv. 977-9, "their theology is covered
by the Old Testament, and a pious Jew would have no difficulty in
assenting to them all." Certainly the facts are such as to call for
some explanation, especially since the religious poems are pervaded by
a wholly different tone.
One suggestion is that Beowulf was composed under the influence of
the missionaries from Iona; but it is extremely doubtful whether
the influence of Irish Christianity would tend in this direction at
all[52]. Another is that the poet had little direct knowledge of the
Christian religion, but that he was acquainted with some religious
poems. This explanation certainly seems to fit the case much better
than the other. Moreover there is one piece of positive evidence in its
favour. In Beow. v. 89 ff. we hear of recitation to the accompaniment
of the harp in Hrothgar's hall, and the subject of the recitation is
the creation of the world. It appears to me highly probable that we
have here an allusion to Caedmon's poem or poems on Genesis, which may
very well have been among the earliest of that poet's productions. At
all events it was by his hymn on the Creation that he first became
known. The inference is strengthened by the rather close resemblance
which the hymn bears to the phraseology of Beowulf. If the two poets
were contemporary the author of Beowulf would have no other Christian
poet on whom to draw, and the limitations of his theological equipment
might be satisfactorily accounted for on the hypothesis that he knew
only a few of Caedmon's works. As a matter of fact two or three out of
the list given by Bede[53] would have been quite sufficient to provide
him with all the statements and terms that he uses.
There is another question however with regard to the composition of
Beowulf which has aroused more controversy than this, namely whether
the Christian passages formed an original part of the poem or not. In
the former case of course the poem cannot have been composed before the
second quarter of the seventh century. Indeed, if we grant the use of
Caedmon's poetry the earliest possible date would be about 660. On the
other hand if the Christian passages are due to interpolation the upper
limit for the dating of the poem vanishes into air.
As to the possibility of such interpolation in principle we need
scarcely entertain any doubt. It is true that the Christian passages
or references cannot as a rule be removed without breaking into the
rhythm. Consequently, if interpolation has taken place we must assume
it to be the work of poets or minstrels, and not of scribes. But
have we any reason for doubting that the minstrels of that period
were capable of such 'interpolation.' Wherever poetry--at all events
anonymous narrative poetry--is preserved exclusively by oral tradition,
it is usually the case that the minstrel is allowed a certain amount
of freedom in the presentation of his subject.[54] Now probably no one
will suggest that it was only after their conversion to Christianity
that the English began to compose poems about 'heathen kings.' But,
if we grant that such poems were already in existence, does it really
involve a greater amount of effort on the part of the minstrels to
bring these poems up to date--by removing objectionable matter and
introducing expressions in accordance with the new religion--than to
compose an entirely new set of poems on the same subjects. I cannot
think that such a view will be seriously maintained. Therefore we must
consider the case of Beowulf--the only narrative poem which has come
down to us entire--without prejudice on the general question; and we
must endeavour to see whether it bears the stamp of a new composition
or that of an old work which has been brought into conformity with new
ideas. The probability or improbability of the latter view will of
course depend largely on the amount of inconsistency which the poem is
found to contain.
Until within the last few years the majority of scholars believed that
Beowulf was a composite work. This theory was most fully developed in
the writings of Müllenhoff and ten Brink. According to the former[55]
the poem was made up from four separate lays, though in its present
form nearly half of it is the work of interpolators. The latter[56]
likewise traced the origin of the poem to lays, but explained its
inconsistencies as being due not to extensive interpolations but to
the combination of two parallel versions. In regard to the relative
antiquity of the various parts of the poem there was great divergence
of opinion both between these scholars and generally. It is perhaps
partly on this account that in recent years there has been a reaction
in favour of believing that the poem as we have it is practically
the work of one man, though it is allowed that he may have made use
of earlier lays. But those who have adopted this view seem to agree
that the author, whatever his precise date, belonged to the Christian
period, and consequently that the religious passages are not due to
interpolation.
Now in the first place it is clear that the story of Beowulf is derived
from the Baltic, and the first question which we have to settle is as
to the time at which the information on which it is based became known
in England. The Angli themselves were originally a Baltic people, as I
have tried elsewhere to show, and there is no doubt that down to the
time of the invasion of Britain they were thoroughly familiar with all
the surrounding regions. But we have no evidence whatever for believing
that such was the case within the historical period. By the end of the
sixth century, when the first missionaries arrived in this country,
they had apparently ceased to be a seafaring people, and we have no
record of any voyage made by an Englishman across the North Sea for
several centuries. Again, the Danes became familiar to the west of
Europe during the sixth century; but from about 580 onwards we hear
no more of their presence on the North Sea for fully two centuries.
During the whole of this period their name is heard of only in
connection with the missionary expeditions of St Willibrord, early in
the eighth century. I have suggested elsewhere[57] that their temporary
disappearance was due to the maritime supremacy held by the Frisians.
At all events we have archaeological evidence for a considerable amount
of communication between southern Norway and the Frisian coasts during
this period, while for the Baltic such evidence is almost wholly
wanting.
Bearing these facts in mind we can hardly doubt that the information
used by Beowulf was acquired before the end of the sixth century--in
all probability we may say considerably before that date.[58] Next we
have to notice that we have practically no trustworthy information
regarding the history of the English kingdoms before the middle of the
sixth century, and I think it will be the opinion of any attentive
student of early English history that even the best informed persons of
Bede's time were not much better off in this respect than we ourselves
are. How then are we to account for the preservation of detailed
information regarding the early kings of the Danes and Swedes? The only
answer to this question, so far as I can see, is that the doings of
such persons must have become embodied in stories which were preserved
by recitation in a more or less fixed form of words. Such recitative
pieces may have consisted of poetry alone or of poetry mixed with
prose, like some of the pieces contained in the Older Edda. If we
may trust the analogy of what appear to be the oldest pieces in this
collection, such as Völundarkviða or Helgakviða Hundingsbana II, the
speeches would be given in metre, while the connecting narrative might
be partly or wholly in prose and quite brief. We have no evidence for
believing that the early Teutonic peoples ever used entirely prose
narratives, like the Icelandic and Irish sagas, for such purposes.
At all events it seems to me that if Beowulf is no older than the
middle of the seventh century we are bound to assume the existence of
earlier poems or narratives on the same subject. Such pieces may of
course have been quite short, and it is likely enough that our epic
has made use of more than one of them. One perhaps may have dealt
with the hero's exploits at the Danish court and another with his
last adventure, while in the scene between Beowulf and Hygelac it
is possible that an older poem has been incorporated, more or less
complete, in the text.[59]
But we have yet to take account of what is perhaps the most striking
feature of the poem, namely the fact that, though it abounds in
expressions of Christian sentiment, yet the customs and ceremonies to
which it alludes are uniformly heathen. Among these we may mention
the funeral ship in v. 27 ff., the offerings at the shrines in v. 175
f., the observation of the omens in v. 204 and the curious reference
to hanging in v. 2444 ff. (cf. v. 2939 ff.), probably also the use
of the boar on helmets (vv. 303 f., 1111 f., 1286, 1451 ff., 2152)
and the burial of the treasure (v. 2233 ff.), together with the curse
imprecated on the person who should disturb it (v. 3069 ff.). But most
important of all are the descriptions of the disposal of the dead by
cremation in vv. 1108 ff., 2124 ff., 3137 ff. In the long account
of Beowulf's obsequies--beginning with the dying king's injunction
(v. 2802 ff.) to construct for him a lofty barrow on the edge of the
cliff, and ending with the scene of the twelve princes riding round the
barrow, proclaiming the dead man's exploits--we have the most detailed
description of an early Teutonic funeral which has come down to us, and
one of which the accuracy is confirmed in every point by archaeological
or contemporary literary evidence[60]. Such an account must have been
composed within living memory of a time when ceremonies of this kind
were still actually in use.
The significance of these passages seems to me to have been altogether
misapprehended by recent writers. If the poem preserves its original
form and is the work of a Christian, it is difficult to see why the
poet should go out of his way in v. 175 ff. to represent the Danes as
offering heathen sacrifices; for not long before he has introduced a
song of the Creation at the Danish court, and in the sequel Hrothgar is
constantly giving utterance to Christian sentiments. Again why should
he lay Beowulf himself to rest with heathen obsequies, described in
all possible detail, when in his dying speeches (vv. 2739 ff., 2794
ff.[61]) the hero has been made to express his faith and gratitude to
the Almighty? On the other hand if the poem was originally a heathen
work these inconsistencies are perfectly natural. If it was to retain
its place after the change of faith and to be recited in the presence
of bishops or clergy, all references to actual heathen worship or
belief would of necessity have to be either accompanied by censure--as
is the case in the homiletic verses following v. 175 ff.--or else
suppressed altogether, and their place taken by expressions in
accordance with Christian doctrine. Hence it seems to me probable that
such expressions are frequently in the nature of substitutions for
objectionable matter, rather than gratuitous additions; and in the same
way I would account for the occasional survival of ideas which appear
to be essentially heathen[62], though they are cloaked in Christian
phraseology. But references to practices such as cremation which,
though heathen, had long ago passed out of use, would not excite the
same repugnance and consequently might be allowed to stand.
It may be urged[63] that cremation seems to have lingered on among the
Old Saxons of the Continent until late in the eighth century. True:
but it is quite incredible that a Christian poet should borrow from
this quarter a method of funeral for his Christianised heroes. If the
description of Beowulf's obsequies stood alone a bare possibility might
be conceded to the suggestion that it had once formed a poem by itself,
unconnected with Beowulf, and based upon a traveller's story. But
cremation is clearly regarded as the normal rite throughout the poem,
apart from the legendary story of Scyld. We have another description of
it in the episode dealing with Finn (v. 1108 ff.), and above all there
is the purely incidental reference in v. 2124 ff.: "Yet when morning
came the knights of the Danes could not burn his (Aeschere's) lifeless
form with fire, nor lay the man they loved on the pyre. She had carried
the body away," etc. Here the poet realises the significance[64] of the
rite quite clearly and consequently notes that the inability of the
Danes to carry it out added materially to their sorrow. In such a case
the possibility of Christian authorship seems to me to be definitely
excluded.
On the hypothesis that these descriptions had come down from the days
of English heathenism all is easily explicable. At the time when the
poem was Christianised it may very well not have been known that
the rite of cremation was still practised among the heathen of the
Continent, and in later days the verses of the old poet would be
handed on in parrot fashion without their significance being generally
understood. Well informed persons however, like Alcuin, who had
travelled abroad, perceived clearly enough that, however much coated
over with Christian phraseology, the heroic poems were in reality of an
essentially heathen character.
Now cremation was widely prevalent in this country during the early
days of the Saxon invasion--a fact attested by numerous cemeteries
especially in the northern and midland counties, including the valley
of the Thames. But it appears to have become a thing of the past when
the Roman missionaries arrived here; otherwise it is difficult to
account for the absence of any reference to the custom in the records
which have come down to us. Indeed we may say with safety that it had
passed out of general use, at least in the southern half of England,
quite a generation before this time; for there are scarcely any traces
of it to be found in those western districts which appear to have been
conquered during the latter half of the sixth century. Consequently,
if we are justified in believing that the descriptions of cremation
ceremonies contained in Beowulf date from a time when the practice was
still remembered, we must conclude that they were composed not later
than the third or fourth decade of the seventh century[65].
But it is not contended, so far as I am aware, by any scholar that the
account of Beowulf's obsequies belongs to the earlier parts of the
poem. It is the final scene of the story, it is not contained in any
speech, and further it is of a thoroughly epic character and would
be quite out of place in a short lay. Hence, if the line of argument
which we have been following is legitimate, we shall be forced to admit
that though the poem has undergone a fairly thorough revision in early
Christian times, it must in the main have been in existence some time
before the conversion. I do not mean to suggest that the 'revision' was
entirely limited to the religious element. Other changes and additions
may have been made about the same time[66]. What I do mean is that
the great bulk of the poem must have been in existence--not merely as
a collection of lays or stories, but in full epic form--an appreciable
time before the middle of the seventh century.
* * * * *
The other heroic poems do not furnish us with any similar criteria for
estimating the date of their composition, but there seems to be no
valid reason for doubting that they are quite as early. Two of them,
Deor and Widsith, are expressed in the first person and lay claim to
being of a remote antiquity. Deor says that he had been the bard of
the Heodeningas and that he had been displaced by a skilful minstrel
named Heorrenda. Since in old Norse literature _Hiaðningar_ (i.e.
_Heodeningas_) means 'Heðinn and his men,'[67] and since Heorrenda can
hardly be separated from the minstrel Hôrand in Kûdrûn, it would seem
that the poet claims to have been a contemporary of Heðinn and Högni,
with whose story we have dealt briefly above (pp. 8 f., 16).
Widsith is still more explicit. The poet states that he visited the
Gothic king Eormenric, who as we know died about 370. It is true
that incidentally he mentions that he had met with a number of other
princes, some of whom lived in the fifth and sixth centuries; but the
visit to Eormenric is his main theme. Eormenric is of course one of
the most prominent figures of the Heroic Age, and it may be for this
reason--as the type of a powerful king--that he is chosen for the
poet's host and patron. But then it is by no means so easy to see why
he is associated with such an obscure person as Eadgils, prince of the
Myrgingas. The suggestion that the poem is founded upon a tradition
that this Eadgils possessed a famous minstrel breaks down upon the
name _Widsith_, which is obviously fictitious as we have seen (p. 44).
It appears to me that considerably less difficulty is involved in the
hypothesis that the kernel of the poem[68] is really the work of an
unknown bard of the fourth century, and that successive minstrels from
time to time have added the names of famous heroes with which they were
acquainted[69]--a process to which the original plan of the poem may
well have offered inducement.
However this may be neither of the poems shows any characteristics
which suggest a later date than Beowulf. Both appear to be constructed
in strophic form, a feature rare elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon poetry, while
Deor also has a refrain, which is almost without parallel. Lastly, we
have seen that _Widsith_ occurs as a personal name, apparently in the
seventh century, and that this presupposes the existence not only of
the poem itself but also of the introduction, which is clearly later.
The case of Waldhere stands somewhat apart from the others, since it
has been suggested that this is really a translation of a lost German
poem, on which Ekkehard's Waltharius is also based. That the story
came from the Continent may of course be granted; but we have also to
consider when and in what form it was brought. The linguistic arguments
which have been adduced in favour of the German origin of the poem
are not now generally maintained. But it is further to be noticed
that the poet seems to have treated his subject very differently from
Ekkehard. The speeches, with which the fragments are entirely taken
up, have nothing corresponding to them in the Latin poem, while the
characterisation of the heroine is as unlike as it well could be.
Ekkehard represents her as a timid creature, but in the fragments she
displays a spirit which may fairly be called martial. It is unwise to
lay stress on agreements between Ekkehard and the fragments as against
the version of the story given in Thiðreks Saga af Bern. The less
complicated form of the latter--in which Guthhere is omitted and Hagena
represented as an officer of Attila, pursuing the fugitives--may be
due either to imperfect acquaintance with the story or, perhaps more
probably, to the conditions under which it had been preserved. We shall
see later that for a considerable period heroic poetry appears to have
been entirely neglected by the higher classes in Germany; and it may
be accepted as generally true that when stories are preserved only by
the peasants complex situations tend to become simplified, while all
except the most prominent characters drop out. As for the date at which
the story became known in England we may note that besides _Aetla_ and
_Hagena_, which may come from other sources, _Waldhere_, _Hildegyth_
and _Hereric_ were all names current during the seventh century. There
seems therefore to be no adequate reason for believing Waldhere to have
had a different history from the other heroic poems.
On the whole, taking all the poems, including Beowulf, together, we may
conclude with probability that they assumed substantially their present
form[70] in the course of the seventh century. But if our reasoning
with regard to the composition of Beowulf is correct we shall have to
refer the first treatment of the subject to the sixth century, i.e.
almost if not quite to the Heroic Age itself. Deor and Widsith may
quite possibly contain still older elements.
* * * * *
We may now turn to the Old Norse poems. Here the data at our disposal
are of a very different character, for the metrical evidence is said to
preclude the possibility that any of the extant poems date from before
the ninth century. It may perhaps be questioned whether all of them are
necessarily new compositions since that time--whether certain of them
may not be old poems somewhat recast. To this question however we can
hardly hope to obtain a satisfactory answer.
The fragmentary Ragnarsdrápa of Bragi Boddason, who seems to have lived
in the first half of the ninth century, is probably the earliest extant
piece which refers to stories of the Heroic Age. In this poem we find
allusions both to the story of Heðinn and Högni and to the attack made
upon Iörmunrekr by Hamðir and Sörli. Thiódolfr's Ynglingatal, perhaps
half a century later, contains references to the story of Hagbarðr and
Signý, as well as brief accounts of the Swedish kings Óttarr and Aðils,
who are mentioned in Beowulf (cf. p. 20). All these stories, except
that of Óttarr, are told also by Saxo, but in a somewhat different
form, which points to their derivation from Danish rather than Norse
sources[71].
On the other hand the stories of the Völsungar, Sigmundr and Sigurðr,
are not mentioned by any early Danish authority. The story of Sigurðr
is generally supposed to have been introduced into Norway from Germany;
and in some sense or other this would seem necessarily to be true,
since in the Northern version, as well as in the German, the scene
is laid chiefly in the Rhineland. But it is apparently impossible
to determine when and in what form the story was transmitted. We
have already noticed that there is archaeological evidence for a
considerable amount of communication between Norway (not Denmark) and
the southern (Frisian) coasts of the North Sea during the seventh
and eighth centuries, and this is clearly a factor which deserves to
be taken into account. Further, it is worth noting that, with the
exception perhaps of _Atli_[72], the names all appear in regular
Northern form[73], as if they had been known from the earliest times,
e.g. _Gunnarr_, _Högni_, _Giúki_, _Buðli_. This consideration, as far
as it goes, certainly favours a very early date; but it is hardly
conclusive[74].
The story of Sigmundr stands on a somewhat different footing. In the
first place Sigemund (Sigmundr) himself is little more than a name in
German tradition, while though _Welsung_ and _Sintarfizzilo_ occur
as personal names, they are not connected in any way with the story
of Siegfried. Again, in the Helgi poems, which contain no reference
to Sigurðr, Sigmundr is connected with the Baltic, and this is still
more clearly the case with his son Helgi, who is unknown to the German
story. Thirdly, in Beowulf, which knows Sigemund and Fitela, though
not Sigurðr, the former is brought into juxtaposition, and apparently
also into comparison, with a Danish prince named Heremod. The same two
persons are brought together also in the Old Norse poem Hyndlulióð,
while the Hákonarmál likewise seems to imply some connection between
them, as I have tried to show elsewhere[75]. Apart from the passages
specified this Hermóðr (Heremod) is apparently not mentioned in
Scandinavian literature, but the facts noted seem to indicate that
the two characters were connected in poetry before English and Danish
tradition became separated, i.e. presumably in the sixth century.
We have seen that many of the persons mentioned in the main narrative
of Beowulf were remembered also in Scandinavian tradition. But since
these persons are in all probability to be regarded as historical, it
is hardly safe to infer the existence of ancient Scandinavian poems,
unless the same incidents are related of them, which is generally not
the case. There is a rather striking verbal resemblance[76] between
the first speech of Wiglaf (Beow. 2633-60) and certain passages in
Biarkamál (especially Saxo's version), where Hialti is addressing
Biarki; and this fact is the more noteworthy if Biarki is really to be
identified with Beowulf. But the words themselves are of a somewhat
general character and might have been used on other occasions. Again
there is a certain affinity[77] between the account of the dragon-fight
in Beowulf and that of a similar incident related of Frotho I by Saxo
(p. 38 f.); and here again a connection can be traced indirectly
between the two heroes. But the story of Frotho seems really rather to
resemble the account given in Beowulf of Sigemund's dragon-fight; so it
may be questioned whether the points of affinity between the two did
not originally form part of a standard description of incidents of this
kind.
A clearer case is that of the poems attributed by Saxo to Starcatherus,
in which that warrior exhorts Ingellus to avenge his father. These
are clearly to be connected with the speech of the old warrior to
Ingeld in Beowulf (vv. 2047-2056), though there is little verbal
resemblance. Moreover we have seen (p. 41 f.) that in Alcuin's time
poems dealing with Ingeld were known and probably popular in England.
The relationship of the passage in Beowulf to these may be compared
with that of another passage (vv. 1068-1159) to the fragment dealing
with Finn. The poems on Ingeld given by Saxo are traced by Prof.
Olrik[78] to a Danish source; and there can be little doubt that his
view is correct, as they share the characteristics exhibited by other
stories which appear to come from the same quarter (cf. p. 111). Thus
the queen's name is not given and her brothers are described simply
as sons of Suertingus. Further, the story is cut right away from the
surroundings in which we find it in Beowulf, and it may be that for
a time it survived in Denmark only in ballad form. Yet, however much
change it had undergone before it came under Saxo's treatment, there
can be little doubt, in view of the English evidence, that its origin
is ultimately to be sought in heroic poetry, or at all events heroic
narrative, dating from the sixth century.
Lastly we must mention the story of Uffo's single combat, though,
strictly speaking, this is probably not of Danish origin. It was
certainly well known in England and there is good reason for believing
that its home is to be found in the district to which it refers,
i.e. the neighbourhood of Angel, Slesvig and Rendsburg. I have tried
elsewhere[79] to show that this story also rests on historical
foundations. But the details of the combat, as given by Saxo and Svend
Aagesen, and certain legendary features, such as the dumbness or
silence of the hero, which are present in both the Danish and English
versions of the story, strongly favour the view that it was embodied
in poetic form at a very early period. On the other hand there is
nothing to show that such poems survived till Saxo's time. The story is
apparently unknown to all Norse authorities.
* * * * *
Many of the German poems which have come down to us are known to be
derived, directly or indirectly, from earlier ones, but regarding the
antiquity of the latter nothing can be stated with certainty. The
Hildebrandslied, which is the only extant piece of early poetry, goes
back at all events to the eighth century. Further, the language[80]
used by Einhard in describing the poems collected by Charlemagne (cf.
p. 5 f.) would scarcely be appropriate unless they were believed to be
more than a century old by that time. We may probably therefore refer
them at least to the seventh century.
It seems likely that some of the lost poems of the Langobardi were of
still greater antiquity. In the poem which celebrated their victory
over the Vandals (cf. p. 10), a story with which we shall have to
deal more fully in a later chapter, a very prominent part appears to
have been played by the heathen gods. Such a piece can hardly have
been composed after the end of the fifth century, at which time the
Langobardi were already Christians.
Regarding the antiquity of Gothic heroic poetry there can be no
question, for Jordanes, our chief authority on this subject, wrote
about the middle of the sixth century, i.e. during the Heroic Age
itself. We have already noticed (p. 37) that his account of Eormenric
appears to be coloured by poetic tradition. But of the heroes whom
he enumerates (cap. 5) as celebrated in poetry, the only one of whom
we know anything, Vidigoia, is described as _Gothorum fortissimus_
in a quotation (cap. 34) from Priscus, who lived about a century
earlier[81]. There is good reason therefore for believing that the
Goths possessed heroic poems as early as the first half of the fifth
century.
We may now sum up briefly the results of our discussion. The heroic
poetry of the Goths certainly belonged to the Heroic Age itself, and it
is more than likely that certain Langobardic poems were nearly as old.
Some heroic poems belonging to other German peoples may probably be
referred at least to the seventh century. The chief monument of English
heroic poetry must be ascribed to the first half of that century, while
some of the other poems claim to be of greater antiquity. The lost
heroic poetry of the Danes seems to have been occupied largely with the
same subjects as the English poems, and since the stories generally
refer to the Baltic we may reasonably infer that heroic poetry
flourished in that region during the sixth century. On the whole then
it seems probable that the development of heroic poetry began in the
Heroic Age itself, not only among the Goths but throughout the greater
part of the Teutonic world.
FOOTNOTES:
[33] _Verba Dei legantur in sacerdotali conuiuio. ibi decet lectorem
audiri, non citharistam; sermones patrum, non carmina gentilium. quid
Hinieldus cum Christo? angusta est domus; utrosque tenere non poterit.
non uult rex coelestis cum paganis et perditis nominetenus regibus
communionem habere, quia rex ille aeternus regnat in coelo, ille
paganus perditus plangit in inferno. uoces legentium audiri in domibus
tuis, non ridentium turuam in plateis._ Mon. Germ., Epist. Carol. II
124; cf. O. Jänicke, ZfdA. XV 314.
[34] The names Grendel, Cain, Abel, Alexandreas and Casere are not
included.
[35] For the figures and the method of calculation see Note I.
[36] But open to very serious objections, as has been shown by Prof. W.
W. Lawrence in the _Publications of the Modern Language Association of
America_, XXIV 251 ff.
[37] Compound names containing _wīd-_ or _-sīþ_ (_-sinþ-_) are used in
other Teutonic languages; but the latter apparently does not occur in
England, while the former is extremely rare.
[38] In contrast with the body of the poem (vv. 10-134) it is
non-strophic, after the general fashion of Anglo-Saxon poetry.
Originally when the poem was recited it may have been introduced with
a short explanation in prose, such as we find e.g. in Rígsmál or
Atlakviða. The epilogue (vv. 135-143), which is likewise non-strophic,
may belong to the same stratum.
[39] Especially the regular use of unsyncopated forms such as 3 sg.
_onwindeð_, past part. _onsended_.
[40] The statistics for these poems are as follows: Juliana 27:3,
Christ (II) 28:3, Elene 66:9, Guthlac (A) 42:6, Dream of the Cross
10:5, Exodus 10:14, Beowulf 13:65; see Brandl, _S.-B. d. Akad. der
Wiss. zu Berlin_, 1905, p. 718 f.
[41] Cf. Brandl, _l.c._ (p. 721 ff.).
[42] Hist. Eccl., IV 24: _canebat autem de creatione mundi et origine
humani generis et tota genesis historia, de egressu Israel ex Aegypto
et ingressu in terram repromissionis, de aliis plurimis sacrae
scripturae historiis, de incarnatione dominica, passione, resurrectione
et ascensione in caelum, de Spiritus Sancti aduentu et apostolorum
doctrina. item de terrore futuri iudicii et horrore poenae gehennalis
ac dulcedine regni caelestis multa carmina faciebat; sed et perplura de
beneficiis et iudiciis diuinis, etc._ Prof. Brandl (_Grundr._, II 1028)
holds that the reference is to lyric poems throughout. But is this
interpretation really necessary?
[43] On this date see Note II.
[44] For a brief discussion of this question see Note III.
[45] A few examples are given in the following chapter.
[46] vv. 27, 72, 101, 570, 670, 706, 711, 756 (?), 786, 788, 790, 801,
806, 811, 852, 940, 967, 975, 986 (?), 1201, 1255, 1379, 1626, 1658,
1680, 1682, 2088, 2182, 2216 (?), 2276 (?), 2469, 2650, 3083 (?).
[47] vv. 168 f. (?), 227 f., 440 f., 478 f., 588 f., 625 f., 945 f.,
955 f., 1314 f., 1397 f., 1778 f., 1841 f., 1997 f., 2819 f., 2874 f.,
3108 f.
[48] vv. 13-17, 90-8, 106-14, 316-8, 381-4, 665-7 (?), 685-7, 696-702,
928-31, 977-9, 1056-62, 1261-5, 1271-6, 1553-6, 1609-11, 1661-4,
1688-93, 1716-8, 2291-3, 2329-31, 2341-3 (?), 2741-3, 2794-7, 2855-9,
3054-7, 3069-73.
[49] vv. 588 f., 977-9. 2741-3. 2819 f.
[50] It is perhaps worth noting that in v. 2186 the expression _dryhten
wereda_ is used of Hygelac. Elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon poetry this phrase
is applied only to the Deity.
[51] Clark Hall, _Beowulf_, p. xxviii.
[52] If there is Celtic influence at all it is more probably Welsh.
[53] Cf. p. 46, note, where the passage is quoted in full.
[54] The amount of freedom differs of course greatly from case to case
(cf. Note IV, p. 101 ff.); but it is only in communities which have
elaborated the art of minstrelsy to a very high degree that the form of
words can become absolutely stereotyped.
[55] _Beowulf_ (1889), pp. 110-160.
[56] _Quellen und Forschungen_, LXII (1888); summarised p. 242 ff.
[57] _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 93, note.
[58] The references quoted on p. 41 ff. preclude the possibility that
these stories were first acquired from the Danes, when the latter again
became known in this country about the close of the eighth century.
[59] A different view is taken by Schücking, _Beowulfs Rückkehr_
(Studien zur engl. Philologie, XXI), p. 65 ff.
[60] We may refer especially to the account of Attila's funeral given
by Jordanes, cap. 49 (from Priscus).
[61] Apart from certain expressions the general tone of these speeches,
especially the last words of all (v. 2813 ff.), is scarcely Christian;
but they contain nothing which is obviously opposed to Christian
doctrine.
[62] E.g. in the imprecation, v. 3069 ff. The imprecatory formulae of
charters can scarcely be regarded as analogous.
[63] Cf. Brandl, _op. cit._, p. 1003.
[64] The same idea is frequently expressed in the Homeric poems, e.g.
Il. VII 79 f., XXII 342 f., XXIII 75 f., XXIV 37 f., Od. XI 71 ff., etc.
[65] This date does not depend in any way on the question where the
poem originated. Cremation may possibly have lingered in Northumbria
longer than elsewhere; but that kingdom seems to have become entirely
Christian between 626 and 642.
[66] E.g. possibly some of the elegiac passages (e.g. vv. 2236-2270,
2450-2464), which show a certain resemblance to such poems as the Ruin
and the Wanderer.
[67] The name _Hegelinge_ in Kûdrûn is probably a corruption of
_Hetelinge_ (i.e. _Heodeningas_).
[68] Presumably including vv. 88-108; but I am not prepared to suggest
an elaborate analysis of the poem.
[69] These lists are perhaps derived in part from mnemonic
catalogues--'inventories' of the stories known to the minstrels who
composed them. Metrical catalogues of this kind are said to be in use
among Servian minstrels at the present day; cf. Krauss, _Slavische
Volkforschungen_, p. 186 ff., where a specimen is given.
[70] Waldhere, Deor and Widsith all contain 'Christian' passages,
like Beowulf. The interpolations in Widsith (e.g. vv. 15 f., 82 ff.)
appear to have been made by some one who possessed a certain amount of
erudition; but there is no need to attribute them to a different period.
[71] Cf. Olrik, _Kilderne til Sakses Oldhistorie_, p. 132.
[72] The name appears to have been quite common in the North during the
Viking Age; yet the apparent absence of umlaut suggests derivation from
a (Frisian?) form corresponding to the Ang.-Sax. _Aetla_ (cf. _Aecci_,
_Aeddi_ beside _Acca_, _Adda_).
[73] In contrast (e.g.) with _Kûdrûn_, which clearly shows its foreign
origin (cf. p. 34).
[74] Such names may have been current before, though their frequent
occurrence is no proof of this and may be due to the popularity of the
heroic poems. It is perhaps worth noting that alliteration is shown by
certain names which are generally believed to have been introduced into
the story in Norway or Iceland, e.g. _Oddrún_, _Erpr_, _Eitill_ with
_Atli_, _Giaflaug_, _Gullrönd_ (_Guðrún_?) with _Giuki_ and _Gunnarr_.
If we may judge from the genealogies in Landnámabók and elsewhere the
principle of alliteration seems to have been generally given up in
family names before the ninth century.
[75] _The Cult of Othin_, p. 51 f.
[76] Cf. Bugge, _Beiträge_, XII 45 ff.
[77] Cf. Sievers, _Ges. d. Wiss. zu Leipzig, Ber._ 1895, p. 180 ff.
[78] _Kilderne til Sakses Oldhistorie_, pp. 18 ff., 132.
[79] _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 118 ff.
[80] _Item barbara et antiquissima carmina, quibus ueterum regum actus
et bella canebantur, scripsit memoriaeque mandauit_ (Vita Caroli Magni,
cap. 29).
[81] Cassiodorus (_Var._ VIII 9) states that the Gothic king
Gensimundus, who according to Jordanes (cap. 48) reigned shortly
after Eormenric's death, was widely celebrated in poetry (_toto orbe
cantabilis_); but his name is preserved only in Gothic records.
NOTE I. THE USE OF HEROIC NAMES IN ENGLAND.
The distribution of heroic names in English historical documents is
as follows. The Liber Vitae contains 35 (37), of which nine (eleven)
are peculiar to that work[82]. Of those which occur in other documents
29[83] belong to persons born apparently before 700, six to such
persons only, 14 or 15[84] to persons born between 700 and 800, two to
such persons only, and 22[85] to persons born after 800, four to such
persons only. It must be remembered that, apart from the Liber Vitae,
the materials for the ninth and tenth centuries are much more abundant
than those for earlier times.
In the Liber Vitae itself it is possible within certain limits to
distinguish between persons of early and later date. Investigations in
the lists of kings, queens and abbots have shown that they are arranged
chronologically, and it is only reasonable therefore to expect that the
same is true of the much longer lists of clerics and monks. A brief
examination of the names will make it clear that such is actually the
case. Some modernisms of language, such as _-ferth_ for _-frith_, or
of orthography, such as _-ht-_ for _-ct-_, are practically confined
to the last parts of the lists, which may be by later hands[86]. But
even within the parts certainly written by the first scribe archaic
forms such as _-iu-_ for _-io-_ are more frequent at the beginning of
the lists than later; so also occasional _-b-_ for _-f-_. Above all
we may note the uncompounded names in _-i_, a type common in early
Anglo-Saxon, but practically extinct after the eighth century. Fol. 24,
the first in the clerics' list, contains eleven such names, while fol.
30 contains none; fol. 34, the first in the monks' list, has eight,
while fol. 38 has only one.
Now we shall probably be well within the mark if we assume that one
fifth of the names in each list[87] belong to persons born in the
seventh century. On this basis we find that of the 35 (37) heroic
names which occur in the Liber Vitae nine (ten) are limited to persons
of the seventh century[88], and twelve (thirteen) to persons of the
eighth[89]. The total number of names in each century (cf. p. 43) may
be obtained by comparing the evidence of the Liber Vitae with that of
the other documents[90].
The fact that so many heroic names occur in the Liber Vitae has led
several writers to conclude that the true home of English heroic
poetry was in the north. But no such inference is really justified
by the evidence. The number of personal names recorded for the south
of England during the sixth and seventh centuries is very small; yet
it is only here that we meet with persons called Eormenric, Hoc and
Hagena--names which belong to quite different cycles of story. Moreover
out of the 37 heroic names preserved in the Liber Vitae no less than
28 occur in place-names in various parts of England. The frequence
therefore of heroic names in the Liber Vitae is to be attributed
in part to the great abundance of the material and in part to its
comparatively early date.
Including the evidence of the Liber Vitae there are fifteen heroic
names which seem to be borne only by persons of the eighth century or
later times. Eight of these however occur also in place names[91]. Of
the remaining seven[92] all except one or possibly two[93] make their
appearance during the eighth century. On the other hand it has already
been mentioned that not less than nineteen heroic names[94] occur only
in local nomenclature.
We have still to mention a few heroic names which are not found in the
extant remains of Anglo-Saxon poetry. Theodhere (Diether) is known only
from the sixth century, Hild, Herding, Iuring, Omoling only from the
seventh, Hildegyth and Blaedla from the seventh and eighth, Wulfheard
from all periods, Ecga only from the eighth century, Ecgheard from
the eighth and ninth, Sigesteb only from the ninth. Hild, Wulfheard
and Ecga are found also in place-names. In some of these cases, e.g.
in that of Hildegyth, the non-occurrence of the name in the poems is
clearly due to mere accident; but it would scarcely be safe to assume
that all these characters were celebrated in Anglo-Saxon poetry.
FOOTNOTES:
[82] 37 (eleven), if we admit the emendation of the corrupt forms
_Vychga_ and _Vurmeri_ to _Wydiga_ (Widia, Wudga) and _Vyrmheri_
(Wyrmhere). See the Addenda.
[83] Ecglaf, Eadgils, Eomaer, *Eormenric, Frod(a), Hereric, *Hoc,
*Hrothmund, Ingeld, Offa, Oslaf, Sigemund, *Aehha, Sigeferth, Aetla,
*Hagena, Theodric, Waldhere, Becca, Witta, Wada, Oswine, Sigehere,
*Sceafthere, Alewih, Aelfwine, Eadwine, Wulfhere, Frithuric; perhaps
also Herebald. The asterisk denotes names limited to persons of the
sixth and seventh centuries.
[84] Eadgils, Eanmund, Heardred, Hygelac, Ingeld, Offa, Wermund,
Weohstan, Wiglaf, Wada, *Scilling, Oswine, Sigehere, *Gislhere (perhaps
Eomaer).
[85] *Aelfhere, Ecglaf, Eanmund, Heremod, Offa, Sigemund, Wermund,
Weohstan, Wiglaf, Wulfgar, Garwulf, *Ordlaf, Sigeferth, Waldhere,
Becca, Wada, *Hun, *Hringwald, Aelfwine, Eadwine, Wulfhere, Frithuric
(possibly also Deor).
[86] Only the earlier lists, those printed in Sweet's _Oldest English
Texts_, p. 154 ff., are taken into account.
[87] Lines 159-192 and 332-362 in Sweet's text.
[88] †Beowulf, †Billing, †Folcwald, Frod, Heremod, Hereric, Oslaf,
†Widsith, Alewih (†Widia?). Names marked with a dagger are confined to
the Liber Vitae.
[89] Eadgils, †Hildeburg, †Hrothwulf, Wiglaf, Wulfgar, Garwulf, Aetla,
Witta, †Heathuric, Sigeferth, Wulfhere, Frithuric (†Wyrmhere?). The
following names are found both in the early and late parts of the
lists: Eanmund, †Hama, Heardred, Hygelac, Ingeld, Offa, Sigemund,
Wermund, Theodric, Wada, Aelfwine, Eadwine, †Aegelmund; perhaps also
Herebald, if the abbot of this name is to be identified with the one
mentioned by Bede (_H. E._ V 6).
[90] For the details see the preceding notes.
[91] Hildeburg, Hrothwulf, Wiglaf, Wulfgar, Ordlaf, Hun, Hringwald,
Gislhere.
[92] Aelfhere, Weohstan, Garwulf, Scilling, Heathuric, Wyrmhere (?),
Dior.
[93] Aelfhere and Dior. The latter (in the form _Diar_) occurs only
once (Birch, _Cart. Sax._ 497) and may be a mistake for Diara (_ib._
507). The name Diora need not be of heroic origin; it may be an
abbreviation from such names as Diorwald, Diornoth.
[94] Breca, Finn, Fitela, Hengest, Hnaef, Hrethel, Scyld, Weland,
Guthhere, Geat, Gifeca, Heoden, Helm, Wald, Beaduca, Frithla, Secca,
Gifeca--to which we may add Waelse in Walsingaham. Widia is also to
be added, if it is not allowed for the Liber Vitae. For the list of
place-names (not the personal names) I am dependent upon Binz, _Beitr._
XX 141-223.
NOTE II. ON THE DATING OF CERTAIN SOUND-CHANGES IN ANGLO-SAXON.
In my _Studies in Old English_[95], published in 1899, I endeavoured
to formulate a scheme for dating approximately the chief sound-changes
which took place in English during the first few centuries after the
invasion of Britain. In the course of these investigations I was led
to the following conclusions (pp. 117, 253 ff.): i. that 'palatal
umlaut' in Northumbrian and the dialect of the Vespasian Psalter took
place before 650; ii. that the change from _ǣ_ to _ē_ (in all dialects
except West Saxon) was in operation about 650-680; iii. that the loss
of intersonantal _h_ (in all dialects) belongs to the same period or a
little later; iv. that contraction through loss of intervocalic _h_ may
be dated roughly between 680-710; v. that the loss of final _-u_ after
long syllables and in words of the form ⏑⏑⏑ took place in all dialects
at a time approximately contemporaneous with the operation of palatal
umlaut in Northumbrian (i.e. before 650).
Prof. Morsbach in his paper _Zur Datierung des Beowulfepos_[96] has
dealt with several of the same problems and come to conclusions which
differ widely from those at which I arrived. The chief differences are
as follows: i. that after a long syllable which bore the chief accent
_-u_ was not lost before the end of the seventh century, though after
a long 'nebentonig' syllable the loss was somewhat earlier (p. 261
f.); ii. that intervocalic _h_ was lost in Kentish by about 680, but
in Mercian and Northumbrian the same change cannot be shown to have
taken place before about 700 (p. 264); iii. that postconsonantal _h_
(before vowels) was retained in Kentish in 679; its loss, at least in
Mercian and Northumbrian, may be dated about 700, but after the loss of
_-u_ (p. 265). In summarising the results of his discussion (p. 273)
he gives "about 700" for the loss of postconsonantal _h_ and "shortly
before 700" for the loss of _-u_. Incidentally he follows Bülbring
(_Elementarbuch_, §§ 146, 528) in dating the origin of _ē_ (from 'West
Germ.' _ā_) before the breaking, and in placing the loss of _h_ before
_l_ (in _neolaecan_) anterior to the operation of 'palatal umlaut'
(monophthongisation).
The importance of this discussion for our present purpose[97] lies
in the dates proposed for the loss of _-u_ and of postconsonantal _h_.
Prof. Morsbach concludes that Beowulf cannot have been composed before
700, since it contains a number of half-verses which would have been
metrically impossible before the operation of these changes, e.g.
_ofer fealone flod(u)_, _to widan feor(h)e_. I have already expressed
scepticism as to whether such inferences are really justifiable. This
applies more particularly to the verses affected by the question of
postconsonantal _h_, which are quite few in number. The date which
Prof. Morsbach himself (p. 274) proposes for the composition of Beowulf
is 700-730. He finds no difficulty in reconciling this with the
statistics (given above, p. 45) for the use of the article. This seems
to me rather strange; yet the opinion of a scholar who stands in such
deservedly high estimation cannot lightly be disregarded.
Now let us examine the evidence on which these conclusions are based.
First it will be convenient to take the loss of _h_. Prof. Morsbach
holds that in Kentish intervocalic _h_ was lost before postconsonantal
_h_. The evidence is derived from a single charter issued by King
Hlothhere in 679 (Birch, _Cart. Sax._ 45), which contains the
place-name _Vuestan ae_ beside the personal name _Velhisci_ (Latin
Gen.). But surely conclusions of this kind are admissible only when
a number of examples can be adduced. On the same principle we might
argue from the name _Irminredi_ (in the same charter) that the change
_ǣ_ > _ē_ had taken place and also from the name _Aedilmaeri_ (again
in the same charter) that it had not. And what should we do with the
earliest East Saxon charter (Birch, 81), in which the grantor is called
both _Oedelraedus_ and _Ho(di)lredus_? Again, it is clear that Bede
wrote his own name _Baeda_; but will anyone venture to hold that this
represents the current pronunciation of his name in 731--or indeed for
some half a century earlier? In personal names we must clearly allow
for traditional orthography. The form _Irminredi_ may no doubt be used
as evidence for the change _ǣ_ > _ē_, and similarly the form _Vuestan
ae_ may be used as evidence for the loss of _h_. But forms, especially
personal names, like _Velhisci_ and _Aedilmaeri_, which must long
have been in use, may very well show an antiquated orthography--one
which correctly represented the pronunciation of thirty or forty years
previously. A single instance of such a kind is totally insufficient
ground for supposing that the Kentish dialect treated postconsonantal
and intervocalic _h_ differently.
Next we must consider the date given for the loss of _h_ in Mercian
and Northumbrian (p. 263 f.). I find some difficulty here in
following Prof. Morsbach's line of argument. In Northumbrian there
is, admittedly, no evidence at all for the preservation of _h_, while
cases of its omission are numerous in Bede's History (written in 731),
in addition to one or two instances in probably earlier authorities.
For Mercian[98] we are dependent on the Epinal, Erfurt and Corpus
glossaries, the archetype of which is placed before 700 by Prof.
Morsbach. In my _Studies_, p. 232, I came to the conclusion that
in this archetype the cases of retention and omission of _h_ were
probably about equal in number. Prof. Morsbach replies that there is
no necessity for such a conclusion, since all the extant glossaries
themselves date from times when _h_ was already lost. He himself
decides[99] against the loss of _h_ in the archetype for two reasons:
(1) because postconsonantal and intervocalic _h_ are treated alike in
the glossaries and the former was still retained in Kentish when the
archetype was written[100]; (2) because the assumption of such an early
date for the loss of _h_ would be incompatible with his own date for
the loss of _-u_. The first of these arguments, it will be seen, rests
upon the dating of the loss of postconsonantal _h_ in Kentish, on which
enough has been said above. The second depends upon a hypothesis which
we shall have to consider presently.
My reason for concluding that the loss of _h_ occurred in the archetype
was that in at least eight entries (probably several more) all three
glossaries agree in showing forms without _h_. It is to be remembered
that in these glossaries we are dealing not with independent documents
but with copies made, more or less mechanically, from one original.
This remark applies of course much more to Epinal and Erfurt than to
Corpus; for in the latter the materials have been rearranged, as well
as augmented from other sources, while incidentally the forms have been
modernised to a considerable extent. In Epinal such modernisation is
not unknown, but it is restricted within very narrow limits, as may be
seen from the use of _b_ and _f_[101]. Further, it is to be remarked
that we have no ground for assuming the language of the archetype
itself to have been consistent. The occurrence of numerous Dative
forms and of expressions containing more than one word (e.g. _per
anticipationem_--_þorch obst_) shows that the materials were derived
largely from glosses in books, just as in the Leiden glossary[102].
Many of these glosses may have been written a generation or more
earlier than the compilation of the archetype glossary. Whoever bears
these facts in mind and at the same time compares the evidence for
forms with and without _h_ with that for _f_ and _b_ will, I think,
be forced to the conclusion that the forms with _h_ do not represent
the pronunciation of the compiler of the archetype, but that they were
taken over by him from earlier sources.
Now we may take the evidence for the proposed date of the loss of
_-u_. After enumerating (p. 253 ff.) a list of cases which have been
suggested by various scholars Prof. Morsbach comes to the conclusion
that the only certain example of a form in which _-u_ is retained[103]
is the word _flodu_ in the inscription on the Franks casket. As the
whole theory largely depends on the value attached to this form we must
consider it carefully. In my _Studies_, p. 156, I suggested that it
should be regarded as an archaism and at the same time pointed out that
_-u_ is lost in another word (_unneg_) in the same inscription. Prof.
Morsbach rejects this explanation of _unneg_, which he connects,
rightly, I think now, with O. Sax. _nah_. But this form can come
perfectly well from *_nāh(w)u_ (earlier *_nēhwō_), if not from *_nāhwa_
(cf. Goth. _nehwa_, _nehw_). That Ang.-Sax. _neah_, _neh_ has lost
an _u_-sound is, I contend, shown not only by the Gothic forms, but
also by _neolaecan_ and _neowest_ (cf. Lind, _genehwaþ_, etc.). Prof.
Morsbach rejects my explanation of these forms also and adopts that
of Prof. Bülbring, as stated above. But the latter is untenable; for
if _ē_ (from _ā_) had come into existence before the operation of
breaking, we should never find forms with _ae_, which as a matter
of fact are fairly common in the earliest texts of all dialects. In
particular we may note that the three extant coins of the Mercian king
Aethelred (675-704) all have _-ræd_. Hence the change _ǣ_ > _ē_ can
hardly have taken place much before 650.
Apart from _unneg_[104], there are three forms on the recently
discovered right side of the casket which may show loss of _-u_. Prof.
Napier (_An English Miscellany_, p. 375 f.) is inclined to regard the
forms _sær_ and _dœn_ (?), if not also _hos_, as Nom. sg. fem. But the
interpretation of this part of the inscription is still uncertain in
many details.
I confess that since the discovery of the new side I am less inclined
to regard the form _flodu_ as an archaism than as a mere blunder. Even
in the more intelligible parts of the inscription we find a number of
forms which present serious difficulty: _Romwalus_, _Reumwalus_[105],
_gasric_, _Giuþeasu_. The last of these still seems to me to present
the best illustration of _flodu_. If the one is due to the loss of
some letters--e.g. _su_ for _su(mæ)_--the same may be the case with
the other[106]. At all events an inscription which presents so many
difficulties cannot be regarded as a safe authority on which to base a
scheme for the chronology of sound-changes.
The only other instance of _-u_ on which Prof. Morsbach lays any
weight is the form _aetgaru_ in the Erfurt glossary. He speaks of
it as 'nicht unwahrscheinlich' (p. 257), though 'fraglich' (p. 264).
Many scholars cite it as an example of_-u_ without reserve. Now in
order to form a just estimate of the value of any form which occurs
in the glossaries it is obviously necessary to take it in connection
with the forms which the other texts show in the same entry. The entry
in question (_framea_--_aetgaru_) occurs in the Epinal and Corpus
glossaries, as well as in that of Erfurt, though the two former have
_aetgaeru_ (_ætgaeru_) for _aetgaru_. There can be no doubt that the
relationship between the three glossaries is as follows:
x (Arch. I)
|
|--------------------|
| |
y (Arch. II) |
| |
|--------------| |
| | |
Epinal Erfurt Corpus
though we do not know exactly how many intermediate stages lie between
the extant texts and the original archetype. It will be seen that the
question at issue is whether the Erfurt glossary or the other two have
kept the original form--for if the archetype had contained both forms
we may assume that some trace of the double entry would have been
preserved (as in other cases). Now the Erfurt glossary is the latest of
the three, it is the work of a foreign scribe and it is very carelessly
copied. Moreover, no letter or combination of letters has suffered more
than _ae_. Most usually this combination has been reduced to _e_; but
the loss of _e_ is not infrequent, e.g. _smal_, _hrad_, _nacthegelae_.
In view of these facts it is unintelligible to me how anyone can
uphold the evidence of the Erfurt glossary against the other two. But
in this case it is used to prove the existence of an archaic form for
which none of the glossaries elsewhere present a parallel. Lastly, we
may remark that though it is frequently assumed that the word _gar_
was an _u_-stem (*_gaizu-_) no evidence worth consideration has ever
been adduced to prove it[107]. On all grounds therefore we are brought
to the conclusion that the evidence for the preservation of _-u_ in
_aetgaru_ is not merely open to question but entirely worthless.
We must now notice certain early documents in which _-u_ is clearly
lost. Prof. Morsbach mentions the form _felt_ in the earliest East
Saxon charter (Birch, 81), which dates from 692-3. Here then _-u_ was
lost before the date in question[108]. But we can get back further
than this, for the place mentioned is called _Vuidmundes felt_. Some
considerable time must have elapsed after the loss of _-u_ before a
noun, even a proper name, could change its inflection and adopt the
endings of _a_-stems.
Next let us take the Northumbrian evidence. The form _-gar_ on the
Bewcastle column can prove nothing. In the same inscription however we
may find an example in _Cyniburug_; for in view of _hnutu_ etc. it is
probable that consonantal stems used what was originally the Accus.
sg. form also for the Nom. sg. (as in Old Norse). I cannot see any
probability in the suggestion that this monument may date from some
considerable time after 670[109], if it has been rightly interpreted.
More important is the fact that no example of _-u_ after a long
syllable is preserved in Bede's Ecclesiastical History. It is to
be observed that Bede seems to have scrupulously followed the
orthographical peculiarities of the documents which he used. Thus
in Papal letters dating from the first half of the seventh century
we find such forms as _Adilbercto_, _Audubaldi_ which are not used
elsewhere in the work[110]. Now in the record of the proceedings at
the Council of Hertford in 673, which is quoted in IV 5, we find the
forms _Herutford_, _Vilfrid_, _Vynfrid_, _Hrofaescaestir_; and in the
similar record for the Council of Hatfield in 680, quoted in IV 17,
we find the form _Haethfelth_. If_-u_ had not been lost by this time
the forms used must have been _-fordu_ or _-fordus_, _Vilfridu(s)_,
etc., and it is most unlikely, in view of Bede's practice elsewhere,
that he would have altered them. As a matter of fact the latter of
these documents contains two forms--_Hymbronensium_ (or _Humbr-_) and
_Estranglorum_--which are not used elsewhere by Bede. Again, the same
author almost always writes the name of the Northumbrian king Ecgfrith
(r. 671-685) as _Ecgfrid_ (in the Nom.). That this represents the
contemporary orthography is shown by a coin of that king which bears
the legend _Ecgfrid rex_.
But further, there is a whole series of names, much used in
Northumbria, which have as their second element _-haeþ_ from earlier
_-haþu_ (e.g. _Eadhaed_). At the time when _-u_ was lost here the
change _a_ > _æ_ was clearly still operative. Will anyone suggest that
this was the case after the middle of the seventh century? Again, it
can hardly be doubted that the form _Osuiu_, if not also _Osuald_,
represents the pronunciation[111] current in the time of that king. In
Bede's History, III 29, we have extracts from a Papal letter addressed
to _Osuiu_ (v. l. _Osuio_) _regi Saxonum_. The form _os-_ can scarcely
have become current in compounds before _-u_ was lost in the Nom.,
Accus. sg.
It is surely unnecessary to enter into further details. We have seen
that practically the whole evidence for the proposed chronology
consists of two forms, _Velhisci_ and _flodu_, one of which is
incapable of proving what it is meant to prove, while the other is of
exceedingly doubtful value; and on the other hand that this chronology
has opposed to it a large number of forms in the glossaries, in
charters and in early Northumbrian authorities of various kinds. Now
let us consider the various sound-changes in relation to one another.
It is admitted, and necessarily so, that the loss of _-u_ took place
before the loss of _h_. For the sake of convenience we may apply the
terms 'Period I' to times anterior to the loss of _-u_ and 'Period
II' to the interval between the two changes. From neither of these
periods have we any texts surviving, unless we are to reckon the
inscription on the Franks casket to Period I. Our earliest charters,
and apparently also the lost archetype of the glossaries, were composed
at a later time ('Period III') when _h_ was no longer pronounced,
though doubtless often written. But before the date of the earliest
extant glossary (Epinal) a further change or changes had taken place
which brought about the confusion of original _ƀ_ and _f_. It is clear
from a comparison of the glossaries that this confusion was later than
the loss of _h_ and also that it was almost, if not entirely, unknown
to the archetype. So also in Northumbrian. In Bede's History we have
no instance of _h_ preserved in an English word, whereas examples of
its omission are numerous. On the other hand it is clear that Bede
usually retained the distinction between _b_ (i.e. _ƀ_) and _f_,
although the latter has already largely encroached on the former in
the Moore MS.[112] We may therefore constitute two subdivisions of the
period subsequent to the loss of _h_, namely 'Period III' prior to the
confusion of _ƀ_ and _f_ and 'Period IV' subsequent to this confusion.
Now we can see clearly where to date the Franks casket, for it shows
confusion of _ƀ_ and _f_ in _wylif_--according to Prof. Morsbach also
in _sefu_. It belongs therefore not to Period I but to Period IV.
Any attempt to fix an absolute chronology is of course rendered
difficult by the absence of very early texts. We may probably assume
that Period IV begins more or less about 700. The Kentish charter
of 679 falls in Period III. Now when _-u_ was lost, _h_ (whether
intervocalic or postconsonantal) must have been a spirant--a fact which
Prof. Morsbach seems to have entirely ignored. It is quite incredible
that only a few years should elapse between that stage and the total
loss of intervocalic _h_ seen in the charter. The corresponding period
in Germany lasted centuries, and I cannot conceive how the transition
can have been accomplished anywhere in less than half a century. I
conclude therefore that the dates which I gave in my Studies were
approximately correct. If there was an error it was in putting some
of the changes slightly too late. I have little hesitation now in
expressing my opinion that the loss of _-u_ took place not later than
the second or third decade of the seventh century.
FOOTNOTES:
[95] _Transactions of the Cambridge Philological Society_, Vol. IV,
Part II. The page-references are to the figures in the outer corners.
[96] _Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu
Göttingen_, 1906, pp. 251-277.
[97] Prof. Morsbach's paper raises a number of questions besides those
mentioned above. But I am obliged here to confine my attention to those
which have a bearing on the dating of Beowulf.
[98] The application of this term to the Epinal and Erfurt glossaries
(or the archetype) seems to me to be open to grave objection.
[99] If I have interpreted his meaning correctly. But I admit that I
have had great difficulty in understanding the argument in paragraph 5
of p. 263 (especially the "mit _-h-_" of line 12).
[100] Prof. Morsbach seems to regard Kentish as exceptional in its
treatment of intervocalic _h_, rather than in that of postconsonantal
_h_. I am not quite clear as to his reason for this.
[101] Cf. _Studies in Old English_, p. 240.
[102] This text represents a more primitive type of glossary than the
others and, though it is not an ancestor of theirs, it has without
doubt used a considerable number of the same glosses (especially in
Sweet's § XLV) which were incorporated in their archetype.
[103] The form _scanomodu_ on the solidus need not be taken into
account. It is improbable that coins of this type were minted after the
sixth century.
[104] Prof. Morsbach further argues that even if my interpretation of
_unneg_ was correct it would prove nothing, since _-u_ was probably
lost after a long 'nebentonig' syllable earlier than after a long
'haupttonig' syllable. But neither the _-gar_ of the Bewcastle
inscription (cf. p. 70) nor the _felt_ of the East Saxon charter can be
admitted as evidence for this hypothesis.
[105] In spite of what is said by Prof. Morsbach (p. 264 f.) these
forms are scarcely intelligible unless _h_ was already lost.
[106] E.g. perhaps _flod u(p)ahof_.
[107] The place-name _Wihtgarabyrg_ in the Saxon Chronicle, ann. 530
(B, C), 544 (A, B, C) is more probably to be regarded as a corruption
of _Wihtwara-_ through the influence of the personal name _Wihtgar_.
[108] Prof. Morsbach's explanation is that _felt_ here is a long
nebentonig syllable. But we have no evidence that the influence of
'sentence-accent' made itself felt in this way.
[109] Prof. Morsbach would assign the monument to the time of Aldfrith,
who reigned 685-705 (not 725, a printer's error in Vietor's book).
[110] In his own narrative of course he often uses forms which must
have been antiquated in his time (e.g. _Vurtigerno_, _Aeduini_,
_Aeodbaldo_) and also foreign forms in the names of persons of
Continental origin (e.g. _Agilberctus_). But it may safely be assumed
that all these cases are derived from earlier documents.
[111] I.e. Oswiu (Oswald); cf. _Baduuini_, i.e. Baduwini. I have not
taken account of the possibility that _-uiu_ originally contained
an _-h-_. If that could be proved the present discussion would be
practically superfluous.
[112] Cf. my Studies, p. 247. It will be seen that the number of cases
in which M, B and C agree in _f_ (for _ƀ_) is very small.
NOTE III. LITERARY INFLUENCE IN BEOWULF.
I am not aware that any serious argument has been brought forward
to show that Beowulf was a literary production. It is customary
indeed, especially among English scholars, to use the word 'write'
with reference to its composition; but this is frequently due to
mere carelessness. Nevertheless there is undoubtedly a widespread
reluctance to admit that the poem came into existence without the
use of writing--partly on account of its length and partly because
its technique is of rather an advanced order. The first of these
difficulties has now been definitely settled by the Servian poems, as
we shall see in the next Note. Here we need concern ourselves only with
the second.
The most definite pronouncement on this subject known to me is
contained in Prof. Ker's book, _The Dark Ages_, p. 250. "_Beowulf_
and _Waldere_," he says, "are the work of educated men, and they were
intended, no doubt, as books to read. They are not, like the _Elder
Edda_, a collection of traditional oral poems." Here we have three
distinct statements. That Beowulf and Waldhere are not a collection of
poems, like the Edda, is manifest. Whether they are traditional oral
poems at all is a different question, the answer to which depends in
the first place on our attitude to Prof. Ker's second statement--that
they were intended as books to read. But this statement surely requires
some evidence. The only argument brought forward is that "the _Beowulf_
MS ... is intended as a book to be read, and is got up with some care.
From the look of it, one places it naturally in the library of a great
house or a monastic school; and the contents of it have the same sort
of association; they do not belong to the unlearned in their present
form." But, so far as the earlier part of this passage goes, the
argument applies only to the tenth century. No one will deny that the
earlier Anglo-Saxon poems were studied at that time; indeed they had
probably come to be regarded as, in a sense, classical. But have we
any right to assume that scholars of the seventh or eighth centuries
viewed these poems or their subjects in a similar light? If so how are
we to account for the total absence of references to such subjects in
the works of Bede? And what about Alcuin? _Quid Hinieldus cum Christo?_
Is it likely that Alcuin would have regarded these _pagani et perditi
reges_ as suitable subjects for the attention of scholars? The natural
presumption from his language is that he knew of them not from literary
works, but only from street-minstrels whom he looked upon with disgust.
Yet Bede and Alcuin can hardly have been ignorant of any important
literary activity during their times, and it would be unfair to regard
them merely as religious bigots. In view of their silence it seems
to me a precarious hypothesis even that the poems were committed to
writing much before the end of the eighth century.
There is no doubt of course that the writing of English was in common
use during the early part of the ninth century. But the paucity of
earlier evidence renders it probable that this was a recent innovation;
and the orthographical characteristics of eighth century documents
point to the same conclusion. Laws were written in English from the
beginning; but we may safely assume that this was done by professional
scribes, in all probability ecclesiastics. Otherwise there is little
definite evidence for the writing of the vernacular, except of course
in glosses. The more learned clergy clearly preferred to use Latin;
for the less learned Bede states (_Ep. ad Ecgb._, cap. 5) that he had
himself had to make translations even of the Creed and the Lord's
Prayer, for them to learn by heart. Where was a reading public to be
looked for in such a period[113]?
But we have yet to discuss the statement that "_Beowulf_ and _Waldere_
are the work of educated men." The question here is what is meant by
the word 'educated.' Nowadays the expression 'educated Chinese' is
used in more than one sense. Sometimes it is applied to those who have
received a good education according to the traditional standard of
that nation. Sometimes however, especially in newspaper language, it
is used only of those Chinese who have received a Western education.
We need not doubt that the poets of Beowulf and Waldhere were among
the best educated men of their day according to the traditional native
standard. If they were court minstrels--a question we shall have to
discuss in the next chapter--they could hardly be otherwise. But this
is not what Prof. Ker means. The education which he has in view is of
foreign (Roman) type, as may be seen by the latter part of the second
of the quotations given above. Again (p. 252) he says: "The English
epic is possibly due to Virgil and Statius; possibly to Juvencus
and other Christian poets, to the authors studied by Aldhelm and
Bede." If so[114], is it not remarkable that no obvious trace of such
influence can be pointed out? It must not be assumed that the poets
responsible for the composition or preservation of Beowulf would have
any inclination to disguise their knowledge of foreign poetry. The use
which they have made of incidents derived from the Bible is decisive
evidence to the contrary, although their knowledge of this subject
seems to have been of a most elementary description. In Widsith we
actually have at least one reference to a classical character (v. 15
ff.). But Beowulf is entirely free from anything of the kind.
Prof. Brandl[115] has likewise been attracted by the idea that the
growth of Anglo-Saxon epic poetry may have been due to Latin models.
As a probable source of such influence he has fixed upon the Aeneid
and even indicated a number of passages in this poem which may have
suggested certain scenes and incidents in Beowulf. Thus he notes that
both poems begin with the story of a wanderer (Scyld, Aeneas) who came
over the sea (_feasceaft_, _primus et profugus_) and founded a great
dynasty or empire. Then he suggests a connection between the song of
Hrothgar's minstrel on the Creation (Beow. 90 ff.) and a passage (Aen.
I 742 ff.) which describes how Dido's minstrel Iopas sang of the origin
of men and beasts, among other cosmological subjects. Further, he
compares the whole of the scene which contains the latter passage with
the account of Beowulf's reception at Heorot, noting the various stages
in the arrival of the two heroes from their disembarkation to the feast
with which they are welcomed in the palaces. Incidentally, he remarks
that at the feast Wealhtheow hands the cup to Hrothgar and then to the
visitors (Beow. 615 ff.), while Dido pays the same honour to Bitias
(Aen. I 738). Lastly, he compares the racing after Grendel's overthrow
(Beow. 864 ff.) with the rowing contest in memory of Anchises (Aen. V
104 ff.).
I confess that, coming as they do towards the close of an admirable
discussion of the subject, which no attentive student of Beowulf
can fail to appreciate, the comparisons suggested by Prof. Brandl
strike me as surprising beyond measure. The resemblances between the
athletic contests, so far as they have any existence at all, are due to
practices which are worldwide. Is there any reason for supposing that
the act of courtesy ascribed to Wealhtheow was not in full accordance
with early Teutonic custom? Parallels may be found, easily enough, in
Old Norse literature. The arrival of the wanderer (Scyld, not Beowulf)
has nothing in common with that of Aeneas. The one is a baby and
probably alone; the other is the commander of a fleet. Then, as to
the resemblance between Beowulf's visit to Hrothgar and Aeneas' visit
to Dido, I can only say that I fail to detect its existence. Prof.
Brandl seems to lay most stress on this incident and points out certain
parallelisms in the language: _corripuere uiam qua semita monstrat_
(Aen. I 418) with _stig wisode gumum aetgaedere_ (Beow. 320 f.),
and _coram quem quaeritis adsum Troius Aeneas_ (Aen. I 595 f.) with
_Beowulf is min nama_ (Beow. 343). But are these not purely accidental
coincidences, such as one could find between almost any two narrative
poems? When Prof. Brandl speaks of Aeneas' "Verhandlung mit Dido zuerst
durch eine etikettegemässe Mittelsperson", I do not understand what is
meant. Certainly this description applies to the entry of Beowulf. But
Aeneas is present beforehand, shrouded in a cloud with which Venus has
covered him. In the midst of the scene the cloud is suddenly parted and
Aeneas disclosed to Dido's eyes. It seems to me that no meeting could
well be more different. There remains then only the fact that the two
minstrels treat a somewhat similar theme (though in Beowulf this does
not take place on the occasion of the hero's arrival). It is no doubt a
curious coincidence; but the introduction of such a subject in Beowulf
may be accounted for quite satisfactorily without the hypothesis of any
acquaintance with Virgil.
I cannot quit this subject without remarking how much more plausible
a case could be made out for deriving Beowulf from the Homeric poems,
especially the Odyssey. Here there are striking parallels both in
diction and terminology, as we shall see in a later chapter. We may
note especially the epithets applied to princes and the formulae with
which speeches are introduced. If we wish to find a real parallel to
the reception of Beowulf by Hrothgar, it is provided by the account of
Telemachos' visit to Menelaos. Similar parallels are to be obtained
for the minstrel's lays and many other incidents. Are we then to
suppose that Beowulf is based upon the Odyssey? That is a hypothesis
which I will gladly leave for others to work out. For my own part I
prefer the explanation that similar poetry is the outcome, or rather
the expression, of similar social conditions. But in Beowulf and
the Homeric poems, as against the Aeneid, we have additional common
elements in the fact that the interest is centred in the actual
characters--not in the destiny of their descendants--and in the
vividness and reality of the narratives, in spite of Grendel, Scylla
and the rest. The latter of these two common features seems to me to
indicate that both the Greek and English poets were depicting types
of life with which they were themselves familiar, whereas no one will
dispute that the Aeneid is a product of the library.
Half a century ago, when the study of Teutonic antiquity was still
young, there was a general eagerness to refer every institution and
belief to a native origin. To-day we see the inevitable reaction--a
hypercritical attitude towards every explanation of this character,
coupled with a readiness to accept theories of biblical or classical
influence on the slightest possible evidence. It is this intellectual
atmosphere which, naturally enough, has given birth to the chimaera of
a literary Beowulf--a creature which, if I am not mistaken, belongs to
the same genus as certain well-known theories in Northern mythology.
FOOTNOTES:
[113] The case of King Aldfrith shows that educated laymen were not
entirely unknown; but it is extremely unlikely that they were common.
In one charter (Birch, 99) Wihtred, king of Kent, is made to say:
_signum sanctae crucis pro ignorantia litterarum expressi_. This
document exists only in a late copy; but at all events it suggests that
the practice of making the cross, instead of signing, was due to a
widespread inability to write.
[114] I confess that I am strongly inclined to suspect that anyone
imbued with Latin learning would have lacked not only the inclination
but also the ability to compose such a poem as Beowulf. This however is
an opinion which could only be substantiated by a wider knowledge of
the history of poetry in various parts of the world than I can make any
claim to possess.
[115] _Grundriss d. germ. Philol._, II 1008.
CHAPTER V.
THE POETRY AND MINSTRELSY OF EARLY TIMES.
In the preceding chapters we have seen that the persons and events
celebrated in the heroic poems apparently all belonged to the
fourth, fifth or sixth centuries, and further that heroic poetry was
flourishing among the Goths during the same period. For the existence
of English, Scandinavian or German heroic poetry at this time we have
no absolutely conclusive evidence. But the materials from which our
poems are formed must largely be referred to the sixth century. This
may be seen most clearly in cases where the poems of two or more
nations not merely treat an identical theme but also agree in the
motif or in comparatively small details, as in the stories of Ingeld,
Waldhere and Svanhildr. A like age is probably to be attributed
to resemblances in language, such as those shown by the hortatory
addresses and the accounts of dragon-fights cited in the last chapter
(p. 60 f.). The fact that these resemblances sometimes occur in stories
relating to entirely different characters need not prevent us from
believing that they spring ultimately from a common origin.
It cannot of course be proved that the materials from which the heroic
poems are derived were themselves always in poetic (metrical) form. In
principle we must admit the possibility that they were transmitted from
one generation to another in a more or less stereotyped form of prose
narrative, such as we find later in the sagas of Iceland and Ireland.
But in point of fact we have no evidence whatever for the cultivation
of such traditional prose narratives among any of the early Teutonic
peoples, whereas there is good reason, as we shall see shortly, for
believing that narrative poetry was both ancient and widely cultivated.
In the first place we may note that English and German poetry down
to the ninth century shared a common system of metre and that the
Fornyrðislag, which is used in most of the Edda poems, differed but
little from this type, except of course that it was always arranged in
strophes. The application of this common metre to narrative purposes
can scarcely be regarded as a recent innovation, for English and
German poems frequently exhibit verses and half-verses of very similar
construction. Thus in the Hildebrandslied speeches are generally
introduced with the formula: _Hadubrant gimahalta, Hiltibrantes sunu_,
which is almost identical with a formula used in Beowulf: _Wiglaf
maðelode, Weohstanes sunu_. In the same German poem (v. 42) we find the
verse: _dat sagetun mi seolidante_ ('it has been told me by mariners'),
with which we may compare Beow. 377: _þonne saegdon þaet saeliðende_.
Note should also be taken of such phrases as (v. 55) _ibu dir din
ellen taoc_ ('if thy prowess is sufficient') and definitely poetical
expressions like (v. 43) _inan wic furnam_ ('war carried him off'),
as compared with Beow. 572 _ðonne his ellen deah_ and 1080 _wig ealle
fornam Finnes þegnas_. The number of such parallels might be greatly
increased if we were to take into account passages from religious
poems, especially the Old Saxon Heliand.
For a very much earlier period direct evidence is furnished by the
Roman historian Tacitus, who says (_Germ._ 2) that the Germani
possessed ancient poems or songs (_carmina_) even in his time and adds
expressly that they had no other means of preserving a historical
record[116]. That these poems were partly of what may be called a
'heroic' character is clear from another passage (_Ann._ II 88),
where it is stated that Arminius was still a subject of poetry among
barbarian nations (_canitur ... adhuc barbaras apud gentes_). In both
cases the reference is in all probability to the peoples of western
Germany rather than to the Goths.
On the whole then we need not doubt that the heroic poetry which we
find in England and Germany during the seventh and eighth centuries
had a long history behind it. Of course as to the form of the poetry
current in the first century we are entirely without information. Many
scholars hold that it was exclusively choric, not only in Tacitus' time
but for four or five centuries later. This is one of the questions
which we shall have to bear in mind in the course of our discussion.
* * * * *
The earliest historical reference to the cultivation of poetry, or
rather perhaps minstrelsy, in England occurs in Bede's account of the
poet Caedmon (_Hist. Eccl._ IV 24). In this story we are told that
it was the custom that, when the villagers met together to drink and
amuse themselves, everyone should take his turn in singing to the harp.
Caedmon, who had never been able to learn a song, used to leave the
festivities and make his way home as soon as he saw the harp coming
in his direction[117]. No information is given as to the character of
these songs. Probably they would as a rule be quite short--perhaps not
much longer than the hymn learned by Caedmon from the angel, which
contains only nine verses. It is not unlikely that they resembled
some of the metrical riddles more than any other form of Anglo-Saxon
poetry which has come down to us. Longer songs, of a narrative type,
may of course have been known. But it is a question whether such songs
would deal with heroic themes or with folk-tales. We may think of the
Scandinavian story of Svipdagr and Menglöð, which is preserved in a
number of different versions, ranging in date probably from the tenth
century to the seventeenth or later.
But we have already seen (p. 41 f.) that in the eighth century at
least the recitation of heroic poetry was by no means unknown. Indeed
we may infer from the language used by Alcuin (_ridentium turuam in
plateis_) that it enjoyed a good deal of favour with the general
public. Another of his letters[118] speaks to much the same effect.
We may gather from the use of the word _citharista_ that these
recitations also were accompanied by the harp. But the language of the
letters seems rather to suggest that the performers in such cases were
persons who made minstrelsy more or less of a profession. A century
earlier the existence of professional minstrels may be inferred from
the well-known story of Aldhelm[119]--that he used to take up his
position on a bridge, like a professional minstrel (_quasi artem
cantitandi professum_), and sing to the people in order to call them
back to church. We are not informed as to the character of the poems
he recited, but clearly they were of a type calculated to attract the
country people.
On the Continent we find very similar evidence. A passage in the Annals
of Quedlinburg, to which we have already alluded and which dates
perhaps ultimately from the tenth century, states that the country
people used to sing of Dietrich von Bern[120]. From a much earlier
period we have an interesting reference to a Frisian minstrel named
Bernlef, who became a disciple of St Liudger. He had been blind for
three years, when he was brought to the missionary, but "he was greatly
loved by his neighbours because of his geniality and his skill in
reciting to the accompaniment of the harp stories of the deeds of the
ancients and the wars of kings[121]." This incident appears to have
taken place before 785. That minstrelsy was definitely recognised as a
profession among the Frisians is shown by the last clause in the Lex
Frisonum, which fixes a special compensation for injury to the hand of
a harpist[122].
From all this we gather that in the eighth century there existed both
in England and Germany a class of minstrels whose practice it was to
play the harp and recite heroic poetry in the village-streets or on
bridges or wherever they could gather an audience. Now if we turn to
the poems themselves we find that they also contain references to
professional minstrels; but these appear to have been quite a different
class of persons from those with whom we have been dealing.
At the close of his elegy (v. 35 ff.) Deor gives the following account
of himself: "With regard to myself I will say that formerly I was the
bard (_scop_) of the Heodeningas and dear to my lord. My name is Deor.
For many years I have had a good office and a gracious master. But now
Heorrenda, a skilful poet, has received the domain which the king had
before given to me." There may be some difference of opinion as to the
precise meaning of the word _londryht_[123], but it is clear enough
that the poet had been a court-minstrel and that he had been supplanted
in the king's favour by a rival. In Beowulf also we find mention of a
person who seems to hold a similar position. The word _scop_ occurs
three times in this poem (vv. 90, 496, 1066)--always perhaps with
reference to the same man. In each case he is represented as singing or
reciting, and twice mention is made of the harp. On the last occasion,
when he recites the story of Finn and Hnaef at the banquet (cf. p. 2),
he is called _Hroðgares scop_, which seems to imply a sort of official
position.
The case of Widsith is somewhat different. The poet is a traveller
who prides himself on the large number of nations he has visited. He
states also that he served under various princes by whom he had been
handsomely rewarded. The poem ends with some reflections on the life
of wandering minstrels; but these verses may be a later addition, like
the introduction. At all events in v. 94 the poet speaks of his return
home, when he presented to his lord, Eadgils prince of the Myrgingas,
a valuable 'ring' which had been given him by Eormenric. This present
was a reward to Eadgils for his kindness in granting the poet the
land formerly held by his father. It would seem then that the poet is
represented as a man of good position. Whether we describe him as a
wandering minstrel or not, his occupation is clearly to be regarded as
court-minstrelsy and different therefore from that of Bernlef and the
harpists menti
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/48426