ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.

Previous

Page 19 ff. For further information the reader may be referred to Miss Clarke's Sidelights on Teutonic History during the Migration Period (Cambridge, 1911), which contains a very clear and interesting account of the various characters mentioned in the heroic poems.


Page 43, ll. 5-7. This suggestion can hardly be maintained. The true name of Theodberht's son was probably Theodwald.


Page 46, l. 3 ff. The consideration of this difficult question has recently been somewhat facilitated by Richter's Chronologische Studien zur ags. Literatur (Halle, 1910). The general effect of Dr Richter's investigations is to confirm the view put forward by Prof. Sarazzin (Engl. Stud., XVIII 170 ff.) as to the antiquity of Genesis A. Unfortunately I fear that the statistics are not complete and, further, that the evidence is not always treated with strict impartiality. Thus in Beowulf such half-verses as to widan feore are regarded as proofs of shortening (through loss of h) and reckoned in the final statistics (pp. 9, 85); but in Genesis A the metrically equivalent on fyore lifde is not so reckoned (pp. 24, 89). The half-verse geseon meahton is cited in Beowulf without qualification (p. 15), but in Exodus as doubtful (p. 18). In Beowulf -wundor seon is taken to be –×– (pp. 13, 15), but in Daniel A it is treated as doubtful (p. 32). Dr Richter's conclusion that Genesis A is an earlier poem than Beowulf is certainly not substantiated by the treatment of feore or of postconsonantal r, l, m, n[670], or again by that of frea, don, gan, sie[670]; while compounds such as Þreanyd obviously do not stand on the same footing as case-forms like Þrea. It is only in the treatment of intervocalic h that Genesis A apparently shows a more archaic character than Beowulf. In the former poem Dr Richter cites only one case of contraction (p. 28), and even this is doubtful; but the same remark applies to at least 18 of the 24 (genuine) cases which he cites for Beowulf (p. 15). Out of the five or six probable cases of contraction in this poem three occur in practically the same phrase—in (on, to) sele Þam hean—while two of the others occur in consecutive verses (910 f.). The conclusion to which the evidence seems to me to point is that both Genesis A and Beowulf (even in its Christianised form) date from the seventh century, but that the former has been somewhat better preserved than the latter. As Genesis A is doubtless of monastic origin, we may reasonably expect that it was committed to writing at an earlier date. In the intervening period the text of Beowulf may have suffered many changes (such as the insertion of the article) at the hands of minstrels.

The further question raised by Prof. Sarazzin (op. cit., p. 192 ff.) as to the relationship of Genesis A to Caedmon cannot be discussed here. But in view of the evidence brought forward I do think it would be worth while to examine and compare the characteristics of the various 'Caedmonic' poems from all points of view. Apart from the extremely improbable dating of certain sound-changes proposed by Prof. Morsbach (cf. p. 66 ff. above) and accepted both by Sarazzin and Richter, I see no reason for supposing that Caedmon's poems have entirely perished.


Page 61, l. 4 ff. Throughout this book I have followed the view generally held by scholars in the past that the expression geongum cempan in Beow. 2044 refers to Ingeld. In recent years several scholars have adopted a different interpretation, viz. that it means not the prince himself but a nameless member of his retinue. This interpretation is due primarily to v. 2061 f., where it has been assumed, somewhat hastily in my opinion, (1) that se oÐer must denote the slayer and (2) that Ingeld's own country is the scene of the tragedy. On the basis of this interpretation Prof. Olrik (Danmarks Heltedigtning, II p. 30 ff., especially p. 37 ff.) has now put forward a theory that the episode in Beowulf has little more than the names in common with Saxo's story of Ingellus' revenge, and that the latter is in its main features the creation of a Danish poet of Harold Bluetooth's time. His explanation is certainly interesting and ingenious; but at the same time it appears to me to be open to serious objections. Thus he has to admit (p. 39) that in the only other reference to the bridal tragedy ('bryllupskampen') contained in the poem (v. 82 ff.) the scene is laid in the Danish king's hall. His explanation is that here we have a variant form of the story (cf. Widsith, v. 45 ff), emanating from a different poet. But surely one cannot place much confidence in an interpretation which involves the assumption of such an inconsistency as this[671]. Still more important is the reference to Ingeld (Hinieldus) in Alcuin's letter to Hygebald (cf. p. 41), which Prof. Olrik seems to have entirely ignored. From this passage it would seem that Ingeld's fame was as great in England in the eighth century as it ever became in Denmark; and such fame is scarcely compatible with the passive rÔle assigned to him by the theory under discussion. But, more than this, have we any ground for supposing that Alcuin did not exercise his judgment in taking Ingeld as his example of a perditus rex? If the story of Ingeld known to him was substantially identical with that recorded by Saxo, as I myself believe, he could hardly have found a case in which Christian and heathen obligations presented a more glaring contrast. To the heathen this hero appealed as the pious son who exacts vengeance for his father's death; but to the Christian he was doubly abhorrent, not merely as a heathen but also as a murderer and a truce-breaker.

Like other heroic stories recorded by Saxo and Icelandic authors the story of Ingellus has without doubt a long poetic history behind it. Prof. Olrik's investigations have rendered it probable that an element in this poetry dates from the tenth century. It may be that the poem used by Saxo was actually composed—or recast—at that time. But I must confess to some scepticism as to the possibility of determining with certainty what proportion of the material is to be assigned to the various periods intermediate between the sixth and twelfth centuries; and I am disposed to think that in general Prof. Olrik has underrated the significance of the earlier elements.


Page 64, l. 6. It should have been mentioned that the expression "to persons born after 800" applies only to the period extending down to 975. I have not examined the evidence available for later times. About this time a new factor is introduced by the revival of interest in heroic poetry.

I would also call attention to the fact that the statistics are confined to historical documents and do not include names (of moneyers) found only on coins. My impression from a perusal of the material collected in Mr Searle's Onomasticon Anglo-Saxonicum is that this element will not appreciably affect the statistics.


Page 75, l. 26 ff. Reference should have been given to the Exeter Gnomic Verses, 89 ff.


Page 110. On the subject discussed at the beginning of this chapter the reader is referred to Heusler, S.-B. d. Akad. zu Berlin, 1909, p. 937 ff., and Van Gennep, La Formation des LÉgendes. The definitions given above may not be entirely satisfactory—mention should perhaps have been made of the 'Ortssage'—but they will probably be found sufficient for the purpose of this book.


Page 116 ff. On this subject reference should be made to Panzer, Studien zur germ. Sagengeschichte, I Beowulf, which contains a careful and detailed examination of the MÄrchen in question. Unfortunately I have not been able to use this work, as it did not come into my hands until the first eight chapters of my book were in print. In regard to those points on which I have chiefly laid stress, viz. that Beowulf is to be identified with Biarki and that he appears to be a historical character, Prof. Panzer's views (pp. 368 ff., 390 ff.) are practically identical with those expressed above. On the other hand he holds that the story of Biarki—the portion dealing with his origin, as well as the adventure at Leire—comes from the same folk-tale as the story of Beowulf and Grendel. His theory as a whole gives rise to important questions regarding the origin and distribution of folk-tales, which cannot be discussed here. Thus I should like to know how far the same folk-tale can arise independently in different regions. Again, the MÄrchen with which he deals seem to me to be highly composite structures, which I should be inclined to regard rather as aggregations of folk-tales. This is true more especially of the elements common to the stories of Beowulf, Grettir and Ormr, the close affinities of which have been brought into a much clearer light by Prof. Panzer's researches. It may be that the elaborate story which underlies all three was treated in poetry at an early date; but I see no more reason now than before for believing that the two Icelandic stories have been affected by any poem dealing with Beowulf himself.


Page 117 f. It is perhaps worth noting that Ormr StÓrolfsson was related to Grettir, both being descended from HÆngr, the great-grandson of that Ketill HÆngr of Hrafnista whose story is largely taken up with adventures with trolls and iÖtnar.


Page 124. For the death of Frotho III the reader may be referred to Olrik, Danmarks Heltedigtning, II p. 239 ff.; and for the connection between this character and the Beaw of the genealogies to (ib.) p. 249 ff. As stated above (p. 126, note) I should prefer the form Beowa, for earlier Biowi (as Aella for earlier Aelli; cf. p. 64). The latter form may be connected with Byggvir.


Page 139 ff. On the Nibelungenlied reference may be made to Prof. RÖthe's article Nibelungias und Waltharius (S.-B. d. Akad. zu Berlin, 1909, p. 649).


Page 161, l. 1 f. The references to Sarus (accidentally omitted here) are Olympiodoros, p. 449 (ed. Niebuhr), Jordanes, Romana, § 321 (Mon. Germ., Auct. Ant. V 41).


Page 180, l. 20 ff. It has rightly been pointed out to me by Mr C. A. Scutt that, if the statement attributed by Herodotus (VI 3) to Demaratos is to be trusted, the average length of a generation in the Spartan royal families may reasonably be expected to be somewhat longer than elsewhere. Yet in point of fact this is not borne out by the evidence available for the historical period (from the fifth to the third centuries), nor yet by that of the genealogies for the period between Theopompos and Cleomenes, if the commonly accepted date for the first Messenian war is correct.


Page 185, l. 20 ff. Recent discoveries have rendered it probable that cremation was practised in Crete in very early times. Up to now however all the evidence apparently comes from the Early Minoan period, so that the point upon which Dr Mackenzie lays stress remains practically unaffected.


Page 190, l. 2 ff. I regret that when this was written I had not observed that Prof. Meyer accepts the statement of Xanthos with regard to the Phrygian invasion. On this question see p. 437, note 2.


Page 198, l. 27 ff. On this subject reference may be made to Shewan, The Lay of Dolon, which appeared too late for me to be able to make use of it.


Page 244, note 2. A different view is taken by Allen, Jour. Hell. St. XXX 312 ff., where a full discussion of the Trojan Catalogue—as also of the Achaean Catalogue (ib., p. 292 ff.)—will be found. Mr Allen's conclusions differ greatly from the views expressed above.


Page 265, note 3. In the poem HyndluliÓÐ (cf. p. 12) the genealogy of Óttarr the son of Innsteinn is traced back to a certain Svanr hinn rauÐi. The same genealogy occurs in the document Hversu Noregr bygÐist (published in the Fornaldar SÖgur NorÐrlanda, II p. 6 in Dr Valdimar Asmundarson's edition); and here Svanr hinn rauÐi is said to be the son of FinnÁlfr by Svanhildr the daughter of Day (Dagr Dellingsson) and the Sun (SÓl, dÓttir Mundilfara). This document however belongs to a very late period—the close of the fourteenth century—and I know of no earlier authority for the first part of the genealogy.


Page 285, note 1, l. 4. For "I p. 687" read "I ii p. 687," and similarly in all subsequent references to the second edition of Prof. Meyer's Geschichte des Altertums.


Page 313, note 1. For "Pasic" read "Pavic" (and so also in the notes on the following pages).

FOOTNOTES:

[670] As shown by Dr Richter's lists (pp. 9 ff., 24 ff. and 13 ff., 27 f.).

[671] So far as I can see the only argument for this inconsistency which Prof. Olrik brings forward is the statement (Vol. I, p. 16; cf. Vol. II, p. 38, note 1, and p. 39, note 1) that the fight at the marriage precedes Beowulf's visit to the king's hall. This however seems to mean that the present tense, which is used throughout the episode (nearly a score of examples), must be taken as a historic present—a construction which is rarely or never found elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon heroic poetry. In Beowulf only one instance (v. 1879) is cited by Nader (Anglia, X 547), and this is clearly erroneous. A possible case does occur in v. 1923 (wunaÐ); but most recent editors either emend (to wunade) or regard the passage as a speech.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Clyx.com


Top of Page
Top of Page