Both helmet and boar-crest were sometimes gold-adorned[776]: the golden boar was a symbol of the god Freyr: some magic protective power is still, inBeowulf[777], felt to adhere to these swine-likenesses, as it was in the days of Tacitus[778].
In Scandinavia, the Torslunda plates show the helmet with a boar-crest: the Vendel helmet has representations of warriors whose crests have an animal's head tailing off to a mere rim or roll: this may be thewaluorwalawhich keeps watch over the head inBeowulf[779]. The helmet was bound fast to the head[780]; exactly how, we do not know.
See Lehmann (H.),Brünne und Helm im ags. Beowulfliede(Göttingen Diss., Leipzig; cf. Wülker,Anglia,VIII,Anzeiger, 167-70; Schulz,Engl. Stud.,IX, 471); Hoops'Reallexikon, s.v.Helm; Baldwin Brown,III, 194-6; Falk,Altnord. Waffenkunde, 155-73; Stjerna,Hjälmar och svärd, 1907, as above: but the attempt of Stjerna to arrange the helmets he depicts in achronological series is perilous, and depends on a dating of the Benty Grange helmet which is by no means generally accepted.
The Corslet.This inBeowulfis made of rings[781], twisted and interlaced by hand[782]. As stated above, the fragments of the only known Anglo-Saxon byrnie were not of this type, but rather intended to have been sewn "upon a doublet of strong cloth[783]." Byrnies were of various lengths, the longer ones reaching to the middle of the thigh (byrnan sīde,Beow.1291, cf.loricæ longæ, síðar brynjur).
See Falk, 179; Baldwin Brown,III. 194.
The Spear.Spear and shield were the essential Germanic weapons in the days of Tacitus, and they are the weapons most commonly found in Old English tombs. The spear-shaft has generally decayed, analysis of fragments surviving show that it was frequently of ash[784]. The butt-end of the spear was frequently furnished with an iron tip, and the distance of this from the spear-head, and the size of the socket, show the spear-shaft to have been six or seven feet long, and three-quarters of an inch to one inch in diameter.
See Falk, 66-90; Baldwin Brown,III, 234-41.
The Shield.Several round shields were preserved on the Gokstad ship, and in the deposits of an earlier period at Thorsbjerg and Nydam. These are formed of boards fastened together, often only a quarter of an inch thick, and not strengthened or braced in any way, bearing out the contemptuous description of the painted German shield which Tacitus puts into the mouth of Germanicus[785]. It was, however, intended that the shield should be light. It was easily pierced, but, by a rapid twist, the foe's sword could be broken or wrenched from his hand. Thus we are told how Gunnar gave his shield a twist, as his adversary thrust his sword through it, and so snapped off his sword at the hilt[786]. The shield was held by a bar, crossing a hole some four inches wide cut in the middle. The hand was protected by a hollow conical boss or umbo, fixed to the wood by its brim, but projecting considerably. In England the wood of the shield has always perished, but a large number of bosses have been preserved. The boss seems to have been calledrond, a word which is also used for the shield as a whole. InBeowulf, 2673,Gifts of Men, 65, the meaning "boss" suitsrondbest, also inrand sceal on scylde, fæst fingra gebeorh(Cotton. Gnomic Verses, 37-8). But the original meaning ofrandmust have been the circular rim round the edge, and thismeaning it retains in Icelandic (Falk, 131). The linden wood was sometimes bound with bast, whencescyld (sceal) gebunden, lēoht linden bord(Exeter Gnomic Verses, 94-5).
See Falk (126-54); Baldwin Brown,III, 196-204; Pfannkuche (K.),Der Schild bei den Angelsachsen, Halle Dissertation, 1908.
The Bowis a weapon of much less importance inBeowulfthan the spear. Few traces of the bow have survived from Anglo-Saxon England, though many wooden long-bows have been preserved in the moss-finds in a remarkably fine state. They are of yew, some over six feet long, and in at least one instance tipped with horn. The bow entirely of horn was, of course, well known in the East, and in classical antiquity, but I do not think traces of any horn-bow have been discovered in the North. It was a difficult weapon to manage, as the suitors of Penelope found to their cost. Possibly that is why Hæthcyn is represented as killing his brother Herebeald accidentally with a horn-bow: he could not manage the exotic weapon.
See Falk, 91-103; Baldwin Brown,III, 241.
The Hall
It may perhaps be the fact that in the church of Sta. Maria de Naranco, in the north of Spain, we have the hall of a Visigothic king driven north by the Mohammedan invasion. But, even if this surmise[787]be correct, the structure of a stone hall of about 750A.D.gives us little information as to the wooden halls of early Anglo-Saxon times. Heorot is clearly built of timber, held together by iron clamps[788]. These halls were oblong, and a famous passage in Bede[789]makes it clear that, at any rate at the time of the Conversion, the hall had a door at both ends, and the fire burnt in the middle. (The smoke escaped through a hole in the roof, through which probably most of the light came, for windows were few or none.) TheFinnsburg Fragmentalso implies two doors. Further indications can be drawn from references to the halls of Norse chiefs. The Scandinavian hall was divided by rows of wooden pillars into a central nave and side aisles. The pillars in the centre were known as the "high-seat pillars." Rows of seats ran down the length of the hall on each side. The central position, facing the high-seat pillars and the fire, was the most honourable. The place of honour for the chief guest was opposite: and it is quite clear that inBeowulfalso the guest did not sit next his host[790].
Other points we may note about Heorot, are the tapestry with which its walls are draped[791], and the paved and variegated floor[792]. Unlike somany later halls, Heorot has a floor little, if anything, raised above the ground: horses can be brought in[793].
In later times, in Iceland, the arrangement of the hall was changed, and the house consisted of many rooms; but these were formed, not by partitioning the hall, but by building several such halls side by side: thestufaor hall proper, theskálior sleeping hall,etc.
See M. Heyne,Ueber die Lage und Construction der Halle Heorot, Paderborn, 1864, where the scanty information about Heorot is collected, and supplemented with some information about Anglo-Saxon building. For the Icelandic hall see Valtyr Guðmundsson,Privatboligen på Island i Sagatiden, København, 1889. This has been summarized, in a more popular form, in a chapter onDen islandske Bolig i Fristatstiden, contributed by Guðmundsson to Rosenberg'sTræk af Livet paa Island i Fristatstiden, 1894 (pp. 251-74). Here occurs the picture of an Icelandic hall which has been so often reproduced—by Olrik, Holthausen, and inBeowulf-translations. But it is a conjectural picture, and we can by no means assume all its details for Heorot. Rhamm's colossal work is only for the initiated, but is useful for consultation on special points (Ethnographische Beiträge zur Germanischslawischen Altertumskunde, von K. Rhamm, 1905-8. I.Die Grosshufen der Nordgermanen; II.Urzeitliche Bauernhöfe). For various details see Hoops'Reallexikon, s.v.flett; Neckel inP.B.B.XLI, 1916, 163-70 (under edoras); Meiringer inI.F., especiallyXVIII, 257 (under eoderas); Kaufmann inZ.f.d.Ph.XXXIX, 282-92.
Ships
In a tumulus near Snape in Suffolk, opened in 1862, there were discovered, with burnt bones and remains thought to be of Anglo-Saxon date, a large number of rivets which, from the positions in which they were found, seemed to give evidence of a boat 48 feet long by over nine feet wide[794]. A boat, similar in dimensions, but better preserved, was unearthed near Bruges in 1899, and the ribs, mast and rudder removed to the Gruuthuuse Museum[795].
Three boats were discovered in the peat-moss at Nydam in Schleswig in 1863, by Engelhardt. The most important is the "Nydam boat," clinker-built (i.e. with overlapping planks), of oak, 77 feet [23.5 m.] long, by some 11 [3.4 m.] broad, with rowlocks for fourteen oars down each side. There was no trace of any mast. Planks and framework had been held together, partly by iron bolts, and partly by ropes of bast. The boat had fallen to pieces, and had to be laboriously put together in the museum at Flensborg. Another boat was quite fragmentary, but a third boat, of fir, was found tolerably complete. Then the war of 1864 ended Engelhardt's labours at Nydam.
The Gokstad ShipTHE GOKSTAD SHIP
The Oseberg ShipTHE OSEBERG SHIP
The oak-boat was removed to Kiel, where it now is.
The fir-boat was allowed to decay: many of the pieces of the oak-boat had been rotten and had of necessity been restored in facsimile, and it is much less complete than might be supposed from the numerous reproductions, based upon the fine engraving by Magnus Petersen. The rustic with a spade, there depicted as gazing at the boat, is apt to give a wrong impression that it was dug out intact[796].
Such was, however, actually the case with regard to the ship excavated from the big mound at Gokstad, near Christiania, by Nicolaysen, in 1880. This was fitted both as a rowing and sailing ship; it was 66 feet [20.1 m.] long on the keel, 78 feet [23.8 m.] from fore to aft and nearly 17 feet [5.1 m.] broad, and was clinker-built, out of a much larger number of oaken planks than the Nydam ship. It had rowlocks for sixteen oars down each side, the gunwale was lined with shields, some of them well preserved, which had been originally painted alternately black and yellow. The find owed its extraordinary preservation to the blue clay in which it was embedded. Its discoverer wrote, with pardonable pride: "Certain it is that we shall not disinter any craft which, in respect of model and workmanship, will outrival that of Gokstad[797]."
Yet the prophecy was destined to prove false: for on Aug. 8, 1903, a farmer came into the National Museum at Christiania to tell the curator, Prof. Gustafson, that he had discovered traces of a boat on his farm at Oseberg. Gustafson found that the task was too great to be begun so late in the year: the digging out of the ship, and its removal to Christiania, occupied from just before Midsummer to just before Christmas of 1904. The potter's clay in which the ship was buried had preserved it, if possible, better than the Gokstad ship: but the movement of the soft subsoil had squeezed and broken both ship and contents. The ship was taken out of the earth in nearly two thousand fragments. These were carefully numbered and marked: each piece was treated, bent back into its right shape, and the ship was put together again plank by plank, as when it was first built. With the exception of a piece about half a yard long, five or six little bits let in, and one of the beams, the ship as it stands now consists of the original woodwork. Two-thirds of the rivets are the old ones. Till his death in 1915 Gustafson was occupied in treating and preparing for exhibition first the ship, and then its extraordinarily rich contents: a waggon and sledges beautifully carved, beds, chests, kitchen utensils which had been buried with the princess who had owned them. A full account of the find is only now being published[798].
The Oseberg ship is the pleasure boat of a royal lady: clinker-built, of oak, exquisitely carved, intended not for long voyages but for the land-locked waters of the fiord, 70½ feet [21.5 m.] long by some 16½ feet [5 m.] broad. There are holes for fifteen oars down each side, and the ship carried mast and sail.The upper part of the prow had been destroyed, but sufficient fragments have been found to show that it ended in the head of a snake-like creature, bent round in a coil. This explains the wordshringed-stefna[799],hring-naca[800],wunden-stefna[801], used of the ship inBeowulf. A similar ringed prow is depicted on an engraved stone from Tjängvide, now in the National Historical Museum at Stockholm. This is supposed to date from about the year 1000[802].The Gokstad and Oseberg ships, together with the ship of Tune, a much less complete specimen (unearthed in 1867, and found like the others on the shore of the Christiania fiord) owe their preservation to the clay, and the skill of Scandinavian antiquaries. Yet they are but three out of thousands of ship- or boat-burials. Schetelig enumerates 552 known instances from Norway alone. Often traces of the iron rivets are all that remain.Ships preserved from the Baltic coast of Germany can be seen at Königsberg, Danzig and Stettin; they are smaller and apparently later; the best, that of Brösen, was destroyed.The seamanship ofBeowulfis removed by centuries from that of the (? fourth or fifth century) Nydam boat, which not only has no mast or proper keel, but is so built as to be little suited for sailing. InBeowulfthe sea is a "sail-road," the word "to row" occurs only in the sense of "swim," sailing is assumed as the means by which Beowulf travels between the land of the Geatas and that of the Danes. Though he voyages with but fourteen companions, the ship is big enough to carry back four horses. How the sail may have been arranged is shown in many inscribed stones of the eighth to the tenth centuries: notably those of Stenkyrka[803], Högbro[804], and Tjängvide[805].The Oseberg and Gokstad ships are no doubt later than the composition ofBeowulf. But it is when looking at the Oseberg ship, especially if we picture the great prow like the neck of a swan ending in a serpent's coil, that we can best understand the words ofBeowulfflota fāmī-heals fugle gelīcost,wunden-stefna,well rendered by Earle "The foamy-necked floater, most like to a bird—the coily-stemmed."
The Oseberg ship is the pleasure boat of a royal lady: clinker-built, of oak, exquisitely carved, intended not for long voyages but for the land-locked waters of the fiord, 70½ feet [21.5 m.] long by some 16½ feet [5 m.] broad. There are holes for fifteen oars down each side, and the ship carried mast and sail.
The upper part of the prow had been destroyed, but sufficient fragments have been found to show that it ended in the head of a snake-like creature, bent round in a coil. This explains the wordshringed-stefna[799],hring-naca[800],wunden-stefna[801], used of the ship inBeowulf. A similar ringed prow is depicted on an engraved stone from Tjängvide, now in the National Historical Museum at Stockholm. This is supposed to date from about the year 1000[802].
The Gokstad and Oseberg ships, together with the ship of Tune, a much less complete specimen (unearthed in 1867, and found like the others on the shore of the Christiania fiord) owe their preservation to the clay, and the skill of Scandinavian antiquaries. Yet they are but three out of thousands of ship- or boat-burials. Schetelig enumerates 552 known instances from Norway alone. Often traces of the iron rivets are all that remain.
Ships preserved from the Baltic coast of Germany can be seen at Königsberg, Danzig and Stettin; they are smaller and apparently later; the best, that of Brösen, was destroyed.
The seamanship ofBeowulfis removed by centuries from that of the (? fourth or fifth century) Nydam boat, which not only has no mast or proper keel, but is so built as to be little suited for sailing. InBeowulfthe sea is a "sail-road," the word "to row" occurs only in the sense of "swim," sailing is assumed as the means by which Beowulf travels between the land of the Geatas and that of the Danes. Though he voyages with but fourteen companions, the ship is big enough to carry back four horses. How the sail may have been arranged is shown in many inscribed stones of the eighth to the tenth centuries: notably those of Stenkyrka[803], Högbro[804], and Tjängvide[805].
The Oseberg and Gokstad ships are no doubt later than the composition ofBeowulf. But it is when looking at the Oseberg ship, especially if we picture the great prow like the neck of a swan ending in a serpent's coil, that we can best understand the words ofBeowulf
flota fāmī-heals fugle gelīcost,wunden-stefna,
flota fāmī-heals fugle gelīcost,wunden-stefna,
flota fāmī-heals fugle gelīcost,
wunden-stefna,
well rendered by Earle "The foamy-necked floater, most like to a bird—the coily-stemmed."
See Boehmer (G. H.),Prehistoric Naval Architecture of the North of Europe, Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1891(now rather out of date); Guðmundsson (V.),Nordboernes Skibe i Vikinge- og Sagatiden, København, 1900; [*]Schnepper,Die Namen der Schiffe u. Schiffsteile im Altenglischen(Kiel Diss.), 1908; Falk (H.),Altnordisches Seewesen(Wörter u. Sachen,IV, Heidelberg, 1912); Hoops'Reallexikon, s.v.Schiff.
G. LEIRE BEFORE ROLF KRAKI
That Leire was the royal town, not merely of Rolf Kraki, but of Rolf's predecessors as well, is stated in theSkjoldunga Saga, extant in the Latin abstract of Arngrim Jonsson:Scioldus in arce Selandiae Hledro sedes posuit, quae et sequentium plurimorum regum regia fuit(ed. Olrik, København, 1894, p. 23 [105]). Similarly we are told in theYnglinga Saga, concerning Gefion,Hennar fekk Skjǫldr, sonr Óðins; þau bjoggu at Hleiðru(Heimskringla, udgivne ved F. Jónsson, København,I, 15 [cap.V]).
Above all, it is clear from theAnnales Lundensesthat, in the twelfth century, Dan, Ro (Hrothgar) and Haldan (Healfdene) were traditionally connected with Leire, and three of the grave mounds there were associated with these three kings. See the extract given above, pp.204-5, and cf. p.17.
H. BEE-WOLF AND BEAR'S SON
The obvious interpretation of the nameBēowulfis that suggested by Grimm[806], that it means "wolf, or foe, of the bee." Grimm's suggestion was repeated independently by Skeat[807], and further reasons for the interpretation "bee-foe" have been found by Sweet[808](who had been anticipated by Simrock[809]in some of his points), by Cosijn[810], Sievers[811], von Grienberger[812], Panzer[813]and Björkman[814].
From the phonological point of view the etymology is aperfect one, but many of those who were convinced that "Beowulf" meant "bee-foe" had no satisfactory explanation of "bee-foe" to offer[815]. Others, like Bugge, whilst admitting that, so far as the form of the words goes, the etymology is satisfactory, rejected "bee-foe" because it seemed to them meaningless[816].
Yet it is very far from meaningless. "Bee-foe" means "bear." The bear has got a name, or nickname, in many northern languages from his habit of raiding the hives for honey. The Finnish name for bear is said to be "honey-hand": he is certainly called "sweet-foot,"sötfot, in Sweden, and the Old Slavonic name, "honey-eater," has come to be accepted in Russian, not merely as a nickname, but as the regular term for "bear."
And "bear" is an excellent name for a hero of story. The O.E.beorn, "warrior, hero, prince" seems originally to have meant simply "bear." The bear, says Grimm, "is regarded, in the belief of the Old Norse, Slavonic, Finnish and Lapp peoples, as an exalted and holy being, endowed with human understanding and the strength of twelve men. He is called 'forest-king,' 'gold-foot,' 'sweet-foot,' 'honey-hand,' 'honey-paw,' 'honey-eater,' but also 'the great,' 'the old,' 'the old grandsire[817].'" "Bee-hunter" is then a satisfactory explanation ofBēowulf: while the alternative explanations are none of them satisfactory.
Many scholars have been led off the track by the assumption that Beow and Beowulf are to be identified, and that we must therefore assume that the first element in Beowulf's name isBēow—that we must divide notBēo-wulfbutBēow-ulf, "a warrior after the manner of Beow[818]." But there is no groundfor any such assumption. It is true that in ll. 18, 53, "Beowulf" is written where we should have expected "Beowa." But, even if two words of similar sound have been confused, this fact affords no reason for supposing that they must necessarily have been in the first instance connected etymologically. And against the "warrior of Beow" interpretation is the fact that the name is recorded in the early NorthumbrianLiber Vitaeunder the form "Biuuulf[819]." This name, which is that of an early monk of Durham, is presumably the same as that of the hero of our poem, though it does not, of course, follow that the bearer of it was named with any special reference to the slayer of Grendel. NowBiuuulfis correct Northumbrian for "bee-wolf," but the first element in the word cannot stand forBēow[820], unless theaffinities and forms of that word are quite different from all that the evidence has hitherto led us to believe. So much at least seems certain. Besides, we have seen that Byggvir is taunted by Loki precisely with the fact that heisno warrior. If we can estimate the characteristics of the O.E. Beow from those of the Scandinavian Byggvir, the name "Warrior after the manner of Beow" would be meaningless, if not absurd. Bugge[821], relying upon the parallel O.N. formBjólfr[822], which is recorded as the name of one of the early settlers in Iceland[823], tried to interpret the word asBœjólfr"the wolf of the farmstead," quoting as parallelsHeimulf,Gardulf. ButBjólfritself is best interpreted as "Bee-wolf[824]." And admittedly Bugge's explanation does not suit the O.E.Bēowulf, and necessitates the assumption that the word in English is a mere meaningless borrowing from the Scandinavian: forBēowulfassuredly does not mean "wolf of the farmstead[825]."
Neither can we take very seriously the explanation of Sarrazin and Ferguson[826]thatBēowulfis an abbreviation ofBeadu-wulf, "wolf of war." Our business is to interpret the nameBēowulf, or, if we cannot, to admit that we cannot; not to substitute some quite distinct name for it, and interpret that. Such theories merely show to what straits we may be reduced, if we reject the obvious etymology of the word.
And there are two further considerations, which confirm, almost to a certainty, this obvious interpretation of "Beowulf" as "Bee-wolf" or "Bear." The first is that it agrees excellently with Beowulf's bear-like habit of hugging his adversaries to death—a feature which surely belongs to the original kernel of our story, since it is incompatible with the chivalrous,weapon-loving trappings in which that story has been dressed[827]. The second is that, as I have tried to show, the evidence is strongly in favour of Bjarki and Beowulf being originally the same figure[828]: and Bjarki is certainly a bear-hero[829]. His name signifies as much, and in theSaga of Rolf Krakiwe are told at length how the father of Bjarki was a prince who had been turned by enchantment into a bear[830].
If, then, Beowulf is a bear-hero[831], the next step is to enquire whether there is any real likeness between his adventures at Heorot and under the mere, and the adventures of the hero of the widely-spread "Bear's Son" folk-tale. This investigation has, as we have seen above[832], been carried out by Panzer in his monumental work, which marks an epoch in the study ofBeowulf.
Panzer's arguments in favour of such connection would, I think, have been strengthened if he had either quoted textually a number of the more important and less generally accessible folk-tales, or, since this would have proved cumbersome, if he had at least given abstracts of them. The method which Panzer follows, is to enumerate over two hundred tales, and from them to construct a story which is a compound of them all. This is obviously a method which is liable to abuse, though I do not say that Panzer has abused it. But we must not let a story so constructed usurp in our minds the place of the actual recorded folk-tales. Folk-tales, as Andrew Lang wrote long ago, "consist of but few incidents, grouped together in a kaleidoscopic variety of arrangements." A collection of over two hundred cognate tales offers a wide field for the selection therefrom of a composite story. Further, some geographical discrimination is necessary: these tales are scattered over Europe and Asia, and it is important to keep constantly in mind whether a given type of tale belongs, for example, to Greece or to Scandinavia.
A typical example of the Bear's son tale isDer Starke Hansin Grimm[833]. Hans is brought up in a robber's den: but quite apart from any of the theories we are now considering, it has long been recognized that this is a mere toning down of the original incredible story, which makes a bear's den the nursery of the strong youth[834]. Hans overcomes in an empty castle the foe (a mannikin of magic powers) who has already worsted his comrades Fir-twister and Stone-splitter. He pursues this foe to his hole, is let down by his companions in a basket by a rope, slays the foe with his club and rescues a princess. He sends up the princess in the basket; but when his own turn comes to be pulled up his associates intentionally drop the basket when halfway up. But Hans, suspecting treason, has only sent up his club. He escapes by magic help, takes vengeance on the traitors, and weds the princess.
In another story in Grimm[835], the antagonist whom the hero overcomes, but does not in this case slay, is called the Earthman,Dat Erdmänneken. This type begins with the disappearance of the princesses, who are to the orthodox number of three; otherwise it does not differ materially from the abstract given above. Grimm records four distinct versions, all from Western Germany.
The versions of this widespread story which are most easily accessible to English readers are likely to prejudice such readers against Panzer's view. The two versions in Campbell'sPopular Tales of the West Highlands[836], or the version in Kennedy'sLegendary Fictions of the Irish Celts[837]are not of a kind to remind any unprejudiced reader strongly ofBeowulf, or of theGrettir-story either. Indeed, I believe that from countries so remote as North Italy or Russia parallels can be found which are closer than any so far quoted from the Celtic portions of the British Isles. Possibly more Celtic parallels may be forthcoming in the future: some striking ones at any rate are promised[838].
So, too, the story of the "Great Bird Dan" (Fugl Dam[839]), which is accessible to English readers in Dasent's translation[840], is one in which the typical features have been overlaid by a mass of detail.
A much more normal specimen of the "Bear's son" story is found, for example, in a folk-tale from Lombardy—the story ofGiovanni dell' Orso[841]. Giovanni is brought up in a bear's den, whither his mother has been carried off. At five, he has the growth of a man and the strength of a giant. At sixteen, he is able to remove the stone from the door of the den and escape, with his mother. Going on his adventures with two comrades, he comes to an empty palace. The comrades are defeated: it becomes the turn of Giovanni to be alone. An old man comes in and "grows, grows till his head touched the roof[842]." Giovanni mortally wounds the giant, who however escapes. They all go in search of him, and find a hole in the ground. His comrades let Giovanni down by a rope. He finds a great hall, full of rich clothes and provision of every kind: in a second hall he finds three girls, each one more beautiful than the other: in a third hall he finds the giant himself, drawing up his will[843]. Giovanni kills the giant, rescues the damsels, and, in spite of his comrades deserting the rope, he escapes, pardons them, himself weds the youngest princess and marries his comrades to the elder ones.
I cannot find in this version any mention of the hero smiting the giant below with a magic sword which he finds there, as suggested by Panzer[844]. But even without this, the first part of the story has resemblances toBeowulf, and still more to theGrettir-story.
There are many Slavonic variants. The South Russian story of the Norka[845]begins with the attack of the Norka upon the King's park. The King offers half his kingdom to whomsoever will destroy the beast. The youngest prince of three watches,after the failure of his two elder brothers, chases and wounds the monster, who in the end pulls up a stone and disappears into the earth. The prince is let down by his brothers, and, with the help of a sword specially given him in the underworld, and a draught of the water of strength, he slays the foe, and wins the princesses. In order to have these for themselves, the elder brothers drop what they suppose to be their youngest brother, as they are drawing him up: but it is only a stone he has cautiously tied to the rope in place of himself. The prince's miraculous return in disguise, his feats, recognition by the youngest princess, the exposure of the traitors, and marriage of the hero, all follow in due course[846].
A closer Russian parallel is that ofIvashko Medvedko[847]. "John Honey-eater" or "Bear." John grows up, not by years, but by hours: nearly every hour he gains an inch in height. At fifteen, there are complaints of his rough play with other village boys, and John Bear has to go out into the world, after his grandfather has provided him with a weapon, an iron staff of immense weight. He meets a champion who is drinking up a river: "Good morning, John Bear, whither art going?" "I know not whither; I just go, not knowing where to go." "If so, take me with you." The same happens with a second champion whose hobby is to carry mountains on his shoulder, and with a third, who plucks up oaks or pushes them into the ground. They come to a revolving house in a dark forest, which at John's word stands with its back door to the forest and its front door to them: all its doors and windows open of their own accord. Though the yard is full of poultry, the house is empty. Whilst the three companions go hunting, the river-swallower stays in the house to cook dinner: this done, he washes his head, and sits at the window to comb his locks. Suddenly the earth shakes, then stands still: a stone is lifted, and from under it appears Baba Yaga driving in her mortar with a pestle: behind her comes barking a little dog. A short dialogue ensues, and the champion, at her request, gives her food; but the second helping she throws to her dog, and thereupon beats the champion withher pestle till he becomes unconscious; then she cuts a strip of skin from his back, and after eating all the food, vanishes. The victim recovers his senses, ties up his head with a handkerchief, and, when his companions return, apologizes for the ill-success of his cooking: "He had been nearly suffocated by the fumes of the charcoal, and had had his work cut out to get the room clear." Exactly the same happens to the other champions. On the fourth day it is the turn of John Bear, and here again the same formulas are repeated. John does the cooking, washes his head, sits down at the window and begins to comb his curly locks. Baba Yaga appears with the usual phenomena, and the usual dialogue follows, till she begins to belabour the hero with her pestle. But he wrests it from her, beats her almost to death, cuts three strips from her skin, and imprisons her in a closet. When his companions return, they are astonished to find dinner ready. After dinner they have a bath, and the companions try not to show their mutilated backs, but at last have to confess. "Now I see why you all suffered from suffocation," says John Bear. He goes to the closet, takes the three strips cut from his friends, and reinserts them: they heal at once. Then he ties up Baba Yaga by a cord fastened to one foot, and they all shoot at the cord in turn. John Bear hits it, and cuts the string in two; Baba Yaga falls to the earth, but rises, runs to the stone from under which she had appeared, lifts it, and vanishes. Each of the companions tries in turn to lift the stone, but only John can accomplish it, and only he is willing to go down. His comrades let him down by a rope, which however is too short, and John has to eke it out by the three strips previously cut from the back of Baba Yaga. At the bottom he sees a path, follows it, and reaches a palace where are three beautiful maidens, who welcome him, but warn him against their mother, who is Baba Yaga herself: "She is asleep now, but she keeps at her head a sword. Do not touch it, but take two golden apples lying on a silver tray, wake her gently, and offer them to her. As soon as she begins to eat, seize the sword, and cut her head off at one blow." John Bear carries out these instructions, and sends up the maidens, two to be wives to his companions, and the youngest to be his own wife. This leaves the third companion wifelessand, in indignation, he cuts the rope when the turn comes to pull John up. The hero falls and is badly hurt. [John has forgotten, in this version, to put his iron club into the basket instead of himself—indeed he has up to now made no use of his staff.] In time the hero sees an underground passage, and makes his way out into the white world. Here he finds the youngest maiden, who is tending cattle, after refusing to marry the false companion. John Bear follows her home, slays his former comrades with his staff, and throws their bodies on the field for the wild beasts to devour. He then takes his sweetheart home to his people, and weds her.
The abstract given above is from a translation made by one of my students, Miss M. Steine, who tells me that she had heard the tale in this form many times from her old nurse "when we were being sent to sleep, or sitting round her in the evening." I have given it at this length because I do not know of any accessible translation into any Western language.
Panzer enumerates two hundred and two variants of the story: and there are others[848]. But there is reason in the criticism that what is important for us is the form the folk-tale may have taken in those countries where we must look for the original home of theBeowulf-story[849]. The Mantuan folk-tale may have been carried down to North Italy from Scandinavia by the Longobards: who can say? But Panzer's theory must stand or fall by the parallels which can be drawn between theBeowulf-Grettir-story on the one hand, and the folk-tales as they have been collected in the countries where this story is native: the lands, that is to say, adjoining the North Sea.
Now it is precisely here that we do find the most remarkable resemblances: in Iceland, the Faroes, Norway, Denmark, Jutland, Schleswig, and the Low German lands as far as the Scheldt.
An Icelandic version exists in an unprinted MS at Reykjavik[850]which can be consulted in a German translation[851]. In thisversion a bear, who is really an enchanted prince, carries off a princess. He resumes his human form and weds the princess, but must still at times take the bear's form. His child, the Bear-boy (Bjarndreingur), is to be kept in the house during the long periods when the enchanted husband is away. But at twelve years old the Bear-boy is too strong and unmanageable, bursts out, and slays a bear who turns out to be his father. His mother's heart is broken, but Bear-boy goes on his adventures, and associates with himself three companions, one of whom is Stein. They build a house in the wood, which is attacked by a giant, and, as usual, the companions are unable to withstand the attacks. Bear-boy does so, ties the giant's hands behind his back, and fastens him by his beard. But the giant tears himself free. As inBeowulf, Bear-boy and his companions follow the track by the drops of blood, and come to a hole. Stein is let some way down, the other companions further, but only Bear-boy dares to go to the bottom. There he finds a weeping princess, and learns that she, and her two sisters, have been carried off by three giants, one of whom is his former assailant. He slays all three, and sends their heads up, together with the maidens and other treasures. But his companions desert the rope, and he has to climb up unaided. In the end he weds the youngest princess.
The story from the Faroe Islands runs thus:
Three brothers lived together and took turns, two to go out fishing, and one to be at home. For two days, when the two elder brothers were at home, came a giant with a long beard (Skeggjatussi) and ate and drank all the food. Then comes the turn of the despised youngest brother, who is called in one version Øskudólgur—"the one who sits and rakes in the ashes"—a kind of male Cinderella. This brother routs the giant, either by catching his long beard in a cleft tree-trunk, or by branding him in the nose with a hot iron. In either case the mutilated giant escapes down a hole: in one version, after the other brothers come home, they follow him to this hole by the track of his blood. The two elder brothers leave the task of plunging down to the youngest one, who finds below a girl (in the second version, two kidnapped princesses). He finds also a magic sword hangingon the wall, which he is only able to lift when he has drunk a magic potion. He then slays the giant, rescues the maiden or maidens, is betrayed in the usual way by his brothers: in the one version they deliberately refuse to draw him up: in the other they cut the rope as they are doing so: but he is discreetly sending up only a big stone. The hero is helped out, however, by a giant, "Skræddi Kjálki" or "Snerkti risi," and in the end marries the princess[852].
In the Norwegian folk-tale the three adventurers are called respectively the Captain, the Lieutenant and the Soldier. They search for the three princesses, and watch in a castle, where the Captain and Lieutenant are in turn worsted by a strange visitor—who in this version is not identical with the troll below ground who guards the princesses[853]. When the turn of the Soldier comes, he seizes the intruder (the man, as he is called).
"Ah no, Ah no, spare my life," said the man, "and you shall know all. East of the castle is a great sandheap, and down in it a winch, with which you can lower yourself. But if you are afraid, and do not dare to go right down, you only need to pull the bell rope which you will find there, and up you will come again. But if you dare venture so far as to come to the bottom, there stands a flask on a shelf over the door: you must drink what is in it: so will you become so strong that you can strike the head off the troll of the mountain. And by the door there hangs a Troll-sword, which also you must take, for no other steel will bite on his body."When he had learnt this, he let the man go. When the Captain and the Lieutenant came home, they were not a little surprised to find the Soldier alive. "How have you escaped a drubbing," said they, "has not the man beenhere?" "Oh yes, he is quite a good fellow, he is," said the Soldier, "I have learnt from him where the princesses are," and he told them all. They were glad when they heard that, and when they had eaten, they went all three to the sandheap.
"Ah no, Ah no, spare my life," said the man, "and you shall know all. East of the castle is a great sandheap, and down in it a winch, with which you can lower yourself. But if you are afraid, and do not dare to go right down, you only need to pull the bell rope which you will find there, and up you will come again. But if you dare venture so far as to come to the bottom, there stands a flask on a shelf over the door: you must drink what is in it: so will you become so strong that you can strike the head off the troll of the mountain. And by the door there hangs a Troll-sword, which also you must take, for no other steel will bite on his body."
When he had learnt this, he let the man go. When the Captain and the Lieutenant came home, they were not a little surprised to find the Soldier alive. "How have you escaped a drubbing," said they, "has not the man beenhere?" "Oh yes, he is quite a good fellow, he is," said the Soldier, "I have learnt from him where the princesses are," and he told them all. They were glad when they heard that, and when they had eaten, they went all three to the sandheap.
As usual, the Captain and the Lieutenant do not dare to go to the bottom: the hero accomplishes the adventure, is (as usual) betrayed by his comrades, but is saved because he has put a stone in the basket instead of himself, and in the end is rescued by the interposition of "Kløverhans."
What is the explanation of the "sandheap" (sandhaug) I do not know. But one cannot forget that Grettir's adventure in the house, followed by his adventure with the troll under the earth, is localized at Sandhaugar. This may be a mere accident; but it is worth noting that in following up the track indicated by Panzer we come across startling coincidences of this kind. As stated above, it can hardly be due to any influence of theGrettis Sagaupon the folk-tale[854]. The likeness between the two is too remote to have suggested a transference of such details from the one story to the other.
We find the story in its normal form in Jutland[855]. The hero, a foundling, is named Bjørnøre (Bear-ears). There is no explanation offered of this name, but we know that in other versions of the story, where the hero is half bear and half man, his bear nature is shown by his bear's ears. "Bear-ears" comes with his companions to an empty house, worsts the foe (the old man,den gamle) who has put his companions to shame, and fixes him by his beard in a cloven tree. The foe escapes nevertheless; they follow him to his hole: the companions are afraid, but "Bear-ears" is let down, finds the enemy on his bed, and slays him. The rest of the story follows the usual pattern. "Bear-ears" rescues and sends up the princesses, his comrades detach the rope, which however is hauling up only the hero's iron club. He escapes miraculously from his confinement below, and returns to marry the youngest princess. In another Danish version, from the South of Zealand[856], the hero, "Strong Hans" (nothing is saidabout his bear-origin), comes with his companions to a magnificent but empty castle. The old witch worsts his comrades and imprisons them under the trap-door: but Hans beats her and rescues them, though the witch herself escapes. Hans is let down, rescues the princesses, is betrayed by his comrades (who, thinking to drop him in drawing him up, only drop his iron club), and finally weds the third princess.
A little further South we have three versions of the same tale recorded for Schleswig-Holstein[857]. The hero wins his victory below by means of "a great iron sword" (en grotes ysernes Schwäert) which he can only wield after drinking of the magic potion.
From Hanover comes the story of Peter Bär[858], which shows all the familiar features: from the same district came some of Grimm's variants. Others were from the Rhine provinces: but the fullest version of all comes from the Scheldt, just over the Flemish border. The hero, Jean l'Ourson, is recovered as a child from a bear's den, is despised in his youth[859], but gives early proof of his strength. He defends an empty castleun superbe château, when his companion has failed, strikes off an arm[860]of his assailantPetit-Père-Bidoux, chases him to his hole,un puits vaste et profond. He is let down by his companion, but finding the rope too short, plunges, and arrives battered at the bottom. There he perceivesune lumière qui brillait au bout d'une longue galerie[861]. At the end of the gallery he sees his former assailant, attended byune vieille femme à cheveux blancs, qui semblait âgée de plus de cent ans, who is salving his wounded arm. The hero quenches the light (which is a magic one) smites his foe on the head and kills him, and then rekindles the lamp[862]. His companion above seeks to rob him of the two princesses he has won, by detaching the rope. Nevertheless, he escapes, weds the good princess, and punishes his faithless companion by making him wed the bad one.
The white-haired old woman is not spoken of as the motherof the foe she is nursing, and it may be doubted whether she is in any way parallel to Grendel's mother. The hero does not fight her: indeed it is she who, in the end, enables him to escape. Still the parallels between Jean l'Ourson and Beowulf are striking enough. Nine distinct features recur, in the same order, in theBeowulf-story and in this folk-tale. It needs a more robust faith than I possess to attribute this solely to chance.
Unfortunately, this French-Flemish tale is found in a somewhat sophisticated collection. Its recorder, as Sainte-Beuve points out in his letter introductory to the series[863], uses literary touches which diminish the value of his folk-tales to the student of origins. Any contamination from theBeowulf-story or theGrettir-story is surely improbable enough in this case: nevertheless, one would have liked the tale taken down verbatim from the lips of some simple-minded narrator as it used to be told at Condé on the Scheldt.
But if we take together the different versions enumerated above, the result is, I think, convincing. Here are eight versions of one folk-tale taken as representatives from a much larger number current in the countries in touch with the North Sea: from Iceland, the Faroes, Norway, Jutland, Zealand, Schleswig, Hanover, and the Scheldt. The champion is a bear-hero (as Beowulf almost certainly is, and as Bjarki quite certainly is); he is called, in Iceland,Bjarndreingur, in Jutland,Bjørnøre, in Hanover,Peter Bär, on the ScheldtJean l'Ourson. Like Beowulf, he is despised in his youth (Faroe, Scheldt). In all versions he resists his adversary in an empty house or castle, after his comrades have failed. In most versions of the folk-tale this is the third attack, as it is in the case of Grettir at Sandhaugar and of Bjarki: inBeowulf, on the contrary, we gather that Heorot has been raided many times. The adversary, though vanquished, escapes; in one version after the loss of an arm (Scheldt): they follow his track to the hole into which he has vanished, sometimes, as inBeowulf, marking traces of his blood (Iceland, Faroe, Schleswig). The hero always ventures down alone, and gets intoan underworld of magic, which has left traces of its mysteriousness inBeowulf. In one tale (Scheldt) the hero sees a magic lamp burning below, just as he sees the fire inBeowulfor theGrettis Saga. He overcomes either his original foe, or new ones, often by the use of a magic sword (Faroe, Norway, Schleswig); this sword hangs by the door (Norway) or on the wall (Faroe) as inBeowulf. After slaying his foe, the hero rekindles the magic lamp, in the Scheldt fairy tale, just as he kindles a light in theGrettis Saga, and as the light flashes up inBeowulfafter the hero has smitten Grendel's mother. The hero is in each case deserted by his companions: a feature which, while it is marked in theGrettis Saga, can obviously be allowed to survive inBeowulfonly in a much softened form. The chosen retainers whom Beowulf has taken with him on his journey could not be represented as unfaithful, because the poet is reserving the episode of the faithless retainers for the death of Beowulf. To have twice represented the escort as cowardly would have made the poem a satire upon thecomitatus, and would have assured it a hostile reception in every hall from Canterbury to Edinburgh. But there is no doubt as to the faithlessness of the comrade Stein in theGrettis Saga. And in Zealand, one of the faithless companions is calledStenhuggeren(the Stone-hewer), in SchleswigSteenklöwer, in HanoverSteinspieler, whilst in Iceland he has the same name,Stein, which he has in theGrettis Saga.
The fact that the departure home of the Danes inBeowulfis due to the same cause as that which accounts for the betrayal of his trust by Stein, shows that in the originalBeowulf-story also this feature must have occurred, however much it may have become worn down in the existing epic.
I think enough has been said to show that there is a real likeness between a large number of recorded folk-tales and theBeowulf-Grettirstory. The parallel is not merely with an artificial, theoretical composite put together by Panzer. But it becomes equally clear thatBeowulfcannot be spoken of as a version of these folk-tales. At most it is a version of a portion of them. The omission of the princesses inBeowulfand theGrettis Sagais fundamental. With the princesses much else falls away. There is no longer any motive for the betrayal of trustby the watchers. The disguise of the hero and his vengeance are now no longer necessary to the tale.
It might be argued that there was something about the three princesses which made them unsatisfactory as subjects of story. It has been thought that in the oldest version the hero married all three: an awkward episode where ascophad to compose a poem for an audience certainly monogamous and most probably Christian. The rather tragic and sombre atmosphere of the stories of Beowulf and Grettir fits in better with a version from which the princesses, and the living happily ever afterwards, have been dropped. On the other hand, it might be argued that the folk-tale is composite, and that the source from which theBeowulf-Grettir-story drew was a simpler tale to which the princesses had not yet been added.
And there are additions as well as subtractions. Alike inBeowulfand in theGrettis Saga, the fight in the house and the fight below are associated with struggles with monsters of different sex. The association of "The Devil and his Dam" has only few and remote parallels in the "Bear's-son" folk-tale.
But Panzer has, I think, proved that the struggle of Beowulf in the hall, and his plunging down into the deep, is simply an epic glorification of a folk-tale motive.
I. THE DATE OF THE DEATH OF HYGELAC.
Gregory of Tours mentions the defeat of Chochilaicus (Hygelac) as an event of the reign of Theudoric. Now Theudoric succeeded his father Chlodoweg, who died 27 Nov. 511. Theudoric died in 534. This, then, gives the extreme limits of time; but as Gregory mentions the event among the first occurrences of the reign, the period 512-520 has generally been suggested, or in round numbers about 515 or 516.
Nevertheless, we cannot attach much importance to the mere order followed by Gregory[864]. He may well have had no means of dating the event exactly. Of much more importance than the order, is the fact he records, that Theudoric did notdefeat Chochilaicus in person, but sent his son Theudobert to repel the invaders.
Now Theudobert was born before the death of his grandfather Chlodoweg. For Gregory tells us that Chlodoweg left not only four sons, but a grandson Theudobert,elegantem atque utilem[865]:utilemcannot mean that, at the time of the death of Chlodoweg, Theudobert was of age to conduct affairs of state, for Chlodoweg was only 45 at death[866]. The Merovingians were a precocious race; but if we are to allow Theudobert to have been at least fifteen before being placed in charge of a very important expedition, and Chlodoweg to have been at least forty before becoming a grandfather, the defeat of Hygelac cannot be put before 521; and probability would favour a date five or ten years later.
There is confirmation for this. When Theudobert died, in 548, he left one son only, quite a child and still under tutelage[867]; probably therefore not more than twelve or thirteen at most. We know the circumstances of the child's birth. Theudobert had been betrothed by his father Theudoric to a Longobardic princess, Wisigardis[868]. In the meantime he fell in love with the lady Deoteria[869], and married her[870]. The Franks were shocked at this fickleness (valde scandalizabantur), and Theudobert had ultimately to put away Deoteria[871], although they had this young son (parvulum filium), who, as we have seen, could hardly have been born before 535, and possibly was born years later. Theudobert then married the Longobardic princess, in the seventh year after their betrothal. So it cannot have been much before 530 that Theudobert's father was first arranging the Longobardic match. A king is not likely to have waited to find a wife for a son, upon whom his dynasty was to depend, till fifteen years after that son was of age to win a memorable victory[872].
I remember it was with extreme difficulty that I could bring my master to understand the meaning of the wordopinion, or how a point could be disputable; because reason taught us to affirm or deny only where we are certain; and beyond our knowledge we cannot do either. So that controversies, wranglings, disputes, and positiveness in false or dubious propositions are evils unknown among theHouyhnhnms.... He would laugh that a creature pretending to reason should value itself upon the knowledge of other people's conjectures, and in things, where that knowledge, if it were certain, could be of no use....I have often since reflected what destruction such a doctrine would make in the libraries of Europe.Gulliver's Travels.
I remember it was with extreme difficulty that I could bring my master to understand the meaning of the wordopinion, or how a point could be disputable; because reason taught us to affirm or deny only where we are certain; and beyond our knowledge we cannot do either. So that controversies, wranglings, disputes, and positiveness in false or dubious propositions are evils unknown among theHouyhnhnms.... He would laugh that a creature pretending to reason should value itself upon the knowledge of other people's conjectures, and in things, where that knowledge, if it were certain, could be of no use....
I have often since reflected what destruction such a doctrine would make in the libraries of Europe.
Gulliver's Travels.
Gulliver's Travels.
Gulliver's Travels.
The following items are (except in special cases) not included in this bibliography:
(a) Articles dealing with single passages inBeowulf, or two passages only, in cases where they have already been recorded under the appropriate passage in the footnotes to the text, or in the glossary, of my revision of Wyatt's edition.(b) Articles dealing with the emendation or interpretation of single passages, in cases where such emendations have been withdrawn by their author himself.(c) Purely popular paraphrases or summaries.(d) Purely personal protests (e.g.,P.B.B.XXI, 436), however well founded, in which no point of scholarship is any longer involved.
(a) Articles dealing with single passages inBeowulf, or two passages only, in cases where they have already been recorded under the appropriate passage in the footnotes to the text, or in the glossary, of my revision of Wyatt's edition.
(b) Articles dealing with the emendation or interpretation of single passages, in cases where such emendations have been withdrawn by their author himself.
(c) Purely popular paraphrases or summaries.
(d) Purely personal protests (e.g.,P.B.B.XXI, 436), however well founded, in which no point of scholarship is any longer involved.
Books dealing with other subjects, but illustratingBeowulf, present a difficulty. Such books may have a value forBeowulfstudents, even though the author may never refer to our poem, and have occasionally been included in previous bibliographies. But, unlessBeowulfis closely concerned, these books are not usually mentioned below: such enumeration, if carried out consistently, would clog a bibliography already all too bulky. Thus, Siecke'sDrachenkämpfedoes not seem to come within the scope of this bibliography, because the author is not concerned with Beowulf's dragon.
Obviously every general discussion of Old English metre must concern itself largely withBeowulf: for such treatises the student is referred to the sectionMetrikof Brandl's Bibliography (Pauls Grdr.); and, for Old English heroic legend in general, to the Bibliography of my edition ofWidsith.
Many scholars, e.g. Heinzel, have put into their reviews of the books of others, much original work which might well have formed the material for independent articles. Such reviews are noted as "weighty," but it must not be supposed that the reviews not so marked are negligible; unless of some value to scholarship, reviews are not usually mentioned below.
The title of any book, article or review which I have not seen and verified is denoted by the sign ‡.
SUMMARY
§ 1. Periodicals.
§ 2. Bibliographies.
§ 3. The MS and its transcripts.
§ 4. Editions.
§ 5. Concordances,etc.
§ 6. Translations (including early summaries).
§ 7. Textual criticism and interpretation.
§ 8. Questions of literary history, date and authorship.Beowulfin the light of history, archæology[873], heroic legend, mythology and folk-lore.
§ 9. Style and Grammar.
§ 10. Metre.
§ 1. PERIODICALS
The periodicals most frequently quoted are:
A.f.d.A.= Anzeiger für deutsches Alterthum. Berlin, 1876etc.
A.f.n.F.= Arkiv för nordisk Filologi. Christiania, Lund, 1883etc.Quoted according to the original numbering.
Anglia.Halle, 1878etc.
Archiv= Herrigs Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Litteraturen. Elberfeld, Braunschweig, 1846etc.Quoted according to the original numbering.
D.L.Z.= Deutsche Literatur-Zeitung. Berlin, 1880etc.
Engl. Stud.= Englische Studien. Heilbronn, Leipzig, 1877etc.
Germania.Wien, 1856-92.
I.F.= Indogermanische Forschungen. Strassburg, 1892etc.
J.(E.)G.Ph.= Journal of (English and) Germanic Philology. Bloomington, Urbana, 1897etc.
Lit. Cbl.= Literarisches Centralblatt. Leipzig, 1851etc.
Literaturblattfür germanische und romanische Philologie. Heilbronn, Leipzig, 1880etc.
M.L.N.= Modern Language Notes. Baltimore, 1886etc.Quoted by the page, not the column.
M.L.R.= The Modern Language Review. Cambridge, 1906etc.
Mod. Phil.= Modern Philology. Chicago, 1903etc.
Morsbachs Studienzur englischen Philologie. Halle, 1897etc.
P.B.B.= Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache u. Litteratur. Halle, 1874etc.
Pub. Mod. Lang. Assoc. Amer.= Publications of the Modern Language Association of America. Baltimore, 1889etc.
Z.f.d.A.= Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum. Leipzig, Berlin, 1841etc.
Z.f.d.Ph.= Zachers Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie. Halle, 1869etc.
Z.f.ö.G.= Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien. Wien, 1850etc.
The titles of other periodicals are given with sufficient fulness for easy identification.
§ 2. BIBLIOGRAPHIES
Bibliographies have been published from time to time as a supplement toAnglia; also in theJahresbericht über...german. Philologie; by Garnett in hisTranslation, 1882etc.; and will be found in
Wülker'sGrundriss(with very useful abstracts), 1885, pp. 245etc.Clark Hall'sTranslation, 1901, 1911.Holthausen'sBeowulf, 1906, 1909, 1913, 1919.Brandl'sEnglische Literatur, inPauls Grdr.(2),II, 1015-24 (full, but not so reliable as Holthausen's).Sedgefield'sBeowulf, 1910, 1913 (carefully selected).
Wülker'sGrundriss(with very useful abstracts), 1885, pp. 245etc.
Clark Hall'sTranslation, 1901, 1911.
Holthausen'sBeowulf, 1906, 1909, 1913, 1919.
Brandl'sEnglische Literatur, inPauls Grdr.(2),II, 1015-24 (full, but not so reliable as Holthausen's).
Sedgefield'sBeowulf, 1910, 1913 (carefully selected).