As already indicated, the legends of the Volsungs have been formed for the most part from events that happened among German peoples during historic times. The original home of the legends must have been Germany; the circumstance that they are to be found also in the North is not to be explained on the theory that the legends were the common property of Northern and German tribes before these tribes became distinct, but rather on the supposition that the legends migrated from Germany to the North. Just when this may have occurred is difficult to determine. Since the historical events have undergone considerable modifications in this heroic poetry, the German legends must have taken shape at a period measurably distant from the time of the death of Attila (453). On the other hand, the legends of the Volsungs were known in the Northern countries early in the Viking age; Eiríksmál, dating from about the year 950, mentions Sigmund and Sinfjotli,l and skaldic verses contain paraphrases based on the same legends. According to these evidences, the legends must have found their way into the North at some time between the sixth and the eighth centuries. There was opportunity for an independent development of these legends during several hundreds of years among the various Germanic peoples; and herein lies the explanation of the great differences between the German and the Northern forms of the legends, as regards both their general scope and their details. To discover in just what shape the legends came to the North is well-nigh impossible, particularly inasmuch as the most circumstantial German version, the Nibelungenlied, dates from a comparatively late period, the twelfth century.
The Norse form of the story begins with Odin and his son Sigi, and follows the fate of the Volsungs down to the very days of the sons of Ragnar. The Nibelungenlied, on the contrary, deals only with the events from Siegfried’s first appearance in Mainz to the fall of the Burgundians at Etzel’s court. At the start, no doubt, the cycle did not embrace the huge mass of material which now is to be found embodied in the Norse versions. Both the German and the Norse redactions show a tendency toward combination of legends originally foreign to one another into a larger unified structure, and it is therefore necessary to try to determine by a process of comparison how much of the conglomerate belonged to the cycle at the beginning. When, for example, the Nibelungenlied permits the legends of Dietrich of Bern to crop up in the earlier part of the account of the destruction of the Burgundians, while the Eddic poems do not even admit Dietrich among the participating heroes, the probability is that he was not known in the legends of the Volsungs at the time when these legends made their way into the North.1 In a like manner it is possible to cull out from the Northern versions a heap of legends of later origin. First of all, it appears quite clearly that the legend of Aslaug has no proper place in the Volsung cycle. Aslaug is not mentioned at all in the Eddie poems; and the report that she was the daughter of Sigurd Fafnirsbane is directly contradicted by the account given in the Eddic poems of the relations between Sigurd and Brynhild.2 The situation is much the same in the case of the legend of Jormunrek. Jordanes, the first writer to deal with it, makes no mention of Sunilda’s being the daughter of Sigurd, and he gives quite a different reason for Ermanaric’s putting her to death than the one contained in the Northern poems.
In the first divisions of the cycle as well there are similar, and even more accidental cases of attachment. The legend of Helgi Hundingsbane, for instance, is an exclusively Northern story, which has been attached to the Volsung cycle through the device of making Helgi an elder half brother of Sigurd. Still weaker is the link binding together the Volsung legends and the legend of Helgi Hjorvardsson; this Helgi it was necessary to reincarnate as Helgi Hundingsbane. Even if all these additions be eliminated, the whole legendary series from Sigi down to Sigmund Volsungsson would still remain to identify the Northern redactions. How much of this material was ever a portion of legends other than the Northern is not easy to determine; but since the poem of Beowulf mentions Wæls, Sigmund, and Fitela, it is clear at any rate that Volsung, Sigmund, and Sinfjotli were once subject to poetic treatment among other Germanic peoples, so much the more since the remarkable name “Sinfjotli” is readily recognizable in the ancient Germanic man’s name Sintarfizilo. Possibly the legend at first reached no farther back than to Volsung,l in which case the stories of Sigi and Rerir must be regarded as Norse legends added at some later time. Signy’s relation to her husband Siggeir and to her brother Sigmund supports this view; for these relations are to such a degree reminiscent, even in details, of Gudrun’s relations to Atli and to the brothers Gunnar and Hogni that it appears certain that one of these legends is an imitation of the other; and since the version found in the Northern legend of Gudrun (as will be made manifest later) probably is older than the German account of the fate of the Burgundians, likelihood points out the story of Siggeir’s death at the hands of brother and sister as an imitation of the other story.
In those phases of the legend which are common to German and to Northern literature there are a number of differences in detail, as will be evident from the foregoing brief abstract of the contents of the Nibelungenlied.
In the Northern version considerable importance attaches to the hoard of Andvari; this hoard, like Tyrfing in the Hervarar Saga, serves as a means of connecting the several elements of the legend, through the curse that clings to it. In the Nibelungenlied, on the contrary, Siegfried’s hoard is practically inessential to the course of the action; his death has no connection with the treasure, but is merely a result of his relations to Brynhild. This may indeed be the more primitive set of circumstances. For it is to be noted that not even in the Northern version is Sigurd’s death an immediate consequence of his having acquired the fateful treasure; in this version as well it is in reality his relation to Brynhild that brings about his death. The importance attaching to the gold in the Northern story can therefore hardly be regarded as a very ancient trait of the Sigurd legend.
Another difference between the Northern legends and the German lies in the relation between Sigurd and Brynhild. The Nibelungenlied knows nothing of an earlier association of the two, while nearly all of the Northern versions mention, or at least presuppose, a betrothal between them before the marriage of Brynhild and Gunnar. Just how the Poetic Edda presented their first meeting we do not know definitely, since unfortunately there is at this point a considerable lacuna in the manuscript. From various hints in other poems that have been preserved it is nevertheless evident that Sigurd had known Brynhild before the time when he visited her in Gunnar’s stead. And the Volsunga Saga, which in great part is based on older poems, gives a circumstantial account of their meeting at the court of Heimir; this meeting must therefore have been described in some one of the lost poems. When, however, the Volsunga Saga also gives an account of a still earlier meeting between them, in that it identifies Sigrdrifa with Brynhild, this circumstance must be due to a later duplication of the original single legend. For the story of Sigrdrifa forms a finished episode in the Poetic Edda; Sigrdrifumál has nothing to say of a betrothal, and none of the other poems so much as suggests the identity of the Valkyrie and Brynhild, with the solitary exception of the Helreið Brynhildar; but this poem is so confused and apparently of so late an origin that no great value can be attached to it. It is possible, however, that the entire story of the betrothal between Sigurd and Brynhild had no proper place in the legend as first formed, but that it was wholly Northern in origin; for the Nibelungenlied makes no reference to it, and for that matter it is not necessary to an understanding of the fate of the hero. In the Northern version Brynhild determines upon his death in desperation at learning that he of all men, her lover and the hero of heroes, had a part in the deception practised upon her; it is jealousy toward Gudrun and bitter hatred of Sigurd that impels her to the deed. In the Nibelungenlied the motive for Brynhild’s revenge is a feeling of indignation at being duped; and her resentment at the imposture is increased by the thought that it was the impostor Siegfried who had prevailed over her, more especially since she had held the most eminent hero alone worthy of her love. The disposition of the narrative elements in both the Northern and the German stories is satisfactory; and it is hardly possible to determine priority of origin as between the two.
The last great difference between the Nibelungenlied and the Northern story is to be found in the narrative of the fall of the Burgundians. In the German poem, Kriemhild exacts vengeance for her husband; in the Eddic poems it is her brothers she avenges by the killing of Atli. In this particular the Northern account probably has the priority. It has already been mentioned that the story of the fate of the Burgundians rests on historical reminiscences, namely the defeat of the Burgundians at the hands of the Huns in the year 437; here then the Eddic poems have best preserved the historical situation in representing Atli as the foe of the brothers, while the Etzel of the Nibelungenlied bears them no grudge and is drawn into the conflict against his will. Besides, the Northern story has an antique, authentically Germanic coloring. Gudrun is the loving wife and the grieving widow but also the faithful sister; despite the great wrong done to her by her brothers, she proves herself in the final test to be true to the most sacred relationship known to the ancient Germanic peoples, namely the mutual love of brothers and sisters, fidelity to family ties.
The Norse form of the story begins with Odin and his son Sigi, and follows the fate of the Volsungs down to the very days of the sons of Ragnar. The Nibelungenlied, on the contrary, deals only with the events from Siegfried’s first appearance in Mainz to the fall of the Burgundians at Etzel’s court. At the start, no doubt, the cycle did not embrace the huge mass of material which now is to be found embodied in the Norse versions. Both the German and the Norse redactions show a tendency toward combination of legends originally foreign to one another into a larger unified structure, and it is therefore necessary to try to determine by a process of comparison how much of the conglomerate belonged to the cycle at the beginning. When, for example, the Nibelungenlied permits the legends of Dietrich of Bern to crop up in the earlier part of the account of the destruction of the Burgundians, while the Eddic poems do not even admit Dietrich among the participating heroes, the probability is that he was not known in the legends of the Volsungs at the time when these legends made their way into the North.1 In a like manner it is possible to cull out from the Northern versions a heap of legends of later origin. First of all, it appears quite clearly that the legend of Aslaug has no proper place in the Volsung cycle. Aslaug is not mentioned at all in the Eddie poems; and the report that she was the daughter of Sigurd Fafnirsbane is directly contradicted by the account given in the Eddic poems of the relations between Sigurd and Brynhild.2 The situation is much the same in the case of the legend of Jormunrek. Jordanes, the first writer to deal with it, makes no mention of Sunilda’s being the daughter of Sigurd, and he gives quite a different reason for Ermanaric’s putting her to death than the one contained in the Northern poems.
In the first divisions of the cycle as well there are similar, and even more accidental cases of attachment. The legend of Helgi Hundingsbane, for instance, is an exclusively Northern story, which has been attached to the Volsung cycle through the device of making Helgi an elder half brother of Sigurd. Still weaker is the link binding together the Volsung legends and the legend of Helgi Hjorvardsson; this Helgi it was necessary to reincarnate as Helgi Hundingsbane. Even if all these additions be eliminated, the whole legendary series from Sigi down to Sigmund Volsungsson would still remain to identify the Northern redactions. How much of this material was ever a portion of legends other than the Northern is not easy to determine; but since the poem of Beowulf mentions Wæls, Sigmund, and Fitela, it is clear at any rate that Volsung, Sigmund, and Sinfjotli were once subject to poetic treatment among other Germanic peoples, so much the more since the remarkable name “Sinfjotli” is readily recognizable in the ancient Germanic man’s name Sintarfizilo. Possibly the legend at first reached no farther back than to Volsung,l in which case the stories of Sigi and Rerir must be regarded as Norse legends added at some later time. Signy’s relation to her husband Siggeir and to her brother Sigmund supports this view; for these relations are to such a degree reminiscent, even in details, of Gudrun’s relations to Atli and to the brothers Gunnar and Hogni that it appears certain that one of these legends is an imitation of the other; and since the version found in the Northern legend of Gudrun (as will be made manifest later) probably is older than the German account of the fate of the Burgundians, likelihood points out the story of Siggeir’s death at the hands of brother and sister as an imitation of the other story.
In those phases of the legend which are common to German and to Northern literature there are a number of differences in detail, as will be evident from the foregoing brief abstract of the contents of the Nibelungenlied.
In the Northern version considerable importance attaches to the hoard of Andvari; this hoard, like Tyrfing in the Hervarar Saga, serves as a means of connecting the several elements of the legend, through the curse that clings to it. In the Nibelungenlied, on the contrary, Siegfried’s hoard is practically inessential to the course of the action; his death has no connection with the treasure, but is merely a result of his relations to Brynhild. This may indeed be the more primitive set of circumstances. For it is to be noted that not even in the Northern version is Sigurd’s death an immediate consequence of his having acquired the fateful treasure; in this version as well it is in reality his relation to Brynhild that brings about his death. The importance attaching to the gold in the Northern story can therefore hardly be regarded as a very ancient trait of the Sigurd legend.
Another difference between the Northern legends and the German lies in the relation between Sigurd and Brynhild. The Nibelungenlied knows nothing of an earlier association of the two, while nearly all of the Northern versions mention, or at least presuppose, a betrothal between them before the marriage of Brynhild and Gunnar. Just how the Poetic Edda presented their first meeting we do not know definitely, since unfortunately there is at this point a considerable lacuna in the manuscript. From various hints in other poems that have been preserved it is nevertheless evident that Sigurd had known Brynhild before the time when he visited her in Gunnar’s stead. And the Volsunga Saga, which in great part is based on older poems, gives a circumstantial account of their meeting at the court of Heimir; this meeting must therefore have been described in some one of the lost poems. When, however, the Volsunga Saga also gives an account of a still earlier meeting between them, in that it identifies Sigrdrifa with Brynhild, this circumstance must be due to a later duplication of the original single legend. For the story of Sigrdrifa forms a finished episode in the Poetic Edda; Sigrdrifumál has nothing to say of a betrothal, and none of the other poems so much as suggests the identity of the Valkyrie and Brynhild, with the solitary exception of the Helreið Brynhildar; but this poem is so confused and apparently of so late an origin that no great value can be attached to it. It is possible, however, that the entire story of the betrothal between Sigurd and Brynhild had no proper place in the legend as first formed, but that it was wholly Northern in origin; for the Nibelungenlied makes no reference to it, and for that matter it is not necessary to an understanding of the fate of the hero. In the Northern version Brynhild determines upon his death in desperation at learning that he of all men, her lover and the hero of heroes, had a part in the deception practised upon her; it is jealousy toward Gudrun and bitter hatred of Sigurd that impels her to the deed. In the Nibelungenlied the motive for Brynhild’s revenge is a feeling of indignation at being duped; and her resentment at the imposture is increased by the thought that it was the impostor Siegfried who had prevailed over her, more especially since she had held the most eminent hero alone worthy of her love. The disposition of the narrative elements in both the Northern and the German stories is satisfactory; and it is hardly possible to determine priority of origin as between the two.
The last great difference between the Nibelungenlied and the Northern story is to be found in the narrative of the fall of the Burgundians. In the German poem, Kriemhild exacts vengeance for her husband; in the Eddic poems it is her brothers she avenges by the killing of Atli. In this particular the Northern account probably has the priority. It has already been mentioned that the story of the fate of the Burgundians rests on historical reminiscences, namely the defeat of the Burgundians at the hands of the Huns in the year 437; here then the Eddic poems have best preserved the historical situation in representing Atli as the foe of the brothers, while the Etzel of the Nibelungenlied bears them no grudge and is drawn into the conflict against his will. Besides, the Northern story has an antique, authentically Germanic coloring. Gudrun is the loving wife and the grieving widow but also the faithful sister; despite the great wrong done to her by her brothers, she proves herself in the final test to be true to the most sacred relationship known to the ancient Germanic peoples, namely the mutual love of brothers and sisters, fidelity to family ties.
Comments
Post a Comment