Chapter XIX: The Causes and Antecedent Conditions of the Heroic Age (2)
We hear sometimes from legends of national migrations caused by insufficiency of food. Historical records seem to show that such movements were more frequently due to pressure from neighbouring peoples. But it is greatly to be doubted whether these movements usually involved a total displacement of population. Cases like that of the Vandals indeed indicate that frequently the more enterprising part of the community were the first to move and that the chief impulse came from the attractions offered by the chance of living upon the fruits of others' labour, whether in the form of plunder or tribute. So far as our records go back, we find among the Teutonic peoples, as among the Gauls and the early Greeks, a numerous class who prefer the military life to the labour involved in agriculture. Indeed one of the most remarkable features of the Teutonic Heroic Age--and probably of the Gaulish also[669]--is the ease with which immense hosts of warriors could be gathered for an enterprise of plunder or conquest. It is certain that these hosts were frequently drawn from far and wide. If the national kings would not embark on such enterprises their subjects were ready to embrace the service of neighbouring princes, or even that of distant or alien nations, such as the Romans. It is the existence of this military element which in various epochs of European history and under similar cultural conditions has produced the phenomena comprised under the term 'Heroic Age.' For the special characteristics however to which we have called attention above--emancipation from primitive ideas and absence of national feeling--the explanation is to be found in contact with civilised communities, especially in the form of mercenary service. The military life further had the effect of making the kings regard themselves primarily as commanders of armies. It was for their warriors that consideration was required rather than for the tillers of the soil, who were largely of alien nationality.
When this is realised it becomes easy to understand the instability of heroic society. The military followers of a peace-loving king, unless he was very wealthy and generous, were liable to drift away, while the bulk of the population counted for nothing. In the absence of any truly national organisation or national feeling all depended on the personal qualities of the leaders. Under Theodric the Ostrogoths were the chief power in Europe; but within thirty years of his death they disappear and are not heard of again. Under Dušan the Servians seemed destined to absorb all that was left of the Greek empire; after his death they failed to offer any effective resistance to the Turks. The kingdoms of the Greek Heroic Age seem to have succumbed to much less formidable antagonists. So numerous indeed are cases of this kind that one is perhaps justified in regarding national disaster as the normal ending of such epochs.
* * * * *
The Heroic Age, both Greek and Teutonic, presents us with the picture of a society largely free from restraint of any kind. In the higher ranks tribal law has ceased to maintain its force; and its decay leaves the individual free from obligations both to the kindred and to the community. He may disregard the bonds of kinship even to the extent of taking a kinsman's life; and he recognises no authority beyond that of the lord whose service he has entered. The same freedom is exhibited in his attitude to the deities.
It is of course in princes that we find these features most strongly developed. That which they prize above all else is the ability to indulge their desires to the full--in feasting and every form of enjoyment for themselves, in unlimited generosity to their friends, in ferocious vindictiveness towards their foes. The hero of the Odyssey, when his opportunity arrives, sets no limit to the vengeance which he exacts, from prince, goatherd and maidservant. Achilles, the chief hero of the Iliad, is transformed into a savage when he gets possession of the dead body of his enemy. His story furnishes a fitting parallel to that of Alboin, whose brutal conduct brought upon him so swift a retribution. And it is to be remembered that this Alboin's generosity was a theme of poetry from Italy to England.
The best side of heroic kingship may be seen in such a character as Hrothgar. His conception of the duties of a national ruler may have been of a somewhat elementary character. But it is rather as the head of a large household that we have to regard him; and as such he commands our esteem. Even in the Merovingian family--we may cite Gregory's description (III 25) of Theodberht--there were princes who won the respect of Roman ecclesiastics. In the courts of such princes the conditions of life were probably as good as at any time for many centuries later. We have no reason for supposing that the case was otherwise in the Heroic Age of Greece.
But above all we have to remember the heroic poems. It is not reasonable to regard the Anglo-Saxon poems, much less the Homeric poems, as products of barbarism. The courts which gave birth to such poetry must have appropriated to a considerable extent the culture, as well as the wealth and luxury, of earlier civilisations. It is to be remarked however that the hold which these poems have exercised on subsequent ages, in very different stages of culture, is due not only to their artistic qualities but also to the absorbing interest of the situations which they depict. This interest arises very largely from the extraordinary freedom from restraint enjoyed by the characters in the gratification of their feelings and desires and from the tremendous and sudden vicissitudes of fortune to which they are exposed. The pictures presented to us are those of persons by no means ignorant of the pleasures and even the refinements of civilised life, yet dominated by the pride and passions which spring from an entirely reckless individualism and untrained by experience to exercise moderation. According to the view put forward above the explanation of such features is to be found not so much in any peculiarly fertile gift of imagination by which the conventional court poetry of these periods was inspired, but rather in the circumstances of the times and in the character of the courts which produced that poetry.
FOOTNOTES:
[637] Cremation may have a common origin in the two cases; but this practice appears to have been introduced into the North at least fifteen centuries before the Heroic Age. It has been suggested that the origin of the practice may be found in the late neolithic settlements in the district of the Dniestr and Dniepr--dating probably from the latter part of the third millennium (cf. Meyer, _Geschichte des Altertums_², I § 537). Evidence however is now accumulating to the effect that cremation was practised in Crete in Early Minoan times.
[638] _The Early Age of Greece_, Vol. I, Ch. IV and passim, together with a number of articles which have appeared in various publications.
[639] I mention this point only because Prof. Ridgeway lays stress upon it. I do not myself regard the use of iron weapons as an essential characteristic of the Heroic Age. The evidence seems to me to indicate that such weapons came into use only towards the close of the period (cf. p. 199 ff.).
[640] By this term I mean 'belonging to communities which spoke Celtic languages.' It is only fair to add that Prof. Ridgeway appears to have racial (physical), rather than linguistic, characteristics in view. But I am not clear whether he means to include among his 'Celts' peoples who used other than Celtic languages.
[641] What I mean by the term 'Homeric civilisation' will probably be clear from Chapters X and XI. I cannot admit that a satisfactory case has been made out for believing the civilisation of the Heroic Age to have differed widely from that of the poets' own times. The excavations at Cnossos have brought to light the existence (in 'Late Minoan' times) of a highly organised bureaucratic system, for which analogies enough are to be found in Egyptian records of the same period. But the poems themselves do not give the slightest hint of acquaintance with such a system. The absence of striking inconsistencies which has been remarked above (p. 241) is unintelligible unless the civilisation with which the poets themselves were acquainted--presumably in Aeolis--was a more or less direct continuation of that of the Heroic Age. Such changes as had taken place were in general probably of a retrograde character, in spite of the growing use of iron and possibly also of riding. But there is no ground, so far as I can see, for supposing that the Homeric poems are records of the people and events of a highly civilised age preserved by the traditions of a semi-barbaric society.
[642] Both in Ionia and Cyprus there were of course cities which, according to tradition, had been founded by Achaean colonists. But the Greek population as a whole made no such claim in either case. For Cyprus cf. Herodotus VII 90.
[643] Aristotle (_Meteorolog._ I 14. 21 f.) applies the term Ἑλλὰς ἡ ἀρχαία to the country round Dodona and the Acheloos; but it is commonly held that in this he was following a late Molossian story relating to Dodona, rather than a genuine tradition. Yet the part played by the Acheron in Greek religion and poetry (cf. p. 422) suggests that this region was at one time traditionally regarded by a portion of the Greek race as its homeland.
[644] A different view is taken by Prof. Meyer (_Gesch. d. Alt._², I § 473, note) who accepts the statement of the Lydian historian Xanthos (quoted by Strabo, XIV 5. 29; cf. XII 8. 3) that the Phrygian invasion took place μετὰ τὰ Τρωικά. He holds that this statement is confirmed by a passage in Proclus' epitome of the Telegony (cf. Kinkel, _Epic. Gr. Fragm._, p. 57), where the Thesprotoi are represented as being at war with the Brygoi. But the latter are clearly the Brygoi of Albania; and there is nothing in the context to suggest that the Phrygians (of Asia) were believed to be still with their kinsfolk in the west. It seems to me that the statement of a fifth century writer, who is known only from fragments, requires stronger confirmation than this before it can be accepted as evidence for the chronological relationship of events which took place some seven centuries before his time. Especially is this the case when such a statement is directly opposed to several passages in the Iliad, which clearly recognise the presence of the Phrygians in Asia. In view of the fact that the queen (Hecabe) is said to be a Phrygian it is scarcely safe to assume that these elements are unessential or late additions to the story. But, more than this, Xanthos' account itself does not appear to be free from Homeric influence. The names Βερεκύντων and Ἀσκανίας may possibly be derived from Phrygian tradition--perhaps ultimately from the same source as Il. II 862 f.--but the leader's name (Σκαμάνδριος) is not only Homeric but obviously a derivative of Σκαμάνδρος, the name of a river in the Troad. It may be observed that a hero of the same name (Hector's son) figures in a somewhat similar story recorded by Strabo elsewhere (XIII 1. 52); and for my part I see no reason for attaching more importance to Xanthos' account than to this. The expression ἐκ ... τῶν ἀριστερῶν τοῦ Πόντου clearly suggests that he had confused the tradition of the Phrygian invasion with certain much later movements (of the Bithynians, Thynoi, etc.), some of which do seem to have proceeded from the quarter indicated. On the other hand all the evidence which we have (cf. Herodotus, VII 73 and VIII 138, and the position of the Brygoi in historical times) points to the western part of the Balkan peninsula as the original home of the Phrygians.
As to the nationality of the Trojans themselves--the Homeric Trojans--Prof. Meyer does not appear to have expressed an opinion. The question will doubtless be discussed in the next volume of his work. His theory however would seem to involve that any historical events which may underlie the story of the Iliad must be referred at least to the thirteenth century; for the date which he gives for the Phrygian invasion is about, or shortly after, 1200. Here again however I cannot help thinking that the evidence is far from conclusive. There may very well be a connection between the fall of the Hittite kingdom, which apparently did take place about this time, and the invasion encountered by Rameses III (cf. p. 188). But I am by no means clear why it is necessary to conclude that the Phrygian invasion immediately preceded these events. If the Masa and Dardenui of the Poem of Pentaur are rightly identified with the Mysians and Dardanoi we shall probably have to date the earliest settlements at least a century before this time. As for the Dardanoi--who apparently were regarded as the parent stock of the Homeric Trojans (cf. Il. XX 215 ff.)--I see no reason for doubting their European origin any more than that of the Phrygians (Brygoi) and the Mysians (Moisoi), whose neighbours they were both in Asia and in the Balkans. But at the same time there seems to me to be equally little reason for referring the events on which the Iliad is based to times anterior to the eleventh century.
[645] Under such conditions the nearest approach to the heroic spirit is afforded by athletic contests. Such contests have at times produced what we may call 'heroic' poetry of Stage I (cf. p. 94). But the motive for further elaboration of the stories is wanting.
[646] In the folk-tale--at least in some forms of it--the hero's arrival in the cave is involuntary.
[647] In this chapter I am using the word 'Roman' in a very wide sense, viz. for the civilisation of the Empire as a whole. Both the material objects and the influence of which I am speaking came doubtless rather from the provinces than from Italy itself. In many cases it would probably be more correct to use the term 'Romanised Celtic'; cf. _The Origin of the English Nation_, p. 189 ff., though I think now that I was mistaken here in doubting the importance of (strictly) Roman influence upon the Angli--especially in military matters.
[648] It appears from the Notitia Dignitatum that troops of Attacotti were largely employed by the Romans on the Continent at the beginning of the fifth century. According to St Jerome (_Adv. Iouinianum_, II 7) the Attacotti were a British people; and they are mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus (XXVI 4. 5; XXVII 8. 5) as ravaging the province of Britain, together with the Picts and Scots, in the reign of Valentinian I. It is commonly held that they belonged to the south of Scotland, though opinions differ as to whether they were Britons (properly speaking) or Picts of Galloway.
[649] This appears to be the view taken by Prof. Meyer (_Gesch. d. Alt._², I pp. 701, 719 f.). The problem will no doubt be discussed more fully in his next volume. Here I need only mention that the recent discoveries of wall-paintings at Tiryns and elsewhere seem to me to weigh rather heavily against the view that the inhabitants of these buildings were of a totally different nationality from the 'Minoan' Cretans. It is gradually becoming clear also that--contrary to what had been supposed at first--the use of writing was not unknown on the mainland; cf. Evans, _Scripta Minoa_, I p. 56 ff.
[650] Cf. especially Dörpfeld, _Ath. Mitteilungen_, XXXII 600 ff.
[651] Cf. Dörpfeld, _Ath. Mitt._, XXXII vi ff. Dr Dörpfeld however holds (_ib._, p. 595 ff.) that 'Late Minoan II' and 'Late Minoan III' were contemporaneous and assigns both styles to a period (B.C. 1400-1100) considerably later than English archaeologists will allow for the former.
[652] One of the chief arguments for this view is that the tombs show traces of cremation. But account must be taken of the possibility that they may have belonged to an earlier (Arcadian?) stratum of Greek population.
[653] Cf. Dawkins, _Journ. Hell. St._, XXVII 296, where it is suggested that the tomb first explored may have belonged possibly to the ancestors of Nestor.
[654] The great majority of the sherds found in the ruins of the citadel were of that monochrome type which has been met with elsewhere on the west coast of Greece (Leucas, Olympia, etc.) and which Dr Dörpfeld regards as the native pottery of the Achaeans; cf. _Ath. Mitt._, XXXII xv f. Some sherds of the same type were found in the tombs together with the remains of Mycenean vases. Only six fragments of Mycenean pottery were found in the citadel.
[655] This explanation is rejected by Dr Dörpfeld (_Ath. Mitt._, XXXIII 316); but there does not appear to be any definite evidence that the citadel was destroyed soon after the construction of the tombs.
[656] The general effect of recent discoveries has been to bring out a closer resemblance between the Cretan and mainland deposits than had hitherto been suspected (cf. Evans, _Scripta Minoa_, I p. 55 f.). The affinities too are by no means confined to portable objects. In particular note should be taken of the wall-paintings at Thebes and elsewhere--more especially those recently discovered at Tiryns, which belong to two distinct periods (cf. Rodenwaldt, _Ath. Mitt._, XXXVI 198 ff.). The resemblance of these to similar paintings from Crete is very marked, yet perhaps scarcely sufficient as yet to prove that the possessors of Tiryns were of Cretan origin.
[657] For the Aegean connections of the sea-peoples see p. 190 f. Account is also to be taken of the deposits found in the foreign settlements at Gurob and elsewhere in the Fayum, to which belonged the tomb of An-Tursha ('Pillar of the Tursha or Thuirsha'). These deposits cover a period of about two centuries, from the reign of Amenhotep III to that of Sety II or slightly later--a period corresponding practically to that in which we find historical references to the sea-peoples. They contained many stirrup-vases and other objects of Aegean origin. A peculiar custom which prevailed here was that of burning a man's personal effects--presumably at death--in a hole cut in the floor of the house. No human remains were found in these holes, the bodies being buried in cemeteries according to Egyptian fashion; but it has been suggested that the practice may have been due to a former custom of cremation (cf. Petrie, _Illahun, Kahun and Gurob_, p. 16 ff.).
[658] When Shardina alone are mentioned account must of course be taken of the possibility that this name is representative of a class. The Egyptian mercenaries, like those of the Hittites and Libyans, may really have been drawn from a number of similar peoples who were collectively known under the name which had first become familiar in Egypt.
[659] Cf. the quotation given above, p. 247, note 6.
[660] I am not aware that representations of Shardina have yet been found in Crete. Note must be taken however of the porcelain fragment found in the third shaft-grave at Mycenae (cf. p. 191, note 4). The date of these shaft-graves can scarcely be much later than that of the destruction of the palace at Cnossos. Indeed it appears to be the prevalent view at present that they date from 'Late Minoan I,' i.e. before the palace-period; cf. Forsdyke, _Journ. Hell. St._, XXXI 116, Hall, _ib._, 119. If this is correct the porcelain fragment must of course be much older than the earliest Egyptian references to the Shardina.
[661] The use of the word _ḳrn·t_ in the great Karnak inscription of Merenptah has given rise to much disagreement among Egyptologists. Prof. Breasted (_Ancient Records, Egypt_, III p. 247 note) understands from it that the Shardina and their confederates were circumcised. But the allusion is clearly to something which differentiated these peoples from the Libyans. The Libyans themselves however are believed to have practised circumcision (cf. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._², I § 167).
[662] Cf. pp. 190 (note 2), 247. For further references see Hall, _Journ. Hell. St._, XXXI 119 ff. In particular note should be taken of the fact that the feather head-dress is worn by Ionian or Carian mercenaries on a monument of Sennacherib (_ib._, p. 122 f.). Sir A. J. Evans (_op. cit._, pp. 24 ff., 285 ff.) attributes the Phaistos disk--on which this type of head-dress first occurs--to the south-west of Asia Minor. In this connection however it is perhaps worth calling to mind that according to Thucydides (I 4, 8; cf. Herodotus, I 171) the Cyclades also were originally inhabited by Carians. The reference is perhaps properly to the Leleges, a people who may have been nearly related to the Lycians.
[663] The Pulesatha are represented as beardless, whereas many of the Shardina wear beards. More important however is the difference in physiognomy between the two types. It has been observed that the Pulesatha approximate very closely to the Greek type of classical times.
[664] Attempts have been made to find traces of the Shardina in the 'nuraghi' of Sardinia and the burial-places adjacent to them; but, so far as I am aware, no definite evidence in favour of this connection has yet been obtained beyond the fact that a number of statuettes with horned helmets have been found in the island. The chief argument against the western origin of the Shardina is the absence of evidence, either in history or tradition, for movements of population or even for cultural influence from this quarter--at least until Roman times--whereas evidence is abundant not only for cultural influence in the reverse direction but also for settlements both of 'Illyrians' and Greeks in Italy. On the other hand it is perhaps worth noting that a helmet somewhat similar to that of the Shardina survived in historical times among the Thracians (cf. Herodotus VII 76). Further, from Il. XIII 576 f. we may probably infer that the Thracian peoples had early become famous for the manufacture of weapons. Influence from this quarter may have made its way into Greece by more than one channel. But it should be observed that Homeric poetry shows some acquaintance with the districts to the north of Epeiros and Thessaly. In particular note should be taken of certain personal names derived from names of peoples in this region, e.g. Πελάγων, Ὀρέστης, Θυέστης. It is perhaps not without significance that the two latter of these occur in the most important of the Achaean families, while the antiquity of the last is guaranteed by the aspirate (as against Δυέσται).
[665] The extent of these movements may be estimated by the number of names which occur both in the Balkan peninsula and on the east side of the Aegean, e.g. _Brygoi_ (_Phryges_), _Dardanoi_, _Moisoi_ (_Mysoi_), _Mygdones_, _Sintoi_ (_Sinties_), _Pelasgoi_; and it is not to be overlooked that on the European side most of these names occur in the basins of the Axios and Strymon or the region between them. Attention should be paid also to the common element in place-names, more especially to those (e.g. Πέργαμος) which occur in the islands (Crete, etc.) as well as in the two areas under discussion; for they seem to indicate that the movements from the Balkan peninsula were not confined to the Asiatic mainland. Even in Asia Minor itself however the Thraco-Phrygian movements may at first have affected a much larger area than that in which languages of this type survived in historical times. Herodotus (I 171) states that on the ground of common ancestry the Carians allowed Lydians and Mysians to use the temple at Mylasa--a privilege which they did not concede to other peoples, even to those who spoke the same language as themselves. This passage is usually interpreted as pointing to a traditional religious federation of the indigenous peoples. But it is a serious objection to this view that the Mysians were clearly of European origin. If the Lydian and Carian languages were non-Indo-European, as is commonly believed, they may have been taken over from indigenous peoples such as the Caunioi, whose language was similar to that of the Carians and who seem to have been among the peoples excluded from the temple at Mylasa. The possibility that the Carian language belonged originally to the Caunioi is suggested by Herodotus himself.
[666] In particular note may be taken of the absence of national names for the populations of several of the most important kingdoms; cf. p. 389, note.
[667] It may be observed also that some seven centuries elapsed between the settlement of the Servians on the lower Danube and the beginning of their (first) Heroic Age. This latter period was of course accompanied by an extension of the area occupied by the Servians, though the newly won territories were subsequently lost through the Turkish conquest.
[668] _Vand._ II 6: ἐθνῶν γὰρ ἁπάντων ὧν ἴσμεν ἡμεῖς ἁβρότατον μὲν τὸ τῶν Βανδίλων.... βαλανείοις τε οἱ ξύμπαντες ἐπεχρῶντο ἐς ἡμέραν ἑκάστην καὶ τραπέζῃ ἅπασιν εὐθηνούσῃ, ὅσα δὴ γῆ τε καὶ θάλασσα ἥδιστά τε καὶ ἄριστα φέρει. ἐχρυσοφόρουν δὲ ὡς ἐπὶ πλεῖστον, καὶ Μηδικὴν ἐσθῆτα, ἣν νῦν Σηρικὴν καλοῦσιν, ἀμπεχόμενοι.... καὶ ᾤκηντο μὲν αὐτῶν οἱ πολλοὶ ἐν παραδείσοις, ὑδάτων καὶ δένδρων εὖ ἔχουσι, κ.τ.λ.
[669] We may compare the force led by Agamemnon against Troy and the great mixed host encountered by Rameses III (cf. p. 188).
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.
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 "Pasić" read "Pavić" (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.
INDEX
Achaia 174, 282, 289.
Achaioi (Achaeans) 176 f., etc., (in Crete) 177 f., 186 f.
Achilles 175, 222, 250, 263 f., 269, 275 ff., 288 f., 295 f., 462.
Aðils (cf. Eadgils) 17, 20, 31, 153 f.
Aelfwine (see Alboin).
Aeolic element in Homeric poems 208, 215, 273, 290 f.
Aeolic peoples, etc. 209, 272 ff., 295 f.
Aeolis 210 f., 227, 231 ff., 240.
Aeschylus 171, 237 ff.
Agamemnon (i) of Cyme 227, 231.
Agamemnon (ii) of Mycenae 174, 222, 237 ff., 274 ff., 288 f.,
302, 382 ff.
Aias (i), son of Oileus 175, 302.
Aias (ii), son of Telamon 175, 202, 204, 302 f.
Aithiopis 170, 197, 236, 244.
Alboin 26, 28, 462.
Alcinoos 384.
Alcman 215, 222, 266.
Alcuin 41, 73, 79 f., 465.
Aldhelm 80.
Áli (cf. Onela) 20, 153 f.
alliances 373 f., 387 ff.
Amalaswintha 371 f.
Ammianus Marcellinus 23, 366.
Amyclai 240, 302.
Angli 31 f., 51, 61, 97 f., 376, 405.
Ansgar 255 f.
Aphrodite 416 ff.
Apollo 250 f., 416 ff.
Arcadian 284 f., 287, 436 f., 453.
Archilochos 194, 216, 226 f.
Ares 416 ff.
Argo 196, 245, 261.
Argos 274 ff.
Artemis 416.
Ásgarðr 400.
Asia Minor (ethnography of) 178, 245 ff.
assembly 368 f., 382 f.
Athene 250 f., 416 ff.
Athens 171, 216 ff., 381, 421.
Atli (cf. Attila) 13 f., 22, 146 f.
Attila 22, 37 f., 84 f., 156.
Audoin 371.
Balder 112, 400 f., 405.
Bavarian characters 31, 33.
Bede 71, 73, 79, 350, 414 f.
Bellerophon 212, 356 f., 380.
Beowulf 1 f., 47 ff., etc.
Bernlef 80, 87, 222, 243.
Biarkamál 17, 60, 121, 402.
Biarki 119 ff., 466.
birds (speaking) 98, 128.
Bithynians 245 f.
boasting 326 f.
Boeotia 214, 283 f.
Bosnian poetry 101 ff., 216, 429.
Bragi 15, 58.
Bravalla (Brávík) 25, 251.
bronze and iron 195, 199 f.
Brunanburh (poem) 3, 34, 332.
Brynhildr 7, 13 f., 140 ff., 163 ff.
Burgundians 7, 22, 31, 351, 366.
Cadmos 267.
Caedmon 45 f., 79, 230, 465.
Caesar 413, 427 ff.
Callinos 171, 226 f.
Caria, Carians 179, 245 ff.
Cassiodorus 26, 85, 374.
Catalogue (Hesiodic) 194, 197 f., 227, 242.
Catalogue of Ships 174, 279, 289, 379, 387 f., 468.
Chalon-sur-Saône 162.
chariot 203 f.
Charles Martel 127 f.
Chios 176, 209.
Christian influence in Anglo-Saxon poems 47 ff., 241.
Cilices 246 ff.
Cinaithon 170.
Circe 258 f., 419.
class gradations 351 f., 364 f.
Cleisthenes 193.
Clovis 31, 85, 347.
Clytaimnestra 229, 237 f.
Cnossos 178, 311.
comitatus 328 f., 348, 350, 361 ff., 376 f., 443.
council 369 ff., 383 ff.
cremation 53 ff., 397 f., 410 f., 422 f., 467.
Crete 177 f., 184 ff., 311 ff., 435, 450 ff., 467.
Cumbrian history 108 f., 430, 446 f.
Cyme 214.
Cynewulf (i), poet 45.
Cynewulf (ii), king of Wessex 349, 351.
Cynurioi 460.
Cypria 170, 197, 234 ff., 244, 248.
Cyzicos 196.
Danes 1 f., 15, 17, 20 f., 24 f., 29, 31, etc.
Danish heroes 1 f., 17, 20, 31, etc.
Demodocos 221, 234.
Deor 3, 56, 81, 92.
Dietrich von Bern (cf. Theodric) 5, 7 ff., 23, 154 f., 311 f.,
333, 452.
Diomedeia 250 f.
Diomedes 175, 278, 379 f., 419.
divine parentage 264, 357.
divinity of kings 367, 381 f.
Dodona 417, 437.
Doloneia 198 f., 298.
Dorians 174, 178 f., 184, 186 f., 459.
dragons 122 ff.
Dušan 430, 448, 461.
Eadgils (i) 2, 27, 32, 56, 81.
Eadgils (ii) (cf. Aðils) 2, 20, 153.
Eastgota (see Ostrogotha).
Edda (Older) 10 ff., 99 f., 232.
Edda (Prose) 15.
Edda theology 394, 400, 404, 406 f.
Edwin 334, 349, 369.
Egill Skallagrímsson 16, 226.
Egypt 184 f., 187 ff., 266, 455.
Einhard 5, 62, 243.
Eireksmál 15, 257.
Ekkehard 6, 57, 162.
Eormenric (Ermenrich) 2 f., 8 ff., 23, 37, 157, 347.
Epeiros 437, 460.
Epigonoi 171.
eponymous heroes 131 f., 267 ff., 301.
Eratosthenes 179.
Eric the Victorious 252 f.
Etruscans 449 f.
Etzel (cf. Atli) 7 f., 22, etc.
Exodus (Anglo-Saxon) 45, 464.
Eyvindr Skaldaspillir 15 f., 91, 254.
family pride 327 f.
festivals 369, 383.
fictitious names 44, 159 ff., 299.
Finn 2, 20, 26, 42, 333.
folk-tales 110 ff., 258 ff., 264 ff., 466 f.
Franks 31, 39, 337, 343, 345 f., 352, 368, 460.
Frey 11, 15, 125, 253, 367, 394 f., 399 ff., 404.
Freyia 11 f., 400, 402.
Fria (cf. Frigg) 115, 408.
Frigg 394, 403, 405.
Frisians 2, 31, 80, 89 f., 370.
Fróði 15, 27, 123 ff., 467.
Gaulish heroic poetry 427 f.
Gaulish history 427 ff., 449 f.
Gautreks Saga 239, 385, 403.
Geatas (Götar) 1 f., 31 f., 35, 119 f., etc.
Gelimer 86, 94.
genealogies, Anglo-Saxon 42, 408 f.
genealogies, Greek 179 ff., 267.
Genesis (Anglo-Saxon) 211, 464.
Genseric 369 f., 460.
Geruthus 258 f.
Glaucos 341.
glory, love of 87 f., 325 f., 329.
glossaries, Anglo-Saxon 68, 70.
Glúmr 253.
Göndul 254, 263.
Gormo 258 ff.
Gothic heroic poetry 10, 62 f., 86 f.
Goths 23, 26, 31 ff., etc.
Grendel 116 f., 121 f., 466.
Grettis Saga 116 f., 467.
Guðrún 13 f., 37, 146 f., 152 f., 156, 163 ff.
Gundobad 22, 338 f.
Gunnarr (see Guthhere)
Gunnlaugs Saga 91 f.
Guntharius, Gunther (see Guthhere).
Guthhere (Gunnarr, Gunther) 6 f., 14, 21 f., 138 f., 141 ff.,
146 f., 163, 165.
Gylfaginning 229.
Haakon, earl of Lade 16, 91, 252 ff., 401 f.
Haakon I, king of Norway 15, 91, 254, 263.
Hades 422 f.
Hadingus 125 f., 260.
Haethcyn 337, 346.
Hagbarðr 17, 27, 333.
Hagena (Högni) (i), 6 f., 14, 137 f., 140 ff., 161 f.
Hagena (Högni) (ii), see Heðinn and Högni.
Hákonarmál 15, 97, 254 f.
Hamðir and Sörli 14, 37, 156 f., 160 f., 333 (cf. Sarus and Ammius).
Haraldr Hilditönn 17, 24 f., 251.
Harold the Fair-haired 15, 91, 296.
Hávamál 11, 229, 397.
heathen elements in Beowulf 52 f.
Hector 269 ff.
Heðinn and Högni 16, 21, 27 f., 112, 135 ff. 333 (cf. Hetel and
Hagen).
Helen 249, 265 ff., 337.
Helios (cattle of) 259.
Hellenic peoples 285 ff.
Hephaistos 416 f.
Hera 416 ff.
Heracleidai, Return of the 174, 180, 331.
Heremod 20, 60, 366.
Herhor 312.
Hermanaricus 10, 19, etc. (cf. Eormenric).
Hermes 416.
Heruli 346, 372 f., 407, 411, 445.
Hesiod 171 f., 194, 210, 214 f., 223, 228 ff., 242.
Hetel and Hagen (cf. Heðinn and Högni) 8 f., 21, etc.
Hildr (Hilde) 8 f., 16, 136 f.
Hildebrandslied 5, 62, 94 f.
Hiörungavágr 252.
Hittites 178, 188 ff., 204 f., 246 f.
Holmryge (cf. Rugii) 21, 28.
Homer's birthplace 179, 208 f.
Homeric armature 185 f., 191, 201 ff.
Homeric civilisation 186 f., 199 ff., 434 ff.
Hornklofi 15, 91.
Hrólfr Kraki 17, 20, 349.
Hrólfs Saga Kraka 120 ff.
Hrothgar 1 f., 20, 83, 119, 354, 368, 462.
Hygd, 372.
Hygelac 1 f., 24, 341, 371 f.
Hyndlulióð 12, 229, 402, 468.
Iason 196.
Iceland 10, 91 ff., 394 f., 398 ff.
Idomeneus 175, 278, 306.
Iliad 169, 174 f., 193 ff., etc.
images 205.
Ingeld (Ingellus, Ingialdr) 17, 36, 41 f., 61, 333, 465 f.
inscriptions, Anglo-Saxon 69, 71, 214.
inscriptions, Greek 209, 217, 280 f.
international interest of heroic poetry 34 ff., 335 f.
international relations 373 ff., 386 ff.
invulnerability 129, 264.
Ionian Isles 175, 274.
Ionic cities 176, 236, 245 f.
Ionic dialects 208 f., 215 ff., 283.
Ionic language of Homeric poems 208, 215 ff., 273.
Iörmunrekr 14, 19, etc. (cf. Eormenric).
Iphigeneia 238 f.
Istros 269 f.
Ithaca 356, 378.
Jómsvíkingar 251.
Jordanes 10, 26, 62, 86 f., 157.
kindred 344 ff., 353 ff., 442 f.
kingship 227 f., 337, 366 ff., 378 ff.
kinsman (slaying of) 346 ff., 359 f.
Kossovo 313, 316 f., 429, 441.
Kraljević Marko 441.
Kriemhild (cf. Guðrún) 7 f., 19, 145 ff., 163 ff.
Kûdrûn 8 f., 16, 19, 34, 135 f.
Langobardi 9, 26, 62, 89, 115, 371 ff.
Langobardic poetry 9 f., 115, 251, 413.
Langres 31, 162.
Lazar 313 ff.
Leire 377, 403.
Leleges 246, 248.
Lesbos 176.
Little Iliad 170, 197, 236.
Ljubović (Beg) 103, 441.
Locrians 269 f., 278, 357.
Loðbrók (Ragnarr) 17, 24, 295 f.
Lokasenna 11, 83, 403.
Loki 11, 403.
Ludwigslied 5, 21, 34.
Lycians 178 f., 212, 356 f.
Lycurgos 334 f.
Maldon (poem) 3, 97.
manes-worship 398 f., 410, 421.
Marcellinus Comes 37.
marriage-customs 98, 205, 358 f.
Menelaos 175, 277, 356, 362.
Merenptah 187, 455.
mercenary service 445 ff., 455 f., 461.
Merovingians 345 f., 367.
Merseburg charms 405, 408 f., 412.
Midas 227.
Miletos 176, 231, 246.
Miloš Obilić 314 f., 317 f.
Mimnermos 332.
Minoan civilisation 184 ff., 451 ff.
Minos 310 ff.
minstrelsy 79 ff., 221 ff.
Murad I 313 ff.
Mycenae 185, 240, 274, 308 f., 435, 450 ff.
Mycenean civilisation 185 ff., 190 ff., 200 ff., 218, 233, 435
ff., 451 f.
Nekyia 197, 229, 257, 260 f.
Nestor 175, 272, 277, 342.
Nibelungenlied 7, 139 ff., 164 f., 224, 233, 393, 467.
Niflungar (Nibelunge) 140 ff.
Niörðr 399 f., 405.
nobility 352, 364.
north-west Greek 281 ff.
Norway 10, 15, 30, 32 f., 59, 91 f., 100, 118 ff., 375, 395,
401, 404, 406 f.
Nostoi 170, 197, 234 ff.
Odoacer 23, 376 f.
Odysseus 175, 258, 273 f., 288 f., 297 ff., 358, 363 f., 419.
Odyssey 169, 175, 193 ff., etc.
Offa (i), king of Angel 4, 17, 26 f., 126, 333, 376.
Offa (ii), king of Mercia 126, 334 f.
officials 352.
Ohthere (Óttarr) 20, 153.
Old Saxons 88 f., 370, 407, 410.
Olympos 232, 416 f.
Onela (cf. Áli) 2, 20, 153 f., 347.
Ongentheo 2, 153, 340.
Orestes 237.
Orms Tháttr Storolfssonar 117 f., 467.
Ostrogotha 10, 21, 26.
Othin 11, 13, 114, 251, 253 ff., 394 ff. (cf. Woden).
Óttarr (i), son of Innsteinn 12, 402, 468.
Óttarr (ii), father of Aðils (see Ohthere).
Paphlagonia 245.
Paris 222, 229, 269 ff.
Patroclos 328 f., 361 f.
patronymics 355.
Paulus Diaconus 25 f., 372 f.
Peisistratos 216, 256.
Pelasgic Argos 274, 278 ff.
Pelasgoi 177, 186, 248, 285 ff.
Penelope 358 f.
Pentaur (Poem of) 247, 455.
Periandros 261, 422.
personal allegiance 348 ff., 361 ff.
personal names (heroic) 42 ff., 64 ff., 231.
Phaeacians 297, 299 f., 384 f.
Phaistos 268, 311.
Phemios 221, 234.
Philistines (see Pulesatha).
Phocis 283.
Phoinix 279, 360 f., 363.
Phthia 279, 286.
Phthiotis 176, 280, 282, 286 f.
place-names (heroic) 43 f.
Poseidon 416 ff.
Polyphemos 258.
Praisos 178, 213.
priests 367, 380.
Priscus 37, 62, 84.
Procopius 86, 97 ff., 128 ff., etc.
Proitos 212, 452.
Pulesatha 188 ff., 455 f.
Pylos 277, 451.
Quedlinburg Annals 6, 9, 23, 37, 80.
Rabenschlacht 8, 23.
Radiger 98, 370 f.
Rameses II 188, 247, 455.
Rameses III 185, 188 f., 455.
Ravenna 23, 452.
Reginsmál, Fáfnismál, Sigrdrífumál 13, 145, 235.
riding 204.
Roman influence 444 ff.
royal marriages 373 f., 386 f.
Rugii 28, 31, 134 (cf. Holmryge).
Russian heroic poetry 104 f.
Salamis 193, 302 f.
sanctuaries 205 f., 400 f., 406 f.
Sarpedon 305, 357.
Sarus (i) 160 f., 377, 467.
Sarus (ii) and Ammius 10, 14, etc. (cf. Hamðir and Sörli).
Saxo Grammaticus 17, 20, 25, etc.
Scheria 379, 384.
Scyld 75, 131 f., 373.
Servian (Christian) heroic poetry 103 f., 313 ff., 429 f.
Servian history 313 ff., 430, 447 ff.
Sety I 204.
Seyfridslied 7, 122, 140 f., 144 f.
Shardina 188 ff., 201, 451, 454 ff.
shield 201 f.
Shield of Heracles 169, 175.
Sidonius Apollinaris 85.
Siegfried 7, 19, 31, 33, 139 ff., 164 (cf. Sigurðr).
Sigarr 17, 21.
Sigmundr (Sigemund) 2, 16, 59 f., 114, 122 ff., 142, 251, 297.
Sigurðr 12 ff., 59, 114, 139 ff., 163 ff., 263 f., 333 (cf.
Siegfried).
Sigurðr Hringr 17, 24 f., 251.
single combats 339 f.
Smyrna 208 ff., 332.
Sparta 179 ff., 184, 331.
Spercheios 206, 279 ff., 287, 417, 419.
spoils 340 f.
stages in history of heroic poetry 94 ff.
Starkaðr 77, 36, 92 f.
Stesichoros 171, 239 f., 266, 310.
Strassburg, battle of 340, 349.
succession 356.
suitors of Penelope 300 f., 363.
Sunilda 10, 160 f. (cf. Svanhildr).
supernatural beings 114 ff., 250 ff.
supernatural properties 128 f., 262.
Svanhildr 14, 16, 37, 157 (cf. Sunilda).
Swedes (Sweon, Svíar) 2, 15, 20, 31, 153 f., 367 ff., 399.
Tacitus 78, 349, 368 f., 413.
Tchakaray (Zakar) 188 f.
Telemachos 242 f.
Tell-el-Amarna 188, 192, 455.
Thebais 171.
Theodberht 23 f., 462.
Theodric 3, 19, 23, 25, 29 ff, 154 f., 373, 461 (cf. Dietrich
von Bern).
Thersites 228.
Theseus 266.
Thessaly 232, 269 ff.
Thetis 264, 418 f.
Thiðreks Saga af Bern 9, 57, 134, 138 f., 145 f.
Thióðolfr 15, 91.
Thor 11, 253, 394 ff., 404.
Thórgerðr Hölgabrúðr 252, 401 f.
Thorkillus 258 f.
Thraco-Phrygian peoples 178 f., 190, 457 f.
Thucydides 286, 293, 308 ff.
Tiryns 452, 454.
tragic poets 171 f.
tribal heroes 267 ff.
Troy (Hissarlik) 200, 294 f., 309.
Tyrtaios 226, 331.
Uffo 17, 61.
Unferth 159, 347.
Upsala 154, 206, 368, 377, 399 f., 407.
Valhalla (Valhöll) 254, 396 ff., 410 ff.
Valkyries 254, 397, 411 f.
Vandals 31, 86, 115, 369, 371, 445, 460.
Vellekla 16, 254.
Venantius Fortunatus 85.
vengeance 344 f., 353.
Vidigoia 27, 62 (cf. Widia).
Viking Age 25, 90 ff., 100, 251 ff., 342, 404, 406 f.
Virgil 74 ff.
Völsunga Saga 16, 145 ff., 164, 251.
Völundarkviða 12, 132, 134 f.
Völuspá 11, 229.
Waldhere (Waltharius) 2, 6, 38 f., 57 f., 137 ff., 151 f., 161
f., 333, 341, 376 f.
Waltharius (see Waldhere).
Wanderer (poem) 3, 92, 350.
Warni 97 f.
Warrior Vase 185, 191, 451 f.
Weland 3, 9, 12, 132 ff.
Welsh heroic poetry 105 ff.
Weoxtan 20, 159, 329 f., 340, 347, 350.
wergelds 345, 352, 354, 365.
Widia 27, 132, 135 (cf. Vidigoia, Witege, Wudga).
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
The Heroic AgeChapter XIX: The Causes and Antecedent Conditions of the Heroic Age (2)
0%36 min left in chapter