Chapter II: Fróðaþáttr (1)

The first appearance of Hroar (Hrothgar) in literature is in _Widsith_ and _Beowulf_, where we become acquainted with him as the famous King of the Danes. Helgi (Halga) appears first in _Beowulf_, where he is scarcely more than mentioned. Hroar and Helgi belong to the most famous group of ancient kings in Denmark and appear repeatedly in old Scandinavian literature. The account of them in the _Fróðaþáttr_ which introduces the _Hrólfssaga_, is, briefly summarized, as follows.

Halfdan and Frothi were brothers, the sons of a king, and each was the ruler of a kingdom. Halfdan had two sons, Hroar and Helgi, and a daughter, Signy, the oldest of the three children, who was married to Earl Sævil while her brothers were still young. The boys' foster-father was Regin. Near Halfdan's capital was a wooded island, on which lived an old man, Vifil, a friend of Halfdan. Vifil had two dogs, called Hopp and Ho, and was skilled in soothsaying.

Frothi, envying his brother the crown of Denmark, attacked his capital with a large army, reduced it to ashes, and took Halfdan captive and put him to death. Regin took his foster-sons, Hroar and Helgi, to the island and placed them in the care of Vifil, in order that they might not fall into the hands of Frothi. Vifil took them to a cave (earth-hut), where they usually stayed at night; but in the daytime they sported in the grove. Frothi made every effort to locate them and make away with them, calling in witches and wise men from all over the land to tell him where they were, but in vain. Then he called in soothsayers, who told him the boys were not on the mainland, nor far from the court. The king mentioned Vifil's island, and they told him to look for the boys there. Twice he sent men to search for them, but the men failed to find them. Then the king went himself. Vifil, who knew the king was coming, met him on the strand as if by chance, pretending to be looking after his sheep; and when the king bade his men seize Vifil, the old man said, "Do not detain me, or the wolves will destroy my sheep," and cried out, "Hopp and Ho, guard my sheep." The king asked him to whom he was calling; he said, to his dogs. But he had told the boys before, that, when he called out the names of his dogs, they should hide in the cave. The king failed to find the boys and returned; but Vifil told the boys that it was not safe for them to remain on the island and sent them to their brother-in-law, Sævil, saying that they would some day be famous, unless, perchance, something prevented it.

Hroar was now twelve years old and Helgi ten. The boys returned to Sævil, but, calling themselves Hrani and Hamur, did not tell him who they were; and as they always wore masks, their identity remained unknown to him.

Frothi invited Sævil to a feast. Hroar and Helgi expressed a wish to join him; but Sævil commanded them to remain at home. Nevertheless, when Sævil and his retinue had started off, Helgi got an untamed colt, and mounting it with his face toward the horse's tail, set out, acting all the while very foolishly. Hroar also mounted a colt, and joined him; and the two overtook the company. They galloped back and forth beside Sævil's retinue, until finally Helgi's mask fell off, and then Signy recognized him. She began to weep, and when Sævil asked her the cause of her distress, she informed him of her discovery. Sævil tried to get the boys to return home; but, though they now were on foot and remained in the rear, they persisted in accompanying him on his visit to Frothi.

When they arrived at Frothi's, Frothi began to hunt for the boys, and bade a witch, who had come to the hall, to try her skill in finding them. She told him that they were in the hall. Then Signy threw her a gold ring, and the witch said that what she had just stated was false. Frothi threatened to torture her if she did not tell the truth; and she said that unless he soon prevented it, which he would not do, the boys would be his death. But the boys, terrified, fled to the wood. The king ordered his men to seize them; but Regin put out the lights in the hall, and, in the confusion that followed, those who were friendly to the boys used the opportunity to obstruct those who would pursue them. Frothi vowed that he would take vengeance at a more suitable time on those who had assisted the boys, but added, "Let us now drink and feast"; and this they did till the men lay in a drunken stupor in a heap on the floor.

Regin rode out to where the boy's were, but would not return their salutation. In fact, he pretended to be angry. They wondered what this meant, and followed him. Helgi thought that Regin wanted to help them, but without violating his oath to the king. Then Regin said to himself, so that the boys heard it, "If I had a matter to settle with the king, I would burn this grove." They took the hint and started a fire. Sævil came out with all his men and bade them aid the boys, and Regin took measures to get all his men and relatives out of the hall. The king awoke from a dream, in which the goddess of the nether world was summoning him. He discovered the fire, and learning who had set it, offered the boys peace on their own terms; but terms of peace were denied. Frothi then retired from the door of the hall, hoping to escape by an underground passage; but at the entrance stood Regin, who blocked his progress, and he returned into the hall and perished in the flames. His wife, Sigrith (now mentioned for the first time), the mother of Hroar and Helgi, refused to leave the hall and perished also.

The boys thanked their brother-in-law, Sævil, and their foster-father, Regin, and all the others who had helped them, and gave the men rich gifts. The boys subdued the whole land and seized the late king's possessions; and for a while the time passed without the occurrence of anything worthy of special mention.

At this time there was a king by the name of Northri, who ruled over a part of England. Hroar often passed long intervals at the court of Northri, supporting him against his enemies and defending his land. Hroar married Ögn, the daughter of Northri, shared the royal power with his father-in-law, and after Northri's death succeeded to the throne of Northumberland. Helgi remained at home, and, by agreement with Hroar, became sole King of Denmark.

In Saxo's seventh book, there is another version of the same story. The features in which it chiefly varies from the version in the _Hrólfssaga_ are as follows.

Halfdan's name has become Harald; Hroar's and Helgi's names have become Harald and Halfdan; Earl Sævil has become Siward, King of Sweden; Signy has become a daughter of Karl, governor of Gautland, and wife of Harald (Frothi's brother). Envy and the quarrelsomeness of Frothi's wife and Harald's wife cause Frothi to engage men to murder Harald. Frothi tries to avoid suspicion of being the author of the crime, but in vain; the people believe he is guilty. When he seeks the boys of the murdered king, to put them out of the way, their foster-parents bind the claws of wolves under the boys' feet and let them run about and fill a neighboring morass and the snow-covered ground with their tracks, whereupon the children of bond-women are put to death and the children's bodies torn to pieces and strewn about. This is done to give the impression that the boys have been torn to pieces by wolves. Then the boys are concealed in a large hollow oak, where food is brought them under the pretence that they are dogs. Dogs' names are also applied to them. The episode with the witch is present, but other men and women with superhuman power are not introduced. The whereabouts of the boys begins to be bruited about, and Ragnar, their foster-father, flees with them to Fyen. He is captured and admits that he has the boys in his protection; but he begs the king not to injure them, calls attention to the foulness of doing them harm, and promises, in case they make any disturbance in the kingdom, to report the matter to the king. Frothi, whose severity Ragnar thus transforms into mildness, spares the boys, and for many years they live in security. When they are grown up, they go to Seeland. Their friends urge them to avenge their father's death, and this they promise to do. Ragnar, when he hears of this, reports it to the king in accordance with his promise, whereupon the king proceeds against them with an army. In desperation, the boys pretend insanity; and, as it is considered shameful to attack people who are insane, the king again spares them. But in the night the boys set fire to his hall, after having stoned the queen to death; and Frothi, having hid himself in a secret underground passage, perishes from the effects of smoke and gas. The boys share the crown, ruling the kingdom by turns.

Before proceeding further, it would be well to have a summary of the relations of the Danish kings concerned, up to the last stage of development, the stage with which we are dealing; and this summary is best supplied by quoting the following from Olrik's _Danmarks Heltedigtning:[127]--

"Der er en fortælling, som bar banet Skjoldungsagnene vej til
manges hjærter, i vort århundrede ikke mindre end på selve
sagafortællingens tid: sagnene om de to unge kongesönner Hroar og
Helge, der må skjule sig for deres faders morder og tronraner,
farbroderen Frode, men som efter en række æventyrlige oplevelser på
den enlige holm og i selve kongsgården ser lejlighed til at
fuldföre hævnen og hæve sig på, tronen. En strålende begyndelse på
den navnkundige kongeæts mange skæbner! Det er denne fortællings
udspring, vi nu skal söge.

"Tidligst foreligger den i en norsk saga fra 12te årh., der åbner
Sakses 7de bog; men smukkest er den islandske _Hrólfssaga_. Desuden
foreligger den kort og krönikeagtig i den islandske
_Skj[o.]ldungasaga_, som lader brodermorderen hedde Ingjald og ikke
Frode.

"Med disse kilder når vi dog kun til det egenlige sagamands-område,
Norge og Island. I Danmark er fortællingen ukendt; og Sakse og
Svend Ågesön er enige on den lige modsatte overlevering: det er
Halvdan, der slår sin broder Frode eller begge sine brödre ihjel
for at vinde herredömmet alene. Det er ikke rimeligt, at den danske
overlevering skulde have dels forvansket, dels tabt den mere ægte
norske; ti fortællingen om de forfulgte kongesönner er så let at
huske som et æventyr og vil vanskelig gå i glemme, naar den först
er hört.

"Også den ældste sagnform, Beovulfkvadets, kender kampen om
herredömmet imellem Halvdan og Frode; men der er den forskel, at
den ene er konge over Danerne, den anden over Had-Barderne, og det
er imellem disse to folkestammer, striden udkæmpes. Det synes
snarest, som om Frode er falden i kampen (flere forskere opfatter
stedet således); i hvert fald tillader sammenhængen næppe, at
Halvdan kan være falden imod Frode. For så vidt står denne ældste
form nærmest ved den senere danske overlevering, fjærnere fra den
norske.

"Som Halvdans broderdrab fortælles hos Sakse og Svend Ågesön, står
det lösrevet, vi kan godt sige meningslöst. Det över ingen episk
indflydelse på, Skjoldungernes liv, og der rammer heller ikke
Halvdan eller hans æt nogen moralsk gengældelse. Med god grund
undrer Sakse sig over denne livsskæbne, at den grumme drabsmand kan
dö en fredelig död i sin alderdom; ti det er ganske mod
heltedigtningens ånd. Forklaringen derpå har vi til dels i den
ældre sagnform: broderkampen er opstået af den gamle folkekamp,
hvor Had-Barderne lå, under for Danerne; men tillige må der være
bristet en episk sammenknytning. I næste slægtled af Skjoldungætten
er det et ret gammelt sagnmotiv, at Hrörik overfalder og fælder
Hroar; ban har sikkert været opfattet som Frodes sön og hævner,
ikke blot i norsk men også i gammel dansk overlevering.

"Den særlig norske form er da bleven til, ved at man vendte
broderdrabet om. Det er en sagndannelse af ganske samme art som
den, der gjorde Hrörik til Hroars drabsmand; helteætten kom til at
stå skyldfri. Det næste trin var at udvikle denne ny situation med
Halvdansönnernes fredlöshed og deres faderhævn. Vi har en gammel
kilde, der viser, at udviklingen virkelig er gået i disse to trin.
_Grottesangen_ slutter med spådom on, at 'Yrsas sön [Rolf] skal
hævne Halvdans drab på, Frode.' Da kvadet synes digtet af en
Nordmand i 10de årh., har vi i alt fire tidsfæstede udviklingstrin
af sagnet:

"1. Danekongen Halvdan kæmper med Hadbardekongen Frode og bar
formodenlig fældet ham (_Beovulf_).

"2. Skjoldungen Halvdan kæmper med sin broder Frode on riget og
fælder ham (danske sagn).

"3. Skjoldungen Frode dræber (sin broder) Halvdan, sönnesonnen Rolf
hævner det (_Grottesangen_, 10de årh., norsk).

"4. Skjoldungen Frode overfalder sin broder Halvdan og dræber ham;
sönnerne Hroar og Helge redder livet og hævner siden deres faders
död (norsk og islandsk saga, 12te, 13de, 14de årh.).

"Ifölge dette må sagaen om Helges og Hroars barndom være opstået
mellem år 1000 (950) og år 1100, snarest nær ved den förste
tid.[128]

"Langt vigtigere end tidspunktet er dog _arten af denne
omdannelse_. Vi står her foran det störste skel, der forekommer i
heltedigtningens levnedslöb: overgangen fra den löse skare af
småsagn, der slutter sig forklarende og udfyldende omkring kvadene,
til _sagaen_, der selvstændig og i löbende sammenhæng gör rede for
heltenes liv. Netop ved Skjoldungsagnene måtte denne overgang blive
afgörende. Når Halvdans mord var det förste punkt i slægtens
historie, kunde man umulig unddrage sig fra klart og alsidig at
belyse dets fölger. Det var selvfölgeligt, at Frode også stræbte at
rydde Halvdans to sönner af vejen; således fremkom sagnene om
fosterfædre og venner, der sögte at skjule dem. For Helge og Hroar
måtte den eneste vej til deres fædrene trone gå gennem kamp; deraf
opstod da sagnet on hævn over Frode.

"Enkeite træk i denne digtning bar sagamanden natürligvis hentet
fra den overleverede rigdom af sagn. Det er allerede forlængst
indset, at væsenlige træk skyldes lån fra sagnet on _Amled_, den
unge kongesön, der redder sit liv ved foregivet vanvid, da hans
farbroder bar hævet sig på tronen ved mord på hans fader."

The chapter from which the above is taken contains about a page more. Olrik says, "Sagnet om Helge og Hroar er dog som helhed noget ganske andet end den specielle Amledtype." He refers by way of comparison to the life of Sigurd the Volsung, to the myth of Romulus and Remus, and the corresponding myth of the Greek twins of Thebes, Thessaly, and Arcadia; and concludes thus: "Er der fremmed indflydelse ved dens födsel [i.e., the story of Hroar's and Helgi's childhood], må den være svag og let strejfende. Snarere må man opfatte sagnet således, at dette æmne har en livskraft til stadig at födes på ny, hver gang den unge belt vokser op efter faderens drab. Motivet er så nærliggende, så ubetinget heltegyldigt, at da Skjoldungsagaerne voksede frem på folkemunde, måtte de åbnes med denne digtning; den var stadig--så at sige--lige nödvendig for at stemple den store helteskikkelse."

The story about the Scylding kings in its various phases (except the first, in _Beowulf_) is found in Denmark and in the Old Norse. Among the Danes and Norwegians (including Icelanders), therefore, we must look for an explanation of this last stage of development. But in the north of England were many Danes and Norwegians, and, as has already been pointed out, the story about Bothvar Bjarki was known in England and acquired distinct features there.[129] To England, then, we turn for an explanation of the main features of the Hroar-Helgi story.

Furthermore, the story is due to a combination of influences. Evidence of this is the fact that it shows unmistakable influence of the Hamlet story, which, however, does not furnish an explanation of the story as a whole. And the fact that the story about Hroar and Helgi was not a native product of England and had no roots in the soil of the country, so to speak, which tended to hold it within bounds, but was an imported story circulating rather loosely, far from the scene of the supposed events related, would make it peculiarly susceptible to extraneous influences adapted to aid in its development.

The first influence to which the Hroar-Helgi story was subjected was plainly the "exile-return" type of story, whose general characteristics are stated by Deutschbein as follows:--

"Das Reich eines Königs, der nur einen jungen unerwachsenen Sohn
hat, wird eines Tages vom Feinde überfallen. Der Vater fällt im
blutigen Kampfe. Die Rettung des jungen Thronerben ist mit
Schwierigkeiten verbunden--häufig steht dem jungen Fürstensohn in
der äussersten Not ein getreuer Eckhart zur Seite, eine
feststehende Figur in unserm Typus. Der Königssohn wird in
Sicherheit gebracht, in der Fremde zunächst in niedriger Stellung,
meist unter angenommenem Namen, wächst er zu einem tüchtigen Recken
heran, bis zuletzt die Zeit der Heimkehr gekommen ist. Er nimmt
furchtbare Rache an den Mördern seines Vaters und gewinnt sein Erbe
zurück; wesentliche Dienste leistet ihm dabei ein oder mehrere
treue Anhänger seines Vaters, die in der Heimat zurückgeblieben
sind.

"Eine Abart dieses Typus weist einen anderen Eingang auf: statt
äusserer Feinde sind es nahe Verwandte (Oheim, Stiefvater,
Stiefbrüder), die den jungen Prinzen seines Vaters berauben und ihm
selbst nachstellen. Diese Form bezeichnen wir mit B, die Hauptform
mit A."[130]

The Hroar-Helgi story has two young princes; otherwise, it conforms exactly to type B.

Frothi, Halfdan's brother (_Hrólfssaga_ version), attacks him with an army and defeats and slays him. The boys are taken by Regin, their foster-father, to a neighboring island for safety (this, however, is being sent abroad with a limited application of the term), where they live with a shepherd in a cave, responding, when necessary, to the names of dogs. There they remain until they are twelve and ten years old respectively, when they return to their sister and brother-in-law, who, together with Regin, render the boys valuable assistance. They take frightful vengeance on their father's slayer by setting fire to his hall and forcing him to perish in the flames.

The third stage having been reached in the development of the Hroar-Helgi story, in which the brother who is slain is avenged by one of his descendants, it was easy and natural for it to fall in with the "exile-return" type. The type is not an artificial type, it is founded on human nature. The guileless and weak must yield to the designing and strong. History teems with illustrations of the fact that he wears the crown who can win it and hold it. Where a kingdom is the prize, a man is under a mighty temptation when he sees that he can seize it by brushing aside a weak ruler and a still weaker heir, or, the ruler being out of the way, the young heir only. And it is natural that, the young heir surviving, he should avenge a murdered parent, regain the crown, and not permit the usurper to enjoy the fruits of his crime unmolested. Friends each party would also have, actuated, if by nothing else, by self-interest, which is bound up in the success of their chief. What the Hroar-Helgi story in its third stage of development may have been we do not know. We are only told that "Yrsa's son will avenge Frothi's murder of Halfdan." But the story was well prepared for the type it was to assume.

That the story was clearly regarded as one of this type is evident from the fact that in Johannes Bramis' _Historia Regis Waldei_ Frodas is the usurper of the throne which by right belongs to Waldef.[131] It is not necessary to repeat the story; it has all the characteristics of the "exile-return" type. As a whole, it has no connection with the Hroar-Helgi story; and it contains the only instance known of the use of Frothi outside the story where he originally belongs. But he is so typically the same person, with the same unlovable characteristics, that he can be none other than the Frothi who plays such a conspicuous part in the history of the Scylding kings.

The use of Frothi as a typical usurper in the English Waldef story is also a very strong indication that the story in which he has his proper setting was current in England; otherwise, by what channel did he get into the Waldef story?[132]

Our next question is, What stories of the "exile-return" type were current in the portions of England in which the Hroar-Helgi story would naturally circulate? We think, of course, immediately of _Havelok the Dane_. Deutschbein has shown that _Havelok_ is founded on historical events that occurred in the first half of the tenth century.[133] The gist of the story is that an heir to the Danish throne is deprived of his heritage, suffers deep humiliation, but finally regains his heritage and, through marriage, the crown of Norfolk in England in addition. The story was of a nature to make a strong appeal to the Scandinavians, especially the Danes, in England. It achieved, in fiction, the ambition which the Danes realized under Swen and Canute, when these sovereigns governed both Denmark and England. It was a Danish story; it was developed after 950, which was about the time the third stage in the development of the Hroar-Helgi story had been reached; and it was a creation of the Scandinavians in England, among whom the story circulated.

Closely connected with the Havelok story is the Meriadoc story, the first part of which, as Deutschbein has shown,[134] and in regard to which J.D. Bruce agrees with him,[135] is based on the Havelok story. These stories Deutschbein calls "cymrisch-skandinavische Sage" and says, "Wir sehen, dass den Cymren und den Skandinaviern in England der wesentliche Anteil an der Entwicklung unserer Sage zukommt."[136]

It is evident that in the Havelok and Meriadoc stories we have every condition present for contact between them and the Hroar-Helgi story, namely: time (after 950); place (England); people among whom all the stories would circulate (Scandinavians, coming in contact with the Welsh); and, in the case of the Havelok and Hroar-Helgi stories, a popular theme dealing with Danish princes who regain a lost kingdom. The theme would be all the more popular as the time when the Havelok story was developed was a period of struggle on the part of the Scandinavians in the British Isles to gain and maintain supremacy.[137] Again, the nature of the Hroar-Helgi story was such that its development depended wholly on invention or on contact with other stories.

The first part of the Meriadoc story, with which a comparison will be made, is summarized by J.D. Bruce as follows:--

"In the time of Uther Pendragon, Caradoc ruled over Wales. He had a
son and a daughter by his wife, a princess of Ireland, which
country he had conquered. As old age approaches, he turns over the
government of his kingdom to his brother Griffith and devotes
himself to hunting and amusement. Wicked men persuade Griffith to
slay his brother and seize the throne. Despite the warning of a
dream, Caradoc goes hunting and is slain by hired assassins in the
forest.

"The queen dies of grief, and, to turn suspicion from himself,
Griffith has the assassins put to death. Before their execution,
however, they revealed Griffith's guilt. Caradoc's friends among
the nobles wish to get out of Griffith's power their late master's
children, who had been committed to the charge of Ivor and Morwen,
the royal huntsman and his wife. Griffith determines to kill the
children, but, touched in a measure by their appeal, does not have
them executed on the spot. He has them taken to the forest of
Arglud, where they are to be hanged. The executioners, however,
feel compassion and tie them by a slender rope, easily broken, so
that they may fall to the ground unharmed. Hearing of the
children's disappearance, Ivor sets out for the forest, accompanied
by his wife and his dog, Dolfin. To frighten the executioners away,
he kindles fires in the four quarters of the forest and throws
flesh into these fires to attract the wolves. He then hides himself
in a tree. The wolves gather and the men, afraid, conceal
themselves in the hollow of the tree to which the children had been
hanged. Ivor drives away the wolves and then begins to smoke out
the men. They promise to give up the children, if he will let them
come forth. He consents, but kills them one by one, as they are
crawling out.

"He delivers the children, who have been suspended for half a day,
and flies with them and his wife and dog to the Fleventanean
forest. Here he takes refuge in a caverned rock, called Eagle Rock,
because there were built on it the nests of four eagles who
constantly faced the four points of the compass. How Ivor and his
wife struck fire from flint, and the peculiar way in which they
cooked their food is described. One day Urien, King of Scotland,
passing through the forest, carries off the girl from her
companion, Morwen. Similarly Kay, Arthur's seneschal, carries off
the boy from Ivor. Morwen goes to Scotland to seek Orwen, the
girl; Ivor to Arthur's court to seek Meriadoc, the boy.

"The day Morwen reached Scotland, Urien and Orwen are to be
married. The latter recognizes Morwen in the throng by the wayside
and has her brought to the palace. Ivor comes with a dead stag to
Arthur's court and offers it to Kay. Meriadoc recognizes his
foster-father and springs clear over the table to greet him. Kay
receives Ivor among his attendants. Kay visits Urien and takes Ivor
and Meriadoc with him. Mutual recognitions and rejoicings.

"Arthur and Urien determine to take vengeance on Griffith, who
fortifies himself at Mount Snowdon. After a long siege he succumbs
to famine, surrenders and is executed. Meriadoc succeeds him, but
resolves to leave Urien in charge of the kingdom and go forth in
search of adventure."[138]

According to Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story, the usurper procures the assassination of his brother and, to avoid suspicion, has the assassins put out of the way. In this the Meriadoc story agrees. In _Meriadoc_, the queen dies of sorrow. No mention is made of the queen in Saxo's version. In the Hamlet story, the brother slays the king with his own hand, but secretly, to avoid suspicion. He marries the king's widow. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the brother attacks the king with an army and slays him. In _Havelok_, Arthur, likewise, attacks the king with an army and slays him.[139] The widow is rescued. In the _Hrólfssaga_, as appears at the end of the story, the widow is not only rescued, but, as in the Hamlet story, marries the usurper.

In _Meriadoc_, the murdered king's adherents try to rescue the young prince and princess. This feature is common to both the _Hrólfssaga_ and Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story. In _Meriadoc_, the usurper gets the children into his power, but, being appealed to, saves them for the time being. This feature is found in Saxo's version, where the usurper agrees to spare the children during good behavior. It is lacking in the _Hrólfssaga_. In _Meriadoc_, the usurper plans to have the children hanged in a forest. In Saxo's version, the children having violated the condition on which they are to be spared, the usurper gathers an army to attack them. In the _Hrólfssaga_, there is a continuous effort on the part of the usurper to make away with the children.

In _Havelok_, Grim, a fisherman, rescues the prince, who lives as a fisherman's son, under the name of Cuaran. In _Meriadoc_, the royal huntsman, Ivor, rescues the children and they live in a cave in the woods as a huntsman's children; Ivor is accompanied by his wife and his dog, Dolfin. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the children live in a cave in the woods as a shepherd's (Vifil's) children, responding, when necessary, to the names of dogs. In Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story, the children are concealed in a hollow tree, food being brought to them under the pretence that they are dogs, and dogs' names are applied to them. In the Hamlet story, the rescue is supplied by the insanity motive, but friends at court are not wanting.

There is no insanity in _Meriadoc_ or _Havelok_; but it is present in the _Hrólfssaga_ and Saxo's version of the story about the two boys. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the boys, especially Helgi, cut crazy capers while on the way with Sævil when he goes to Frothi's hall in response to an invitation. Helgi rides horseback with his face to the horse's tail, just as Hamlet does; and the horse is an untamed colt, the idea coming from the fact that, when Hamlet is thus riding, a wolf appears and one of the men, to test his sanity, calls the wolf a colt. It would, indeed, be an untamed colt. In Saxo's version, better use is made of the insanity motive. Pretended insanity is the only resort left the boys to save themselves. In the _Hrólfssaga_, it serves no other purpose than to attract attention to the boys and reveal their identity to Signy and Sævil.

In _Havelok_, the prince returns home, and, with the aid of a faithful friend, Sigar, who has remained at court, the usurper is overthrown and the crown regained. In _Meriadoc_, Arthur and Urien besiege the usurper, starve him out, and execute him. Meriadoc becomes king. In the Hamlet story, the prince returns from England, whither the usurper has sent him in order to get rid of him, sets fire to the hall in which the usurper's men lie drunk after a feast, and goes to the usurper's chamber and slays him. Nothing is said about the queen, though the presumption is that she perishes also. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the boys, aided by their foster-father and brother-in-law, trusty friends, set fire to the hall in which the usurper's men lie drunk after a feast; and the usurper's egress through an underground passage having been blocked, he perishes in the flames. The queen, the boys' mother, refusing to leave the hall, perishes also. In Saxo's version, the boys attack the usurper in his hall and set fire to the building; he hides himself in a secret underground passage and perishes of smoke and gas.

It is told of Ivor that when he rescues the children he is accompanied by his dog. Not only that, but the dog's name is given. This looks as if some use is to be made of the dog; otherwise there is no point in the statement that a dog is present, whose name is Dolfin. Bruce says, "It is to be remembered that even this Welsh version, no doubt, passed through the hands of a French romancer before reaching the author of our Latin text";[140] and there is reason to suspect that this is one of the places where the story has suffered. Both Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story, and the _Hrólfssaga_, show to what use a dog's name could be put; and this specific reference to the dog in _Meriadac_, and the use that might have been made of him in an earlier version of the story, arouse a strong suspicion that here is the source of the suggestion of using dogs' names in the Hroar-Helgi story to aid in saving the boys. Even if no such use was ever made of the dog in the Meriadoc story, such specific reference to him is in itself very suggestive. That the Hroar-Helgi story employs two dogs' name's is, of course, due to the fact that there are two boys to which they are to be applied, although, so far as the plot is concerned, the matter could have been managed with the use of one dog's name; and the fact that the dogs' names, in the _Hrólfssaga_, are Hopp and Ho, and that the boys' later assumed names are Hrani and Hamur, is due to a desire to preserve the initial letter, "H," of their names, which is in accordance with Scylding nomenclature.[141]

Furthermore, in the _Hrólfssaga_ it is said that Vifil concealed the boys in a cave in the woods. Likewise, in _Meriadoc_, Ivor concealed the boy and the girl in a cave in the forest. But in Saxo's version of the Hroar-Helgi story, the boys are concealed in a hollow tree. This also must be an adaptation from _Meriadoc_. The men who were to execute the prince and princess hanged them on the branch of a large oak-tree (quercus) and concealed themselves inside the tree, which was hollow. Ivor, in an attempt to rescue the children,

"Quatuor igitur ingentes focos e quatuor partibus ipsius saltus
accendit, accensisque plurimas quas secum attulerat carnes passim
iniecit ilicemque uicinam cum coniuge et cane ascendens delituit.
Fumo autem ignium per nemoris latitudinem diffuso, ubi lupi in
confinio degentes--quorum inibi ingens habebatur copia--odorem
perceperunt carnium, illo contendere et confluere ilico
coeperunt."[142]

Here we have the idea of a hollow oak with people in it, wolves in the vicinity, and children at hand who have been hanged, and therefore presumably dead. Had the cord broken by which they were hanged, they would certainly have been torn to pieces by the wolves. But especially striking is the statement that Ivor's dog is concealed in a tree; and this tree is called "ilex" (holly-oak), the very word used by Saxo to designate the kind of hollow tree that Hroar and Helgi (he calls them Harald and Halfdan, as has been stated) are concealed in, under the pretence that they are dogs. Also, pieces of meat are thrown into the fires; and Ivor, as soon as the men in the hollow tree beg for mercy, shoots four wolves and "ceteri omnes lupi in eos qui uulnera pertulerant irruerunt eosque membratim dilacerantes discerpserunt."[143] Here is again the idea of meat for wolves and the bodies of animals torn asunder. The idea of dismembered bodies of children is indeed absent; but the whole passage in _Meriadoc_ is so suggestive of what we find in Saxo, even to the hiding of a dog, whose name is given, in an "ilex," that it would be remarkable if there was no connection between Saxo's story and _Meriadoc_.

Again, as has already been stated, Saxo says that Frothi perished in an underground passage, of smoke and gas. The men who, in _Meriadoc_, were to execute the prince and princess concealed themselves in a hollow tree, which had an entrance that was so formed that "depressis humeris, illam necesse erat subire,"[144] which is suggestive of the stooping that would probably be necessary in entering an underground passage. But what is noteworthy in this connection is that, at the entrance to the tree, Ivor starts a fire "cuius calore fumique uapore inclusos pene extinxit."[145] Saxo says that Frothi "Vbi dum clausus delitescit, uapore et fumo strangulatus interiit."[146] Here is the idea of concealment again, but particularly noteworthy is the suffocation by "uapore et fumo," the same words that are used in _Meriadoc_. In the _Hrólfssaga_, the account of the events immediately preceding Frothi's death resembles more the account of the corresponding events in the Hamlet story than does Saxo's account; but in the _Hrólfssaga_ also, Frothi attempts to escape by an underground passage.

The use of wolves' claws and the dismembered bodies of children to mislead those who might seek to get possession of the boys is the employment, as Deutschbein has observed, of a form of deceit similar to that practiced by Joseph's brethren.[147]

In regard to the manner in which the children are saved, it is difficult to correlate the Hroar-Helgi story with the Meriadoc story as definitely and simply as one would wish, but the explanation probably lies in the following idea expressed by Bruce, "In conclusion, as to this division there seems to be a certain confusion of _motifs_ in the first part of the _Historia Meriadoci_ with regard to the manner in which the children are saved from execution."[148] The statement, for instance, that the children were suspended for half a day is out of all harmony with the statement that they were to be suspended by slender ropes, easily broken, that would permit them to fall to the ground unharmed. But Bruce's statement quoted above, "This Welsh version, no doubt, passed through the hands of a French romancer before reaching the author of our Latin text," would account for the "confusion of _motifs_"; and the fact that we have not now that form of the story with which the Hroar-Helgi story came in contact would obscure some of the points of relationship between the two. But the hiding of a dog, whose name is given, in an oak tree of a particular species (ilex) is so definite and unique a point of identification that there is no mistaking it.

But even if we had the Meriadoc story in its original form, we should not expect to find it exactly reproduced in the Hroar-Helgi story. Various causes would operate to introduce changes. Such features as mountain-rocks with their eagle-nests would be modified to bring the topography more into harmony with that of Denmark, so that the caverned rock would naturally become an earth-cave. Characteristics of Scandinavian life and history would supplant what was peculiarly Welsh. Thus the shrewd old shepherd, Vifil, naturally takes the place of the royal huntsman, Ivor; and Saxo, quite naturally, gives the story a marked Danish geographical and historical setting, which he does by introducing such names as Fyen and Seeland, and by connecting the Danish royal family in the beginning of the story with those of Sweden and Gautland.

Allowance must also be made for two lines of oral transmission, one going to Iceland, and the other to Norway and thence to Denmark. This would result in the modification of details in the two versions, such as details connected with the insanity motive and the concealment of the boys, and the omission, in one version, of the dogs' names supposed to be applied to the boys and the insertion of the names in the other.

But this would not explain why Hroar, Helgi, and their father are given other names in Saxo's version, and why such a radical change has been made in the family relationship of Siward and Signy. This, however, as will be explained later,[149] is due to arbitrary action on the part of Saxo, in order to conceal the fact that he twice includes the same group of men in his line of Danish kings.

If the foregoing is substantially correct, much in the Hroar-Helgi story is accounted for, besides some striking differences between the two versions. But it is possible to account for more. We have seen how the Siward story exerted marked influence on the story about Bothvar Bjarki; hence, we might expect it to have exerted some influence on the Hroar-Helgi story, which is also a part of the _Hrólfssaga_. And this it has done. Siward was historically closely associated with the events of the Macbeth story; but the Macbeth story is of a type that, in one noteworthy particular at least, resembles the Hroar-Helgi story more than do any of the stories thus far considered, and that is in the fact that Duncan has two sons, who flee when their father is murdered. In the Macbeth story, as in the Hamlet story, it may be said that we have not, under a strict interpretation of the term, an instance of the "exile-return" type of story; but Hamlet goes to England and immediately upon his return avenges his father's murder, and, still nearer the type, Malcolm and Donaldbane flee and Malcolm returns and avenges his father's murder. But the matter of type is, in this connection, unessential. There is no doubt that the Hamlet story exerted an influence on the Hroar-Helgi story, nor can there be any doubt that the Macbeth story did the same.

First, attention is called to the fact that in the _Hrólfssaga_ Siward himself is retained in the story under the name of Sævil.[150] In Saxo's version of the story about Hroar and Helgi, he is called Siward, but there his proper relationship to the other characters is obscured. Siward was related to Duncan by marriage, some versions, Holinshed's for instance, having it that Duncan was married to Siward's daughter;[151] similarly, Sævil was married to Halfdan's daughter. Siward aided Duncan's sons (Donaldbane, however, not being present to take part in the expedition against Macbeth); similarly, Sævil aided Halfdan's sons, not by an armed expedition against Frothi, the usurper, but proceeding against him in such manner as the plot of the story permits. It is said of Donaldbane, that he fled to Ireland "where he was tenderlie cherished by the king of that land";[152] similarly, Hroar went to Northumberland, where he received a hearty welcome and later married King Northri's daughter, Ögn.[153] Siward was first an earl in Denmark; similarly, Sævil was an earl in Denmark. Sævil did not, however, become Earl of Northumberland, as Siward did; but Hroar took his place, so to speak, in this respect, and, as Siward had done, married the earl's (king's) daughter[154] and became King of Northumberland.

In the Hroar-Helgi story, the usurper is represented as consulting a witch in regard to the whereabouts of the young princes. This feature must also be due to the influence of the Macbeth story; for, though the purpose for which Frothi and Macbeth consult the witch, or witches, is not exactly the same, it is the possible future disposition of the throne that in both instances causes anxiety; and while at first, in both instances, a prediction, or information, is given that is favorable, a prediction in both instances is given in conclusion that is unfavorable. The witches are so conspicuous a feature of the Macbeth story that they would, of course, attract the attention of the saga-man; and we naturally expect this feature of the story to leave its impress on the Hroar-Helgi story. It is a special feature, not found in any of the other stories considered in this connection, and there can be no doubt as to whence the Hroar-Helgi story acquired it. The witch in the saga is called a "seiðkona." Concerning the kind of witchcraft practised by a "seiðkona," P.A. Munch has the following: "Som den virksomste, men og som den skjendigste, af al Troldom ansaa vore Forfædre den saakaldte _Seid_. Hvorledes den udövedes, er ikke ret klart fremstillet ...; den var forbunden med sang ... Men dette slags Troldom ansaaes ogsaa en Mand uværdigt, og udövedes derfor sædvanligviis af Kvinder, ligesom dette ogsaa stedse synes at have gaaet ud paa noget ondt."[155] Thus the "seiðkona" is exactly the same kind of creature as the witches in the Macbeth story. Consider, for instance, the disgusting practice in which Shakespeare represents them as engaging, as they go round the cauldron, chanting the refrain, "Double, double toil and trouble," etc. W.J. Rolfe refers to the witches in _Macbeth_ as follows: "Macbeth and his fellow captain Banquo have performed prodigies of valour in the battle, and are on their way home from the field when they are met by the three witches, as Shakespeare calls them, and as they are called in the old chronicle from which he took the main incidents of his plot. They appear simply to be the witches of superstition--hags who have gained a measure of superhuman knowledge and power by a league with Satan, to whom they have sold their souls and pledged their service."[156] The statements at an earlier stage of the story in the _Hrólfssaga_, while the boys are still on the island, that soothsayers and wise men are called in from all over the land to tell where the boys are, and that wizards, who are also summoned, warn Frothi to beware of the old man Vifil on the island, remind us of the statement by Holinshed that Macbeth "had learned of certeine wizzards, in whose words he put great confidence ... how that he ought to take heed of Macduffe."[157]

Still another feature may have been acquired from the Macbeth story. It is said that Hroar and Helgi were transferred to a neighboring island. Holinshed says that Donaldbane fled to Ireland. The Macbeth story has been treated by a number of chroniclers, who, though they agree in the main, occasionally disagree in regard to details. Thus Johannes Fordun says, "Hi a Machabeo rege expulsi, Donaldus insulas, Malcolmus Cumbriam adibant."[168] This is evidently one version and would supply the hint for transferring the young princes to a neighboring island, which would be a convenient disposition to make of them till the time of their return to regain their heritage. It would also harmonize topographically with the coast of Denmark, where there were many islands covered with trees, the idea of woods as a hiding-place for the boys having been abundantly supplied by the Meriadoc story.

It may be said that this introduces a conflict with the statement that Donaldbane fled to Ireland. It is not possible to know, in a case like this, which variant has influenced the saga, or whether, indeed, both have not been utilized. But there was ample warrant for transferring Hroar to Northumberland without such a suggestion as lay in Donaldbane's flight to Ireland. In any event, imitation of Donaldbane's flight has not been a necessary consideration in making Hroar King of Northumberland. A suggestion of the same nature lay in Hamlet's going to England, where he married the king's daughter; but chiefly, the Scandinavians were numerous in the north of England and regarded themselves as the rightful possessors of that part of the country. The mastery of Northumberland was long an object of contest between Anglo-Saxons and Scandinavians, and this was the chief point at issue in the famous battle at Brunanburh, 937. Since Helgi, whom the _Hrólfssaga_ represents as the more forward of the two boys, was made King of Denmark, no more honorable disposition could be made of Hroar than to place him on the throne of Northumberland, and events show that he himself was perfectly satisfied. He thus also became ruler of the land once governed by Siward, who must have made a powerful impression on his countrymen in England; and with one of the two princes reigning in Denmark and the other in England, the glory of the Danes when Canute was king of both countries would be revived in story, as it was in _Havelok the Dane_, where Havelok, likewise, reigned both in England and Denmark.

No attempt has been made to point out all the respects in which the Hroar-Helgi story resembles the Macbeth story. The Macbeth story has most of the characteristics of the "exile-return" type, and striking resemblances that fall in with features of the stories already mentioned might have been added, but will suggest themselves to the reader. Only such things as point to special influence exerted by the Macbeth story on the Hroar-Helgi story have been mentioned.

It may be urged that some of the material, such as the "seiðkona," said in the foregoing to be derived from foreign sources, is recognized saga-material. The point, however, is that it is not the material itself, but the suggestion for the use of it, that in such an instance is said to be derived from a foreign source.

_The Hroar-Helgi Story in the _SKJ[O.]LDUNGASAGA_ and the _BJARKARÍMUR.

Thus far nothing has been said about the "short and chronicle-like form in the Icelandic _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_, where the fratricide is called Ingjald, not Frothi."[159] The story is, in substance, as follows.

Fridleif, King of Denmark, abducted Hilda, daughter of Ali, King of the Uplands in Norway, and by her had a son who was named Ali; by another woman he had a son who was named Frothi.

Frothi inherited his father's kingdom; but Ali, his half-brother, who was a great warrior, conquered Sweden. Frothi's men feared Ali and persuaded Frothi to try to have him put to death. Frothi yielded to their entreaties, and Starkad, the famous warrior, was dispatched to perform the deed. When an opportunity presented itself, he stabbed Ali to death. "My brother has caused this," said Ali, and died laughing.

Later, Frothi defeated Jorund, King of Sweden, and made him a tributary prince. He also defeated Swelling, a Swedish duke, and treated him in the same manner. Frothi abducted Jorund's daughter, by whom he had a son who was called Halfdan. But taking another woman to wife, a legitimate heir was born to him, and this son was called Ingjald.

Starkad, however, was so filled with remorse for having killed Ali that he did not wish to remain with Frothi. He went, therefore, soon after to Russia and later to Sweden, but, disgusted with the idolatry of the Swedes, returned to Frothi. Ingjald, son of Frothi, had in the meantime married the daughter of Swerting, thus, as it seemed to all, effecting a reconciliation with him.

Jorund and Swerting, however, formed a conspiracy against Frothi, and he was slain one night while sacrificing to the gods. In the meantime, Starkad was absent in Sweden, where, under the guise of friendship, he was detained by gifts, in order that the plot against Frothi might be the more easily executed.

Swerting placated Ingjald, Frothi's son and Swerting's son-in-law; but Halfdan, Ingjald's half-brother, conquered Skåne and avenged his father's murder by putting to death Swerting's twelve sons, who had slain Frothi. At the instigation of Starkad, Ingjald put his wife, Swerting's daughter, aside. He also granted Halfdan a third of the kingdom. Swerting's daughter later bore Ingjald a son (Agnar); and by his wife, Sigrith, Halfdan had a daughter, Signy, and two sons, Hroar and Helgi.

Ingjald, however, desiring to rule over the whole kingdom, fell upon Halfdan unexpectedly with an army and slew him. He married Halfdan's widow, and by her had two sons, Hrörik and Frothi. Signy grew up under her mother's care, and later Ingjald gave her in marriage to Sævil, an earl in Seeland. But Hroar and Helgi hid from the king on an island near Skåne, and when they had arrived at the proper age they slew Ingjald and thus avenged their father's death.

Hroar and Helgi now became Kings of Denmark. Later Hroar married the daughter of the King of England. Hrolf, nicknamed Kraki, who was eight years old when his father, Helgi, died, succeeded him on the throne. Hroar was soon after slain by his half-brothers, Hrörik and Frothi. Hrolf then became sole King of Denmark.[160]

The story in the _Bjarkarímur_ is substantially the same as the story in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_. Both are plainly based on the same account, and, within certain limits, are identical with the corresponding story in the _Hrólfssaga_. Skåne, mentioned in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_ in the phrase "in insula quadam Scaniæ," is not mentioned in the _Hrólfssaga_. Its insertion in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_ is due to the fact that Halfdan, the father of Hroar and Helgi, is said to have conquered Skåne, and, as a result, would be regarded as having ruled there. But its presence in one account and omission in the other involve no contradiction. In all that belongs peculiarly to the story about Hroar and Helgi, the account in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_ is identical with the account in the _Hrólfssaga_. According to both sources, the name of the boys' mother was Sigrith; their father's name was Halfdan; he was slain by his brother, who fell upon him unexpectedly with an army; the fratricide married the murdered man's widow; Signy was the sister of Hroar and Helgi; she married Sævil, an earl in Denmark; Hroar and Helgi had to conceal themselves on an island to save their lives (according to the _Bjarkarímur_, they were brought up by the old man Vifil, a circumstance omitted in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_, but contained in the _Hrólfssaga_); when they had arrived at the proper age, they slew (according to the _Hrólfssaga_ and the _rímur_, "burnt-in") their father's murderer and thus avenged their father's death; Hroar and Helgi then became Kings of Denmark; Hroar married the daughter of the King of England; Helgi's son was Hrolf, who later became sole King of Denmark.

The essential difference between the story as it is in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_ and as it is in the _Hrólfssaga_ is that, in the _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_, Ingjald is said to be the brother of Halfdan; while in the _Hrólfssaga_, Frothi is Halfdan's brother. The _Hrólfssaga_ has, however, preserved the earlier account. The _Skj[o.]ldungasaga_ dates from about the year 1200.[161] About the year 950, Frothi is said to be the slayer of Halfdan;[162] and in _Historia Regis Waldei_, Frothi is made the typical villain in a Hroar-Helgi type of story[163] (the "exile-return" type), so that, in the version of the story that was current in England, Frothi must have been the slayer of his brother. The conflicting statement that it was Ingjald who slew Halfdan requires, therefore, an explanation.