PREFACE
This work has been undertaken in the belief that a literaltranslation of as famous an epic as the "Nibelungenlied" would beacceptable to the general reading public whose interest in thestory of Siegfried has been stimulated by Wagner's operas and bythe reading of such poems as William Morris' "Sigurd theVolsung". Prose has been selected as the medium of translation,since it is hardly possible to give an accurate rendering and atthe same time to meet the demands imposed by rhyme and metre; atleast, none of the verse translations made thus far havesucceeded in doing this. The prose translations, on the otherhand, mostly err in being too continuous and in condensing toomuch, so that they retell the story instead of translating it. The present translator has tried to avoid these two extremes. Hehas endeavored to translate literally and accurately, and toreproduce the spirit of the original, as far as a prosetranslation will permit. To this end the language has been madeas simple and as Saxon in character as possible. An exceptionhas been made, however, in the case of such Romance words as werein use in England during the age of the romances of chivalry, andwhich would help to land a Romance coloring; these have beenfrequently employed. Very few obsolete words have been used, andthese are explained in the notes, but the language has been madeto some extent archaic, especially in dialogue, in order to givethe impression of age. At the request of the publishers theIntroduction Sketch has been shorn of the apparatus ofscholarship and made as popular as a study of the poem and itssources would allow. The advanced student who may be interestedin consulting authorities will find them given in theintroduction to the parallel edition in the Riverside LiteratureSeries. A short list of English works on the subject had,however, been added.
In conclusion the translator would like to thank his colleagues,C.G. Child and Cornelius Weygandt, for their helpful suggestionsin starting the work, and also to acknowledge his indebtedness tothe German edition of Paul Piper, especially in preparing thenotes.
-- DANIEL BUSSIER SHUMWAY,
Philadelphia, February 15, 1909.
INTRODUCTORY SKETCH
There is probably no poem of German literature that has excitedsuch universal interest, or that has been so much studied anddiscussed, as the "Nibelungenlied". In its present form it is aproduct of the age of chivalry, but it reaches back to theearliest epochs of German antiquity, and embraces not only thepageantry of courtly chivalry, but also traits of ancientGermanic folklore and probably of Teutonic mythology. One of itsearliest critics fitly called it a German "Iliad", for, like thisgreat Greek epic, it goes back to the remotest times and unitesthe monumental fragments of half-forgotten myths and historicalpersonages into a poem that is essentially national in character,and the embodiment of all that is great in the antiquity of therace. Though lacking to some extent the dignity of the "Iliad",the "Nibelungenlied" surpasses the former in the deep tragedywhich pervades it, the tragedy of fate, the inevitableretribution for crime, the never-dying struggle between thepowers of good and evil, between light and darkness.
That the poem must have been exceedingly popular during theMiddle Ages is evinced by the great number of Manuscripts thathave come down to us. We possess in all twenty-eight more orless complete MSS., preserved in thirty-one fragments, fifteen ofwhich date from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Of allthese MSS., but nine are so well preserved that, in spite of someminor breaks, they can be considered complete. Of this numberthree, designated respectively as A, B, C, are looked upon as themost important for purposes of textual criticism, and around thema fierce battle has been waged, which is not even yet settled.(1) It is now generally conceded that the longest MS., C, is alater redaction with many additional strophes, but opinions aredivided as to whether the priority should be given to A or B, theprobabilities being that B is the more original, A merely acareless copy of B.
In spite of the great popularity of the "Nibelungenlied", thepoem was soon forgotten by the mass of the people. With thedecay of courtly chivalry and the rise of the prosperous citizenclass, whose ideals and testes lay in a different direction, thisepic shared the fate of many others of its kind, and wasrelegated to the dusty shelves of monastery or ducal libraries,there to wait till a more cultured age, curious as to theliterature of its ancestors, should bring it forth from itshiding places. However, the figures of the old legend were notforgotten, but lived on among the people, and were finallyembodied in a popular ballad, "Das Lied vom Hurnen Segfrid",which has been preserved in a print of the sixteenth century,although the poem itself is thought to go back at least to thethirteenth. The legend was also dramatized by Hans Sachs, theshoemaker poet of Nuremberg, and related in prose form in a chapbook which still exists in prints of the eighteenth century. Thestory and the characters gradually became so vague and distorted,that only a trained eye could detect in the burlesque figures ofthe popular account the heroes of the ancient Germanic Legend.
The honor of rediscovering the "Nibelungenlied" and of restoringit to the world of literature belongs to a young physician by thename of J.H. Obereit, who found the manuscript C at the castle ofHohenems in the Tirol on June 29, 1755; but the scientific studyof the poem begins with Karl Lachmann, one of the keenestphilological critics that Germany has ever produced. In 1816 heread before the University of Berlin his epoch-making essay uponthe original form of the "Nibelungenlied". Believing that thepoem was made up of a number of distinct ballads or lays, hesought by means of certain criteria to eliminate all parts whichwere, as he thought, later interpolations or emendations. As aresult of this sifting and discarding process, he reduced thepoem to what he considered to have been its original form,namely, twenty separate lays, which he thought had come down tous in practically the same form in which they had been sung byvarious minstrels.
This view is no longer held in its original form. Though we haveevery reason to believe that ballads of Siegfried the dragonkiller, of Siegfried and Kriemhild, and of the destruction of theNibelungs existed in Germany, yet these ballads are no longer tobe seen in our poem. They formed merely the basis or source forsome poet who thought to revive the old heroic legends of theGerman past which were familiar to his hearers and to adapt themto the tastes of his time. In all probability we must assumetwo, three, or even more steps in the genesis of the poem. Thereappear to have been two different sources, one a Low Germanaccount, quite simple and brief, the other a tradition of theLower Rhine. The legend was perhaps developed by minstrels alongthe Rhine, until it was taken and worked up into its present formby some Austrian poet. Who this poet was we do not know, but wedo know that he was perfectly familiar with all the details ofcourtly etiquette. He seems also to have been acquainted withthe courtly epics of Heinrich von Veldeke and Hartman von Ouwe,but his poem is free from the tedious and often exaggerateddescriptions of pomp, dress, and court ceremonies, that mar thebeauty of even the best of the courtly epics. Many painstakingattempts have been made to discover the identity of the writer ofour poem, but even the most plausible of all these theories whichconsiders Kurenberg, one of the earliest of the "Minnesingers",to be the author, because of the similarity of the strophic formof our poem to that used by him, is not capable of absoluteproof, and recent investigations go to show that Kurenberg wasindebted to the "Nibelungen" strophe for the form of his lyric,and not the "Nibelungenlied" to him. The "Nibelungen" strophe ispresumably much older, and, having become popular in Austriathrough the poem, was adopted by Kurenberg for his purposes. Asto the date of the poem, in its present form it cannot go backfurther than about 1190, because of the exactness of the rhymes,nor could it have been written later than 1204, because ofcertain allusions to it in the sixth book of "Parzival", which weknow to have been written at this date. The two Low German poemswhich probably form the basis of our epic may have been unitedabout 1150. It was revised and translated into High German andcirculated at South German courts about 1170, and then receivedits present courtly form about 1190, this last version being theimmediate source of our manuscripts.
The story of Siegfried, his tragic death, and the dire vengeancevisited upon his slayers, which lies at the basis of our poem,antedates the latter by many centuries, and was known to allnations whose languages prove by their resemblance to the Germantongue their original identity with the German people. Not onlyalong the banks of the Rhine and the Danube and upon the uplandplains of Southern Germany, but also along the rocky fjords ofNorway, among the Angles and Saxons in their new home across thechannel, even in the distant Shetland Islands and on the snow-covered wastes of Iceland, this story was told around the firesat night and sung to the harp in the banqueting halls of kingsand nobles, each people and each generation telling it in its ownfashion and adding new elements of its own invention. This greatgeographical distribution of the legend, and the variety of formsin which it appears, make it difficult to know where we must seekits origin. The northern version is in many respects older andsimpler in form than the German, but still it is probable thatNorway was not the home of the saga, but that it took its rise inGermany along the banks of the Rhine among the ancient tribe ofthe Franks, as is shown by the many geographical names that arereminiscent of the characters of the story, such as a Siegfried"spring" in the Odenwald, a Hagen "well" at Lorsch, a Brunhild"bed" near Frankfort, and the well-known "Drachenfels", orDragon's Rock, on the Rhine. It is to Norway, however, that wemust go for our knowledge of the story, for, singularly enough,with the exception of the "Nibelungenlied" and the popularballad, German literature has preserved almost no trace of thelegend, and such as exist are too late and too corrupt to be ofmuch use in determining the original features of the story.
Just when the legend emigrated to Skandinavia we do not know, butcertainly at an early date, perhaps during the opening years ofthe sixth century. It may have been introduced by Germantraders, by slaves captured by the Northmen on their frequentmarauding expeditions, or, as Mogk believes, may have been takenby the Heruli on their return to Norway after their defeat by theLangobardi. By whatever channel, however, the story reached theNorth, it became part and parcel of Skandinavian folklore, onlycertain names still pointing to the original home of the legend.In the ninth century, when Harald Harfagr changed the ancientfree constitution of the land, many Norwegians emigrated toIceland, taking with them these acquired legends, which werebetter preserved in this remote island because of the peacefulintroduction of Christianity, than on the Continent, where theChurch was more antagonistic to the customs and legends of theheathen period.
The Skandinavian version of the Siegfried legend has been handeddown to us in five different forms. The first of these is thepoetic or older "Edda", also called Saemund's "Edda", as it wasassigned to the celebrated Icelandic scholar Saemundr Sigfusson. The "Codex Regius", in which it is preserved, dates from themiddle of the thirteenth century, but is probably a copy of anolder manuscript. The songs it contains were written at varioustimes, the oldest probably in the first half of the ninthcentury, the latest not much before the date of the earliestmanuscript. Most of them, however, belong to the Viking period,when Christianity was already beginning to influence theNorwegians, that is, between the years 800 and 1000. They arepartly heroic, partly mythological in character, and are writtenin alliterative strophes interspersed with prose, and have theform of dialogues. Though the legends on which these songs arebased were brought from Norway, most of them were probablycomposed in Iceland. Among these songs, now, we find a numberwhich deal with the adventures of Siegfried and his tragic end.
The second source of the Siegfried story is the so-called"Volsungasaga", a prose paraphrase of the "Edda" songs. The MS.dates from the beginning of the thirteenth century, but theaccount was probably written a century earlier. The adventuresof Siegfried and his ancestors are here related in great detailand his ancestry traced back to Wodan. Although a secondarysource, as it is based on the "Edda", the "Volsungasaga" isnevertheless of great importance, since it supplies a portion ofthe "Codex Regius" which has been lost, and thus furnishes uswith the contents of the missing songs.
The third source is the prose "Edda", sometimes called the"Snorra Edda", after the famous Icelander Snorri Sturluson(1178-1241),to whom it was ascribed. The author was acquaintedwith both the poetic "Edda" and the "Volsungasaga", and followsthese accounts closely. The younger "Edda" is not really a tale,but a book of poetics; it relates, however, the Siegfried sagabriefly. It is considered an original source, since it evidentlymade use of songs that have not come down to us, especially inthe account of the origin of the treasure, which is here toldmore in detail and with considerable differences. The"Nornagestsaga" or "Nornageststhattr", the story of "Nornagest",forms the fourth source of the Siegfried story. It is really apart of the Olaf saga, but contains the story of Sigurd andGunnar (the Norse forms of Siegfried and Gunther), which an oldman Nornagest relates to King Olaf Tryggvason, who converted theNorwegians to Christianity. The story was written about 1250 toillustrate the transition from heathendom to the Christian faith. It is based on the "Edda" and the "Volsungasaga", and istherefore of minor importance as a source.
These four sources represent the early introduction of theSiegfried legend into Skandinavia. A second introduction tookplace about the middle of the thirteenth century, at the time ofthe flourishing of the Hanseatic League, when the story wasintroduced together with other popular German epics. These poemsare products of the age of chivalry, and are characterized by theromantic and courtly features of this movement. The one whichconcerns us here, as the fifth source of the Siegfried story, isthe so-called "Thidreksaga", which celebrates the adventures ofthe famous legendary hero, Dietrich of Berne, the historicalTheodorich of Ravenna. In as far as it contains the adventuresof the Nibelungs, it is also called the "Niflungasaga". The"Thidreksaga" was written about 1250 by a Norwegian who, as hehimself tells us, heard the story from Germans in theneighborhood of Bremen and Munster. Since it is thus based onSaxon traditions, it can be considered an independent source ofthe legend, and, in fact, differs from the earlier Norse versionsin many important details. The author was acquainted, however,with the older versions, and sought to compromise between them,but mostly followed his German authorities.
The story, as given in the older Norse versions, is in mostrespects more original than in the "Nibelungenlied". It relatesthe history of the treasure of the Nibelungs, tracing it back toa giant by the name of "Hreithmar", who received it from the god"Loki" as a compensation for the killing of the former's son"Otur", whom Loki had slain in the form of an otter. Lokiobtained the ransom from a dwarf named "Andwari", who in turn hadstolen it from the river gods of the Rhine. Andwari pronounces aterrible curse upon the treasure and its possessors, and thiscurse passes from Loki to the Giant Hreithmar, who is murderedwhen asleep by his two sons "Fafnir" and "Regin". The latter,however, is cheated out of the coveted prize by Fafnir, whocarries it away to the "Gnita" heath, where he guards it in theform of a dragon.
This treasure, with its accompanying curse, next passes into thehands of a human being named Sigurd (the Norse form of Siegfried,as we have seen), a descendant of the race of the Volsungs, whotrace their history back to Wodan and are especially favored byhim. The full story of Siegfried's ancestry is far too long torelate here, and does not especially concern us, as it has littleor no influence on the later development of the story. It issufficient for our purpose to know that Siegfried was the son ofSiegmund, who was slain in battle before the birth of his son.Sigurd was carefully reared by his mother "Hjordis" and the wisedwarf Regin, who taught him the knowledge of runes and of manylanguages. (2) At the suggestion of Regin, Sigurd asks for andreceives the steed "Grani" from the king, and is then urged byhis tutor to help him obtain the treasure guarded by the latter'sbrother Fafnir. Sigurd promises, but first demands a sword.Two, that arc given him by Regin, prove worthless, and he forgesa new one from the pieces of his father's sword, which his motherhad preserved. With this he easily splits the anvil and cuts intwo a flake of wool, floating down the Rhine. He first avengesthe death of his father, and then sets off with Regin to attackthe dragon Fafnir. At the advice of the former Sigurd digs aditch across the dragon's peth and pierces him from below withhis sword, as the latter comes down to drink. In dying thedragon warns Sigurd against the treasure and its curse, andagainst Regin, who, he says, is planning Sigurd's death,intending to obtain the treasure for himself.
When Regin sees the dragon safely dead, he creeps from his placeof concealment, drinks of the blood, and, cutting out the heart,begs Sigurd to roast it for him. While doing so, Sigurd burnshis fingers, and, putting them in his mouth, understands at oncethe language of the birds and hears them say that Sigurd himselfshould eat the heart and then he would be wiser than all othermen. They also betray Regin's evil designs, and counsel the ladto kill his tutor. This Sigurd then does, cutting off Regin'shead, drinking the blood of both brothers, and eating Fafnir'sheart. (3) On the further advice of the birds Sigurd firstfetches the treasure from the cave, and then journeys to themountain "Hindarfjall", where he rescues the sleeping Valkyrie,"Sigrdrifu" ("Brynhild", "Brunhild"), who, stung by the sleepthorn of Wodan, and clad in full armor, lies asleep within acastle that is surrounded by a wall of flame. With the help ofhis steed Grani, Sigurd succeeds in penetrating through the fireto the castle. The sleeping maiden awakes when he cuts the armorfrom her with his sword, for it was as tight as if grown fast tothe flesh. She hails her deliverer with great joy, for she hadvowed never to marry a man who knew fear. At Sigurd's requestshe teaches him many wise precepts, and finally pledges her trothto him. He then departs, after promising to be faithful to herand to remember her teachings.
On his journeyings Sigurd soon arrives at the court of "Giuki"(the Norse form of the German "Gibicho", "Gibich"), a king whosecourt lay on the lower Rhine. Giuki has three sons, "Gunnar","Hogni", and "Guthorm", and a daughter "Gudrun", endowed withgreat beauty. The queen bears the name of Grimhild, and isversed in magic, but possessed of an evil heart. (4) Sigurd isreceived with great honor, for his coming had been announced toGudrun in dreams, which had in part been interpreted to her byBrynhild. The mother, knowing of Sigurd's relations to thelatter, gives him a potion which produces forgetfulness, so thathe no longer remembers his betrothed, and accepts the hand ofGudrun, which the king offers him at the queen's request. Themarriage is celebrated with great pomp, and Sigurd remainspermanently attached to Giuki's court, performing with the othersmany deeds of valor.
Meanwhile Grimhild urges her son Gunnar to sue for the hand ofBrynhild. Taking with him Sigurd and a few others, Gunnar visitsfirst Brynhild's father "Budli", and then her brother-in-law"Heimir", from both of whom he learns that she is free to choosewhom she will, but that she will marry no one who has not riddenthrough the wall of flame. With this answer they proceed toBrynhild's castle, where Gunnar is unable to pierce the flames,even when seated on Sigurd's steed. Finally Sigurd and Gunnarchange forms, and Sigurd, disguised as Gunnar, rides through thewall of fire, announces himself to Brynhild as Gunnar, the son ofGiuki, and reminds her of her promise to marry the one whopenetrated the fire. Brynhild consents with great reluctance,for she is busy carrying on a war with a neighboring king.Sigurd then passes three nights at her side, placing, however,his sword Gram between them, as a bar of separation. At partinghe draws from her finger the ring, with which he had originallypledged his troth to her, and replaces it with another, takenfrom Fafnir's hoard. Soon after this the marriage of Gunnar andBrynhild is celebrated with great splendor, and all return toGiuki's court, where they live happily for some time.
One day, however, when the ladies go down to the river to take abath, Brynhild will not bathe further down stream than Gudrun,that is, in the water which flows from Gudrun to her, (5) givingas the reason, that her father was mightier and her husbandbraver, since he had ridden through the fire, while Sigurd hadbeen a menial. Stung at this, Gudrun retorts that not Gunnar butSigurd had penetrated the flames and had taken from her thefateful ring "Andvaranaut", which she then shows to her rival inproof of her assertion. Brynhild turns deathly pale, but answersnot a word. After a second conversation on the subject hadincreased the hatred of the queens, Brynhild plans vengeance.Pretending to be ill, she takes to her bed, and when Gunnarinquires what ails her, she asks him if he remembers thecircumstances of the wooing and that not he but Sigurd hadpenetrated the flames. She attempts to take Gunnar's life, asshe had pledged her troth to Sigurd, and is thereupon placed inchains by Hogni. Seven days she sleeps, and no one dares to wakeher. Finally Sigurd succeeds in making her talk, and she tellshim how cruelly she has been deceived, that the better man hadbeen destined for her, but that she had received the poorer one.This Sigurd denies, for Giuki's son had killed the king of theDanes and also Budli's brother, a great warrior. Moreover,although he, Sigurd, had ridden through the flames, he had notbecome her husband. He begs her therefore not to harbor a grudgeagainst Gunnar.
Brynhild remains unconvinced, and plans Sigurd's death, andthreatens Gunnar with the loss of dominion and life, if he willnot kill Sigurd. After some hesitation, Gunnar consents, and,calling Hogni, informs him that he must kill Sigurd, in order toobtain the treasure of the Rhinegold. Hogni warns him againstbreaking his oath to Sigurd, when it occurs to Gunnar, that hisbrother Gutthorm had sworn no oath and might do the deed. Bothnow proceed to excite the latter's greed, and give him wolf's andsnake meat to eat to make him savage. Twice Gutthorm makes theattempt, as Sigurd lies in bed, but is deterred by the latter'spenetrating glance. The third time he finds Sigurd asleep, andpierces him with his sword. Sigurd, awakening at the pain, hurlshis own sword after his murderer, fairly cutting him in two. Hethen dies, protesting his innocence and designating Brynhild asthe instigator of his murder. Brynhild at first laughs aloud atGudrun's frantic grief, but later her joy turns into sorrow, andshe determines to share Sigurd's death. In vain they try todissuade her; donning her gold corselet, she pierces herself witha sword and begs to be burned on Sigurd's funeral pyre. In dyingshe prophesies the future, telling of Gudrun's marriage to "Atli"and of the death of the many men which will be caused thereby.
After Brynhild's death Gudrun in her sorrow flees to the court ofKing "Half" of Denmark, where she remains seven years. FinallyGrimhild learns of the place of her daughter's concealment, andtries to bring about a reconciliation with Gunnar and Hogni. They offer her much treasure, if she will marry Atli. At firstshe refuses and thinks only of revenge, but finally she consentsand the marriage is celebrated in Atli's land. After a timeAtli, who is envious of Gunnar's riches, for the latter had takenpossession of Sigurd's hoard, invites him to his court. A mannamed "Vingi", who was sent with the invitation, changes therunes of warning, which Gudrun had given him, so that they, too,read as an invitation. The brothers determine to accept theinvitation, and, though warned by many dreams, they set out forAtli's court, which they reach in due time. Vingi now breaksforth into exultations, that he has lured them into a snare, andis slain by Hogni with a battle axe.
As they ride to the king's hall, Atli and his sons arm themselvesfor battle, and demand Sigurd's treasure, which belongs by rightto Gudrun. Gunnar refuses to surrender it, and the fight begins,after some exchange of taunting words. Gudrun tries at first toreconcile the combatants, but, failing, arms herself and fightson the side of her brothers. The battle rages furiously withgreat loss on both sides, until nearly all of the Nibelungs arekilled, when Gunnar and Hogni are forced to yield to the power ofnumbers and are captured and bound. Gunnar is asked, if he willpurchase his life with the treasure. He replies that he firstwishes to see Hogni's bleeding heart. At first the heart of aslave is cut out and brought to him, but Gunnar recognizes it atonce as that of a coward. Then they cut out Hogni's heart, wholaughs at the pain. This Gunnar sees is the right one, and isjubilant, for now Atli shall never obtain the treasure, as Gunnaralone knows where it is hid. In a rage Atli orders Gunnar to bethrown to the snakes. Though his hands are bound, Gunnar playsso sweetly with his toes on the harp, which Gudrun has sent him,that all the snakes are lulled to sleep, with the exception of anadder, which stings him to the heart, so that he dies.
Atli now walks triumphantly over the dead bodies, and remarks toGudrun that she alone is to blame for what has happened. Sherefuses his offers of peace and reconciliation, and towardsevening kills her two sons "Erp" and "Eitil", and serves them atthe banquet, which the king gives for his retainers. When Atliasks for his sons, he is told that he had drunk their blood mixedwith wine and had eaten their hearts. That night when Atli isasleep, Gudrun takes Hogni's son "Hniflung", who desires toavenge his father, and together they enter Atli's room and thrusta sword through his breast. Atli awakes from the pain, only tobe told by Gudrun that she is his murderess. When he reproachesher with thus killing her husband, she answers that she caredonly for Sigurd. Atli now asks for a fitting burial, and onreceiving the promise of this, expires. Gudrun carries out herpromise, and burns the castle with Atli and all his dead retainers. Other Edda songs relate the further adventures ofGudrun, but they do not concern us here, as the "Nibelungenlied"stops with the death of the Nibelungs.
This in brief is the story of Siegfried, as it has been handeddown to us in the Skandinavian sources. It is universallyacknowledged that this version, though more original than theGorman tradition, does not represent the simplest and mostoriginal form of the tale; but what the original form was, haslong been and still is a matter of dispute. Two distinctlyopposite views are held, the one seeing in the story thepersonification of the forces of nature, the other, scouting thepossibility of a mythological interpretation, seeks a purelyhuman origin for the tale, namely, a quarrel among relatives forthe possession of treasure. The former view is the older, andobtained almost exclusively at one time. The latter has beengaining ground of recent years, and is held by many of theyounger students of the legend. According to the mythologicalview, the maiden slumbering upon the lonely heights is the sun,the wall of flames surrounding her the morning red("Morgenrote"). Siegfried is the youthful day who is destined torouse the sun from her slumber. At the appointed time heascends, and before his splendor the morning red disappears. Heawakens the maiden; radiantly the sun rises from its couch andjoyously greets the world of nature. But light and shade areindissolubly connected; day changes of itself into night. Whenat evening the sun sinks to rest and surrounds herself once morewith a wall of flames, the day again approaches, but no longer inthe youthful form of the morning to arouse her from her slumber,but in the sombre shape of Gunther, to rest at her side. Day hasturned into night; this is the meaning of the change of forms.The wall of flame vanishes, day and sun descend into the realm ofdarkness. Under this aspect the Siegfried story is a day myth;but under another it is a myth of the year. The dragon is thesymbol of winter, the dwarfs of darkness. Siegfried denotes thebright summer, his sword the sunbeams. The youthful year growsup in the dark days of winder. When its time has come, it goesforth triumphantly and destroys the darkness and the cold ofwinter. Through the symbolization the abstractions gain form andbecome persons; the saga is thus not a mere allegory, but a personification of nature's forces. The treasure may haveentered the saga through the widespread idea of the dragon as theguardian of treasure, or it may represent the beauty of naturewhich unfolds when the season has conquered. In the last act ofthe saga, Siegfried's death, Wilmanns, the best exponent of thisview, sees again a symbolic representation of a process ofnature. According to him it signifies the death of the god ofthe year in winter. In the spring he kills the dragon, in thewinter he goes weary to his rest and is foully slain by thehostile powers of darkness. Later, when this act was connectedwith the story of Gunther's wooing Brunhild, the real meaning wasforgotten, and Siegfried's death was attributed to the grief andjealousy of the insulted queen.
Opposed now to the mythological interpretation is the other viewalready spoken of, which denies the possibility of mythologicalfeatures, and does not seek to trace the legend beyond the heroicstage. The best exponent of this view is R. C. Boer, who hasmade a remarkable attempt to resolve the story into its simplestconstituents. According to him the nucleus of the legend is anold story of the murder of relatives ("Verwandienmord"), theoriginal form being perhaps as follows. Attila (i.e., the enemyof Hagen under any name)is married to Hagen's sister Grimhild orGudrun. He invites his brother-in-law to his house, attacks himin the hope of obtaining his treasure, and kills him. Accordingto this view Hagen was originally the king, but later sinks to asubordinate position through the subsequent connection of thestory with the Burgundians. It is of course useless to hunt forthe date of such an episode in history. Such a murder could havefrequently occurred, and can be localized anywhere. Very earlywe find this Hagen story united with the Siegfried legend. Ifthe latter is mythological, then we have a heterogeneouscombination, a mythical legend grafted on a purely human one.This Boer thinks unlikely, and presents a number of arguments todisprove the mythical character of the Siegfried story, intowhich we cannot enter here. He comes, however, to theconclusion, that the Siegfried tale is likewise purely human, andconsisted originally of the murder of relatives, that is, arepetition of the Hagen title. Siegfried is married to Hagen'ssister, and is killed by his brother-in-law because of histreasure. The kernel of the legend is, therefore, the enmitybetween relatives, which exists in two forms, the one in whichthe son-in-law kills his father-in-law, as in the "Helgi" saga,the other in which Hagen kills his son-in-law and is killed byhim, too, as in the "Hilde" saga. The German tradition tries tocombine the two by introducing the new feature, that Kriemhildcauses the death of her relatives, in order to avenge her firsthusband. Boer is of the opinion that both the Norse and theGerman versions have forgotten the original connection betweenthe two stories, and that this connection was nothing more norless than the common motive of the treasure. The same treasure,which causes Hagen to murder Siegfried, causes his own death inturn through the greed of Attila. There was originally,according to Boer, no question of revenge, except the revenge offate, the retribution which overtakes the criminal. This feelingfor the irony of fate was lost when the motive, that Hagen killsSiegfried because of his treasure, was replaced by the one thathe does it at the request of Brunhild. This leads Boer to theconclusion, that Brunhild did not originally belong to theSiegfried story, but to the well-known fairy tale of SleepingBeauty ("Erlosungsmurchen"), which occurs in a variety of forms.The type is that of a hero who rescues a maiden from a magiccharm, which may take the form of a deep sleep, as in the case ofSleeping Beauty, or of being sewed into a garment, as in No. 111of Grimm's fairy tales. By the union of the two stories, i.e.,the Hagen-Siegfried saga with the Sleeping Beauty tale, Siegfriedstands in relation to two women; on the one hand his relation toSigrdrifa-Brynhild, the maiden whom he rescues on the rock, onthe other his marriage with Grimhild-Gudrun and his consequentdeath. This twofold relation had to be disposed of, and sincehis connection with Grimhild was decisive for his fate, hisrelation to Brunhild had to be changed. It could not be entirelyignored, for it was too well known, therefore it was given adifferent interpretation. Siegfried still rescues a maiden fromthe rock, not for himself, however, but for another. Theexchange of forms on the part of Siegfried and Gunther is areminiscence of the older form. It gives the impression, thatSiegfried, and yet not Siegfried, won the bride. This alterationprobably took place when the Burgundians were introduced into thelegend. With this introduction an unlocalized saga of unknownheroes of ancient times became one of events of world-wideimportance; the fall of a mighty race was depicted as the resultof Siegfried's death. To render this plausible, it was necessaryon the one hand to idealize the hero, so that his death shouldappear as a deed of horror demanding fearful vengeance, and onthe other, to make the king of the Burgundians an activeparticipator in Siegfried's death, for otherwise it would notseem natural, that the whole race should be exterminated for acrime committed by the king's brother or vassal. As the role ofBrunhild's husband had become vacant, and as Gunther had nospecial role, it was natural that it should be given to him. Boer traces very ingeniously the gradual development of thisexchange of roles through the various sources.
Another method of explaining away Siegfried's relation to twowomen is to identify them, and this has been done by the Seyfridballad. Here the hero rescues Kriemhild from the power of thedragon, marries her, and then is later killed by her brothersthrough envy and hatred. As Brunhild and Kriemhild are hereunited in one person, there is no need of a wooing for the king,nor of vengeance on the part of Brunhild, accordingly the oldmotive of greed (here envy) reappears.
As to the fight with the dragon, Boer believes that it did notoriginally belong to the saga, for in none of the sources exceptthe popular ballad is the fight with the dragon connected withthe release of Brunhild. If the Siegfried-Hagen story is purelyhuman, then the dragon cannot have originally belonged to it, butwas later introduced, because of the widespread belief in thedragon as the guardian of treasure, and in order to answer thequestion as to the provenience of the hoard. This is, however,only one answer to the question. Another, widespread in Germanlegends, is that the treasure comes from the Nibelungs, that is,from the dwarfs. Many identify the dwarfs and the dragon, butthis finds no support in the sources, for here the dwarfs andFafnir are never confused. The "Nibelungenlied" describes anadventure with each, but the treasure is only connected with thedwarfs. The "Thidreksaga" knows only the dragon fight but notthe dwarfs, as is likewise the case with the Seyfrid ballad. Only in the Norse sources do we find a contamination. The storyof Hreithmar and his sons, who quarrel about the treasure,resembles that of Schilbung and Nibelung in the "Nibelungenlied",and probably has the same source. One of the sons, because ofhis guarding the treasure, is identified with the dragon, and sowe read that Fafnir becomes a dragon, after gaining the treasure.Originally, however, he was not a dragon, but a dwarf. These twoindependent forms can be geographically localized. The dwarflegend is the more southern; it is told in detail in the"Nibelungenlied". The dragon legend probably originated in theCimbrian peninsula, where the "Beowulf" saga, in which the dragonfight plays such an important part, likewise arose.
There thus stand sharply opposed to each other two theories, oneseeing in the Siegfried saga a personification of natural forces,the other tracing it back to a purely human story of murderthrough greed. It may be, that the true form of the originalsaga lies half way between these two views. The story of thefall of the Nibelungs, that is, their killing at Etzel's court,may go back to the tale of the murder of relatives for money. Onthe other hand it is hard to believe that the Siegfried saga isnothing but a repetition of the Attila motive, for this is toobrief a formula to which to reduce the long legend of Siegfried,with its many deeds. Even if we discard the mythologicalinterpretation, it is the tale of a daring hero, who is broughtup in the woods by a cunning dwarf. He kills a dragon and takespossession of his hoard, then rescues a maiden, imprisoned upon amountain, as in the older Norse version and the popular ballad,or in a tower, as in the "Thidreksaga", and surrounded either bya wall of fire, as in the Norse, or by a large body of water, asin the "Nibelungenlied". After betrothing himself to the maiden,he sets forth in search of further adventures, and falls into thepower of an evil race, who by their magic arts lure him to them,cause his destruction, and then obtain his treasure and themaiden for themselves. By her very name Sigrdrifa belongs toSiegfried, just as Gunther and Gudrun-Grimhild belong together,and it seems hardly possible that she should have entered thestory later, as Boer would have us believe. After all, it islargely a matter of belief, for it is impossible to provepositively that mythical elements did or did not exist in theoriginal.
To the combined Siegfried-Nibelung story various historicalelements were added during the fifth century. At the beginningof this period the Franks were located on the left bank of theRhine from Coblenz downward. Further up the river, that is, tothe south, the Burgundians had established a kingdom in what isnow the Rhenish Palatinate, their capital being Worms and theirking "Gundahar", or "Gundicarius", as the Romans called him. Fortwenty years the Burgundians lived on good terms with thesurrounding nations. Then, growing bolder, they suddenly roseagainst the Romans in the year 436, but the rebellion was quietlysuppressed by the Roman general Aetius. Though defeated, theBurgundians were not subdued, and the very next year they broketheir oaths and again sought to throw off the Roman yoke. Thistime the Romans called to their aid the hordes of Huns, who hadbeen growing rapidly in power and were already pressing hard uponthe German nations from the east. Only too glad for an excuse,the Huns poured into the land in great numbers and practicallyswept the Burgundian people from the face of the earth. According to the Roman historians, twenty thousand Burgundianswere slain in this great battle of the Catalaunian Fields.Naturally this catastrophe, in which a whole German nation fellbefore the hordes of invading barbarians, produced a profoundimpression upon the Teutonic world. The King Gundahar, theGunther of the "Nibelungenlied", who also fell in the battle,became the central figure of a new legend, namely, the story ofthe fall of the Burgundians.
Attila is not thought to have taken part in the invasion, still,after his death in 454, his name gradually came to be associatedwith the slaughter of the Burgundians, for a legend operatesmainly with types, and as Attila was a Hun and throughout theMiddle Ages was looked upon as the type of a cruel tyrant, greedyfor conquest, it was but natural for him to play the roleassigned to him in the legend. Quite plausible is Boer'sexplanation of the entrance of Attila into the legend. The"Thidreksaga" locates him in Seest in Westphalia. Now thisprovince once bore the haute of "Hunaland", and by a naturalconfusion, because of the similarity of the names, "Huna" and"Huns", Attila, who is the chief representative of Hunnish power,was connected with the legend and located at Seest. This wouldshow that the original extension of the legend was slight, asXanten, the home of Hagen, is but seventy miles from Seest. Theoriginal form would then be that Hagen was slain by a king of"Hunaland", then because history relates that the Burgundianswere slain by the Huns, the similarity of the names led to theintroduction of Attila and the identification of the Nibelungswith the Burgundians. The fact, too, that the Franks rapidlytook possession of the district depopulated by the crushingdefeat of the Burgundians likewise aided the confusion, and thusthe Franks became the natural heirs of the legend concerning thedeath of Gunther, and so we read of the fall of the Nibelungs, aname that is wholly Frankish in character. This identificationled also to Attila's being considered the avenger of Siegfried'sdeath. Poetic justice, however, demands that the slaughter ofthe Burgundians at the hands of Attila be also avenged. Therumor, that Attila's death was not natural, but that he had beenmurdered by his wife Ildico ("Hildiko"), gave the necessaryfeatures to round out the story. As Kriemhild was the sister ofthe Burgundian kings, it was but natural to explain her killingof Attila, as described in the Norse versions, by her desire toavenge her brothers.
In our "Nibelungenlied", however, it is no longer Attila, butKriemhild, who is the central figure of the tragedy. Etzel, ashe is called here, has sunk to the insignificant role of a stageking, a perfectly passive observer of the fight raging aroundhim. This change was brought about perhaps by the introductionof Dietrich of Berne, the most imposing figure of all Germanicheroic lore. The necessity of providing him with a rolecorresponding to his importance, coupled with a growingrepugnance on the part of the proud Franks to acknowledge defeatat the hands of the Huns, caused the person of Attila to dwindlein importance. Gradually, too, the role played by Kriemhild wastotally changed. Instead of being the avenger of her brothers,as depicted in the Norse versions, she herself becomes the causeof their destruction. Etzel is not only innocent of any desireto harm the Nibelungs, but is even ignorant of the revengeplanned by his wife. This change in her role was probably due tothe feeling that it was incumbent upon her to avenge the murderof Siegfried.
Our "Nibelungenlied" knows but little of the adventures ofSiegfried's youth as depicted in the Norse versions. The themeof the poem is no longer the love of Sigurd, the homelesswanderer, for the majestic Valkyrie Brunhild, but the love idyllof Siegfried, the son of the king of the Netherlands, and thedainty Burgundian princess Kriemhild. The poem has forgottenSiegfried's connection with Brunhild; it knows nothing of hispenetrating the wall of flames to awake and rescue her, nothingof the betrothal of the two. In our poem Siegfried is carefullyreared at his father's court in the Netherlands, and sets outwith great pomp for the court of the Burgundians. In the Norseversion he naturally remains at Gunther's court after hismarriage, but in our poem he returns to the Netherlands with hisbride. This necessitates the introduction of several new scenesto depict his arrival home, the invitation to the feast at Worms,and the reception of the guests on the part of the Burgundians.
In the "Nibelungenlied" the athletic sports, as an obstacle tothe winning of Brunhild, take the place of the wall of flames ofthe older Norse versions. Siegfried and Gunther no longer changeforms, but Siegfried dons the "Tarnkappe", which renders himinvisible, so that while Gunther makes the motions, Siegfriedreally does the work, a thing which is rather difficult toimagine. The quarrel of the two queens is likewise verydifferently depicted in the "Nibelungenlied" from what it is inthe Norse version. In the latter it takes place while the ladiesare bathing in the river, and is brought on by the arrogance ofBrunhild, who refuses to stand lower down the stream and bathe inthe water flowing from Gudrun to her. In the "Thidreksaga" itoccurs in the seclusion of the ladies' apartments, but in ourpoem it culminates in front of the cathedral before the assembledcourt, and requires as its background all the pomp and splendorof medieval chivalry. With a master hand and a wonderfulknowledge of female character, the author depicts the gradualprogress of the quarrel until it terminates in a magnificentscene of wounded pride and malignant hatred. Kriemhild, asusual, plays the more important part, and, while standing up forher rights, tries in every way to conciliate Brunhild and not tohurt her feelings. At last, however, stung by the taunts of thelatter, she in turn loses her patience, bursts out with the wholestory of the twofold deception to which Brunhild has beensubjected, and then triumphantly sweeps into the church, leavingher rival stunned and humiliated by the news she has heard. Inthe Norse tradition the scene serves merely to enlighten Brunhildas to the deception played upon her. In the "Nibelungenlied" itbecomes the real cause of Siegfried's death, for Brunhild plansto kill Siegfried to avenge the public slight done to her. Shehas no other reason, as Siegfried swears that there had been nodeception. Brunhild appeals to us much less in the"Nibelungenlied" than in the Norse version. In the latter shefeels herself deeply wronged by Siegfried's faithlessness, andresolves on his death because she will not be the wife of twomen. In our poem she has no reason for wishing his death excepther wounded pride. In the "Nibelungenlied", too, she disappearsfrom view after Siegfried's death, whereas in the Norse traditionshe ascends his funeral pyre and dies at his side.
The circumstances of Siegfried's death are likewise totallydifferent in the two versions. In the Norse, as we have seen, heis murdered while asleep in bed, by Gunnar's younger brotherGutthorm. In our poem he is killed by Hagen, while bending overa spring to drink. This is preceded by a scene in which Hagentreacherously induces Kriemhild to mark the one vulnerable spoton Siegfried's body, on the plea of protecting him. This deepensthe tragedy, and renders Kriemhild's misery and self-reproachesthe greater. After Siegfried's burial his father, who had alsocome to Worms with his son, vainly endeavors to persuadeKriemhild to return with him to the Netherlands. Her refusal isunnatural in the extreme, for she had reigned there ten years ormore with Siegfried, and had left her little son behind, and yetshe relinquishes all this and remains with her brothers, whom sheknows to be the murderers of her husband. This is evidently areminiscence of an earlier form in which Siegfried was a homelessadventurer, as in the "Thidreksaga".
The second half of the tale, the destruction of the Nibelungs, istreated of very briefly in the early Norse versions, but the"Nibelungenlied", which knows so little of Siegfried's youth, hasdeveloped and enlarged upon the story, until it overshadows thefirst part in length and importance and gives the name to thewhole poem. The main difference between the two versions is thatin the older Norse tradition it is Attila who invites theNibelungs to his court and attacks them in order to gainpossession of the treasure, while Gudrun (Kriemhild) first triesto reconcile the warring parties, and, not succeeding in this,snatches up a sword and fights on the side of her brothers andlater kills her husband as an act of revenge. In the"Thidreksaga" and the "Nibelungenlied", however, she is theinstigator of the fight and the cause of her brothers' death, andfinally suffers death herself at the hands of Master Hildebrand,who is furious that such noble heroes should fall at a woman'shand. The second part of the poem is grewsome reading at best,with its weltering corpses and torrents of blood. The horror isrelieved only by the grim humor of Hagen and by the charmingscene at Rudeger's court, where the young prince Giselher isbetrothed to Rudeger's daughter. Rudeger is without doubt themost tragic figure of this part. He is bound on the one hand byhis oath of allegiance to Kriemhild and on the other by ties offriendship to the Burgundians. His agony of mind at the dilemmain which Kriemhild's command to attack the Burgundians places himis pitiful. Divided between love and duty, the conviction thathe must fulfill his vow, cost what it may, gradually forcesitself upon him and he rushes to his death in combat with hisdearest friends.
Towering above all others in its gloomy grandeur stands thefigure of Hagen, the real hero of the second half of the poem.Fully aware that he is going to his death, he nevertheless scornsto desert his companions-in-arms, and awaits the fate in storefor him with a stoicism that would do honor to a Spartan. Hecalmly accepts the consequences of his crime, and to the lastmocks and scoffs at Kriemhild, until her fury knows no bounds. No character shows so little the refining influences ofChristianity as does his. In all essential respects he is stillthe same old gigantic Teuton, who meets us in the earliest formsof the legend.
As to the various minor characters, many of which appear only inthe "Nibelungenlied", space will not permit of their discussionhere, although they will be treated of briefly in the notes.Suffice it to say, that the "Nibelungenlied" has introduced anumber of effective scenes for the purpose of bringing some ofthem, especially Folker and Dankwart, into prominence. Among thebest of these are, first, the night watch, when Folker firstplays the Burgundians to sleep with his violin, and then standsguard with Hagen, thus preventing the surprise planned byKriemhild; further, the visit to the church on the followingmorning, when the men of both parties clash; and lastly thetournament between the Huns and the Burgundians, which gives theauthor an excellent chance to show the prowess of the variousheroes.
Let us pass now to the consideration of the strophic form of the"Nibelungenlied". The two Danish ballads of "Grimhild's Revenge"("Grimhild's Haevn"), which are based upon the first combinationof the Low German, i.e., Saxon, and the Rhenish traditions, provethat the strophe is considerably older than the preservedredactions of our poem, and that it was probably of Saxon origin.The metrical form goes back most probably to the four-accentedverse of the poet Otfrid of the ninth century, although some havethought that Latin hymns, others that the French epic verse, mayhave been of influence. The direct derivation from Otfrid seems,however, the most plausible, as it accounts for the importance ofthe caesura, which generally marks a pause in the sense, as wellas in the verse, and also for its masculine ending. The"Nibelungen" strophe consists of four long lines separated by acaesura into two distinct halves. The first half of each linecontains four accents, the fourth falling upon the last syllable.This last stress, however, is not, as a rule as strong as theothers, the effect being somewhat like that of a feminine ending.On this account some speak of three accents in the first halfline, with a feminine ending. The fourth stress is, however, toostrong to be thus disregarded, but because of its lightercharacter is best marked with a grave accent. The second half ofeach line ends in a masculine rhyme. The first three lines haveeach three stresses in the second half, while the second half ofthe fourth line has four accents to mark the end of the strophe.This longer fourth line is one of the most marked characteristicsof the "Nibelungen" strophe. The rhymes are arranged in theorder of "a", "a", "b", "b", though in a few isolated cases neartheend of the poem but one rhyme is used throughout the strophe.
The opening lines of the poem may serve to illustrate thestrophic form and scansion, and at the same time will give thereader an idea of the Middle High German language in which thepoem is written:
Uns ist in alten maeren wunders vil geseit von heleden lobebaeron, von grozer arebeit, von froude und hochgeziten, von weinen und von klagen, von kuener recken striten muget ir nu wunder hoeren sagen.
Ez wuochs in Burgonden ein edel magedin, daz in allen landen niht schoeners mohte sin, Kriemhild geheizen; si wart ein scoene wip, darambe muosen degene vil verliesen den lip.
Der minneclichen meide triuten wol gezam, ir muotten kuene recken, niemen was ir gram, ane ma zen schoene so was ir edel lip; der iunevrouwen tugende zierten anderiu wip.
Ir pilagen drie kilnege edel unde rich, Ganther ande Geruot, die recken lobelieh, und Giselher der iunge, ein uz erwelter degen, diu frouwe was ir swester, die fu'rsten hetens in ir pflegen.
Die herren waren milte, von arde hohe erborn, mit kraft unmazen kuene, die recken uz erkorn, dazen Burgonden so was ir lant genant, si framden starkiu wunder sit in Etzelen lant.
Ze Wormze bidem Rine si wenden mit ir kraft, in diende von ir landen stolziu ritterscaft mit lobelichen eren unz an ir endes zit, sit sturben si inemerliche von zweier edelen frouwen nit.
Some of the final rhymes with proper names, such as "Hagene" :"degene" (str. 84) or "Hagene" : "tragene" (str. 300) appear tobe feminine, but it is really the final "e" that rhymes, and ascansion of the line in question shows that the three accents arenot complete without this final "e". In this respect our poemdiffers from most of the Middle High German poems, as thispractice of using the final "e" in rhyme began to die out in thetwelfth century, though occasionally found throughout the period.The rhymes are, as a rule, quite exact, the few cases of impurerhymes being mainly those in which short and long vowels arerhymed together, e.g. "mich" : "rich" or "man" : "han". Caesuralrhymes are frequently met with, and were considered by Lachmannto be the marks of interpolated strophes, a view no longer held.A further peculiarity of the "Nibelungen" strophe is the frequentomission of the unaccented syllable in the second half of thelast line of the strophe between the second and third stresses.Examples of this will be found in the second, third, and fifthstrophes of the passage given above.
The language of the "Nibelungenlied" is the so-called Middle HighGerman, that is, the High German written and spoken in the periodbetween 1100 and 1500, the language of the great romances ofchivalry and of the "Minnesingers". More exactly, the poem iswritten in the Austrian dialect of the close of the twelfthcentury, but contains many archaisms, which point to the fact ofits having undergone a number of revisions.
In closing this brief study of the "Nibelungenlied", just a wordor two further with reference to the poem, its character, and itsplace in German literature. Its theme is the ancient Teutonicideal of "Treue" (faithfulness or fidelity), which has found hereits most magnificent portrayal; faithfulness unto death, theloyalty of the vassal for his lord, as depicted in Hagen, thefidelity of the wife for her husband, as shown by Kriemhild,carried out with unhesitating consistency to the bitter end. This is not the gallantry of medieval chivalry, which colors solargely the opening scenes of the poem, but the heroic valor, thedeath-despising stoicism of the ancient Germans, before which themasters of the world, the all-conquering Romans, were compelledto bow.
In so far as the "Nibelungenlied" has forgotten most of thehistory of the youthful Siegfried, and knows nothing of his lovefor Brunhild, it is a torso, but so grand withal, that one hardlyregrets the loss of these integral elements of the old saga. Asit is a working over of originally separate lays, it is notentirely homogeneous, and contains not a few contradictions. Inspite of these faults, however, which a close study reveals, itis nevertheless the grandest product of Middle High German epicpoetry, and deservedly the most popular poem of older Germanliterature. It lacks, to be sure, the grace of diction found inGottfried von Strassburg's "Tristan und Isolde", the detailed andoften magnificent descriptions of armor and dress to be met within the epics of Hartman von Ouwe; it is wanting in the loftyphilosophy of Wolfram von Eschenbach's "Parzival", and does not,as this latter, lead the reader into the realms of religiousdoubts and struggles. It is imposing through its verysimplicity, through the grandeur of the story, which it does notseek to adorn and decorate. It nowhere pauses to analyze motivesnor to give us a picture of inner conflict as modern authors arefond of doing. Its characters are impulsive and prompt inaction, and when they have once acted, waste no time in uselessregret or remorse.
It resembles the older "Spielmannsdichtung", or minstrel poetry,in the terseness and vigor of its language and in the lack ofpoetic imagery, but it is free from the coarseness and vulgar andgrotesque humor of the latter. It approaches the courtly epic inits introduction of the pomp of courtly ceremonial, but thisveneer of chivalry is very thin, and beneath the outward polishof form the heart beats as passionately and wildly as in the daysof Herman, the Cheruscan chief. There are perhaps greater poemsin literature than the "Nibelungenlied", but few so majestic inconception, so sublime in their tragedy, so simple in theirexecution, and so national in their character, as this greatpopular epic of German literature.
ENDNOTES:
(1) A is a parchment MS. of the second half of the thirteenth century, now found in Munich. It forms the basis of Lachmann's edition. It is a parchment MS. of the middle of the thirteenth century, belonging to the monastery of St. Gall. It has been edited by Bartsch, "Deutsche Klassiker des Mittelalters", vol. 3, and by Piper, "Deutsche National- Literatur", vol. 6. C is a parchment MS., of the thirteenth century, now in the ducal library of Donauesehingen. It is the best written of all the MSS., and has been edited by Zarncke.
(2) The "Thidreksaga" differs from the other Norse versions in having "Sigfrod", as he is called here, brought up in ignorance of his parents, a trait which was probably borrowed from the widespread "Genoveva" story, although thought by some to have been an original feature of our legend.
(3) The "Thidreksaga", which has forgotten the enmity of the brothers, and calls Sigurd's tutor "Mimr", tells the episode in somewhat different fashion. The brothers plan to kill Sigurd, and the latter is attacked by the dragon, while burning charcoal in the forest. After killing the monster with a firebrand, Sigurd bathes himself in the blood and thus become covered with a horny skin, which renders him invulnerable, save in one place between the shoulder blades, which he could not reach. This bathing in the blood is also related in the Seyfrid ballad and in the "Nibelungenlied", with the difference, that the vulnerable spot is caused by a linden leaf falling upon him.
(4) The fact that all but one of these names alliterate, shows that the Norse version is here more original. Gunnar is the same as Gunther (Gundaharius), Hogni as Hagen; Gutthorm (Godomar) appears in the German version as Gernot. In this latter the father is called Danerat, the mother Uote, and the name Grimhild is transferred from the mother to the daughter.
(5) In the prose "Edda", in the water which drips from Gudrun's hair.