Review

Reviewed Work(s): The Legend of Brynhild by Theodore M. Andersson

Review by: Franz H. Bäuml
Source: Speculum, Vol. 57, No. 2 (Apr., 1982), pp. 346-349
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2847465
Accessed: 05-12-2016 14:38 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Speculum

This content downloaded from 130.208.37.218 on Mon, 05 Dec 2016 14:38:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 346 Reviews

of love (Vita nuova 3), among whom Guido Cavalcanti figures prominently (chap. 6).
So convinced is he of their importance to Dante's life and art - he even posits a
connection between them and the Knights Templar (pp. 412-13) - that he would
assume for them "a far more influential role than they are usually given and . . . say
that they saw themselves as having a conscious civilizing mission" (p. 413). Anderson
goes on to claim that "Dante's innate gifts were giant-like; they were only developed
to their full power through the early training begun by thefedeli d'amore that taught
him to unseal the founts of inspiration" (p. 415). There is no doubt that Guido and
other poets of the "dolce stil nuovo" (Purgatorio 24.57) played a crucial role in Dante's
development, and Anderson is right to insist on their importance. Nevertheless, here
as in other arguments, there are hints of exaggeration - in "only," for example -
just enough such hints to cast suspicion on assumptions otherwise probably justly
bold.
Because the book is long and dense, there is much that mnust go unsaid. I would be
remiss, however, if I failed to comment on some of the oddities of Anderson's
bibliography. Although the bibliography is certainly ample, it betrays some regretta-
ble lacunae. For example, it includes relatively little recent American scholarship;
consequently Anderson apparently cut himself off from important contributions such
as Robert Hollander's findings on Dante theologus-poeta and Anthony K. Cassell's
reinterpretation of Inferno 1. Some important technical studies are also missing, such
as Pier Vincenzo Mengaldo's intermittent papers on De vulgari eloquentia (now col-
lected in Linguistica e retorica di Dante, 1978) and Robert Javelet's monumental Image et
ressemblance au douzieme siecle (1967). Finally, Anderson should have made a special
point of informing his readers of Giorgio Petrocchi's Biografia, which is conveniently
available in the appendix to the Enciclopedia Dantesca.
The reactions to Dante the Maker have been and will continue to be many and
varied; but I think most will agree that when Anderson writes history, he writes not
only well and accurately but also excitingly. When he analyzes Dante's poetry, how-
ever, the excitement diminishes because he rarely takes us as far into the texts as we
know we should go, although he does manage to whet the appetite for the energy
and beauty of Dante's writing. Finally, when he speculates about the nature and the
sources of Dante's creativity and when he conjectures a special connection between
Dante and the Knights Templar, his work is least satisfactory. By this time and in this
way he has departed too far from the ground and inspiration of his task - "lo sacro
poema.

R. A. SHOAF
Yale University

THEODORE M. ANDERSSON, The Legend of Brynhild. (Islandica, 43.) Ithaca and London:
Cornell University Press, 1980. Pp. 270. $22.50.

RELIABLE ANTHROPOLOGICAL data on the transmission of the Volsunga material are

lacking for the period preceding the fixation of this literature in the Codex Regius
and the Snorra Edda in the thirteenth century. For other times and places, however,
there is considerable evidence regarding the characteristics of nonliterate transmis-
sion - in preliterate or nonliterate societies as well as within literate societies. (A
good introduction is Ruth Finnegan, Oral Poetry, Cambridge, Eng., 1977.) Since the

This content downloaded from 130.208.37.218 on Mon, 05 Dec 2016 14:38:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Reviews 347

attributes of certain kinds of nonliterate transmission differ fundamentally from

those of literate transmission, and since there is nothing to suggest that the Volsunga
tradition in the thirteenth century and earlier lacked the attributes of nonliterate
transmission that have been observed elsewhere, it is a surprise to find that Professor
Andersson chooses to view his material through the spectacles of literacy. His book is
therefore something of a methodological curiosity. In effect it resuscitates an ap-
proach preeminently associated with the work of Andreas Heusler in the 1920s,
which has long since been rendered seriously questionable.
Andersson claims that certain texts which do not exist "must have existed because
they explain the presence of German and Norse texts that tell the same story without
direct access to one another" (p. 18). Much of his attention is devoted to these
hypothetical texts, and he proposes, in Heuslerian terms, a coherent evolution of the
narratives of Brynhild, from the Eddic Sigurd Poems (pp. 24-127) through Pi6reks
saga (pp. 128-50) and the Nibelungenlied (pp. 151-228) to the Lied vom Hurnen Seyfrid
(pp. 229-35). The author is aware of the fact that his criteria for establishing this
evolution may seem outmoded: "Nibelungenlied scholars . . . will find this method
antiquated because they are currently more concerned with the literary or oral
qualities of the poem than with the sources. I ask them to bear in mind that the
present study focuses on the Brynhild tradition, not the status of Nibelungenlied
research" (p. 5). One may ask in return whether a study of the Brynhild tradition and
its sources can remain untouched by questions similar to those that currently agitate
Nibelungenlied research. Is not a concern with "oral qualities" - whatever may be
meant by the phrase - necessarily a concern with the "sources" of those qualities,
that is, with the tradition that supplies them and shapes the poem, within which the
poem functions?
The author is not at all concerned with such matters, preferring instead to view the
literary development of the Brynhild legend as a giant jigsaw puzzle with some of the
pieces missing. In order to put the puzzle together, one must "reconstruct" the
missing pieces; in order to be able to do this, one must assume certain relationships to
have existed between the transmitted and the missing pieces; in order to be able to
assume these relationships, one must already have a very clear image of what the
complete puzzle looked like. In short, one must start with the answer to the problem
and construct a justification for that answer, a Heusler-hallowed philological pastime.
To justify this method, it is not enough to say that it "has temporarily receded in the
cycle of scholarly fashions" (pp. 17-18) or to lament the "neglect of legendary history
in the past forty years" (p. 18).
Throughout the book the author uses totally hypothetical texts such as the poem
Sigur6arkvi6a in meiri (which presumably filled part of a lacuna in the Codex Regius,
MS 2365 4? of the Arnamagnaean Manuscript Institute, Reykjavik) and that all-
purpose invention of Heusler, the "Altere Not," as well as partially hypothetical text
such as Sigur6arkvi6a in forna (only about half of which is preserved in the Codex
Regius). It is perhaps arguable that the hypothetical texts may have existed. That
they must have existed is another matter, as is the assumption that they are recon-
structable. According to Andersson, "We have an obligation to concern ourselves
with these sources not only because they existed [my italics], but because they are a
valuable instrument for our critical appreciation of the surviving versions" (p. 18).
Hypotheses all too quickly become facts that we must take into account.
The book abounds with examples of reasoning that undergoes this kind of muta-
tion. On page 47, the author proposes as an assumption "that the Meiri poet knew

This content downloaded from 130.208.37.218 on Mon, 05 Dec 2016 14:38:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 348 Reviews

both Forna and Skamma." There follows the statement that "Forna betrays no knowl-
edge of a prior betrothal while Skamma is ambiguous and can be interpreted either
way. Meiri, however, is perfectly precise." But Meiri is nothing but a hypothesis, a fact
that is not altered by the further hypothesis that "Volsunga saga [is] an undisputed
derivative from Meiri" (ibid.). The author's contention that "the most altered text is
Volsunga saga's version of Meiri" (p. 193) not only makes matters even more colorful,
but also surely justifies the raising of an eyebrow when we are told that a scene in
Pidreks saga is "supported by analogous phrasing in Meiri" (p. 169). On page 54 we
are told of the "indisputable testimony of Meiri" and on page 58 we are even made
acquainted with "a familiar preoccupation of the Meiri poet." A sort of crescendo is
reached when Meiri is characterized as "a firmly restrung drama of jealousy" (p. 74),
and when we are assured that this nonexistent text is "comparable with the contem-
porary German Nibelungenlied" (p. 75). Similar magic is wrought with the nonexistent
"Altere Not": "The guests are relieved of their arms in a scene borrowed from the
attempted disarming of the Burgundians when they arrive at the Hunnish court in
the 'Altere Not'" (p. 172). Adventure 9, "an ornamental canto" that "offers nothing
of substance" (p. 175), is said to have originated in the "Altere Not" and we are even
told of a passage in the Nibelungenlied which "demonstrably [my italics] derives from
the 'Altere Not' " (p. 181).
Similar instances of "mistaken reality" can be found by the dozen throughout the
book, to the extent that one begins to look for something that would explain the
consistent application of such a "method." I can suggest two possibilities:
(1) On page 128 we are told that the section of pidreks saga that deals with the fall
of the Burgundians ("Niflunga saga") "is based on the same written south German
epic (Heusler's 'Altere Not') that served as the source for the second part of the
Nibelungenlied. This source can be reconstructed in broad outline from a comparison
of the Nibelungenlied and Pidreks saga, and we can trace how it was recast by the north
German redactor in terms of his native traditions and again to a lesser extent by the
Norse translator in accordance with his knowledge of the Scandinavian version." The
use of two existing texts to reconstruct a nonexistent text may in this instance be
explained by Andersson's choice of authorities. "In our area it is in fact sufficient to
study the contributions of Boer, Heusler, Polak, Neckel, Panzer, de Boor, Hempel,
Schneider, Wieselgren, Mohr, Hans Kuhn, and individual articles by Fromm and
Bumke. The remaining literature adds little" (p. 152, n. 1). This is a magisterial
statement, considering that the earliest of the contributions referred to was published
in 1902, the most recent in 1962, and only five since the end of World War II. Even
"in our area," a number of other names are more than marginally significant: Finch,
Krogmann, Hugo Kuhn, Lohse, Haug, Klaus von See, Ploss, Hellmut Rosenfeld,
and, not least, Helmut Brackert, who shed some revealing light on many problems
with which this book ought to -be concerned.
(2) The second possible explanation, not unrelated to the first, may lie in the
following passage: "The reconstructions of the 'Altere Not' are in fairly good agree-
ment with each other and I believe the burden of disproof rests on the skeptics. They
must find an alternative explanation for the massive correspondences in detail and
wording between 'Niflunga saga' and Part II of the Nibelungenlied. Until such an
explanation is offered, it is safe to assume that the correspondences derive from a
common written source" (p. 6). It is curious that "massive correspondences in detail
and wording" (p. 6) can lead to reconstruction only "in broad outline" (p. 128), and it
must be pointed out that correspondences in wording between an Old Norse prose

This content downloaded from 130.208.37.218 on Mon, 05 Dec 2016 14:38:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Reviews 349

text and a Middle High German verse text are always less than demonstrable, if not
impossible. Massive correspondences of any sort merely indicate that the narrative
patterns in question (and the manner of formulating them) are part of the same or
similar traditions; they may be fixed exclusively in a particular written source, but
they do not have to be. Accordingly, it is impossible to ascertain the precise text of
the source or sources. Nothing illustrates this better than the prologue to PiOreks
saga: "This saga is composed according to the account of Germans, to some extent
from their poems [plural] intended for the entertainment of nobles . . . , and even
if you take a man from every town in all of Saxony, they will all tell this tale the same
way because of their old poems [plural ]...." And similarly the conclusion of
"Niflunga saga": "We have been told about this by men who were born in Bremen or
Miinster and none knew anything about the other, but all told it in the same way, for
the most part as it is told in the old poems [plural] in the German tongue" (p. 129).
Finally, I should like to point out that the coherence of a text is determined by
conventions of perception that do not emanate from the text, but are superimposed
on it by a consensus of a culture or subculture. The "meaning" of a text, its function,
depends on the society in which it is transmitted. Apart from scattered gener-
alizations about "courtly" or "heroic" attributes, this most important aspect of any
text is totally neglected by the author. Andersson does not discuss such problematic
concepts as a heroic age, courtly civilization, the effects of literacy, and precodical
written transmission in Iceland. An occasional remark about "psychological ex-
perimentation" in Forna (p. 34), the Skamma poet's fondness for "flamboyant effects"
(ibid.), the fact that the Meiri poet "speculated openly for us" (p. 59), that he "was
more judicious" than the Skamma poet (p. 61), that in Meiri Brynhild "morally
dominates Sigurd" (p. 247) - all this is no substitute for an explanation of the
coherence of these texts as texts and of their function in their respective societies.
The next to last sentence in the book is an exemplum in nuce: "The Brynhild of
Skamma, and more particularly of Meiri, is the most complete psychological portrait,
male or female, in Icelandic literature" (p. 249). In view of the fact that the Brynhild
of Meiri does not exist, this is not saying much for Icelandic literature.
The selected bibliography (pp. 250-57) and index of the principal motifs (pp.
259-60) are helpful, as long as the reader remembers the limitations imposed by the
author's conception of his subject.

FRANZ H. BXUML
University of California, Los Angeles

KLAUS ARNOLD, Kind und Gesellschaft in Mlittelalter und Renaissance. Beitrdge und Te
zur Geschichte der Kindheit. (Sammlung Zebra, B/2.) Paderborn: Ferdinand
Sch6ningh; Munich: Martin Lurz, 1980. Paper. Pp. 201; 9 illustrations. DM 19.80.
THE PUBLICATION of this book tells us a good amount about the evolution of schol-
arship devoted to the history of childhood. It suggests both that it is now possible to
put together a synthetic overview of medieval and Renaissance childhood and that
there is sufficient student interest in the topic (at least in German universities) to
justify producing a book intended as a teaching tool.
Klaus Arnold's brief book is sharply divided into two sections (the pages are even

This content downloaded from 130.208.37.218 on Mon, 05 Dec 2016 14:38:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms