jealousy of the insulted queen.
Opposed now to the mythological interpretation is the other view already
spoken of, which denies the possibility of mythological features, and
does not seek to trace the legend beyond the heroic stage. The best
exponent of this view is R. C. Boer, who has made a remarkable attempt
to resolve the story into its simplest constituents. According to him
the nucleus of the legend is an old story of the murder of relatives
("Verwandienmord"), the original form being perhaps as follows. Attila
(i.e., the enemy of Hagen under any name) is married to Hagen's sister
Grimhild or Gudrun. He invites his brother-in-law to his house, attacks
him in the hope of obtaining his treasure, and kills him. According
to this view Hagen was originally the king, but later sinks to a
subordinate position through the subsequent connection of the story with
the Burgundians. It is of course useless to hunt for the date of such
an episode in history. Such a murder could have frequently occurred, and
can be localized anywhere. Very early we find this Hagen story united
with the Siegfried legend. If the latter is mythological, then we have
a heterogeneous combination, a mythical legend grafted on a purely human
one. This Boer thinks unlikely, and presents a number of arguments to
disprove the mythical character of the Siegfried story, into which
we cannot enter here. He comes, however, to the conclusion, that the
Siegfried tale is likewise purely human, and consisted originally of the
murder of relatives, that is, a repetition of the Hagen title. Siegfried
is married to Hagen's sister, and is killed by his brother-in-law
because of his treasure. The kernel of the legend is, therefore, the
enmity between relatives, which exists in two forms, the one in which
the 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 by him, too, as
in the "Hilde" saga. The German tradition tries to combine the two by
introducing the new feature, that Kriemhild causes the death of her
relatives, in order to avenge her first husband. Boer is of the opinion
that both the Norse and the German versions have forgotten the original
connection between the two stories, and that this connection was nothing
more nor less than the common motive of the treasure. The same treasure,
which causes Hagen to murder Siegfried, causes his own death in turn
through the greed of Attila. There was originally, according to Boer, no
question of revenge, except the revenge of fate, the retribution which
overtakes the criminal. This feeling for the irony of fate was lost
when the motive, that Hagen kills Siegfried because of his treasure,
was replaced by the one that he does it at the request of Brunhild. This
leads Boer to the conclusion, that Brunhild did not originally belong to
the Siegfried story, but to the well-known fairy tale of Sleeping Beauty
("Erlosungsmurchen"), which occurs in a variety of forms. The type is
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account