Theodore Andersson - The Epic Source Od The Nibelungenlied PDF

T H E O D O R E M.
A N D E R S S O N
The Epic Source of Niflunga saga and

the Nibelungenlied
Uncovering the epic source of the NI. P a rt I I (Heuslers ltere Not) is

a classical problem which has fallen into disrepute. In the wake of Panzers
rejection of such a source, a rejection which coincided with a new critical
trend and which therefore exerted an influence quite unw arranted by
the quality of the argum ent advanced, it has become custom ary to dis-
miss the sources of the NI. as hypothetical or to disregard them because
they divert attention from the NI. te x t [e.g., W. Schrder (1) 194 [but cf.
(2) 182 84], Weber 14, Mancinelli 295 and 304, Mowatt and Sacker 20,
W. H offm ann (2) 14; the ltere N ot is still accepted by Lohse (1) (2),
Hempel (3) 182, H ans K uhn 282]. For source study recent critics have
asked us to substitute close attention to the poem itself [e.g., M aurer 70,
Linke 371, Bostock 228, Mowatt 26162, W. Hoffmann (1) 8587,
Fourquet 221]. So unfashionable have source problems become th a t
Rosw itha Wisniewskis m ajor contribution from 1961 has gone virtually
unm entioned in the literature of the last decade except for a handful of
reviews and an article by H orst Ptz, which does not bear directly on
the Nibelung problem. The epic source continues to be brushed aside
despite the faet th a t Professor Wisniewski substantiated it and despite
the faet th a t her book is tightly reasoned and skillfully argued. I t has
certainly deser ved detailed examination long before this.
Wisniewski argues th a t the account in ireks saga (Niflunga saga)
results from the intertw ining of two more or less parallel sources, the epic
source of the NI. and a Soest chronicle. She attem pts to reconstruct both
these sources and to characterize each. The reconstruction envisages
a rather substantial chronicle source alongside H euslers epic source and
therefore departs from the views advanced by Heusler and Hempel to
the effect th a t Niflunga saga is based almost entirely on the epic source
and to a much lesser extent on unformed or balladic traditions from
N orth Germany. The question which confronts us is whether this new
analysis is preferable to the old one. Despite the rigor of Professor Wis
niewskis argum ent, I believe th a t her results are not compelling and th a t
1 A R K IV F R N O R D IS K FIL O L O G I L X X X V II I
2 Theodore M. Andersson. [2
the older view, argued with individual differences by Heusler and Hempel,
should be reinstated. In general, I find W isniewskis two sources so similar
th a t a t m any points they run the risk of being identical, and in detail
I find th a t much of the narrative which she derives from her second source
can be more readily derived from the epic source. Howe ver, rather than
conducting a point-by-point critique of her analysis, I propose to offer
an alternate reconstruetion of the epic source, noting deviations from
Wisniewskis view as I progress. In conclusion I will suggest how such a
reconstruction m ay be applied to the understanding of the NI. as we have
it. The NI. is cited from Bartsch-de Boor (with references to B atts when
needed) and ireks saga from Bertelsens edition (vol. 2 by page and
line). Bibliographical citations are in square brackets and refer to the
appended bibliography. In the following sum m ary of the epic source the
NI. A dventure divisions are indicated parenthetically in Rom an numerals.
The N arrative Outline of the Epic Source
The Wooing of Kriemhilt

(XX) Etzel becomes a widower and learns of Siegfrieds death.1 He sends
for Rdeger and dispatches him richly equipped to woo K riem hilt.2
Reception a t W orm s.3 Rdeger conveys E tzels suit.4 He is given a favor
able hearing.5 Gnther convenes a council to discuss the su it.6 Hagen
warns of K riem hilts vengefulness, b u t is obliged to acquiesce.7 K riem hilt
is persuaded by E tzels power and the prospect of revenge.8 Hagen seizes
K riem hilts gold and G nther bestows gifts on Rdeger.9 D eparture with
K riem hilt.10 (XXI) K riem hilts progress down the Danube.11 (X X II)
Etzel meets K riem hilt (at Tulln?) and the nuptials are celebrated (at
Vienna?).12 Kriem hilt continues to bewail the loss of Siegfried.13
The Nibelung s Bidden to a Feast

(X X III) Kriem hilt bears a son Ortliep and remains in H unland for seven
years.14 She reflects on Siegfrieds death and the loss of the Nibelung
treasure and ponders revenge.15 One night in E tzels bed she expresses
a longing to see her brothers.16 Etzel gives her permission to invite them
and she equips and instructs two m instrels.17 She gives them a false letter
on their departure.18 (XXIV) They set out and journey to W orms.19
Reception at W orms.20 The minstrels convey the letter.21 G nther con
venes a council to debate the invitation. Hagen opposes it and argues th a t
3] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga an d the N ibelungenlied 3
they will not return ali ve, but G nther m aintains th a t the invitation
betokens good intentions. Hagen repeats his baleful prediction and Gn
th er rails a t his birth. Hagen repeats the prediction a third time and
Gnther now mocks his fear of K riem hilt.22 Hagen finally declares his
intention to make the trip and summons Volker.23 The Nibelungs detain
E tzels messengers so th a t Kriem hilt will have no advance notice of their
arrival and no tim e to plot against them .24 (XXV) Hagen rejects U otes
ominous dream .25 Uote is eager to detain Giselher, b u t he insists on ac-
companying his brothers.26 The Nibelungs m uster and depart, leaving
m any fair women behind.27
The Journey East

The Nibelungs camp by the Rhine, then march to the D anube.28 They
find no boat.29 Hagen stands watch and proceeds downstream in the
m oonlight.30 He observes mermaids bathing in a pond and takes their
clothes.31 The mermaids ask for the return of their clothes, b u t Hagen
stipulates a prophecy. One of the mermaids prophesies th a t all the
Nibelungs will cross the river, bu t only the chaplain will return. Hagen
kills the mermaid and her daughter.32 Hagen continues downstream and
finds a ferryman on the river.33 Hagen identifies himself as Elses m an
Amelrich. The boatm an refuses to ferry him across w ithout a fee. Hagen
offers him a gold ring and the boatm an, who is eager to earn gold for his
young wife, rows to shore.34 At first the boatm an refuses to obey H agens
instructions and follow the shoreline to the Nibelung cam p.35 Hagen
quickly subdues him and obliges him to follow this course.36 After
arri ving a t camp, Hagen acts as ferrym an.37 He rows so hard th a t he
breaks both oars and oarlocks, curses the boatm an, and kills him .38 When
Gnther asks the reason, he explains th a t he wishes to prevent a prem at-
ure report of their arrival. He then repairs the b o at.39 Hagen pitches the
chaplain overboard in an attem pt to drown him. G nther chides him
again, but Hagen asks why he should refrain from wicked deeds since
they are all fated to die.40 When the Nibelungs have all been ferried
across, Hagen destroys the boat.41 (XXVI) Having crossed the river,
the Nibelungs march all day and pitch camp in the evening.42
Hagen again holds the w atch.43 He finds the border guard Eckewart
asleep and disarms him.44 Eckew art lam ents.45 Hagen returns his sword
and gives him gold.46 Eckewart warns him of enm ity in H unland.47 Hagen
asks for lodging.48 Eckew art directs him to Riideger and acts as mes-
4 Theodore M. A ndersson [4
senger.49 Hagen reports to the Nibelungs.50 Eckew art announces their

arrival to Rdeger.51
The Idyll at Pchlarn

(X XV II) Festive preparations.52 Rdeger rides out to receive his guests.53
They are seated a t a banquet.54 The Nibelungs feast and then retire.55
T hat night Rdeger consults w ith Gotelint on the marriage of their
daughter to Giselher.56 The following day Rdeger urges the Nibelungs
to extend their stay .57 They are eager to press forward and decline.58
There is feasting and entertainm ent.59 Rdeger bestows gifts on his guests:
Gnther receives a helm et (coat of mail?); Gernot receives a shield;
Giselher receives the hand of Rdegers daughter in m arriage and a
sword; Hagen receives Nuodungs shield.60 Gotelint bids her guests fare-
well.61 Rdeger takes leave of G otelint.62 He accompanies the Nibelungs.63
He dispatches a messenger to E tzel.64
The Arrival in Hunland

(X X V III) Dietrich rides out to welcome the guests.65 He warns them th a t
Kriem hilt still m ourns.66 Hagen rejects the warning w ith the comment
th a t Siegfried is dead and buried and should be forgotten.67 The proces
sion advances and K riem hilt observes her brothers from a window.68
The Nibelungs proceed am idst a general adm iration of H agen.69 The
Nibelungs and their retinue are lodged separately.70 K riem hilt greets and
kisses Giselher.71 Hagen tightens his helm et.72 Kriem hilt demands the
Nibelung treasure from H agen.73 Hagen replies th a t he has brought only
his weapons.74 K riem hilt bids the Nibelungs lay aside their arms before
entering the banquet hall.75 Hagen refuses.76 Kriem hilt realizes th a t the
Nibelungs have been warned and denounces the culprit.77 Dietrich de-
clares th a t he gave the w arning.78 Kriem hilt departs in silence.79 Dietrich
and Hagen converse arm in arm .80 Etzel observes Hagen from a distance
and inquires about his identity.81 He is identified.82 Etzel reminisces
about Hagen and W alther.83 (X X IX ) The Nibelungs enter E tzels hall.84
Etzel welcomes his guests from his highseat.85 The feast is sum ptuous.86
(XXX) The Nibelungs retire to their sleeping quarters.87
Kriemhilt Incites the Huns

(X X X I) Hagen awakens th e Nibelungs in the morning.88 They go to
church arm ed.89 Etzel inquires into the meaning of their arm s.90 Hagen
5] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied
explains the bearing of arms as a Nibelung custom .91 The church ser
vices.92 Preparations are made for a banquet.93 Kriem hilt appeals to
Dietrich for help in her vengeance.94 He refuses.95 Kriem hilt now appeals
to Bldelin.96 Bldelin refuses at first.97 Kriem hilt persists and Bldelin
consents. He is to kili the Nibelungs atten d an ts.98
The First Day of Fighting

The banquet begins." K riem hilt has her son Ortliep carried into the
hall.100 (X X X II) Bldelin attacks and kills the attendants.101 (X X X III)
Kriem hilt instructs Ortliep to strike Hagen.102 Hagen beheads Ortliep and
his tu to r.103 Etzel orders his men to attack the Nibelungs.104 All the H uns
who do not escape from the hall are killed.105 (XXX IV) Etzel orders his
men to renew the attack .106 Dietrich withdraws.107 Kriem hilt incites the
Hunnish warriors with gold.108 Bldelin engages Gernot and falls.109
Rdeger is infuriated at the news of Bldelins death and piunges into
the fray.110 K riem hilt incites Irinc w ith gold.111 (XXXV) He engages
Hagen and inflicts a wound.112 Kriem hilt thanks Irinc and encourages
him with the sight of biood flowing from H agens wound.113 Irinc renews
his attack on Hagen and falls.114 (XXXVI) Kriem hilt orders the hall set
ablaze.115 The Nibelungs pass the night in terrible straits.116
The Second Day of Fighting

In the morning the survivors prepare for a new attack .117 (X X X V II)
Rdeger leads the a tta ck .118 He engages Giselher and falls.119 Gernot and
Giselher lead the counterattack against the remaining H uns.120
(X X X V III) Dietrich sees th a t Rdeger is dead and orders his men into
battie.121 Dietrich kills Volker.122 H ildebrant kills Gernot.123 Giselher
engages H ildebrant.124 Hagen asks Etzel to spare Giselher; Giselher points
out th a t he was a mere child a t the tim e of Siegfrieds death, b u t he is
unwilling to survive his brothers.125 Giselher falls, leaving H ildebrant to
confront Hagen while Dietrich confronts G nther.126 Hagen wounds
H ildebrant a t about the same moment th a t Dietrich subdues G nther.127
(X X X IX ) Hagen challenges Dietrich to fight him alone.128 Dietrich
agrees.129 They fight and Dietrich subdues H agen.130 Hagen is bound and
brought before K riem hilt.131 She bids him surrender the Nibelung treas-
ure.132 He replies th a t his lips are sealed as long as any of his lords is
alive.133 Kriem hilt brings him G unthers head.134 Hagen exults in his
secret.135 Kriem hilt beheads him .136 Dietrich executes K riem hilt.137
The Composition of the Epic Source

Werner Hoffmann [(1) 8587] has cautioned against our preoccupation
with the lost antecedents of the NI. on the ground th a t we can only illumi-
nate m atters of plot and cast, while the dichterische Gestaltungshhe
of the lost m aterial will continue to be inaccessible. This spirit of renuncia-
tion seems to me prem ature. If we can deduce a plot for the epic source,
we can also say something about general features of structure and com
position; these are liter ary features, susceptible of liter ary assessment.
Such an assessment is a tem pting task because the lost epic source appears
to have been neatly and effectively composed and because it is the closest
thing we have to a survival of heroic poetry from tw elfth-century Ger
many. As such, it is too valuable to be sacrificed to a critical dogma about
what should and should not be studied.
The narrative divides naturally into eight sections: wooing, invitation,
journey, idyll a t Pchlarn, arrival in Hunland, K riem hilts strategy, the
first days fighting, and the second days fighting. The divisions are
m arked by the passage of unfilled tim e and these interstices shrink as the
story progresses. The invitation comes se ven years af ter the wooing, the
journey a few days af ter the invitation, the idyll a t Pchlarn m arks the
delay of a single day and night, between the arrival and the onslaught
there is one night, and between the two days of fighting there is another
night, which, however, brings no respite to the Nibelungs trapped in the
burning banquet hall. The plot tightens as it builds.
The first section provides the necessary background on Siegfrieds
death, retrospectively and in the form of a report. Etzel sues for the hand
of Siegfrieds widow and G nther convenes a council a t which the theme
of the poem becomes immediately apparent in H agens foreboding. His
fears are borne out when Kriem hilt accepts the suit, overtly out of defer-
ence to E tzels distinction, secretly because of the power and wealth
which the marriage will pu t a t the disposal of her vengeance. The section
ends on an ominous note as K riem hilt continues to bewail the loss of
Siegfried, signifying th a t there is no wavering in her vengeful designs.
This introduction provides w hat is needed in the way of exposition and
focuses clearly on the personalities of the chief antagonists. Hagen is
clear-sighted, b u t unheeded (already burdened by inferior birth in dealing
with his half brothers). He is destined throughout to see clearly b u t to be
thw arted in his perceptions. K riem hilt is shown from the outset to be not
only lancrche, bu t also cunning in the form ulation of her designs.
The second section picks up the them e of gnawing vengefulness after
7] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied 7
seven years in H unlandwe are given to understand th a t Kriem hilt has

scarcely let a day go by w ithout pondering her secret intentions and we
surmise th a t she has wasted no tim e in accum ulating the necessary power
and influence. H er deviousness emerges fully when she approaches Etzel
(in bed, where the duli husband will be weakest!), feigning, w ith cold
hypocrisy, a longing to see her brothers. Etzel, whose role throughout is
to be his wifes unwitting instrum ent, agrees to the desired invitation and
compounds his imperceptiveness by charging Kriem hilt with the arrange
ments. She avails herself of the opportunity by dispatching a false letter,
always the device of consummate schemers. Upon receipt of the letter,
G nther, whom seven years have made as forgetful as they have made
K riem hilt mindful of her woe, reconvenes his council. Time has not
obscured H agens intelligence, bu t in a threefold exchange of m ounting
rancor he is baited into an angry acceptance of the perfidious invitation.
The first two sections thus stage a sequence of cautious maneuvering and
countermaneuvering executed a t a wary distance from one another by
Hagen and Kriem hilt, an exercise in which Kriem hilt, preying on the
credulity of Etzel and her brothers, gains the initial advantage and causes
her opponent to falter. The second section, like the first, ends on an omi-
nous note as Hagen, now absorbed in his own anger, rejects U otes
m onitory dream, Giselher refuses to be detained, and the Nibelungs
depart, leaving behind m any fair women whom they will never see again.
The th ird section is the book of H agens wrath; he has been outmaneu-
vered, b u t he is terrible in his fury. He meets the mermaids, learns from
them w hat doom awaits the Nibelungs, and cuts down the unoffending
soothsayers. He then browbeats the boatm an and, when the oarlocks fail,
gives him equally short shrift. He wo uld happily make an end of the
chaplain as well and his failure only serves to confirm his doom according
to the prophecy of the mermaids. Einally, he destroys the boat after he
has ferried the Nibelungs across, presumably to forestall any thought of
return. The journey acquires a special dimension by being perceived
through the magnification of H agens angerit is not the itinerary which
preoccupied the poet, b u t H agens pent-up resolve and the restless energy
with which he directs the march. This energy is conveyed most forcefully
by H agens two consecutive night watches after full days on the road.
B ut by the second night his w rath has subsided and gives way to a courtly
exchange with Ecke w art, with whom he obviously feels a sym pathetic
bond. The generous words and polite gestures of this interview contradict
his relationship to the Nibelungs, tem porarily darkened by insult and
frustration, and give a glimpse of H agens fundam ental correctness
beneath his emotion. The tone of the scene also ushers in the peaceful
interlude a t Pchlarn.
Whereas section three is given over to black anger and m isunderstand-
ing, section four affords a scene of bright intim acy and promise, sealed by
Giselhers betrothai and the giving of gifts. B n t even here the foreboding
persists. Gotelint wonders whether Giselher will live to m arry her
daughter, and her parting with Rdeger reenacts the wistful parting of
the Nibelungs from m any fair women earlier.
This foreboding becomes more explicit in the fifth section when Dietrich
warns the Nibelungs of K riem hilts mood. B u t Hagen is comm itted to
the encounter and shrugs off the warning. He advances am idst the
adm iration of the Huns, secure not only in his conspicuous stature but
clearly also in the strength of his determ ination. This is the m oment for
the first direct confrontation. K riem hilt dem onstratively kisses only
Giselher, and Hagen, with a wry gesture, tightens his helmet. Kriem hilt
responds to the goad and mockingly inquires whether Hagen has brought
her treasure. Hagen replies in kind: his weapons were all he could manage!
The mention of weapons suggests to K riem hilt th a t she can disarm her
enemies by the simple device of storing their weapons outside the banquet
hall, but when Hagen refuses, she drops her sarcastic tone and angrily
exclaims th a t the Nibelungs are forewarned. Dietrich prom ptly takes
credit for the warning and K riem hilt m ust depart in smoldering silence,
leaving Hagen in command of the verbal battlefield. This is the compensa-
tory p attern of heroic poetry; Hagen is already a doomed m an, b u t he is
given the satisfaction of a verbal and moral victory before succumbing.
W hen the direct confrontation has been resolved in this sense, Etzel
emerges to issue a guileless welcome and there is another pause in the
dram a while the Nibelungs banquet and retire for their last sleep.
The following morning the last rest is succeeded by the last church
services; then preparations are made to renew the banquet. A t this mo
m ent Kriem hilt begins to work her will behind the scene. She fails to
enlist D ietrichs support, but she does prevail on Bldelin and dispatches
him to kill the Nibelung retinue, thus eliminating any relief from outside
the banquet hall. W ithin the hall she gives the final proof of w hat is at
the same time her ruthlessness and her spirit of self-sacrifice by prodding
her little son to strike Hagen full in the face. Hagen understands the
finality of K riem hilts resolve implied in the gesture and responds by
striking off the childs head, together w ith his tu to rs, probably not so
much out of anger as out of a sense of inevitability and a realization th a t
there is no point in buying a little tim e. Hagen thus initiates the combat
9] The E pic Souree of N iflunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied 9
knowingly, bu t Etzel once more becomes the victim of his wifes m ani
pulation and orders his warriors into battle just as she intended. As in the
opening sections, only Hagen and K riem hilt stand above the action in
the full knowledge of w hat is happening.
The fighting itself is w ithout psychological interest. The most obvious
characteristic is symmetrical patterning, first in the form of doubling:
Etzel orders an initial attack within the hall, then, when all the H uns
have succumbed, a second attack from without; Kriem hilt first incites the
H unnish warriors w ith a general offer of gold, then applies specifically
to Irinc with an individual offer; Rdeger is activated by Blcedelins fall
and Dietrich in tu rn by Rdegers fall. The first combats hint a t a Nibel
ung victory as the chief H unnish warriors Bldelin, Irinc, and Rdeger
fall successively before Gernot, Hagen, and Giselher. Then the tide turns
when Dietrich enters the battie and kills Volker. The chief Nibelungs
now succumb one after the other in the final sequence of duels:
H ildebrant / Gernot
H ildebrant / Giselher
Hildebrant / Hagen Dietrich / Gnther
Dietrich / Hagen
The action then concludes w ith the final confrontation between Hagen
and K riem hilt and the successive execution of Gnther, Hagen, and
Kriemhilt.
The outline suggests th a t the older poem was characterized by great
clarity of construction and m otivation. K riem hilts vengeance is the
theme, while the restoration of her treasure is introduced in the first
instance as a mockery. In the final confrontation the mockery becomes
serious, but Hagen and K riem hilt are such perspicacious characters th a t
they can hardly have allowed the secondary issue to obscure the prim ary
issue. The treasure m otif merely focuses their animosity. Kriem hilt baits
Hagen with one last demand for her gold and he baits her in return by
stipulating G unthers death. As if to prove her u tte r abandon and her
disregard of everything b u t her ties to Siegfried, she turns the blade
against Hagen by delivering G unthers head in faet, leading him, once
more mockingly, to exult in his secret, which has now become inviolable.
Here the game is played out and Kriem hilt takes her final revenge. There
is a distorted kind of equality in this last exchange; the gold is not a real
issue, bu t it serves to give Hagen a m om entary victory, however hollow,
to counterbalance K riem hilts trium ph [cf. K uhn 280 306 and Schrder
(2) 15784]. The scene preserves intact the dram atic line of the whole
poem, which manages to m aintain the contest between Hagen and Kriem-
hilt always a t the center of the stage and always on even term s. The
very sym m etry of the bloodletting tow ard the end suggests the central
theme: a conflict between two equally inflexible wills, which, after a
lengthy prelude of counterbalancing attrition, ends in a standoff. The
chief excellence of the old poem was the sharpness w ith which it focused
this even contest. There is of course no way to calculate the poetic qualities
of the text, bu t the dram atic power m ust have been considerable.
The Composition of Niflunga saga

My reconstruction of the epic source has led me to depart from Wisniew-
skis hypothesis of two more or less coterminous and concurrent texts
intertw ined in Niflunga saga and to return to the hypothesis argued m ost
fully by Heusler and Hempel th a t Niflunga saga is based almost entirely
on the epic source, into which the compiler worked a Saxon ballad and
some local tradition from Soest. I also follow Hempel in believing th a t
the compilation was executed in Soest, for the reasons he gives and, more
particularly, because of the passage on Irungrs death, where details from
the epic source are combined w ith a Soest place name. I t is difficult to
imagine th a t this connection was made from the distant perspective of
Bergen, bu t it m ight have occurred naturally to a m an working in Soest
and familiar with some such m onument as Irings W all (see note 114).
The Soest tradition is concentrated in the fighting sequence in s. 310
316, bu t the m aterial from the Saxon ballad is more generally distributed.
Those passages which, to my mind, cannot be derived from the epic
source and reflect the Saxon ballad are the following [cf. Hempel (1)
10809]:
Osir as A ttilas chief lieutenant (275, 23276, 2)

A ttilas covetousness (279, 2426; 304, 13 15)
The capsizing of a small boat (287, 1824)
W et clothing dried a t fires (292, 6 13; 298, 7 11)
A ttila summons Osir to the feast (295, 20296, 10)
A ttila and Grimhildr assemble followers (296, 1522; 311, 4 7; 316, 3 7)
Grimhildr glimpses the Niflungs byrnies (298, 11 12)
The banquet in the orchard (302, 20 24; 304, 20 22; 308, 8309, 23)
Raw oxhides spread before the gates (309, 1620)
The attem pt to break out (310, 15; 311, 14312, 15; 314, 19315, 10)
11] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga and th e Nibelungenlied 11
Osir subdues Gunnarr (314, 6 19)

irekr subdues Hgni with fiery breath (325, 18)
Hgni begets a son and dies (326, 1322)
T he chief difficulty confronting the compiler of Niflunga saga was the

harm onization of this ballad version with the story of the epic source.
H is solution is far from adroit. Osir is worked in as a substitute for
Rdeger in the wooing sequence, bu t a lapse betrays the substitution
(note 2). A ttilas covetousness is introduced when Grimhildr tem pts him
w ith Sigurds wealth. He appears to take the bait, b u t his greed is sub-
sequently eliminated in favor of A ttila the hospitable dupe, as he was
portrayed in the epic source. Thus, when Grimhildr once more tem pts
him with gold (304, 13 15), he categorically rejects the lure.
The capsizing motif from the ballad source is introduced in the form
of a second smaller boat (that is, a boat w ith the dimensions of the ballad),
which has been discovered by Gunnarr and has capsized before Hgni
arrives with the larger boat (taken over from the epic source). This is
sym ptom atic of the compilers tendency to superimpose one source on the
other rather th an choosing between them or blending the two versions
into one. In this instance, he realizes th a t an insufficient num ber of Nif-
lungs has been soaked in the smaller boat and, as an afterthought, causes
th e larger boat to capsize as well, thus compounding the improbabilities.
The same sort of duplication occurs in connection with the fires at
which the Niflungs dry themselves. In the ballad this episode belonged to
the arrival at the H unnish court, b u t the Soest compiler was obliged to
square the motif with the longer journey in the epic source, which in-
cluded a stopo ver a t Pchlarn. His expedient was to add the drying
scene to the reception a t Bakalar as well as to the reception a t Soest,
inserting a heavy rainfall on the second stage of the journey in order to
redrench the Niflungs prior to the second drying cycle.
Closely associated with the drying scene a t Soest is Grimhildrs glimpse
of the byrnies worn by the Niflungs under their tunics, an intim ation th a t
th ey are on their guard. This too is duplicated in the scene a t Bakalar
when Guilinda comments on their arms and on Grimhildrs sorrow, also
a kind of intim ation, though not very clearly conceived.
A motif mentioned several times in the saga is the assembling of troops
an d followers by A ttila and Grimhildr. This motif was not to be found
in the epic source, but it is alluded to so persistently in the saga th a t it
can hardly be the compilers invention. We m ay therefore guess th a t it
was in the Saxon ballad as a feature of the deceitful reception prepared
for the Niflungs. One aspect of this motif is the summoning of Osir,
which, as I have suggested (note 64), is a t the bottom of the m ysterious
messenger scene at Dortmund.
The banquet in the orchard also clearly belongs to a source other than
the older epic. I t too is not merged w ith the hall banquet of the epic
source, b u t is superimposed on it end to end as explained in note 83.
Thus some of the action which took place a t the banquet and was described
a t greater length in the epic source was held over and reassigned to the
orchard banquet.
The fighting in the saga is a combination of the single combats from
the epic source and several features from the ballad: the spreading of
oxhides before the gates, the attem p t to break out of the orchard, and
the capture of Gunnarr by Osir. There is also an adm ixture of local
tradition attached to place names in Soest, an adm ixture which is more
difficult to isolate.
Toward the end of the fighting, the compiler finds th a t he is no longer
able to join his sources and m ust choose one or the other. H e therefore
opts for the ballad source (he is alm ost obliged to after the loss of Gunnarr)
and concludes with irekrs draconic subduing of Hgni and the la tte rs
engendering of a posthumous son.
The procedure followed in this combination of sources m ight better be
called additive th an syncretic, until the end, when it becomes substitutive.
In addition, there is some evidence th a t the Soest compiler abbreviated
and telescoped on occasion. The examples of abbreviation are the suppres
sion of Hgnis resistance to the wooing of Grimhildr (note 7) and the
suppression of irekrs warning, though some of the wording in this
scene is later retrieved (note 66). Evidence of telescoping comes from
the merging of public announcem ent and private council in the wooing
sequence (note 6), the merging of reflection and conversation scenes in
Grmhildrs urging of the invitation (note 15), and the merging of Rhine
and Danube (and the two camp sites) during the journey east (note 28).
Some of these changes m ay be accounted for as inadvertence, bu t some
m ay be the result of a deliberate redistribution of narrative as explained
in the appropriate notes (especially 83).
On the other hand, it is clearly intentional when the Soest compiler
suppresses all mentions of South German topography in the epic source.
This follows logically from his localization of the action a t Soest and
results in the elimination of the various journeys up and down the Danube
(notes 3, 10, 19).
The combination of sources, the occasional abbreviation, and the
13] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga an d th e N ibelungenlied 13
elimination of South German place names are all characteristic of the

Soest compiler. In addition, there are two compositional features which
belong to the Norse translator: the suppression of Christian references
and some token efforts a t Scandinavianization.
I t has generally been supposed th a t some of the Christian references
in the NI. belong to the last poet and were not present in the epic source,
which is more faithfully represented by the churchless saga text. B ut as
K laus von See writes [p. 151]: Dass das Nibelungenlied die Burgunden
als Christen auftreten lsst, entspricht also durchaus der historischen
W irklichkeit. E rst die Skandinavier haben die Sagenhelden durchweg zu
Heiden gemacht, und es ist wohl vor allem die altnordische berlieferung,
die den Eindruck h a t entstehen lassen, die Heldensage sei durch
und durch heidnisch. In view of this Norse tendency, I am
inclined to think th a t a t least two Christian references were present in
the Soest Compilation and were dropped only by the Norse translator:
the chaplain and the church services in Hunland. The elimination of the
chaplain leads to a slight non sequitur (note 32) and the elimination of
the church services leads to the somewhat innane and peculiarly Norse
passage in which the Niflungs walk about town oc skemta ser (note 89).
Those passages which show a superficial Scandinavianization, presum-
ably as a concession to the Norse reader, are Ds. 278, 24 279, 1; 280, 15;
294, 8 10. They confine themselves to naming Sigurds horse and sword
as gifts (with the resulting inconsistencies) and alluding to his youthful
feats. In addition, there may be a trace of Norse thinking in the Consulting
of Grimhildrs wishes in the m atter of a second marriage (note 5) and in
the open council at Worms (note 6), b u t it soon became evident to the
translator th a t he could make no headway with this sort of adaptation
and he quickly abandoned the idea.
The only passage in the saga which is difficult to square with the epic
source, the ballad, the work of the Soest compiler, or the work of the
Norse translator is the curious passage on the Niflung standards (s. 284,
20285, 6).
The Composition of the Nibelungenlied P a rt II

After tw enty years of synchronic orthodoxy, it m ay bear repeating th a t
the object of source study is not to obscure a te x t b u t to facilitate a clearer
understanding of the w riters technique and the nature of his special
contribution. A great deal has been w ritten in the last decade or two about
the artistic merits of the NI. poet w ithout much effort at distinguishing
between w hat he inherited and w hat he changed or added himself (the

notable exceptions are Joachim Bumke and Friedrich Neumann). The
following is an attem p t to isolate the NI. poets technique on the basis of
w hat we can deduce about his source for the second p a rt of the poern.
Unlike most recent criticism, it is not w ritten w ith adm iration afore-
thought. The NI. is an emotionally and sometimes scenically effective
work, but it is structurally, logically, and conceptually imperfect and
bears no comparison to the great courtly works of the same period.
The NI. poets m ost obvious contribution is the addition almost in toto
of five new Adventures: X X V I (Wie Gelfrt erslagen w art von Danc-
warte), X X IX (Wie Kriem hilt Hagenen verweiz u n t wie er niht gen ir
f stuont), X X X (Wie Hagen u n t Volkr der schiltw aht pflgen), X X X II
(Wie Dancw art Bldelinen sluoc), X X X V II (Wie Riiedegr erslagen
wart). [I differ from Heusler (pars. 40, 42, 83) in attributing the concep-
tion of Adventures X X X and X X X V II to the last poet and not to the
epic source.] A study of the NI. poet as Creative genius m ight well begin
with these Adventures; they are by no means the worst parts of the poem
and would no doubt reward special scrutiny. They are rem arkably uni
form in conception and are all designed to emphasize personal confronta-
tions, twice arm ed confrontations (XXVI, X X X II), twice a confrontation
of wills (X X IX , X X X ), and once an inner confrontation of alternatives
(X X X V II). Three of them p it Hagen against the Bavarians (XXVI),
then against Kriem hilt alone (X X IX ), then against K riem hilt and her
Hunnish followers (XXX). In the first instance he is seconded by D anc
w art, in the latter two by Volker. This in itself contrasts to the pattern
of the epic source, in which Hagen is thoroughly isolated both in spirit
and literally during his lonely night watches. There is something to be
said for the starkness of the older text, bu t there is no doubt th a t the
emphasis on companionship in the NI. adds a new w arm th to the hum an
situation. The same dimension emerges from Rdegers last-m oment,
supra-partisan relationship to Hagen. All of this bespeaks a special feeling
for the fellowship of arms [cf. Heusler (2) pars. 64 and 67] and might, for
example, be used to argue the poets m ilitary and chivalric affinities.
Another common feature in these new Adventures is the unusually
effective use of dialogue in them . One m ight almost say th a t each one is
built around a verbal exchange, sharp exchanges in the first four and the
sharp as well as pathetic exchanges in A dventure X X X V II. This is not
a little surprising since the verbal challenge is so closely associated w ith
the older forms of Germanic heroic poetry th a t we would instinctively
be inclined to regard it as a holdover in the NI. and not as an innovation.
15] The Epic Source of N iflunga saga an d th e Nibelungenlied 15
However, the only clear indication of such a tradition in the epic source
is one exchange between Kriem hilt and Hagen (notes 73 78) and we
m ust therefore regard edged dialogue as an im portant feature of the NI.
p o ets elaboration. Since this dialogue a rt does not derive directly from
the im m ediate antecedents of the poem and does not correspond to
anything in Contemporary German literature, it poses an interesting
question. Perhaps it is the last recapturing of a vanishing tradition of
heroic dialogue, akin to Saxo Gram m aticus cultivation of the fliting, in
which case it teils us something about the kind of narrative tradition still
available as a model to the NI. poet at the end of the tw elfth Century.
A th ird peculiarity of the new Adventures is a certain scenic vividness
in some of them: the nighttim e attack of the Bavarians, the demonstrative
posture of Hagen as he remains seated before Kriem hilt with Siegfrieds
sword across his knees, and the silent approach of K riem hilts Huns as
H agen and Volker hold the watch. These scenes document a special sense
of staging and a special sense of the dram atic moment. Two of them take
place a t night, again a rarity in the narrative literature around 1200,
but common enough in earlier heroic poetry. They m ay have been inspired
by a fam iliarity with a lingering heroic tradition or they m ay simply have
been inspired by an effort to accommodate new episodes in the old time
framework and the resulting necessity of utilizing the unexploited night
hours in the epic source. Thus, the night scenery in the Bavarian encounter
seems clearly to be carried over from the mermaid episode in the epic
source.
In general, the most persistent compositional principle in the NI. poets
adaptation of the epic source is the reassignment of action and dialogue
in order to absorb a larger cast into the narrative and provide a more
evenly distributed participation. This principle emerges, for example,
in a fondness for lengthy councils and discussions. Thus the NI. poet
prefaces E tzels wooing with a detailed inquiry conducted w ith his
vriunde and Rdeger (note 2). The council held to debate E tzels invita
tion was originally confined to Hagen and Gnther, but the NI. poet
broadens it by reassigning some of G unthers words to Gernot and Giselher
and by adding Rum olt (note 22). In the interview between Hagen and
Eckew art the NI. poet injects Gnther into the conversation and, in
retrospect, Gernot and Giselher (note 50). In the source the betrothal of
R degers daughter to Giselher is mooted only with Gotelint and then
proposed directly by Rdeger. The NI. poet manages to include Volker,
Gernot, and Hagen in the proposal scene (note 56). The original form of
D ietrichs warning was probably a simple exchange between Dietrich and
Hagen, bu t the NI. poet adds Gnther and Volker (note 67). In the source,
Kriem hilt appealed to Dietrich for aid and was refused. The NI. poet
divides the refusal between Dietrich and H ildebrant (note 95). The prin
ciple of broadened participation can apply not only to dialogue b u t to
action as well. In the most mechanical and incongruous redistribution
of all, the NI. poet interrupts Irincs combat w ith Hagen so th a t he can
fight a series of minor skirmishes with Volker, Gnther, Gernot, and
Giselher before rejoining Hagen (note 112). Other examples of expanded
participation are indicated in notes 115, 119, and 121.
Another im portant source of expansion is borrowing. There is some
inconclusive evidence of borrowing from Knig R other, H artm ann, and
Heinrich von Veldeke (notes 2 and 8), b u t more im portant is w hat I
would call intra-borrowing, th a t is, borrowing from other passages in
the NI. Thus, H agens identification of Rdeger approaching W orms is
based on his earlier identification of Siegfried (notes 3 and 19). K riem hilts
reluctance to rem arry and U otes urging echo the same p a tte rn a t the
beginning of the NI. (note 8). K riem hilts first meeting w ith Etzel echoes
her first meeting with Siegfried (note 12). Volkers offices as guide in
H unland echo Siegfrieds role in the journey to Iceland (note 33). H agens
and Volkers schiltwaht is probably an analogy to earlier night watches
(note 87). The jostling with the H uns in front of the church is modelled
on the jostling of the previous evening when the Nibelungs retire (note 91).
The joust in which Volker kills a Hunnish dandy is in im itation of the
joust at Tulln, which is itself an im itation of earlier jousts (notes 12 and
92). E tzels request th a t the Nibelungs foster Ortliep is an im itation of
K riem hilts fostering of Rdegers daughter (note 100).
Another form of borrowing is anticipation, which amounts to borrowing
ahead. Thus, E tzels concern about his acceptability as a husband to
a Christian queen anticipates K riem hilts own scruples on the same subject
(note 2). K riem hilts constant distributions of wealth anticipate her
specific wooing of allies once the Nibelungs have arrived in H unland
(note 12). After the Nibelung decision to accept the Hunnish invitation,
the NI. poet anticipates the mustering of men and relocates this episode
before the series of portents which warn of disaster and m ust be rejected
before it is logical to think of the preparations for departure (note 23).
In the mermaid sequence, the seeress anticipates H agens request for
a prophecy (note 32) and the subsequent conversation anticipates his
discovery of a boatm an (note 33). Again, after the discovery, the NI. poet
anticipates Hagens killing of the boatm an (note 36).
On occasion, the NI. poet will also retrieve a motif which for some reason
17] The E pic Source of Nif lunga saga and the N ibelungenlied 17
he has previously dropped. Thus, hving suppressed the false letter con-
taining an offer to divide E tzels realm, in order to relieve K riem hilts
character of some duplicity, the NI. is free to use this motif in E tzels
representations to Rdeger (note 118). Again, ha ving dropped the idea
th a t Giselher is too young to join the expedition to H unland, the poet is
able to transfer the motif to D ancwart (note 125), for whom it is, of course,
equally inappropriate since Dancwart was already active in the Saxon
war and in the wooing of Brnhilt.
This expansion and reordering does not always proceed smoothly and
sometimes involves w hat I will call narrative improvidence. For example,
K riem hilts prem ature distribution of wealth involves the poet in difficult
explanations of how she acquired the wealth (note 12). W hen the poet
anticipates her alleged longing for her brothers and assigns it to her own
private refleetions, thus converting it from a pretext into a genuine senti
m ent, he confuses her m otivation and muddles her character (note 15).
Again, when he plays down her duplicity in the invitation sequence by
reassigning the dispatching of the messengers to Etzel, he forgets th a t
the royal couple is in bed and provides no transition from the bedchamber
to the council chamber (note 17). Prior to the departure from Worms,
the NI. poet anticipates the lengthy preparations for the departure before
retrieving U otes prophetic dream, leaving unexplained why she has been
unaware of the plans so long and then reporting the dream as if she had
been present all the tim e (note 25). In the mermaid sequence, Hagen
discovers the boatm ans house across the river rather than the boatm an
himself on the river, leaving the circumstances of the ensuing conversation
quite unclear (note 33). The scene becomes even more difficult to visualize
because the poet allows Hagen to assume the identity of the boatm ans
brother without explaining how the boatm an can fail to see or hear the
falsehood (note 35). W hen the poet adds the Bavarian pursuit in Adven
ture XX VI, he fails to explain how news of the boatm ans death could
have reached Else and Gelpfrat (note 42). Having staged the Bavarian
attack a t night, the poet m ust abandon the nocturnal setting of H agens
encounter with Ecke w art and must, in the first place, cause the Nibelungs
to pitch camp in the morning and, in the second place, resort to an im
possible stanza in which the Nibelungs meet Eckew art in a body while
they are allegedly resting and he is sleeping (note 43). The insertion
of Adventure X X X (K riem hilts confrontation with Hagen and Volker
seated on a bench) also causes a chronological awkwardness since the
other Nibelungs are present b u t unaccounted for during the scene and
m ust be imagined in a state of suspended anim ation (note 83). Another
2 A K K IV F R N O R D IS K FIL O L O G I L X X X V II I
incongruity which derives from the expansion is E tzels inexplicable

obliviousness even after the hostile confrontations in Adventures X X IX
and X X X (note 91). Finally, at the very end of the poem, the action is
expanded and altered by using H ildebrant as a courier to Dietrich, who
stands aloof, and by appointing him as K riem hilts executioner, all this
despite the faet th a t he is suffering from a disabling wound (note 137).
The m ost troublesome consequence of D ietrichs absence until the last
moment is of course the anomaly th a t G nther is an idle witness to
H agens defeat (note 127).
A more incidental feature of the expansion in the NI. is the new a tte n
tion to ceremony. This is the aspect of the NI. poets elaboration which
is m ost clearly recognized and a few examples will suffice. There is the
increased form ality of Riidegers reception a t Worms (note 3) and the
subsequent reception of E tzels messengers (note 20). These messengers
are also dismissed with great courtesy, which stands in direct contradic-
tion to their prior involuntary detainm ent, a further example of improvi-
dence (note 24). H agens interview with the mermaids is given a cere-
monious aura, once again an alteration which does not harmonize per-
fectly with the nature of their prophecy (note 33). Another example is
the magnificent entertainm ent offered by Rdeger a t Pchlarn (note 58).
A special characteristic of this ceremonial dimension in the NI. is a
heightened attentiveness tow ard women [see Wisniewski 103], There is,
for example, a persistent effort to include women where scrupulous polite-
ness demands. Thus, E tzels messengers extend their invitation to include
Uote (note 22) and are in tu rn granted a parting interview w ith her
(note 24). Hagens courtesy to the mermaids is, one feels, largely dictated
by their sex (note 32). Rdeger makes a special point of announcing the
Nibelungs arrival a t Pchlarn to Gotelint (note 52) and much attention
is paid to the finery of the ladies a t Pchlarn and their reception of the
Nibelungs (notes 52 and 53). The betrothai of Rdegers daughter is
preceded by appreciative compliments paid her by Volker and Gernot
(note 56). The elimination of K riem hilts explicit willingness to sacrifice
Ortliep is no doubt also inspired by deference to her womanhood (note
102 ).
Another aspect of the ceremonial dimension which emerges now and
again is a certain hierarchical sense. The responsibility for the Hunnish
invitation is transferred from K riem hilt to Etzel, perhaps out of a belief
th a t this is a kings prerogative (note 17). Eckew art deals prim arily w ith
Hagen, b u t reports to Rdeger in G unthers name, presum ably out of
the same deference to rank (note 50). Similarly, the initiative in the m atter
of Giselhers betrothai is transferred from Rdeger to the kings entourage

(note 56). A final example is the reordering of the combats a t the end of
the poem in order th a t Gnther should succumb last (note 127).
A minor outgrow th of the expanded ceremoniousness is the taste for
precise numbers pointed out in notes 5, 9, 14, 22, and 58 [cf. Heusler (2)
par. 62].
Some changes seem not to develop out of narrative principles but
reflect the poets idiosyncracies, for example the anti-B avarian bias
apparent in the persistent references to highway robbery (note 3) and
the invention of a Bavarian defeat (note 42), or the recurring concern
over the marriage of a heathen to a Christian (notes 8, 14, 15). More inter-
esting is an obvious preoccupation w ith quandries and ambiguities re-
flected in K riem hilts hesitancy a t the prospect of remarriage (note 8),
her introspection before proposing the invitation (note 15), and, most
notably, Rdegers dilemma (note 118).
There has been a recent tendency to identify comprehensive poetic
principles in the NI., extracted by critics eager to promote a keener appre-
ciation of the poem, bu t it should be apparent th a t m ost of the innovations
are piecemeal, dictated by a wish to expand the dimensions of the te x t and
by a few general considerations of taste. The changes are not inspired by
a new overall design or a new poetic concept and they are often imperfectly
executed. The only grand idea carefully worked into the older epic and
carried through consistently and effectively is Rdegers dilemma. In
other respects the NI. poet has undertaken his elaborations ad hoc and
w ithout a great deal of concern for the composition as a whole. Perhaps
a more balanced aesthetic assessment of the poem will take into account
not only the undeniable scenic and emotive gains, b u t the equally undeni-
able compositional lapses as well. This was H euslers viewpoint and I will
conclude by recalling three of his relevant formulations [(2) pars. 74 and
98], which retain their validity af ter fif ty years: Man darf verallge
meinern: die Unebenheiten im Nibelungenlied haben ihren ersten und
hufigsten Grund darin, dass der Verfasser seine Vorlagen ungengend
eingeschmelzt hat; dass er ihnen nicht ganz selbstherrlich gegenb ersteht,
den Blickpunkt nicht hoch genug nim m t. Unserm Nibelungenmeister
werden wir nur gerecht, wenn wir beides, die hohe Selbstndigkeit und
die haushlterische Gebundenheit seines Dichtens wrdigen. Wo wir
m it den Quellen vergleichen, lautet das Ergebnis wieder und wieder: ein
seelischer Gewinnund eine Einbusse an straffer Fgung.
Notes
1 Nl. 1143 1144; s. 275, 2023. W isniewski 23 32 finds it impossible to recon-
cile th e wooing sequence as it is described in the Nl. an d s. (p. 27): Ths. u n d Nl.
sind in diesem ganzen 1. Teil (Aussenden des W erbers, W erbung, H ochzeit) so
verschieden, dass m an sagen kann: wir haben hier zwei W erke vor uns, die wohl
dasselbe T hem a behandeln, die aber in F orm u n d In h a lt so sta rk voneinander
abweichen, dass sie nicht auf eine gem einsame Quelle, die ltere N o t, zurck
gefhrt w erden knnen. Die Saga m uss eine andere V orlage b en u tzt haben, wenn
nicht der Sagam ann selbstndig gearbeitet h at. N u r in wenigen P u n k te n scheint
die Saga einen Einfluss der lteren N o t zu v erraten . My own view is th a t both
texts can be derived from th e epic source, th e Nl. w ith considerable b u t fairly
tran sp aren t elaboration and th e saga w ith m inor changes based on a few readily
com prehensible principles. The changes are: (1) th e su b stitu tio n of Osir (from the
Saxon ballad) for R deger in th e epic source, (2) th e telescoping of public hearing
and p rivate council a t W orm s in line w ith th e open n a tu re of a Norse court an d th e
Norse trad itio n of m arriage negotiations conducted b y representatives of b oth
principals (the saga w riters m ention of a dow ry is also p a r t of this trad itio n ), (3)
deference to G rim hildrs opinion in line w ith a Norse w idow s freedom to determ ine
her own rem arriage, (4) th e elim ination of H gnis opposition, since it duplicates his
later opposition to th e invitation, an d th e resulting nonsensical tran sfer of th e
power m otif in such a w ay as to signify th a t it is Hgni, ra th e r th a n G rim hildr, who
is persuaded by A ttila s pow er an d reputation, (5) th e identification of O sirs gift
as Sigurds sword G ram r, a touch of N orse au th en ticatio n [Wisniewski 30 31],
and (6) th e elim ination of S outh G erm an topography a n d th e consequent shift of
the w edding from V ienna to W orms. There are essentially three principles a t work
here: (1) harm onization w ith a N o rth G erm an ballad version an d th e elim ination
of South G erm an place nam es n o t to be reconciled w ith th e N o rth G erm an setting
(this tendency a ttrib u ta b le to th e Soest com piler), (2) ab breviation (the elim ination
of H gnis opposition a ttrib u ta b le either to th e Soest com piler or th e N orse tra n sla
tor), and (3) Scandinavianization (the w ork of th e N orse translator). The first two
principles are fairly persistent throu g h o u t the saga account, b u t th e last is aban-
doned alm ost im m ediately w hen it becomes clear to th e tran slato r th a t th e story
in hand is too different to allow for m uch Scandinavian ad ap tatio n .
2 Nl. 1145 1158; s. 275, 23 276, 14. s. a ttrib u te s th e wooing in itiativ e to
A ttila, th e Nl. to E tz e ls vriunde (1143). The Nl. adds a full discussion: E tzel is
concerned th a t a heathen will be unacceptable (1145); his advisers argue his great
nam e and w ealth (1146), th u s anticipating th e m otive for K riem h ilts acceptance
as we have it in E>s. 277, 1520; E tzel asks for inform ation on th e Burgiindians
and R deger responds th a t he has know n K riem hilt since he was a child (1147
1148); E tzel asks his advice an d R deger urges th e su it (1149 1150); E tzel asks
him to undertake th e suit an d promises rich rew ards (1151 1152); R deger wishes
to defray the expenses himself (1153); E tzel bids him Godspeed (1154); R deger is
eager to appear in W orm s in fitting splendor (1155 1156); he reinforces his re-
com m endation of K riem hilt on th e ground th a t she was m arried to such a distin-
guished m an as Siegfried, w ith whom E tzel was acq uainted (1157); E tzel approves
the argum ent (1158). s. departs from th e source chiefly in su b stitu tin g th e un-
know n Osir of H erraland for R deger. T h a t th e source h ad R deger in th is role
21] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga an d th e Nibelungenlied 21
is b etray ed by a slip in P s. 278, 25 279, 1, according to which G unnarr bestows

gifts on th e m argrave (i.e., Rongeirr) after th e wedding ceremony, despite th e
fact th a t M argrave R oingeirr has n o t y et been m entioned [Wisniewski 27 29].
A second difference is th a t P s. 275, 23 276, 3 causes Osir to come from a distance
to un d ertake the mission while R deger in th e NI. is already present a t E tz els
council. Ps. m ay be closer to th e source because th e council scene is a n innovation
in th e NI. and m ay have squeezed out th e m ention of a sum m ons. F urtherm ore,
th e reason for R degers presence a t court in th e NI. is left unexplained. The council
scene in th e NI. is th e first indication in P a r t I I of th e p o ets predilection for lengthy
discussions w ith full participation. I t m ay have been inspired by K nig R o th er
(vv. 19 85) or th e Brautwerbung p a tte rn in general and it is in line w ith m arriage
councils in P a rt I (48 64, 329 334). E tz els concern ab o u t th e acceptability of
a h eath en anticipates K riem hilts scruples (1248, 1261 1262). The argum ent of
nam e and w ealth is another anticipation and suggests th a t th is was th e real, or
ra th e r feigned, reason for K riem h ilts acceptance in th e epic source, m ore or less
as we have it in P s. 277, 15 20. R degers early acquaintance w ith K riem hilt and
E tz e ls previous acquaintance w ith Siegfried are b o th Augenblickseinflle [de Boor
189] to validate K riem hilts eligibility and to prepare th e w ay for th e special rela-
tionship betw een R deger an d K riem hilt. R degers desire to equip himself a t his
own expense m ay or m ay n o t have been in th e source [Ps. 276, 10 11: N v byz kann
til pessar ferdar med m ikilli kurteisi . . .]. s. m ay have neutralized a m ore insistent
S tatem ent in th e source or th e NI. m ay have elaborated a n eu tral statem en t as we
have it in s. The NI. expands R degers d eparture (1159 1173) w ith a leave-
tak in g from G otelint, some pillow ta lk ab o u t his mission (anticipating 1400 1407),
an d some splendid preparations.
3 The NI. elaborates the som ew hat S partan reception as it appears in P s. 276, 14 15
(eim er par vel fagnat.) by specifying th e journey through B av aria and to th e R hine
m ore exactly (1174 1175), by im itating th e teichoscopeia of NI. 79 102 and
allo wing H agen to identify R deger as he approaches (1177 1181), and by height-
ening th e ceremonial tone of th e welcome (1182 1189). Of these pluses, only th e
first is likely to belong to th e source since P s. consistently elim inates references to
South G erm an topography. On th e other hand, th e m otif of th e thieving B avarians
(1174) appears to be the last p o e ts idiosyncrasy (cf. 1302, 1429, 1494).
4 I n th e NI. R deger prefaces his su it w ith a form al com m unication of H elches
d eath (1190 1197). I t is n o t clear w hether this belongs to th e source and it is rath er
m ore likely to betoken th e la st p o e ts respect for high-ranking ladies. s. 276, 21
includes m ention of a dow ry (see note 1).
5 The original term s of th e response are difficult to reconstruct exactly. The
deference to G rim hildrs consent in P s. 277, 7 10 looks as though it m ay be in-
fluenced by th e Norse widow s independence often alluded to in th e n ativ e sagas.
On th e other hand, th e three-day (C: seven-day [B atts 364]) delay in th e NI. (1200)
partak es of th e last p o e ts fondness for specific num bers (cf. 1174 1175). The only
th in g th a t is certain about th e source is th a t G nther was favorably disposed. The
NI. adds a stan za w ith special provision for th e com fort of th e guests (1201).
6 The council certainly belongs to th e source since th ere is consultation b o th in
th e NI. (1202 1214) and in s. 276, 16 277, 11. I n P s. th e messenger addresses
himself to G unnarr, Hgni, and Gemoz and th ey consult in his presence. This m ay
be th e telescoping of tw o scenes in th e source in line w ith public councils as we have
them in Atlakvia, an d Atlaml as well as in th e N orse sagas. I n th e NI. th e B u r

gundian consultation is private.
7 I n s. 276, 24 277, I I there is im m ediate agreem ent am ong th e brothers, b u t
in th e NI. H agen dissents. Again, th e saga is pro b ab ly telescoping. H ag en s dissent
m ust have been in th e epic source. W hy stage a form al council if th ere is to be no
discussion? I n addition, this is th e only point a t w hich K riem h ilts grief an d venge-
fulness can emerge as a m otivation for her m arriage to E tzel an d as a backdrop for
the whole story. F urtherm ore, ominous w arnings belong to th e te x tu re of th e epic
source and occur a t regulr intervals throughou t. I t is difficult to believe th a t this
portentous note was n o t sounded a t th e very outset. Finally, th e dissent serves to
establish th e special antagonism betw een H agen an d K riem hilt w ith o u t delay.
8 I n s. 277, 15 17 G rim hildr agrees in a single sentence, w ith a second sentence
added to explain th a t she is sw ayed b y th e faet th a t A ttila is such a pow erful king
and has dispatched such a distinguished messenger. I n th e NI. her decision is pro-
trac ted (1215 1264). I t is clear th a t m ost of th e discrepancy is to be explained by
am plification in th e NI., n o t abbreviation in s. The am plification is accom plished
through th e use of analogies to previous passages in th e NI. an d perhaps loans from
H einrich von Veldeke an d H a rtm a n n von Aue. K riem h ilts initial refusal (1215
1220) echoes her dem ure response to th e prospect of m arriage in th e NI. 15 18.
S tanza 1218 m ay echo Erec 532 533 (cf. NI. 1676). K riem h ilts reluctance in her
first interview w ith R deger (1230 1241) looks as though it m ay be p a tte rn e d on
L audines role as sorrowful widow (cf. NI. 1233, 1234, 1238 an d Iw ein 1808 1810,
2070, 1811 1813) [R ichter 35: D as L audinenm otiv klingt ganz en tfe rn t und
verw andelt an .]. Giselher renews his urging (1242 1245) seconded b y U ote, who
harks back to her m atern al role in th e NI. 16. S tanza 1247, in which K riem hilt longs
for th e golt silber unde wt w hich she h ad during h er h u sb a n d s lifetim e, is strangely
o ut of tu n e w ith th e rest of th e sequence. I t m ay be a trace of th e source indicating
th a t K riem hilts decision was guided by th e desire for w ealth w ith w hich to carry
out her revenge. This thinking would th e n coincide w ith G rim hildrs consideration
of A ttila s power in s. 277, 17. K riem h ilts scruples ab o u t m arrying a heathen
(1248, 1261) m u st belong to th e last poet. H er sleeplessness m ay im itate E neide
vv. 1342 1408 w ith th e em phasis shifted from lovesickness to a m arriage dilemma.
R degers renewed urging (1254) m ay echo Iw ein 1925 1931. H is o ath of allegiance
anticipates K riem h ilts recruitm ent of support am ong th e H unnish nobles and
satellites, as it already existed in th e source. The selfless devotion of R deger m ay
have been suggested by ru n g rs generous response recorded in s. 307, 22 23,
although this response probably belonged to Bl delin in th e source. If so, th e tra n s
fer of a special allegiance from B l delin to R deger shows considerable foresight
and planning. In stanzas 1259 1260 K riem hilt ponders th e prospect of w ealth and
vengeance explicitly. This is th e tru e m otive an d m u st come from th e source.
9 The NI. poet prefaces th e departu re from W orm s w ith 5 yz (C: 12 [B atts 384])
days of p reparation (1268 1270). H e th e n relates an aw kw ard episode in which
H agen plans to w ithhold Siegfrieds gold, aw kw ard because he has already sunk the
gold in th e R hine in stan za 1137. The la ter passage m ay be ta k e n as a duplication
of the earlier one, b u t it is n o t impossible th a t it is th e second seizure w hich faith-
fully reflects th e epic source an d th a t NI. 1137 is a n anticip atio n [cf. H eusler (2)
par. 66]. The gold was a factor in th e source, as we shall see, a n d H ag en s seizure
m ust therefore also have been im plicitly or explicitly present. The NI. po et m ay th en
23] The E pic Source of Nif lunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied 23
h av e retained it m echanically in th e original position (1271 1281), realized th a t

it was already preem pted in 1137, an d foreshortened it w ith G ern o ts intercession
in K riem h ilts favor (1277). The saga au th o r m ay have dropped it o ut of carelessness
(he refers to it in s. 279, 14 22) or because he th o u g h t of th e R hine as a fairly
d ista n t point on th e route to H u nland and did n o t see how H gni could deposit
it th ere on th e spur of th e m om ent. The bestow al of gifts on R deger was probably
in th e source, b u t th a t th e gifts were Siegfrieds shield an d helm et, as th e saga teils
us [s. 278, 1 4], is unlikely [Wisniewski 28 29]. I n th e NI. th e gift-giving is
tran sferred from G nther to K riem hilt as a ra th e r prem ature phase of her cam paign
to curry favor (1282). R deger declines his share (1278 1279) in line w ith th e
generous spirit show n in 1153, b u t th e h o sts bestow al of gifts on departing guests
nonetheless belonged to the ceremonial p attern s of th e source as indicated by Rde-
g ers own gift-giving a t Pchlarn. The M argrave E ckew art who offers to accom pany
K riem hilt (1283 1284) is m ysterious.
10 I n th e NI. 1285 1289 K riem hilt departs w ith th e messengers, in s. 278, 4 10
Osir dep arts alone an d reports to A ttila, who la ter journeys to W orm s to celebrate
th e wedding. The saga version is m ore cum bersom e and has nothing to recom m end
it we m u st im agine a n intervening period of daily friction betw een G rim hildr and
Hgni. The sim plest explanation is th a t th e saga w riter wished once again to extri-
cate himself from S outh G erm an topography (a wedding in Vienna) an d could do
th is by bringing A ttila to W orm s instead of following G rim hildr down th e D anube.
11 Since s. locates G rlm hildrs w edding a t W orm s, it elim inates her bridal journey.
T he NI. devotes a sho rt A dventure (X X I) to th e journey and describes receptions
a t P assau, P chlarn, Melk, and Traism auer. H ow m uch of this detail belongs to
th e source is impossible to say. The m ost elaborate reception in th e NI. is th e one
a t Pchlarn; it occupies 29 stanzas (1299 1327) out of a to ta l of 46 or nearly tw o
th ird s of th e A dventure. This reception is closely related to R d eg ers la ter recep
tio n of th e B urgundians a t P chlarn described in A dventures X X V I and
X X V II (NI. 1648 1673), a n episode w hich is guaran teed for th e epic
source by s. 291, 11 24. B oth th e first and second receptions a t P chlarn
are characterized by an equestrian m eeting, a large welcoming com pany of
knights, splendid a ttire , and th e special preparation of quarters. The question
is w hether th e source h ad b oth receptions or only one. If it h ad only Rde-
g ers later reception of th e Burgundians, th e n th e NI. an ticip ated th is scene in
A dventure X X I. If th e source had b o th receptions, th e saga sim ply dropped th e
first along w ith th e whole D anube journey. Because of th e close sim ilarity betw een
A dventures X X I an d X X V II and th e NI. p o e ts tendency to borrow ahead, I lean
to the first alternative, th a t is, th a t A dventure X X I is an im itation of A dventure
X X V II. Presum ably th e source offered little to w ork w ith a t this ju n ctu re, merely
a brief m ention of K riem h ilts journey dow n the D anube, an d th e elaboration is
alm ost entirely th e w ork of th e last poet.
12 A dventure X X II (1336 1386), like A dventure X X I, is alm ost entirely th e crea-
tio n of th e last poet. The only scene certain to be carried over from th e source is
K riem h ilts m arriage to E tzel. s. transfers th e event to W orm s an d disrupts th e
source altogether. T he NI. locates th e m arriage in Vienna, n o t in E tzelnburc as one
m ight expect. The la st poet m ay have transferred th e m arriage from H u n lan d to
V ienna in order to place it in te rrito ry fam iliar to his audience, b u t a case for V ienna
as th e wedding site in th e source m ight be m ade as follows: if th e source h ad located
the wedding in H unland, it would have been n a tu ra l for th e saga w riter to follow this
lead and locate the wedding a t Soest. If, how ever, th e source located th e w edding a t
some interm ediate p oint betw een W orm s and E tzelnburc, a p o in t n o t to be reconciled
w ith th e N o rth G erm an geography of s., th e n th e saga w riter was obliged to alter th e
site. Once he was confronted w ith th e necessity for change, W orm s becam e as good
a choice as Soest. W e m ay therefore assum e th a t th e bedrock of A dventure X X II
is to be found in th e w edding festivities a t V ienna (NI. 1361 1374). M any of th e
details in this sequence and all th e rem aining scenes are new an d constructed on th e
basis of earlier festivities in th e NI. W hen R deger indicates to K riem hilt which
gentlem en in E tz els retinue are w orthy to receive her kiss (1348 1352), th e m otif is
borrow ed from K riem hilts first reception of Siegfried (297; repeated in 1652, 1665).
The ceremonial joust a t T ulln (1353 1355) is m odeled on num erous earlier jousts
(33 36, 584 585, 596 598, 796 797, 808 809, 814; rep eated a t g reatest length
and w ith serious consequences a t E tzelnburc 1871 1897). The en tertain m en t in pa-
vilions in stanza 1356 echoes the sam e m o tif in stan za 594. K riem h ilts first m eeting
w ith E tzel and th e wiziu hant m otif in stanza 1358 echo her first m eeting w ith Siegfried
in stanza 294; b oth m eetings tak e place a t P entecost (271, 1365). The tran sitio n al
stanza m arking th e passage of night (1360) echoes a sim ilar stan za in A dventure
X I I I (806). The duratio n of th e festivities echoes closely th e d u ratio n of th e dubbing
cerem ony a t X an te n (cf. 1367, 1 and 40, 1), as does th e g rea t display of liberality (cf.
1368 1374 and 40 41). The only them e in A dventure X X II w hich does n o t appear
to be pure im itation is K riem hilts continued eagerness to d istrib u te h er w ealth d u r
ing the festivities(1366) and later in H un lan d (1384 1386). This raises once again th e
problem of her p riv ate w ealth, in view of H ag en s seizure of th e N ibelung gold, and
th e repeated efforts on th e p a rt of th e NI. poet to reconcile th e tw o contradictory
m otif s. H is em barrassm ent m ay be of his own m aking. The source clearly indicated
th a t K riem hilt m ade lavish distributions of gold to acquire allies during th e later
fighting (s. 307, 19 21; 310, 17-20; 319, 11 15). This is no d o u b t H un n ish gold
acquired during her sta y in H unland; such was th e object of her m arriage to E tzel.
B u t th e NI. poet, w ith his custom ary tendency to an ticipate, introduces her d istri
butions from th e very outset before she has ever arrived in H u n lan d an d has h ad
the opportunity to acquire w ealth (1280 1282, 1322 1323, 1366, 1384 1386).
This anticipation th en forces him to account for th e origin of her w ealth an d leads
to aw kw ard explanations such as those in 1281, 2; 1323, 2 4; 1366, 3 4.
13 A dventure X X II in th e NI. concludes (1384 1386) w ith th e inform ation th a t
K riem hilt gains p opularity by distributing w ealth in H u nland, while th e correspond -
ing section in 3>s. (279, 5 6) concludes by rem arking th a t she w ept every d ay for
her dear husband young Sigurd. B oth conclusions to th e wooing sequence are
portentous and effective an d there is n o t m uch to choose betw een them . H ow ever,
th e distribution m otif is m ore clearly indicative of th e NI. p o ets special em phasis
th a n is th e lam entation of th e sagas em phasis. F urtherm ore, th e presence of the
lam entation m otif in th e epic source is confirm ed b y NI. 1371. I t is therefore likely
th a t s. adheres to th e p a tte rn of th e original while th e NI. amplifies it w ith th e
distribution motif.
14 B oth the NI. (1387) and s. (279, 9) note th e passage of seven years, w hich m ust
therefore have been in th e epic source [Wisniewski 32]. s. om its m ention of
O rtliep/A ldrians birth , alm ost certainly an oversight. The NI. seems to d ate th e
b irth a t th e end of th e seventh year and th en allows an o th er six years (C: five years
25] The E pic Source of N iflunga saga an d th e Nibelungenlied 25
[B atts 422]) to pass (1390, 4) in order to give th e boy tim e to reach th e age pre-
scribed in th e source. T h a t O rtliep/A ldrian was m ore th a n a babe in arm s during th e
subsequent fighting in the epic source is indicated by th e blow he adm inisters to
H agen, a m otif faithfully retained in s. 308, 17 21 b u t dropped in th e NI. except
b y im plication in th e tell-tale stanza 1912 (suppressed in C [B atts 582]). The
th irteen -y ear period is p a rt of th e NI. p o ets overextended tim e scheme an d m u st
be a m isunderstanding. The epic source presum ably d ated th e b irth after one or two
years in H unland and th e invitation after seven years w hen th e boy was old enough
to strike H agen. The delayed b irth in th e NI. is in line w ith th e earlier ten-year
(C: tw elve-year [B atts 216]) interval before K riem h ilts and B r n h ilts first b irth s
(715, 718). In addition, th e NI. poet adds tw o other characteristic motifs: he con-
tinues to counteract th e shock of a m ixed m arriage by specifying th a t O rtliep was
baptized (1388) and he rem arks once again on K riem hilts m ethodical cultivation
of p opularity (1389 1390). The form er echoes Christian preoccupations in 1248,
1261, 1338 an d th e la tte r returns to th e them e of 1384-1386.
15 H aving n oted th e passage of seven years, E>s. 279, 10 22 piunges directly into
G rim hildrs nocturnal interview w ith A ttila. The NI. prefaces th e interview w ith
nine stanzas (1391 1399) devoted to K riem hilts p rivate reflections: she rehearses
her woes (1391, 4), her special grudge against H agen (1392), an d th e possibility of
revenge if he could be bro ught to H u nland (1393, 1 [not in C: B a tts 422]). She
yearns to see Giselher (1393, 2 4). A t this point there is a stan za (1394 [altered
in C: B a tts 422]) suggesting th a t K riem hilt was inspired b y th e devil to bestow
a kiss of reconciliation on G nther w hen she left B urgundy (NI. 1114-1115
[altered in C: B a tts 336]). R eturning to her reflections, K riem hilt reproaches H agen
an d G nther for causing her to m arry a heathen (1395) and she speculates on her
w ealth and th e capacity for revenge w hich it provides (1396). She expresses longing
for her relatives (1397, 1) and a t th e sam e tim e a desire to avenge Siegfried (1397,
2 4). Finally, th e poet com m ents on her faithful following (1398) an d K riem hilt
determ ines to approach E tzel (1399). This is a confused passage which tries to
account for too m uch. I t includes K riem hilts grief for th e d eath of Siegfried, her
special grudge against H agen (who has deprived her of m any honors ), her ponder -
ing of revenge, her longing for Giselher an d her relatives in general, her false recon
ciliation w ith G nther, and her resentm ent a t being m arried to a heathen. I t
includes, oddly enough, everything b u t her desire to recover th e N ibelung treasure.
The question is: how m uch belongs to th e source and how m uch is th e NI. p o ets
elaboration? T h a t K riem h ilts reflections were a t least adum b rated in th e source is
suggested by th e abruptness w ith which th e nocturnal interview is introduced in
s. and by the ap p a ren t transfer of some of th e reflection m otifs as th ey ap p ear in
th e NI. into th e conversation scene in th e saga. In th e saga G rim hildr tries to per-
suade A ttila to satisfy her longing (279, 12 13: pat er m ikill harmr er a pessvm .vij.
vetrvm hevi ek eigi hitta mina brr) and a t th e sam e tim e to te m p t him w ith th e
N iflung treasure. The first m otif probably belonged to th e conversation scene in
th e source since it also occurs in this spot in th e NI. (1403). B u t th e second m otif
surely belonged to th e reflection scene in th e source because p a rt of th e phrasing
reveals it to be an expression of G rim hildrs personal anger an d n o t an a tte m p t to
persuade A ttila (s. 279, 17 19: en pat mikla fe hava nv m inir brdr. oc eigi vilia
peir mer af vnna eins pennings.). W e m ay therefore assum e th a t th ere was a reflec
tio n scene in th e source, in which K riem hilt experienced grief over th e loss of her
treasure (presum ably also over Siegfrieds death) an d pondered an in v itatio n as

a m eans of taking revenge. The saga altered th e source by elim inating th e reflection
scene altogether and assigning th e grief over lost treasu re to th e conversation
scene. The notion th a t A ttila could be te m p ted b y th e N iflung gold was clearly
suggested either to th e Soest com piler by his knowledge of a Saxon ballad w ith this
m otif or to the Norse tran slato r by his knowledge of th e sto ry as we have it in
Atlakvida and Atlaml. [Wisniewski 33 34, 37 explains th e tem p tin g of A ttila from
her second source; cf. H eusler (2) par. 34.] On th e other hand, th e NI. poet retained
th e reflection scene an d tried to m ake it m ore delicate b y replacing K riem h ilts
resentm ent over her lost treasure w ith a m ore ab s tra ct concern ab o u t th e loss of
manige ren (1392). A t th e sam e tim e, he elaborated th e passage by anticipating
th e expression of longing in th e conversation scene, by explaining K riem h ilts
disregard of her earlier reconciliation w ith G nther as th e inspiration of th e devil
(a w eak effort a t patching up a discrepancy), an d b y ascribing to her a persistent
resentm ent against H agen and G nther for m arrying h er to a h eathen. This m ulti-
plication of m otifs is clumsy; it biurs th e action and weakens K riem h ilts charac-
terization. In th e source (as in th e saga) th e longing for her relatives is clearly a pre-
te x t for E tz els consum ption. W hen th e NI. poet transfers it o ut of th e conversation
scene into th e reflection scene, thereb y m aking it a genuine sentim ent, he confuses
K riem hilts m otivation: she is now p u t in th e position of expressing fondness for
her brothers while m ethodically planning to ta k e revenge against them . H er resen t
m ent against G nther and H agen because of her m arriage to a h eathen, in addition
to being a trichte Einflickung des geistlichen M otivs [de Boor 224], loses sight
of the faet th a t H agen counseled against th e m arriage (1203, 1205).
16 I n b o th s. (279, 11 280, 9) and th e NI. (1400 1407) K riem hilt suggests, or
leads E tzel to suggest, th e issuing of an in v itatio n during a conversation in bed.
The bed scene is therefore secured for th e source, as is th e expression of longing
which m otivates th e invitation (s. 279, 11 13 an d NI. 1403).
17 The NI. 1408 1412 and s. 280, 10 16 agree th a t tw o m instrels are dispatched
to convey the invitation, b u t th e actu al dispatching is done by E tzel in th e NI.
(1410 1412) and by G rim hildr in th e saga (280, 10 16). There is some indication
th a t th e source placed this au th o rity in K riem h ilts hands because E tz e ls words in
th e NI. 1406, 1 (swenne ir gebietet, / sd lzet ez geschehen) are close to s. 280, 6 8
(N v vil ek fru at v bioder eim ej pv vill heim invm brrvm.). T h a t K riem hilt
instructed th e m instrels on her own an d in p riv ate is suggested b y th e stray line
NI. 1409, 4 (Kriemhilt diu vrouwe / si sunder sprechen began). This appears to be
a seam left by an im perfect rew orking of the source and it was accordingly rem oved
in C 1436 [B atts 426]. I n view of K riem h ilts initiative, it is surprising th a t in th e
NI. E tzel gives the orders himself, while G rim hildr quite consistently carries out
her m andate in the saga. The change in th e NI. m ay be inspired by a wish to gloss
over K riem hilts duplicity or by a respect for th e k ings prerogatives [Wisniewski
37 38]. I n any event, it is th e cause of y e t an o th er lapse: E tzel seems to forget
th a t he and his wife are in bed and sum m ons his messengers on th e sp o t (1408, 1:
S i ilten harte balde / d der knec saz [!] [Wisniewski 36]). I n b o th te x ts th e m essen
gers are equipped w ith rich apparel (NI. 1408, 4 an d 1414, 4: hrlich gewant and
s. 280, 13 14: med gulli oc silfri oc godum kldum). [Wisniewski 38 39 presses
this passage rath e r too h ard for evidence of her second source.]
18 In s. 280, 17 18 G rim hildr dispatches her messengers w ith letters (fr peim
bref og in nsigli. attila konungs oc sitt), w hich corresponds to th e NI. 1421, 1 (brieve
unde botschaft / was in nu gegeben). B u t th e NI. prefaces th is accred itatio n w ith
special instructions designed to allay th e fears of th e B urgundians: K riem hilt teils
th e m essengers no t to report ever having seen her grieved (1415), to urge th a t th e
k in g s (AB: R degers [B atts 428 429]) in v itatio n be accepted (1416), to com m uni-
cate special greetings and good will to G ernot an d Giselher (1417 1418; A co rru p t
[B atts 430]), to give news of her honor to U ote (1419, 1), and, finally, to m ake cer-
ta in th a t H agen accom panies them as guide even if he wishes to rem ain behind
(1419, 2 4), an instruction w ith im plications w hich are n o t clear to th e messengers
(1420). I t is n o t possible to say how m any, if any, of these special instructions belong
to th e source.
19 T he saga states sim ply (280, 19 21): esser menn jara alla sina leid til ess er
peir koma i niflvngaland. oc hitta Gvnnar konung i vernico borg. The NI., as usual,
m akes m uch of th e itinerary (1422-1429) an d includes stopovers a t P chlarn an d
P assau. Again, the source is n o t tran sp a ren t because s. elim inates all traces of
S outh G erm an topography. A clear innovation in th e NI. is H ag en s identification
of th e approaching messengers (1430 1432), a m otif borrow ed from P a r t I (83 86)
an d im itated as well in stanzas 1177 1181.
20 s. 280, 21 281, 1: Gunnarr konungr teer vel sendi monnum attila konungs mags
sins. oc ero peir par igodvm fagnade. The corresponding verses in th e NI. are 1433,
3 4: des kneges ingesinde / enpfie si s zehant. / man gap in herberge . . . The NI.
provides considerably m ore detail (1433 1445) by adding inform ation on th e
m in strels m agnificent a ttire (1433 1435) an d polite inquiries ab o u t E tz e ls well-
being (1437, 1441).
21 I n b o th s. 281, 1 19 an d th e NI. 1446 1449 th e in v itatio n is delivered orally,
b u t th e saga creates a contradiction by adding im m ediately (281, 19 20): a er
konungr gvnnarr hever lesit petta bref . . . This is no afte rth o u g h t since it h ark s back
to th e bref oc innsigli of s. 280, 18 and th e brieve unde botschaft of th e NI. 1421.
[W isniewski 40 41 derives th e te x t of th e le tte r from her second source, b u t the
presence of the letter in th e epic source is strongly suggested by th e N l.s brieve unde
botschaft; th e epic source presum ably had b o th the oral com m unication an d the
letter, b o th of which th e saga retained, while th e NI. suppressed th e le tte r in order
to deem phasize K riem h ilts duplicity.] The source therefore m ade m ention of a
le tte r, a m otif which is somehow connected w ith G urns runic message as we
have it in Atlamdl. A ccording to the saga (281, 15 17), th e le tte r offers th e Niflungs
a share of A ttila s realm . This is startlin g since no m ention of such a division has
been m ade before, b u t it is an old m otif and echoes Atlakvida 4 5. If it belongs to
th e source, K riem hilt acquires a new diabolical dim ension and her dispatching of
messengers w ith secret instructions becomes clear: we m u st imagine th a t she actually
forges a false le tte r in order to lure her brothers to H unland. [Wisniewski 41 42
ascribes th e division of th e realm to her second source since it does n o t appear in
th e NI., b u t th e NI. poet, h a ving dropped th e deceptive le tte r, is obliged to drop
th e deceptive offer as well. T h a t th e m otif was fam iliar to th e NI. p o et from the
epic source is suggested by his use of it later in E tz els a tte m p t to win over R iideger
(2158).] This sort of treach ery on K riem h ilts p a rt is probably w h at lies a t th e b o tto m
of Saxos Grimildae erga fratres perfidia (X H I.v i. 7).
22 A t this p oint in th e saga G unnarr sum m ons his brothers to a council (s. 281,
20 21: kallar hann amalstemnv sina brr hogna. oc gernoz oc gislher.). The NI.
prefaces th e council w ith G u n th ers promise to reply to th e in v itatio n in seven days

(1450) and the m essengers extension of th e invitatio n to include U ote (1451 1456).
The form er m otif betrays the NI. p o e ts ta ste for exact num bers and th e la tte r
m otif his courtly attentiveness tow ard women. The council scene itself is sim ilarly
described in s. 281, 21 283, 14 an d th e NI. 1457 1470. I t can be reconstructed
for th e source on th e basis of s., a version from w hich th e deviations in th e NI. are
readily explained. The outline involves a th ree -p a rt exchange betw een H agen and
G nther. The th ree -p a rt stru ctu re is retained by th e N h, b u t w ith changes. Only
th e first exchange is assigned to H agen and G nther an d H gnis dire prediction
in th e saga (282, 1 2) is reduced to a w arning of K riem h ilts vengefulness (s.
282, 3 4 = NI. 1459). G u n th ers response is based n o t on his assum ption of E tz els
good intentions, b u t on his knowledge th a t K riem hilt d ep arted reconciled (1460),
a recurrence of th e m otif which preoccupies th e NI. poet in stanzas 1114 1115 and
1394. In the second exchange, H gnis prediction, as we have it in s. 282, 20 23,
is retained by th e NI. in th e words (1461, 3): ir muget d wol Verliesen / die re und
ouch den lip . B u t th e response is transferred from G nther to G ernot an d Giselher
in line w ith the NI. p o e ts fondness for councils w ith full p articip atio n as we have
it in th e NI. 1462 1463. H ow ever, th e NI. poet, for whom H agen was a vassal and
n o t a half brother, m odified th e personal vilification an d su b stitu te d for it an
accusation of fear. This accusation anticipates th e final insult in th e th ree -p a rt
series (s. 283, 4 7) and th e NI. poet m u st therefore foreshorten H ag en s role by
inserting his intention to m ake th e trip already a t this ju n ctu re afte r th e second
exchange (1464). The th ird exchange is consequently reassigned to R u m o lt and
G ernot (1465 1470). [This solution is sim pler th a n th e one proposed by W isniewski
42 49 and obviates any recourse to a second source for th e saga. I am n o t quite
persuaded by W isniewski 58-62 th a t R u m o lts advice belonged to th e leave-taking
in th e epic source and was transferred from there to th e council scene by th e NI.
poet, b u t it is possible. I see no great difficulty in assum ing th a t R u m o lt is th e NI.
p o ets innovation in b o th passages despite his vague sim ilarity to H jalli.]
23 I n t>s. 283, 8 14 th e council concludes w hen H gni stalks out, apprises Folker
of th e departure, and summ ons th eir m en to arm s. This conclusion is too good n ot
to have been in th e epic source, or rath e r, it is too good to be th e sagas invention
[W isniewski 48 49]. I t becomes slack in th e NI. (1471 1478). H ere a subdued
H agen, who has ap p aren tly forgotten his w rath , diffidently suggests th a t a retinue
of 1000 m en w ould be advisable as a precaution (14711472). G nther falls in
w ith th e suggestion and a force of over 3000 is assem bled from th e surrounding
country (1473 1474). D ancw art and V olker are am ong those who m u ster (1475
1477) and H agen selects a following of 1000 (1478). Most of th e m ustering scene
(including th e specific figure of 1000) takes place after O das prophetic dream in
s. 283, 15 26. This is th e logical order (the final decision to d ep art should precede
th e detailed preparations) and can be assum ed for th e epic source. Once again the
NI. po et anticipates.
24 The detention is m issing a t this poin t in th e saga an d is present only in th e NI.
(1479 1481), b u t th e m otif was fam iliar to th e saga w riter, who used it later (3>s.
288, 10 11) in a passage which faithfully reflects th e source. The NI. 1479 1481
could conceivably be anticipating this la ter occurrence, b u t th e m otif is so o u t of
keeping w ith th e courteous dism issal of the messengers which follows it in th e NI.
th a t it is m ore likely to be an unthinking reten tio n th a n an invention. I therefore
29] The Epic Source of N iflunga saga an d th e Nibelungenlied 29
deviate from W isniewski 50 in assum ing it for th e source. The rem ainder of A dven
tu re X X IY is th e NL p o e ts ornam ental expansion. H a ving offended th e messengers
by detaining them against th e ir will, G nther now sum m ons th em to announce his
acceptance of th e invitation as if nothing h ad happened (1482 1484). There follow
tw o curious stanzas in which G nther gives th e messengers perm ission to interview
B rnhilt, only to have it w ithdraw n by Volker (1485 1486). The messengers are
th e n richly rew arded (1487 1490) and are a d m itte d to a p artin g interview w ith
U o te (1491 1492). F inally th ey set out (1493 1494), spreading th e news in general
an d in particular a t Passau and P chlarn (1495 1496) before eventually reporting
to E tzel a t G ran (1497). K riem hilt interview s th e messengers (1498 1502), expresses
her pleasure to E tzel (1503 1504), and preparations for th e occasion begin (1505).
All of this b etrays th e NI. p o e ts ta ste for rew ards, interview s, an d itineraries,
a ta ste w hich leads him to cancel th e idea of secrecy w ith o u t m uch reflection.
25 U o tes prophetic dream (s. 283, 15-26 and NI. 1509) belongs to a threefold
w arning scheme in th e source: H agens predictions, U o tes dream , an d U o tes wish
to detain Giselher. The NI. separates th e first tw o m otifs an d drops th e th ird , b u t
th e source m u st have k ep t them together in such a w ay as to provide a m ounting
portentousness. F or th e source we m ay p ostulate th e following sequence [which
differs from W isniewski 51]: th e council scene ends w hen H agen jum ps up and
sum m ons Volker in order to signal his determ ination, U ote learns of th e plan and
comes to th e brothers w ith her dream , H agen rejects the dream . H ow ever, th e NI.
p o et becomes m ired in th e first phase of this sequence and seizes on H ag en s
sum m oning of Volker to give a full account of th e m ustering (1471 1478 and 1506
1507). Only after this tim e-consum ing operation (men are g athered from th e
neighboring countryside) does U ote learn of th e p lan from an old bishop of Speyer
(1508). She im m ediately addresses th e brothers (1509) as if she were already in
th eir presence and w ithout any indication of how she got there (cf. s. 283, 15 17);
it is as if th ey were still assem bled in th e council scene (as indeed th ey were in th e
source). [This solution again obviates the com bination of sources proposed by W is
niewski 49 52.] H agens rejection of the dream (NI. 1510) is considerably m ilder
th a n in s. (284, 2 3) and reflects the NI. p o e ts courtliness. A t this point, th e
NI. teils us (1512) th a t H agen would still have advised against th e journey h ad it
n o t been for G ernots renewed ta u n ts. This notion runs counter to H ag en s p o rtra it
in th e source, where, once he has been insulted, he becomes th e m ost ad a m a n t of all
in prosecuting th e journey. [I agree essentially w ith W isniewskis analysis of this
passage (p. 56) and would only add th a t G ernots repeated in tervention is perhaps
a clumsy substitution for th e following scene in th e source, a scene centering on
Giselher and suppressed by th e NI. poet.]
26 This scene survives only in s. 284, 4 10, b u t we m ay assum e th a t it was in
th e source because it fits well in the w arning sequence. I t seems clear th a t th e NI.
poet dropped it for chronological reasons. I n th e source Giselher was a child of
twelve and ra th e r young for the perilous journey, b u t in the NI. he is a grown m an
(strictly speaking ab o u t forty) and there is no reason to spare him [W isniewski 53].
27 A t this point the saga (284, 10 285, 6 ), an d presum ably also th e source, allow
for th e m ustering of th e N iflung arm y. The m ustering m otifs com mon to th e saga
and the NI. an d therefore a ttrib u ta b le to th e source are th e num ber 1000 (s. 284,
15 and NI. 1472, 1478), th e special valor of th e troops (s. 284, 12 13 an d NI. 1478),
th eir devotion to G nther (s. 284, 13 14 and NI. 1474), and th eir gathering from
th e countryside (s. 284, 11 and NI. 1473) [W isniewski 52]. B oth saga an d NI. m ake
m ention of th e w om en left behind w hen th e m en d ep a rt (s. 284, 18 20 a n d NI.
1515 1516, 1520 1523). R u m o lts caretakership of th e realm is pro b ab ly th e NI.
p o e ts addition (1517 1519). The saga (284, 20 285, 5) describes th e N iflung sta n
dards in detail, b u t th ere is no sign of them in th e NI. [Wisniewski 62 63 assigns
them to th e second source; I do n o t find this compelling, b u t have no b e tte r explana-
tion to offer.]
28 In a fam iliar passage, s. 285, 6 8 coalesces R hine and D anube. T h a t th e saga
w riter is also coalescing tw o cam p sites in th e source (accurately retain ed in th e
NI. 1515 and, by im plication, in 1525 and th e ensuing nig h t [cf. note 30]) is suggested
by a m ention of ten ts. NI. 1515, 1 2 states: Gezelt unde hatten j spien man an daz
gras / anderthalp des Rvnes. H ere th e te n ts belong to th e R hine cam p, b u t th e saga
w riter transfers them to his single R hine/D anu b e cam p (285, 9 10): peir dveliaz
ar um nottena me sinum landtiolldum. [I follow Wesle 233; cf. W isniewski 63.]
29 s. 285, 9: en peir finna ekki skip. NI. 1527, 1: Daz wazzer was engozzen, / diu
schif verborgen.
30 The night w atch in s. 285, 11 19 does n o t appear in th e NI., where th e whole
Crossing sequence takes place to all in ten ts and purposes in broad daylight. T h at
th e night scenery belongs to th e source is suggested b y several considerations.
H gnis m oonlight progress is unlikely to be inv en ted by th e saga w riter, while
th e NI. poet m ay well have dropped it here in order to have it available for th e
night encounter w ith Else and G elpfrat in A dventure X X V I. I t is also clear th a t
H gnis encounter w ith th e m erm aids is more effective a t night, as H eusler [(2 ) par.
39] noted. T h at th e m otif of th e night w atch belongs to th e epic source is, in ad d i
tion, indicated by its recurrence in A dventures X X V I an d X X X , w hich th e NI.
poet would appear to have created b y analogy to th e n ig h t w atch on th e D anube
[cf. W isniewski 87 93]. Since th e NI. poet decided to reserve th e n ig h t scenery
for th e b attie w ith th e B avarians, he was obliged to disassociate it from th e w atch
on th e D anube. s. 285, 11 19 and 287, 18 24 doubles th e w atch by sending
G unnarr upstream while H gni proceeds dow nstream . This enables G unnarr to
find a small boat, w hich subsequently capsizes w hen it is used to ferry some of th e
N iflungs across th e river. The doubled w atch w ith th e discovery of an ex tra b o at
is probably an a tte m p t to harm onize th e Saxon ballad, w hich h ad th e capsizing,
w ith th e epic source, which had no capsizing.
31 s. 285, 22 286, 5 and NI. 1533 1534.
32 T his sequence is preserved in ta ct in s. 286, 5 15 w ith th e exception of the
chaplain, who is elim inated together w ith all other Christian references by th e saga
tran slato r. T h at th e chaplain was present in th e source is indicated fu rth e r along
by H gnis non sequitur response to G u n n arrs reproach for killing th e boatm an
(s. 288, 15 17): hvat skal ek spara nv at gera illt medan ver farvm fram. ek veit nv
gerla at ekki barn i varre ferd kemr aptr. I n th e source these words m u st have been
a response to G un th ers reproach for try in g to drow n th e chaplain; it is only this
unsuccessful a tte m p t w hich confirms th e m erm aid s prophecy an d th u s provides
H agen w ith th e ce rtain ty th a t no one will re tu rn ali ve [I deviate from H eusler (2)
par. 57 and W isniewski 81]. The NI. po et disturbs th e sequence. I n th e first place,
one of th e m erm aids volunteers her prophecy in re tu rn for her clothes even before
she is asked (1535); this belongs to th e NI. p o e ts an ticip ato ry habits. The m erm aids
initiative is then im m ediately contradicted by words w hich im ply a n in itiative on
H ag en s p a rt (1536, 4): des er d hin z'in gerte, / wol bescMeden si im daz [Wisniewski
66 ]. W ith o u t an y specific m ention of H ag en s agreem ent, th e m erm aid m akes a
favorable prophecy (1537) an d th e clothes are retu rn ed (1538). The favorable pro-
phecy is th e NI. p o e ts addition [I agree w ith W isniewski 65 67]. I t allows th e
m erm aids to recover th eir clothing and presum ably th e m agical pow er to elude
H agen. The point seems to be to elim inate H ag en s barbarous killing of th e m er
m aids. The NI. poet appears n o t to have grasped, or n o t to have approved, H ag en s
ferocious sta te of m ind. I n fact, he goes o u t of his w ay to m ake a categorical denial
of th e killing (1534, 4): der helt enschadete in niht m ir. The unfavorable prophecy
is essentially th e sam e in s. 286, 10 12 and th e NI. 1540, 1542, 1 2.
33 I n s. H gni kills th e m erm aids (286, 12 15) and th e n continues dow nstream
(286, 15 16). This is probably th e form of th e source, b u t th e NI. po et creates a
tran sitio n by allowing one of th e m erm aids to give H agen directions to th e ferrym an
(1544 1548). The tran sitio n is m ade possible b y th e fact th a t in th e NI. th e m er
m aids are still alive and can continue th e conversation; th e conversation in tu rn
gives th e poet an o p p o rtu n ity to indulge his fondness for anticip atio n b y suggesting
in advance th e stratagem w ith which H agen will try to acquire th e ferry m an s
services (1548). I t also allows for a touch of courtly ceremonial: H agen takes leave
of th e m erm aids w ith a polite bow (1549) despite th e fact th a t th ey have first de-
ceived him and th e n prophesied his death. A ccording to s. 286, 16 17 H gni finds
eit skip vt amiia na oc ein mann . According to th e NI. 1549, 4 he finds eine
herberge, from which th e ferrym an presum ably emerges a t some unspecified p o in t
during th e ensuing scene. The saga v aria n t is preferable because th e scene depends
on th e visibility of the gold which H agen offers. The NI. poet has once m ore involved
himself in difficulties: th e ferrym ans location is given by th e m erm aid, who cannot
very well foresee (w ithout an additional display of prophetic powers) th a t he will be
in th e m iddle of the river a t the m om ent of H ag en s arrival an d who therefore gives
only th e location of th e house (1544, 2). I n order to adhere strictly to th e m erm aid s
directions, th e poet m u st therefore describe H ag en s arrival a t th e house, n o t a t
a b o at afloat in the river. H e does so faithfully, forgetting th a t th e scene requires
th a t both m en be visible to one another (s. 287, 3 4: se her godr drengr pina skip-
leigv. and NI. 1559, 2: nemet von mir ze minne / diz golt vil guot.) [This explanation
departs from W isniewski 71 74 and obviates th e need to assum e a second source
for th e saga.]
34 The sequence w hich I assum e for th e source [in agreem ent w ith W isniewski
68 71] is exactly as it stands in s. 286, 17 287, 10 . Once again it becomes con-
fused in th e NI. H ere H agen offers gold first (1550), b u t th e b o atm an appears to
scorn th e offer (1551) in direct contradiction to his later acceptance. N ex t, H agen
identifies himself as E lses m an (1552, 3) and offers gold again (1553). This tim e
th e boatm an responds to th e offer because he is new ly w ed (1554, 1 [only B: B a tts
472 473]) an d rows to shore (1555). The NI. v a ria n t loses th e p o in t of H ag en s
im personation, to which th e ferrym an never replies, and, in addition, destroys th e
logical progression from a n im personation to a n offer of gold.
35 Again th e saga appears to give a faithful reflection of th e source (s. 287, 12 16).
I n th e NI. th e boatm an realizes th a t his passenger is n o t his b ro th er A m elrich (the
fratern al im personation is th e NI. p o e ts fanciful invention) an d he tries to eject
him from th e b o at first w ith w ords (1556, 1558) and th en b y using his oar as a cudgel
(1560 1561). H agen kills him on th e spot (1562). The NI. po et has elaborated
32 Theodore M. Andersson. [32
w ithout m uch regard for verisim ilitude. Since Amelrich tu rn s o ut to be th e boat-

m a n s brother, it is absurd in the first place th a t th e b o atm an did not recognize th e
deception u n til th ey were face to face in th e bo at, absurd in th e second place th a t
A m elrich should offer his own brother a fee, an d ab su rd in th e th ird place th a t th e
boatm an should n o t respond to his b ro th ers request except for th e prom ise of gold.
The altercation in th e b o at m ust therefore have concerned th e direction to be
followed ra th e r th a n a problem of im personation.
36 [In this note and th e following I deviate extensively from the explanations
proposed by W isniewski 75 87.] The saga again determ ines th e source (s. 287,
16 18). I n the NI. H agen has killed th e boatm an an d m u st therefore row him self
(1563 1565). H e rows so h ard th a t he breaks th e oar an d m u st repair it (1564;
missing in C [B atts 474]). The m otif of th e bro ken oars was trad itio n ally associated
w ith H agens transporting of th e Nibelungs (Atlamdl 37) an d m u st be an an ticip a
tion a t this prem ature jun ctu re in the NI. The whole po in t is a physical d em o n stra
tion of H agens foreknowledge and his resentm ent of th e doom which aw aits th e
Nibelungs. W h at effect does th e dem onstration have w ith o u t an audience? The
second boat, w hich G unnarr has located in th e m eantim e (s. 287, 18 24), is an
a tte m p t to harm onize th e epic source and the Saxon ballad as explained in note 30.
[Wisniewski invokes the second source, b u t I prefer H em pel (1) 37 39 and th e
Saxon ballad.] On H agens arrival in cam p, G nther questions him ab o u t th e origin
of th e blood in his b o at (1566 1567), b u t H agen denies having found a ferrym an
(1568). The observation of blood looks like an a tte m p t to recover, a t least partially,
th e m otif of th e slain ferrym an, w hich has been p rem atu rely spent. H ow ever, it
rem ains suspended af te r H agens uneharacteristic denial.
37 s. 288, 1 3 and NI. 1569 1573.
38 s. 288, 3 7. The NI. poet has already expended th e m otif of th e broken oars
as well as th e m otif of th e slain ferrym an and is left w ith nothing here.
39 This wish to p revent news from spreading (s. 288, 10 11) is n ot in th e NI., b u t
it is too consistent w ith th e detention of E tz els messengers (NI. 1479 1481; cf.
note 24) n o t to have been in th e source. The NI. p o et m u st abandon it here after
relocating the slaying of the boatm an.
40 The a tte m p t a t drowning appears only in th e NI. (1574 1580). I t can be assum ed
for th e source because s. regularly elim inates clerical motifs. G u n th ers reproach
and H agens reply referred to th e attem p ted drowning in th e source and n o t to th e
slaying of the boatm an as in th e saga (cf. note 32).
41 The destruction of th e b o at is reported only in th e NI. (1581 1583). T h at it m ay
belong to the source is suggested by th e faet th a t it is consistent w ith H ag en s other
violent acts, his breaking of th e oars, his killing of th e boatm an, and his attem p ted
drowning of th e chaplain. s. concludes th e initial Crossing w ith th e capsizing of
th e b o at (288, 24-289, 2), of w hich th ere is no trace in th e NI. I t looks like a duplica-
tion of the earlier capsizing and m ay be inspired by th e saga w riters realization
th a t th e N iflung chieftains m u st also be drenched for th e later drying episode a t
Pchlarn. [Heusler (2) pars. 45 and 84 assigned th e capsizing to th e epic source,
b u t I again adhere to H em pel (1) 37 39.]
42 The NI. poet takes advantage of th e surplus tim e provided b y an overland m arch
to devise an entirely new episode the encounter w ith th e B av arian counts Else
and G elpfrat [Wisniewski 90 91]. This episode occupies ab o u t half of A dventure
X X V I. A fter th e Crossing Volker offers himself as guide (1586). H agen announces
33] The E pic Source of Nif lunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied 33
th a t no one will re tu rn and com m unicates th e m erm aids prophecy an d th e signi-

ficance of th e chaplains escape (1587 1590). H e now also adm its killing th e ferry-
m a n an d anticipates an a tta c k by th e B avarian counts G elpfrat an d Else (1591
1593). Volker repeats his offer to serve as guide (1594 1595). G elpfrat an d Else
g ath er th eir forces and set o u t 700 strong (1596 1598). H agen an d D ancw art
assum e th e com m and of th e N ibelung rear guard (1599). The p u rsu it tak es place
a t n ig h t (1600 1601). G elpfrat and H agen exchange words (1602 1607). I n th e
ensuing b attie G elpfrat is killed, Else w ounded, an d th e B av arian forces routed
(1608 1616). W hen th e p u rsu it is broken off, the Nibelungs have lost four dead
an d th e B avarians one hundred. H agen advises against reporting th e action to
G n th er (1617 1620). Most of this sequence bears th e signature of th e NI. poet.
V olkers office as guide accords w ith previous uses of th e m otif Siegfried as guide
to Iceland (331, 378) and H agen as guide to H unland (1419). Volker su b stitu tes
here for H agen in keeping w ith th e p o e ts principle of expanded particip atio n an d
because H agen m u st be reserved for th e rear guard action. H agens rep o rt on th e
m erm aid s prophecy and th e sense of the chaplains escape specifies w h at is obvious
from his angry gestures and w hat was already sta te d in th e source w hen he slew
th e b o atm an (see notes 32 and 40). The NI. poet an ticip ated th e b o atm an s d eath
an d was therefore obliged to drop H agens explanation of it to G nther; a t th e same
tim e he o m itted H agens revelations of doom propos of th e castaw ay chaplain
(s. 288, 10 17). H e m u st therefore provide a new scene for th e revelations. T hey
are less im m ediately m otivated and less effective th a n in th e source, where th ey
are com m unicated to m en already stunned by th e b o atm an s ap p aren tly senseless
m u rd er an d presum ably aghast a t H agens tre a tm e n t of th e chaplain. H ag en s
desire to p revent th e spread of news is missing in th e NI., or r a t her it is altered so
as to provide a point of d eparture for the B avarian pursuit. Thus, H agen foresees
th a t th e B avarians will a tta c k w hen th ey learn of th e ferrym an s death. However,
th is alteratio n entails a new difficulty since it presupposes th a t th ere is someone
to rep o rt th e d eath even though, according to th e NI., th e m urder took place w ithout
w itnesses and th e headless body was plunged into th e river (1562). Should we
im agine th a t th e ferrym ans young wife was an unobserved bystander? Otherwise,
th ere was no w ay for th e news to get to th e Bavarians, a problem which th e poet
passes over lightly w ith th e words (1596, 1 2): D was tot dos vergen / Gelpfrte
komen j m it gewissem mre. The m otif of th e spreading rum or is borrow ed from
a n earlier passage in th e source, which was dropped a t th a t point by th e NI. poet
b u t utilized here (see note 39). The encounter w ith the B avarians fits into th e NI.
p o ets anti-B avarianism an d insistence on unsafe roads. Verse 1600, 4 {die helde
wurden an gerant) in faet echoes th e first reference to B avarian robbers in 1174, 4
{si wurden f der strzen / durch rouben selten an gerant). The b a t tle in Ad v en t ure
X X V I th u s gives th e poet a welcome oppo rtu n ity to inflict a resounding defeat
on th e B avarians [cf. H eusler ( 2 ) pars. 67 an d 70]. Because of th e added episode,
th e poet m ust also suspend tim e. The m erm aid scene does n o t ta k e place a t night
an d th e b o atm an scene does n o t ta k e place in th e early m orning (as th e source
probably intended); b o th ta k e place during th e preceding day. The n ig h t hours are
th u s freed for th e encounter w ith th e B avarians. The result is th a t th e Nibelungs
m arch a t night in th e NI. and n o t during th e day as in th e saga (289, 6 ). F u rth er-
more, th ey pitch cam p in th e m orning (1627) and n o t in th e evening as in th e saga
(289, 7) [cf. W isniewski 87 93].
3 A R K IV KR N O R D IS K FIL O L O G I L X X X V II I
43 s. 289, 7 9. Since th e NI. poet transform s th e evening encam pm ent in to a

m orning encam pm ent, he m ust sacrifice th e nig h t w atch. The resu lt is th e opaque
stanza 1631: D die wegemeden / ruowe genmen / unde si dem lande / naher quamen,
/ d fundens uf der marke j slfende einen man, j dem von Tronege Hagene / ein
starkez wfen an gewan. The first line finds th e N ibelungs resting, b u t th e second
line finds them advancing again after th e y rest (an aw kw ard su b stitu tio n for H ag en s
patrol). The th ird line suggests th a t they come across th e sleeping sentinel in a body,
b u t th e fourth line shows th a t th e action is restricted to H agen an d th e sentinel.
As th e scene progresses, there is a t first no indication of th e arm y in th e backgro und;
this is understandable because in th e source H agen encountered E ckew art alone
and th e arm y was n o t present [cf. W isniewski 93 98].
44 s. 289, 10 16; NI. 1631 1632.
45 s. 289, 16 20; NI. 1633.
46 s. 289, 20 290, 3; NI. 1634.
47 s. 290, 13 16; NI. 1635. The words of th e source show through clearly here:
er pv hogne alldrians son. er drapt minn herra Sigurd svein. get pin medan p v ert i
hvnalande. pv mtt her eiga marga avondar men. = ir sluoget S if riden: j man ist iu
hie gehaz. / daz ir iuch wol behetet, j in triuwen rt ich iu daz.
48 s. 290, 10 11; NI. 1636 1637.
49 s. 290, 16 17 and 291, 1; NI. 1638 1643.
50 s. 291, 1 5. The NI. poet drops H ag en s rep o rt because in his version E ckew art
is in the presence of th e whole B urgundian arm y and his words are h eard b y all.
The poet suddenly rem em bers this tow ard th e end of th e interview and injects
G nther into th e conversation (1640) to second H ag en s request for hospitality.
The result is th a t in s. 291, 8 10 E k k iv a r r bears a message from H gni alone,
while in th e NI. 1644, 1 3 E ckew art bears his message in th e first instance from
G nther and in th e second instance from Giselher and G ernot. H agen figures only
in the following stanza (1645, 1 2). The upshot of this rearrangem ent is a fuller
participation in the group scene and a sense of court protocol, tw o features charac-
teristic of the NI.
51 s. 291, 5 11; NI. 1644 1649.
52 s. 291, 11 14; NI. 1650 1654. The saga w riter com m ents on th e m ens cere
m onial dress: Roddingeir margreife stendr vpp. oc kallar til allra sinna manna, bidr
pa taka [scil. sin vopn in AB] skyndiliga oc buaz um sem bezt oc vegligast. The NI.
poet transfers his a tte n tio n to th e women, causing Riideger to com m unicate the
B urgundian arrival to G otelint and his daughter (1650) and em phasizing th e finery
of th e ladies a t court (1653 1654 [1654 n o t in C: B a tts 502]). Cf. n o te 11.
53 s. 291, 14-20; NI. 1655 1659. The saga provides for the p rep aratio n of q u arters
before Roingeirr rides out (291, 14); th e NI. notes th e pitching of pavilions as th e
reception takes place (1660 1661). The NI. m akes particu lar m ention of th e recep
tion by the ladies (1662 1667). Cf. note 11.
64 T>s. 292, 11 23; NI. 1668. The saga (292, 6 10 and 12 20) prefaces th e ban q u et
w ith an additional episode in which tw o fires are bu ilt in th e co u rty ard to enable
th e Niflungs to dry out. This m otif appears to be connected w ith th e capsized boats
in 287, 23 and 288, 24, although th e N iflungs have been m arching all d ay an d should
have dried out before this. There is no trace of w et clothes or fires in th e NI. an d th e
drying in s. gives th e appearance of an extraneous scene introduced from another
source [Heusler (2 ) pars. 45, 84, 119 assigned it to th e epic source, b u t I follow
35] The Epic Source of N iflunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied 35
H em pel ( 1 ) 37 41; cf. W isniewski 99]. I n s. 292, 15 19 G uilinda com m ents on

th e arm s of th e N iflungs an d G rim hildrs co nstant grief over Sigurd. The com m ent
appears to function as another w arning, b u t it elicits no response. I t is so closely
tied to th e drying scene in s. th a t it m ust derive from w hatever source pro vided
th is episode, an d n o t from the epie source. [See th e plausible explanation given by
W isniewski 100 101, 110 112; I equate her second source here w ith H em pels
ballad.]
55 s. 292, 21 23; NI. 1668 1673. The NI. poet adds some flirtatious details and
th e n extends th e evening conviviality to allow for Giselhers betro th a l on th e sam e
evening.
56 s. 292, 24 293, 12. The NI. poet elim inates th e nig h t consultation an d attach es
th e b etro th ai to th e b anqu et scene [I deviate from W isniewski 101 102]. The
sequence is as follows: Volker praises R degers daughter, who, he says, is fit for
a prince (1674 1675); R deger disclaims any such distinction (1676 [missing in A:
B a tts 510]; cf. 1218 and H a rtm a n n s Erec, vv. 532 533); G ernot confirms th e com-
plim ent (1677); H agen proposes m arriage to Giselher (1678); th e b etro th ai takes
place (1697 1685); th e m arriage is planned on Giselhers retu rn (1686). The NI.
p o et has again altered a sequence so as to produce a group scene in which th ere is
m axim um p articipation. In addition, th e ran k consciousness is enhanced by tra n s
ferring th e m arriage initiative from the vassal to th e k ings entourage (cf. note 50).
On th e o th er hand, th e loss of R oingeirrs p riv ate consultation w ith his wife
entails th e sacrifice of G uilindas foreboding as we have it in s. 293, 10 12 :
P a t er vel at v gever hanum oclcra dottur. ej sva er at hann mette niota. en pat rdvmk elc.
57 s. 293, 15 16; NI. 1688 1690.
58 s. 293, 16 17. I n s., and probably in th e source, they decline to rem ain. In
th e NI. 1691 1693 th e y rem ain unz an den vierden morgen (1691, 2). This hospitable
extension gives R deger an added o pportunity to display th e m agnificent generosity
he has previously show n in E tz els service. T h at th e extension in th e NI. has no basis
in th e source is indicated by the faet th a t no t a single event is reported for th e three
additional days [cf. W isniewski 102].
59 s. 293, 19 21: oe ganga nv til borda oc drecka nu gott vin. oc ero allkter. Par ero
nv margskonar leikar oc annor skemtan. This entertain m en t is developed by th e NI.
poet into R degers grandiose offer of hospitality for fourteen days (1690, 2).
60 s. 293, 21 295, 6 ; NI. 1694 1707. In th e saga G unnarr receives einn hialm
gvlle vardan oc settan dyrlegvm steinvm (293, 22 23), in th e NI. G nther receives
ein wfenlch gewant (1695, 3). The helm et appears to be th e m ore striking gift,
b u t it is impossible to teil w hat was in th e source an d w h at reason there was to
change it. I n th e saga Gernoz receives ein nyian skiolld (294, 2), in th e NI. G ernot
receives ein wfen guot genuoc (1696, 1). I n th e saga Gislher receives n o t only Roin-
geirrs dau g hter (294, 4 5), b u t also S igurds sword G ram r (294, 7-11 ). In th e
NI. Giselher is o m itted from the gift sequence. T h a t he was originally included and
th a t his b etro th ai belonged to this gift scene and n o t to th e b an q u et scene of th e
previous evening is suggested by stan za 1694, w hich refers to R d eg ers d aughter
as a gift to Giselher [see W isniewski 29]: Der wirt d sine gbe / bot ber al / daz die
edeln geste / krnen fr den sal. / er konde miltecliche / mit grzen ren leben. / die
sine tohter schne / die het er Giselher gegeben. One gift is th u s displaced in th e NI.
by th e relocation of th e betro th al. The sword gift is displaced b y y et an o th er
change. I n th e source Giselher received th e sword here an d used it la te r to kill
R deger (the po in t th a t R deger is killed by his own gift is m ade b o th in s. 321,

3 5 an d the NI. 2217, 2220 and m u st therefore have been in th e epic source). Since
th e NI. poet reassigns R degers killing to G ernot, b u t retains th e idea th a t R deger
is killed by his own gift, he m u st also reassign th e sw ord gift to G ernot an d leave
Giselher w ith no gift a t all. W e m ay therefore conclude th a t in th e epic source
G ernot received a shield while Giselher reeeived b o th d aughter an d sword, ju s t as
we have it in I>s. The saga tra n sla to rs identification of th e sw ord as G ram r is
another trace of his inept efforts a t Scandinavianization. The NI. po et ex tends th e
gift-giving to D ancw art (1703) an d to Volker (1706), in th e form of a special rew ard
offered by G otelint for his partin g serenade [cf. W isniewski 102 103].
61 s. 295, 10 11: a bad frv Gvdelin pa fara vel oc hila. The NI. does n o t specify
th e farewell, b u t it m ay nonetheless have been in th e source and m ay have served
as th e basis for G otelints p artin g gift to Volker.
62 s. 295, 12 13: Oc margreivenn kyssir sina frv Gvdelinn adr hann ridi brott . . .
NI. 1710, 1: M it kusse minnecliche / der wirt do dannen schiet.
63 s. 295, 6 10; NI. 1708 1713.
64 s. 295, 16 297, 1; NI. 1713 1715. The epic source m u st be reconstructed from
th e NI. a t this poin t since s. b etrays th e interference of an additional source.
According to s., th e Niflungs, drenched by rainfall, arrive a t D o rtm u n d an d m eet
a messenger dispatched by A ttila to invite R oingeirr. Since R oingeirr is present
in th e Niflung procession, th e messenger can consider th a t his mission has been
carried out. R oingeirr asks for and receives inform ation on th e festive preparations
in Soest, th e n redispatches th e messenger to A ttila to announce th e arriv al of th e
Niflungs. The scene is too elaborate to be either an invention or a m isunderstanding;
instead it m ust be an a tte m p t by th e com piler to harm onize two disparate sources.
The redispatching of th e messenger to A ttila accords w ith NI. 1713 1715 an d th e re
fore belongs to th e epic source. The rem ainder of th e scene belongs to ano th er
source, th e drenching clearly to th e sam e source w hich provided th e capsizing and
drying m otifs. The central idea in this second source is th a t E tzel/A ttila dispatched
a special invitation to someone. This someone cannot have been R deger/R oin-
geirr, who has no place except in th e epic source. I t m u st therefore have been som e
one else, whom th e com piler coalesced w ith Rdeger/R oingeirr. The qualifications
for this other person are th a t he be im p o rtan t enough to m erit a special invitation,
th a t he be easily confused w ith R deger/R oingeirr, and th a t he be present in
A ttila s retinue a t th e la ter action in Soest. Osir of H erralan d m eets all these
requirem ents. H e is A ttila s chief confidant according to s. 275, 23 276, 3, he has
already displaced R deger/R oingeirr in s. 276, 5 278, 7 and in tu rn given w ay
to him in s. 278, 25-279, 1, and he is prom inent in th e fighting a t Soest in s.
314, 6 16. I t is therefore conceivable th a t th e com piler tried to harm onize th e
dispatching of a messenger by R deger to E tzel in th e epic source w ith th e dis-
patching of a messenger by A ttila to Osir in th e ballad source [cf. W isniewski
104107]. The NI. concludes A dventure X X V II w ith tw o an ticip ato ry stanzas
(1716 1717), in w hich K riem hilt observes the approach of her relatives and, with-
o u t any visible audience, offers gold to anyone who will consider her grief (an illo-
gicality carefully rem oved in C [B atts 520 522]). These stanzas are proleptic and
th e poet is obliged to b acktrack in A dventure X X V III when D ietrich rides out to
welcome the N ibelungs presum ably before th e y come into view.
66 s. 297, 4 8 ; NI. 1718 1723. [For th e following sequence (the arriv al in H u n

land) I am largely in agreem ent w ith W isniewski 107-137.]
66 NI. 1724. [I deviate in w hat follows from W isniewski 116 117.] s. drops
D ietrich s w arning a t this point. T h a t it was nonetheless in th e epic source is indi-
cated b y th e faet th a t it is used on th e following m orning in s. 301, 5 10: N u meler
irekr konungr. ver katr min gode vin hogne, oc gladr oc med oss velkomen, oc uara
pie her i hvnalande. fyr pvi at pin systir Grimhilldr grtr enn huern dag Sigurd svein
( NI. 1724, 4: Kriem hilt noch sire weinet / den helt von Nibelunge lant) oc allz mantu
pess vid purva. adr enn pu komer heim. W hy th e saga w riter should have delayed th e
w arning is n o t clear, b u t a w arning during th e arrival scene, w hen re tre a t is a t least
theoretically s till possible, is certainly m ore appropriate. F urtherm ore, th e w arning
is trad itio n ally associated w ith th e arrival of th e N ibelungs even a t th e stage of
th e legend w hen it belongs to K riem hilt (Gurn) and has n o t y e t been transferred
to D ietrich (Ailakvida 15; Atlaml 48).
67 NI. 1725 1726. The saga w riter, having dropped th e w arning, m u st also drop
th e rejection. B u t he reintroduees it later w here th e source h ad an altercatio n be-
tw een H agen and K riem hilt (s. 299, 10 15): pa suarar Hogne. Sigurd svein oc
hans sar latvm nv uera kyrr oc getvm eigi. attila konung af hvnalandi gerom hann nv
sva livvan sem adr uar per Sigurdr sveinn. hann er halvo rikare, en ecki fr nv at gort at
grda sar Sigurdar sveins. The verbal correspondences to NI. 1725 (S i mac wol
lange weinen," / sprach do Hagene: / er lit vor manigem jre / ze tde erslagene. j den
knec von den Hiunen { sol si nu holden haben: / S ifrit kumt niht widere, / er ist vor
maniger zit begraben.") an d NI. 1726, 1 ( Die S if rides wunden / lzen wir nu sten: . . . )
reveal th e w ording of th e source. The NI. poet elaborates th e scene, indulging once
again his fondness for councils and debates: G nther joins H agen in rejecting th e
w arning (1727), H agen tem pers his o u trig h t rejection by cautiously asking for
fu rth e r p articulars (1728), D ietrich repeats his rep o rt of K riem h ilts sorrow (1729
1730), an d Volker sta te s th a t th e Nibelungs are once an d for all com m itted (1731).
68 X>s. 297, 10 19; NI. 1716, 1 3 an d 1717, 1 3. The NI. places this scene before
th e w arning, b u t it is m ore likely to follow, w here it is linked w ith th e general
observation of th e N ibelungs an d the adm iration of H agen. T h a t K riem h ilts view of
h er brothers is accom panied by some expression of sorrow is suggested b y 3>s. 297,
18 19 (Nv grtr hon allsarlega Sigurd svein) an d NI. 1717, 3 4 (swer nemen welle
golt, / der gedenke miner leide, / und wil im immer wesen holt"). In th e saga G rim hildr
im m ediately goes o u t to receive her brothers (s. 297, 19 22), b u t th is is a duplica-
tio n of her reception in s. 298, 9 299, 5 and m u st be an anticipation. I n E>s. 298,
5 6 A ttila also receives th e N iflungs im m ediately on th eir arrival, a sim ilar a n ti
cipation of his reception as it stood in th e epic source and as it is retained in s.
300, 4 15 [cf. W isniewski 107 109].
68 s. 299, 24300, 4; NI. 1732, 3 4 and 1733.
70 NI. 1735. s. om its this detail, b u t its presence in th e source is b etray ed by sub-
sequent confusions in th e saga. There is also some h in t of th e sep arated retinue in
s. 307, 1 4: oc par hava peir til sett sina sueina. oc ,xx. sveina haua p eiR til set fyr
gezlu lidz at bera peim niosn ef svie eda ufridr kunne hefiaz. oc pessu hever radit hogne
oc gernorz. The NI. adds th e inform ation th a t D ancw art is p u t in com m and of th e
retinue (1736). This provides a p a r t for one of th e new characters and prepares th e
w ay for an innovation in th e plot. s. 298, 7 12, on th e other hand, adds a retak e
of th e scene a t P chlarn in w hich th e N iflungs dry them selves around a fire and
reveal the arm or beneath th eir cloaks. This scene belongs to H em pels Saxon ballad
and it belongs a t this po in t since there was no episode a t P chlarn except in th e
epic source. Confirm ation th a t th e glimpse of arm or b eneath th e cloaks belonged to
a Saxon ballad m ay be found in Saxos description of th e Saxon singer who recites
a ballad of G rim hilds treachery in order to w arn K n u d L av ard of M agnus plot.
Since the ballad itself fails to arouse K n u d s suspicions, th e singer goes one step
fu rth er and provides a glimpse of th e arm or he is w earing un d ern eath his cloak
(Saxo X II I . vi. 7: Quem cantor certioribus adhuc indiciis aggredi perseverans, loricae,
guam sub veste gestabat, summa detexit.). This second w arning of hostility becomes
m uch richer and m ore significant if we regard it as p a rt of th e literary co n tex t in
which the Saxon singer was dealing.
71 s. 299, 3 4: N v gengr Grimhilldr at sinum vnga brdr Gislher oc kyssir hann . . .
NI. 1737, 3: si kuste Giselhren / und nam in bi der hant.
72 s. 298, 13 15: N u ser Hogne sina systor Grimhilldi. oc teer pegar sinn Malm oc
setr a hauod ser. oc spenner fast. oc slict ed sama folkher. NI. 1737, 4: daz sah vcm
Tronege Hagene: j den helm er vaster gebant. I n s. th e tightening of th e helm et
precedes th e kissing of Gislher and is n o t explained. I n th e NI. th e kissing of Giselher
and th e hostility im plied in th e exclusion of th e other brothers causes H agen to
tig h ten his helm et. The la tte r sequence is preferable because it provides a logical
m otivation and fits into a regulr confrontation betw een H agen and K riem hilt.
73 s. 298, 16 19; NI. 1714.
74 s. 298, 19 299, 1; NI. 1744.
75 NI. 1745, 1 3: D sprach diu kneginne / zen recken ber al: / man sol deheiniu
wfen f tragen in den sal. / ir helde, ir sult m irs f geben: / ich wil si behalten ln."
This prohibition does n o t appear in th e saga, b u t th ere is a h in t of it in 298, 7 9:
en niflvngar fara ecki af sinum bryniom. oc ecki lata peir sin vopn at sinni. The
prohibition m u st in faet be dropped in th e saga because th e Niflungs are already
in the hall (298, 6 : oc er peim fylkt i hallernar). This is because th e saga w riter has
m om entarily confused th e N iflungs lodgings (NI. 1735) w ith th e m ain hall in w hich
the banquet is to take place an d has even proceeded to a form al seating (s. 299,
35). In th e epic source, th e confrontation betw een H agen an d K riem hilt probably
took place after th e provision of lodgings an d outside th e m ain hall.
76 NI. 1745, 4 an d 1746. Since th e saga drops th e prohibition, it m u st also drop the
refusal.
77 NI. 1747. Since b o th th e im m ediate m otivatio n for G rim hildrs realization and
i re k rs earlier w arning have been dropped by th e saga w riter, he m ust also drop
this response.
78 NI. 1748. In th e saga i re k rs declaration is abandoned together w ith the rest
of th e sequence.
79 s. 299, 16 17: a stendr upp Grimhilldr oc gengr ibrott. NI. 1749, 34: d gie si
von im balde, / daz si niht ensprach, f wan daz si swinde blicke / an ir viande sach.
80 s. 299, 22 25: En pidreckr konungr af bern oc Hogne ero sua goder viner at hvaR
peirra legr hond sina ivir annan. oc ganga sva t dr hollenne. oc alla leid par til er peir
koma til konungs hallar . . . NI. 1750, 1 2: B i henden sich d viengen / zwne degene: /
daz eine was her Dietrich, / daz ander Hagene.
81 s. 301, 23 302, 1: oc ei kenner attila konungr til viss huar Hogne ferr eda folkher
fyr pvi at ei ma hann sia pa sua gerla. pvi at peir hava sida hialma. oc spyrr huerer par
ganga med Ounnare lconunge oc ireke honunge. NI. 1752, 1-3: D iu mre ich weste
gerne, / sprach der knec rieh, / wer jener recke wre, / den dort her Dietrich / so
friuntlich enpfhet. I n s. this identification scene is located after A ttila s official
reception of th e Niflungs, a t which point he should have no difficulty in identifying
his chief guests. I t m ust therefore be th e NI. w hich preserves th e correct order:
inquiry, identification, reminiscence, official reception.
82 s. 302, 1 3: pa suarar hertoge blodlenn. at venter mek at par man uera Hogne oc
joiker. NI. 1753, 1 2: Des antwurte dem knege / ein Kriemhilde man: / er ist
geborn von Tronege, / sin vater hiez Aldrin. W hether this identification was pro-
vided in th e epic source by Bldelin, one of K riem h ilts men, or y et an o th er person
is n o t clear.
83 s. 302, 3-6 : a suarar konungr. vel metta ek kenna Hogna jyr pu i ath hann var
med mier vm hrid og ek dubbade hann til riddera. oc erka drotning. Oc vist var hann pa
uar vin godr. NI. 1754 1757. The tw o versions differ to th e ex ten t th a t th e NI.
focuses E tz els a tte n tio n on H agen alone while th e saga distributes A ttila s a tte n
tio n betw een H gni an d Flkher, b oth of whom are identified (302, 3). I n all prob-
ab ility th e saga represents th e source and th e NI. poet has narrow ed th e focus for
a m om ent. This is suggested by th e faet th a t he ra th e r aw kw ardly reassociates
H agen an d V olker im m ediately after the identification scene (1758 1759). B u t th e
saga au th o r is guilty of an even greater aw kw ardness. H e telescopes th e sequence
before th e arrival a t A ttila s hall (300, 4 5) b y dropping first i re k rs warning,
th e n G rlm hildrs realization th a t th e guests are forewarned, an d finally A ttila s
observation of H gni and F lkher a t a distance along w ith th eir identification and
A ttila s reminiscences. Instead , th e saga proceeds directly to th e b an q u e t (300,
8 19). H ow ever, th e b an q u e t is uneventful an d quickly abridged (300, 22).
E veryone retires an d fu rth er action is delayed u n til th e n ex t m orning. A t this point
th e saga w riter recovers some of th e lost m otifs (301, 5 302, 6 ), th e w arning, th e
identification of H gni and Flkher, an d A ttila s reminiscences. This extension of
th e reception sequence over tw o days m ay be th e result of in ad v erten t telescoping
and subsequent backtracking, b u t it is m ore likely to be deliberate redistribution
of th e action in order to accom m odate both a hall banquet, as it existed in th e epic
source, an d an orchard banquet, as it no doubt existed in th e Saxon ballad. Thus,
th e saga w riter uses some of th e reception m otifs on th e first d ay to preface th e hall
banquet, b u t he reserves other reception m otifs for th e second day to preface th e
orchard ban quet. The NI. po et pursues a course opposite to telescoping an d expands
th e reception scene on th e first day by inserting a new confrontation betw een
H agen, seconded b y Volker, an d K riem hilt. This new confrontation was surely
suggested to him by th e pairing of H agen and Volker, another h in t th a t this pairing
was already present in th e source. The confrontation occupies m ost of A dventure
X X IX (1758 1799) and reveals itself as a n interpolation because it dilates th e
tim e scheme in a particularly aw kw ard way: we m u st ap p aren tly imagine th e other
N ibelungs in a sta te of suspended anim ation w aiting to go into th e b an q u et hall
while H agen, Volker, and K riem hilt ac t out th e ir separate d ram a [cf. H eusler (2)
par. 67]. The scene is as follows: H agen and Volker occupy a bench opposite K riem
h ilts hall (1758 1761); th e H uns stare a t them as if they were wild beasts (1762);
K riem hilt weeps an d incites her followers (1763 1769); she advances tow ard
H agen an d Volker (1770 1771); they observe her an d discuss th e m enacing appear-
ance of h er retinue (1772 1780); H agen refuses to sta n d u p an d exhibits Siegfrieds
sword (1781 1783); K riem hilt weeps as H agen intended (1784); she challenges him
and he declares his guilt (1785 1791); she now appeals to her men, b u t th e y are
intim idated by the appearance of H agen and Volker (1792 1799); H agen an d
Volker rejoin the N ibelungs (1800 1803). A note of in terest in this scene is th e faet
th a t H agen has Siegfrieds sword, which cannot therefore have been a gift from
R deger to Giselher as s. 294, 8 10 w ould have us believe.
84 In th e NI. 1804-1807 th e guests pair off to en ter th e hall: D ietrich/G unther,
Irnfrit/G ernot, Rdeger/G iselher, V olker/H agen, H aw art/Irin c, D anew art/W olf-
hart. In s. 300, 9 15 special m ention is m ade of th e seating order on A ttila s
right an d left. The descriptions do n o t m atch, b u t th e y suggest th a t th e source
did entail some sort of ceremoni al arrangem ent a t th e b anquet.
85 s. 300, 8-10: Attila konungr sitr nu isinu hasete. oc setr a hgra veg ser Gunnar
konung sinn mag. NI. 1808, 2 3: Etzel der riche / daz langer niht enlie, j er spranc von
sinem sedele, / als er in [seil. G nther] komen sach.
86 s. 300, 17 19: eir drecka at kvelld gott vin. oc her er nv en dyrlegsta veizla oc
med allzkonar fongom er bezt megv vera. oc eru nv kater. NI. 1817, 1 3: E in wirt bi
sinen gesten / schner nie gesaz. / man gab in volleclichen / trinken unde maz. / alles
des si gerten / des was man in bereit.
87 s. 300, 22 23: Oc pessa nott soua peir igodum fridi oc ero nu allkater oc med
godum umbunade. NI. 1819, 1 2 : Gnther sprach zem wirte: j ugot lz' iuch wol
geleben. / wir wellen varn slfen; / ir sult uns urloup geben.' The saga disposes of th e
night in a single sentence; th e NI. uses it to create a new episodeth e schiltwaht.
The episode is as follows: Volker and H agen chide th e jostling H u n s as th e y leave
the hall (1820 1823); m agnificent bedding is prepared (1824 1826); Giselher is
apprehensive (1827); H agen and Volker assum e th e n ig h t w atch (1828 1832);
Volker fiddles th e Nibelungs sw eetly to sleep (1833 1835); Volker an d H ag en
observe th e approach of a detachm ent of K riem h ilts w arriors (1836 1839);
the H uns see th a t th e house is guarded an d re tre a t (1840 1841); V olker
is eager to pursue them , b u t H agen refuses to be draw n aw ay from th e door
(1842 1844); Volker reviles th e co ward ly H uns (1845 1847); K riem hilt learns of
their failure (1848). I t is possible th a t th e schiltwaht was in th e epic source, b u t n o t
probable [I deviate from H eusler (2) par. 40]. The NI. po et w ould ap p ear to have
devised it by analogy to H agens patro l on th e D anube an d th e p atro l n ear P assau
when he encounters E ckew art. The scheme underlying th e source was p ro b ab ly
th a t H agen acted as lone sentinel during th e journey to H unland. The NI. poet
elaborated this scheme by extending H ag en s sentinel function into th e actu al
sojourn a t E tzelnburc. A t th e same tim e, he doubled th e w atch by adding Volker,
ju st as he doubled th e rear guard during th e nig h t ride through B avaria b y adding
D ancw art. We m ay say, then, th a t where th e source persists, there is a single w atch,
b u t where the NI. poet elaborates, there is a double w atch an d an em phasis on
com panionship. A by-product of this expansion is additional em ploym ent for th e
larger cast of characters in th e NI. To re tu rn to th e schiltwaht, H ag en s an d V olkers
renewed confrontation w ith K riem hilts m en anticipates th e hostilities w hich will
break out the following day. H ow ever, it subverts th e clear outline of th e epic
source to some ex ten t since this outline provided for a m ore gradual decline in th e
relations betw een Nibelungs and H uns: first a cordial reception and en tertain m en t
unm arred by discord, on the second d ay K riem h ilts inciting of her followers, and
only then an outbreak of hostilities. I n th e NI. th e friction begins alm ost from th e
v
very o u tset w hen K riem hilt incites th e H uns for the first tim e in th e scene opposite
her hall (1792). H er dispatching of m en th a t sam e night to a tta c k th e Nibelungs
m u st be connected w ith her previous incitation, b u t th e connection is n o t explicit.
B o th episodes are m erely an ticipatory and th e real action is suspended u n til th e
n ex t day. Nonetheless, they are am ong th e scenically m ost effective in th e NI.
88 NI. 1850. s. does no t specify th a t H gni aw akens th e sleepers, b u t it is H gni
who responds to i re k rs first inquiry (301, 2 3), th u s im plying th a t he h ad th e
leading role in th e preceding scene.
89 NI. 1852 1859. 3>s. consistently drops church-related episodes and secularizes
th is p articu lar scene by su b stitu tin g a w alk around th e tow n (301, 15 16): oc nu
er o aller niflungar upp stadner. oc ganga um borgena oc skemta ser. [Cf. H eusler ( 2 )
p ar. 67.] The saga does n o t include H ag en s instructions th a t th e y go arm ed (NI.
1852 1854), b u t G rim hildrs offer to relieve them of their weapons (s. 304, 22 25)
m akes it clear th a t they are in faet arm ed.
90 NI. 1860 1862. I n th e NI. E tzel is grieved a t th e th o u g h t th a t some in ju ry
m ight have been done to th e Nibelungs. I t is n o t certain th a t he was quite so apolo-
getic in th e source. s. sheds no light: since it dropped H gnis instructions to arm ,
it m ust also drop A ttila s query. T h at helm ets h ad a conspicuous p a rt in th e scene
is faintly suggested by the correspondence betw een NI. 1861, 3 an d s. 301, 25 26.
91 NI. 1863. s. drops th e explanation along w ith the query. In th e NI. (1864 1865)
K riem hilt m u st contain her w ra th a t th e tran sp a ren t lie for fear of arousing E tz els
suspicions ab o u t her activity. This m ay well belong to th e source, b u t in th e NI.
her continued reticence has become a ra th e r groundless precaution. E tzel would
be a fool n o t to have noticed, or n o t to have learned of, th e hostilities of th e previous
d ay and night, an o th er indication th a t these confrontations are th e NI. p o e ts
additions, n o t th e saga w riters subtractions. I n stanzas 1866 1867 th ere is m ore
jostling betw een N ibelungs an d H uns modeled on stanzas 1820 1823 (see note 87).
92 NI. 1868, 1. A t this point the NI. inserts a cerem onial jo u st (1868 1897): th e
co ntestants g ath er (1868 1873), D ietrich and R deger w ithdraw th eir m en (1874
1876), th e T huringians an d D anes joust w ith th e N ibelungs (1877 1878), B l delins
H uns follow (1879 1888), Volker kills a H unnish dandy (1889), open hostilities
th rea ten (1890 1894), E tzel intervenes and re-establishes order (1895 1897).
There is no h in t th a t this joiist was in th e source and it probably belongs to th e NI.
p o e ts festive elaborations in line w ith th e jo u st a t Tulln (1353 1355).
93 s. 302, 20 24: Attila konungr ser nu huersu m ikit fiolmenne er her saman komet
oc ecki fr hann skipat pessu allu folki i eina holl. En nu er gott ver oc fagrt skin hann
letr bua vizluna ieinum apalldrs garde. NI. 1898, 3: d rihte man di tische, / daz
wazzer man in truoc.
94 s. 303, 3 12; NI. 1899.
96 s. 303, 13 17: fru pat ma ek gera vist eigi. oc huer er pat gerer, pa skal pat vera
gort idtan m itt rad oc uttan minn vilia fyr pvi at peir eru m inir ener beztu uinir. oc
helldr skillda ek veita peim gagn en ugagn. The NI. poet divides th is response, assign-
ing th e first p a rt to H ild eb ran t (1900, 2: uswer sieht die Nibelunge, / der tuot iz ne
mich") and th e second p a rt to D ietrich (1901, 3: umir habent dine mge j der leide
niht getn ). This redistribution stem s from th e p o e ts desire, once again, to find
em ploym ent for as m any of his charaeters as possible, b u t th e result is unusually
aw kw ard in th a t H ild eb ran t replies to a request which was n o t addressed to him.
96 s. 303, 18 24; NI. 1904.
97 s. 304, 1 3; NI. 1905.

98 NI. 1906 1910. I n th e saga Bllinn does n o t relent an d G rim hildr n ex t m akes
a n a tte m p t to win A ttila over to her revenge. The urging of A ttila is m ost unlikely
because the whole purpose of G rim hildrs strateg y is to circum vent his a u th o rity
[W ilmanns 21: . . .; es ist w idersinnig und gewiss n ich t der ursprnglichen E r
findung gemss, dass K riem hild bei E tzel H lfe sucht, nachdem u n m ittelb ar v orher
Bldel aus F u rc h t vor E tzels F eindschaft ihre B itte n abgelehnt h a t.]. F u rth e r-
more, Bllinns initial response (note 97) sounds te n tativ e an d n o t quite convincing,
as if it were designed to elicit further representations. W e m ay also no te th a t th e
rew ard offered A ttila by G rim hildr (s. 304, 14 15: oc pa mattu fa niflunga skatt.
oc allt niflungaland.) echoes th e rew ard w hich K riem hilt promises Bl delin in NI.
1906, 2 (/a gib' ich dir ze miete j silber unde golt) an d 1907, 1 (uDaz lant zuo den
brgen / wil ich dir allez geben''1); an easy inference m ight be th a t th e saga w riter
altered th e source by elim inating K riem hilts second request to Bl delin an d tr a n s
ferring th e unused p a rt of her prom ised rew ard to E tzel. The final indication th a t,
in th e source, Bl delin acceded to K riem h ilts urging is th e necessity of his role
as slayer of th e N ibelung atten d a n ts. The saga w riter clearly realized la ter th a t
he h ad abolished a necessary role and he was th e n obliged to reassign th e killing of
th e atten d a n ts to ru n g r. As a consequence, th e scene in w hich G rim hildr enlists
ru n g r for this purpose is a retake of the scene in which she enlists B l delin as we
have it in the NI. an d as it was in th e epic source. [I therefore disagree w ith Wis-
niewski 142 145 w hen she derives Iru n g rs a tta c k on th e a tte n d a n ts from th e
second source; the saga w riter is sim ply repairing an omission an d m u st use a new
character because Bllinn has already refused to oblige Grim hildr.] The obvious
question is: w hy did th e saga w riter choose to ex tend G rim hildrs urging to A ttila?
I t m ay be th a t he missed th e point of G rim hildrs conspiracy to circum vent A ttila
and could n o t understan d w hy she failed to appeal to such an obvious source of
power. Or it m ay be th a t the ballad source assigned g reater in itiative to A ttila and
th e saga w riter is attem p tin g here to reconcile K riem h ilts role as inciter from th e
epic source w ith A ttila s role as aggressor from th e Saxon ballad, even though
A ttila s a tta c k fails to m aterialize. I n any event, in th e epic source K riem hilt
approached only D ietrich and Bldelin, n o t E tzel. [The view advanced here differs
from W isniewski 124 132, who assigns all three incitations to th e epic source;
cf. H eusler (2 ) par. 40.] A lthough th e NI. version is m uch clearer here, it fails to
specify the n atu re of B l delins mission and this emerges only in th e n ex t A dventure.
99 s. 304, 2022; NI. 1911.
100 NI. 1912, 1 3 (altered in C [B atts 582]): Do der strit niht anders / kunde sin
erhaben / (Kriemhilde leit daz alte / in ir herzen was begraben), / do hiez si tragen ze
tische / den Etzelen sun. This is th e well-known stan za in which th e NI. poet betray s
K riem hilts intention to sacrifice her son to her vengeance, although he later shies
aw ay from m aking th e sacrifice explicit. T h at O rtliep is carried to th e b an q u et as
in NI. 1913 is indicated by an an ticipatory passage in s. 299, 20 21: N v teer
gunnarr konungr sueinin alldrian oc ber ifadme ser t. H a ving pre-em pted th e m otif,
th e saga w riter does n o t rep eat it here. The NI. poet elaborates th e scene by deve-
loping an effort on E tz els p a rt to engage for his son th e kindness of th e N ibelungs
(1914 1917). H is request th a t th ey ta k e O rtliep w ith th em on th e ir re tu rn (1916)
is rem iniscent of K riem h ilts fostering of R degers d aughter in 1326. A fu rth er
elaboration is H agens harsh response th a t O rtliep is doomed to die in 1918.
43] The Epic Source of N ifluuga saga and th e Nibelungenlied 43
101 [W isniewski 139 believes th a t the a tta c k on th e atten d a n ts as a cataly st for the
o u tb reak of fighting in th e b anquet hall belongs to her second source. I believe th a t
th is a tta c k was only a precaution in th e epic source and was developed into a c a ta
ly st by th e NI. poet after he obscured the m otif of O rtlieps sacrifice. There is th e n
no need for a second source to explain th e saga.] >s. 308, 3 7: Oc nu mler drotning
at kann [seil. ru n g r] skal fara fyrst oc drepa peirra sveina. oc lata engan pan komaz
igard er adr er fyr uttan af niflungum oc engan pan ut komaz med livi er adr er fyr innan.
T he NI. devotes all of A dventure X X X II (1921 1950) to this episode. I n th e saga
th e episode is preceded by tw o motifs: G rim hildrs dem and th a t th e N iflungs lay
aside th eir arm s (s. 304, 22 25) and her inciting of ru n g r (s. 307, 8 308, 1).
I n b o th cases it is a question of recovering scenes previously dropped. The prohibi-
tion of arm s was lost because of a confusion betw een living q u arters an d banquet
hall (see note 75). T h a t th e saga w riter is here working from th e earlier passage is
clearly indicated by a verbal correspondence betw een s. 305, 1 6 an d NI. 1746.
The inciting of ru n g r duplicates th e inciting of Bl delin as it m u st have been in
th e epic source and as it survives in the NI. 1906 1907 (see note 98). The killing
of th e a tte n d a n ts is reported only as a plan in th e saga, b u t th e NI. provides a full
description: Bl delin advances 1000 strong against th e atte n d a n ts com m anded
by D ancw art (1921); D ancw art greets him (1922); Bl delin announces his in te n
tions (1923); D ancw art declares his innocence (1924, 3: ich was ein wnic kindel / d
S ifrit vls den Upwords transferred from G iselhers role in th e epic source as s.
323, 14 16 shows); after a further exchange D ancw art strikes off B l delins head
(1925 1927); D ancw art mocks th e dead m an w ith K riem hilts prom ise of N uod u n g s
widow (1928alludes to 1906); a general engagem ent begins (1929 1930); th e
a tte n d a n ts defend them selves w ith footstools an d kill 500 (1931-1932); th e H uns
receive reinforcem ents of 2000 and com plete th e slaughter (1933 1936); only
D ancw art survives (1937 1940); he asks for a messenger to be sent to his b ro th er
H agen (1941); he is told to ac t as his own messenger (1942); he fights his w ay through
th e H uns to th e banqueting N ibelungs (1943 1950). There is no indication th a t
anv of th is action belongs to th e epic source and A dventure X X X II (like A dventures
X X V I, X X IX , and X X X ) is likely to be th e NI. p o ets own creation, especially
since it centers around one of his new ly-created characters (D ancw art).
102 s. 308, 11 21. T h a t this version belongs to th e epic source is b etray ed by th e
telltale stanza NI. 1912. H ow ever, the NI. poet avoids such a coldhearted device
and resorts to a new m otif in order to p recipitate hostilities. D ancw art, having
fought his w ay through th e H uns, suddenly appears in th e doorw ay of th e b an q u et
hall to announce th e d eath of the a tte n d a n ts (1951 1956) an d this bloody a p p a ri
tion provokes H agens slaying of Ortliep.
103 t>s. 308, 21 309, 11; NI. 1960 1962. The NI. adds, as a ra th e r g ratu ito u s touch,
th a t H agen also cuts off W erbels right hand (1963-1964).
104 s. 309, 12 14: N u lypr attila konungr upp oc kallar. Stande vpp hvner aller
minir menn. oc vapne sic oc drepe niflunga. This is the reaction we expect from A ttila
after th e killing of his son an d th e reaction w hich G rim hildr has calculated. On th e
other han d , th e NI. poet registers no reaction on E tz e ls p a rt (thus leaving th e m otif
blind) an d a ttrib u te s th e beginning of th e general fighting to H agen and Volker
(1965 1966) soon followed by th e other Nibelungs (1967 1971).
105 s. 310, 5-7; NI. 2008, 1 2. [Wisniewski 145.] The actu al details of th e fighting
emerge less clearly (s. 309, 15 310, 5; NI. 1972-2007). The strateg y in th e saga
is to keep th e N iflungs penned in th e orchard by spreading raw oxhides before

th e gate, a feature w hich m u st belong to th e Saxon ballad. The NI. provides more
detail: D ancw art blocks th e door so th a t no H uns will escape (1973 1974);
Volker goes to his aid (1975 1979); H agen w ades into th e enem y ranks (1980);
D ietrich and E tzel are dism ayed (1981 1982); K riem hilt appeals to D ietrich to
bring h er to safety (1983 1986); D ietrich requests free exit (1987 1994); he takes
K riem hilt and E tzel w ith him (1995); R deger requests and receives free exit
(1996 1998); a H unnish w arrior try in g to escape w ith E tzel an d D ietrich is be-
headed by Volker (1999); E tzel lam ents (2000 2002); th e slaughter proceeds apace
(2003); H agen an d G nther praise Volker (2004 2007). I t is impossible to teil how
m uch of this action was suggested by th e source an d how m uch of it is th e NI.
p o ets own explanation for th e faet th a t, although every H u n in th e hall is slain,
E tzel (together w ith K riem hilt, D ietrich, and Rdeger) somehow survive. This is
n o t a serious contradiction in th e saga and we are sim ply led to assum e th a t A ttila
and th e others somehow m ade th eir w ay to safety during th e fighting, b u t it be-
comes ra th e r m ore serious in th e NI. since D ancw art blocks th e door from th e very
outset and no escape is possible. I t was perhaps th is new role of D an cw arts which
obliged th e NI. poet to fabricate his elaborate free exit sequence. [I therefore see
no need to assume w ith W isniewski 144 th a t th e epic source provided a special
explanation for th e escape of E tzel and his intim ates an d I incline ra th e r to H euslers
view (2) par. 87 th a t th e explanation is th e NI. p o ets innovation.]
106 s. 310, 7 9. The NI. poet, who has already robbed E tzel of his in itiative when
th e fighting broke out in th e b an q u et hall, now fu rth er deprives him of an y leader-
ship in this scene. All th a t rem ains is a ra th e r futile desire on E tz els p a rt to piunge
into th e fray (2022, 1 3). The initiative itself is tran sferred to H agen an d Volker
in th e N ibelung cam p an d to K riem hilt in th e H unnish cam p. The NI. poet prefaces
th e renewed confrontation w ith several incidents which m ay or m ay n o t have been
in th e epic source: Volker a n d H agen rest af ter th e slaughter in th e hall is com pleted
(2009); Giselher advises th a t th e hall be cleared for fresh fighting (2010 2011);
H agen com mends his advice (2012); 7000 H uns are ejected, some still alive (2013
2014); Volker mocks th e plaintive H uns (2015); he spears a H unnish m argrave
(2016); th e H uns sc atter (2017-2018); H agen an d Volker incite E tzel (2019 2020).
The central incident in this sequence is th e ejection of th e dead (and still living)
H uns. I t m arks a chilling luli in th e b a ttie and m ay well have been in th e source;
we m ight imagine, for exam ple, th a t th e saga w riter, w ith his ground level orchard,
dropped th e scene because it was no longer possible to p icture th e dead and m oribund
bodies tum bling dow n th e steps of th e raised ban q u et hall (NI. 2013, 3: vor des sales
stiegen / vielen si zetal). B u t this supposition is n o t enough to secure th e scene for
th e source.
107 s. 310, 9 13: En irecr konungr af bern gengr heim isinn gar me alla sina.
men. oc pikkir str illa er sua marger hans goder vinir skulu ganga i tua stade oc beriaz.
The NI. poet does n o t record D ietrichs w ithdraw al an d does n o t account for his
location during th e ensuing fighting. I t is, how ever, quite likely th a t his w ithdraw al
was m entioned in th e source because his absence from th e following scenes would
otherw ise rem ain unexplained. D ietrich does n o t p articip ate in an y w ay u ntil th e
beginning of A dventure X X X V II, w hen he is explicitly recalled to th e scene
(2137, 1: Do sande an Dietrichen / der guote Riiedegr).
45] T he E pic Source of N iflunga saga an d the Nibelungenlied 45
108 s. 310, 13 20; NI. 2024 2025.

109 s. 318, 1 8 : N u gengr Oernoz frarn fra allum sinum mannum. oc hogr atuer
hlidar ser. oc drepr nu margan mann. Oc nu kemr igegn hanum hertoge blodlinn. Oc
hef ia eir ar sitt einvigi med storum hogum. oc skia langa rid allrystimanlega.
Oc gernoz skilz sua padan. at hann heuir af hogit hauod blodlinn iarls. This is th e first
in th e sequence of single com bats. I t is dropped in th e NI. because B l delin has
already fallen victim to D ancw art and it does n o t occur in s. u n til p. 318 long afte r
th e fighting has recom m enced on p. 310. The saga th u s has a long passage covering
eight pages w hich bears little or no relation to th e epic source. In th is passage th e
Niflungs b reak o u t of th e orchard and fight w ith th e H uns in th e streets of Soest.
G unnarr is captu red b y O sir [contrary to W isniewski 148 149 I believe th a t
MS B has th e b e tte r reading and th a t A has dropped Osir because th ere is no oth er
record of his presence during th e fighting; cf. H em pel ( 1 ) 97] an d is subsequently
east into th e snake p it. N ight comes on and th e N iflungs count th eir surviving
troops (700 rem ain). I n order to continue th e fight during th e night, since H unnish
reinforcem ents are expected in the m orning, th e y p u t fire to a cookhouse an d illu-
m ine th e tow n. T h a t this n arrativ e is largely ta k e n from local Soest trad itio n , or
perhaps from th e Saxon ballad a ttac h ed to Soest trad itio n , is indicated b y a series
of local references: 1 ) th e nam e of th e orchard-hom[ hom\gardr er orostan stendr
i oc sua heiter hann en i dag. niflunga homgardr (311, 1 2 ), 2 ) th e enclosing w all
around th e orchard oc same steinvegr er en um hann idag (312, 1 2), an d 3) th e
tow er w ith G u n n arrs snake p itog sa turn stenndur j m idri Susa (314, 18 19).
Only th e la st episode (the burning of th e cookhouse) m ay perhaps be a reflection of
th e burning ban q u et hall in A dventure X X X V I of th e NI. [W isniewski 150 151].
The only difficulty is th a t th e night burning in th e saga appears to be p rem atu re
an d precedes th e com bat betw een H gni and ru n g r. T hus, in th e NI. H agen an d
Irinc fight on th e first day, b u t in the saga th ey fight on th e second day. There is
a plausible explanation for th e discrepancy. J u s t as th e saga w riter has already
harm onized th e hall ban q u et of th e epic source w ith th e orchard b an q u et of th e
ballad source by placing them end to end on successive days an d relocating some
of th e action in the epic sourcc to fill out th e second day, he here harm onizes his
Soest or ballad source w ith th e epic source by assigning th e action from th e form er
to th e first day and th e action from th e la tte r to th e second day. We m ay thereforo
safely assum e th a t th e epic source h ad th e sam e division as th e NI. an d located n ot
only th e com bat betw een Bl delin and G ernot (om itted by th e NI.) b u t also th e
com bat betw een H agen and Irinc on th e first day. The other question which arises
in this co n text is w hether G unnarr is captu red early in th e fighting (as in th e saga)
or late in th e fighting (as in th e NI.). H eusler ( 1 ) 540 541 followed th e saga, b u t
th e saga account is so clearly based on ballad or Soest trad itio n th a t th e NI. sequence
is preferable in reconstructing th e epic source. I t is supported by th e consideration
of a w ell-constructed clim ax budding from th e m inor encounters to th e m ajor
encounters of th e finale and, in addition, by th e sym m etry which clearly prevailed
in th e epic source: four single com bats betw een th e chief w arriors on either side
(G ernot/Bldelin, H agen/Irinc, G iselher/R deger, V olker/D ietrich), three ending
in N ibelung victories and th e fourth tu rn in g th e tide w ith D ietrichs en try and
V olkers fall, th e n four m ore single com bats, tw o assigned to H ild eb ran t (ending
in th e d eath of G ernot and Giselher) and two assigned to D ietrich (culm inating in
th e cap tu re of H agen and G nther).
110 s. 318, 10 15: Oc a hyrir Roddingeirr margreife. oc verr reir mioc at fallen
er blodlinn hertoge ok kallar asina menn at nu skulu peir beriaz oc drepa niflunga. oc
ltr hann bera merki sitt fram i orrustu allrystimanlega. oc firi hanum falla niflungar.
oc nu hever hann barez langa rid. The NI., having dropped th e com bat betw een
G ernot and B ldelin, is prevented from using this com bat as a m o tivation for
R degers en try into th e battie. I t m u st be ad m itted th a t his e n try a t th is m om ent
causes some aw kw ardness because it leads to nothing R d eg ers single com bat
against Giselher does n o t tak e place u n til th e following day. H ow ever, th e Connec
tion betw een B l delins fall an d R degers e n try belongs to th e p a tte rn and sym-
m etry of th e epic source because it is duplicated by D ietrichs activ atio n after
R degers fall [Wisniewski 154]. F urtherm ore, R d eg ers en try m u st have occurred
a t this point because dram atic considerations forbid delaying his access of w ra th
u n til th e following m orning.
111 s. 319, 11 15; NI. 2025. The wording in these tw o passages is very similar;
th e only difference is th a t th e y constitute a direct appeal to ru n g r in th e saga,
while the NI. poet uses them as a general appeal, to w hich Irinc responds. The saga
probably reflects th e source, whereas th e NI. has telescoped it b y elim inating th e
single com bat betw een Bl delin and G ernot an d th u s m erging K riem h ilts first
general appeal (responded to by Bldelin) and her second specific appeal to Irinc.
The saga w riter deviates in a different w ay by causing H gni to ta k e cover (for
reasons which are n o t clear) in a hall and th en attem p tin g to retrieve th e burning
b an q u et hall m otif of th e epic source by causing G rim hildr to set fire to th e hall
where H gni has found refuge (319, 8 10). The sagas com pounding of G rim hildrs
inciting of ru n g r an d her igniting of th e hall is illogical: we w ould expect th a t
either a fire would be ignited to drive H gni from his shelter, or th a t someone
would be dispatched to a tta c k him , n o t both.
112 s. 319, 15 23; NI. 2050 2054. Irin c s a tta c k in th e NI. is prefaced by his
acceptance of a challenge issued by th e Nibelungs (2026 2027), his offer of single
com bat against H agen (2028 2030), H a w a rts desire to follow him w ith 1000 m en
(2031), V olkers reproach for reneging on th e offer of single com bat (2032 2033),
Irin c s dismissal of his followers (2034 2036), an initial skirm ish w ith H agen
(2037 2039), a skirm ish w ith Volker (2040 2041), a skirm ish w ith G nther (2042),
a skirm ish w ith G ernot (2043), the slaying of four Nibelungs (2044), and Irin c s
m om entary fall in an encounter w ith Giselher (2045 2049). All of this m ay safely
be a ttrib u te d to the NI. p o ets desire for an increased deploym ent of his cast.
113 s. 319, 23 320, 3; NI. 2055, 1 3. I n th e saga, G rim hildr goes on to renew her
offer of a shield full of gold and silver, b u t this repeats her original appeal and m ay
be a m echanical duplication. ru n g r gives no sign of being unwilling and there is
no need for her to press th e point. The NI. poet adds tw o stanzas (2056 2057)
in which H agen belittles his wound.
114 s. 320, 8 14: Oc nu hlypr jrungr annat sinni ihollena at hogna. Oc nu varaz
hogni vid. oc snyr igegn honum. oc legr sinu spioti under hans skiolld i hans briost sua
at sundr teer bryniona oc bukinn sua at um herdarnar kom t. oc pa letr irungr sigaz
vid steinveginn. oc pesse steinuegr heitir irungs vegr en i dag. NI. 2058 2064, speci-
fically 2062, 2 4: der Hwartes man / wart von Hagenen swerte / krefteclichen wunt /
durch schilt und durch di brnne, / des er wart nimmer m ir gesunt. and 2064, 1 3:
Hagen vor sinen fezen / einen ger ligen vant. / er schz f Iringen, / den heit von
Tenelant, / daz im von dem houbte / diu stange ragete dan. There are enough common
features to suggest th e n atu re of the w ound (or wounds) in th e epic source: th e

th ru s t th ro u g h (or under) the shield an d through th e byrnie an d th e spear projecting
from th e shoulders in th e saga and from th e head in th e NI. The allegation of Soest
tra d itio n (this stone w all is called ru n g rs w all to this very d ay ) in a passage so
clearly ta k e n over from th e South G erm an epic source is curious. P erhaps th e Soest
place n am e belongs to th e independent legend of Irin g and has here been transferred
to th e N ibelung sto ry ad hoc. I n any event, th e passage appears to give good evi-
dence th a t the com bination of epic source and N o rth G erm an trad itio n took place
in Soest [as H em pel has argued (2) 138 156] since it is n o t likely th a t a N orsem an
w orking in Bergen w ould have com bined a passage in the epic source w ith a site
in Soest. I n th e saga Iru n g r succum bs on th e spot, b u t in th e NI. he is able to rejoin
his m en (2065), listen to th e solace of K riem h ilts lam ent (2066), and use his dying
words in a vain a tte m p t to dissuade his m en from joining in th e fight (2067 2069).
They a tta c k nonetheless (2070) and in th e ensuing b attie Irn frit succum bs to Volker
(2071 2072), H aw art succum bs to H agen (2073), and 1004 D anes and T huringians
are slain (2074 2077). A dventure X X X V concludes as th e Nibelungs rest (2078
2079) an d E tzel an d K riem hilt lam ent (2080). This additional n arrativ e is alm ost
certain ly th e p ro p erty of th e NI. poet.
115 NI. 2109, 1 2. The saga w riter has expended th is m otif in conjunction w ith
ru n g rs a tta c k on H gni in a separate hall. The firing of th e hall in this context is
illogical for the reason given above (note 111 ), b u t th e saga w riter could n o t proceed
ag ain st th e whole N ibelung force in th is w ay since, in his account, th ey are penned
n o t in a n inflam m able hall, b u t in an open orchard. According to th e epic source,
th e hall was probably ignited directly after Irin c s fall as th e n ex t phase in K riem
h ilts a tta c k , b u t th e NI. adds a luli and th e n renewed fighting before nightfall:
th e N ibelungs disarm and rest seated on th e w ounded H uns (2081 2082 a ghoul-
ish to u ch analogous to th e ejection of the H uns still half alive); th e H uns renew
th e a tta c k u n til nightfall (2083 2086); G nther, Giselher, an d G ernot parley w ith
E tzel an d ask for leave to fight in the open (2087 2097); K riem hilt intervenes to
refuse (2098 2103); she will agree only if H agen is surrendered as a hostage, b u t
this condition is rejected successi vely by G em ot, Giselher, an d D ancw art (2104
2107). M ost of this additional sequence (2087 2107) m ay be accounted for in term s
of th e NI. p o e ts predilection for councils.
116 T he suffering of th e N ibelungs is described only in th e NI. (2112 2119), b u t
it is unlikely th a t th e epic source included th e burning hall w ith o u t any m enti on
w hatsoever of the hardship endured by the trap p ed Nibelungs. The m otifs provided
by th e NI. are: general lam entation (2112 2113), the quenching of th irst w ith the
biood of th e dead (2114 2117), and th e extinguishing of firebrands w ith biood
(2118 2119). W h at derives from the source is impossible to say.
117 NI. 2120 2124 (2122 2123 echo 1849). Line 2124, 3 gives th e num ber of sur-
vivors as 600. The num ber is rem iniscent of th e night m ustering in L>s. 315, 18 34,
w hich reveals th a t 300 N iflungs have fallen and 700 rem ain [Wisniewski 150].
P erh ap s th e m ustering belongs to th e epic source and was dropped by th e NI. except
for th e bare m ention of a figure. I n th e source, th e m orning no d o u b t b rought
R d eg ers a tta c k and his com bat w ith Giselher, b u t th e NI. delays this action w ith
m ore general fighting: th e H unnish a tta c k is renewed (2125 2129), K riem hilt
continues to distribute gold (2130), th e N ibelungs challenge th e advancing H uns
(2131 2132), and a detachm ent of 1200 H uns is killed (2133 2134).
118 s. 320, 2022: J essu bili eru nu m ikil tidindi. Rodingeirr margreife sker nu
hart fram oc drepr niflunga. The saga om its specific m ention of his arm ed followers,
b u t th e y m ust be present as in th e NI. 2167 2170 (2169, 1: Oewfent wart d
Redeger / mit fnf hundert man). I n th e saga (and presum ably th e source) Roin-
geirrs a tta c k has already been m otiv ated by his w ra th a t G ernoz slaying of Bl-
linn, b u t th e NI. poet, having reassigned B l delin to D ancw art, has lost th e com bat
betw een B ldelin an d G ernot together w ith th e m o tiv atio n pro vided. H e there-
fore 1) reassigns G ernot to R deger an d 2) m anufactures a new m o tiv atio n in th e
form of R degers well-known quandry. This q u an d ry provides th e m aterial for
a very substantial new scene. R deger lam ents a t th e sight of so m uch bloodshed
(2136) an d sends for D ietrich, whose absence was accounted for in th e epic source
if n o t in th e NI. (see note 107), b u t D ietrich judges th a t conciliation is futile (2137).
A H unnish w arrior reproaches R deger for holding aloof an d R deger strikes him
dead (21382142). R deger protests th a t he is pro h ib ited from fighting by his
role as th e N ibelungs guide (2143 2144). E tzel chides him for killing th e H unnish
w arrior (2145), b u t R deger pleads th e vindication of his honor (2146). K riem hilt
rem inds him of his o ath to her (2147 2149), b u t he m aintains th a t he did n o t
swear his soul aw ay an d once m ore pleads his role as guide (2150). K riem hilt renews
her representations and R deger rem inds her of his custom ary loyalty (2151).
E tzel and K riem hilt now appeal to him on bended knee (2152) an d R deger
lam ents his dilem m a (2153 2154). T hey continue to press (2155), th u s leaving
R deger w ith a choice betw een, on th e one han d , refusing his king and queen, and,
on th e other hand, killing one of th e N ibelungs w ith whom he is bound by th e ties of
h ospitality and prospective m arriage (2156). H e tries to ex tricate himself b y of fering
to restore everything E tzel has gran ted him (2157), b u t E tzel counters w ith an
offer of joint rule (2158). R deger once m ore pleads th e bonds of h o spitality and
b etro th ai (2159 2161), b u t K riem hilt is unrem ittin g (2162) an d R deger resigns
himself to death (2163 2164). E tzel th an k s him (2165) an d R deger, having finally
recognized th e binding n atu re of his obligations to E tzel an d K riem hilt (2166), arm s
himself together w ith 500 m en (2167 2170).
119 s. 320, 22 321, 5; NI. 2220. [W isniewski 165 167.] These passages differ in
two im p o rtan t respects. I n th e saga R oingeirr is killed b y Gislher an d succumbs
alone. In the NI. R deger is killed by G ernot an d b o th succum b. The saga probably
represents the source accurately and th e NI. po et is responsible for b o th differences.
H e substitutes G ernot for Giselher in order to tem p er th e fam iliacidal situ atio n in
th e source and he balances victory and defeat in order to enhance th e heroic propor
tions he has created for R deger. I n addition, he provides th e elaborate pathos of
R degers last conversation w ith th e Nibelungs: Giselher observes R degers
approach and supposes th a t he is coming to th eir assistance, b u t V olker disabuses
him (21712173); R deger declares his position to th e Nibelungs and G nther
expresses disbelief (2174 2177); R deger explains th a t he is u n d er o ath to fight,
b u t G nther urges him to consider th e conflicting n atu re of his obligations (2178
2180); R deger is only too willing, b u t he is unable to recognize th e com peting claims
of th e N ibelungs (2181); G ernot repeats th e piea an d R deger restates his regret
(2182 2183); G ernot rem inds him of th e sword gift and R deger can only express
his grief once m ore (2184 2187); Giselher rem inds R deger of th e b etro th ai and
R deger pleads th a t his daughter n o t be held responsible for his action, b u t Giselher
replies th a t th e death of his relatives will dissolve all ties (2188 2191); H agen now
49] T he E pic Source of N iflunga saga and th e Nibelungenlied 49
requests R degers shield and w hen it is granted, he praises R deger an d vows to

avoid any encounter w ith him in th e coming b a ttle (2192 2201); afte r some general
lam entation Volker follows H agens exam ple an d asks in additio n to be rem em bered
to G otelint, to w hich R deger agrees (22022205); b a ttle is joined, G ernot chal-
lenges R deger, and b oth fall (2206 2221); H agen and G nther lam ent (2222
2223). The NI. p o ets form ulation of this long scene is in tu n e w ith his fondness for
polyagonal discussion. F requently, this sort of volubility in th e NI. inflates an ep i
sode beyond th e lim its of its narrativ e resources, b u t on this occasion, an d perhaps
this occasion alone, th e em otional content is sufficient to bear th e diffuseness an d
repetitiveness of th e discussion.
120 s. 321, 5 7; NI. 2224 (obscured in C [B atts 676]). I n th e NI. Giselher leads
th e a tta c k alone because G ernot has already fallen. The scene th e n concludes w ith
a brief afterm ath: there is m ore lam enting for R deger and G ernot (2225 2226);
th e N ibelungs rest (2227); K riem hilt in terprets th e silence to m ean th a t R deger
has deserted her cause (2228-2229); Volker reveals th e tr u th to her (2230 2231);
th e N ibelungs exhibit R degers corpse and th e H uns lam ent (2232 2234).
121 s. 321, 19 322, 1: N u ser pidrecr konungr at roddingeirr margreife er daudr.
pa kallar hann hatt. N u er daudr minn bezte vin Rodingeirr margreife. N u ma ek ei
lengr vera kyrr. Taki allir m inir menn sin vopn. oc verd ec nu beriaz vid niflunga.
This sequence in th e saga accords w ith th e established p attern : ju st as R oingeirrs
in tervention is precipitated by Bllinns death, so i re k rs in tervention is pre-
cip itated by R oingeirrs death. A t least the second of these tw o n arrativ e hinges
is secured for th e epic source by a correspondence in th e NI., according to which
D ietrich slowly begins to prepare his intervention after R degers d eath. However,
in th e process th e NI. poet greatly dilates th e fram ew ork by delaying th e in terv en
tion w ith prefatory action (chiefly, once again, to allow for th e deploym ent of new
m inor characters). I t emerges a t th is point th a t, although D ietrich was present a t
th e beginning of A dventure X X X V II (2137), he has somehow once m ore retreated
from th e scene and is only w ithin earshot of th e action, n o t in plain view. This dis
tance m akes possible th e delay, which is tak en up w ith discussions, speculations,
and th e relaying of inform ation by messenger: D ietrich in te rp re ts th e H unnish
lam ent a t th e end of A dventure X X X V II to m ean th a t either E tzel or K riem hilt is
dead (2235 2238); W olfhart offers to investigate, b u t D ietrich dispatches H elpfrich
instead (2239 2243); H elpfrich reports R degers d eath and D ietrich is stu n n ed
(22442245); W olfhart vows vengeance (2246); D ietrich sends H ild eb ran t to o btain
confirm ation (2247); W olfhart chides H ildebrant for going u narm ed and proceeds to
arm himself (2248 2250); his m en insist on accom panying him (2251); Volker
observes th eir approach and announces their arrival (2252 2253); H ild eb ran t asks
for confirm ation of R degers d eath (2254-2255); H agen provides th e confirm ation
and D ietrichs m en lam ent (2256 2261); H ild eb ran t requests th e surrender of
R degers body and G nther praises his loyalty (2262-2264); W olfhart repeats
th e request im patiently and Volker advises him to reclaim th e body him self
(2265 2266); W olfhart is prepared to fight were it n o t for D ietrich s prohibition
(2267); Volker charges him w ith cowardice and th e y exchange th re a ts (2268 2270);
H ildebrant restrains W olfhart, b u t Volker provokes him once again and he attac k s
followed by D ietrichs m en (2271 2284); Volker kills Sigestap (2285). The result
of this oblique version is to shift th e initiative in th e renewed fighting from D ietrich
to th e h o theaded W olfhart an d th u s preserve D ietrichs O lym pian role.
4 A R K IV F R N O R D IS K FIL O L O G I L X X X V II I
122 s. 322, 16 19. Since th e NI. poet insists on D ietrichs aloofness, this killing
falls to his second in com m and, H ildebrant, as vengeance for Sigestap (2286 2287).
[Wisniewski 167 168.]
123 s. 322, 20 323, 1 . Since G ernot has already succum bed in his b a ttle ag ain st
R deger in the NI., th e G erm an poet elim inates th e com bat w ith H ild eb ran t.
[Wisniewski 168 169.]
124 s. 323, 1 4: Oc nu standa ei jleiri upp i pessi holl peir er vapn frer eru. en
pessir fiorir. pirecr oc Hogne med sitt vig. Hilldibrandr. oc Gislher iadrum stad.
The NI. poet reassigns Giselher to W olfhart, who has played an im p o rtan t p a r t in
th e new fighting and earned a w orthy opponent. The shift also secures a m ore even
distribution of roles since H ildebrant has ju st confronted Volker. I n th e NI. th e
action betw een Giselher and W olfhart is preceded by a general m le in w hich
H agen is conspicuous (2288 2290) an d a n individual confrontation in w hich H elp-
frich kills D ancw art (2291).
125 s. 323, 13 19: ei mli ek pvi petta at ei pore ek at ueria mik. pat veit min systir
grimhilldr. ath pa er drepin uar Sigurdr svein, pa uar ek .v. vetra gamall. oc la ek i
reckio minnar modor med henni. oc saclaus em ek pess vigs. enn ecki hirdi ek at liva
ein eptir mina brcedr. These words were know n to th e NI. poet, b u t were transferred
to D ancw art in A dventure X X X II (1924; see no te 101) because Giselher was n o t
a child a t the tim e of Siegfried s d eath according to his version of th e story. The
association of these two passages m ay account for th e fact th a t th e NI. po et chooses
to register D ancw arts d eath a t this particu lar m om ent (2291).
126 s. 323, 19 324, 1: Oc nu sker Gislher at hilldibrandi meistara oc hogr huert
hog at odru. En peirra einvigi ferr sem von var at. ad meistare hilldibrandr veitir
Gislher bana sar. oc fellr hann nu. The NI. poet equalizes th e com bat, as in th e case
of R deger and G ernot, by causing b o th w arriors to succum b (2292 2298). The
m easure allows him b oth to enhance G iselhers sta tu re a t th e last m om ent (like
G ernot, he dies a victor) and to remove W olfhart from th e scene when he has become
expendable. H ild eb ran t now rem ains as th e sole survivor am ong D ietrich s m en
(2298) an d W o lfh arts dying words w arn him to bew are of H agen (2299 2303).
H agen, suddenly rem inded th a t H ildebrant is responsible for killing Volker,
nullifies the w arning by attack in g him an d inflicting a w ound (2304 2307). This
a tta c k m ay contain th e key to a particularly perplexing illogicality in th e n e x t
A dventure, according to which D ietrich subdues H agen while G nther stands idly
by [see N eum ann 103], The saga w riter has no difficulty because, in his version,
G unnarr has been captured long before, b u t we have decided against th is sequence
for th e epic source. H ow ever, if we imagine th a t in the source H ag en s com bat w ith
H ildebrant and D ietrichs com bat w ith G nther were sim ultaneous, all th e diffi-
culties vanish and there are no loose ends. We m ay suppose th a t D ietrich subdues
G nther a t ab o u t th e sam e tim e th a t H agen incapacitates H ildebrant, th u s clearing
th e w ay for the final com bat betw een H agen and D ietrich. The idea of tw o sim u lta
neous semifinal com bats is in fact explicitly suggested by s. 323, 1 4: Oc nu
standa ei jleiri upp i pessi holl peir er vapn frer eru. en pessir fiorir. pidrecr oc Hogne
med sitt vig. Hilldibrandr. oc Gislher iadrum stad. Because of G u n n arrs early cap tu re
th e saga w riter has h ad to redistribute p artn ers (irekr/H gni, H ild ib ran d r/
Gislher), b u t th e sim ultaneity rem ains. The NI. poet retains th e original distribution
of partn ers (H ildebrant/H agen, D ietrich/G unther), b u t he has sacrificed th e sim u lta
n eity by keeping D ietrich in th e wings u n til th e last m om ent. T hus H ild eb ran t
51] The Epic Source of N iflunga saga and th e N ibelungenlied 51
is w ounded before D ietrich ever arrives, leaving G nther unoccupied an d a passive

observer while H agen is subdued b y D ietrich. A dventure X X X V III, like A dventure
X X X V II, concludes w ith a pause, during w hich H ild eb ran t reports back to D ietrich
(2309 2316) and D ietrich lam ents a t sorae length (2319 2323).
127 The saga has sacrificed G unnarr early in th e fighting an d has therefore lost one
of th e four sem ifinalists. H e remedies th e situ atio n by extending th e quarterfinal
m atch betw een Gislher an d H ildibrandr to coincide w ith th e fight betw een his
other rem aining principals (Hgni and irekr). The NI. is m ore faithful to th e
original an d retains b oth H agens w ounding of H ildebrant a n d D ietrichs subduing
of G nther. The form er occurs tow ard th e end of A dventure X X X V III (2306,
4 2307). B u t D ietrichs subduing of G nther is doubly postponed, once because
D ietrich m u st first be sum m oned to th e scene an d again because his com bat w ith
H agen is relocated before his com bat w ith G nther. This last reordering m u st
belong to th e NI. poet since it runs counter to th e clear clim actic n atu re of th e con-
te st betw een H gni and i re k r in th e saga. The contest betw een D ietrich and
G nther in the NI. (2356 2360) becomes anticlim actic because all th e elaborate
staging effects have already been expended to preface th e contest betw een D ietrich
and H agen. This reversal of th e original order by th e NI. po et m ay be a ttrib u te d
to his sense of hierarchy: th e king m u st succum b last.
128 s. does not have the challenge, b u t it does have i re k rs reply, which presup-
poses th e challenge (see note 129). The NI. version is b o th elaborated an d confused.
D ietrich m u st first arrive on th e scene w ith H ild eb ran t (2324 2325) an d as he
approaches, H agen declares his readiness to do b a ttie (2327, 4: ich tar in rehte wol
bestn). A t this point, th e action is fu rth er suspended to allow for a discussion:
D ietrich reproaches G nther th e d eath of his m en (2329 2332), b u t G nther
claims provocation (2333); D ietrich a ttrib u te s th e fighting to th e N ibelung refusal
to surrender R degers body (2334); G nther counters by m aintaining th a t th e
refusal was intended to irritate E tzel, n o t D ietrich (2335); D ietrich now asks
G nther and H agen to surrender (23362337), b u t H agen refuses (2338); D ietrich
repeats th e request an d offers safe passage (2339 2340), b u t H agen refuses once
again (2341); H ild eb ran t urges acceptance (2342) and H agen chides him for his
flight from th eir previous encounter (2343); H ildebrant counters by accusing
H agen of cowardice in his m eeting w ith W alther (2344), b u t D ietrich silences th e
fliting (2345). The NI. poet now returns to th e m ain issue, which is th e single com bat
betw een H agen and D ietrich. D ietrich, as it emerges, has overheard H ag en s
declaration th a t he is ready to m eet him alone in b a ttie (2327) and finally responds
to th e challenge (2346, 4: ir jhet daz ir eine / m it strite woldet mich bestn). This
is n o t quite accurate and it reverses the source, in which H agen m u st have asked
D ietrich to fight single-handed rath e r th a n declaring his own willingness to do so.
The reversal is perhaps a lam e a tte m p t to account for G un th ers p assivity during
th e following com bat; in any event, it invests H agen w ith some additional b rav u ra.
I t is also in harm ony w ith th e NI. p o ets idea th a t all the H u n s and A m lungs have
now been slaughtered (there is therefore no one on w hom D ietrich could call for
assistance), while th ere is no indication in th e saga th a t th e cam age has left i rek r
entirely stripped of w arriors [cf. W isniewski 170].
129 s. 324, 8 10: Engi man bid ek mer lidveizlu ipessu einvigi. oc pat vil ek vist
vinna me list oc drengskap. The NI. poet, having reversed roles, a ttrib u te s these
sentim ents to H agen (2347).
130 s. 324, 10 325, 9; NI. 2348 2352. I n th eir description of th e com bat, saga
and NI. p a rt com pany; H agens elfin ancestry an d D ietrich s fiery b rea th as we
have them in th e saga either belong to th e Saxon ballad or, if th e y were present in
th e epic source, th ey were refined o u t by th e NI. po et [see H eusler ( 2 ) p ar. 81;
W isniewski 171]. I n th e NI. H agen is sim ply w restled into Submission (2352).
131 NI. 2353. This preface to the last Hortforderung is lost in th e saga along w ith th e
Hortforderung itself. T hey served only to lead up to H ag en s execution, w hich m u st
be suppressed so th a t he can survive to beget his avenger (a m otif doubtless ta k e n
over from th e ballad source).
132 This scene, w hich m u st have occurred directly after H ag en s cap tu re in th e epic
source, is postponed in th e NI.: K riem hilt th an k s D ietrich (2354), he in tu rn
requests clemency for th e prisoner (2355), retu rn s to th e b a ttie scene to subdue
G nther (2356 2360), delivers G nther bound (2361 2363), asks once again for
clemency (2364), and departs after obtaining K riem h ilts agreem ent (2365). The
postponem ent is explained in note 127. K riem hilt now separates th e prisoners an d
m akes her dem and of H agen (2367, 3 4: weit ir mir geben widere / daz ir m ir habt
genomen, / s muget ir noch wol lebende / heim zen Burgonden komen.").
133 NI. 2368.
134 NI. 2369. [Wisniewski 60.]
135 NI. 2370 2371.
136 NI. 2372 2373.
137 s. 326, 4 6 : N u lypr irecr konungr ad grimhilldi oc hogr hana i sundr imidio.
[Wisniewski 172.] The NI. poet, w ith his ennobled view of D ietrich, transfers th e
execution to H ild eb ran t (2375 2376). This is unlikely to have been th e version
in th e epic source, n o t only because th e change can be plausibly explained in line
w ith th e NI. p o ets elevation of D ietrich, b u t also because H ild eb ran t was presum -
ably incapacitated by th e w ound w hich H agen h ad inflicted on him . The NI. p o et
tw ice ignores th is w ound by using H ildebrant first as a courier to D ietrich and th en
as K riem hilts executioner. I n th e NI. K riem hilt is executed because she killed
H agen. I n the saga th e Hortforderung and H gnis d eath have been lost so th a t a new
m otive m ust be found for G rim hildrs execution. This is provided by th e scene
p s . 325, 9 326, 4) in which she tests w hether Gernoz and Gislher are still alive
b y plunging a firebrand in their m ouths, th u s m o tiv atin g i re k rs execution as
an expression of indignation. The origin of th is baroque m otif is n o t tran sp a ren t.
The NI. concludes th e proceedings (as in A dventures X X X V II an d X X X V III)
w ith lam entations voiced first by E tzel (2374) an d th e n by th e people generally
(2377 2379).
Bibliography
Texts:
D as Nibelungenlied. N ach der A usgabe von K arl B artsch hg. von H elm u t de Boor,
W iesbaden 196518 (== N eudruck der 1956 erschienenen neubearb. 13. Auflage).
Das Nibelungenlied. P aralleldruck der H andschriften A, B u n d C nebst L esarten
der brigen H andschriften hg. von Michael S. B a tts, Tbingen 1971.
E dda. Die Lieder des Codex Regius nebst verw andten D enkm lern hg. von G ustav
Neckel, 3. um gearb. Auflage von H ans K uhn, H eidelberg 1962.
53] The Epie Source of N iflunga saga an d th e N ibelungenlied 53
iriks saga af Bern. U dgivet for Sam fund til udgivelse af gam mel nordisk litte ra tu r
ved H enrik Bertelsen, 2, K benhavn 1908 11.
Saxonis G esta D anorum . P rim um a C. K nabe & P . H errm an n recensita, recognove-
ru n t e t ediderunt J . Olrik & H . R der, tom us I te x tu m continens, H auni 1931.
K nig R o ther. N ach der A usgabe von Theodor F rings u n d f Joachim K u h n t,
H alle (Saale) 1954.
H enric v an Veldeken, Eneide. H g. von Gabriele Schieb und Theodor Frings, 1 2,
B erlin 1964 1965 ( = D eutsche T exte des M ittelalters 58 59).
H artm a n n von Aue, Erec. Hg. von A lbert L eitzm ann, ATB 39, T bingen 1957.2
, Iwein. Hg. von G. F . Benecke und K . L achm ann, B erlin 19596 ( = U n v ern d er
te r N achdruck der 5. von L. Wolff durchgesehenen Ausgabe).
Critical Studies:
J . K . Bostock, Realism and Convention in th e N ibelungenlied, Modern Language
Review, 56 (1961), 228 34.
Joachim Bum ke, Die Quellen der B rnhildfabel im N ibelungenlied, Euphorion,
54 (1960), 1 38.
J e a n F o u rq uet, Reflexions sur le N ibelungenlied, E tudes germ aniques, 20 (1965),
221 32.
H einrich H em pel ( 1 ), N ibelungenstudien. I. N ibelungenlied, Thidrekssaga und
B alladen (Germanische B ibliothek, A bteilung U ntersuchungen u n d T exte 22),
H eidelberg 1926.
(2), Schsische N ibelungendichtung u n d schsischer U rsprung der T hidrikssaga
in E dda, Skalden, Saga. F estschrift zum 70. G eburtstag von Felix Genzmer hg.
von H erm ann Schneider, H eidelberg 1952, pp. 138 56. R p t. in K leine Schriften.
Zur V ollendung seines 80. L ebensjahres am 27. A ugust 1965 hg. von H einrich
M atthias H einrichs. H eidelberg 1966, pp. 209 25.
(3), Z ur D atierung des Nibelungenliedes, ZfdA, 90 (1960/61), 181 97. R p t. in
K leine Schriften, pp. 226 39.
A ndreas H eusler (1), Die H eldenrollen im B urgundenuntergang in Sitzungsberichte
der Preussischen A kadem ie der W issenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse, 1914, pp.
1114 43. R p t. in K leine Schriften, 2, hg. von Stefan Sonderegger, Berlin 1969,
pp. 518 45.
(2), N ibelungensage und N ibelungenlied, D ortm und 19656.
W erner H offm ann (1), Zur S ituation der gegenw rtigen N ibelungenforschung:
Problem e, Ergebnisse, Aufgaben, W irkendes W ort, 12 (1962), 79 91.
(2), Das N ibelungenlied, M nchen 1969.
H ans K uhn, D er Teufel im N iblungenlied: Zu G nthers und K riem hilds Tod, ZfdA,
94 (1965), 280 306. R p t. in K leine Schriften. A ufstze u n d Rezensionen aus
den G ebieten der germ anischen u n d nordischen Sprach-, L iteratu r- u n d K u ltu r
geschichte, 2, Berlin 1971, pp. 158 82.
H ansjrgen Linke, U ber den E rzhler im Nibelungenlied u n d seine knstlerische
F u n k tio n, GRM, N .F . 10 (1960), 370 85.
G erhart Lohse (1), Rheinische N ibelungendichtung u n d die Vorgeschichte des
deutschen N ibelungenliedes von 1200, Rheinische V ierteljahrsbltter, 20
(1955), 54 60.
(2), Die Beziehungen zwischen der Thidrekssaga u n d den H andschriften des
Nibelungenliedes, PB B (T), 81 (1959), 295 347.
L au ra Mancinelli, L a N ibelungenforschung di A ndreas H eusler alla luce della

critica pi recente in A rte e storia. Studi in onore di Leonello V incenti. Torino
1965, pp. 285 307.
F riedrich M aurer, Die F orm kunst des D ichters unseres Nibelungenliedes, D er
D eutschunterricht, 6 (1954), H eft 5, 77 83 an d F estsch rift fr D ietrich K ralik
d argebracht von Freunden, K ollegen u n d Schlern, H orn, N .- . 1954, pp.
93 98. R p t. in D ichtung u n d Sprache des M ittelalters: G esammelte A ufstze,
Bern/M nchen 1963, pp. 70 79.
D. G. M ow att, Studies tow ards an In te rp re ta tio n of th e N ibelungenlied, G erm an
Life and L etters, 14 (1961), 257 70.
and H ugh Sacker, The N ibelungenlied: A n In te rp re ta tiv e C om m entary, Toronto
1967.
F riedrich N eum ann, D as N ibelungenlied in seiner Zeit, G ttingen 1967.
F riedrich Panzer, Zur Vorgeschichte des Liedes. N ibelungenlied u n d T hidrekssaga
in Studien zum Nibelungenliede, F ra n k fu rt a.M. 1945, pp. 109 78.
H o rst P . P tz, H eim es Klosterepisode. E in B eitrag zur Quellenfrage der T hidreks
saga, ZfdA, 100 (1971), 178 95.
W erner R ichter, B eitrge zur D eutung des M ittelteils des Nibelungenliedes, ZfdA,
72 (1935), 9 47.
W erner Schrder (1), Die epische K onzeption des N ibelungenlied-D ichters, W irken
des W ort, 11 (1961), 193 201.
(2 ), N ibelungenstudien, S tu ttg a rt 1968.
K laus von See, Germ anische H eldensage. Stoffe, Problem e, M ethoden. E ine E in
fhrung. F ra n k fu rt a.M. 1971.
G ottfried W eber, D as N ibelungenlied. P roblem u n d Idee. S tu ttg a rt 1963.
Carl Wesle, D er D onaubergang im lteren N ibelungenepos, P B B , 46 (1922),
231 47.
W ilhelm W ilm anns, D er U ntergang der Nibelunge in alter Sage u n d D ichtung in
A bhandlungen der K niglichen Gesellschaft der W issenschaften zu G ttingen,
phil.-hist. K lasse, 1903, no. 2, 1 43.
R osw itha Wisniewski, Die D arstellung des N iflungenunterganges in der T hidreks
saga. Eine quellenkritische U ntersuchung (H erm aea 9), Tbingen 1961.

Theodore Andersson - The Epic Source Od The Nibelungenlied PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theodore Andersson - The Epic Source Od The Nibelungenlied PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

T H E O D O R E M.

The Epic Source of Niflunga saga and

Uncovering the epic source of the NI. P a rt I I (Heuslers ltere Not) is

The N arrative Outline of the Epic Source

The Wooing of Kriemhilt

The Nibelung s Bidden to a Feast

The Journey East

senger.49 Hagen reports to the Nibelungs.50 Eckew art announces their

The Idyll at Pchlarn

The Arrival in Hunland

Kriemhilt Incites the Huns

The First Day of Fighting

The Second Day of Fighting

The Composition of the Epic Source

seven years in H unlandwe are given to understand th a t Kriem hilt has

The Composition of Niflunga saga

Osir as A ttilas chief lieutenant (275, 23276, 2)

Osir subdues Gunnarr (314, 6 19)

T he chief difficulty confronting the compiler of Niflunga saga was the

elimination of South German place names are all characteristic of the

The Composition of the Nibelungenlied P a rt II

between w hat he inherited and w hat he changed or added himself (the

incongruity which derives from the expansion is E tzels inexplicable

of Giselhers betrothai is transferred from Rdeger to the kings entourage

is b etray ed by a slip in P s. 278, 25 279, 1, according to which G unnarr bestows

them in Atlakvia, an d Atlaml as well as in th e N orse sagas. I n th e NI. th e B u r

h av e retained it m echanically in th e original position (1271 1281), realized th a t

treasure (presum ably also over Siegfrieds death) an d pondered an in v itatio n as

prefaces th e council w ith G u n th ers promise to reply to th e in v itatio n in seven days

w ithout m uch regard for verisim ilitude. Since Amelrich tu rn s o ut to be th e boat-

th a t no one will re tu rn and com m unicates th e m erm aids prophecy an d th e signi-

43 s. 289, 7 9. Since th e NI. poet transform s th e evening encam pm ent in to a

H em pel ( 1 ) 37 41; cf. W isniewski 99]. I n s. 292, 15 19 G uilinda com m ents on

R deger (the po in t th a t R deger is killed by his own gift is m ade b o th in s. 321,

66 s. 297, 4 8 ; NI. 1718 1723. [For th e following sequence (the arriv al in H u n

97 s. 304, 1 3; NI. 1905.

is to keep th e N iflungs penned in th e orchard by spreading raw oxhides before

108 s. 310, 13 20; NI. 2024 2025.

features to suggest th e n atu re of the w ound (or wounds) in th e epic source: th e

requests R degers shield and w hen it is granted, he praises R deger an d vows to

is w ounded before D ietrich ever arrives, leaving G nther unoccupied an d a passive

L au ra Mancinelli, L a N ibelungenforschung di A ndreas H eusler alla luce della

You might also like