Chapter III: Canto VIII (1)

But haughty Hunferth, Ecg-láf’s Son
Who sat at royal Hróth-gár’s Feet
To bind up Words of Strife begun
And to address the noble Geat.
The proud Sea-Farer’s Enterprize 5
Was a vast Grievance in his Eyes:
For ill could bear that jealous Man
That any other gallant Thane
On earth, beneath the Heavens’ Span,
Worship beyond his own should gain. 10
‘Art thou Beó-wulf,’ then he cry’d,
‘With Brecca on the Ocean wide
That didst in Swimming erst contend,
Where ye explor’d the Fords for Pride
And risk’d your Lives upon the Tide 15
All for vain Glory’s empty End?
And no Man, whether Foe or Friend,
Your sorry Match can reprehend.
O’er Seas ye rowed, your Arms o’erspread
The Waves, and Sea-paths measuréd. 20
The Spray ye with your Hands did urge,
And glided o’er the Ocean’s Surge;
The Waves with Winter’s fury boil’d
While on the watery Realm ye toil’d,
Thus seven Nights were told, 25
Till thee at last he overcame,
The stronger in the noble Game.
Then him at Morn the billowy Streams
In triumph bare to Heatho-rǽmes
From whence he sought his Fatherland, 30
And his own Brondings’ faithful Band,
Where o’er the Folk he held Command,
A City, Rings, and Gold.
His Promise well and faithfully
Did Beanstán’s Son perform to thee; 35
And ill I ween, though prov’d thy Might
In Onslaught dire and deadly Fight,
Twill go with thee, if thou this Night
Dar’st wait for Grendel bold.’

_Criticism of the Translation._

Wackerbarth’s translation is not to be considered as a rival of Kemble’s[1]--the author did not wish it to be so considered. Kemble addressed the world of scholars; Wackerbarth the world of readers. Wackerbarth rather resembles Conybeare[2] in trying to reproduce the _spirit_ of the poem, and make his book appeal to a popular audience. Wackerbarth had the advantage of basing his translation on the accurate and scholarly version of Kemble; yet Conybeare and Wackerbarth were equally unsuccessful in catching the spirit of the original. The reason for their failure is primarily in the media which they chose. It would seem that if there were a measure less suited to the Beowulf style than the Miltonic blank verse used by Conybeare, it would be the ballad measures used by Wackerbarth. The movement of the ballad is easy, rapid, and garrulous. Now, if there are three qualities of which the _Beowulf_ is not possessed, they are ease, rapidity, and garrulity. Not only does the poet avoid superfluous words--the ballad never does--but he frequently does not use words enough. His meaning is thus often vague and nebulous, or harsh and knotted. Nor can the poem properly be called rapid. It is often hurried, and more often insufficient in detail, but it never has sustained rapidity. The kenning alone is hostile to rapidity. The poet lingers lovingly over his thought as if loath to leave it; he repeats, amplifies. The description of Grendel’s approach to Heorot is given three times within twenty lines.

Now these features which have just been described Wackerbarth’s ballad lines are eminently unfitted to transmit. But there is still another reason for shunning them. They are almost continuously suggestive of Scott. Of all men else the translator of _Beowulf_ should avoid Scott. Scott’s medievalism is hundreds of years and miles away from the medievalism of _Beowulf_. His is the self-conscious, dramatic, gorgeous age of chivalry, of knight and lady, of pomp and pride. _Beowulf_ is simple to bareness.

It is in such strong picturesque passages as the swimming-match that Wackerbarth’s style is worst. There is a plethora of adjectives, scarcely one of which is found in the original; but they are of no avail--they are too commonplace to render the strength and raciness of the original words. There is too much ballad padding--‘then he cry’d,’ ‘at last,’ ‘well and faithfully,’ ‘onslaught dire, and deadly fight.’ Hunferth prattles. The heroic atmosphere is gone.

In passages calling for calmness, solemnity, or elevation of thought--and there are many such--the easy flow of a verse monotonous and trivial effectually destroys the beauty of the lines.

But in spite of its very evident limitations, Wackerbarth’s translation was a move in the right direction. His aim, in his own words, was to ‘get his book read,’ and he was wise in choosing a medium that would be popular, even if it were not satisfactory to the scholar. It was better to have _Beowulf_ according to Wackerbarth than no _Beowulf_ at all.

[Footnote 1: See supra, p. 33.] [[Kemble]]

[Footnote 2: See supra, p. 28.] [[Conybeare]]

THORPE’S EDITION

The Anglo-Saxon Poems of Beowulf, The Scop or Gleeman’s Tale, and the Fight at Finnesburg. With a literal translation, notes, and glossary, &c., by Benjamin Thorpe. Oxford: printed by James Wright, Printer to the University. M.DCCC.LV.

*Reprinted, 1875. 12mo, pp. xxxiv, 330.

Third English Translation. Short Lines.

_Author’s Prefatory Remarks._

‘Twenty-four years have passed since, while residing in Denmark,
I first entertained the design of one day producing an edition of
Beowulf; and it was in prosecution of that design that,
immediately on my arrival in England in 1830, I carefully collated
the text of Thorkelin’s edition with the Cottonian manuscript.
Fortunately, no doubt, for the work, a series of cares, together
with other literary engagements, intervened and arrested my
progress. I had, in fact, abandoned every thought of ever resuming
the task: it was therefore with no slight pleasure that I hailed
the appearance of Mr. Kemble’s first edition of the text of
Beowulf in 1833....

‘Copies of Mr. Kemble’s editions having for some time past been of
rare occurrence, I resolved on resuming my suspended labour, and,
as far as I was able, supplying a want felt by many an Anglo-Saxon
student both at home and abroad....

‘My first impulse was to print the text of the poem as it appears
in the manuscript, with a literal translation in parallel columns,
placing all conjectural emendations at the foot of each page; but,
on comparing the text with the version in this juxta-position,
so numerous and so enormous and puerile did the blunders of the
copyist appear, and, consequently, so great the discrepance
between the text and the translation, that I found myself
compelled to admit into the text the greater number of the
conjectural emendations, consigning to the foot of the page the
corresponding readings of the manuscript. In every case which I
thought might by others be considered questionable, I have
followed the more usual course, of retaining in the text the
reading of the manuscript, and placing the proposed correction at
foot....

‘Very shortly after I had collated it, the manuscript suffered
still further detriment.

‘In forming this edition I resolved to proceed independently of
the version or views of every preceding editor.’ --Pages vii,
viii, xii, xiii.

_Criticism of Thorpe’s Text._

Considering the amount of time that had elapsed between this and the edition of Kemble[1], Thorpe can hardly be said to have made a satisfactory advance. In some respects his edition is actually inferior to Kemble’s. It is probable, for example, that the collation of which the author speaks in his introduction was the one which he had made twenty years before, and that, in taking up his work a second time, he did not trouble himself to revise it. At any rate, the MS. did not receive from Thorpe that respectful attention that it had had from Kemble. Thorpe was more clever than the former scholar in deciphering faded lines of the MS., but he was not always careful to indicate those letters which he actually found there, and those he himself supplied from conjecture. Yet these readings were often of sufficient importance to affect an entire passage, and later scholarship has in many cases deciphered readings whose sense is entirely different from Thorpe’s. Thus his edition presents striking divergences from later texts, while no explanation of them is offered in the footnotes. Not only does he frequently incorporate his own readings in the text without noting the MS. forms, but he even makes mistakes in the MS. forms which he does note. A collation of Thorpe’s text with the MS. has revealed a carelessness which was all the more reprehensible in that it came from a scholar who was thought to be well-nigh infallible. A few examples of this carelessness are given:--

Line 319 (158)[2], _banan_ (misreads MS. in footnote).
487 (241), _Ic_ (word emended from _le_ without noting MS. form).
1160 (578), _hwæþere_ (emends without noting the MS. form).
1207 (601), _ac him_ (omits a word).
4408 (2201), _hilde hlemmum_ (MS. misread in a footnote.
Emendation unnecessary).

At line 2218 the MS., badly mutilated at this point, reads,

_... slæpende be syre ... de þeofes cræfte._

In Thorpe’s edition the line reads (4443),

_... slæpende be fire, fyrena hyrde þeófes cræfte._

Not only does he fail to state that he has changed MS. _sy_ to _fi_, but he gives no indication that for the words _fyrena hyrde_ there is no room in the MS., and that the reading is entirely of his own making.

In order to afford a comparative estimate of the work of Thorpe and Kemble, I append the texts of each as they appear at what is now line 2000[3].

THORPE. KEMBLE.

Þæt is undyrne, þ̷ is un-dyrne,
dryhten Higelác, dryhten Hige-lác,
(uncer) gemeting ... ge-meting
monegum fyra, monegū fira
hwylce (orleg)-hwíl 5 hwylce ... hwíl
uncer Grendles uncer Grendles
wearð on þám wange, wearð on wange,
þær he worna fela þær he worna fela
Sige-Scyldingum síge-(Scyl)dingum
sorge gefremede, 10 sorge ge-fremede,
yrmðe tó aldre. yrmð(o) tó aldre;
Ic þæt eall gewræc, ic þ̄ eall ge-wræc,
swá ne gylpan þearf swá (ne) gylpan ðearf
Grendles maga Grendeles maga
(ǽnig) ofer eorðan 15 (ǽnig) ofer eorðan
uht-hlem þone, uht-hlem ðone,
se þe lengest leofað (se þe) lengest leofað
láðan cynnes. ládan cynnes,
Fǽr-bifongen, ... (fǽr)-bí-fongen.

These selections give a good basis for judging the merits and defects of Thorpe’s edition. Thorpe is seen to have the advantage in deciphering certain parts of the text, see e.g. lines 9, 11, 17. On the other hand, Kemble is far more conscientious. Thus at line 13 Thorpe reads _ne_ as if it were found in the MS. It is not there, and Kemble is right in inclosing the letters in parentheses. The same thing is true of _Fǽr_ in line 19, and Gren{dl}es in line 14. Thorpe’s emendations in lines 3 and 5 are an advance on Kemble, and are still retained in the text. But Thorpe might have followed Kemble’s punctuation in 18 and 19 to his advantage.

EXTRACT.

VIII.

Hunferth spake,
Ecglaf’s son,
who at {the} feet sat
of {the} Scyldings’ lord;
unbound {a} hostile speech.
To him was {the} voyage of Beowulf,
{the} bold sea-farer,
{a} great displeasure;
because he grudged 1010
that any other man
ever more glories
of mid-earth
held under heaven
than himself:
‘Art thou the Beowulf
who with Breca strove
on {the} wide sea,
in {a} swimming strife,
where ye from pride 1020
tempted {the} fords,
and for foolish vaunt
in {the} deep water
ventured {your} lives?
Nor you any man,
nor friend nor foe,
might blame
{for your} sorrowful voyage,
when on {the} sea ye row’d,
when ye {the} ocean-stream, 1030
with {your} arms deck’d,
measur’d {the} sea-ways,
with {your} hands vibrated {them},
glided o’er {the} main;
ocean boil’d with waves,
with winter’s fury:
ye on {the} water’s domain,
{for} seven nights toil’d.
He thee in swimming overcame,
{he} had more strength, 1040
when him at morning tide,
on to Heatho-ræmes
{the} sea bore up;
whence he sought
{his} dear country,
{the} beloved of his people,
{the} Brondings’ land,
{his} fair, peaceful burgh,
where he {a} people own’d,
{a} burgh and rings. 1050
All {his} promise to thee
Beanstan’s son
truly fulfil’d.

_Criticism of the Translation._

This being a strictly literal translation, the reader is referred to the sections on the text for a valuation and criticism. It is a question whether there was need for another literal rendering in England at this time. Kemble’s translation was not yet out of date, and with Thorpe’s new glossary the student had a sufficient apparatus for the interpretation of the poem.

Some German scholars have discovered that the short lines in which Thorpe’s translation is couched are imitative of the Old English measure. I am unable to agree with them. Probably any short-line translation would _ipso facto_ assume a choppiness not dissimilar to the Old English, and probably plenty of lines could be discovered which correspond well enough to the ‘five types,’ but the agreement seems purely fortuitous. It is quite unlikely that Thorpe intended any imitation.

_Influence of Thorpe’s Edition._

The influence of this edition has been considerable. It was the principal authority used by Grein[4] and Heyne[5] in constructing their texts. Thus its influence was felt in all texts down to the publication of the Zupitza _Autotypes_ (1882). Thomas Arnold[6] copied the text almost word for word.

[Footnote 1: See supra, p. 33.] [[Kemble]]

[Footnote 2: The numbers in parentheses are those of Wyatt’s text.]

[Footnote 3: Line 3995 in Kemble; 4004 in Thorpe.]

[Footnote 4: See infra, p. 55.] [[Grein]]

[Footnote 5: See infra, p. 63.] [[Heyne]]

[Footnote 6: See infra, p. 71.] [[Arnold]]

GREIN’S TRANSLATIONS

Dichtungen der Angelsachsen, stabreimend übersetzt von C. W. M. Grein. Erster Band. Göttingen: Georg H. Wigand, 1857. 8vo, Beowulf, pp. 223-308. Zweite (Titel-) Auflage, 1863.

Beowulf. Stabreimend übersetzt von Professor Dr. C. W. M. Grein. Zweite Auflage. Kassel: Georg H. Wigand, 1883. 8vo, pp. 90.

Second German Translation. Imitative Measures.

_Grein’s Preparation for Scholarly Work._

Christian Wilhelm Michael Grein[1] (1825-77) was eminently well fitted for the editing and translating of Old English poetry. He possessed a natural aptitude for the study of Germanic Philology, and had the advantage of studying with an excellent professor, Franz Eduard Christoph Dietrich (1810-83), in the University at Marburg. As early as 1854 he began his labors as a translator of Old English poetry with a version of the _Phoenix_, ‘Der Vogel Phoenix: ein angelsächsisches Gedicht, stabreimend übersetzt,’ Rinteln, 1854. In the same year he printed a translation of the _Heliand_.

In 1855 he assumed the position of Praktikant at the Kassel Landesbibliothek. Here he was able to devote a large part of his attention to the study of Old English, acquiring a familiarity with the poetry of that tongue which it has seldom been the fortune of a scholar to surpass. He formed the design of editing and translating the entire body of Old English poetry and appending to it a complete glossary which should not only give the meanings of the words, but instance every occurrence of the word. This design he carried out between the years 1857 and 1864.

_Grein’s Texts._

The text of _Beowulf_ is found in Grein’s _Bibliothek der angelsächsichen Poesie_, Erster Band, Göttingen, 1857, where it occupies pp. 255-341. A second edition, several times re-edited, is _Beovulf, nebst den Fragmenten Finnsburg und Waldere_, Kassel und Göttingen, 1867.

Grein never saw the MS. of the poem[2]. He based his text on a collation of all the preceding editions. This was unfortunate, because, had Grein seen the MS., he would doubtless have hastened to make a correct transcription of it. As it was, his edition necessarily shares some of the faults of its predecessors, since the text had never yet been accurately transcribed. A simple illustration of this defect may be seen by examining line 2218 of the text, where Grein reads,

_be fire, fyrena hyrde_,

following Thorpe[3]. As has been pointed out, this is an impossible reading, and one for which there is no justification in the MS. Thorpe, however, had presented it as the MS. reading, and Grein could not but copy it.

Like Kemble, Grein had a supreme respect for the readings of the MS., and he announced his intention of following this reading wherever possible:--

‘Bei der Behandlung des Textes galt als erste Pflicht,
handschriftliche Lesarten, wo es nur immer möglich war, zu retten
und namentlich auch manche angezweifelte, den Lexicis fremde
Wörter als wolbegründet nachzuweisen: nur da, wo Verderbniss auf
der Hand liegt, habe ich mir mit der grössten Vorsicht Aenderungen
erlaubt oder bereits von Andern vorgeschlagene Aenderungen
aufgenommen, wobei ich mich möglichst eng an das handschriftlich
gebotene anzuschliessen suchte.’ --Vorwort, iv. (_Bibl._).

This was wise. Since the days of Kemble, emendation had become unnecessarily frequent. We have seen in what a light-hearted way Thorpe spoke of the ‘blunders of the scribes,’ and how careless he was in the preparation of his text. The dialect had not yet received proper attention, and the copyists were blamed for errors that they never made.

Grein was extremely clever in filling the lacunae of the MS., and his conjectural emendations are frequently retained by later editors.

Still another improvement which he introduced was the full punctuation of the text; this was superior to any that had preceded it. In previous editions defective punctuation had obscured the sense of the lines; here it was made a factor in their interpretation.

_Theory of Translation._

Grein’s theory of translation is sufficiently expressed in the Vorrede to the _Dichtungen_:--

‘Die Sammlung von metrischen Uebersetzungen angelsächsischer
Dichtungen, deren erster Band hiermit der Oeffentlichkeit
übergeben wird, soll einen doppelten Zweck erfüllen. Einerseits
betrachte ich dieselben als eine wesentliche Ergänzung, gleichsam
als fortlaufenden Commentar zu meiner gleichzeitig in demselben
Verlag erscheinenden Textausgabe der angelsächsischen Dichter,
indem sie meine Interpretation der Originaltexte, worin ich oft
von meinen Vorgängern abweiche, einfach vor Augen legen.
Andrerseits aber bezweckte ich dadurch die Bekanntschaft mit den
in vieler Beziehung so herrlichen dichterischen Erzeugnissen des
uns engverwandten englischen Volkes aus der Zeit vor dem
gewaltsamen Eindringen des romanischen Elements durch die
normannische Eroberung auch in weiteren Kreisen anzubahnen, was
sie sowol nach ihrem Inhalte als auch nach der poetischen
Behandlung des Stoffes gewiss in hohem Grade verdienen. Daher war
ich eifrigst bemüht, die Uebersetzung dem Original in möglichster
Treue nach Inhalt, Ausdruck und Form eng anzuschliessen:
namentlich suchte ich, soweit es immer bei dem heutigen Stande
unserer Sprache thunlich war, auch den Rhythmus des Originals
nachzubilden, wobei es vor allem auf die Beibehaltung der
eigentümlichen Stellung der Stabreime ankam, ein Punkt, der bei
der Uebertragung alter Alliterationspoesien nur zu oft
vernachlässigt wird.’ --Vorrede, iii.

_Differences between the two Editions._

The second edition of the translation (see supra, p. 65) was edited from Grein’s ‘Handexemplar’ of the _Dichtungen_ after his death by Professor Wülker, who has also re-edited the text of the _Bibliothek_. The differences are seldom more than verbal, and are largely in the early parts of the poem. The second edition is, of course, superior.

EXTRACT.

III.

Darauf sprach Hunferd, Ecglafs Sohn,
der zu den Füssen sass dem Fürst der Skildinge, 500
entband Streitrunen, (ihm war Beowulfs Reise
des mutigen Seefahrers sehr zum Aerger,
da er durchaus nicht gönnte, dass ein anderer Mann
je mehr des Ruhmes in dem Mittelkreise
besässe unterm Himmel, denn er selber hatte): 505
‘Bist du der Beowulf, der einst mit Breka schwamm
im Wettkampfe durch die weite See,
wo in Verwegenheit ihr die Gewässer prüftet
und aus tollem Prahlen in die tiefen Fluten
wagtet euer Leben? Nicht wehren konnt’ euch beiden 510
weder Lieb noch Leid der Leute einer
die sorgenvolle Fahrt, als in den Sund ihr rudertet,
wo ihr den Oceansstrom mit euren Armen decktet,
die Holmstrassen masset, mit den Händen schluget
und über den Ocean glittet: der Eisgang des Winters 515
wallete in Wogen; in des Wassers Gebiet
plagtet ihr euch sieben Nächte.
Im Schwimmspiel überwand er dich:
er hatte mehr der Macht; zur Morgenzeit
trug ihn der Holm da zu den Headorämen.
Von dannen suchte er die süsse Heimat 520
lieb seinen Leuten, das Land der Brondinge,
die liebliche Friedeburg, wo er sein Volk hatte,
Burg und Bauge. Da hatte all sein Erbot wider dich
vollbracht in Wahrheit Beanstans Sohn[4].’

_Criticism of the Translation._

The translation is a literal line-for-line version. Its superiority to its predecessors is, therefore, one with the superiority of the text on which it is founded.

The translation became at once the standard commentary on _Beowulf_, and this position it retained for many years. It is still the standard literal translation in Germany, none of the later versions having equaled it in point of accuracy.

[Footnote 1: For biographical facts see Grein-Wülker,
_Bibliothek_, Band III, 2te Hälfte, p. vii.]

[Footnote 2: See Grein-Wülker, _Bibliothek_, Vorrede.]

[Footnote 3: See supra, p. 52.] [[Thorpe: Criticism of Text]]

[Footnote 4: The second edition presents no variation from this
save the omission of the comma in line 501.]

SIMROCK’S TRANSLATION

Beowulf. Das älteste deutsche Epos. Uebersetzt und erläutert von Dr. Karl Simrock. Stuttgart und Augsburg: J. G. Cotta’scher Verlag, 1859. 8vo, pp. iv, 203.

Third German Translation. Imitative Measures.

_Simrock._

Dr. Karl Simrock (1802-1876) brought to the translation of _Beowulf_ the thorough knowledge of a scholar, the fine feeling and technique of a poet, and an enviable reputation as a translator of Old German poetry. At the time when he made his translation of _Beowulf_, he was Professor of Old German Literature at Bonn, whither he had been called because of his contributions to the study of Old German mythology. His title to remembrance rests, however, on his metrical rendering of the _Nibelungenlied_, a work which, in 1892, had passed into its fifty-second edition. As an original poet, Simrock is remembered for his _Wieland der Schmied_ (1835), and _Gedichte_ (1844).

_Object of the Translation._

Simrock wished to do for _Beowulf_ what he had done for the _Nibelungenlied_, _Walther von der Vogelweide_, and _Der arme Heinrich_. He objected to the too literal work of Ettmüller[1] and Grein[2], hoping in his own work to make the poem readable and to dispense with a ‘note for every third word’:

‘Geist und Stimmung einer fernen Heldenzeit anklingen zu lassen,
und doch dem Ausdruck die frische Farbe des Lebens zu verleihen.’
--Vorrede, iii.

In this ambition he was justified by his success as a translator of Old German poetry.

_Nature of the Translation._

The diction of the version is, on the whole, characterized by simplicity and ease. Yet the author, like many another translator of Old English, tries to give his style an archaic tinge by preserving the compound forms characteristic of that language, such as Lustholz, Aelgelage, Kampfrunen, a fault that Ettmüller had carried to excess. These forms he sometimes used to the exclusion of simpler, or even more literal, words. The nature of the German language, however, keeps these from being as repulsive as they are in English, but they are sufficiently strange to mystify and annoy the reader.

The feature of his translation for which Simrock was most concerned was the measure:

‘Vor Allem aber den Wohllaut, der echter Poesie unzertrennlich
verbunden ist, das schien mir die erste Bedingung, damit der Leser
... den Sinn ahne und von der Schönheit des Gedichts ergriffen
von Blatt zu Blatt getragen werde. Nur so glaubte ich eine
tausendjährige Kluft überbrücken und dieser mit Angeln und Sachsen
ausgewanderten Dichtung neues Heimatsrecht bei uns erwerben zu
können.’ --Vorrede, iii, iv.

He also preserved alliteration, believing that a fondness for that poetic adornment may be easily acquired, and that it is by no means inconsistent with the genius of modern tongues.

_Relation of Translation and other Parts of the Book._

The notes to the translation contain discussions of the episodes and of the mythological personages of the poem. There is a discussion of the poetic worth of _Beowulf_, and an argument for the German origin of the poem. But the translation is the _raison d’être_ of the volume, and other parts are strictly subordinated to it. The Finnsburg fragment is inserted at the end of section 16. As the author does not wish to disturb the order of _Beowulf_, he is obliged to place the poem at the end of the Finnsburg episode (in _Beowulf_), a very ill-chosen position, where it can only confuse the general reader more than the obscure lines to which it is related. This practice of inserting the Finnsburg fragment, lately revived by Hoffmann[3], has been generally repudiated.

_Text, and Indebtedness to Preceding Scholars._

The text followed is Grein’s (1857)[4]. The translator acknowledges his indebtedness to the versions of Ettmüller and Grein.

EXTRACT.

8. HUNFERD.

Da begann Hunferd, Ecglafs Sohn,
Der zu Füssen sass dem Fürsten der Schildinge,
Kampfrunen zu entbinden: ihm war Beowulfs Kunft,
Des kühnen Seeseglers, schrecklich zuwider.
Allzu ungern sah er, dass ein anderer Mann
In diesem Mittelkreiss mehr des Ruhmes
Unterm Himmel hätte als Hunferd selbst:

‘Bist du der Beowulf, der mit _Breka_ schwamm
Im Wettkampf einst durch die weite See?
Wo ihr tollkühn Untiefen prüftet,
Mit vermessnem Muth in den Meeresschlünden
Das Leben wagtet? Vergebens wehrten euch
Die Lieben und Leiden, die Leute zumal
So sorgvolle Reise, als ihr zum Sunde rudertet,
Das angstreiche Weltmeer mit Armen decktet,
Die Meerstrassen masset, mit den Händen schlugt
Durch die Brandung gleitend; aufbrauste die Tiefe
Wider des Winters Wuth. Im Wasser mühtet ihr
Euch sieben Nächte: da besiegt’ er dich im Schwimmen.
Seiner Macht war mehr: in des Morgens Frühe
Hob ihn die Hochflut zu den _Headorämen_.
Von dannen sucht’ er die süsse Heimat,
Das Leutenliebe, das Land der _Brondinge_,
Die feste Friedensburg, wo er Volk besass,
Burg und Bauge. Sein Erbieten hatte dir
Da _Beanstans_ Geborner vollbracht und geleistet.’

_Criticism of the Translation._

Simrock’s translation is commendable for its faithfulness. It is, moreover, a simple and readable version, though in these respects it is not equal to Heyne’s rendering which was to follow it; but it was easily superior to Grein’s. Yet, in spite of this, the book is not well known among German translations, and has never passed into a second edition. This is surprising when we consider the success of Simrock’s previous translations. The partial failure is accounted for by two facts: (1) Simrock’s reputation as a scholar was not equal to that of Grein or Heyne, nor had he the advantage of editing the text; (2) the measure which the translation employed has never been popular among readers. No German translation in imitative measures, with the single exception of Grein’s (which has made its appeal as a scholarly work and not as a piece of literature), has ever passed into a second edition; while versions couched in iambic lines or Nibelungen meters have been reprinted.

[Footnote 1: See supra, p. 37.] [[Ettmüller]]

[Footnote 2: See supra, p. 55.] [[Grein]]

[Footnote 3: See infra, p. 99.] [[Hoffmann]]

[Footnote 4: See supra, p. 56.] [[Grein’s Texts]]

HEYNE’S TRANSLATION

Beowulf. Angelsächsisches Heldengedicht übersetzt von Moritz Heyne. Paderborn: Druck und Verlag von Ferd. Schöningh, 1863. 12mo, pp. viii, 127.

Zweite Auflage. Paderborn: Schöningh, 1898. 8vo, pp. viii, 134.

Fourth German Translation. Iambic Pentameter.

_Heyne._

The name of Moritz Heyne is one of the most illustrious in the history of Beowulf scholarship. The Heyne editions of the text[1] have been standard for nearly forty years, while the translation has been recently reprinted (1898). Beside his work on the _Beowulf_, this scholar was to become prominent as editor of the _Heliand_ and of _Ulfilas_, and as one of the staff appointed to complete Grimm’s Dictionary.

At the time when he printed his edition of the _Beowulf,_ Heyne was a student at Halle, and but twenty-six years of age (born 1837)[2]. In his work he had some assistance from Professor Leo[3] of Halle.

_Relation of Text and Translation._

The translation was founded on the text of 1863. At the time it was by far the best edition that had yet appeared. It was furnished with an excellent glossary. The text had the advantage of the valuable work done by Grundtvig[4] in collating the two transcripts made by Thorkelin[5]. It thus came a stage nearer the MS. readings than any other existing edition, while it avoided the unnecessary conjectures of the Danish editor.

Heyne’s text having been five times re-edited, the first edition of the translation often fails to conform to readings which have been introduced into the text in later editions; but the free nature of the translation makes this of no great importance.

_Differences between the First and Second Editions of the Translation._

The differences between the two editions are not of much importance. The translation is in general, though not always, brought up to the late editions of the text, and some changes are made for the improvement of the meter.

The first edition contains 3201 lines; the second 3207. The theory and aim of the translation are not changed at all.

_Aim of Heyne’s Translation._

In this translation of the _Beowulf_, Heyne attempts to popularize what he considers the most beautiful of the Old English poems. He says of it--

‘Es ist nicht die erste, die ich biete; gleichwol hoffe ich es
werde die erste sein, die auch einem grössern Publicum, das noch
nicht Gelegenheit hatte, sich mit den ältern Dialecten unserer
Sprache zu beschäftigen, verständlich ist. Die ältern deutschen
Uebersetzer haben, bei allen Verdiensten ihrer Arbeit, unserer
neuhochdeutschen Muttersprache teilweise übel mitgespielt.’
--Vorwort, iii.

With this in view, Heyne put his translation out in a form that would make it accessible to all. This was in itself an innovation. The works of Ettmüller[6] and Simrock[7] had been in a more elaborate _format_, while Grein’s translation[8] was not only expensive, but encumbered with other work, and intended primarily for the scholar.

_Nature of the Translation._

Heyne chose a new medium for his version, the unrimed iambic line. His aim being to get his book read, he avoided a literal translation, and rendered with commendable freedom, though not with inaccuracy. He used no strange compounds, and shunned an unnatural verse. Thus he produced the most readable translation that has ever appeared in Germany. Of his own attempt he says--

‘Die vorliegende Uebertragung ist so frei, dass sie das für uns
schwer oder gar nicht genau nachzubildende allitterierende Versmass
des Originals gegen fünffüssige Jamben aufgibt, und zu Gunsten des
Sinnes sich der angelsächsischen Wort- und Satzstellung nicht zu
ängstlich anschmiegt; dagegen auch wieder so genau, dass sie
hoffentlich ein Scherflein zum vollkommenern Verständniss des
Textes beitragen wird.’ --Vorwort, iii.

Heyne’s theory of translation is one that has been very little in vogue in Germany. He has been criticized on all sides for his freedom. Yet the criticism is undeserved. Heyne is never paraphrastic--he never adds anything foreign to the poem. He merely believes in translating the obscure as well as the simple ideas of his text. His ‘freedom’ seldom amounts to more than this--

Hē bēot ne āleh, l. 80 (he belied not his promise)
Was er gelobt, erfüllt er.

He occasionally inserts a word for metrical reasons, and sometimes, in the interests of clearness, a demonstrative or personal pronoun, or even a proper name (cf. l. 500 of the extract).

EXTRACT.

IX.

Da sagte Hunferd, Ecglafs Sohn, der Hrodgar 500
zu Füssen sass, dem Herrn der Schildinge,
des Streites Siegel löste er (denn sehr
war Beowulfes Ankunft ihm verhasst,
des kühnen Meerbefahrers; er vergönnte
es Niemand, mehr des Ruhmes als er selber 505
sich unterm Himmel jemals zu erwerben):
‘Bist du der Beowulf, der einst mit Breca
sich auf der weiten See im Schwimmkampf mass,
als ihr euch kühnlich in die Tiefen stürztet,
und mit verwegnem Brüsten euer Leben 510
im tiefen Wasser wagtet? Niemand konnte,
nicht Freund, nicht Feind, des mühevollen Weges
euch hindern. Da schwammt ihr hinaus in See,
wo ihr die wilde Flut mit Armen decktet,
des Wassers Strassen masset und die Hände 515
die Wogen werfen liesst; so glittet ihr
hin übers Meer. Die winterlichen Wellen,
sie giengen hoch. Der Tage sieben mühtet
ihr euch im Wasser: jener überwand dich
im Schwimmen, denn er hatte grössre Kraft. 520
Da trug die Hochflut ihn zur Morgenzeit
auf zu den Hadorämen, von wo aus er,
der seinem Volke liebe, seinen Erbsitz
im Land der Brandinge, die schöne Burg
erreichte. Dort besass er Land und Leute 525
und Schätze. Was er gegen dich gelobt,
das hatte Beanstans Sohn fürwahr erfüllt.’

The extract illustrates sufficiently the characteristics of Heyne’s rendering. In the first place, attention may be called to the extreme freedom of the verse, a freedom which at times makes the composition verge upon prose. In the second place, the translation of the Old English phrase _beadu-runen onband_ should be noticed, and compared with the translations of Ettmüller, Grein, and Simrock, who have respectively--

_entband beadurunen_
_entband Streitrunen_
_Kampfrunen ... entbinden._

Heyne is the only one who translates the phrase in such a way as to make the words intelligible to a reader unacquainted with Old English. Finally, it should be noticed that the translation is quite as accurate as those which preceded it. Heyne certainly succeeded in his attempt to make the poem more intelligible to the general reader than it had ever been before. While not so serviceable to the scholar as Grein’s translation, it is undoubtedly the most enjoyable of the German versions.

[Footnote 1: There have been six--1863, 1868, 1873, 1879, 1888,
1898; the last two are by Dr. Adolf Socin.]

[Footnote 2: Heyne is at present Professor in the University of
Göttingen.]

[Footnote 3: See infra, p. 121.] [[Leo]]

[Footnote 4: In _Beowulfs Beorh_. See also supra, p. 22.]

[Footnote 5: See supra, p. 16.] [[Thorkelin]]

[Footnote 6: See supra, p. 37.] [[Ettmüller]]

[Footnote 7: See supra, p. 59.] [[Simrock]]

[Footnote 8: See supra, p. 55.] [[Grein]]

VON WOLZOGEN’S TRANSLATION

Beovulf (Bärwelf). Das älteste deutsche Heldengedicht. Aus dem Angelsächsischen von Hans von Wolzogen. Leipzig: Philipp Reclam, jun. (1872?).

Volume 430 of Reclam’s Universal-Bibliothek. Small 8vo, pp. 104.

Fifth German Translation. Imitative Measures.

_Concerning the Translator._

Hans von Wolzogen (born 1848), popularly known as a writer on the Wagnerian operas and as conductor of the _Bayreuther Blätter_, translated three Germanic poems for Reclam’s ‘Bibliothek’: _Beowulf_, 1872, _Der arme Heinrich_, 1873, and the _Edda_, 1877. There is no evidence that he had any _special_ interest in Old English studies.

_Aim of the Volume._

As expressed in the ‘Vorbemerkung,’ the aim of the translator was (1) to provide a readable translation ‘für unser modernes Publicum,’ and (2) to make a convenient handbook for the student, so that the beginner, with Grein’s text[1] and the present translation, might read the _Beowulf_ with no very great difficulty. So von Wolzogen made his version ‘more literal than Heyne’s, but freer than Simrock’s’ (p. 1).

_Nature of the Translation._

The translation is in alliterative measures, called by the translator imitative of the Old English. Von Wolzogen is concerned for this feature of his work, and is at pains to give what he considers a full account of the original verse as well as a lengthy defence of alliteration. Archaic touches are occasional. The names are ‘re-translated into German’ according to a system of which, apparently, von Wolzogen alone holds the key:--

‘... diese angelsächsische Form selbst nur eine Uebertragungsform
aus den ursprünglich deutschen Namen ist, wobei manch Einer sogar
sinnlos verdreht worden, wie z.B. der Name des Helden selbst, der
aus dem deutschen Bärwelf, Jungbär, zum Beovulf, Bienenwolf,
gemacht worden war.’ --Vorbemerkung, p. 5.

The account of the Fall of Hygelac and of Heardred, 2354-96, is shifted to line 2207 (p. 75).

_Text Used._

The translation is apparently founded on one of Grein’s texts[2], but the work is so inaccurate that exact information on this point is impossible from merely internal evidence.

EXTRACT.

DRITTER GESANG.

HUNFRID.

_So sagte Hunfrid_[3], der Sohn des _Eckleif_,
Dem Schildingenfürsten zu Füssen gesessen,
Kampfrunen entbindend (es kränkte des _Bärwelf_
_Muthige Meerfahrt_ mächtig den Stolzen,
Der an Ehren nicht mehr einem andern Manne 5
Zu gönnen gemeint war im Garten der Mitte,
Als wie unter’m Himmel erworben er selbst!):
‘Bist du der _Bärwelf_, der mit _Brecht_ bekämpfte
Auf weiter See im Wetteschwimmen,
Da übermüthig und ehrbegierig 10
Eu’r Leben ihr wagtet in Wassertiefen,
_Die beid’ ihr durchschwammt?_ Da brachte zum Schwanken
Den Vorsatz der furchtbaren Fahrt euch Keiner
_Mit Bitten und Warnen_, _und_ Beide durchtheiltet
Mit gebreiteten Armen die Brandung ihr rudernd, 15
Durchmasset das Meer mit _meisternden_ Händen
Auf wogenden Wegen, während der Wirbelsturm
Rast’ in den Well’n, und _ihr rangt mit_ dem Wasser
Durch sieben Nächte. Der Sieger im Neidspiel
Zeigte sich mächt’ger; zur Zeit des Morgens 20
Riss zu den Haduraumen die Flut ihn;
ins eigene Erbe enteilt’ er von dort,
Zum Lande der Brandinge, lieb seinen _Mannen_,
Zur bergenden Burg. Da gebot er dem Volke
_Schlossreich und schatzreich_. Wie geschworen, so hielt 25
Sein Versprechen dir redlich der Sprössling des _Bonstein_.’

_Criticism of the Translation._

Von Wolzogen’s translation is hardly trustworthy. A specimen of his free interpretation of the _Beowulf_ diction may be seen in the footnote on page 13, where he defines _horngēap_ (i.e. ‘with wide intervals between its pinnacles of horn’) as ‘hornreich,’ and translates _hornreced_, ‘Hornburg.’ Inaccurate renderings of the Old English have been noted above in italics. They reveal an especial difficulty with the kenning, a device which von Wolzogen apparently did not understand, since the entire translation shows an attempt to interpret the kenning hypotactically. Had the translator been making a paraphrase, inaccuracies like ‘muthige Meerfahrt’ and ‘ihr rangt mit dem Wasser’ might be excused; but in a translation which was avowedly literal (more literal than Heyne’s) they appear to be due to nothing less than ignorance and carelessness. To give one example from the thousand that bear out the truth of this statement, we may cite line 561 (p. 27),

_Ic him þēnode
deoran sweorde swā hit gedēfe wæs._

which is translated,

dawider doch diente
Mein treffliches Schwert, das treu mir beistand. (p. 27.)

This is not paraphrase; it is sheer misapprehension of the Old English.

A similar misapprehension is seen in line 15 of the extract,

Mit Bitten und Warnen,

which we are asked to accept as a translation for

ne lēof nē lāð. (l. 511.)

The verse of von Wolzogen’s translation is the poorest of the German attempts at imitative measures. The translator is obliged at times to append footnotes explaining the scansion of his lines (see pp. 33, 34, 65, 91). The cesura is frequently not in evidence (cf. lines 14 and 22, both of which are also metrically incorrect); the lines are often deficient in length (p. 29, line 26; p. 31, line 19; p. 32, line 19).

[Footnote 1: See supra, p. 55.] [[Grein]]

[Footnote 2: See Vorbemerkung, p. 3.]

[Footnote 3: The italics, save those used for proper names
(which are von Wolzogen’s), indicate inaccurate renderings.]

ARNOLD’S EDITION

Beowulf, a heroic poem of the eighth century, with a translation, notes, and appendix, by Thomas Arnold, M.A. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1876. 8vo, pp. xliii, 223.

Fourth English Translation. Prose.

_Circumstances of Publication._

No edition of the text of _Beowulf_ had appeared in England since the work of Thorpe[1], now twenty years old. The textual criticism of the Germans had, meanwhile, greatly advanced the interpretation of the poem. Grein’s text of the poem had passed into a second, and Heyne’s into a third, edition. There was an opportunity, therefore, for an improved English edition which should incorporate the results of German scholarship. This edition Mr. Thomas Arnold (1823-1900) undertook to supply.

_Relation of the Parts._

The Introduction contained a new theory of the origin of the poem[2]. But the important part of the book was the text and translation. There is no glossary[3]. The notes are at the bottom of the page. Here glossarial, textual, and literary information is bundled together. There is a very inadequate bibliography in the Introduction.

_Nature of the Translation._

The translation is a literal prose version, printed under the text. It resembles Kemble’s work[4], rather than Thorpe’s[5]. It eschews unwieldy compounds, and makes no attempt to acquire an archaic flavor. Supplied words are bracketed.

_Criticism of the Text._

Arnold had access to the MS., and gave the most thorough description of it that had yet appeared. But, strangely enough, he did not make it the basis of his edition. He speaks of a ‘partial collation’ of the MS., but this appears to have been nothing more than a transcription of certain fragmentary parts of the MS. One of these passages is printed in the Introduction, where it is referred to as an ‘exact transcript’; yet, in collating it with the Zupitza _Autotypes_, I have found the following errors:--

Line 2219[6], þeowes _for_ þeofes.
2220, biorn _for_ beorna.
2211, geweoldum _for_ ge weoldum.
2223, b _for_ þ.
2225, wea ... _for_ weal ...
2226, inwlitode, inwatode _for_ mwatide.

Of course the faded condition of the MS. offers some excuse for one or two of these errors, but, if we encounter mistakes in a short transcript professedly exact, what would have been the fate of the text had the entire MS. been collated?

Professor Garnett[7] has noted that Arnold’s text was taken from Thorpe’s, with some changes to suit the 1857 text of Grein. In order to test the accuracy of these statements I have made a collation of the texts of Arnold, Thorpe, and the MS. The list of errors in Thorpe’s text, which I have mentioned in a discussion of that work[8], is repeated bodily in Arnold’s. Yet there was no excuse at this time for the retention of many of these readings. Grundtvig[9] had corrected several of them as early as 1861 by his collation of the Thorkelin transcripts[10]; Heyne had got rid of them by collating Thorpe’s work with Kemble’s[11] and Grundtvig’s. Arnold makes almost no reference to the work of Heyne, and incorporates none of his emendations. He also overlooked Grein’s 1867 text, which contained new readings and a glossary. Arnold himself did not emend the text in a single instance.

EXTRACT.

VIII.

Hunferth spake, the son of Ecglaf, who sat at the feet of the
master of the Scyldings; he unbound the secret counsel of his
malice. The expedition of Beowulf, the valiant mariner, was to him
a great cause of offence; for that he allowed not that any other
man on the earth should ever appropriate more deeds of fame under
heaven than he himself. ‘Art thou that Beowulf who strove against
Breca in a swimming-match on the broad sea? where ye two for
emulation explored the waves, and for foolish boasting ventured
your lives in the deep water. Nor could any man, either friend or
foe, warn you off from your perilous adventure. Then ye two rowed
on the sea, where with your arms [outspread] ye covered the
ocean-stream, measured the sea-ways, churned up [the water] with
your hands, glided over the deep; the sea was tossing with waves,
the icy wintry sea. Ye two toiled for seven nights in the watery
realm; he overcame thee in the match, he had more strength. Then,
at dawn of morn, the sea cast him up on [the coast of] the
Heathoreamas; thence he, dear in the sight of his people, sought
his loved native soil, the land of the Brondings, the fair safe
burgh where he was the owner of folk, burgh, and precious jewels.’
--Pages 37, 38.

_Criticism of the Translation._

The translation is literal, and its value is therefore in direct ratio to the value of the text, which has been discussed above.

[Footnote 1: See supra, p. 49.] [[Thorpe]]

[Footnote 2: A theory which the author continued to regard as
partially tenable. See _Notes on Beowulf_ (London, 1898), p. 114.]

[Footnote 3: Contrast this with the editions of Heyne. See p. 64.]

[Footnote 4: See supra, p. 33.] [[Kemble]]

[Footnote 5: See supra, p. 49.] [[Thorpe]]

[Footnote 6: The numbers are those of Wyatt’s text; for Zupitza’s
and Arnold’s add 1.]

[Footnote 7: See _Amer. Journal of Philol._ I. 1. 90.]

[Footnote 8: See supra, p. 51.] [[Thorpe: Criticism...]]

[Footnote 9: See _Beowulfs Beorh_, and p. 22.]

[Footnote 10: See supra, p. 15.] [[Thorkelin]]

[Footnote 11: See supra, p. 33.] [[Kemble]]

BOTKINE’S TRANSLATION

Beowulf, Épopée Anglo-Saxonne. Traduite en français, pour la première fois, d’après le texte original par L. Botkine, Membre de la Société Nationale havraise d’Études diverses. Havre: Lepelletier, 1877. 8vo, pp. 108.

First French Translation. Prose.

_Old English Studies in France._

The only attention that _Beowulf_ had received in France prior to this time was in the work of Sandras, _De Carminibus Cædmoni adiudicatis_[1]. Other scholars, if they devoted themselves to English at all, studied chiefly the later periods of the literature[2]. In 1867 the author of the article on _Beowulf_ in Larousse’s Dictionary could say, ‘Le poème n’est pas connu en France.’ In 1876 Botkine published a historical and critical analysis of the poem[3]. This was the first scholarly attention that the poem received in France. In the following year Botkine’s translation appeared.

France has added nothing to our knowledge of _Beowulf_; there has never been another translation, nor even a reprint of Botkine’s. There has been no further scholarly work done on the poem; and the principal literary notices of it, such as Taine’s and Jusserand’s, have been notoriously unsympathetic. The genius of Old English poetry is at the furthest possible remove from that of the French.

_Aim of the Translation._

It will be made evident in the section that follows on the nature of Botkine’s translation that his work could never have been intended for scholars. Had it been so intended, the translator would have rendered more literally. His introduction[4] proves that the book was addressed to the general reader rather than the student of Old English.

The Introduction deals with the nature of Old English poetry, and makes historical and critical remarks on the _Beowulf_. There are occasional notes explanatory of the text.

In his critical work the author is chiefly indebted to Grein[5] and Heyne[6].

_Nature of the Translation._

The translation, which is in prose, is characterized, as the author himself admits, by extreme freedom and occasional omission of words and phrases. The author’s defence of these may be given here:--

‘Je crois devoir me disculper, en présentant cette première
traduction française de Beowulf, du double reproche qui pourrait
m’être adressé d’avoir supprimé des passages du poëme et de n’en
avoir pas suffisamment respecté la lettre. D’abord je dois dire
que les passages que j’ai supprimés (il y en a fort peu) sont ou
très obscurs ou d’une superfluité choquante. Ensuite, il m’a
semblé qu’en donnant une certaine liberté à ma traduction et en
évitant autant que possible d’y mettre les redites et les
périphrases de l’original anglo-saxon, je la rendrais meilleure et
plus conforme à l’esprit véritable de l’œuvre. Est-ce sacrifier du
reste la fidélité d’une traduction que d’épargner au public la
lecture de détails le plus souvent bizarres et inintelligibles?
N’est-il pas plus logique d’en finir de suite avec des artifices
poétiques inconnus à nos littératures modernes, plutôt que de
vouloir s’escrimer en vain à les reproduire en français? Et alors
même qu’on poursuivrait jusqu’au bout une tâche si ingrate,
pourrait-on se flatter en fin de compte d’avoir conservé au poëme
son cachet si indiscutable d’originalité? Non certes.’
--Avertissement, p. 3.

‘Il ne faut pas oublier que, la langue française différant
complètement par ses racines de l’anglo-saxon, il ne m’a pas été
permis d’éluder les difficultés de l’original comme on a pu le
faire parfois en anglais et en allemand.’ --Note, p. 4.

It has been customary, in speaking of the work of M. Botkine, to call attention to the numerous omissions. This is misleading. The passages which the translator has omitted are not the obscure episodes or the long digressions, but the metaphors, the parenthetical phrases, and especially kennings and similar appositives.

For example, the original has:--

Þǣr æt hȳðe stōd hringed-stefna
īsig ond ūt-fūs. (l. 32 f.)

which Botkine renders:--

Dans la porte se trouvait une barque bien équipée. (p. 29.)

The principal passages which Botkine omits entirely are: 1002b-1008a; 1057b-1062; 1263-1276; 1679-1686.

_Text Used._

The author seems to have been well acquainted with the scholarly work done on _Beowulf_ up to his time. He mentions in his Notes the interpretations of Grein, Grundtvig[7], Ettmüller[8], Thorpe[9], and Kemble[10]. He appears to follow, in general, the text of Heyne, not, however, invariably.

EXTRACT.

IX.

Hunferth, fils d’Ecglaf, qui était assis aux pieds du prince des
Scyldingas, parla ainsi (l’expédition de Beowulf[11] le
remplissait de chagrin, parce qu’il ne voulait pas convenir
qu’aucun homme[12] eût plus de gloire[13] que lui-même):

‘N’es-tu pas le Beowulf qui essaya ses forces à la nage sur la mer
immense avec Breca quand, par bravade, vous avez tenté les flots
et que vous avez follement hasardé votre vie dans l’eau profonde?
Aucun homme, qu’il fût ami ou ennemi, ne put vous empêcher
d’entreprendre ce triste voyage.--Vous avez nagé alors sur la
mer[14], vous avez suivi les sentiers de l’océan. L’hiver agitait
les vagues[15]. Vous êtes restés en détresse pendant sept nuits
sous la puissance des flots, mais il t’a vaincu dans la joûte
parce qu’il avait plus de force que toi. Le matin, le flot le
porta sur Heatho-ræmas et il alla visiter sa chère patrie[16] le
pays des Brondingas, où il possédait le peuple, une ville et des
trésors. Le fils de Beanstan accomplit entièrement la promesse
qu’il t’avait faite.’

_Criticism of the Extract and Translation._

If the translation is compared with the text, the reader will be struck by the characteristic beauty of the words omitted. We may agree with the translator regarding the difficulty of rendering compound and kenning into French, and yet the very absence of an attempt to do this jeopardizes the value of the translation more than the omission of many episodes, for it brings it dangerously near to paraphrase. ‘Vous avez nagé alors sur la mer, vous avez suivi les sentiers de l’océan,’ cannot possibly be called a translation of--

þā git on sund rēon;
þǣr git ēagor-strēam earmum þehton,
mǣton mere-strǣta, mundum brugdon,
glidon ofer gār-secg.

ll. 512, ff.

A part of the story has been thrown away with the adjectives. The force and beauty of the passage are gone.

But there is another danger in this paraphrastic method. In omitting words and phrases, the translator will often misinterpret his original. This is especially true of Botkine’s work in the obscure episodes where he wishes to make the meaning perfectly clear. In attempting to simplify the Old English, he departs from the original sense. Instances of this may be brought forward from the Finn episode:

Folcwaldan sunu
dōgra gehwylce Dene weorþode,
Hengestes hēap hringum wenede,
efne swā swīðe sinc-gestrēonum
fǣttan goldes, swā hē Frēsena cyn
on bēor-sele byldan wolde.

ll. 1089 ff.

The idea is misinterpreted in Botkine’s--

Le fils de Folcwalda (stipulait qu’il) leur ferait chaque jour une
distribution de trésors. (p. 50.)

Again, at line 1117 it is said of the lady--

earme on eaxle ides gnornode,

meaning that the lady stood by the body (shoulder) of the corpse as it lay on the pyre. Botkine makes of this--

‘Elle poussait des lamentations en s’appuyant sur le bras de son
fils.’ (p. 50.)

The rendering is not without its amusing features, chiefly illustrations of the inability of the French language to accommodate itself to typically Germanic expressions. Thus when Hrothgar says what is the equivalent of ‘Thanks be to God for this blessed sight,’ Botkine puts into his mouth the words: ‘Que le Tout-Puissant reçoive mes profonds remercîments pour ce spectacle!’--which might have been taken from a diplomatic note.

[Footnote 1: See infra, p. 123.] [[Sandras]]

[Footnote 2: Save Michel. An account of his work may be found in
Wülker’s _Grundriss_, § 102.]

[Footnote 3: _Analyse historique et géographique._ Paris, Leroux,
1876.]

[Footnote 4: p. 4.]

[Footnote 5: See supra, p. 55.] [[Grein]]

[Footnote 6: See supra, p. 63.] [[Heyne]]

[Footnote 7: See supra, p. 22.] [[Gruntvig]]

[Footnote 8: See supra, p. 37.] [[Ettmüller]]

[Footnote 9: See supra, p. 49.] [[Thorpe]]

[Footnote 10: See supra, p. 33.] [[Kemble]]

[Footnote 11: Omits mōdges mere-faran.]

[Footnote 12: Omits middan-geardes.]

[Footnote 13: Omits under heofonum.]

[Footnote 14: Omits lines 513-515a.]

[Footnote 15: Omits wintrys wylum.]

[Footnote 16: Omits lēof his lēodum.]

LUMSDEN’S TRANSLATION

Beowulf, an Old English Poem, translated into Modern Rhymes, by Lieut.-Colonel H. W. Lumsden[1]. London: C. Kegan Paul & Co., 1881. 8vo, pp. xx, 114.

Beowulf, an Old English Poem, translated into Modern Rhymes, by Lieut.-Colonel H. W. Lumsden, late Royal Artillery. Second edition, revised and corrected. London: Kegan Paul, Trench and Co., 1883. 8vo, pp. xxx, 179.

Fifth English Translation. Ballad Measures.

_Differences between the two Editions, and Indebtedness to Preceding Scholars._

In the first edition of the translation a number of passages were omitted. Some of these omissions were owing to corrupt text, some to extreme obscurity of the original, and some merely to the fact that the original was deemed uninteresting. The principal omissions were: 83-86; 767-770; 1724-1758; 1931-1963; 2061-2062; 2214-2231; 2475; 2930-2932; 3150-3156. These passages were inserted in the second edition.

‘In this edition I have endeavoured to remove some of the blunders
which disfigured its predecessor.... Some parts have been entirely
rewritten, and the passages formerly omitted ... have been
inserted.... A few notes have been added; and the introduction has
been materially altered and, I hope, improved.’ --Preface to the
Second Edition, p. v.

_Aim and Nature of the Translation._

Lumsden’s desire was to produce a readable version of the poem. Thus his work resembles that of Wackerbarth[2]; and, like Wackerbarth, he couched his translation in ballad measures. Lumsden does not vary his measure, but preserves the iambic heptameter throughout. His lines rime in couplets.

No attempt is made to preserve alliteration or archaic diction.

The Introduction and Notes contain popular expositions of the work of preceding scholars. Several of the Notes are original and well worth while (see Notes A, C, G, M).

_Texts Used._

The translation is based on Grein’s text of 1857[3] and Arnold’s text (1876)[4]. Garnett has shown[5] that Lumsden ignored the 1867 text of Grein and the editions of Heyne. These defects were remedied to some extent in the second edition. Lumsden himself never emends the text.

EXTRACT[6].

IV. HUNFERD AND BEOWULF.