The Translations of Beowulf Part 2

iter in Britanniam anno seculi praeteriti Lx.x.xVI. ad thesauros bibliothecarum Albionensium perscrutandos facerem....

A curatoribus, Musaei Britannici, aliarumque Bibliothecarum, potestas mihi data [est] inspiciendi, tractandi, et exscribendi omnia, quae rebus Danicis lucem affere possent ma.n.u.scripta. Ad quam rem conficiendam viri nostro praeconio majores Josephus Planta et Richardus Southgate dicti Musaei Brit. praefecti in me sua officia humanissime contulerunt. Optimo igitur successu et uberrimo c.u.m fructu domum reversus sum ...' (pp. viii, ix).

Thorkelin thus obtained two copies of the poem, one made with his own hand, the other by a scribe ignorant of Old English. These transcripts (still preserved in Copenhagen) formed the basis for Thorkelin's edition. The account of his studies continues:--

'Quaecunque igitur possent hoc meum negotium adjuvare, comparare coepi, magnamque librorum copiam unde quaque congessi, quorum opera carmen aggrederer. In hoc me sedulum ita gessi, ut opus totum anno MDCCCVII confecerim, idem brevi editurus ...' (p. xv).

Just at this time, unfortunately, Copenhagen was stormed by the English fleet, and Thorkelin's text and notes were burned with his library. But the transcripts were saved. Thorkelin renewed his labors under the patronage of Bulow, and at length published in 1815.

_Thorkelin, and his Interpretation of the Beowulf._

Grimus Johnssen Thorkelin (or Thorkelsson), 1752-1829, is remembered as a scholar in early Germanic history. He had little beside this knowledge and his general acquaintance with Old Germanic languages to recommend him as an editor of the _Beowulf_. Grundtvig said that the transcript of the _Beowulf_ must have been the work of one wholly ignorant of Old English[3]. Thorkelin knew nothing of the peculiar style of Old English poetry; he could recognize neither kenning, metaphor, nor compound. He was not even fitted to undertake the transcription of the text, as the following section will make evident.

We have seen how Sharon Turner[4] could describe the _Beowulf_.

Thorkelin seems to have been little better fitted to understand the poem, to say nothing of editing it. He failed to interpret some of the simplest events of the story. He did not identify Scyld, nor understand that his body was given up to the sea, but thought that King Beowulf 'expeditionem suscipit navalem.' He failed to identify Breca, and thought that Hunferth was describing some piratical voyage of Beowulf's.

He makes Beowulf reply that 'piratas ubique persequitur et fudit,' and 'Finlandiae arma infert[5].' He regarded Beowulf as the hero of the Sigemund episode. He quite misapprehended the Finn episode, 'Fin, rex Frisionum, contra Danis pugnat; vincitur; fdus c.u.m Hrodgaro pangit; fidem frangit; pugnans cadit[6].' He regards Beowulf and a son of Hunferth as partic.i.p.ating in that expedition. He failed to identify Hnaef, or Hengest, or Hrothulf, &c.

EXTRACT[7].

Hunfer maleode _Hunferd_ loquebatur Ecglafes bearn _Ecglavi_ filius, e aet fotum saet Qui ad pedes sedit Frean Scyldinga Domini Scyldingorum, On band beadu Emeritus stipendiis Rune waes him Momordit eum Beowulfes si modges _Beowulfi_ itinere elati Mere faran Maria sulcando Micel aefunca Magna indignatio, For on e he ne ue 10 Propterea quod ille nesciret aet aenig oer man Ullum alium virum aefre maera Magis celebrem on ma middangardes In mundo Gehedde under heofenum Nominari sub coelo on he sylfa eart Quam se ipsum.

u se Beowulf Tu sis _Beowulfus_, Se e wi breccan Qui ob praedas Wunne on sidne sae Ceris per latum aequor Ymb sund flite Et maria pugnas.

aer git for wlence 20 Ibi vos ob divitias Wada cunnedon Vada explorastis, And for dol gilpe Et ob falsam gloriam On deop waeter Profundas aequas.

Aldrum nedon Annis subacto Ne mic aenig mon Non mihi aliquis Ne leof ne la Amicus aut hostis Belean mighte. Objicere potest, Sorh fullne si Illacrimabiles expeditiones.

a git on sund reon. Ubi vos per aequora ruistis, a git ea gor stream 30 Ibi fluctus sanguinis rivis Earmum ehton Miseri texistis.

Maeton mere straeta Met.i.ti estis maris strata: Mundum brugdon Castella terruistis: Glidon ofer ga.r.s.ecg Fluitavistis trans aequora.

Geofon yum Salis undae Weol wintris wylm Fervuerunt nimborum aestu.

Git on waeteris aeht Vos in aquarum vadis Seofon night swuncon Septem noctibus afflicti fuistis.

He e at sunde Ille c.u.m sundum Oferflat haefde 40 Transvola.s.set, Mare maegen Magis intensae vires a hine on morgen tid Illum tempore matutino On heao Raemis In altam Raemis Holm up aet baer Insulam advexere.

onon he gesohte Deinde petiit Swaesne. Dulcem, Leof his leodum Charam suo populo Lond Brondinga Terram Brondingorum.

Freoo burh faegere. Libertate urbem conspicuam aer he folc ahte 50 Ibi populo possessam Burh and beagas Urbem et opes Beot eal wi Correpsit. Omne contra e sunu Beanstanes Tibi filius _Beansteni_ Sode gelaeste. Vere persolvit.

_Criticism of the Text._

In order to show how corrupt the text is, I append a collation of the above pa.s.sage with the MS. It may be added that the lines are among the simplest in the poem, and call for no emendation. In pa.s.sages that present any real difficulty, Thorkelin is, if possible, even more at fault.

Line 1, _for_ maleode _read_ maelode.

4, _insert period after_ Scyldinga.

9, _insert period after_ aefunca.

13, _for_ middangardes _read_ middangeardes.

15, _for_ on _read_ on{ne}.

17, _for_ breccan _read_ brecan (i.e. Brecan).

25, _for_ mic _read_ inc.

27, _for_ mighte _read_ mihte.

37, _for_ waeteris _read_ waeteres.

38, _for_ night _read_ niht.

40, _insert period after_ oferflat.

43, _for_ heao Raemis _read_ heaoraemes (i.e. Heaor?mas).

46, _for_ Swaesne _read_ swaesne ? (i.e. eel).

54, _for_ sode _read_ soe.

In the composition of his text Thorkelin made all the errors known to scribes and editors. He misread words and letters of the MS., although he had two transcripts. He dropped letters, combinations of letters, and even whole words. He joined words that had no relation to each other; he broke words into two or even three parts; he ignored compounds. He produced many forms the like of which cannot be found in Old English.

One further example of his great carelessness may be given. The first line of the poem, which is written in large capitals in the MS.:--

Hwaet we Gardena....

Thorkelin perversely transcribed:--

Hwaet wegar Dena....

and for this combination of syllables he chose the translation:--

Quomodo Danorum.

There is, of course, no such word as 'wegar' in Old English.

Of the necessity of punctuation Thorkelin seems to have been serenely unconscious; he did not even follow the guides afforded by the MS. Had he done so, he would have saved himself many humiliating errors. For example, in the text given above, to have noticed the periods mentioned in the collation would have been to avoid two glaring instances of 'running-in.'

_Criticism of the Translation._

But, in spite of the wretched text, it remained for the translation to discover the depths of Thorkelin's ignorance. It will be seen by reading the extract given from the translation that he did not even perceive that two men were swimming in the sea. It is to be remembered, too, that his error of the 'piratical expedition' is carried on for sixty lines--certainly a triumph of ingenuity. It is useless to attempt a cla.s.sification of the errors in this version. In the words of Kemble:--

'Nothing but malevolence could cavil at the trivial errors which the very best scholars are daily found to commit, but the case is widely different when those errors are so numerous as totally to destroy the value of a work. I am therefore most reluctantly compelled to state that not five lines of Thorkelin's edition can be found in succession in which some gross fault, either in the transcription or translation, does not betray the editor's utter ignorance of the Anglo-Saxon language.' --Edition of 1835, Introd., p. xxix.

_Reception of Thorkelin's Edition._

The book was of value only in that it brought Beowulf to the attention of scholars. The edition was used by Turner, Grundtvig, and Conybeare.

I have found the following notices of the book, which will show how it was received by the scholarly world.

TURNER. On collating the Doctor's printed text with the MS. I have commonly found an inaccuracy of copying in every page.--Fifth edition, p. 289, footnote.

KEMBLE, see supra.

THORPE. (The work of the learned Icelander exhibits) 'a text formed according to his ideas of Anglo-Saxon, and accompanied by his Latin translation, both the one and the other standing equally in need of an dipus.' --Edition of 1855, Preface, xiv.

See also Grundtvig's criticism in _Beowulfs Beorh_, pp. xvii ff.

[Footnote 1: Supra, p. 7.] [[Preliminary Remarks]]

[Footnote 2: See also Grundtvig's edition of the text of _Beowulf_, p. xvi.]

[Footnote 3: See _Beowulfs Beorh_, p. xviii.]

[Footnote 4: See supra, p. 11.] [[Turner's Account...]]

[Footnote 5: See Thorkelin, p. 257.]