A Modern Review of Thidrekssaga
Merovingians by the Svava
 
by Rolf Badenhausen

Date: 2017-07-22
| Update History |


 

Contents
Introduction
The original narrative geography
King Theuderic I = King Þiðrek of Bern
Some literary and historical environments
       Gransport
       Theuderic's disappearance after 507
       Some interliterary receptions
Lower Saxon Historiography and the 'Annals'
How reliable is Gregory of Tours ?
Chlodio and Hloðr in northern Húnaland
Theuderic I or Þiðrek of Bern: »King of Bonn«
Which are the dynasties of the eastern Franks of 5th century ?
King Sigebert of Cologne = King Sigurð the Nibelung ?
Preliminary Filiations
       Ermenrik and Samson
       Weland and Widga
       Atala of Susat and a perspective survey
       Some literary-historical perspectives
Early activities in Baltic lands and Western Russia
        Remarks on 'Historicity' of 'Vilkinaland' and other Baltic lands
            Ostancia, queen of 'Vilkinaland', Baltic Sea Region
Résumé
       General conformity of contemporary residential regions
       Common geostrategical ambitions
       Dénouements on literary genre
Endnotes
Appendix
A1   Remarks on the evaluation of Þiðreks saga manuscripts
A2   Edward R. Haymes' translation: The Saga of Thidrek of Bern
A3   Appended documents
  
Introduction

The reviewing literary research into Old Norse and Swedish traditions, as initiated by Heinz Ritter-Schaumburg, PhD († 1994), might motivate not only experts in Late Antiquity and prae-mediaeval times to take note of some new interesting context: The Old Norse Þiðreks saga and Old Swedish 'Didriks chronicle', both appearing closely related to the sagas or legends about an »Ostrogothic Dietrich von Bern«, seem to throw back certain narrative light from Frankish history, whose Merovingian origin and its 5th6th - century period have been briefly regarded by Gregory of Tours, Fredegar’s Chronicle and the so-called 'Chronicle of Frankish Kings'.

'Svava' translation cover
Contradicting scholastic conviction, Ritter has evaluated the mediaeval Old Swedish texts he shortly called Svava, catalogued as E 9013, of Skokloster-Codex, formerly No. I/115 & 116 quarto, at the 'Riksarkivet' Stockholm, as more objective copy from an early but unknown archaic manuscript being prior to the more longwinded narrating Þiðreks saga which, however, is of surviving elder version and sometimes rendering more topographical information.(1) As the late expert was able to prove by means of his numerous German publications and lectures, these manuscripts cannot mean the 'Ostrogothic Theoderic' mainly for topographical reasons, but rather provide narration related to an equally named Frankish king, the Old Swedish Didrik, who started his rise at 'Bern(e)' in the northern Rhine-Eiffel outland.(2)
Heinz Ritter’s basic reference for his translation is SAGAN OM DIDRIK AF BERN efter svenska handskrifter by Gunnar Olof Hyltén-Cavallius, Stockholm 1850–1854. Publisher in German language: Otto Reichl Verlag, St. Goar, Germany. Regarding the literary style of these Old Swedish manuscripts, Hyltén-Cavallius classified at first the Old Swedish manuscripts as prosaic 'krönikan'. Henrik Bertelsen and Bengt Henning also shared this evaluation (Bertelsen, 'Didrikskroniken' 1905–1911; Henning, 'Didrikskrönikan' 1970). Edward R. Haymes translated the supplemental chapters of the Old Swedish scribes under the headline THE END OF VIDGA AND KING THIDREK ACCORDING T0 THE SWEDISH CHRONICLE OF THIDREK.

Regarding a circumspect re-evaluation of the aforementioned manuscripts and other records of occidental antiquity, we obviously have to contemplate a sharp natural limit that was previously forming the big border between the Roman Empire and Germanic tribes, and, later again, the Franks and more eastern folks: The Rhine. Apparently, our first Frankish historiographers or 'chroniclers' would hardly cross that river to have a look at the outlandish tribes beyond; and almost all their foreign colleagues seem to have left an almost blank sheet about their history, particularly from the times after the downfall of the Roman Empire to Charlemagne.

The original narrative geography
 
Heinz Ritter’s primal geographical terminology of Þiðreks saga and Old Swedish 'Didriks chronicle' represents an interesting result of his diligent verification of intertextual location and river names. With respect to the environment and localization of Bern, the 1st Century Roman Eiffel Map, issued by Kurt Stade, provides a Roman based mining location nowadays called Breinig ('Breinigerbg.') at the exceptional Gallic-Roman temple site VARNE  (VARNVERNBERN).(3) Although the contemporary name of adjacent Breinig was not handed down, its current spelling could be based on derivation from e.g. Varneniacum → Bareniacum → B(e)reniacum.
Some important locations of 'Didriks chronicle' and Þiðreks saga
Some important locations of 'Didriks chronicle' and Þiðreks saga, cf. the Geographical and Ethnic Glossary of Thidrek Saga and the Old Swedish manuscripts. The place being named VARNENUM has been excavated at Kornelimünster, suburban location of Aachen (the Roman AQUAE GRANNI), a place of residence of Charlemagne.
With respect to
Vereinnahmungsstrategien für die Gestalt des Þiðrek aus dem Milieu des ostgotischen Theoderich – strategical claims and allegations for setting up a non-negligible 'Ostrogothic Theoderic milieu' for Þiðrek –, in particular created by elder German scholarship and vastly colported by philologists writing for the RGA and Wikipedia, there is, for example, no passage in the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts which connects their protagonists 'Þiðrek' and 'Ermenrik' with the 'gens Amalorum', as these texts do refer to this German Eiffel folk in nothing more than geographical context. As regards Dietrich’s follower 'Amlung', son of 'Hornboge', Ritter introduces Þiðrek’s follower clarifyingly in Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, p. 296, en. 77. Since the earlier and/or in Migration Period insufficiently recorded ancestors of Sayn-Wittgenstein dynasty have been estimated between Westfalia and the confluence of the Rhine and Moselle rivers, Dietrich’s contemporary 'Widga' (this spelling form by the translators August Raszmann and Fine Erichsen) must not necessarily come from the other side of the Alps; cf. Mb 79 & 283.(4) Generally, the Old Swedish forms 'Wideke', 'Wideki' might potentially reflect the result of shortening derivation from Old German 'Widechinstein'.
Ritter underlines well that the mediaeval scribes of the 'Didriks chronicle' and Þiðreks saga may refer to geographical names 'formerly known as' or, instead, 'recently known as'. Some geonyms of these texts are not provided by other records of Migration Period and Middle Ages, whereas many other geographical expressions can be recognized in several sources. For example
Bardengau (→ Berdengau ) ('understood as') Bertanga, the former localized on the Lower Elbe in connection with Charlemagne’s Saxon War campaigns, the latter being used by the scribes of the Old Norse and, with some spelling derivation, Old Swedish texts. (The paco Badinc provided by the Annales Petaviani has been annotated as pagi Bardengan caput Bardowik erat by the MGH editor G. H. Pertz, cf. William J. Pfaff 1959, pgs 38–39. The 'Örlunga' or 'Harlungen' region includes the former Roman BRISIACUM which is in current German spelling (Bad) Breisig.
Regarding historical records with limitations to less comprehensive context, Ritter also subsumed that name giving to locations, their etymological history and early historical events could have taken place even before 'first certified documentary mention'.

Since Heinz Ritter has thoroughly translated the Old Swedish 'Didriks chronicle' into German language and reviewed the Þiðreks saga manuscripts, the regions of today’s North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland - Palatinate, Lower Saxony, Jutland and western Baltic territories appear as the authentic locations focused by antique and mediaeval historiographers who enticingly forwarded lifetime events related to a king of obvious Franco-Rhenish descent.
Ancient Seal of Trier - 'Roma secunda'
An ancient seal of Trier on the Moselle, 11th century.





Nonetheless, we must carefully study their records to find some synchronous or completing passages about Franco-Rhenish politics of 5th and the first third of 6th century. Regarding the Rhine again as dominant natural and cultural border, they seem to have had nearly the same limited geographical horizon of recitation as their Frankish colleagues vice versa. Thus, besides primal geographical terminology, we have to interpret the Old Norse + Swedish writers' farthest known southern centre ROME as 'Roma secunda', whose spelling, localization and significance is unmistakably provable as the Roman Augusta Treverorum(5) through both historical and geostrategical contexts. However, we should not expect a detailed recitation of the Merovingian bloodline from Þiðrek’s 'biographers' who certainly were not crossing the Meuse westwards, therefore providing fragmentary views, and we also should keep an eye on the right sequence of more than 300 chapters written by the scribes of the 'Didriks chronicle' and Þiðreks saga.
Porta Nigra, Trier on the Moselle - 'Roma secunda'
Porta Nigra, Trier on the Moselle - 'Roma secunda'
Imperial Bath of Roman Empire and Frankish Kingdom, Trier on the Moselle - 'Roma secunda'
Imperial Bath of Roman Empire and Frankish Kingdom, Trier on the Moselle - 'Roma secunda'
The Emperor Hall 'Basilika', Trier on the Moselle - 'Roma secunda'
 
Trier on the Moselle with the Porta Nigra and the ruins of the Roman Imperial Bath which the succeeding Franks had taken and extended for their 'Kings Palace'. The Emperor Hall or 'Basilica', Throne Hall of Constantine I, is largest surviving single-room structure from Roman era. (All these buildings are declared World Heritage of the UNESCO.)


King Theuderic I = King Þiðrek of Bern
 
High Resolution Image
MS page of Old Swedish transmission
A colourized page of Þiðreks saga. Perg.fol.nr.4. Cf. Mb 150 & 170; cf. H.Bertelsen, ÞIÐRIKS SAGA, 1905-11, I, pgs 279–282.
A photocopy from Old Swedish manuscript, ch. 365 of the mediaeval Skokloster folio.

Since the 'Didriks chronicle' and its derived epic novel Thidreks saga, as Ritter prefers this literary classification (cf. Der Schmied Weland; posthumously published by Olms, Hildesheim 1999), like to put forward some coherent historical information and relations upon large territories of today’s Central and North Europe, we should estimate with him that these texts would basically not prefer depiction of any less important provincial antics against more reasonable reports on superior events. Evaluating Ritter’s conclusions by means of the momentous context of the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts on such level, we finally will be confronted with the impasse of not enough geographical, temporal and personal space for Theuderic '&' Þiðrek.

It has been considered that

 –  Þiðrek, Franco-Rhenish king, died  c. 534–36  according to Ritter’s estimation;
 –  Theuderic, not only Franco-Rhenish king, died at the end of 533.

Kemp Malone (1959) and Karl Simrock, German translator of the Nibelungenlied, Old Norse Epics and the Old English Beowulf, identify Dietrich von Bern with Frankish king Theuderic I. Simrock, reviewing and basically following his colleague Prof. Laurenz Lersch, pleads for an original cycle of (Franco-)Rhenish tradition centered around Bonn = Verona (notably Franz Joseph Mone 1836) which, as these scholars do generally combine, thereafter was assimilated by receiving authors of southern Dietrich von Bern epics. (Laurenz Lersch, Verona., in: Jahrbücher des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinlande. Bonn 1842, I, pgs 1–34. Karl Simrock, Bonna Verona., in: Bonn. Beiträge zu seiner Geschichte und seinen Denkmälern. Festschrift Bonn 1868, III, pgs 1–20.)

Karl Müllenhoff, another 19th-century scholar, tried to discern Dietrich von Bern as an amalgamation of Frankish kings Theuderic and his son Theudebert with a poetical 'Ostrogothic Theoderic' (Die austrasische Dietrichsage, in: ZfdA 6 (1848), pgs 435–459). Thereafter Hermann Lorenz declared Theuderic of the Frankish kingdom as the prototype serving for Dietrich epics, estimating [transl.] 'Theuderic utterly dragged into the cycle of the Gothic Dietrich saga' (Das Zeugniss für die deutsche Heldensage in den Annalen von Quedlinburg, in: GERMANIA 31 [19, 1886], pgs 137–150, p. 139). Regarding newer publications, Helmut G. Vitt renders short but astute initial intercessions resulting in Þiðrek = Theuderic I and Samson = Childeric I : Wieland der Schmied (ISBN 3 925498 00 1), pgs 127–138.

However, all these authors do not provide detailed studies substantiating their opinion.(6)

We must state deficient biographical information about that young Theuderic before 507 and, again, c. 523. He is mentioned as most talented son of C(h)lodovocar I or 'Clovis' in the texts written by Bishop Gregory of Tours, principal Frankish 'chronicler' whom we obviously have to credit with truth telling, and who might appear to some item more informative than the pseudonymous Fredegar.

Unfortunately, Gregory has not left a line to find the answers to these urgent questions about this Franco-Rhenish king:


1.
May a clerical raconteur punish Theuderic with a certain portion of ignorance, since he has taken him for a son of any heathen concubine?
     
 
2.
Has that skilled young man kept a respectable distance to his rude and bloodthirsty father?

Fact is that King Clovis could rely on Theuderic for daring missions, e.g. against the Visigoths. On the subject of this operation, the history reveals that only the powerful appearance of King Theoderic the Great could stop the conquests made by Theuderic in 507/508. Nonetheless, we may wonder whether or how much Gregory did discriminate him against Clovis' sons Chlothar, Chlodomer and Childebert, whose mother was the honourable Saint Clotilde (primordially rather Chrodechildis, Chrodigildis) of Burgundian dynasty; and we may also wonder whether Theuderic trained his skilfulness and sophistication by keeping out of Clovis' gory ways. Thus, we may consequently ask: Did that young-aged man rather turn to an adventurous eastern border area of the Franks? We must think of great possibility that he could have received a certain part of Rhenish territory as operation base and place of residence from his father and/or the local leader of this area – that large region which Theuderic actually inherited later as part of eastern Frankish territory: Bern, apparently localized in the region covering German towns Aachen and Bonn, was an excellent geographical point of that area, good or the best place for Theuderic 'and' Þiðrek to start any exiting exploration into the dangerous depth of miraculous woodlands beyond the Rhine, where all those Roman Eagles were driven back or torn into bits and pieces just a few centuries ago. Bern was the eminent place for the young Theuderic to observe Franco-Rhenish residence of Cologne and same good location for King Þiðrek to ride out to his good friend King Atala who was residing some dozen miles away at one of the most important settlements on a territory of today’s Westphalia: SusaSusat–Soest. The form 'Attila' appears as most popular derivation of a more likely genuine Atala bearing the diminutive form of the (Proto-)Indo-European Ata = father. He is spelled 'Aktilius' or 'Atilius' in the Old Swedish manuscripts, and also 'Attala' in Icelandic MS B.
 
However, referring again to both questions above, we are leaving at this point Gregory’s Frankish horizon of recitation for real barbaric outland.


Some literary and historical environments

Gransport

The manuscripts report that one day King Ermenrik expelled Þiðrek from his Bern residence. He immediately fled to King Atala for that reason. After '20 years', obviously a dubious period of time (cf. Ritter by counting up these '20 years' to c. A.D. 515), Þiðrek goes out to meet martially his kinsman Ermenrik. Þiðrek’s messengers finally find him at Roma II (Trier on the Moselle) where Ermenrik, being informed likely earlier than expected, prepares for the counter-attack (Sv 272–273, Mb 322–323). As all manuscripts unmistakably provide, Þiðrek has to take high losses in the battle on Moselle’s location which the literati call 'Gransport' or 'Gronsport'.

It seems not unproblematic to chronologize this campaign. The writers of the Old Norse and Swedish texts connect the age of Þiðrek’s brother Þetmar/detmar, aged '20 years' at that time, with the interim period of exile. However, it appears less believable that Þiðrek would have waited two decades for the first real opportunity to regain his kingdom. Since Sv 355 and Mb 413, both the last chapters numerically taking up Þiðrek’s expulsion, are making this span unbelievable (see farther below), the more or less questionable age of his alleged brother might have inspired the prime narrator to enlarge Þiðrek’s interim period of exile on a grand scale.

Map of Koblenz, 1806
The 'Gänsefü(h)rtchen', diminutive form of 'Gänse-furt', is evident historical nickname of a notable historical rapid localized nearly one mile before the Moselle’s mouth. Ritter underlines that this name cannot originally derive from 'a ford that geese (Germ. 'Gänse') formerly used to cross the river at that very place'. He rather estimates the concave rock of the rapid filled or covered with stony 'grant' (cf. En. 'gravel', 'granule') for the original name based upon spelling like 'Grantfurt'. Ritter also notes well that 'Rauenthal' (Raven → Raben -tal) may indicate rather the real historical location for detracting epics dealing with the battle known as the Rabenschlacht.
 
This cartographic detail is provided by the map of Tranchot & von Müffling, 1806. The rapid’s name and position was added by Ritter who refers to the research of Fritz Michel, eminent local historian of Koblenz.

CONFLUENTES: The panoramic copperplate engraving by Möbius (1820) provides a view from the east bank of the Rhine to the hills of traditional 'Hunnenkopf' ('Huns Head' field) on the left. The Moselle’s mouth on the right appears as a lake (Germ. 'See') in high-water times. See also the author’s comprehensive article catalogued at the National German Library DNB: Die Mosel im Licht von Thidrekssaga und Dietrich-Chronik.
Koblenz 1820

More literary items of interest:
 
  1.
Þiðrek’s ancestor Samson started his expansive politics from the same area as Childeric I: north-eastern Gaul. Samson’s region included also 'Appolij' (not Apulia!), nowadays the Dutch Peel north of the Hesbaye which is neither southern 'Hispania' nor Spain (!), as the authors of the Old Swedish and Norse texts certainly provide Hispania between the western foreland of the Eiffel and the northern fringe of the silva carbonaria, a woodland frequently mentioned in Roman and Frankish historiography. Samson was written down of 'Salerni', which seems to express corresponding relation to the Salian Franks and, historically, certain delicate affairs in their obvious 5th-century region being ascribed also to the spatial activities of Childeric whose grave appears not far from the 'charcoal wildwood'. The writers of the Svava and Þiðreks saga relate in their early chapters that he seduced the daughter of an influential ruler and went with her into an interim refuge for that reason. They also note well that Samson had remarkable black hair and an impressing beard.(7) He slew two noble brothers of 'Salerni', the literary Salvenerias by Ritter’s suggestion which, however, might represent nothing more than generally the Salian region. Mentioned as dux and king of 'Salerni', at that time already grey-bearded, he decided to move martially to the Rhine-Eiffel lands. There he had impudently demanded 12 free-born virgins, daughter 'Odilia' of the Bern ruler, and some other tributes from him.
 
  2.
Samson, accompanied by his son and successor Ermenrik, died on his martial way to Roma II, cf. Ritter. Rather accordingly, Childeric died when the Franks were capturing Trier on the Moselle.


  3.
In 486/487, for the first time, Clovis had good reason to call out 'Great Kingdom of the Franks' after the martial removal of Syagrius, last Roman governor of Gaul. Shortly before and after this event, as contextually deduced by Ritter, Ermenrik called in his kinsmen, chieftains, mighty followers to his first and second 'Imperial Diet', a colloquium of obvious Frankish leaders and some jovial guests at the Roma 'cisalpina'.
   
 
'Imperial Diet':
 I: Sv 124, in greater detail Mb 123–124.
II: Sv 227, Mb 269.
Cf. HISTORIA WILKINENSIUM, THEODERICI VERONENSIS... provided by J. Peringskiöld, ch. 100 (cf. Mb 123):
Convivii magnum apparatum, regia pompa celebrandum, instituerat Ermenricus, convocatis ad eam solennitatem primariæ dignationis viris ex principum, Jarlorum, comitumque ...


  4.
The third writer of the Membrane remembers by Mb 246 an individual spelled Salumon as mighty chief of a Frankish realm that extended into today’s German Westerwald woodlands (cf. Ritter). Thus, at the end of 5th century, the scriptor seems to regard an early Frankish acquisition of a Mid-German region on the Rhine.(8)


  5.
As Gregory of Tours narrates events between c. 488 and c. 492, King Clovis slew his cousin Ragnachar, king of Cambrai on the Schelde ('Scheldt'). Apparently anticipating this action of eliminating awkward Frankish chiefs and their potential successors, Sv 231–233 and Mb 278–280 remark the insidious removals of Ermenrik’s sons Frederik, Regbald and Samson. As the texts provide, Ermenrik was induced to tolerate them no longer by counsel of his advisor 'Sifka'. Regbald, ordered to a mission apparently to the Anglo-Saxons and thus needing a watercraft, had to choose between three ships for that passage. He sank on most ramshackle ship deceitfully offered to him as best of all. Was it Frankish kingdom of already believable force to demand tribute from a ruler who was obviously dwelling in 'Ængland' as an Anglo-Saxon territory? For potential or rather likely interest of the Merovings in tribal regions from Jutlandic-Danish area to East Anglia, see Ian N. Wood, The Merovingian North Sea.
   
 
James Campbell, The Anglo-Saxon State, London 2000, p. 75, states on Wood’s notions that he
   
 
brings out some of the connections between Merovingian Gaul and Britain, including the possibility of Merovingian overlordship over parts of England.84 He suggests that a factor in these may have been Merovingian control over the Frisian coastline for a substantial period. This could, of course, have had important significance in relation to East Anglia and raises important questions about Frankish sea power.
__________________
84  Ian N. Wood, The Merovingian North Sea (Alingsås, 1983).

Wood recapitulates in 1994, that Gregory the Great seems to have thought that Theudebert I and Theuderic I (!?) exercised
some authority in England, presumably in the kingdom of
Kent.(Gregory I,
Register, VI 49)

(The Merovingian Kingdoms 450–751, p. 176.)

It seems interesting in this context that Gregory the Great had not considered primarily western Frankish or Neustrian kings.


  6.
While Gregory mentions Theuderic’s service for King Clovis in 507, Þiðrek already supported King Ermenrik against an obvious south-eastern leader called 'Runsteinn' or (Lat.) Rimsteinius (cf. Mb 147). Ritter estimates the place and time of this conflict between Frankish and Alemannic territories at the end of 5th century. At this point we remember Gregory’s passages dealing with Alemannic-Frankish war, whose battles were apparently going on for several years on some more locations than around Zülpich where, as Gregory narrates, King Sigebert of Cologne was wounded and became lame.
   
 
A leader called 'Alperkus', who was ruling in 6th century a territory on the Danube, is mentioned as filium Rŏsteini in the manuscript De Origine Gentis Swevorum.


  7.
While King Clovis passes away after possibly A.D. 511, as the chroniclers do not mention any attempt on his life, King Ermenrik dies of severe abdominal disease. His letal symptoms described by the Old Norse + Swedish scribes, not unlikely provided posteriorly for dramatic increase at Sv 345, Mb 401–402, seem to indicate cancer.
   
 
Ian N. Wood, an author of the RGA (Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde), does critically review scholarship’s estimation on Clovis' date of death in his paper Gregory of Tours and Clovis, in: Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire 63 (2) 1985, pgs 254–255:
   
 
That Gregory himself was faced with an absence of trustworthy dates in his sources can be seen clearly in his attempts to compute the date of Clovis' death. Clovis, we are told, died five years after Vouillé, that is in 512; eleven years after Licinius became bishop of Tours, which apparently gives a date of 517 or later; and one hundred and twelve years after the death of Martin which comes to 509(35). Gregory’s later computations on the deaths of Theudebert and Chlothar(36), however, and the regnal dating for the fifth council of Orleans(37) seem to require an obit for Clovis of 511–2. Nevertheless before accepting this, it is worth recalling the fact that the king was clearly alive at the time of the first council of Orleans which consular and indictional dates place firmly in 511(38). Moreover the Liber Pontificalis records Clovis' gift of a votive crown to the shrine of St. Peter in the pontificate of Hormisdas, in other words between 514 and 523(39). Although the weight of the evidence does suggest that Clovis died in late 511 or 512 the chronological confusion in Gregory’s attempts to calculate this can only imply that the bishop did not have reliable evidence on which to base his computations. This coincides with the conclusions suggested above, that Gregory’s known sources would have provided him with no dates, and it means that even the most general chronological indications in the second half of Book Two of the Libri Historiarum, with the possible exceptions of the quinquennial dates for the defeat of Syagrius and the Thuringian war(40), are invalid as historical evidence.
__________________
(35) Gregory, Liber Historiarum, II, 43. Licinius' predecessor was still alive at the time of the council of Agde in 506, to which he sent a representative; see Concilia Galliae, A 314-A 506, ed. C. Munier, Corpus Chrislianorum Series Latinorum, 148 (Turnholt, 1963), pp. 214, 219. For further problems on Licinius's chronology see Weiss, Chlodwigs Taufe, p. 17.
(36) Gregory, Liber Historiarum, III, 37 ; IV, 21. W. Levison, Zur Geschichte des Frankenkönigs Chlodowech, in Aus rheinischer und fränkischer Frühzeit (Düsseldorf, 1948),  p. 208.
(37) Orleans, V (549), Concilia Galliae A 511-A 695, ed. C. de Clercq, Corpus Christianorum Series Latinorum, 148 A (Turnholt, 1963), p. 157. Levison, Zur Geschichte des Frankenkönigs Chlodowech, p. 208.
(38) Orleans, I, ed. de Clercq, pp. 13-5(?) ; Levison, Zur Geschichte des Frankenkönigs Chlodowech,  p. 208.
(39) Liber Pontificalis, ed. L. Duchesne (Paris, 1955), LIIII.
(40) Gregory, Liber Historiarum, II, 27. Two further quinquennial dates appear in some manuscripts only ; Liber Historiarum, II, 30, 37. The authenticity of these dates was defended by Levison, Zur Geschichte des Frankenkönigs Chlodowech, pp. 205-7 and denied by Weiss, Chlodwigs Taufe,  p. 16.


  8.
Þiðrek goes martially out to take revenge for severe humiliation, his expulsion from Bern by his kinsman Ermenrik, just about that time when King Clovis seems no longer living or mighty.


  9.
Immediately after the Soest Battle, as the texts provide, Þiðrek moved to Bern and recruited an army that won the decisive battle against 'Sifka', advisor of the apparent late Ermenrik, on location called Greken, Graach on the Moselle in the Palatinate of Rhineland.


10.
After the conquest of Roma Þiðrek certainly rose to a mighty leader of Frankish kingdom. This is translated text from Old Swedish version, Sv 356:
   
  He rode into Roma, got off his horse, went to take the same seat on which kings are inured to sit and to be crowned … they crowned him and appointed him King of great realm that King Ermenrik has had …


11.
According to the Old Norse + Swedish texts (Mb 426–428, Sv 367–369) Þiðrek took over a region which covers parts of the later North Rhine-Westphalia and Lower Saxony after the death of Atala who had lost there many of his male subjects in the Soest Battle which Ritter has dated into 6th century.
   
 
This context does correspond with ethnographical and archaeological studies which provide the Merovingian Franks moving to the aforesaid regions and parts of the later Hesse, Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt.


Clip CCCLXXX Latin script
Clip from Latin text provided by J. Peringskiöld: the beginning of ch. CCCLXXX, cf. 10th item above.

Heinz Ritter estimates the birth of Þiðrek about 470, whereas King Clovis is believed to be born a half decade before him. Since this circumstance might appear as predominant item contradicting Þiðrek’s literary reflection Theuderic I, reviewing research regards both Ritter and the Frankish chroniclers' genealogy about early Frankish kings Meroveus, Chlodio and Childeric as unsharp and insufficient: As Gregory provides with his Frankish history, he seems to have no solid pedigree information especially about both first named kings, and so he rather uses a meagre 'Some People say'-phrase for them – which indicates his dependence on oral tradition. Nonetheless, it seems not unimportant to annotate that Ritter chronologizes Þiðrek’s birth at least five years before the final conquest of Trier (Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, p. 282). Since circumspect source research detects this event finished sometime between 480 and 486, notably Hans Hubert Anton, Trier im Übergang von der römischen zur fränkischen Herrschaft Francia 12 (1984), pgs 1–52, Þiðrek’s approximate date of birth would comply well with that of Theuderic in this case.

Gregory, whose genealogical colportages about Frankish kings up to 2nd half of 5th century are uncritically accepted by some scholarship, remarks Theuderic’s son Theudebert being already sturdy at a time when King Clovis died, cf. libri historiarum (hist) III, 1. Regarding Þiðrek’s as well as Theuderic’s bloodline over a band of three generations, all male names being recorded are strikingly beginning with 'Th' but not with any other letters. Theuderic’s line (Theuderic → Theudebert → Theudebald) is outstandingly unique with a view to all the other early Merovingian branches wherein we typically meet kingly names formed with capital 'C'. Apart from the facts that Gregory would not mention Theuderic’s date of birth, and the early Frankish kings habitually have not ascended the throne as son of any heathen concubine, we rather can effortlessly recognize corresponding 'Th…' name-giving in the bloodlines related by the Old Norse + Swedish scribes and Gregory’s Frankish history which might be based on obvious clear-cut ancestral tradition. Matthias Springer, an author of the RGA, places at the disposal that the maternal roots of the eminent Frankish Theuderic could be located at the 'Amals' who have been ascribed to the gender of Ostrogothic king Theoderic the Great. However, it also seems noteworthy that both Theuderic’s and Theoderic’s name is basically related to a composition of the Gothic þiuda [= grouping of peoples or tribes as a nation, cf. (Proto-) Indo-European teuta] plus reiks [= rich' + 'ruler', cf. 'reign'].

 
Theuderic’s disappearance after 507

His mission to the Visigoths to satisfy Clovis, a campaign in 507/508 with sizeable territorial gains which, however, were stopped and massively reverted by Theoderic the Great, is related to that very time-frame of approximately one decade where Þiðrek was expelled according to Ritter’s estimation. He dates this event 495 but, strangely enough, ignoring an important item he already pointed out in 1982 (see below). Regarding the ambitions of Ermenrik, revaling Frankish relative of Þiðrek and mighty ruler of Roma II – the metropolis that only a short time before was known as largest colonia on the north side of the Alps –, consequently might have had good reason to follow Theoderic’s standpoint and decision to put the Frankish Theoderic harshly in his new place. Ermenrik’s advisor 'Sifka' was contributing this significant speech before Þiðrek’s expulsion; cf. Mb 284, Sv 238:

Mb 284.
One time King Erminrek called Sifka to counsel and Sifka spoke to the king:
"Sir, it seems to me you should be wary of your kinsman, King Thidrek of Bern. It seems to me that he is preparing some great deed against you, because he is an unfaithful man and a great fighter. I suspect that you will maintain or lose your royal power as a result of his desire to fight. You will have to prepare to defend yourself. Since he became king, he has expanded his kingdom in many places and has reduced your kingdom. Who has tribute from Amlungland, which he took with his sword, and which belonged to your father? It is none other than King Thidrek, and he will not share it with you, and you will never receive it as long as he rules in Bern."
The king answered:
"What you remind me of is true; that land belonged to my father, and I do not know whether it should belong less to me than to King Thidrek, but I shall certainly take it."...
 
[Translation: Edward R. Haymes.]

Sv 238.
One day Seveke talked to King Ermenrik:
'It seems to me that you soon have to be on the lookout for your relative, King Didrik of Bern. He is an unfaithful man and a mighty fighter. Watch out for him, see that he will not win your realm! He enlarges his realm every day, but thereby he is making yours smaller. I have come to know that it is your due to demand tribute from him. Your father won this land with his sword!'
The king answered:
'My father was owner of this land as a whole and it is to be mine not less than to be his one.'...
 
[Translation: Ritter-Badenhausen. The Old Swedish scribe does not mention the 'Amlung(a)land' which has been localized as the important region between the Meuse and the Middle Rhine, thus not far from Ermenrik’s Roma secunda.]

CAP. CCLIX (cf. Mb 284).
Apud Ermenricum regem de rerum publicarum commodis in medium consulturus Sifka, multa de Theoderico rege sermocinari exorsus est. Huius inprimis potentiam formidandam maximopere Ermenrico; iam multa magna moliri ipsum viribus confisum suis atque bellicarum claritudine operum, de palma etiam regni cum Ermenrico haud dubio disputaturum. Proinde non aliud magis idoneum sibi videri consilium, quam istud præsens nunc suggerendum. Nimirum, a suscepto regiminis tempore primo regni sui fines majorem in modum augendo extendisse Theodericum, etaim cum decremento commodorum ad Ermenricum pertinentium. Amlungiæ quippe regno iustis Ermenrici genitoris armis acquisito, vectigalium proventum omnem sibi vindicavisse Theodericum, quasi iure quodam legitimo inposterum retinendum. Rex, probe Sifkam meminisse ait, paternæ quondam possessionis fuisse provincias istas. Quapropter etiam sibi, utpote qui legitimo prognatus est thoro, æquis rationibus competere ius easdem vindicandi terras ...
 
[Latin manuscript of Þidreks saga, Johan Peringskiöld, 1715.]

The advisor of Ermenrik, mighty ruler at Roma II  from 2nd half of 5th century to 'c. 526' (as deduced by Ritter), could certainly fathom that Theuderic–Þiðrek would be vulnerable if his South Gaul campaign would be repelled.

Gregory placed the removal of Sigebert of Cologne at (nearly) the same time. He has been identified with King Sigmund’s son Sigurð(r), Old Swedish Sigord, the eminent champion who follows Þiðrek as designated brother-in-law of the Niflungar rulers. The leaders of this folk between the Meuse and the Middle Rhine might have had good reason to accept and serve the expansion politics of either Clovis or – as we can postulate for intertextual consistency – a potential loyalist at the former Colonia Treverorum for the opportunity to administrate the northern Eiffel lands of a disempowered Þiðrek.(9)

                Roma Secunda on the Moselle – the dark decades in the reign of Clovis I

As far as we know Clovis never turned towards the former Belgica I with its eminent metropolis for enlarging his kingdom. Why? First of all, H. G. Vitt (op. cit.) and other analysts reasonably suppose Childeric already acting ahead in the political interest of his son Clovis in the last two decades of his life; notably David Frye 1992, Guy Halsall 2001+2007, less determinedly Ian N. Wood 1994. Furthermore, it seems hard to accept that Childeric – or his obvious interliterary parallel 'Samson' – were not appreciating or preparing to the Frankish conquest of that location known only a short time before as largest colonia on the north side of the Alps. Considering the Old Norse + Swedish texts and the Latin manuscript by Peringskiöld providing Samson Salernitana urbis imperium regiumque titulum adeptus est (ch. VIII), as chronologized between c. 460 and 470, at this time also the final Frankish conquest of Cologne and occupations of its surrounding regions, all sources allow to detect no other contemporary Franco-Rhenish or Gaulish leader mightier than Childeric or Samson. If the former had played actually a leading rôle for the conquest of the Treveri metropolis, his successor thereby had an adequate resource in prestige, population, economy and military crafts he certainly needed for his hefty campaigns.

Does the special value of this possibility correspond well with Trier’s blank sheet of history perfectly covering the reigning period of Clovis '&' Ermenrik, alternatively prolongated up to Theuderic’s '&' Þiðrek’s first appearance and reconstitution of this metropolis? Or asked in another way: For what reason should Clovis have renounced a geopolitical status symbol not less than a former imperial Roman seat? There may be a sublime circumstantial evidence for his seat on the Moselle at least at the end of 5th century, although Gregory writes about De baptismo Chlodovechithat the queen arcessire clam sanctum Remedium Remensis urbis episcopum iubet [hist. II, 31].
 
First, however, we therewith cannot make evident both Clovis' residence and his baptism at Reims, albeit the 13th-century monks of Saint-Denis, compilers of the so-called Grandes Chroniques de France, like to localize this event at its cathedral. Second, as regards a concealed historical parallel, only some words later Gregory apparently makes a flashy local allusion with the phrase that Clovis procedit novos Constantinus ad lavacrum. Thus, by means of Gregory’s and our sources, we should not disregard that Constantine I has been affiliated to 'first baptized Roman emperor'. If forwarding this parallel, as this seems more than likely, Gregory might have provided a covert local indication related to Constantine’s western seat, making in this way the locality’s name expressis verbis superfluous. Since Remidius ('Remigius') sometime congratulates Clovis on taking over Belgica II [Epistolae Austrasiacae 2], we neither have material nor any plausible reason contradicting the authority of Childeric’s successor over the superior adjacent province. As Gregory remarks twice later [hist. II, 38 & 40], Clovis chose Paris for his new seat during or shortly after his more than hazardous South Gaul campaign. Ian N. Wood reasonably remarks that (op. cit. 1985, p. 264.)
 
Clovis ceases to appear in the Italian records at this time; it may be significant that it is the period to which Gregory assigned the extermination of his hero's northern rivals.117
_________________
117  Gregory, Liber Historiarum II, 40-2. For arguments in favour of the late dating of these events, Wood, Kings, kingdom and consent, p. 28.
 
In consideration of Clovis' inexorable ascent – he climbed up the ladder of success and power when the Franks took Trier – and Dietrich’s dynastical plus geopolitical background by the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts, the consequences of such potential context taken as authentic would preliminary concern nothing more than a renewed nickname identification of Dietrich’s close relative Ermenrik, appearing at least as the best 'placeholder' the historiographers could choose for their distinctive (!) exposition of 'parallelism' in history. However, as regards the fragmentary Frankish history about Clovis and Theuderic which emerges from this context, there are now at least three burning questions we are left with:
 
1.
Which Frankish ruler was responsible for the exceptionally recorded politico-religio-cultural 'irregularities' – »historically and interpretatively appearing as an isolation based on politically troubled times« – in the metropolis Roma II of the former Belgica prima (see more details and quotations farther below), as these were contemporarily known since the mid of 2nd half of 5th century and lasting even for more than one decade after Clovis' uncertain death in A.D. 511?
 
2.
Why has Theuderic restored this eminent urban location not earlier than 524/525?
 
3.
Why could Theuderic not appear in person in available Frankish history between 508 and c. 524/525? (The military break-in of a Nordic leader called 'Chlochilaichus' within this period of time, apparently along some northern Rhine territory, was beaten back by Theuderic’s son Theudebert.)

Regarding the Frankish campaign against the Visigoths of 507/508, however, it seems less plausible that the crafty Clovis and some other vigilant Frankish chieftains had no idea of the risks and consequences of Theuderic’s military operation, particularly after the intervention of the undefeated Ostrogothic protector. We thus may impute to the mightiest Frankish leader that he was certainly right to stay away, to have possibly calculated even upon Theuderic’s failure, and to have reckoned with his potential follower/rival being finally deprived of his military power.

Theuderic had – apparently impudently – violated the 'Pax Gothica' of Theoderic the Great.

And in fact, after 16 summers and 16 winters Theuderic successfully reconquered Auvergne – at that time the fading vigour in the very last year(s) of the Ostrogothic Theoderic being in religious conflict with his Roman subjects and Justin I. Since Theuderic did not appear in the aforementioned repulse of Chlochilaichus' troops, presumably a large-scale offensive of northern forces, this second Auvergnat expedition is Theuderic’s next known 'Frankish campaign' after 507/508(10) – with or after his stopovers at Cologne (with Gallus) and Roma II !

An absence of Theuderic, designated king at least of the eastern Franks, might have meant a challenging or, more likely, just pre-planned situation for Clovis: Therewith he could take the chance to remove Sigebert, the leader of the Rhenish Franks, in order to enlarge his kingdom, obviously immediately after his unsuccessfully turning South Gaul campaign, in north-eastern direction now instead – and in so far without any involvement of Theuderic. Ian N. Wood, op. cit. 1985, p. 264, estimates that blocked in the south after 508, Clovis may have turned his mind towards enhancing his prestige in the Rhineland and perhaps across the English Channel.

Gregory, implying more indirectly this point of view, makes Clovis responsible for the elimination of King Sigebert of Cologne between 507 and 509 [hist. II, 40]. Although Gregory does not really indicate any conflict between Clovis and Theuderic, it seems not certain that Clovis ever intended to protect Theuderic! Presumably immediately or a short time after the death of Clovis, Theuderic’s son might have conducted the kingdom of his father for a certain period, as the military extent of Chlochilaichus' invasion seems to point to this reasonable case. Besides, this Nordic chief invaded the paygo Attoarios by the account of the Liber historiae Francorum, 19, a former 'Chattuari' region which has been scholastically estimated at that time (c.515–c.523) on the Lower Rhine but not in an obvious identical region of Burgundy called terram Chatuariorum by Carolingian historiographers; cf. Richard A. Gerberding, A Critical Study of the Liber Historiae Francorum. Doctoral thesis, Oxford 1982, p. 84f. As regards the moment of this northern attack, we may wonder if the death of Clovis, possibly rather some years after 511 (!), and an absence of his eastern successor Theuderic had caused the impression of a weak and vulnerable phase of (a part of) the Frankish kingdom.

Following both Ritter’s timeline related to the Old Norse + Swedish texts and historical upheavals on the other side of this river, it may be further considered that some years before Theuderic’s Thuringian invasion the Niflungen – or Frankish intruders – could have crossed the large stream for the conquest of the obvious wealthy region of SusatSoest.(11)

All these significant contexts are not corrupting historiographical interpretations of Þiðrek’s literary parallel Theuderic, cf. for instance
 

Regarding Old German counting of time, it seems apt to reassess Hildebrand’s and Þiðrek’s 'time of absence' as quoted at Mb 396. Before this, however, we should regard at the outset the measure of time we will be confronted with. The manuscript published by J. Peringskiöld 1715 conveys quotations that Hildebrand died at an age of either 180 or 200 years. H. Bertelsen transcribes the original passage as halft annad hunndrad wetra þa er hann anndaþist. enn þydersk kuæde seigia ath hann hefdi .cc. wetra  (op. cit. II. p. 359). The German translator F. H. von der Hagen agrees with Peringskiöld’s transmission and supplements with the Icelandic texts referring explicitly to German tradition. According to Hagen, these manuscripts specify Hildebrand’s age of death with 150 (MS A) or 170 (MS B) winters, cf. Mb 415.

Hans-Jürgen Hube follows Ritter on the subject of half-years counting related to the life of Hildebrand, cf. Thidreks Saga, Wiesbaden 2009, p. 354, ann. 1. Thus, the corresponding passages of Mb 396 obviously admit to comprehend Hildebrand’s and Þiðrek’s »32 winters« outside the country – Ek hæfi nu latit mitt riki .xxx. vætra oc ij vætr; (cf. Bertelsen op. cit. II. p. 331) – as

sixteen  summers  and  sixteen  winters.

While the Latin redactor of Peringskiöld’s edition has modernly equated winters with years in that instance, the scribe of the 'Didriks chronicle' does not relay the length of their exile (Sv 340–341). However, this special context related to the time of Dietrich’s and Hildebrand’s grief may not automatically legitimize recalculations or halvings of other times conveyed by the Old Norse manuscripts and Old German traditions. Incidentally, the poet of the 9th- century Hildebrandslied knows of summers and winters sixty – line 50: ih wallota sumaro enti wintro sehstic. Did an oral provider of this tradition mean sixty or rather sixteen? Although the latter number seems more acceptable in view of fast-changing relationships of Migration period, this question may be either left unanswered or replied correctively with further estimations following below. However, as quoted from Mb 415, there was evidently confusion among at least mediaeval authorship dealing with Hildebrand’s life.

As concerns the Old Norse + Swedish texts, we furthermore can stumble upon Mb 413 and Sv 355 whose writers and heroes look apparently back to the time of Þiðrek’s Gransport expedition: Relating now the death of Ermenrik’s advisor, he had survived his king certainly by some years, both chapters provide a period of two decades (vicennium, ch. CCCLXXIX Latin manuscript) after the battle of Gransport. The Icelandic redactions specify this time span, which ends by all texts just before Þiðrek’s appearance in Roma II, remarkably shorter: MS A = ix , MS B = xi. This approximate halving seems to point to an attempt to convert the 'elder mode of counting' likewise, albeit both numerical data are still specified – obviously shortened – into winters. Regarding this context in so far, the second or last period of Þiðrek’s exile, starting from his military endeavour to regain his kingdom at Gransport, was lasting not less than nine and not more than eleven years, as this seems plausible for even the entire exile period of rather 16 than 32 years. Besides, the Danish-born philologist Josefine 'Fine' Erichsen translated only the period given by MS A (Thule. Altnordische Dichtung und Prosa, 22, Jena 1924). Thus, this battle on the Moselle could be dated to c. A.D. 514/515; cf. Ritter’s proposal about A.D. 515 by another approach. Although estimations on the historicity of the latest possible date of Clovis' death should not be attested, at most compared with a Nordic historia or 'saga', the Frankish Ermenrik seems to be still alive at this time.

Furthermore, it seems worth to reconsider the numeric allegation of the Icelandic texts at Mb 429 where scribe of MS B may have rounded down slightly the period of Dietrich’s and Hildebrand’s exile to xxx winters, cf. Mb 396. Regarding the difference of x winters left by the scribe of MS A at the same passage, however, he has seemingly lost one decade character; cf. F. Erichsen who consequently resigned her preference of this redactor for this item!


Some interliterary receptions

Regarding Upper German traditions of lesser connectedness with a putative historical background for a real Dietrich von Bern, the Waltharius comes with an obvious 10th-century narration about two champions known as followers of Þiðrek. This work, likely or possibly edited by Ekkehard I at Upper German St Gall(en) Monastery (now Switzerland), seems to have taken patterns from an early historiographical source of Þiðreks saga and 'Didriks chronicle' in order to transform interpretation, at least partially, to a legendary 'Ostrogothic environment' (cf. Hildebrandslied). Although either this Ekkehard or the real first author of this lay has (re-)localized the Nibelungen Eiffel residence Worms on the Rhine, supposing 'King Atala of Hunaland' apparently as Attila the great Hun, he nevertheless calls the Nibelungen Gunter and Hagen heroes of the Franks. This may appear as a smart contemporary relocation basing on 10th-century Frankish territory which actually encompassed Worms on the one hand. On the other, however, this ascription does basically meet Ritter’s Franco-Rhenish identification of the rather northern 5th-century seat of the Niflungar, and it may also seem noteworthy that the Franks annexed this and other location west of the Rhine to their territory after the Alemannic Wars in 5th–6th century, cf. RGA 9 (1995) 'Francia Rinensis', p. 372; Eugen Ewig, Die Rheinlande in fränkischer Zeit; in: Franz Petri, Georg Droege (Ed.), Rheinische Geschichte 1,2, p. 16f.

The Waltharius is known also as the poem of Walter and Hildigund. The Old Norse + Swedish texts provide her as daughter of a Russian or Slavic ruler Ilias and, according to the texts, female hostage at the court of Atala; cf. the coherent localization of Hildigund’s father Ilias af Gercekia by Hans-Jürgen Hube at ch. Early activities in Baltic lands and Western Russia. Hǫgni, trying to stop the fleeing two lovers, loses one eye in the fight against Walter who later falls as Duke of Waskenstein at Gransport – the former geonym appears more likely as the papally mentioned Vosca on the Lower Moselle. 'Ekkehard' implanted thrilling elements in his much embellished adaptation that some reviewer would judge between 'subtle' and 'oversubtle'. However, the archaic version seems to reflect in so far the Old Swedish transmission by Sv 222–225. The Latin text of the Upper German tradition, preserved at bibliotheca Augustana, is available at
http://www.fh-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost10/Waltharius/wal_txt0.html  (retrieved Aug. 2008).

The Lament of Deor (10th century, the Exeter Book) conveys Ðéodríc’s period at the 'Mæringa burg' as of thirty winters – the author or his source supposedly neglecting the original 'summers' apposition. Deor’s lament likes to substantiate this relation:

(18–20)
Ðéodríc áhte  þrítig wintra
Máeringa burg;  þæt wæs mongegum cúþ.
Þæs oferéode,  ðisses swá mæg .
 
Theodric had thirty winters
Mæringa burg; that was known to many.
As that passed away, so may this.
 
The author continues with these lines (21–22):

Wé geáscodan   Eormanríces
wylfenne geþóht;  áhte wíde folc
...
We learned of Eormanric's
wolfish mind;  he ruled people far and wide
...
 
Does the strophe of lines 18–20 provide a more or less tendentious retrospective view to Þeodric’s location of exile? Westphalian regions between the Rhine and Soest, residence of King Atala by the Old Norse + Swedish texts, have been estimated historically under Mær(ov)ingian rulership or administration in and after the first half of 6th century. Taking scope within Kemp Malone’s approaches, however, there might be more interesting detections e.g. of Þeodric’s outlandish location name which may be found in 'old continental Saxony' and, according to the Old Norse + Swedish texts, in King Atala’s large kingdom. Malone points out that those Myrgingas, the tribesmen to which the writer of The Widsith belonged, have been scholarly detected in continental Saxony, more narrowly in southern Jutland which partially belongs to modern Schleswig-Holstein. He furthermore remembers, besides, that the Geographer of Ravenna has already situated (roughly enough!) the Maurungani on the Elbe – patria Albis Maurungani certissime antiquitius dicebatur, whereas a Curtius Moranga in pago Morangano appears connected with the region around Hildesheim: The Vita Meinwerci episcopi Patherbrunnensis remarks on the life of the meritorious 11th-bishop of Lower German Paderborn a Bernwardo Hildesheimensi ... quandam regiam curtem Moranga dictam, in pago Morangano, ch. XXII. (Malone, Widsith, Copenhagen 1962, p. 183–186 quoting i.a. Karl Müllenhoff, 1859, p. 279–280.) Müllenhoff’s foregoing colleague Ludwig Ettmüller has been suggesting the form 'Mar' as common root of both 'Mer' and 'Myr' in this interlingual context (Scopes vidsith, p. 11), whilst Müllenhoff assesses 'Maur' and 'Myr' transposable, the latter even in spite of the following 'binding consonant'. As noted farther below, he finally may be right on *myr in the (phonetical) meaning of mire – miry (adj.), ON. mýrr, OE. mór, German moor, Old Frisian mor. It may be worth mentioning that the meaning of Zoëga’s mæringr (-s, -ar), m. a noble man is not related to a tribal region in so far (Geir T. Zoëga, A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic, 1910), while Jan de Vries (op. cit.) places a 'boundary mark or line' at the disposal for the preferential interpretation of ON. *mæri ; cf. correspondingly endnote 6 i  quoting from Malone’s Studies (1959). Thus, we obviously have no reliable source context to identify the Mæringa with e.g. an eponymic 'Marika' which has been suggested from North Italian and Istrian 'Merania' by means of mainly Upper German poetry.

Raymond W. Chambers rejects Ettmüller’s and Müllenhoff’s conceptual coincidence during his Widsith analysis, claiming rather that the derivation of Mauringa, Maurungani (cf. Lat. Maurus = moor) from a root connected with O.H.G. mios, English moss and mirearedistinct from English moor (...) which is linguistically impossible (Widsith, 1912, p. 160 & 236). Nonetheless, Chambers presents a geographical version with overlapping Maurungani and Myrgingas (op. cit. p. 259).

Regarding another geographical approach, Alfred Anscombe prefers the remark made by Paulinus of Nola who knows of an obvious Gaulish terra Morinorum beside the English channel (Nola, Ep. 18.4). Thus, we may re-estimate a stronger relationship of these apparently concurring geonyms provided by the Widsith, Deor and the Rök Runestone.
 
 
Besides: If the translating scribes of the Þiðreks saga had mistaken an original form of Mæringar for their Væringiar (Waringi at chs 13 and 17 in Johan Peringskiöld’s Latin script), the annotations provided with Mb 13, 19, 69, 185 and 194 would make more sense for narrating tribesmen living between the Rhine and Jutland but not people originated in Scandinavia or Slavic regions, cf. 'Värend' location in Middle Ages. Bertelsen ascribes the 'Varangians' = Væringiar to 'Nordic traveling merchants'. As regards the apparently typical 'g' consonant, these people should not have been mistaken as the Varini of Tacitus or the Varni of Procopius or the Varinnæ of Plinius. The War(i)ni have been frequently identified with the German 'Warnen' who, in common with the Thuringii and Heruli, were urged by Theoderic the Great upon an alliance against Clovis, king of the rapidly expanding Franks.
   
 
Between A.D. 507 and 510 this Theoderic was warring against the equally named Gaulish general (successor to the throne) in service of the power-craving king of the Franks, who might appear to some narrator as the second Gaulish–'Gothic' Eormenric.

The Wolfdietrich, an epic of different versions dated from 13th century to Late Middle Ages about a hero whom literary research identifies with both Theudebert and his father Theuderic I ('Hug-Dietrich'), contradicts genealogically Dietrichs Flucht provided by the Ambraser Heldenbuch. The Wolfdietrich cycle suggests at least two significant parallels with Þiðrek of Bern: the dragon fight at Bergara/Brugara (cf. 2nd part of the Ortnit) and Wolfdietrich’s exile and return. The majority of elder and newer scholarship votes for a Frankish but not (Ostro-)Gothic origin of this epic, notably Joachim Heinzle 1999 not following Roswitha Wisniewski and other analysts who argue in favour of an Ostrogothic Theoderic environment, as to (t)his geographical and personal complex the mediaeval authorship might have transformed their obvious Frankish protagonists, cf. e.g. Lydia Miklautsch 2005. As regards basic interliterary reflections between the 5th6th-century Frankish kings and the Wolfdietrich cycle, one of the most characteristic epithets of Hugdietrich – sired by the devil – (Wolfdietrich A quoting Sabene) appears reconnected at Mb 435,438 (Sv 379,382).

The RGA 9 (1995) gives this summary of Wolfdietrich under the lemma Franken (p. 384):
 
In der dt. Heldendichtung kommen 3 Personen mit dem Namen Hugdietrich vor. Erstens wird in den Fassungen B und D des → Wolfdietrich (21) das Kind eines Ritters erwähnt, das bei der Geburt den Namen Hugdietrich erhält, aber gleich darauf stirbt. Es mag in der Dichtung nach einem der beiden folgenden Hugdietriche genannt sein, ist aber selbst ohne Bedeutung. Ein zweiter Hugdietrich ist der Sohn Wolfdietrichs. Auch er tritt in verschiedenen Fassungen des ,Wolfdietrich’ auf, außerdem aber auch in ,Dietrichs Flucht’ (9), wo er Sigeminne von Francrîche heiratet und mit ihr Amelunc, den Großvater Dietrichs von Bern, zeugt. Auffällig ist hier die Verbindung der Genealogie des Goten Kg.s Dietrich von Bern mit einer frk. Dynastie. Der hist. Theoderich war verheiratet mit Audefleda, einer Schwester Chlodwigs. Der bedeutendste der 3 ist jedoch Hugdietrich, der Vater Wolfdietrichs. Dieser kommt sowohl in den verschiedenen Fassungen des ,Wolfdietrich’ wie in denen des → Ortnit (21) vor. Gegen eine Verbindung Hugdietrichs mit dem Stamm der Frk. spricht allerdings, daß sich seine Residenz in diesen Dichtungen in Konstantinopel befindet und sein Reich Griechenland, Bulgarien und die hunnische Mark umfaßt. In ,Wolfdietrich’ D wird zudem noch von einem Kampf gegen die Babylonier berichtet. Die mögliche Umlokalisierung einer frk. Heldensage nach Konstantinopel wird wohl erklärt, indem man darauf hinweist, daß Chlodwig der erste bedeutende christl. Herrscher im w-röm. Reich seit der Absetzung des letzten Ks.s im J. 476 war und daß er deshalb als Äquivalent zu Ks. Konstantin d. Gr. betrachtet wurde. Plausibler ist, daß die verschiedenen Fassungen des ,Wolfdietrich’ unter frz. Einfluß entstanden sind. In dem afrz. Epos ,Floovant’ (Chlodovinc, ,Sohn des Chlodwig’) heißt der Vater des Protagonisten Constantine (24, 130). Auch Gregor von Tours nennt Chlodwig bei der Beschreibung seiner Taufe einen neuen Konstantin (II, 31). Daß dessen Residenz sodann in der Dichtung Konstantinopel genannt wird, ist verständlich, hat aber nichts mit der Stadt am Bosporus zu tun. In den inhaltlich zusammenhängenden Epen ,Ortnit’ und ,Wolfdietrich’ hat man reine frk. Stammessage zu erkennen geglaubt (19, 24): Hugdietrich sei Theuderich I., Wolfdietrich sei dessen Sohn Theudebert I. († 548). Die uneheliche Geburt Theuderichs habe einen Ausgangspunkt für die Entstehung der Sage geboten, sei aber auf den Sohn übertragen worden. Auch afrz. Helden mit den Namen Hugon/Huon können aus der frk. Heldensage stammen.
Der Poeta Saxo berichtet im 9. Jh. von der Existenz von Liedern (vulgaria carmina) über Pippin und Karl, Chlodwig und Theuderich, Karlmann und Chlothar (Grimm [13, 30]). Eine Stelle im ae. ,Widsith’, (Theodric weold Froncum, v. 24) scheint ebenfalls auf die Existenz von frk. Heldenliedern hinzuweisen. Die Inhalte dieser Heldenlieder sind uns aber nicht bekannt, es sei denn, man nimmt an, daß viele der Einzelheiten, von denen Chronisten berichten, solchen Dichtungen entnommen sind.
 

[Transl.:  There are 3 persons named Hugdietrich in German heroic epics. First, the redactions B and D of the → Wolfdietrich (21) mention a knight’s child that received the name Hugdietrich at its birth, but it died soon after. It might be named after one of the following Hugdietrichs, albeit this may be not of any importance in the poetry. A second Hugdietrich is the son of Wolfdietrich. He, too, appears in various redactions of the ‘Wolfdietrich’, further in ‘Dietrichs Flucht’ (9) where he marries Sigeminne of Francrîche and fathers with her Amelunc, grandfather of Dietrich von Bern. The connection of the genealogy of the Gothic king Dietrich of Bern with a Frankish dynasty is striking here. The historical Theoderic was married with Audefleda, a sister of Clovis. Yet, the most important of these 3 persons is Hugdietrich, father of Wolfdietrich. He appears both in the different redactions of the ‘Wolfdietrich’ as in those of the → Ortnit (21). However, Hugdietrich’s connection with the Frankish tribe does neither correspond with Constantinople as his residence, nor Greece, Bulgaria and the Hunnish region as his kingdom. ‘Wolfdietrich’ D reports on a fight against the Babylonians. The potential re-localization of a Frankish heroic tradition with Constantinople is probably explained by the fact that Clovis was the first important Christian ruler of the Western Roman Empire after the deposition of the last emperor in the year 476, and, therefore, was regarded as an equivalent of the emperor Constantine the Great. However, it seems more plausible that the different redactions of the ‘Wolfdietrich’ have been created under French influence. In the Old French epic ‘Floovant’ (Chlodovinc, son of Clovis) the father of the protagonist is called Constantine (24, 130). Gregory of Tours does also call Clovis a new Constantine (II, 31) in the description of his baptism. The fact that his residence was then called Constantinople in the poem appears reasonable, but has nothing to do with the city on the Bosporus. The origin the epics ‘Ortnit’ and ‘Wolfdietrich’, both with regard to their depending contents, has been suggested as pure heroic tradition of the Franks (19, 24): 'Hugdietrich was Theuderich I, Wolfdietrich was his son Theudebert I († 548)'. The illegitimate birth of Theuderich thus had offered a starting point for the origin of the legend but was transferred to the son. The Old French heroes named Hugon/Huon may be also originated in Frankish heroic tradition.
In 9th century the Poeta Saxo reports on the existence of lays (vulgaria carmina) about Pepin and Charlemagne, Clovis and Theuderic, Carloman and Chlothar (Grimm [13, 30]). A passage in the Old English ‘Widsith’ (Theodric weold Froncum, v. 24) seems to point also to the existence of Frankish heroic lays. Yet, the contents of these heroic lays are unknown to us unless we presume that many details provided by chroniclers had been taken from these poetries.]


Sources
(9) Dietrichs Flucht, in: E. Martin (Hrsg.), Dt. Helden-B. 2, 1866, 57–215.
(13) Grimm, DHS.
(19) J. Nadler, Lit.-Gesch. der dt. Stämme und Landschaften 1, 31929.
(21) Ortnit und Wolfdietrich, in: A. Amelung u. a. (Hrsg.), Dt. Helden-B. 3–4, 1871–1873.
(24) Schneider, Dt. Heldensage, 1930.

It is self-evident that the Dietrich von Bern epics, his German Heldendichtung apparently nascent in mediaeval Upper Germany and North Italy on one side, contradicting on the other some very basic contextual relationship endogenously in this literary cycle, are definitely of insufficient historical credibility.

The Lower German tradition Koninc Ermenrîkes Dôt, published on a 16th-century leaflet under the title Van Dirick van dem Berne, clearly provides Dietrich’s most evil antagonist as ruler of Franckriken. This lay has been estimated as an episodic work, appearing as legendary as an âventiure, in parts at least. It seems remarkable that this tradition would hardly harmonize enough with more or less immediate source context of the Þiðreks saga or other extant material, notably Joachim Heinzle 1999. Furthermore, the leaflet’s text nowhere allows to cognize 'Ostrogothic ambiance'. As regards Dietrich’s expeller, locally titled van Armentriken, Heinzle remarks also the proverb collection of Johannes Agricola, follower and, for a certain period, close friend of Martin Luther. As being noted in this 'anthology' of 1523, the 'Franks under Ermentfrid had conquered the »Lombardy« whence they killed the Harlungen'.
 
Lower Saxon Historiography and the 'Annals'

Widukind of Corvey, 10th-century historiographer of the continental Saxons (Res gestae Saxonicae – Rerum Gestarum Saxonicarum libri tres), disagrees with some basic accounts and items on Gregory of Tours' versions. Relating the protagonists in the war between the Franks and the Thuringians, for instance, the Saxon historiographer conveys Thiadricus as an illegitimate son of Huga, rex Francorum, and recounts Amal(a)berga as the daughter of the latter. Furthermore, the source of the Saxon monk provides her as scheming spouse of Thuringian king Irminfridus. Widukind neither provides Clodoveus nor any related spelling form pointing satisfyingly to this name of Theuderic’s father whom, however, the author(ess) of the 'Annals' copied later from an obvious Frankish historiography.

Widukind’s version of this Frankish-Thuringian War, likely completed with a memorabilis fama, places emphasis on the nobleman Iring. He is serving the Thuringian couple as emissary in the escalating conflict with Thiadricus who finally makes Iring to kill the Thuringian king, cf. Gregory’s hist. III, 8. After reciting Iring’s assassination of Thiadric, however, Widukind instantly signalizes doubt on this version: si qua fides his dictis adhibeatur, penes lectorem est. Interestingly, Gregory relates that the rumor on Theuderic’s death became known even in Clermont [hist. III, 9].

Widukind remarks on the Frankish-Thuringian War that Theuderic regarded the Saxons socii quoque Francorum et amici (op. cit. ch.I , 13). Since Lower Saxon historiography provides Iring as contemporary of Frankish king Theuderic I, however, it seems unlikely that northern traditions were in dire need of transferring their protagonists Þidrek and Irung from any receptive Ostrogothic milieu. The author of the Annales Quedlinburgenses knows of an Iringus who accompanied Thuringian king Irminfridus, his spouse and sons on their escape from Schidinga. Obviously not interdependently, a passage in the manuscript De Origine Gentis Swevorum, 9 completes that Irminfridus fled to an 'Hunnic Attila', see quotations below.

The Quedlinburgian 'Annals' recite the father and brothers of Theuderic I = Hugo Theodoricus in accordance with a basic genealogy from Frankish historiography. Nonetheless, it seems noteworthy that the writer of the 'Annals' apparently accepted Widukind’s short dynastical ranking of Frankish kings with this ethnic explication:
 
Hugo Theodoricus iste dicitur, id est Francus, quia olim omnes Franci Hugones vocabantur a suo quodam duce Hugone (Annales Quedlinburgenses, MHG SS 3 [1839], p. 31).

As recorded at Quedlinburg, apparently after sending 'pro regni stabilitate' a message to King Irminfrid ad electionem suam Irminfridum regem Thuringorum honorifice invitavit, Theuderic appeared in Thuringiaon territory east of the Rhineas new authority and legitimate successor of Chlodoveus in A.D. 532. This dating, referring to rather an 'invading new king of our land', seems conceivable in so far. Interestingly, as regards the Frankish-Thuringian War breaking out about that time, these 'Annals' connect the meeting of this Theodericus with a chieftain of the Saxones, who came ashore somewhere at the historic landscape Hadeln (Hadalaon – an area of an HADALA on or Hadolaun in the meaning of fighting location?) for alliance, aid and territorial reward, with twelve of Theoderic’s noblest companions testifying with him as witnesses of oath:
 
Audiens autem Theodoricus Saxones, quorum iam fortitudo per totum pene divulgabatur mundum, in loco Hadalaon dicto applicuisse, in suum eos convocavit auxilium, promittens eis cum suo suorumque XII nobilissimorum iuramento, si Thuringos sibi adversantes vincerent...

The Quedlinburgian editor dates the death of a ruler known as 'Attila' into 6th century, recounting that 'a little girl, whom he had forcibly deported from her slain father, daggered him with a knife':
 
Attila, rex Hunorum et totius Europae terror, a puella quadam, quam a patre occiso vi rapuit, cultello perfossus, interiit.

The 'Annals' provide this text straight before Iustinus minor imperator annis XI regnavit, likely or presumably on miscounting the imperial periods up to Justin I and his successor Justinian I, whilst Matthias Springer, possibly taking the De Origine Gentis Swevorum, 9 into consideration, likes to recognize the Quedlinburgian writer errorneously placing Attila’s death into the imperial period of the latter, Die Sachsen, 2004, p. 92. Did the editor of the 'Annals' actually have no idea of the circumstances of death of that most impressing 5th-century ruler of the eastern Huns? The passages contextually quoted from Jordanes' Getica (49, 254; 'Ildico'), Poeta Saxo (G. Caroli III, 17, 26–34) appear less compelling for a solid receptive pattern serving for the note about Attila’s death written at Quedlinburg.

Rather, this account provided by the 'Annals' seems to be based on confusion caused by a tradition on another milieu of 'Attila'. This context might be indicating at least an unclarified problem of 'source and transmission' – albeit the Poeta Saxo’s version seems preferable for those analysts who accept the pattern that the queen herself assassinated the king in order to revenge her father’s death.

Martina Giese argues onto problem of the Quedlinburgian reception of 'Attila’s death':
 
Unter allen historiographisch für Attila bezeugten Todesvarianten272 stehen diesem Satz der Annalen der Bericht des illyrischen Chronisten Marcellinus Comes († ca. 534)273 und das Gedicht des Poeta Saxo aus dem endenden 9. Jahrhundert am nächsten274, doch deckt keine der beiden Quellen alle Informationen der Quedlinburger Annalen ab275. Während durch Übernahmen im annalistischen Teil gesichert ist, daß die Annalistin die Gesta Caroli des Poeta Saxo gekannt hat276, liegen Berührungspunkte mit Marcellinus' Chronik in den Annalen sonst nicht vor. Gegen eine direkte Benutzung seines Werkes für die Schilderung von Attilas Ende spricht überdies die vergleichsweise geringe Verbreitung der Chronik um 1000277. Obwohl sich die Frage nicht zweifelsfrei entscheiden läßt, dürfte die Variante von Attilas Tod in den Annalen nach dem Vorbild der Gesta Caroli und auf Grund mündlicher Erzähltradition wiedergegeben sein278, auf die sich auch der Poeta Saxo explizit beruft279. Eine zusätzliche Benutzung von Marcellinus' Werk ist dagegen unwahrscheinlich.
 
272) Vgl. dazu DE BOOR, Attilabild S. 19–25.
273) Marcellinus Comes, Chronicon ad a. 454 (MGH Auct. ant. 11 S. 86 Z. 2–5): Attila rex Hunnorum Europa orbator provinciae noctu mulieris manu cultroque confoditur. quidam vero sanguinis reiectione necatum perhibent. Von der hier als Todesursache angebotenen Blutsturz-Variante findet sich in den Quedlinburger Annalen keine Spur. Zu Marcellinus Comes und seinem Werk vgl. Brian CROKE, Count Marcellinus and his Chronicle (2001).
274) Poeta Saxo, Gesta Caroli III, 26–34 (MGH Poetae 4, 1 S. 31): [...] rex donec eorum / Attila, multorum totiens victor populorum, / Feminea periit dextra sub Tartara trusus. / Namque ferunt, quod cum vino somnoque gravatum, / Cum nox omnigenis animantibus alta quietem / Suggereret, coeptis crudelibus effera conjunx / Ducens insomnes odiis stimulantibus umbras, / Horrendo regem regina peremerit ausu; / Ultra necem proprii tamen est hoc crimine patris. Siehe zu dieser Quelle insgesamt unten S. 168. Die Ähnlichkeit der in den Annales Quedlinburgenses überlieferten Todesvariante mit derjenigen der Gesta Caroli zeigten auf:  HÜFFER, Studien S. 69;  SIMSON, Exkurs III, in: ABEL / SIMSON, Jahrbücher 5, 2  S. 592 mit Anm. 7. Vgl. auch DE BOOR, Attilabild S. 22. In Unkenntnis dieser Studie und ohne auf die Annales Quedlinburgenses einzugehen, analysierte die betreffenden Verse des Poeta Saxo BOHNE, Poeta S. 34–37. Diese Studien, mit Ausnahme derjenigen de Boors, ignorierte HAUBRICHS, Heldensage S. 185 f. Zu Attilas Tod in den Annalen vgl. auch WEDDIGE, Heldensage S. 100.
275) Von einem Messer als Mordwaffe weiß der Poeta Saxo nichts, er hält die Mörderin für Attilas Frau, während die Quedlinburgerin von puella quaedam spricht. Auch zur gewalttätigen Komponente (vi rapuit) der Annalen fehlt eine Parallele beim Poeta. Gemeinsam ist beiden das Wissen um den von Attila verschuldeten Tod des Vaters der Täterin. Bei Marcellinus fehlt eine Entsprechung zu den Angaben im Relativsatz der Annalen (S. 415 Z. 2: quam – rapuit).
276) Siehe unten S. 167 ff.
277) Vgl. die Auflistung der Handschriften von Brian CROKE, The Chronicle of Marcellinus. A Translation and Commentary (with a reproduction of Mommsen’s edition of the text) (Australian Association for Byzantine Studies. Byzantina Australiensia 7, 1995) S. XXVI, darunter als früheste Handschriften nur ein Codex des 6. und lediglich zwei Codices des 11. Jahrhunderts. HAUBRICHS, Heldensage S. 185 behauptet ohne Belege, die Chronik des Marcellinus sei „im Westen durchaus verbreitet“ gewesen, S. 177 Anm. 31, S. 183, 185 und 198 nimmt er die Chronik des Marcellinus als Vorlage für den Satz über Attilas Tod in den Annalen in Anspruch.
278) Im Unterschied zu HAUBRICHS, Heldensage S. 186, halte ich die sprachlichen Unterschiede beider Versionen angesichts der aus der Versform der Gesta resultierenden Formulierungszwänge nicht für ein zugkräftiges Argument gegen eine Textabhängigkeit.
279) Poeta Saxo, Gesta Caroli III, 17 und 29 (S. 31): Sic veteres memorare solent [...] / Namque ferunt [...].


[Transl.: Among all the variants of death being historiographically attested to Attila272, the closest to the annals' account are the report of the Illyrian chronicler Marcellinus Comes († c. 534)273 and Poeta Saxo’s poem274 of the ending 9th century, but none of the two sources reveals all information given by the Quedlinburgian annals.275 Since it is ascertained by receptions in the annalistic part that the annalist knew the Gesta Caroli of the Poeta Saxo276, there are no meeting points with Marcellinus' chronicle in the annals. The comparatively small circulation of the chronicle about 1000277 contradicts a direct use of his work for the presentation of Attila’s end. Although the question can not be decided without doubt, the variant of Attila’s death in the annals might follow the pattern of the Gesta Caroli and oral tradition278 to which the Poeta Saxo explicitly refers279. An additional use of Marcellinus' work, on the other hand, is unlikely.
 
272) On this item cf. DE BOOR, Attilabild pp. 19–25.
273) Marcellinus Comes, Chronicon ad a. 454 (MGH Auct. ant. 11 p. 86  l. 2–5):
Attila rex Hunnorum Europa orbator provinciae noctu mulieris manu cultroque confoditur. quidam vero sanguinis reiectione necatum perhibent. There is no trace in the Quedlinburgian annals of the cortical variant offered here as cause of death. On Marcellinus Comes and his work cf. Brian CROKE, Count Marcellinus and his Chronicle (2001).
274) Poeta Saxo, Gesta Caroli III, 26–34 (MGH Poetae 4, 1 p. 31): [...] rex donec eorum / Attila, multorum totiens victor populorum, / Feminea periit dextra sub Tartara trusus. / Namque ferunt, quod cum vino somnoque gravatum, / Cum nox omnigenis animantibus alta quietem / Suggereret, coeptis crudelibus effera conjunx / Ducens insomnes odiis stimulantibus umbras, / Horrendo regem regina peremerit ausu; / Ultra necem proprii tamen est hoc crimine patris. Cf. in all on this source p. 168 below. The similarity of the variant of death given by the Annales Quedlinburgenses with that of the Gesta Caroli show: HÜFFER, Studien, p. 69; SIMSON, Exkurs III, in: ABEL / SIMSON, Jahrbücher 5, 2  p. 592 with note 7. Cf. also DE BOOR, Attilabild p. 22. Ignoring this study and without referring to the Annales Quedlinburgenses, the relevant verses of Poeta Saxo were analyzed by BOHNE, Poeta, pp. 34–37. These studies, with the exception of those of de Boor, ignored HAUBRICHS, Heldensage, p. 185f. On Attila’s death in the Annals cf. also WEDDIGE, Heldensage, p. 100.
275) The Poeta Saxo does not know of a knife as the murder weapon, he regards the murderer to be Attila’s spouse, whereas the Quedlinburgian nun speaks of puella quaedam. There is also a parallel at the Poeta to the violent component (vi rapuit) of the annals. Both know that Attila caused the death of the father of the committer. Marcellinus lacks a correspondence with the statements in the relative clause of the annals, p. 415  l. 2: quam – rapuit.
276) See below p. 167f.
277) Cf. the list of manuscripts by Brian CROKE, The Chronicle of Marcellinus. A translation and commentary with a reproduction of Mommsen’s edition of the text, in: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, Byzantina Australiensia 7, 1995, p. XXVI, including the earliest manuscripts which are only one code of the 6th and only two codices of the 11th century. HAUBRICH, Heldensage, p. 185, maintains without evidence that the Chronicle of Marcellinus was "widespread in the West", p. 177 note 31. On p. 183, 185 and 198 he claims the chronicle of Marcellinus as a model for the sentence on Attila’s death in the annals.
278) In distinction to HAUBRICHS, Heldensage, p. 186, I do not estimate the linguistic differences between the two versions as a compelling argument against the dependence of the text in view of the forced formulation resulting from the verse form of the Gesta.
279) Poeta Saxo, Gesta Caroli III, 17 & 29 (p. 31): Sic veteres memorare solent [...] / Namque ferunt [...].  ]
 
Martina Giese, Die Annales Quedlinburgenses. Doctoral thesis, Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, 1999. Reprint at Hanover 2004, quot. pgs 109–111. Review (en.): http://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/tmr/article/view/16073/22191 (retrieved July 2015).
 
The approximate position of 'Attila' in the timeline of these 'Annals' does not contradict the 12th- or 13th-century account titled De Origine Gentis Swevorum (cf. farther below) whose author provides this ruler as an important contemporary of Thuringian king Irminfrid.

Martina Giese reconfirms the conclusion of newer research that some 'Ostrogothic interpolation' in(to) the 'Annals' does not seem genuine in a closer context of historical and/or editorial authenticity. Thus, this very passage seems to be a later edit (op. cit. pgs 370–372):
 
Amulung Theoderic dicitur, proavus suus Amul vocabatur, qui Gothorum potissimus censebatur. Et iste fuit Thideric de Berne, de quo cantabant rustici olim.
 
Regarding the Frankish-Thuringian War, the 'Annals' localize at least three battles between the rivers Weser and Unstrut. The places Maerstem and Arhen, modernly identified with e.g. 'Marstem at Hanover' and 'Ohrum on the Oker', are also mentioned in the accounts about the Saxon campaigns of Charlemagne. The texts written at Quedlinburg do not relate the battle between Thiadric and Irminfrid on location called Runibergun by Widukind – either Ronnenberg at Hanover, region of Marstem or, less likely, Ronneberge at Nebra. It should be further annotated that Widukind’s urbe quae dicitur Scithingi does reappear in the 'Annals' as the important place of siege and conquest (Schidinga). However, its contextual fortification cannot be proved as a contemporary venue for archaeo-chronological reasons if equated with the ground area of the pre-Carolingian foundation of the castle at Burgscheidungen on the Unstrut; notably M. Springer (op. cit.) quoting Erika Schmidt-Thielbeer, Burgscheidungen, in: Handbuch der historischen Stätten Deutschlands Bd. II, Stuttgart 1987, p. 62. The author at Quedlinburg connects this obvious place with Irminfridus autem cum uxore et filiis et uno milite Iringo nomine capta a Saxonibus noctu civitate Schidinga, qua se concluserat, vix evasit. He (or she) situates the decisive battle, now with Saxons aiding the Franks, somewhere on the Unstrut.

The Quedlinburgian chronicler nonetheless provides an amalgamation of obvious divergent spatiotemporal traditions about figures representing or equated with 'Theodericus', 'Attila', 'Odoacrus' and 'Ermanricus': After the death of his only son 'Fridericus', the latter hangs his relatives 'Embrica' and 'Fritla' (who are first mentioned by the Widsith as 'Emerca' and 'Fritla'). Then, on the incitement of his relative 'Odoacrus', he forced his other relative Theoderic, after he was expelled from 'Verona', to go into exile at an 'Attila' whose regnal right of disposal rather includes the Harz. The interrelated passage reads as follows:
 

1. Eo tempore Ermanricus ... qui post mortem Friderici, unici filii sui, sua perpetrata voluntate patrueles suos, Embricam et Fritlam (= 'Herlungos') patibulo suspendit. Theodericum similiter, patruelum suum, instimulante Odoacro patruele suo de  Verona  pulsum apud  Attilam  exulare coegit ...

2. Theodoricus Attilae regis auxilio in regnum Gothorum reductus, suum patruelem Odoacrum in Ravenna civitate expugnatum interveniente Attila, ne occideretur, exilio deputatum paucis villis iuxta confluentiam Albiae et Salae fluminum donavit.
 
Excerpt 2 is situated between datings related to second half of 5th and first quarter of 6th century!

However, it seems worth mentioning that Gregory of Tours knows of an explicit Saxon chieftain called 'Adovacrius', 'Odovacario' at hist. II, 18 in the Leiden MS, acting in Gaul on the Loire between A.D. 460 and 470. The scribe of the lines being quoted above has apparently mixed Ostrogothic with eastern Frankish or local history. He (or she) does not relate that the northern 'Odoacer' was killed by 'Theoderic', since an obvious second 'Attila', ruler of a Lower German(ic) territory and supporting contemporary of this 'Theoderic', donated property on the confluence of the Elbe and Saale rivers to the former. However, this second Attila must not necessarily be forwarded anachronistically by the Ottonian scribe, nor this Theoderic be the Ostrogothic king. Rather, we can start from the premise that a second northern 'Attila–Theoderic'-account of history, at least of oral tradition, had caused confusion among this chronicler.

Not attaching relevance to the texts written at Quedlinburg, Ritter identifies King Atala’s mighty sister in the Harz mountains by means of the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts. Furthermore, acknowledged history does not provide the Ostrogothic but rather Frankish Theodericus as king of lands on the Lower Moselle (→ Gransport, 'Rauenthal') and, thereafter, temporary authority over Saxon or Thuringian territory where the Quedlinburgian scribe identifies an Odoacrus of Migration Period. Regarding the possibility of related names on German territories, Reinhard Wenskus quotes e.g. a 'Middle Rhenish' Otacarus in connection with an Irminfrid comes from the Traditiones et antiquitates Fuldenses (ed. by E.F.J. Dronke 1844) and, inter alia, an early 10th-century Odocar whom Ulrich Nonn (Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 42, 1978, pgs 52–62) suggests as father of Widricus, comes palatii of Charlemagne. (Reinhard Wenskus, Der ‘hunnische’ Siegfried. Fragen eines Historikers an den Germanisten, in: Heiko Uecker, Studien zum Altgermanischen. Festschrift für Heinrich Beck, Walter de Gruyter 1994, p. 715.)

Slashing Iring’s rôle colported by Widukind, the 'Annals' are forwarding a more brief version of Widukind’s tradition on Amalberga’s and Irminfrid’s incitement leading to Theuderic’s military expedition. The core of this narration knows even the author of De Origine Gentis Swevorum, but this tradition as well as the 'Annals' do not convey the death of the Frankish king. Regarding the Frankish-Thuringian War, Matthias Springer reviews the scribe, 'scribess' or scribes at Quedlinburg by this general assessment:
 
Die Arbeitsweise des Quedlinburger Verfassers ähnelt durchaus der eines neuzeitlichen Historikers. Da er aus dem „Buch der fränkischen Geschichte“ wusste, wo Irminfrid den Tod gefunden hatte, wird er Widukind's lange Erzählung von Iring für eine „Sage“ gehalten haben, zumal der Corveyer Mönch selber die Schilderung als kaum glaubwürdig bezeichnet hatte. (Op. cit. p. 93.)
 
[Transl.:  The operating principle of the author at Quedlinburg might resemble well that of a modern historian. Since he knew from the 'Book of Frankish History' where Irminfrid met his death, he might have estimated the long story of Iring as a legend, the more so as the monk of Corvey himself had been qualifying this narration as barely credible.]

Rudolf of Fulda, 9th-century historiographer who most likely represents an important source of Widukind, writes on Frankish-Thuringian War that Thiotricus rex Francorum could only overthrow the Thuringians with aid by obvious 'Anglo-Saxons' under their leader Hadugoto (Translatio Sancti Alexandri, auctoribus Ruodolfo et Meginharto). Adam of Bremen, another German historiographer of 11th century, basically conveys Rudolf’s version (Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum, ch. III).

It seems not unproblematic to except definitely any involvement of Anglo-Saxon mercenaries and/or 'true Saxons' north or north-west of the Thuringians in this war. The participation of sailing forces 'Saxones ex gente Anglorum', provided at first by Rudolf and thereafter re-introduced by Widukind and the 'Annals', has been challenged to detect as fiction, notably Richard Drögereit concluding in the last recital »Rudolf zeugte die Fabel, Widukind zog sie mit Liebe groß«. (Die sächsische Stammessage, in: Niedersächsisches Jahrbuch für Landesgeschichte 26, 1954, see p. 197; id., Die „Sächsische Stammessage. Überlieferung, Benutzung und Entstehung, in: Stader Jahrbuch Ser. NF, Bd. 63, 1973, pgs 7–58.)
 
Possibly serving for narrative motif and solution in this apparently blurry context, Martin Lintzel remembers Procopius (History of the Wars, Gothic Wars, VIII, xx, 6) who knows of Anglo-Saxons (people of 'Brittia' = 'Angili, Frissones, Brittones') emigrating back to less populated territory of the Franks (M. Lintzel, Zur Enstehungsgeschichte des sächsischen Stammes, in: Sachsen und Anhalt 3, 1927, pgs 1–46, see fn. 132). With further connotation basically agreeing: Reinhard Wenskus, Sachsen – Angelsachsen – Thüringer, in: Walther Lammers (Ed.), Entstehung und Verfassung des Sachsenstammes, Darmstadt 1967, pgs 483–545, see p. 520f.
 
Richard Drögereit and Matthias Springer (op. cit. pgs 75–89) strongly reject a believable 'migration-and-origin tradition' of the Saxons which is somewhat echoed by the eldest trio of Rudolf of Fulda, Widukind of Corvey and the 'Annals'. While Drögereit does basically follow Sigurd Graf von Pfeil (Die Sachsensage bei Widukind von Corvey, Göttingen 1968, p. 46), Hilkert Weddige might resume the disparate scholarly opinions with this compromise (Heldensage und Stammessage, Tübingen 1989, p. 39):
 
Hathagat und die mit ihm verbundenen kultischen Elemente werden wohl autochthon-altsächsischer Überlieferung entstammen, während das Eingreifen der Sachsen in den Thüringerkrieg auf Grund eines fränkischen Hilfegesuchs sowohl auf einem realhistorischen Faktum als auch auf einem literarischem Schema beruhen kann.
 
[Transl.:  Hathagat and the cultic elements being connected with him might be derived from an autochthonous Old Saxon tradition, while the intervention of the Saxons into the Thuringian war on Frankish request of help can be based on an actual historical fact as well as a literary scheme.]

How reliable is Gregory of Tours ?

A page of a mediaeval transcription of a vellum
written by Gregory.
Gregory apparently put forward unsatisfactory information about Theuderic’s descent and vita. On the one hand, he considers him well as pre-eminent son of Clovis, but on the other, he would not satisfyingly recite a supporting scale of examples. The more we closely follow Gregory to Clovis and Theuderic, the more queries we get. Nonetheless, it seems plausible that the mightiest Frankish king kept an eye on the young designated king of an important eastern kingdom between the Meuse and the Rhine. Yet, Gregory actually appears credible in this case if he calls Clovis at least the political foster-father of Theuderic.

In general, there is sound criticism of Gregory’s attitude of rendering history by ignoring or misrepresenting history among scholars who have been contributing to the prevailing scholarly opinion; see, for instance, Ian N. Wood, Walter A. Goffart, Matthias Springer, Georg Scheibelreiter.

The historiographical dilemma of 5th to 6th century naturally encompasses the family of Chlodio, head of a Frankish dynasty in the very dark shadow of Gregory’s brightly shining early Merovings, and Albero of Mons (420–491) whom Emil Rückert, German philologist and historian of 19th century, cites as Chlodio’s most influential son and brother-in-law of Theoderic the Great – a fact that obviously forbids to underrate the historical position of that 'Auberon' or any of his close kinsmen, cf. The Geography and History of Mons translated by John Mack Gregory at THE HARLEIAN MISCELLANY XI http://books.google.de/books?id=Qh0wAAAAYAAJ (retrieved Oct. 2010). Rückert identifies Frankish King Clodio as grandfather of Audefleda by means of other local tradition, and he compares genealogical information about the early Merovings also with the records of Jordanes. He is known as less chronological writer of a Gothic historia that conveys Frankish King Lodoin (cf. 'cLodio') as her father who, however, cannot be verified easily as Childeric or Clovis for spelling derivation related to Lodoin’s sons Celdebert, Heldebert, Thiudebert as provided by the historian of the Goths. Thus, Jordanes forwarded apparently confusing context of Frankish kings offspring.

Following the research of Emil Rückert, Albero’s relative Theoderic was called out King of the East Goths at that very time when Þiðrek was born according to Ritter’s timeline – a correlation that seems to substantiate Theoderic as Þiðrek’s eponymist. Nonetheless, there seems to be a trail from C(h)lodio’s son Albero to the ownership of Samson castle through old telling on Brabant and 'Hannonia', cf. Die Nibelungen – Dichtung und Wahrheit, Münster 2005, quoting from Rückert’s source research.

The author remarks at endnote 22 of his article Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici, catalogued at the National German Library DNB:
 
Zumindest finden wir im Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, Bd. 30 (2005), unter Theuderich I.  (S. 459–463) die völlig zurecht formulierte Quellenkritik, dass Gregor von Tours behauptet, T.s Mutter sei nur eine Beischläferin (concubina) Chlodwigs I. gewesen (S. 460). Dort heißt es weiter über diesen Theuderich (S. 459), dass er vor 484 geboren sein soll und die erste Tat aus T.s. Leben, von der wir wissen sein nach 507 im Auftrag Chlodwigs I. unternommener südgallischer Feldzug war (S. 461). Nachdem Theuderichs Sohn Theudebert eine „Däneninvasion“ im väterlichen Auftrag zurückgeworfen haben soll, spätestens 520 – nach Chlodwigs Tod –, dokumentiert Gregor von Tours erstmals die monarchische Autorität Theuderichs aus der Kölner aula regia. Für die Interpretation von Vertreibung, Exil und Rückeroberungsberichten der Thidrekssaga ist also keineswegs ausgeschlossen, dass deren Protagonist Theuderich in einem Machtkonflikt unterlag, welcher entweder Konsequenzen aus seinem südgallischen Zug von 507/508 nach sich zog oder einen paternalen/maternalen und damit auch rheinische Gebiete tangierenden Erbrecht-Streit betroffen haben konnte. So, wie im subjektiv-subtilen Vorstellungskomplex ein scheinbar verlässlicher fränkischer Historiograf die Mutter Theuderichs bewusst verkannt haben mag, durfte dessen Vater von einem nicht minder verzerrenden mediävalhistoriografischen Konzept – das aus niederdeutschem Traditionspatriotismus nicht weniger als die Tilgung des primus rex Francorum der Lex Salica ausmachen konnte – mit einer in der Thidrekssaga überlieferten Ersatzgestalt unkenntlich gemacht werden.
 
[Transl.:  The author of the article  Theuderich I.  in the  Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, RGA 30 (2005), pgs 459–463, rightly issued: Gregory of Tours claims that the mother of T. was just a concubine of Clovis I (p. 460). Furthermore, the encyclopaedist states op. cit. p. 459 that Theuderic is supposed to have been born before 484 and the first deed of T. we know of was a campaign to South Gaul after 507 on behalf of Clovis I (p. 461). After Theuderic’s son Theodebert I repulsed a 'Danish invasion' by order of his father, not after 520 but certainly after the death of Clovis, Gregory of Tours begins to document the first appearance of Theuderic as royal authority at the aula regia of Cologne. [Rem.: Between 520 and 525, he was already aged at least between 36 and 41!] Comparatively regarding the interpretation of humiliation, exile and reconquests related by the Þiðreks saga, it is certainly not out of the question that its protagonist Theuderic had to bear consequences of either his South Gaul campaign (507/508) or an hereditary conflict with a kinsman of his paternal or maternal line about territory even on the Rhine. When an apparently reliable but nonetheless subjective and subtle Frankish historiographer seems to have intentionally misjudged Theuderic’s mother, the mediaeval historiographical concept of a patriotic Lower German history could have faded out nothing less than the primus rex Francorum of the Lex Salica in order to make Theuderic’s father unidentifiable with a placeholder who could appear then in the Þiðreks saga.]

It may seem flashy that Þiðrek’s father is named after Gregory’s 'first known' rex Francorum whom he provides as Theudemar/Theudomer, as Eugen Ewig remarks well this ranking by disregarding Theudemar’s father Richimer [Gregory’s hist. II, 9] and Ostrogothic genealogy, cf. Trojamythos und fränkische Frühgeschichte, RGA 19 (1998), p. 14. The Guðrúnarkviða III (þriðja) consequently calls Þioþrecr’s father Þioþmar, a correlation which has been so gushily regarded as an evidential reflection of only an Ostrogothic pattern. As already annotated, the name of Þiðrek’s grandfather Samson does also appear in Merovingian genealogy [Gregory’s hist. V, 22].

The Þiðreks saga conveys at Mb 6 an obvious mighty ruler Þetmar whom the Icelandic MS A specifies as Þiðrek’s great-grandfather, whereas the scribes of both the eldest vellum manuscript and MS B ascribe him to a great-uncle of Þiðrek’s father; cf. recursively Mb 9. Since Þiðrek’s father Þetmar II died apparently young, cf. chronologically Mb 12, Mb 131, we should not discard the possibility that another close and mighty kinsman of him was historiographically supposed to be the father of Þiðrek. This alternative option, apart from nothing more than a potential interpolation with either the Ostrogothic Theodemir or, more likely, an early Frankish offspring named after Gregory’s 'first known' rex Francorum, may even appear as a rough literary approximation related to the descendance both Þiðrek – Ermenrik and, finally 'historically', Theuderic – Clovis.

Regarding reliable genealogical information about Frankish kings of times until the second half of 5th century, we only can say that Gregory left nothing more than assumption.

Chlodio and Hlǫðr in northern Húnaland

More noteworthy onto the likelihood of the northern geographical environment of Eormenric the 'Gaulish' Gotan, appearing as a candidate for the identification with Clovis I, might be the article Der ‘hunnische’ Siegfried ... (op. cit.) by Reinhard Wenskus, an author of the RGA
 
First, Wenskus reviews briefly Otto Höfler’s publication Siegfried, Arminius und die Symbolik (Heidelberg 1961, p. 13). The former argrues that Sigurð’s geographic apposition hunskr, as provided by Sigurðarkviða hin skamma (The Short Lay of Sigurð) and the Atlamál hin groenlenzku (The Greenlandish Lay of Atli), would hardly ascribe the hero’s roots to South-East Europe but rather North-German(ic) Hunaland. Second, Wenskus recognizes an eye-catching frequentness of Middle Rhenish location names with forms related to 'A(-)mal', '-mal', '-mael', '-mall'. This observation was afterwards significantly substantiated by Otto K. Schmich, Hünen, Viöl 1999 (ISBN 3-932878-01-9), p. 240, who gives credit i.a. to J. M. Watterich, Die Germanen des Rheins... Leipzig 1872, p. 230. Schmich supplements remarkably with related names of hydronyms. Both authors discern these outstandingly appearing names of locations and watercourses in the area between the Middle + Lower Rhine and the Meuse, as this perception will be combined later.

According to Wenskus' approach we should not disregard the potential literary confusion of this 'Gaulish' with 'Gothic' territory and, therefore, not disrespect that in the Migration Period (the narrative 'horizon of event') Nordic tradition could have associated the latter with rather the Gaulish kingdom of Clovis I and his predecessors than the Italian or south-eastern region on the Tisza. Reinspecting under this fundamental aspect the Hlǫðskviða (The Battle of the Goths and Huns), Wenskus considers Árheimar as the Arnhem of the later Netherlands as one important location of the North Gaulish 'Goths'.(12) Furthermore, Wenskus takes critically account of Helmut Humbach’s article on the geographical names in the Old Icelandic 'Lay of the Battle of the Goths and Huns': Die geografischen Namen des altisländischen Hunnenschlachtliedes, Germania 47, 1969, pgs 145–162. As insinuated by Wenskus, the message of this discourse is of altogether missing persuasiveness in so far as it proceeds from an original south-eastern core around the Black Sea but not Hunaland around the later German Westphalia, as, for instance, explicitly determined by the Þiðreks saga and the Old Swedish manuscripts. Regarding a basic interfigural recognition in this more authenic appearing area – seemingly not far from an 'Amal-Gothic' land even for dynastic ancestral reasons, as apparently delineated by the Hervarar saga ok Heiðreks which includes the Hlǫðskviða – Wenskus advisably collocates its eminent Hlǫðr with C(h)lodio, one potential progenitor of the Salian Franks who lays an heritage-based claim to a north-eastern Gaulish region which appears closely related with Húnaland. Furthermore, it seems not inappropriate to remember at this juncture that Isidore of Seville has already combined this ethnic and etymologic relationship (Etymologiae IX, II, 66):
 
Hugnos antea Hunnos vocatos, postremo a rege suo Avares appellatos ...
[The Hugni (apparently more likely: Hugas), previously called the Huns, finally called Avars by their king ...]
 
The Hugas have been scholastically identified with the Chauci, since this tribe seems partially connectable not only with 'northern Hunaland' but also the 'Origo gentis' of the Franks, cf. on the latter RGA 22 (2003) p. 189f. (Translation).

The Hlǫðskviða begins with this statement:
 
Hlǫðr var þar borinn í Húnalandi
[Hlǫðr was born there in Hunaland.]

The complex geography of this Nordic tradition has been remarkably reinspected by Edo Wilbert Oostebrink, De Hunenslag bij Groningen – Die Hunenschlacht bei Groningen, Delft 2012 (ISBN 978-90-818901-0-6), pgs 15–28 resp. 59–72. (German version reread by Kees van Eunen, Dieter Geuenich, Ingo Hansen.)
 
The Þiðreks saga (Mb 39→), the Old Swedish version (Sv 33→) and Suffridus Petrus (op. cit.) seem to continue this heroic lay with Frisian counterattacks against an old weakening Hunalandish king called Melias by the Old Norse + Swedish texts which relate that he had no son for heir. He was possibly a relative of Humli or someone of his successors. Incidentally, Wenskus proposes the last Sugambric chief Maelo, who caused a heavy defeat to the Romans, as eponymist of the Hunalandish Melias who should be taken into consideration as predecessor of an Eadgils–Adgils–Athils (see farther below). Melias' obvious residence Susat was finally conquered by the Frisian prince Atala, as localized by the Old Norse + Swedish texts and dated between A.D. 450 and 470 by Ritter, while Suffridus mentions a Frisiorum dux Odilbaldus; see below Ferdinand Holthausen and Willi Eggers. His his potential short name 'Odilo' might comply with an etymological consideration by Wenskus who, in an independent context, regards closely related name forms 'Otilo, Uatalo' even by Upper German texts of 7th–8th century (op. cit. p. 708).

Theuderic I or Þiðrek of Bern: »King of Bonn«

Theuderic might have known parts of regions called later Ripuaria and Austrasia already before the death of King Clovis I. Although Gregory of Tours is remarkably focussing on Clovis' vita, the appearance of this king was reported hardly ever on territory between the Meuse and the Rhine. Thus, we further may imagine that Theuderic, not only in mission for Clovis, kept an eye on the largest metropolis on the Rhine: the former Roman Colonia with adjoining Bonn, the ecclesiastical-based Lower German Verona on the Rhine.

After the death of King Sigebert of Cologne Gregory remarks Theuderic c. 523 at the aula regia of this metropolis. Since there is a 'rhyme-chronicler’s tradition' of 13th century strongly connecting Bern with Bonn »by Bunna, dat heisz man dô Berne«,(13) we should not repudiate that another but lost historical source could have mentioned Theuderic or Þiðrek of Bern emphatically appearing there. Furthermore, as regards Gregory’s report [Liber Vitae Patrum VI, 2] and the ecclesiastical history of Lower German Verona – Bern, it would not seem inconsistent that the Roman based nickname BABI–LONIA (cf. below en. 15), its obvious large area contextually to reason as second name of Theuderic’s later residence CO–LONIA, was given up after formative Christian missions on this eminent location. Regarding Gregory’s demonstrative and believable words in this connection, the first and very remarkable 6th-century mission was undertaken by this Franco-Rhenish king in a region which Ritter called Berner Reich.

VARNENUM + C.C.A.A.
DEO VARNENONI
M(ARCUS[?]) FUCISSIUS SECUND
DUS SEXVIRALIS AUG
USTORUM C(OLONIA) C(LAUDIA) A(RA) A(GRIPPINENSIUM)
VOTUM SOLVIT

Museum Burg Frankenberg, Aachen. Cat. No. 27, formerly No. 188.
Interpretative supplements put in brackets by W. M. Koch.
TABULA ANSATA, found at archaeological explorations of VARNENUM between 1907 and 1924, connotes well the cultural and worshipping influence of this location on Roman Cologne (C.C.A.A.), while VERONA appears to be connected thereafter with adjacent Bonn in Christian times.

Inscription quoted from

Wilfried M. Koch, Führer zur römischen Abteilung des Museums Burg Frankenberg, 1986, p. 16.

Erich Gose, Der Tempelbezirk von Cornelimünster in:
Bonner Jahrbücher 155-156, 1955-1956, p. 170.


The special connectedness of 'VARNE' with the C.C.A.A. has been estimated by Wilfried M. Koch who explains the text on this tabula as follows:
 
Hier hat M. Fucissius Secundus aus dem Sechsmännerkolleg der Stadt Köln (Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium) sein Gelübde an Varneno mit Freude erfüllt.
Er gehört zu den Sevir Augustalis, die in der Stadt den Kaiserkult vertreten. Er zählt damit zu den hohen Würdenträgern der Stadt. Die Schenkung erhält damit eine größere Bedeutung, ohne daß sie genauer bestimmt werden kann. Die Tabula war früher zusammenklappbar, jetzt in der Mitte gebrochen.

(Op. cit. p. 16.)

[Transl.: As shown here, M. Fucissius Secundus, of the Six-Men-League of the City of Cologne (Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium), has fulfilled his oath to Varneno with joy.
He belongs to the Sevir Augustalis who represent the Imperial Cult in the city. He is thus one of the city’s high dignitaries. Hence, the donation is of greater significance, albeit this cannot be determined more precisely. The tabula, now broken in the middle, was originally foldable.]


Furthermore, as regards an exemplary relationship between the eminent place of worshipping 'VARNE' and the C.C.A.A. in Roman times, Wilfried M. Koch quotes i.a. recursively from the review of previous explorations written by the archaeologist Erich Gose (op. cit. p. 171). In context with the tabula ansata shown above, the aforesaid dignitary seems to reappear on another bronze plate which was also found in the temple site of Varnenum. The inscription on this plate read by W. M. Koch is
 
(DE)AE SUNUXSAL
VO (?) CISSONIS
V(OTUM) S(OLVlT) L(IBENS) M(ERITO)

[Interpretative supplements put in brackets by W. M. Koch.]
 
Von der hier angesprochenen Göttin Sunuxsal (oder Sunuxal) wird angenommen, daß sie die Stammgottheit der SUNUCI war, deren Hauptsitz daher im Aachener Gebiet vermutet wird. Von den SUNUCI ist bisher wenig bekannt, sie dürften als befriedeter gallischer Stamm im Gebiet zwischen Aachen und Tolbiacum/ Zülpich gewohnt haben. Die schwer verständliche Lesung kann ggf. dahin ergänzt werden, daß hier ein Familienmitglied der auf der Inschrift Kat. Nr. 27 genannten Familie Fucissius (= CISSONIS) aus Köln sein Gelübde an die Göttin Sunuxsal (= DEAE SUNUXSAL) mit Freude erfüllte (= VOTUM SOLVIT LIBENS MERITO).
(W. M. Koch op. cit. p. 16.)

[Transl.: The goddess Sunuxsal (or Sunuxal), as mentioned here, is assumed to be the main deity of the SUNUCI (Sunici), whose seat thus may be presumed in the Aachen region. So far as little is known about the SUNUCI, they may have lived as a pacified Gallic tribe in the area between Aachen and Tolbiacum / Zülpich. It seems possible to supplement the difficult reading with the meaning that a relative of the family Fucissius (= CISSONIS) of Cologne, mentioned on the inscription cat. No. 27, may have joyfully fulfilled his oath (= VOTUM SOLVIT LIBENS MERITO) to the goddess Sunuxsal (= DEAE SUNUXSAL).]


VERONA-BONN, 1280
VERONA NVNC OPIDI BVNNENSIS SIGILLV ANTIQUA
Seal of Bonn, 13th century.
Inventory pieces shown on the left & below:
Stadtarchiv und Wissenschaftliche Stadtbibliothek Bonn.
VERONA-BONN, 1575 VERONA, nunc Bonna, Communiter;
Bonn Oppidum Supra Coloniam Agrippinam, ad Rheni flumen, (...)

Detail from an engraving of 1575.

   
Regarding these spatial contexts, the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts seem to qualify the historical Franco-Rhenish and Old German profile of Dietrich von Bern. Although Ritter has only focused Verona nunc Bonna as the residential place of Þiðrek of Bern, in so far not regarding the catchment and commuting area between Aachen and the Rhine with its eminent cultural and economic significance since Roman times, he was apparently not committing a real faux pas of interpretation. Thus, with respect to the narrative dimension of Þiðrek’s or Theuderic’s large kingdom and action spaces, the literary difference or the scaled distance between this Verona and Varne(num) may appear rather infinitesimal.

With a view to the economic ranking of the Roman region of Aachen, Heinz Cüppers (op. cit. p. 12, fn. 46 ref. to H. Petrikovits) rates that the former existence of a remarkable sigillata pottery, district Schönforst, points to great economic importance as a significant market and trading place. He underlines his estimations also with large calamine deposits found at Breinig and Gressenich which suggest further processing and sales facilities.

The Varnenum cult site close to Breinig was presumably supplemented or replaced with another place of worshipping in the very centre of Aachen. Such 'central change' has been suggested and chronologized between 2nd and 3rd century by archaeological indications which have been considered by Wilfried M. Koch, Heinz Cüppers and other authors referring to the research of German LVR organization and elder explorations. This cult site, between today’s Aachen cathedral and the Büchel or Imperial baths, was built up at the beginning of the 2rd century and supplemented about a century later with porticoes, as the excavations brought to light this kind of an impressive arcaded colonnade architecture. Although the presence of the Sevir augustalis has been ascribed to also this location, the archaeologists found in its centre dedicatory inscriptions to only Mercurius Susurrion and Fortuna. Regarding settlement activities from 5th to 8th century which are basing on present excavations, however, there was neither considerable nor continuous occupation after massive destructions by Gaulish insurgents in 3rd and presumably even in 4th century; cf. Heinz Cüppers, Beiträge zur Geschichte des römischen Kur- und Badeortes Aachen; in: Aquae Granni, Beiträge zur Archäologie von Aachen (edition series Rheinische Ausgrabungen No. 22), Köln/Bonn 1982, see p. 14. Generally: RGA 1 (1973) pgs 1–3, see p. 1.
 
Roman Aquae Granni: Plan of centre.
 
The Roman Aquae Granni: Archaeological plan of its centre with the position of the later build cathedral. (Translated version.)
 
Names of modern places put in brackets.

Buildings on temple site supplemented with
H. Cüppers op. cit., Tafel 1.

Source file retrieved 2017-07-15.
The Key of Varnenum, cat. No. 29, Museum Burg Frankenberg:
 
»Der Griff des Schlüssels ist in Form eines Löwen gearbeitet.«
(W. M. Koch op. cit. p. 16.)
 
The lion corresponds with the heraldic animal of Dietrich von Bern.
The Key of Varne, cat. No. 29, Museum Burg Frankenberg.

The Old Norse manuscripts relate that the aged Þiðrek took a bath on a location which is known as 'Þiðrek’s Bath' (Mb 438), while the Old Swedish redactor additionally writes (Sv 382) that the king had to ride to this place which, however, has been never mentioned as an urban or residential location. Thus, it seems less likely that this bath belongs to his last known seat at Roma II = Trier on the Moselle. So we may rather think now of Aachen, prospectively the AQUIS VILLA, whose thermal springs were adorned with the equestrian statue of the Italian king Theoderic on behalf of Charlemagne, in so far appearing as the best narrative place where the prime author, inspired from a fantastical horse emerging in the garden of the bath and throwing a deep black shadow from the setting sun of the Frankish protagonist, could think out his allusively transformed epilogue with a hart whose precious crown represents the kingship uncatchable vanishing from the dying king.

Which are the dynasties of the eastern Franks of 5th century ?

The records about local Hannonian history cited by Emil Rückert interestingly allow to be seen that the Merovingian kings Meroveus and, subsequently, Childeric have tolerated Chlodio’s descendants to administrate obviously no other regions than partially those of today’s Netherlands and Belgium, and some Eiffel land between the Meuse and the Rhine. Early in the 6th century, however, the political status of Franco-Rhenish territory was insidiously challenged by Merovingian King Clovis who once had the right time to look over the lands beyond the Meuse and to engage the murderer(s) of King Sigebert of Cologne. Thereafter, as Gregory of Tours narrates, this region of unquestionable strategic importance was forwarded to a son of 'any heathen concubine' but not to any of King Clovis' legal sons!

Could a splendid planning Theuderic or Þiðrek, oath-breaker against Sigurð in a case of honour, take later revenge on his kinsman Ermenrik (cf. the 8th item above) without using an army of his own folk? Did one of them pretend beyond the Rhine to be still an expelled king, since one of them could not motivate Franks to fight against Franks? The Old Norse + Swedish scribes report on Þiðrek’s attack against Ermenrik at a place called Gransport to which he came with an army from King Atala.

Samson, the grandfather of Þiðrek as well as the German-Nordic spelled Salian location seem to be the key players. The records about the early Frankish history of Brabant and Hannonia let also raise the question whether Samson left 'Salerni' rather compulsorily as an important pioneer of a kingdom in an area that Gregory’s translator W. Giesebrecht and other historians have ascribed to 'Ripuaria'.(14)

Fort Samson (1)
Fort Samson (2)



Visitor Info Samson
The Roman fort of Samson is an exceptional ancient building in Salian region. The text on the left is photographic quotation from the visitor information board at Samson village.

Some authors raise the objection that narration by Þiðreks saga would not be related mainly to 5th century and first third of the next for the most part, rather taking dominating pattern from events of other periods. Regarding those Thetmars in Samson’s line to this item, we actually can find an earlier Frankish king who was spelled fairly identically with those Nordic Thetmars: King Theudemer de Thérouanne (374–414). Possibly semi-legendary, as some historian would judge him, he was noted as spouse of Blésinde de Cologne. Theudemer, titled magister militum in 383 and consul in 384, is mentioned by both Gregory and Fredegar as an early Frankish king, the predecessor of Chlodio by Gregory. Theudemer was supposedly congenial with Jovinus, Roman anti-emperor from 411 till 413, when he was captured and executed. Chlodio’s predecessor is believed to have shared the same fate with that Jovinus.

A spatiotemporal interrelation with Burgundians ?

Olympiodorus of Thebes recounts the Burgundian leader Guntiarius ('Gundahar') and Alan king Goar proclaiming Jovinus anti-emperor on location provided as Mundiacum, Мουνδιακω της ετερας Гερμανιας. However, some attentive researchers would not equate this geonym with Mogontiacum (Mainz, in the region of legendary Burgundy with its 'capital Worms' by the Nibelungenlied, thus in Germania superior), rather identify contextually the Mundiacum as a possible or more likely location in Germania inferior instead. Cf. for instance:
 
Julius R. Dieterich, Siegehard von Lorsch Der Dichter des Nibelungenlieds, Frankfurt & Darmstadt 1923.
Reiner Müller, Die Burgunden am Niederrhein 410–443, Jülich 1924.
J. P. C. Kent, Roman Imperial Coinage (RIC) X, p. 152.
R. C. Blockley (Ed.), The Fragmentary Classicising Historians of the Later Roman Empire. Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus. II: Text, Translation and Historiographical Notes, p. 216, ann. 46.
H. von Petrikovits (Ed.: F. Petri, G. Droege), Rheinische Geschichte 1,1, pgs 275 & 288.
F. J. Schweitzer, Die ältesten literarischen Quellen zum rheinischen Burgunderreich und das MUNDIACUM-Problem. Annalen des Historischen Vereins für den Niederrhein (AnnHVNdrh) 203 (2000), pgs 7–22.
S. Seibel, Typologische Untersuchungen zu den Usurpationen der Spätantike. Doctoral thesis, University of Duisburg-Essen 2004, p. 165.

Ritter has shown in both geographical and plausible strategical context of the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts that the Mundia, which he localizes in Germania inferior and very northern superior, covers residence location of the Niflungen in the inferior. However, he does not connect the gens Burgundionum, situated at Worms by Upper German poetry, with that of Niflungicarum, a tribe to be localized rather not far from the 'Niederrhein'. Hence, it seems superfluous to remark that the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts do not provide the Gibichungs in the Niflungar ancestry.

This literary and geographical relationship has been reviewed and not only not rejected but also estimated as historically more likely by Hans Georg Kirchhoff (University of Dortmund, em.); cf. an article on Kirchhoff’s public lecture whose core message has been estimated 'speculative but well-founded': Nibelungen und Burgunden am Niederrhein (2002).

The RGA 22 (2003) states on the 'Origo gentis' of the gens Burgundionum, p. 195:
 
Im Unterschied zu anderen gentes der VWZ sind die → Burgunden in den Qu. schon im 1. Jh. n. Chr. durch → Plinius bezeugt (44, 4,14; 171, 49. 231), wo sie zu den → Wandalen gerechnet werden. Ebenso werden sie von → Ptolemaeus (48, II, 11,8) erwähnt, der sie zw. Oder und Weichsel lokalisiert. Woher sie urspr. kamen, ist unklar. Eine skand. Herkunft der gens spielt erst in späteren Traditionen eine Rolle und konnte auch arch. nicht nachgewiesen werden (→ Bornholm S. 312).
    Aus schriftlichen Qu. sind uns weder eine frühe OG noch andere Herkunftsmythen überliefert, die als burg. Traditionen gesehen werden könnten. Wie in einigen anderen Punkten unterscheiden sich die Burg. auch hier vom Großteil der germ.
gentes der VWZ. Die einzige Überlieferung zur burg. Gesch., die uns aus dem burg. Kgr. selbst noch erhalten ist, ist eine Aufzählung burg. Kg. im Liber constitutionum (→ Lex Burgundionum) aus dem J. 517. In diesem Abschnitt (31, 3) verfolgt der Gesetzgeber, wohl Kg. → Gundobad, die Gesch. der manumissio bis zurück in die Zeiten Gibichas, Godomars, Gislahars und → Gundahars (→ Gibichungen § 2). Diese Liste der vier kgl. Vorfahren Gundobads kann durchaus als Kg.sliste betrachtet werden und läßt sich vielleicht mit der später verfaßten, umfangreicheren im Edictum Rothari (→ Leges Langobardorum) vergleichen. Doch im Unterschied zum langob. Kg. → Rothari verbindet Gundobad die burg. Kg.sliste nicht mit einer Herkunftsgesch.
    Der letzte Name der Liste, Gundahar, ist auch aus anderen schriftlichen Qu. bekannt. Olympiodor (38, fr. 17) zählt ihn zur Partei des Usurpators Jovinus. Prosper berichtet, daß unter seiner Herrschaft das Burgunderreich am Rhein durch die mit → Aetius → verbündeten → Hunnen vernichtet wurde (435). Diese dramatischen Ereignisse wurden bekanntlich der Kern späterer Erzählungen, v.a. des → Nibelungenliedes. Doch gibt es keinen Hinweis darauf, daß diese Geschichten burg. Traditionen widerspiegeln, die nach der Niederlage der Burg. 435 und nach ihrer Ansiedlung in der → Sapaudia in ihrem Kgr. an Rhône und Saône entstanden. Es ist allerdings möglich, daß die Tradierung dieser Geschichten auf Burg. zurückgeht, die sich nicht an Rhône und Saône ansiedelten. Auch gibt es keine Version dieser Erzählungen, die die weitere Gesch. der Burg. behandelt – weder das Weiterbestehen der
gens noch ihre Ansiedlung in der Sapaudia. Außerdem wird in karol. Qu. zur burg. Ethnogenese, in der Passio Sigismundi (42, c.1) und in der Vita Faronis des Hildegar von Meaux (23, c. 2), die Katastrophe von 435 überhaupt nicht erwähnt.
(...)

[
Transl.:   In contrast to other gentes of the Migration Period, the → Burgunden are already attested in sources of 1st century AD by → Pliny (44, 4,14; 171, 49, 231), which ascribe them to the → Wandalen [Vandals]. Likewise, they are mentioned by → Ptolemaeus [Ptolemy] (48, II, 11.8), who localizes them between the rivers Oder and Vistula. It is unclear where they originally came from. A Scandinavian origin of the gens plays a rôle only in later traditions, but could not be proved archaeologically (→ Bornholm, p. 312).
    Written transmissions provide neither an early Origio gentis nor any other origin myth which could be seen as Burgundian tradition. As regards some other item, the Burgundians differ from the main stem of the Germanic gentes of the Migration Period. The only extant account about Burgundian history, preserved in the Burgundian kingdom itself, is a list of Burgundian kings in the Liber constitutionum (→ Lex Burgundionum) of 517. In this list, section (31, 3), the likely legislature → Gundobad traces the history of the manumissio back to the times of Gibica, Godomar, Gislahar and → Gundahar (→ Gibichungen § 2). This list of the four royal ancestors of Gundobad can be regarded at least as a line of kings and may perhaps be compared with the later written and more comprehensive Edictum Rothari (→ Leges Langobardorum). However, in contrast to the Langobardian king → Rothari, Gundobad does not connect the Burgundian list of kings with a history of origin.
    The last name of the list, Gundahar, appears also in other written transmissions. Olympiodorus (38, fr 17) ascribes him to the party of the usurper Jovinus. Prosper reports that, under his rule, the Burgundian kingdom on the Rhine was destroyed by the → Hunnen [Huns], allied with → Aetius in 435. As popularly known these dramatic events make the core of later narratives, especially the → Nibelungenlied [quot. rem.:  this claim rather unprovable to Þiðreks saga]. However, there is no indication that these stories reflect Burgundian traditions which were following after the defeat of the Burgundians in 435 and then in their settlement in the → Sapaudia in their kingdom on the Rhône and Saône. However, it is possible that the tradition of these stories goes back to Burgundians who did not settle on the Rhône and Saône. Futhermore, there is no version of these narratives which deals with a continuation of Burgundian history – neither with the continuation of the gens nor with their settlement in the Sapaudia. Moreover, neither Carolingian sources related to Burgundian ethnogenesis nor the Passio Sigismundi (42, c.1) and the Vita Faroni of Hildegar of Meaux (23, c.2) mention the catastrophe of 435.
(...) ]


Sources
(23) Hildegar von Meaux, Vita Faronis, hrsg. von J. Mabillon, Acta Sanctorum Ordinis sancti Benedicti, Nachdr. 1936, 606–625.
(31) Liber Constitutionum, hrsg. von L. R. de Salis, MGH LL 2/1, 1892, Nachdr. 1973, 29–116.
(38) Olympiodorus, hrsg. von J. C. Bockley, The fragmentary classicising historians of the Later Roman Empire, 1981.
(42) Passio Sigismundi, hrsg. von B. Krusch, MGH SS rer. Mer. 2, 1888, Nachdr. 1984, 329–340.
(44) Plinius der Ältere, Historia naturalis libri XXXVII, hrsg. von H. Rackham, 9 Bde., 1949–1952, oder; hrsg. von G. Winkler, R. König, 1988.
(48) Ptol., Geographia, hrsg. von C. Müller, 1883, oder: hrsg. von C. F. A. Nobbe, 1843–45, Nachdr. 1966.
(171) Wenskus, Stammesbildung.


Cf. Ian N. Wood, Gentes, Kings and Kingdoms — The Emerge of States: The Kingdom of the Gibichungs, in: Regna and Gentes, Brill NV, Leiden 2003, pgs 243–269.

The records on authentic history of Burgundian kingdoms do not provide contemporary leaders corresponding with Gunnar and Hǫgni. Hence, both the 'Didriks chronicle', apart form its fictitious younger supplements serving for the final but contradicting chapters (Sv 383–386), and the Þiðreks saga nowhere mention spelling forms somehow related to 'Burgundia' or 'Burgundy'. Ingo Runde, an author of the RGA, resumes shortly [transl.] 'a legendary destruction of the Wormsian kingdom of the Burgundians'; Xanten im frühen und hohen Mittelalter. Doctoral thesis, Gerhard-Mercator-University of Duisburg 2001. Reprint 2003, see p. 84.

The Genealogy of Piat-Herrero provides the bloodline of Theudemer, son of King Richimer de Thérouanne, to a remarkable extent. The former was also captured and executed with his spouse by the Romans. That data notes Theudemer’s son and successor 'Clogio' ('Clodio') as 'Le Cheveulu' ('the Longhaired'). Since his lifetime is roughly estimated from 400 to 450, he appears as contemporary of Samson by Ritter’s timeline. C(h)lodio is chiefly known as conqueror of some western lands on the Somme and of Cambrai which he later forwarded to one of his sons. However, there are no sources which disallow his further appearance in more (north-)eastern Gaulish regions. Would Chlodio’s environment thus be of interest in order to detect Samson on the subject of Piat-Herrero’s and other sources comprehensiveness and reliability? Nonetheless, the political failure of both Jovinus and King Theudemer corresponds with the basic item that the Romans would not have tolerated those vast and manifested conquests up to that point of time when Aëtius, the great Roman Magister militum, could destroy Burgundy in Germania superior – more likely: overwhelmingly the inferior – finally with Hunnic warriors.

A view to the time 'post Aëtius' nevertheless allows to detect the Roman Eagle being bled white on the Upper and Middle Rhine. Thus, at the beginning of the second half of 5th century, the first Franks in the area of the later defined 'Ripuaria' could seize the opportunity to self-govern and enlarge their territory by expeditions we can easily encounter in some early chapters of the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts.

King Sigebert of Cologne = King Sigurð the Nibelung ?

Gregory let us know that Clovis supported his cousin Sigebert of Cologne against an Alemannic raid on Zülpich location. The Old Norse + Swedish scribes inform us that Franco-Rhenish king ('Sigurðr Sveinn') was brother-in-law and, obviously, the new neighbour of King Gunnar, ruler of the Niflungen, at the same place and time.

Helmut de Boor, 20th-century philologist and remarkable researcher across the Nibelungen and their Old Norse bibliography, rather shortly considers a possible historical connection of this Sigebert on the Lower Rhine with 'Siegfried the Hero'; Hat Siegfried gelebt? PBB 63, p. 254, ISSN 1865-9373 (Walter de Gruyter). Alfred Carl Groeger, another contemporary German philologist, considers correspondingly in the epilogue of his booklet Nibelungensage:
 
Nicht ausgeschlossen ist es auch, dass historische Vorgänge um Chlodwig den Sagenstoff beeinflusst haben: Dieser ließ seinen Vetter,den niederrheinischen Frankenfürsten Sigibert (Siegfried?) im Jahre 508 auf der Jagd ermorden (...) Möglich, dass auch von hier aus Einflüsse zu suchen sind.
 
[Transl.:  It is not to exclude that historical events around Clovis had influenced the legend, since the latter had killed his cousin, Sigibert (Siegfried?), ruler on the Lower-Rhine, in the year 508 on the hunt (...) Possibly, influences must be sought starting from this issue.]
 
Publisher: Hamburger Lesehefte Verlag, Heft Nr. 137; ISBN 3-87291-136-8.

Cologne, 2nd to 3rd Century
Cologne at the beginning of 3rd century.
 
Painting reprinted on an old postcard.
 
(Artist’s name illegible.)
 
This is a passage dealing with King Sigebert of Cologne from Gregory’s hist. II, 40:
 
When King Clovis was dwelling at Paris he sent secretly to the son of Sigibert saying: 'Behold your father has become an old man and limps in his weak foot. If he should die,' said he, 'Of due right his kingdom would be yours together with our friendship.' Led on by greed the son plotted to kill his father. And when his father went out from the city of Cologne and crossed the Rhine and was intending to journey through the wood Buchaw [Buconiam silvam], as he slept at midday in his tent his son sent assassins in against him, and killed him there, in the idea that he would get his kingdom. But by God’s judgment he walked into the pit that he had cruelly dug for his father. He sent messengers to king Clovis to tell about his father’s death, and to say: 'My father is dead, and I have his treasures in my possession, and also his kingdom. Send men to me, and I shall gladly transmit to you from his treasures whatever pleases you.' And Clovis replied: 'I thank you for your good will, and I ask that you show the treasures to my men who come, and after that you shall possess all yourself.' When they came, he showed his father’s treasures. And when they were looking at the different things he said: 'It was in this little chest that my father used to put his gold coins.' 'Thrust in your hand,' said they, 'to the bottom, and uncover the whole.' When he did so, and was much bent over, one of them lifted his hand and dashed his battle­ax against his head, and so in a shameful manner he incurred the death which he had brought on his father. Clovis heard that Sigibert and his son had been slain, and came to the place and summoned all the people, saying: 'Hear what has happened. When I, 'said he, 'was sailing down the river Scheldt Cloderic, son of my kinsman, was in pursuit of his own father asserting that I wished him killed. And when his father was fleeing through the forest of Buchaw, he set highwaymen upon him, and gave him over to death, and slew him. And when he was opening the treasures, he was slain himself by some one or other. Now I know nothing at all of these matters. For I cannot shed the blood of my own kinsmen, which it is a crime to do. But since this has happened, I give you my advice, if it seems acceptable; turn to me, that you may be under my protection.' They listened to this, and giving applause with both shields and voices, they raised him on a shield, and made him king over them. He received Sigibert’s kingdom with his treasures, and placed the people, too, under his rule. For God was laying his enemies low every day under his hand, and was increasing his kingdom, because he walked with an upright heart before him, and did what was pleasing in his eyes. (English version by Earnest Brehaut.)

The 'Didriks chronicle' and Þiðreks saga seem to complete Gregory’s report on Clovis and Sigebert. These are the most important items considering the view of the Old Norse + Swedish scribes:

1.
Sigurð as well as Sigebert were contemporary kings of rather smallest area between Cologne and Zülpich.
 
2.
Sigurð had also a treasure hidden somewhere in the woodlands.
 
3.
Sigurð had also to cross the Rhine to go there.
 
4.
Sigurð, victim of a family plot, was also slain while on a trip into the 'Lyr' woodlands on eastern side of the Rhine. Buc(h)onia can be regarded as less specific Frankish expression being used rather for any hilly woodland beyond the Rhine, cf. Fr. bûcheron: woodcutter.

The Guðrúnarkviða II, 7 likes to confirm that Sigurð was slain somewhere on the other side of the river, as 'Grimhild' (Old Norse: Guðrún) remembers this detail:

Gunnar hung his head,
but Hǫgni told me
of Sigurð’s cruel death.
"Beyond the river
slaughtered lies
Guthorm’s murderer,
and to the wolves given ...

Intertextual exploration of Þiðreks saga, Vǫlsunga saga and the Nibelungenlied allows to conclude that 'Guthorm', slaughterer of Sigurð, was replaced with 'Gernoz' (the Upper German 'Gernot') for epic insertion and amplification of Hǫgni. Regarding his performance towards Sigurð, however, we should contemplate the Nibelungenlied, Þiðreks saga and 'Didriks chronicle' taking pattern from manslaughter’s part of Gui and Bove in the poem of Daurel et Beton, obviously written in first half of 13th century. This literary work has been ascribed to the 'Cycle of Charlemagne'. (The author of the Vǫlsunga saga could have taken the Sigurðarkviða II to transfer the place of murder to the hall of residence.)
 
5.
Sigurð died also at the place of his treasure, as these circumstances seem to provide evidence:
   
 
Hagen must have known exactly its position because the mother of his son Aldrian could successfully forward the key and the route to that place to the boy. Hagen, he had told Brynhild ('Brynilda') that Sigurð’s power would be stronger than his own, could only get the key to the lockable cave from Sigurð’s dead body by choosing that safest as well as lethal way.

Thus, the dead Cloderic seems to be Gregory’s and Clovis' subject, since the former retells us that the latter needs him for the folk to give them fallacious reasoning of the murderous plot, whereas the dead Sigurð appears as remaining subject to the assassins and the Old Norse + Swedish texts which relate that the murderers need his dead body to shock Grimhild with revenge.

Extrapolating these manuscripts, their source provider apparently connects both the identity of the assassins and Babilonia with the large region of Cologne(15) that seems to be closely related to Sigurð and his realm on occasion of the Nibelungen’ fatal march to their sister Grimhild: When their rearguard, commanded by King Gunnar and Hagen, was approaching the opposite bank of the Rhine at Duna Crossing just a few miles north of Cologne, Hagen slew the ferryman on board and apologetically said to his protesting half-brother Gunnar:
 
'He shall not tell where we are going to.'

A short time later Hagen met a guardian on the eastern banks of the Rhine, and that man called 'Eckivard' warned him with these words:
 
I am wondering how you've come along here, because you are Hagen, King Aldrian’s son, who has killed my lord, Young-lord Sigurð. As long as you are in Hunaland( 16): Look out! Many people are keeping here hostility against you.
(Mb 367 replacing missing chapter in the Old Swedish texts.)

Regarding the murderous plot on Sigurð and Sigebert, Gregory does not explicitly narrate the same circumstances of death as the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts, however.

How far can we follow Gregory beyond the Rhine?

Both kings Sigurð and Sigebert were surely popular in large regions on both sides of the Rhine. The place of Sigurð’s hoard, his 'treasure cave' as mentioned in the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts, is geographically related to the Lurvald, largest woodland region of the later Westphalia. J. Baptiste Gramaye, chronicler of Antiquitates Brabantiae; Nivella, p. 3 n. 9, notes 'Sigibertus et Moringus in vita S(anta) Wiberti'. Nevertheless, both Sigurð and Sigebert seem of Merovingian descent and thus kinsmen of Clovis who proclaimed the same to the folk in the region of Cologne. The Old Norse scribes correspondingly convey Sigurð’s mother as daughter of King 'Nidung' who ruled the Hesbaye (cf. Sv 148–152), a former Salian area that nowadays belongs to Belgium. As the author remarks by means of Emil Rückert’s research into Frankish onomastics of the Merovings,(17) the position of King 'Nidung', Old Nordic name for 'hater', seems to be reserved for King Meroveus ('Moroveus', 'Morung', 'Morvung'), the father of 'ORTVANGERIS', as this spelling can express a son of '(M)OR.VANGER. Emil Rückert points up his conviction that Childeric, son of Meroveus, appears also as Jutlandic Hjalprek in both Vǫlsunga saga and heroic lays of the Elder Edda. These traditions relate him as an obvious mighty leader who cares for Sigurð after the death of his father Sigmund. A 'Cheldric' does also appear as 'Saxon' chief in the Historia Regum Britanniae!

The Þiðreks saga and 'Didriks chronicle' provide an interesting geographical detail by chapter Mb 62:
 
A king named Nidung was ruling Jutland, that part which is called Thiodi ...,

while the Old Swedish chronicler notes well in chapter 59:
 
He [Weland/Velent] was finally washed ashore Jutland; a king named Nidung was there ...

Has the first Merovingian already been ruling some territory outside of Salia, particularly Frisian coastland up to the north-western cap of Jutland? Fredegar, protagonist of unbelievable Greek descent of the Franks, nevertheless can provide an interesting unvoluntary metonymy. The founder of the Merovingian dynasty, as he writes about the origo of the Franks, was a bizarre individual that came across the sea to have a son with the spouse of Frankish King Chlodio: the mythical Minotaur ('Neptuni Quinotauri') as the very best creature for the impressing horns on a furry alien helmet of a fierce or unfathomed Nordic chief, but not, as he suggests, that figure of Greek origin?(18) Thus, we should focus further interest also on that part of Jutland which the Old Norse scribes remarked as King Nidung’s territory (see attachment Merovingian Origin Location).

A concerted effort to synchronize some apparently analogous or completing pattern from Frankish historias or chronicles, Hannonian records of local history, and 'Didriks chronicle' plus Þiðreks saga, may result in the following chart of early Merovingian and Frankish genealogy. As already mentioned above, its predicate is endorsed i.a. by Mb 9:
 
King Samson further fathered with his concubine another son who was named Thetmar after his [Samson’s] father-brother...

In so far the above remembered Theudemer seems to meet the demand on corresponding historical, chronological and genealogical environment.

Preliminary Filiations

Genealogical Synchronization of 'Didriks chronicle' with Merovings

 a Gregory of Tours has no idea of his date of death. Some research makes a difference between Meroveus 'the Elder' (disappearing about 457 in Frankish Salia) for a son of him called 'the Younger'.
 b  As regards Samson’s vita, on almost every occasion the manuscripts (esp. the Old Norse redactions) like to reemphasize Ermenrik some years elder than his brother Thetmar whom Samson entrusted with ruling the eminent BERN after its conquest between 460 and 470. Furthermore, apart from this obvious compensation to Ermenrik, these texts nowhere remark that Samson’s son Thetmar died young. For contextual chronology on Thetmar’s death cf. Mb 131, Sv 131. By the way of contrast, the scribes provide the first appearance of three sons of Ermenrik not soon (!) after the conquest of ROMA = Trier on the Moselle, as Ritter estimates their removals A.D. 493, cf. Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, p. 282. If Ermenrik were already having an elder son at that time, this potential scion would have been appearing more significantly against the interest of 'Sifka' and, consequently, his own! Principally, an authorship can make use of eye-catching recurrences in order to contradict opposite information by other tradition.
 

The genealogical inspections of the Old Norse + Swedish texts and Gregory of Tours may not suggest to identify Þiðrek as Theuderic I at the first go. Eugen Ewig and the RGA estimate his mother descended from a family of Cologne (Eugen Ewig, Francia 18/1 (1991) p. 49). The first named manuscripts provide a Jarl Elsung the Younger, obviously a close relative of Elsung the Elder who formerly was slain by Samson. 'The Younger' is known as ruler of Babilonia that Ritter identified as Colonia-Cologne, 'the Elder' as father of Odilia who possibly was introduced as Franco-Rhenish 'Evochildis' at the court of Theuderic’s or Þiðrek’s father.

The pseudonymous Fredegar notes that
 
the Franks were diligently seeking a long haired king from themselves as they had before … created Theudemer king, the son of Richemer, who was killed by the Romans in that battle which I mentioned above. His son Chlodio, the most suitable man in his tribe, took his place in the kingdom.

However, the 'Chronicle of Frankish Kings', known as the Liber historiae Francorum or the Gesta regnum Francorum of 726/727, ascribes Chlodio to son of Faramond, son of Marchomir to whom the liber’s writer(s) draw(s) on certain Trojan narrative from the Priam and Antenor Legend.

Christian Settipani, of Augustan Society Inc., genealogist of Charlemagne’s Ancestry (Les Ancestres de Charlemagne; Editions Christian, Paris 1989), orders these Frankish records in accordance with this rating:
 
Nowadays, it is pointless, I hope, to say anything about the legend of the Trojan origins denounced by good scholars since 14th century as an absurd fable and which is only a literary creation… It is self-evident that Fredegaire had interpolated Gregory at this place, but he could have done so with good evidence or according to the oral tradition. So, if we had absolutely to choose between Fredegaire’s and the Liber’s version, we would prefer that of Fredegaire ...
(From Christian Settipani’s addenda of 1990 at
http://www.rootsweb.com/~medieval/addcharlENG.pdf   retrieved Aug. 2005.)

As modern research has been trying to point out, there might be some circumstantial evidence that Frankish historiographers of second half of 6th to first half of 7th century were premeditatedly replacing basic facts about early Frankish history by an absurd core of Trojan legends, notably Eugen Ewig, Trojamythos und fränkische Frühgeschichte 1996, 1998; Troja und die Franken 2009.

Ermenrik and Samson

Ermenrik

The Beowulf provides at lines 1198–1204 a narrative pattern which seems to reflect the hostility between Heimir and Erminrikr of Þiðreks saga with this action of  Þiðrek’s loyal follower:

hordmádmum hæleþa   syþðan Háma ætwæg
tó herebyrhtan byrig   Brósinga mene
sigle ond sincfæt·   searoníðas fealh
Eormenríces ·   gecéas écne raéd ·
þone hring hæfde   Higelác Géata
nefa Swertinges   nýhstan síðe
...
A hoard-gem of heroes, since Hama bore
to his bright-built burg the Brisings' necklace,
jewel and gem casket. — Jealousy fled he,
Eormenric’s hate: chose help eternal.
Hygelac Geat, grandson of Swerting,
on the last of his raids this ring bore with him
...
 
English translation by Francis B. Gummere.

Do these lines deal with an 'Ermenrik' as king of the Ostrogoths or rather the Gøtar, Gauts or Geats north of the Alps? The author of the Beowulf assigns him apparently younger, but at least not much older than Higelác Géata. Historians who critically review the Beowulf and compare cautiously other Nordic traditions with Frankish historiography equate the latter with the Nordic chieftain 'Chlochilaichus'. Following historical estimation, he was killed on the retreat from his invasion into Theuderic’s paygo Attoarios roughly about A.D. 521; cf. Liber historiae Francorum, 19; Gregory’s hist. III, 3 (without geographical information); → Hygelac in RGA 15 (2000), pgs 298–300.

Since the narrative intentions of the Beowulf are not turning to an Ostrogothic or Upper German milieu, it may be noteworthy to remark that Karl Simrock, Beowulf, 1859, p. 64, translated Brósinga into Breisach which, however, we can localize rather as the northern Brisiacum, the former name of (Bad) Breisig on the Rhine. Thus, the area of Heimir’s action appears intertextually related to the Middle Rhine region of Amelunga and Ørlunga, where Ritter has independently identified both the battle of Gransport and Heimir’s raids of revenge thereafter against the undefeated Erminrikr.

Regarding his own historiographical and intertextual research, Ritter has compared 'Gaulish Ermenrik'  with Clovis I  from a conclusive point of view, and he correspondingly places at the disposal  [transl.]:
 
The figure to be historically allocated with preference, however, is King Ermenrik of Rom/Trier. He is constantly governing there more than 50 years by the Ths (Þiðreks saga). This is also the period of Clovis about which we know hardly more than passably [...] One may also question the existence of rather another historical individual behind »Ermenrik«; and yet there is to encounter a similarity typified by the murder of male relatives committed by both Ermenrik and Clovis. Nonetheless, this may be based on imitation. The main source about this period, though not contemporarily written, is the work of Gregory of Tours. He is utterly affected by West Frankish topics. His sight onto the centre area stretching out to the Rhine, apart from some clear view, is apparently foggy.

[Original text:]
 
Die Gestalt aber, welche vor allem geschichtlich eingeordnet werden müßte, ist König Ermenrik in Rom/Trier. Er herrscht hier nach der Ths ohne Unterbrechung mehr als 50 Jahre. Dies ist aber auch die Zeit Chlodwigs, welche wir leidlich gut zu kennen meinen [...] Man kann auch fragen, ob sich unter dem Namen »Ermenrik« etwa eine andere geschichtliche Persönlichkeit verbirgt, und man wird die Ähnlichkeit bemerken, wie Ermenrik alle seine männlichen Verwandten umbringt und wie ganz entsprechend Chlodwig das gleiche tut. Aber hier kann auch einer den andern nachgeahmt haben. Die Hauptquelle über jene Zeit, von ihr aber zeitlich schon weit entfernt, ist Gregor von Tours. Er ist ganz westfränkisch eingestellt. Den mittleren Bereich bis an den Rhein heran scheint er nur wie durch einen Nebel zu sehen, mit einzelnen Erhellungen.
 
(Ritter, Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, pgs 285–286.)

Regarding this statement we may assume that Ritter was aware of the genealogical outline of the early Frankish kings drawn by Gregory of Tours and some Roman historiographer. Identifying the Ermenrik of the Þidreks saga and the younger Old Swedish texts with Clovis I, which implicates his king- and kinship related to his eminent successor Theuderic I in so far, Ritter has thereby significantly emended his basic opposite view being published previously in 1981, Die Nibelungen zogen nordwärts, cf. p. 247, en. 27. Thus, this important re-evaluation does not basically contradict the interliterary research on the determination of the real spatiotemporal prototype of Dietrich von Bern which has been made or reviewed already by L. Lersch, H. Lorenz, K. Malone, F. J. Mone, K. Müllenhoff, K. Simrock, H. Vitt and other scholars.

 
It is obvious that the scribes of the Þidreks saga and Old Swedish manuscripts have connected almost all momentous decisions in the reigning period of King Ermenrik with his advisor who, however, might have been nicknamed in the lineage of both oral and clerical transmissions. Thus, it seems indicated to demand additionally that King Clovis also must have had an advisor whose nature ought to correspond generally with Ermenrik’s confident and, finally, whom even has been set at least one pictorial monument in the French history of arts.

Richard A. Gerberding’s critical study of the Liber Historiae Francorum might allow to conclude the cunning and loyalty of Clovis' influential advisor who played a very significant rôle in regnal affairs conveyed by the author(s) of the book of Frankish  history. Gerberding points out this appearance of the Frankish king’s counsellor, op. cit. p. 69:
Aurelian, Chancellor of Clovis I.
A stamp by an anonymous artist,
Bibliothèque nationale de France.
 
(...) In  LHF-11, -12, and -13 the author gives us another royal counsellor whom Gregory does not mention. This is Clovis' advisor, Aurelian, who is the hero in the LHF's long story of Clovis' courtship of Clothild. Gregory simply says that the Burgundian king, Gundobad, was afraid to refuse Clovis' request for his niece and so he handed her over (Hist., 11-28). The LHF on the other hand dedicates the greater part of three chapters to laying out the cunning and loyalty of Aurelian in obtaining the Burgundian princess. Doubt has been expressed about Aurelian's authenticity,1 but, since he is also mentioned by Fredegar in the same connection2 and since we know there to have been a number of men by that name3 who could have been an advisor to Clovis, there seems little reason to doubt that he did exist. (...) In  LHF-15 it is again Aurelian who suggests that Clovis turns to the Christian God in order to secure his victory over the Alamanni. In Gregory's account (Hist., 11-30) of his conversion, the king turns to Christ on his own.
__________________
 
1.   "...wohl eine unhistorische Gestalt..." (Zöllner, Geschichte der Franken, p. 56).
2.   Fredegar, III-18, in:
SSRM, II, pp. 99-100.
3.   Karl Stroheker,
Der senatorische Adel im spätantiken Gallien, Tübingen, 1948, lists four men who were Clovis' contemporaries. His number 46 on page 150 seems the most likely candidate.

Furthermore, Gerberding states the avaricious side of Clovis' advisor under the headline II. Emphasis on Treasure and Booty, cf. p. 71:
 
(...) With the exception of its last sentence, the whole of  LHF-13 is an addition to Gregory's Historia. The chapter is the story of the successful attempt of Aurelianus to claim Clothild's treasure from her uncle, King Gundobad of Burgundy.

Martin Heinzelmann lists Aurelianus 4  as the legatarius 'Aurilianus' in service of King Clovis I, cf. Gallische Prosopographie 260–527. Francia 10 (1982), p. 564.

The Old Norse scribes remember that Sifca serves his king not only as counsellor but also as a 'fiarhirdi' (treasurer); cf. Mb 127, Johan Peringskiöld: ch. 103.


Morphological connections and prospects

Linguistically and semantically, the name of King Clovis does appear Latin based, since the adjective+verb compound CHLODO (Lat. 'c(h)lodus', 'c(h)loda', 'c(h)lodum') + VOCARE (En. call, name) computes as either having an unsteady or defective mind or, physically, of lame, limping or crippled appearance. King Clovis could have received his bibliographical Christian name at a certain point of time in his political career, likely after his baptism. This momentous event could draw attention to the milieu of clerics, mediaeval writers and narrators who apparently transformed his name for mentioning him in e.g. the Wǫlundarkviða and Guðrúnarkviða II ('Hlǫðvés', see farther below). Nevertheless, we should not generally exclude the apparent low probability that Clovis' name could be derived from a non-Latin form which has been already proposed for Chlodio, cf. endnote 18, but, in any case, it seems less likely that Clovis were named with a Latin compound immediately after his birth in an obvious syncretic, unchristian or pagan environment. A former Germanic based name of him and, consequently, of his father would not seem inconsistent in intertextual literary context, regarding even those spelling forms related with 'Ermenrik' when consulting J. de Vries: OE. yrman, ME. (i)ermen: to grieve 'sb', cf. ON. erma.

It seems worth mentioning here that there may be some Franco-Gothic (re)naming of an historical individual which finally might result in misinterpretation, e.g. transforming the name of Visigothic king Athanagild’s daughter Bruna to Brunichildis, as taken for questionable scholarly interpretation as spouse of both Sigebert I and the literary Sigurð (Siegfried), and, therewith, the German–Nordic Brunhilda–Brynhild, the latter popularly (nick)naming a female warrior for wearing a Brynne–Brünne = ring armour or byrnie. However, the retransformation of this interpretation back to a synonymic Visigothic origin, which is apparently based on nothing more than a female form of Franco-Gothic brun ('bright', 'brown', cf. 'brunette') can not be performed satisfyingly. For example, for an apparently same contextual and figural identity with however different names, we may note well Gunnar’s sister provided by the Þiðreks saga and the Elder Edda, cf. Grímhildr = the Eddic Guðrún. In the Guðrúnarkviða II (in önnur) her mother appears as 'a grim Hilde' = Grímildr, resolutely asking her sons who would pay for her killed son-in-law. It seems conclusive that the author of the common source of the Þiðreks saga and Nibelungenlied transferred her name and the basic motif of revenge to her daughter.

Contemplating these and further aspects, we may alternatively reckon with an epithet as the idiosyncratic name of a figure appearing especially in ancient historiography. Thus, Ritter did not disregard the Hunalandish king 'Ata-la' (the Eddic 'At-li') who is portrayed rather in a defensive rôle, especially by the author of the Nibelungenlied. It should be further annotated that even Gregory of Tours provides a name of a quite similarly spelled historical individual. Regarding Gregory’s 6th-century accounts, he knows of an Attalus, a nephew of bishop Gregory of Langres, as hostage at the court of Theuderic I. The article »Who is King Atala?« remarks some historical person of 6th–8th century being closely related to this name.


Further interliterary explorations

Eormenric’s geographic environment by the Old English Widsith

Alfred Anscombe made an interesting approach to reintroduce an obvious Gaulish Eormenric by means of The Widsith, the Venerable Bede and some other sources, i.a. the Origo Gentis Langobardorum. Although the route of the Lombards from Scandinavia to Vurgundáib (Burgundy, likely already on the Middle and/or Upper Rhine) with stopovers i.a. in Anþáib (this blurry tribal region likely of the 'Antes') and Báináib (OE. 'Bãning...', likely Bohemia) under the 4th–5th-century Agilmund and his successor Laiamicho (see dating by the RGA 13 [1999] p. 181) has been scholastically suggested 'legendary', Anscombe combines the Gaulish Eormenric on territory somewhat close to the later German Westphalia, i.e. the region which Ritter has contextually specified.

Regarding Anscombe’s structural-based geographical and ethnographical analyses of the Old English 'poem' by its obvious continental author and, among other material, the work of Bede and the Origo, it may seem redundant to remark that Anscombe reviews R. W. Chambers' work on the Widsith (1912) with this general statement:
 
Nevertheless, Mr. Chambers has treated the matter as a student of legend – and I for one feel that this method is apt to present princes and peoples in distorted attitudes and in dislocated and discrepant environment.
(The Historical Side of the old English Poem of 'Widsith'. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society [III. Series] Vol. IX, pgs 123–165, cf. p. 125.)
 
Interestingly, in the matter of Ritter’s basic reinspections the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts, it may seem not superfluous to note that Anscombe points out an antique connection, based on either story or history, of tribesmen called 'Greeks' with the Treveri:
 
‘Igitur omnipotens Deus tres plagas maxime gladium venire permisit super regnum christianorum et super civitatem Trevirorum tribus vicibus: prima autem plaga Grecorum sub imperatore Constante filio Constantini [† 350] secunda Wandali et Alemanni [A.D. 406] tertia Hunorum [A.D. 451].’ Vide ‘Codices S. Mathiæ et S. Gisleni’ in Hillar’s Vindicatio Historiæ Treverorum, pp. 57, 159. Also cp. ‘Post quem [sc. post S. Paulinum Treverensem episcopum († 358)] Bonosius; deinde Brittonius ... Horum temporibus Greci cum magna manu Treberim invasere et cædibus et rapinis et incendiis graviter attrivere’; Gesta Treverorum ed. G. Waitz, ‘M.G.H.,’ ‘SS.’ tom. VIII. (1848), p. 154.
(Transactions ... op. cit. p. 148, fn. 2)

As far as our context is concerned, it seems less significant that a Greek relict or former settlement on Ermenrik’s Moselle could have been 'potentially inspiring or misleading the Old Norse and Swedish scribes'.

Furthermore, Alfred Anscombe has localized the 'northern neighbours of the Treveri as the Gōtas' by geographical inspection of mainly the Widsith and Origo Gentis Langobardorum. This seems intertextually interesting but, standing on its own without further circumstancial indications, not forming a solid historical evidence. Anscombe also combines that 'Jarmeric’s uncle Budli' recalls the Frankish name of Bodilo (Notes and Queries, op. cit. pgs 144–145) who, however, could be identified with rather a Frisian ruler BODIL (see farther below). Following Anscombe’s intertextual identifcations of related persons in so far, the kinship between 'Eormenric', Franco-Rhenish Theoderic and Ætla ( Atala) may project the mother of the latter as a daughter of Þiðrek’s grandfather or Þiðrek’s mother as a sister of Atala’s father. However, we must also take into consideration that Anscombe may win little favour by identifying Saxo Grammaticus' Danish ruler 'Jarmeric' with 'Eormenric' without further material. However, it seems noteworthy that the scribes of the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts do not convey any consanguinity between Þiðrek and Atala, but do forward the common basic interests of both kings.
 
 
Who is Hermenrico mentioned by Fulk of Reims ?

Ritter has expressively considered the libri Teutonici of certain connotation, cf. Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, pgs 304–305, en. 122. An author referring to this edition is Flodoard (894–966), historiographer and archivist at the cathedral of Reims for the most time of his life. He is known as creditable writer, especially by means of his ecclesiastical chronicle of Reims. Flodoard left a passage taken from a letter that archbishop Fulk of Reims wrote in 893 under political strain between Charles the 'Simple-minded', whom Fulk called out by unction for making him counter-king against Odo, king of Western Francia, and Arnulf of Carinthia, king of Eastern Francia. With this paper Fulk forwards some warning arguments to Arnulf, regarding this example about the history of – apparently more likely – the Frankish kingdom:
 
... subjicit etiam ex libris Teutonicis de rege quodam Hermenrico nominee, qui omnem progenium suam morti destinaverit impiis consiliis cuiusdam consilarii sui ...
 
...he (Fulk) subjects to further item from the Teutonic books a certain king named Hermenric, who destined all his progeny to die by impious counsel from one of his counsellors...

Here is cunning enough, but Ermanric has none of it ... (Kemp Malone, 1962, contextually on the 4th-century Greuthungian Goth.) Whom is Fulk remembering? Does he actually look back to an individual of Ostrogothic history? Or does he mean that potent chief of 'Roma secunda' who killed some of his offspring on recommendation of an impious advisor, and whom the Old Norse + Swedish texts provide as a mighty ruler on that very territory belonging formerly and now to Frankish kingdom? If the archbishop bears in mind the latter, he could have given enough personal attributes. Obviously disregarding the Þiðreks saga, Malone states on Ermanric’s short portray by the Quedlinburg annalist that it seems odd that we find him nowhere else.

Regarding Ermenrik’s ancestry, the synchronizing chart as shown above considers narration that Albero of Mons, persistently claiming some Salian land as dominant son of Chlodio by Rückert’s research, was successively the right legal heir of Samson(’s) castle, as this detail may complete his great-uncle’s emigration by means of the Old Swedish texts and Þiðreks saga.

Samson

This name was given to an early died Samson of Merovingian dynasty. Another more or less significant buttress appears as ancestral name forwarding by an interesting nexus between Theudemer’s father RICHEMER and Samson’s son Ermenrik through simple half-word interchange: EMER-RICH (ch = k).

Samson accidentally met his kinsman Thetmar, either his uncle or father, after the slaying of the noblemen 'Brunstein' and 'Rodger'. This Thetmar, bearing a golden lion on his red shield (Sv 4, Mb 6), had apparently come to aid his close relative on this account, presumably against the Roman occupation force. In any case, however, Samson would have had good reason to remember him with name forwarding to one of his sons.

It seems noteworthy to remark that Samson’s father does not correspond with that prototype of King Arthur whom the Samson saga fagra loves to expose to some light of Lancelot romance. Furthermore, it seems difficult to equate the famous King Arthur with a king provided as Arkimannus (Icelandic MS A, cf. Mb 245) whose surviving but expelled two sons received new properties from King Atala.

Summarizing Samson’s narrative outline presented by the Old Norse and Swedish manuscripts, his ethnical environment seems rather Frankish than Roman based. Furthermore, with respect to the geographical side of these transmissions, his ancestry appears related to rather the Frankish Theudemer than the Ostrogothic Theodemir. As regards Samson’s literary-historical epicentres, his conquests with his prominent sons are geostrategically plausible only between the Hesbaye, the Eiffel down to the Middle-Rhine, where the Germania inferior meets the superior at the Roman Brisiacum, and, as the texts provide, the previously Roman-ruled Moselle with its eminent metropolis where his outstanding son Ermenrik was acting afterwards as its mighty and cruel ruler.

As pointed out above and so far, both Samson and Ermenrik seem worthy of synchronizing them with the Merovingian leaders Childeric and Clovis I.

Weland and Widga

Weland

He is mentioned in the appendix or 'addendum' of the German Heldenbuch editions. Earlier remarks and renditions on Weland provide e.g. The Lament of Deor, an 8th-century elegy, the heroic poem Waldere, the Wǫlundarkviða of the Elder Edda. The Beowulf connects best armour with Weland’s work. The Old Norse scribes of the Þiðreks saga use the form Velent, while their younger colleagues of the Old Swedish transmissions spell him Weland, Velland(h), Wellandh.

Weland’s father Vaðe, a 'risi a siolande' as appositioned by the Old Norse manuscripts of the Þiðreks saga, is mentioned in The Widsith, a 'poetry' that has been generally regarded as a survey of European individuals, kings and heroes:
 
Witta weold Swæfum, Wada Hælsingum

The identical form Wada (alternatively Wade) is preferred by the Old Swedish scribes. Kemp Malone (1962, p. 207) remarks on the quoted line (22) that
 
the thulaman thinks of Wada, not as a mythological figure of any kind but rather as a Germanic king, ruler of a tribe apparently historical. The theory that Wada "was originally a sea-giant, dreaded and honored by the coast tribes of the North Sea and the Baltic" (Chambers 95), seems therefore unlikely. On the later (largely mythological) versions of the tale of Wade, see Chambers 95 ff.
 
Referring to the Venerable Bede, Malone does not equate Weland’s son called Widgawith with the (North-)Suebian Witta who has been identified with Widning and Wihtgils, assumed to be the grandfather(s) of Hengist and Horsa. The Widsith introduces Weland’s son Wudga at line 124 and line 130 with Heimir (Heime) = Hãma (cf. Beowulf line 1198). As already remarked above, Dietrich’s contemporary Widga must not necessarily come from the other side of the Alps.

H. Ritter and the author estimate the 'historical horizon' of the Weland parts of the 'Didriks chronicle' and Þiðreks saga between 440 and 470 (see Ritter’s timeline). After his apprenticeship Weland was in service of King Nidung who was ruling not only his Jutlandic kingdom but also the Salian territory called Hesbaye ('Hesbania'). The manuscripts refer to his daughter called 'Heren' (cf. Icelandic MS A, intertextually to be identified with 'Beaduhild') and three of his sons. Weland, being cited also in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Vita Merlini as Pocula que sculpsit Guielandus in urbe Sigeni, fled across Weser river and the North Sea to Jutland with a specially prepared trunk that serves him well as a watercraft. In order to save his life, he had slain his outstandingly skilled masters for his father’s unwillingly broken oath at 'Ballova Smithy', a location 30 miles far from Siegen town. Geoffrey of Monmouth never mentions Ballova in his literary work, whereas the Þiðreks saga and the Old Swedish texts never Siegen. Although Geoffrey’s Sigeni has been alternatively surmised as Segontium or Sigontium as the Old Welsh Kaer Sigont, we nevertheless may wonder how Geoffrey had acquired the interesting information about Weland.

The Waltharius remarks Weland shortly with these words at the lines 965 & 966:

Et nisi duratis Wielandia fabrica giris
Obstaret, spisso penetraverit ilia ligno.

Weland, grandson of King Vilkinus, was recorded as superb working smith and artist of his time, certainly appearing as an early predecessor of Leonardo da Vinci. However, Weland became victim of intrigues from some man of King Nidung, and so he secretly took murderous revenge on his two youngest but innocent sons for laming him by order of that probably unsuspecting big ruler. Thereafter Weland made his daughter pregnant at his forge and finally left the king with an aircraft that corresponds well with a simple modern windsurfing glider, as Ritter has explanatorily interjected, cf. Der Schmied Weland, Hildesheim 1999, which includes a nautical expert’s opinion of Weland’s passage. We naturally would remember at this point Daedalus of Greek mythology, the extraordinary inventor and master craftsman who devised the Cretan Labyrinth for the fierce Minotaur: King Mino, to whom Daedalus fled after he had committed murder, would not allow him to leave the Minotaur’s special dwelling from which he could escape by artificial wings nevertheless. We thus may wonder if there were any better literary innuendo for Weland’s literary biographer to confirm and analogize Fredegar’s Minotaur with King Nidung! Maurus Servius Honoratus, late 4th-century grammarian, left the interesting commentary on Virgil that the crippled Vulcan, metal-smith of the gods, attempted to use violence on goddess Minerva when she met him for forging service. If the scribe of Weland’s vita had transformed this anecdote, the manuscripts certainly would be basing on scholarly background!
The Franks Casket Lid Panel
The Franks Casket Front Panel
The whalebone made Franks Casket, Anglo-Saxon, first half of 8th century. Regarding the divided scenes on its front panel (smaller picture), '... the left is derived from the Germanic legend of Weland the Smith ...' as The British Museum points out briefly. Surprisingly, the front panel’s right half shows historical adoration of the Magi. Carved scenes of quite similar style from the Þiðreks saga and related Nordic narratives were also adorning the former church of Hyl(l)estad, Norway. The photo on the left, imaging the scene in the left half of the front panel, documents also Weland getting and feeding geese, as this action will clearly mark the most important first step for the
Creation of the Mimung (Sv 64, Mb 67).i The larger scene shown by this smaller photo refers to Weland working at his smithy. He might be depicted at that time when he had slain the two youngest sons of King Nidung, seemingly illustrated with one small human body laying on the ground behind Weland (Sv 73, Mb 74). This scene corresponds well with the appearance of King Nidung’s daughter and a supernatural maiden serving Weland with a bottle of liquid to make her obedient. Thus, the artist seems to consider mythological tradition. The first panoramic image of the casket’s lid '... shows another Germanic story about a hero named Ægili who is shown defending his home from armed raiders.' (Comment by The British Museum). Ritter regards this scene 'The Return of Odysseus', however.
The Smithy, carving at Hylestad church portal
Two carvings of Hylestad Stave Church.
 
Slaying the Smith, carving at Hylestad church portal
The redrawn scene above remembers well also Weland slaying Amelias, Master Smith of King Nidung.

i A method of refining iron by digestion of birds is believed to be traditionally kept as a secret in China and Tibet. Ritter remarks that the usage of bird excretion for making nitriding steel of astonishing high quality was scientifically verified by
Dr Karl Daeves, Technical Engineer,
Rundschau deutscher Technik, Nr.26 20.Jg. Germany 1940;
Dr J. Heddaeus, Technical Engineer,
Das Werk, Heft 9, Jg. 1936, published by Vereinigte Stahlwerke AG, Germany.
See appended document
The Steel of Weland the Smith –
Summaries of Scientific Analyses.
Velad-Welad Solidus
The Velad or Welad Solidus.


Weland of Old Tradition 
Ritter provides on Weland another discovery being evaluated of 6th–7th century (!), thus of elder creation than the Franks Casket: the Gold Solidus of Frisian Schweindorf with its obverse estimated as a facsimile of a typical Late Antiquity solidus. The reverse shows the likeness of a person and runic symbols of enlarged Anglo-Saxon set of characters.
Jantina H. Looijenga, authoress of the doctoral thesis
Runes around the North Sea and on the Continent AD 150–700, classifies this piece as:
»... a cast gold solidus, found in Schweindorf near Aurich in 1948. Now in the Ostfriesisches Landesmuseum, Emden. Date 575–625.
Runes run left: weladu or þeladu.

WELADU solidus

The initial rune has a large loop, from the top of the headstaff to the bottom, so either w or þ may be read. As þeladu does not render something meaningful, generally the reading wela[n]du is preferred. This is a personal name Wela(n)du, cf. Old English Weland, Old Norse-Icelandic Volundr, New German Wieland
*wsla-handuz, nominative singular maskuline: u-stem, ‘trickster'. (Düwel/Tempel 1968/70; Beck 1981:69ff. with references). The first part of the compound is *wel – ‘trick, ruse' cf. Old Nordic vél ‘artifice, craft, device‘ followed by the suffix -and < Germanic *handuz.
The name might refer to the well-known legendary smith Weland.«

Tineke Looijenga, authoress of Texts and Contexts of the Oldest Runic Inscriptions, Leiden & Boston 2003, corrected this reading of the solidus to
welad.
Thus, we would adhere to consideration that coincident 'Lower Saxon minting' referring to mythological persons might be unprecedented. The Ardre VIII image stone of Gotland (8th century) and the Cross-shafts of Leeds (c. 11th century) provide other pictorial traditions of Weland the Smith.

Weland of old tradition. Painting by E. Nowack.
 

Widga

The Waldere provides the eldest known father-son-connection of Wēland with Widia and represents the earliest tradition we have on the relationship of the latter to Ðēoderīc, whereas the Widsith does obviously disregard the father of Wudga. He appears remarkably as Widrick in Old Danish heroic epics(19) and became also a significant subject of receptive MHG poetry (Wittich, Witige). As concerns his original ancestry and homeland in particular, Gunnar Olof Hyltén-Cavallius and other philologists identify Weland’s son Widga (Widerich) with a 'Widerick' Widrik Willandsson or Werlandsson by sources related to the former 'Willands' härad, now Villands härad, as this region of Skåne seems to correspond with the name of Widga’s father (Hyltén-Cavallius, op. cit. pgs XXIIf.). Some local historians of this administrative district have suggested a naming from rather a pretty lake called Wætli thereabout which, however, seems to point to a derivation which does reflect an early or final property of Widga’s grandfather Vaðe, Vaði, Wadi (cf. the forms by Icel. MS A; cf.
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villands_h%C3%A4rad#Namnet [retrieved March 2016]).

Coat of arms: Villands häredThe 19th-century copyist and reviewer of the Old Swedish manuscripts quotes i.a. from sources which situate the final resting place of Widrik in the same 'härad' of South Sweden, district of Bromölla-Valje-Sölvesborg. The current coat of arms of the superior administrative district has been designed with hues corresponding with Sweden’s national colours. The Royal Library of Denmark preserves at least one elder version of this coat of arms which is adorned with a centre-placed carbuncle-stone. Hyltén-Cavallius mentions that in the aforementioned region the grave of Widrik, in the south of today’s Vidriksberg farmstead by other sources,(20) was documented for the archives of Scandinavian king Christian IV by Rev. Jens Svendssøn in 1624. Referring to this localization, Nils H. Sjöborg’s Samlingar för nordens fornälskare, innehållende Inskryfter, Figurer ... II (Stockholm 1824) ascribes Widrik’s grave to c. A.D. 500.

Combining this context with Viðga’s literary vita provided by the Old Norse manuscripts, he finally could have been returned from Gransport (or his Northern German family and property) to the defining or last residential place of his father and/or grandfather which, however, may be less likely Fimber, Isle of Fehmarn in the Baltic Sea, but more likely another northern location as being placed above at the disposal. Considering the interliterary spelling variations of Widga the hero (cf. e.g. Roswitha Wisniewski, Mittelalterliche Dietrichdichtung, Heidelberg 1986, p. 276), especially the Old Swedish name forms Wideke and Wideki can generally echo a result of shortening derivation from Old German Widechinstein, a former name related to the Sayn-Wittgenstein dynasty.

The Latin manuscript of Þiðreks saga, ch. CLVI published by Johan Peringskiöld, provides these insignias of Widga:
   
  ...Galeam gestabat candidi coloris, scutum, ephippium, axillaris tunica, vexillum, scutum rubro colore interstinctum malleum forcipemque exhibebant, quorum in medio tres elucebant carbunculi lapides, gentilitia paterni stemmatis insignia, quæ fabrilium operum magistrum eum prorsus excellentem præfigurabant; maternum genus per lapides ternos indigitabatur...
   
  The English translator Edward R. Haymes reads the corresponding passage of Mb 175 as follows:
   
  Vidga the strong had all of his equipment white in color, shield, saddle, surcoat, banner and helmet-cover. His shield was marked with red paint in the shape of a hammer and tongs. There are three carbuncle-stones in his shield. The mark is a sign of the origin of his father. He is a smith and the most skilled of all men in the world. The three gemstones signify his mother.

 
 
There is no proof of evidence that name-giving of this South-Swedish region, apparently related to father and son Weland and Widga, is based on rather fictitious figural background.
 
Atala of Susat and a perspective survey

Ferdinand Holthausen, a 19th-century researcher of Þiðreks saga and Dietrich epics, suggested in 1884 [transl.]:
 

I think that narration of Suffrid’s Frisian chronicle principally relates an old local saga of Soest, in fact the original version considering the later amalgamation with the Attila saga. Attila has been early localized in Lower German heroic epics, also Heimi at Wedinghausen and the Rabenschlacht on the Moselle; and so the sagas of the former and the Frisii were gradually fusing in Soest’s mind; and at that time when the men of Soest, Bremen, and Münster were reciting their sagas and lays to the saga writer, this compound must have been a very solid one. The report of Thidreks saga provides the result of this saga amalgamation; so the great king of the Huns appears as Frisian prince and founder of Soest...

(Studien zur Thidrekssaga, Part II. PBB 9 [Paul u. Braunes Beiträge], p. 456.)
   
Why did Holthausen stumble upon the Frisian chronicle written by Suffridus Petrus in 1590? This is the very passage Holthausen encountered in Suffrid’s De Frisiorum antiquitate et origine libri tres  II, 15:
 

Vesvalii igitur ab eo tempore, quo terram istam occupassent, una cum confoederatis Angrivarijsii vicinam Frisiam diversis incursionibus infestarunt, & tandem anno Christi 344. qui Odilbaldi, Frisiorum ducis, nonus fuit, terram Gruninganamiii ex improviso invaserunt, & antequam Frisij in armis esse possent, omnia flammis ac rapinis vastaverunt usque ad fluvium Lavicamiv, qui eam terram ab Occidentali Frisia separat. Odilbaldus autem, contractis quantocius copijs, hostes fugientes non modo praeda exuit, set & domum usque insecutus, castris aliquot ac munitionibus occupatis privavit; nec porro destitit, donec Angrivariam totam, & maxima quoque ex parte Vesvaliam suae ditioni subjugasset, relicto illic praesidiario duce, cui nomen erat Yglo Lascon. Ille hisce populis in officio continendis praefuit annis integris sexaginta quinque, & ad securitatem domini sui aedificavit arces tres, primam in Angria, quae postea Vitekindi fuit; alteram Susati, quae postea in civitatem per Dagobertum Clotarii filium sublimata, & tandem S. Cuniberto Coloniensi Episcopo donata est, quod nostris scriptoribus referentibus, attestantur Chronica civitatis Lippiae & Coloniensis; tertiam Iburgi, quod nunc Driburgum dicitur, de quibus infra plura.

________________________
  i Westfalians
 ii Engern: name of a tribe on Weser river
iii Groningen (Netherlands)
 iv frequently mentioned in local histories but today difficult to prove as watercourse that possibly had some closer relation to Dutch 'Lauwers zee'
 
 
Suffridus Petrus, of Christian name Sjoerd Pietersz, was Professor of Jurisprudence, Canon at St Apostles Church of Cologne, and appointed 'First Historiographer' of West-Frisian corporative system in 1590. Although his obvious patriotic disposition has been indicated for some uncertain historical reprojection, we further should keep an eye on the following text from his Frisian chronicle:
 

Supradictus autem Frisiorum dux Odilbaldus filium habuit, cui nomen erat Udolphus Haron, quem Gymnasticis certaminibus egregie domi exercitatum anno Christi 357. in Angriam misit, ut eum Yglo Lascon veris praelijs cum hoste subeundis expoliret, apud quem paulo plus biennio uno fuit.
     Habitabat ea tempestate prope Hamburgum praecipuae nobilitatis satrapa Vergistus, qui filios duos Hengistum & Horsum, & filiam unam nomine Svanam habebat. Filij in Albis mortui sunt. Udolphus dum visendorum amicorum gratia Saxoniam ingressus, ad Vergistum divertit, amore Svanae correptus est, quam & cum parentum utrinque consensu uxorem duxit.
 (op. cit.)

According to the Frisia seu de viris rebusque illustribus, written by Martinus Hamconius, a king called Odilbaldus was succeeding his father in A.D. 435. The 'hypothetical Frisian historiography', as the writings by both Frisian scholars are recalled by some scholars, provides from its more or less fragmentary accounts at least seven reges, principes, duces, potestati with a name or second name based on *Adel. It seems more than likely that this form does basically correspond with *Odil. Thus, we are apparently confrontated with a dynasty of Frisian Adils, Aðils or Athils reaching the 5th century. As maintained by these accounts, an Adgill(us) rules later in the 6th, another one in the 8th century. Although not a few details in the Frisian vitae of these leaders appear apocryphally constructed, there is no proof of evidence that all representatives of this regnal clan, even those of Migration Period as listed by Suffridus Petrus, Martinus Hamconius and other authors, are purely fictitious.

Since we can not clearly distinguish between Frisian-born and Saxon rulers in this spatiotemporal matter of historical or historiographical recognition, and, against Suffrid’s and Martin’s accounts, neither verify nor disprove the political connectivity of Soest with the Frisian kingdom in Merovingian and even later times, we should not disregard that mediaeval historiography could relate not only a former 4th or 6thcentury ruler of a southern region to the Odil–Adel–Adgill dynasty and call or byname any of their successors likewise an Athil (see farther below). Besides, it may be worth to compare the obvious common stems of Adil–Odil with the forms of the Eddic rulers Atli and Budli, where the initial consonant of Atli’s ancestor seems to emphasize *Udli / *Odli. The ending forms -li and -il appear certainly interchangeable for interliterary usage. Moreover, it should be recognized in an ethno-geographical context that the Icelandic and Swedish manuscripts introduce not only an Odilia – presumably indicating a daughter of an offspring or good-son Elsung of an Odil – as Þiðrek’s mother, but also, as forwarded as well by the Old Norse texts, an equally named woman as spouse of Ermenrik’s advisor Sifka. All this cannot reflect a basic narrative milieu of the Ostrogothic Theoderic.

Holthausen’s perception, in view of considerable literary detraction of 'Attila the Balkan Hun', is based on an early passage in Þiðreks saga that relates the Frisian invasion and conquest of King Melias' Hunaland. Johan Peringskiöld provides this text of the Latin script which appears closely related to the Stockholm folio of Þiðreks saga (cf. Mb 39–42):
 

LXII.
Inclaruit ea tempestate rex Osides, qui Frislandiæ regno potiebatur, opum atque regionum amplitudine præstans. Duo ipsi nati erant filii, Ortnitus atque Attila. Quorum minorennis alter a primis pueritiæ annis roboris & fortitudinis egregia dedit specimina. Equestria exercitia probe edoctus, liberalem habebat animum, sapientæ etiam donis instructum. Cætera alienarum etiam rerum appetens erat, in prosequendo proposito suo maximopere persistens. Hunc duodecimum ætatis annum cum ageret, præfectum prætorio constituit Osides. Attila crebas cum copiis suis in regnum Meliæ excursiones fecit. Quod vero annis iam gravis esset Melias, nec filium haberet, cui tutandam regni finium curam committere posset, multum detrimenti ab Attila ipsi allatum fuit, subjugatis urbibus eius plurimis. Circa idem tempus in morbum incidens Milias, militiæ duces atque præfectos ad se convocari iussit, ut rerum secreta cum ipsis communicaret. Doluit autem vehementer, nullum sibi esse filium hæredem cui regni gubernacula committere posset; quippe filiam in Vilkinalandiæ boreali regione marito nuptam, generumque suum Osantrigem moderando regno proprio intentum esse. Interea multo cum successu per Hunalandiam grassari Attilam Osidis filium; unde conjectura haud fallaci prævidere se, ex stirpis suæ progenie propediem ablatum iri Hunalandiæ regimen. Hanc ob causam regnum Osantrigi committendum voluit, ut adversus Attilam tutaretur. His agitatus curis, simulque morbi ægritudine labefactatus, tandem exspiravit Melias. Mortuum magno luctu prosequebantur Hunalandiæ cives, propter pacis quæ coluerat studia, opumque erogandarum liberalitatem, inque legibus servandis exactitudinem. Huius morte cognita, Attila solennem populi conventum indixit, advocatisque familiaribus suis, prolixo verborum sermone exposuit, quanto hactenus successu res in Hunalandia prospere ab ipso gestæ, urbesque expugnatæ fuerant : Iuramento insuper se adstrinxit, non prius avitum regnum repetiturum se, donec universa Hunalandia sub suam potestatem redacta sit. Ipso hunc in modum loquuto, ingens adstantium in multum diem concitatus est clamor, collaudantibus aliis insignem regis virtutem atque fortitudinem, divitiarumque copiam, qua priores sua familia satos longe superavit.

LXIII.
Melias Vilkinaburgum primariam regni sui sedem habuit. Redacto autem in suam potestatem universo regno, sedem hanc Susatum promovit, quam & diutius deinde tenuit. Huius nimirum urbis ipse prima fundamenta posuerat, permanetque hodiernum in diem celebris eius gloria, & opulentiæ fama. Attila solenni pompa Hunalandiæ rex creatus est. Quam dignitatem sibi præreptam cum cognovit Osantrix, admodum id ægre tulit utpote iure hæreditario Odæ uxoris suæ Meliæ filiæ sibi debitam. Hinc dissidiorum origo inter utrosque reges, prælia cruenta cædesque. Occupatum nihilominus regnum Meliæ gladio sibi vindicavit Attila, addito prætextu illo, Osidis in Frislandia regnum exiguis limitibus circumscriptum, patri suo vix in vita suffecturum esse ; quin & ægre laturum fratrem Ortnitum, si defuncto patre, regnum cum ipso dividere velit. Quapropter regno multis cum molestiis occupato, se nequaquam cessurum, sed ultima potius experiri paratum. Interjecto tempore aliquo ê vivis excessit Osides Attilæ pater, post quem regnum Frislandiæ  occupavit filius eius maior natu Ortnides. Ipsi filius natus est Osides, optimæ atque præclaræ indolis, egregiisque corporis exercitiis imbutus. Ad adultam cum pervenisset ætatem, patruum suum Attilam Hunalandiæ regem adire gestiebat. Advenientem multo honore excepit Attila, præfectum legionis equitum eum constituens. Hoc in statu diuturno tempore res perstiterunt.

LXIV.
Attila vocato ad se nepote Oside, eum sui causa in Wilkinalandiam ad Osantrigem ablegandum dixit, pro sollicitandis filiæ regiæ nuptiis. Magno mox apparatu iter instructum, adjunctis ei in societatem viginti præstantissimis viris è nobilium cohorte ...
 
Edward R. Haymes provides these passages as follows:
 

39.
There was a king named Osid. He ruled a country called Frisia. He was a powerful chieftain and rich both in lands and in movable goods. He had two sons. The elder was named Ortnid and the younger Attila. Attila was large and strong very early in his life, a good knight on horseback, generous with money, wise and ambitious. He was the greatest fighter in all respects. When he was twelve years old, King Osid set him as chief over all of his chieftains. King Attila often rode out with his army into the domain of King Milias, who was feeble with age and who did not have a son to protect him. Attila did much damage in his kingdom and took many cities in his land.
      At this time King Milias fell seriously ill. He summoned his chieftains and conferred with them secretly. He greatly regretted that he had no son to rule after him and that his daughter was married off in the north in Vilkinaland, and that his son in law, King Osantrix, was too far away to take care of his kingdom. But Sir Attila, the son of King Osid, was often in his kingdom, and thus he thought that the kingdom might pass out of his family, even though he wished that King Osantrix would rule over it and protect it from Attila.
      Because of these concerns and because he was very sick, King Milias died. He was greatly mourned in Hunland, because he was peaceful and generous with money and because he had kept the law while he had ruled Hunland.

40.
When Attila, the son of King Osid, heard that King Milias was dead, he summoned an assembly of the multitude and had his friends come. He gave a long speech about how well his harrying expeditions into Hunland had gone and how many cities he had taken in the domain of King Milias. He then swore that he would not return to the kingdom of his father until he had won all of Hunland. His speech produced great applause and for a long time everyone praised him for his generosity, his valor, and for the fact that he had become much more powerful than his kinsmen had been.

41.
Attila was accepted as king over the army and the retainers gave him the title of king. He swore to them justice and law in return, and another time he promised them that he would never return to the kingdom of his father until he had won all of Hunland with his sword along with all of the territory King Milias had owned. King Milias had had his capital in Valterborg, but King Attila set up his city at Susa. It is now called Soest. He became the richest of kings. For a long time there was enmity with the Vilkinamen, because King Osantrix thought that King Attila had taken by force the kingdom that belonged to his queen Oda and had belonged earlier to her father, King Milias. But King Attila kept all of the kingdom that belonged to Hunland so that King Osantrix received no tribute from it.
      Now King Osid died, the father of King Attila, and his kingdom was taken by his elder son, Ortnid, and he was now king in Frisia. He had one son, named Osid. He sent him to King Attila to be raised. Osid was the bravest and most gallant of men. King Attila placed him as chieftain in his army over many of his knights. The kingdom remained thus a long time.

42.
It happened one time that King Attila called his kinsman Osid to him and said that he wished to send him north into Vilkinaland to meet King Osantrix. His task was to ask for the hand of Erka, his daughter, in marriage. King Attila also chose a second chieftain to go on this journey. His name was Rodolf and he was a duke over many knights in Attila’s army. He selected twenty knights on the basis of their courtesy and good manners to accompany them, and each had two well-accoutered squires. Thus was this journey splendidly planned in all details ...
 
The Old Swedish manuscripts render this brief version (Ortnitus ↔ Herding):
 

33.
In Frisia was a king called Osid. He had two sons; one was called Herding, the other Aktilia. He had in mind to make war anytime, and he gained some land and glorious victories. Once he was warring against Melias king. When Aktilia invaded Melia’s land, he said: ‘I will never return unless and until I have won this land!’ He won many battles against Melias king. Melias withdrew to an urban location called Wilcina. Aktilius won all his land and subjected it by his rules. And he settled at a place called Susat, and he let build it up preciously. Tribute was paid to Aktilius as king of all Hunaland that Melias had had before him. Osanttrix king heard of it, and it seemed to him ashamed that the father of his spouse had been expelled in such way. Now a big war began between Osanttrix and Aktilius king, and they had many battles against each other. However, Aktilius king did not lose anything of the realm that he had won. He said that nobody shall get anything of it as long as he was living: ‘My brother Herding shall have Frisia after the death of our father.’

34.
Then Osid, king of Frisia, died. Herdink took over the realm. A son called Osid was born to him. He became a strong man. As he was grown up, he rode to his father-brother Aktilius king, and he was always the commander of his folk when they were warring. Aktilius sent out his nephew Osid and with him xx knights to Osanttrix king, submitting that Aktilius wants to have his daughter Ercha.



A comparison of these passages with Suffrid’s report results in these general relations, cf. Willi Eggers (op. cit. p. 84f.):
 
Thidreks saga & 'Didriks chronicle' Suffridus Petrus
The warriors of Osid, king of Frisia, invade Hunaland under Atala’s command. The warriors of Odilbald, king of Frisia, are acting in response of attacking southern and south-eastern tribes 'Vesfali' and 'Angrivari' and invade regions of the later Westphalia under Yglo Lascon’s command.
Atala takes Susat as residence and builds it up. Yglo Lascon stays in conquered Westphalian land. He builds up three fortressed settlements. The most important one is Soest.
Osid, son of Herding and grandson of Osid the Elder, kings of Frisia, moves to Atala. Udolph Haron, son of Odilbald, moves to Yglo Lascon for education.
Osid the Younger goes to Osantrix, king of the Wiltsians. As representative of Atala he makes a proposal for Osantrix' daughter. Udolph Haron goes to the region of the later Hamburg for courting Svana, daughter of Vergist whom Suffrid quotes as an influential ruler on the Lower Elbe, territory of the later Hamburg.
 
There are some different details in these courting stories. For instance, Suffridus or his source does not mention a kinship between Odilbald and Yglo Lascon, and there is no 'rule keeping escort' for Udolph’s special mission, whilst the Old Norse + Swedish texts relate that Margrave Rodingeir/Rodger, an accompanying but obviously interpolative nobelman based in Hunaland, finally takes the chance to court the Wiltsian princess Berta.

Nevertheless we may wonder if this literary comparison can be based on an believable historical event. (The Helgakviða Hjǫrvarðssonar from the herioc lays of the Old Norse Edda offers an interesting allusion where King Hjǫrward sends out Atli to Svavaland for courting King Svafnir’s daughter.)

Comparing the geohistorical pattern of the Osantrix+Oda and Atala+Erka wooing stories with both Ritter’s timeline and Suffrid’s history of Frisia, these episodes seem to have occurred in 4th and/or 5th century. As regards Suffrid’s date tandem anno Christi 344, we have to reconsider historical incursions of 'northern Saxons' into regions of today’s North Rhine-Westphalia and southern parts of Lower Saxony by means of some independent ethno-archaeological research. For instance, Peter Berghaus contextually agrees with the archaeological and numismatical research by Jan W. de Boone:
 
Den nördlichen Teil dieses Schatzfundgebietes, den Raum zwischen Wiehengebirge und Teutoburger Wald, hat J. W. de Boone sehr überzeugend mit dem Vorstoß einer sächsischen Gruppe etwa um 370 in Verbindung gebracht.17) Diese Deutung wird durch die Fundumstände des Ellerbecker Fundes unterstrichen; er stammt aus einer Siedlung des 3. bis 5. Jahrhunderts, die bei dem sächsischen Vorstoß überrannt und verwüstet worden sein dürfte. Man möchte fast glauben, daß sich ein erneuter Vorstoß dann fünfzig Jahre später weiter nach Süden, bis in das Hellweggebiet gerichtet hat. Seine Spuren hat er in den dortigen Schätzen aus dem Anfang des 5. Jahrhunderts hinterlassen.

[Transl.:  J. W. de Boone has very convincingly connected the northern part of this treasure-finding-region, the area between the Wiehengebirge and the Teutoburger Wald, to a group of Saxons pushing forward about A.D. 370.17) This interpretation is underlined by the characteristic circumstances of the Ellerbecker finding. It belongs to a 3rd- to 5th- century settlement which must have been overrun and devastated by this Saxon advance. One would almost believe that a further advance was launched fifty years later farther to the south, just into the Hellweg area. This incursion has left its traces in the local treasures dated into the beginning of 5th century.]
__________________
17) J. W. de Boone: De Franken van hun eerste optreden tot de dood van Childerik, Diss. Groningen 1954, S. 109.
 
Cf. Peter Berghaus, Der römische Goldmünzenfund von Ellerbeck, Lkr. Osnabrück, in: Die Kunde. Neue Folge 7, 1956, Heft 1–2, pgs 30–40, cf. p. 37.

Wilhelm Winkelmann reassesses the conjected opinion of Berghaus as historical 4th–5th-century incursions of northern people into the Hellweg region which includes the urban district of Soest. Winkelmann, formerly archaeological director of German LWL organization, connects the treasure trove discoveries and other archaeological finds with these ethnographical conclusions:
 
Aber warum sind diese Schätze vergraben worden? Bei dem einen oder anderen Schatz, die mit großen Steinen abgedeckt waren, Ellerbeck und Letmathe-Oestrich, kann es sich um Opfergaben handeln. Aber ihre dichte Verbreitung im Norden und Osten des altfränkischen Gebietes weist auf wiederholte, vom Norden erfolgende kriegerische Vorstöße, die sich zwischen 365 und 450 ereigneten. Hier wird schon seit der ersten zusammenfassenden Veröffentlichung dieser Funde durch Sture Bolin im Jahre 1926 und später auch durch de Boone und P. Berghaus auf wiederholte sächsische Vorstöße verwiesen, die über den Hellweg bis zum Rhein führten. In diesen unsicheren Kriegsjahren sind zweifellos die Schätze vergraben worden, um sie vor dem Feind zu verbergen und später wieder zu heben. Aber dazu kam es nicht mehr. Denn schon begannen aus den nördlicher liegenden sächsischen Gebieten an der Weser erste Vorstöße nach Süden. Ein erster Zug der Jahre 365 bis 370 durchbrach das Wiehengebirge, das Weserbergland und gewann das Gebiet bis zur oberen Ems und oberen Lippe. Ein weiterer Zug der Jahre 425 bis 450 traf auch das Hellweggebiet bis zum Rhein.

[Transl.:  But why have these treasures been buried? Some of the treasures, covered with large stones at Ellerbeck and Letmathe-Oestrich, can be sacrificial offerings. But their dense spreading in the north and east of the old Frankish region points to warlike advances made repeatedly from the north between A.D. 365 and 450. The first summarizing publication on these findings by Sture Bolin in 1926, other later by de Boone and P. Berghaus, does already refer to repeated Saxon advances across the Hellweg to the Rhine. In these uncertain years of war the treasures have undoubtedly been buried in order to conceal them from the enemy, and to raise them again later. However, this did not happen, since new advances from northern Saxon regions on the Weser begun southwards. A first movement between A.D. 365 and 370 broke through the Wiehengebirge, the Weserbergland and took the region up to the upper Ems and upper Lippe rivers. A further movement from A.D. 425 to 450 also affected the Hellweg area to the Rhine.]
 
Winkelmann remarks also opposite pushing migrations in the same period. Thus, these movements seem consistent with Suffridus' version about those eastern tribes (somewhere on the rivers Hunte and Weser) who invaded regions on the Lower Rhine, Drente, and other areas of Frisia:
 
In den gleichen Jahren sind aber aus den elbgermanisch-sächsischen Gebieten zwischen Weser und Hunte auch nach Westen gehende Vorstöße festzustellen. Sie erreichen die Drente, Friesland und weite Gebiete des Niederrheins, wie die zahlreichen einander verwandten sächsischen Gefäße des 5. Jahrhunderts erkennen lassen.

[Transl.:  In the same years, however, advances even to western regions can be determined from Saxon regions on the Elbe, between Weser and Hunte rivers. They reach Drente river, Frisia, and wide areas on the Lower Rhine, as this is shown by many corresponding Saxon vessels of 5th century.]
 
Cf. Wilhelm Winkelmann, Frühgeschichte und Frühmittelalter, in: Wilhelm Kohl (Ed.), Westfälische Geschichte 1, Düsseldorf  1983, pgs 187–230. Both quotations p. 194; includingly referring to Sture Bolin, Fynden av Romerska mynt i det fria Germanien. Doctoral thesis, Lund 1926.

Albert Genrich, Die Altsachsen, Hildesheim 1981, does also estimate these forcible movements of 'northern Saxons' in 4th and 5th century  (pgs 25–27):
 
Im westlichen Randgebiet Niedersachsens, dem an Westfalen angrenzenden Osnabrücker Raum, läßt sich eine gewaltsame Ausdehnung der Sachsen durch einige Münzfunde deutlich machen. Innerhalb einer germanischen Siedlung bei Ellerbeck, Kr. Osnabrück, wurde eine anscheinend in Notzeiten vergrabene Bronzedose mit 25 römischen Goldmünzen, sogenannten Solidi, gefunden (...) Die jüngste Münze ist um 367 geprägt worden. Dieser Münzschatz steht nicht allein. Andere Funde gleicher Art und ähnlicher Datierung sowie eine Anzahl von einzeln gefundenen Goldmünzen derselben Zeit finden sich in demselben Gebiet und im benachbarten Westfalen. Der letzte Bearbeiter dieses Fundkomplexes, Peter Berghaus, vermutet, daß die Münzen den Sold germanischer Krieger in römischen Diensten darstellen. In die Erde gelangten sie, weil sie anläßlich eines sächsischen Vorstoßes nach Süden – am Ende des 4. Jahrhunderts – vergraben wurden, der das Wiehengebirge betraf. Gleichartige Funde aus dem Hellweggebiet in Westfalen sind an das Ende des 5. Jahrhunderts zu datieren. Sie kennzeichnen damit den Fortgang einer hier gewaltsamen Ausdehnung des sächsischen Machtbereiches.

[Transl.:  In a western fringe of Lower Saxony, the area of Osnabrück adjoining Westphalia, a violent expansion of Saxons can be made clear by a few coins. In a Germanic settlement near Ellerbeck, district of Osnabrück, a box of bronze containing 25 Roman gold coins, the so-called Solidi, was found being buried in distress (...) The youngest of them was coined around A.D. 367. This coin treasure stands not alone. Other finds of the same kind and similar dating, as well as a number of individually found gold coins of the same period, are found in the same region and the neighbouring Westphalia. Peter Berghaus, the last editor of this fund complex, assumes that the coins represent the pay of Germanic warriors in Roman service. They were buried because of a Saxon advance to the south at the end of 4th century, which did affect the Wiehengebirge. Similar finds from the Hellweg area in Westphalia can be dated into the end of 5th century. They thus characterize the progress of a violent expansion of the Saxon sphere of power.]
 
Both Berghaus and Winkelmann date the 5th-century invasion of northern folk(s) into the region between of Osnabrück and the Hellweg rather not after 450.
 
Other sources of contextual research:
 
Werner Best, Ostwestfalen im 4. und 5. Jahrhundert nach Christus. Gedanken zur ethnischen Veränderung einer Landschaft während der Völkerwanderungszeit, in: Ravensberger Blätter Heft 1, 1996, pgs 29–38.
 
An ordinarily quoted collection of elder studies on the emergence, constitution, political and ethnosocial  structures of the Saxons: Walther Lammers (Ed.), Entstehung und Verfassung des Sachsenstammes, Darmstadt 1967.

Solidi Findspots 4-5th century in Saxony, bordering Westphalia and NL Albert Genrich (op. cit.) quotes this mapped survey provided by Peter Berghaus, op. cit. p. 38.















 



Frisian, Saxon and Northern rulerships

Suffridus, who implicates the coastland between the rivers Ems and Elbe also Frisian, provides two Yglos ruling Soest in 4th and 7th century: Lascon in 2nd half of 4th century, Galama in in 7th century. The elder Dutch bibliography comprehends one or both of these Yglos (Iglos) as historical person(s), apart from Suffridus Petrus and Martinus Hamconius notably Abrahm J. van der Aa, Daam Fockema, Christianus Schotanus, Waling Dykstra. Since Soest must have had its local ruler also in first third of 6th century, a contemporary of Theuderic I  in so far, the former could have been an agnate of the 7th- century Yglo. One the other hand, however, the dynastical names and bynames Adel, Adil, then Odil, appear strikingly in Frisian historiography. Furthermore, an Adil is conveyed by the Ynglinga saga, an Eadgils by the Anglo-Saxon Beowulf, an Aðil by Old Norse Hrólfs saga kraka, an Athislus by Saxo’s Gesta Danorum, a northern 5th- to 6th-century Attila by both the Annales Quedlinburgenses and De Origine Gentis Swevorum, an Athisl by the Annales Lundenses which include the Chronicon Lethrense. These name forms may indicate at least the general possibility of a correspondingly named ruler even on a Migration Period location which nowadays borders or pertains to Northern Germany.

Since we can tentatively combine the spelling forms Odil with Adil and Eadgils with both Agils and Athislus, the latter likely form(ed) by a high mediaeval author, we should pay attention to the context provided by the Widsith who relates an Eadgils, ruler of the Myrgings, at lines 93–96. We may assume that he overthrew or became successor of Meaca Myrgingum, line 23, who is possibly/likely King Melias of Þiðreks saga (see below). However, it seems conclusive that Kemp Malone does not agree with an evident Swedish identity of an Eadgils, who is depicted – likely detracted and distorted – by Saxo Grammaticus because (1962, p. 137)
 
(1) Saxo connects the story of Athislus with that of Offa, and since Offa certainly fought the Myrgings the sons of Frowinus presumably fought them too, and Athislus can be identified with the King Eadgils of the Myrgings who figures in Widsith;
(2) the Myrgings were a branch of the Swaefe, and tradition may have turned their king into a Swede through an easy confusion of Swaefe with the Swedish name,
(3) though Saxo makes Athislus a Swede, his slayers are from Sleswick and the episode may reflect prehistoric wars...
 
Kemp Malone on Swaefe = Suebi, (1962, p. 202):
 
The Saxons, not the Suebi, held the south bank of the Eider, and the Myrgings are best taken for a branch of the widespread Saxon confederacy of tribes, a branch later known as Nordalbings.

Although the name of this tribe suits very well the watery region between Elbe and Eider where the seats of the Myrgings were presumably to be found (Malone 1962, p. 186), their territory should be recognized not only on these rivers. Consulting Jan de Vries (op. cit.) on ON. mýrr, the characteristic toponymic environment of this tribe appears to be based on En. mire, myry (adj.), OE. mór, cf. also German moor and Old Frisian mor. Hence, we cannot exclude even adjacent Frisian regions.

The slayers in the vita of Athislus, as claimed by Saxo, may be not automatically transferred to the killers of Eadgils given by the Widsith. Besides, his lines 41–44 are without any participation of this protagonist. Raymond W. Chambers (Widsith, op. cit. p. 260) does also reject a Swedish identity of this Eadgils 'remade by Saxo' and understands him ON. Athils. Regarding his temporal appearance as king of the Myrgings, Chambers argues (p. 94, fn. 2):
 
But Widsith equally represents him as a contemporary of Alboin (died c. 573) and on his ground Eadgils used to be placed with equal confidence in the sixth century.

Neither the place of birth nor ancestral homeland of this Athils is known to the author of the Widsith. As regards the unknown real dimension of his kingdom enclosing or bordering the alleged river Elbe, Malone has already requoted the Vita Meinwerci episcopi Patherbrunnensis for the more or less critical consideration of a regiam curtem Moranga dictam  even more to the west, cf. above ch. Some interliterary_receptions. If combining this context with the transmissions by the Old Norse + Swedish scribes in connection with the ethno-archaeological history of Westphalia’s Migration period, the appearance of a Frisian-born Atala, whom Ritter and other analysts assign to a 5th and 6th century Saxon or 'Hunalandish' contemporary of Þiðrek–Theuderic beyond the Rhine, can be collocated with a conspicuous intertextual Athil.

Although historical research on late mediaeval transmissions about the earliest and early Frisian dynasties has relegated these traditions more or less to pure fiction, they stubbornly stick to the appearance of leaders called *Odil and *Adel/Adil. As already regarded farther above, it seems obvious however that we can not clearly distinguish between Frisian-born and Saxon rulers in this spatiotemporal matter of historical recognition and, against the regnal accounts by Suffridus Petrus and Martinus Hamconius, neither verify nor disprove the political connectivity of Soest with the Frisian kingdom in Migration Period and even later times. Thus, we may take into the basic consideration that a mediaeval historiographer could relate not only a former 4th- or 6th century ruler of a southern region to the Frisian Odil–Adil dynasty and call one of his successors likewise an Athil. Martinus Hamconius forwards with Suffridus Petrus a 6thcentury Adgillus, ruler of a larger territory east of the Rhine – understood as Adgilla or Attila? – as a contemporary of Chlotar II. Martinus' elder colleague Suffridus has already completed that this Frankish king moved martially eastwards with his son Dagobert who might be seen as a decisive Frankish conqueror of Soest. But on the other hand, apart from the contextual northern 'Attila' environment noted by the Annales Quedlinburgenses and De Origine Gentis Swevorum, the line of all those Odils–Adils by Frisian tradition, the Athils recognized by Chambers plus the Atala finally identified by Ritter seem to solidify the existence of a likewise called Saxon ruler who, as an apparent contemporary of the Thuringian War in the early 6th century, could withstand an advance of Franks moving from a region west of the Rhine.

Drawing a preliminary conclusion from these observations, the accounts of the Þiðreks saga, as provided by mediaeval Scandinavian scribes who connect an early advance of the Niflungen with this location, can be regarded at least as an interpolated compilation based on the transmission by an earlier author who wrote mainly as an historiographer. Furthermore, as shown above for the narrative background, we must reckon with the very high probability of hostile incursion and political upheaval at the aforementioned geoethnographical timestamps being related to 4th and 5th century.

 
Some literary-historical perspectives

A maternal line in the synchronizing chart related to the early Merovings seems to indicate an important political relationship between the emerging Franks and their eastern neighbours, as their common Germanic ancestors were severely subjugated by the Romans not long ago. As the Old Norse + Swedish texts provide, such 'association' was hereditarily sealed in the Hesbaye in the middle of 5th century between King Nidung’s daughter and King Sigmund, cf. Sv 148. After an epic insertion dealing with the birth and vanishing of their son Sigurð, seemingly based on a pattern of Franko-German Saint Genevieve Legend which has been enriched with motives of the birth of Moses and the saga of Romulus and Remus, the third writer of the eldest extant manuscript relates the hero’s youth at Mime the Smith. Within this period Sigurð fell in (hot) love with Queen Brynhild 'the Virgin' on location connected with 'Svava': The Harz, certainly most attracting Lower German region.(21) On recommendation of Brynhild, Sigurð moved to King Isung and his gorgeous sons the Old Norse scribes know as strongest fighters – actually a mighty ruler family of a very important political and economic territory: King Isung’s land between the Harz and the mouth of Elbe river, the latter nowadays pertaining to Hamburg, was bordering on the territories of martial Baltic tribes and guaranteeing enormous toll and tax profits for Scandinavian trade routes.

Þiðrek’s 'Grand Banquet Mission', a trip to big fighting event at King Isung (Sv 177–209, Mb 190–226), appears as a tricky political campaign for making Sigurð submissive to think about his father’s connection with the family of an obvious Salian ruler: If the Niflungen were endeavouring to expand their territory towards the northern Meuse or a northern Rhine region, Þiðrek, a good or the best friend of King Atala, could have been compelled to install providently an extraordinary trustee for holding them in check.

The name of Sigurð can express his peculiar skin that even Theophanis the Confessor, eminent Byzantine co-author of a world chronicle from 284 to 813, knew of as characteristic hereditary mark going with the Merovings: an obvious ichthyosis hystrix, striking form of skin disease. Thus, Theophanis' exceptional remark allows to punchline 'bristles of swine growing on Merovingian spine'; see, for instance, the translation by C. Mango and R. Scott. Edward G. Fichtner quotes Theophanis' entry for the years 723–724 with these words:
 
The descendants of that line [the Merovingian line] were called Kristatai, which means 'hairy backs' [trichorachatai]: for, like pigs, they had bristles sprouting from their back.
(Edward G. Fichtner, Sigfrid’s Merovingian Origins, 2004, p. 335.)

Jan de Vries, editor of Old Nordic etymological dictionary (Altnordisches etymologisches Wörterbuch ed 2000), seems to enlighten us on Sigurð’s name and nature:
 
sigg = bacon rind (from primal Nordic 'segja')
sigg (Modern Norse) = rind
sigg (Shetlandic) = hard skin
segg (Modern English dialectical) = skin with gristles

Thus, German affix -fried or -frid seems to accomplish best nicknaming, since it is old suffix for strong male nature or property, cf. 'Burgfried' for biggest tower of a castle or fortress.

Early activities in Baltic lands and Western Russia

The history of the 'Wiltsians' is connected with Þiðrek’s and Atala’s eastern operations and the political interests of the latter holding Hildigund (Hildigunnð) hostage, daughter of Ilias af Gercekia (Grec(i)a, Greka). Hans-Jürgen Hube (op. cit.) remarks Adam of Bremen (a. m.) who provides Graecus and Graecen as general expressions for a Slav, the Slavs resp. While the Old Norse + Swedish texts report on several campaigns of Þiðrek and Atala in regions between Pomerania and some western part of Russia, Procopius of Caesarea transmits an interesting account related to the marriage of a sister of Theodibert and, in so far, most likely a daughter of Theuderic I. This episode, titled as the Story of Radigis by some reviewers, does not appear unbelievable as a whole, notably H. M. Chadwick who sees  no ground for disputing that it has a historical basis, cf. The Heroic Age, Cambridge 1912, pgs 97–99.

Thus, it seems traceable that the eastern Franks under either Theuderic I or his son Theudebert could have been engaged in political relations with a region which J. Peringskiöld called 'Vilkina' land. This spelling form is also mentioned in H. Bertelsen’s ÞIÐRIKS SAGA AF BERN, p. XXIX.

Procopius relates that a daughter of Theuderic became spouse of Hermegis ('Hermegisclus'), king of the Varnii, and, afterwards, his son Radigis. The area of this tribe (cf. Germ. 'Warnen') has been identified with Mecklenburg locations Warnemünde and Warnow, likewise Warnow river. After the death of Hermegis, as Procopius continues his narration (History of the Wars, Gothic Wars, VIII, xx, 11), his son Radigis cancelled intended marriage with a princess of 'Brittia' in order to marry the widow of his father due to the political intention of the late king. Procopius completes that the 'Brittian' princess thereupon confronted Radigis martially with her fleet and finally made him to keep his former promise. Following the descriptions of Procopius, the 'island' called 'Brittia' may be not identical with 'Britannia' (Great Britain), however. The former bewildering geonym has been scholastically interpreted as (a part of) the Jutlandic area; notably by Ernst Stein (Histoire du Bas-Empire, II, Paris 1949, p. 718 f.) and Procopius' translator H. B. Dewing who opts for a probable 'Denmark'. However, these proposals were not accepted and rather replaced with the Brittany peninsula, (part of) the later French Bretagne, by Edward A. Thompson, Procopius on Brittia and Britannia, in: The Classical Quarterly 30, No. 2 (1980), pgs 498-507. Nonetheless, Thompson had to concede again that this localization is also based on some significant source emendation.
 
 
Remarks on 'Historicity' of 'Vilkinaland' and other Baltic lands

The Venerable Bede mentions a Frisian Wiltaburg, a very obvious historical relict quoted as oppidum Wiltorum, in connection with other events related to 6th–7th century, cf. Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum V, XI. Thus, we cannot exclude the tribal existence of the Wilti, this form provided by Widukind of Corvey, on Northern German territories in Roman Times and/or Migration Period. Einhard, 9th- century author of the Vita Karoli Magni, situates the Welataben, apparently identical with the ethnic group he calls Wilzi, as an historical tribe dwelling along a certain shore of the Baltic Sea.

However, the scribes of the Old Swedish texts have been charged with ascribing 'Vilkinaland' to 'Swedish lands'. There are two quotations from the Old Swedish version providing geographical information about 'Vilkinaland', as translated in this way:
 

 

 

Sv 17: A king was called Wilkinus. He was a gorgeous man. He won Wilcina land by fighting for this land that now is called Sweden and Gotland, and Schonen and Sealand and Winland and all the realms there. These were called Wilcina land, as named after King Wilkinus. At that time there was tradition to name a land after the name of its ruler ... 
 
Sv 297: Herding, king of Vilkinia land that is now called Great Sweden, was a rich man and a mighty fighter. He had a spouse called Ostancia; her father was Unne ('wnne'), king of eastern realm... (Herding → 'Hernid ' → Old Norse Hertnið)
 
Ritter recognizes Winland or Vinland as German Wendland. The equation Vilkinaland that is now called Great Sweden has been consigned to the Old Swedish manuscripts. However, its prime scribe left that kind of chosen words which cannot refer to archaic tradition. Thus, we obviously are able to distinguish between the geographical levels of early report and the later 'patriotical edition'. Since all manuscripts can hardly provide more detailed ethnological and geographical definitions of 'Vilcina', 'Vilkina', Wilzi or Wiltsians, we have to understand these ethnonyms, in common with the eminent scholar of Charlemagne, just as a general tribal allocation.
 
Genealogical chart of Nordic kings
Genealogical chart of Nordic kings.
Some name appearing in Atala’s genealogy might be related to southern reception for the sake of just name harmonization; cf. e.g. 'Erka' whose vita cannot be transferred to the first known wife of Attila the South-Eastern Hun.
 
As already noted above, the Old Norse + Swedish scribes may refer to geopolitical events in Migration Period by using geonyms currently known to high mediaeval readers and listeners, as placed at the disposal by Ritter, Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, pgs 146–147. Contemplating this context, we cannot make evident that these records do represent 'compositions of different temporal layers of historical events', as this opinion has become a popular basic suggestion which, however, is devoid of any convincing substance against some conclusion provided already by elder scholarship; see, for instance, the approaches of E. Studer (op. cit., see below en. 25), W. Eggers (op. cit., see below en. 20i). Since the dynastical lines and vitae of the 4th–6th-century Baltic & Slavic kings cannot be found satisfyingly in other surviving sources, Ritter regards the Wiltsian and other Slavic chieftains preferably as potential Migration Period kings ruling Baltic territories which, as the high mediaeval texts postmodernly provide, include 'Poland and Russia'. Ipso facto, he would not relegate their accounts just perforce to unhistorical, inconstistent or unauthentic traditions. Considering both the Frankish politics of Theuderic I, explicitly rather his daughter and son Theudebert as shortly remarked by Procopius, and the accounts provided by the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts, it seems inappropriate to relocalize the Baltic regions, geographically recognized well by both elder and modern scholarship (e.g. William J. Pfaff, 1959), to more or less anachronistic venues pertaining to pretty tribes situated in today’s southern Dutch and northern Belgian regions.

William J. Pfaff considers i.a. the conquest of the obvious large Húna-land by the Frisian prince 'Attila' with regard to the 'chronicled material' released by Suffridus Petrus in 1590 (Pfaff 1959:102 considering F. Holthausen’s reasonable suggestion), while Willi Eggers (op. cit.) has antecedently underlined the potential relationship between Osantrix and his eminent son-in-law by referring to Suffrid’s historiography. Regarding this interliterary context, his sources may be not disregarded for the identification of Osantrix with a Southern Jutlandic ruler called Vergistus, qui filios duos Hengistum et Horsum et filiam unam nomine Svanam habebat. As noted above, Suffridus recites this genealogical connection, but claims that Udolphus Haron is the natural father of Hengist and Horsa.(22) Vergistus or Vetgistus, appositely 'the Jute', is Bede’s Victgilsus [cuius pater Vitta by Nennius (!), cuius pater Vecta], while the so-called Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (on A.D. 449–488) and the Historia Brittonum spell him Wihtgils. A potential intertextual Anglo-Saxon relationship of these familial figures, albeit commonly judged at least 'semi-legendary', seems worth to explore by means of Mb 28, as its author regards Osantrix’ father-in-law residing or ruling in/over Skrottan, Brittan.

Since we apparently have to reckon with some nicknamed or 'renamed' individual appearing in the Þiðreks saga and the Old Swedish manuscripts, the 'Eastern lands ruler' Osantrix may appear to some reader as shortened spelling form of Old German 'Os(t l)ant rex' who seems to reappear as Oserích in MHG poetry. Incidentally, as to be remarked shortly at this instance, there may be some examples for different names of an historical individual in mediaeval German and Russian dynasties, e.g. Adelaide or Eupraxia, daughter of Vsevolod I, Prince of Kiev. At least one example for the only usage of an obvious epithet has been given above, cf. Morphological connections and prospects.

It should be briefly complemented the Latin quotations above taken from the work of Suffridus Petrus. As he forwards, a general of the Frisian dynasty, who had invaded territory known later as Westphalia and taken over Soest for his residence in Migration Period, was wooing thereafter the daughter of an important ruler residing on the Lower Elbe, territory of the later Northern German metropolis. Although there is no reliable source to prove or disprove Suffrid’s account, we may concede at this spatiotemporal juncture that a Wiltsian tribe could have been settling there. Furthermore, as regards Mb 55, the residence of Osantrix appears not far from the Falstrskogr, cf. its position provided by Mb 109 and, plausibly, H. Bertelsen (op. cit. II, p. 403).

Ostancia, queen of 'Vilkinaland', Baltic Sea Region

Flying Dragon, mediaeval painting
A mediaeval motif.
Source: Niedersächsische Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen.
Cf. Heinz Ritter-Schaumburg, Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, pgs 241–245, Abb. 26.
As Ritter disenchants the magic arts of Osta(n)cia the Sorceress, spouse of King Her(t)nid of 'Vilkinaland', she managed the installation of special kites to shock the warriors of King Isung, cf. HISTORIA WILKINENSIUM, THEODERICI VERONENSIS..., CCCXXVIII (Sv 299, Mb 352):
 ...Isthæc vero secretas per artes convocavit in medium feras omnimodas, utpote leones, ursos atque dracones horrendæ magnitudinis, quos voci suæ obsequentes hostium agmini propulsando obmisit ...


Gregory of Tours also considers this obvious 6th-century warfare method for confusing the enemy [hist. IV, 29]:
Chuni vero iterum in Gallias venire conabantur ... Cumque confligere deberent, isti magicis artibus instructi, diversas eis fantasias ostendunt et eos valde superant...
[The Huns were again endeavoring to make an entrance into the Gauls ... And when they were about to fight, the Huns, who were versed in magic arts, caused false appearances of various sorts to come before them and defeated them decisively... (English version by E. Brehaut.)]

Résumé

As regards Old Norse bibliography and mediaeval historiography, the Þiðreks saga appears as being based on a chronicle or historia rendering an eulogy of most important 'Austrasian' king Theuderic. Nevertheless, Þiðrek’s biography has to be regarded fragmentary: Just at that time when he was celebrated King of Roma II, Sv 356 and Mb 414, his curriculum vitae provided by the Old Norse + Swedish texts is drawing to an end. The remaining last parts of these manuscripts relate Aldrian’s Revenge and two epic implantations. The first deals with Bergara (Sv: Brugare) which the author identifies with Bergen, place of translation by the Old Norse scribes who were editing or knowing of continental heroic epics and adding here their own imprint with a central motif of the Wolfdietrich-Ortnit. The second is Heimir’s episode at Wadhincusan monastery which Roswitha Wisniewski recognizes as the literary signature of the Lower German scriptor Ludewicus, a provable 13th-century scriptor and copyist of a precious bible at Wedinghausen monastery.(23)

Gregory relates Theuderic acting not before 507. Thereafter our Frankish scriptor mentions him on campaigns against the Auvergne (523/524) – counselled by his dux Hilpingus or Hildingus, then against Thuringia (c. 530). Thereafter he removed a challenging Gaulish chief called Mundericus (532/533) and his kinsman Sigivald who likely had served him as viceroy in Clermont. The Thuringian War, however, might stand in strategical connection with the downfall of the Niflungen at Soest. Considering Theuderic’s biographical gap between 507/508 and 523/524 plus his following actions, the vita of this Frankish king rather appears completed by the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts.

General conformity of contemporary residential regions

Trier – Roma II:

Regarding the exposition of Þiðrek’s exile, we obviously have to consider the ethical side of his humiliation that might have been lasting as long as he was unable to compensate his expulsion. Although he could not regain his kingship from his kinsman Ermenrik (dated 1st quarter of 6th century by Ritter), he could have been able to make or join a campaign somewhere else. This context might also comprehend Gregory’s suppression of contemporary history of Roma II and some area between the Meuse and the Rhine – as he actually did for his very fragmentary reports on both Theuderic and, especially, the significant region of Belgica I. As to another item raising from this spatiotemporal context, now of further interest, Gregory’s readers may be made to believe that Theuderic was crowned in no time after Clovis' death, thereafter residing on locations called Mettae and Remi – though Gregory does not say a word about the date and place of Theuderic’s coronation. According to archaeological research, however, Roma II was definitely larger and more precious colonia of the eastern Frankish regions by far when Theuderic ascended the throne. Thus, the elder scholarly conclusion does not correspond with basic political principles of Late Antiquity and Migration Period. More to this basic point, we cannot substantiate Metz and/or Reims as Theuderic’s place(s) of residence, notably e.g. Roger Collins 1983.

Gregory indubitably provides Trier as Theuderic’s residence while reporting on a noble individual called Attalus, who was sent c. 530 as an hostage to his court [hist. III, 15].


North-Western Eiffel:

Listening to the 'Didriks chronicle', Þiðreks saga, and Gregory for an important historical occurrence in Lower and Central Germany, however, Þiðrek was crossing the Eiffel at that very time when Theuderic
 
indeed had returned to his property and sent for Hermanfrid ...
 
(Idem vero regressus ad propria, Hermenefredum ad se data fidem securum praecipit venire, quem et honorificis ditavit muneribus. Factum est autem, dum quadam die per murum civitatis Tulbiacensis confabularentur, a nescio quo inpulsus, de altitudine muri ad terram corruit ibique spiritum exalavit. Sed qui eum exinde deiecerit, ignoramus; multi tamen adserunt, Theudorici in hoc dolum manifestissime patuisse.)
 
and ... one day, as they were standing on the walls of Tulbiacum (Zülpich) and talking ...   [hist. III, 8]

A fatally shrinking space for homeland of two different Frankish individuals at this certainly significant political event!

A fragment of a Roman wall, supporting Gregory’s localization, has been archaeologically proved at Zülpich by Ursula Heimberg (Publisher: Landesmuseum Bonn, Sonderheft Rheinische Ausgrabungen ’78 Köln/Bonn 1979, p. 90). Furthermore, it is worth noting that the geostrategical importance of Zülpich from Roman Times to 5th century has been persuasively underlined by Eugen Ewig, Rheinische Geschichte Bd. 1,2, p. 15.

Cologne – Bonn – Verona:

Regarding Ritter’s basic identifications at least for the contemporary dimension of Þiðrek’s 'and' Theuderic I’s realm, there are political and cultural indications, even far-reaching in the past, which allow to match Cologne, place of the aula regia of Theuderic I, with the regnal authority over its 'suburban location Bonn' Verona and, connectively with elder history, Aachen–Varnenum, cf. Theuderic or Þiðrek of Bern: »King of Bonn«.

Common geostrategical ambitions

The narrative return of Theuderic–Þiðrek is typified by corresponding pattern. Both Gregory of Tours (c.  A.D. 523/524) and the Old Norse + Swedish texts (Mb 413, Sv 355) provide the king’s reappearance with reconquering Gaulish territories west of the Rhine and the Lower Moselle.
 
Gregory of Tours relates King Theuderic I at the aula regia of Cologne about A.D. 525. Regarding Ritter’s basic spatiotemporal identification of the historical Dietrich von Bern in so far, it seems absurd to place and interpret another king Þiðrek on the side of the Frankish Theuderic, who, in the same period being involved, became authority over territory even east of Hunaland, exempli gratia a western Harz area. The most important and emphatically presented account dealing with unquestionable historiographical testifying is reproduced also by ch. CCCLXVII of Peringskiöld’s Latin manuscript (cf. Mb 393–394):
 
Enimvero Thiotiscis carminibus  (ON. 'Thydeskir menn') memoriæ  prodita est, celebris gloria pugnæ istius, etiam apud antiquos memorandæ. Magnam utique cladem illam summorumque virorum jacturam, superstitis Attilæ Regis temporibus in Hunalandia neutiquam resarciri potuisse ... Et sane lectu digna sunt Thiotisca carmina ('Thydeskra manna') illa, quibus exponuntur Susatensium civium effata, eorum præcipue qui urbe adhuc incolumi vitam vixerant ... Quin & alii apud Bremensis atque Monasterienses præclara in existimatione viri, antedictarum luculentam notitiam nobis dederunt, nulla tamen cum prioribus habita communicatione rerum, mito consensu iisdem ferme circumstantiis descriptarum. Visa nimirum his popularium traditionum indubia veritas, quam carminibus Thiotisco idiomate in illustrium virorum factis describendis solenni studio proponere moris erat.
 
This passage then completed with the Icelandic manuscripts, cf. Bertelsen ch. 429a (Mb 428):
 
Epter davþa Attila kongs tok Þidrek af Bern allt Hunalannd [ad rade margra vina sinna er vered høfdu med Attala konge þa er Þidrek kongur var j Húnalande. Þidrek kongur ried sijnu rijke til elle, og ecke er nu fra þvi ad seigia, ad hofdingiar hafe barest i móte honum, so eru nu aller hrædder fyrer honum, ad eingenn þorer ad hefnast a honum, þott eirnsaman rijde hann med sijnumm vopnumm.
 
[Transl. Mb 428:] After the death of King Attila, Þidrek of Bern took over all of Hunaland, supported by many of his friends who were at King Attila’s court when he was in Hunaland. From now on King Þidrek was reigning his whole realm, and there is nothing to say about chieftains rebelling or anybody daring an attack against him, even when he was lonely riding with his weapons.
 
These accounts relate that Þiðrek became authority over the later Westphalia – part of Hunaland with its capital Susat – after the tragical disappearance of its ruler. This is, consistently or at least uncontradictorily, the narrative point of view of the historical eastward expansion of the Franks in and after 6th century. After the takeover of the kingdom of Cologne by Clovis I, the Frankish advance was significantly expedited by Theuderic I, who presumably tolerated or appointed local individuals as loyal chieftains in regions beyond the Rhine. This enormous movement of the Franks resulted in some occupied or administered region by the Franks at least west of Weser river in and after the 6th and 7th centuries. According to the letter of Theuderic’s son Theudebert, who informed Emperor Justinian I about territorial heritage of Austrasian kingdom only a few month after the death of his father, its status quo is ...cum saxonibus (,)? Euciis, qui se nobis voluntate propria tradiderunt [Epistolae Austrasiacae 20]. Cf. in chronological and interpretative contexts Franz Beyerle, Süddeutschland in der politischen Konzeption Theoderichs d. Gr., Grundfragen der alemannischen Geschichte, Vorträge und Forschungen, 1, 1955, p. 77f.
 
On the one hand, Beyerle obviously concludes that the placement 'Saxon Jutes' (saxonibus Euciis) would cover perforce all southern Saxon people. Thus, he transcribes 'cum saxonibus et Euciis'. On the other hand, 'Saxon Jutes' could have been chosen by Theudebert’s scribe in order to distinguish them clearly from the Anglo-Saxons.
 
Notably disagreeing with Beyerle is Richard Drögereit who ambiguously localizes (a part of) saxonibus Euciis rather in Pannonia: Fragen der Sachsenforschung in historischer Sicht, in: Niedersächsisches Jahrbuch für Landesgeschichte 31, 1959, pgs 38–76, cf. p. 50f.
 
Theudebert’s letter to Justinian does not contradict the political relationship between the 'Hunalandish' or 'Saxon' Atala and Þiðrek. As regards the timeline of events provided by the Þiðreks saga (cf. Ritter and the author), both had overthrown a tribe equated with the 'Wiltsians' in the early 6th century.
 
Saxon Findspots 5th C. Westphalia (Winkelmann) This map, originally titled 'Sächsische Fundstellen im 5. Jahrhundert' by Wilhelm Winkelmann (op. cit. p. 195), navigates with antique (or antiquated) tribal (re-)localizations by its original author. The 'demarcation of Saxon and Frankish territory' is primarily basing on archaeological research.

The 'Liber historiae Francorum', XIX, seems to equate the '(C)hattuarii' with the 'Attoarii' of 6th–8th (!) century. Gregory of Tours does only refer to some ethnonyms provided by Tacitus for narration related to the end of 4th century, while Bede and other authors still use them for their descriptions of later events up to 7th–8th century. However, neither Widukind of Corvey nor the Annales Quedlinburgenses mention the specified Roman-based tribal names in their 5th–7th-century accounts, albeit Widukind remarks once 'Angarios' in his 'Res gestae Saxonicae' I, 14, just before his introduction of Charlemagne. Both Gregory and the 'Annals' refer to 'Sicambria', perhaps the tribal region of the 'Gambrivii', in their 5th-century reports.

More realistically, the region between Lippe river and the former 'Chatti' should be regarded as a more or less occupied area. Thus, this ethnographical outline does not allow an inference on the stability of the
6th–9th-century 'Franco-Westphalian Reich'.
Frankish Graves in Northern Rhineland and Westphalia 6th-7th C. (Winkelmann)
Furthermore, W. Winkelmann provides these findspots for estimating the peripheral Frankish borderline crossing the Westphalian region in 6th/7th century (op. cit. pgs 198–199). 

The kiln was excavated at Geseke, c. 17 km south-west of Paderborn. Winkelmann further remarks that some revealing finds of Westick, location of Kamen, have been dated to 5th century; for instance a small Francisca of lead, elaborately profiled needles, pots of glass and goblets. He also estimates some of these finds burned in kilns on the Rhine.

Referring to the map above, Winkelmann additionally ascribes "Hamaland", a small region east to north-east of the 'Chamav', to Frankish territory of 6th–7th century.
 
 
Frisian, Saxon & Thuringian regions, A.D. 526 (Tackenberg). An elder scholarship’s version of borderlines related to 6th century, cf. the 'Saxon notion' not only by Gregory of Tours. This partial view is an excerpt from a map of Europe designed by German prehistorian Kurt Tackenberg; cf. e.g. Putzger, 88th ed. 1965, p. 39.

Gregory’s contemporary Venantius Fortunatus knows of Saxons, Danes and Jutes warring against Chlotar I and his son Chilperic (carmina IX, 1, 73f.). He further relates a dux Lupus successfully fighting against Saxons and Danes (carmina VII, 7, 50f.), as contexually annotated by Walther Lammers, Die Stammesbildung bei den Sachsen, in: Westfälische Forschungen X, Münster 1957, pgs 25–57.
Id. (Ed.), Die Eingliederung der Sachsen in das Frankenreich, Darmstadt 1970; the latter mainly focussing on 7th–9th century.

Albert Genrich (op. cit. p. 6f.) attempts to project the view of 'Saxon(y)' as a likely collective tribal body already before the Merovingian period by means of ethno-archaeological studies whose related cartography (i.a. by Hans Jürgen Eggers) points to »a homogeneous economic area with a typical burial cult extending from the Lower Elbe to the Middle Weser and the Teutoburg Forest after A.D. 200.« Therewith he infers (transl.): 'It is not improbable that the borders of this archaeological sphere are coextensive with those of a political group.'
['Es ist nicht unwahrscheinlich, daß die Grenzen dieses archäologischen Kreises mit denen einer politischen Gruppierung zusammenfallen.']
 
In 2005 Christoph Grünewald, archaeologist at German LWL organization, resumed the archaeo-ethnological research on Westphalian 6th century with this statement:
 
(...) im 6. Jahrhundert müssen wir uns voll und ganz auf die Analyse von Gräberfeldern stützen, denn eindeutig und gut interpretierbare Siedlungen dieser Zeit mit Befunden sind selten. Ein Blick auf die Karte (...) weist insgesamt 15 Gräberfelder auf. Fast alle liegen ganz eng in der Lippe-Hellweg-Zone. Alle peripheren Regionen wie das nördliche Münsterland, Südwestfalen und auch die Zone, in der wir im 5. Jahrhundert noch an der Weser viele Fundpunkte hatten, bleiben ausgeklammert. Dies kann als ein weiterer Beleg dafür gesehen werden, dass die „sächsische Südausbreitung“ des 5. Jahrhunderts keinen Bestand hatte und jetzt eher westliche Einflüsse dominieren.
    Etwas differenziert gesehen werden müssen die Grab- und Beigabensitten. Sie variieren sowohl von Friedhof zu Friedhof wie innerhalb eines Gräberfeldes stark (...)
    Fasst man zusammen, so zeigen die Grabfunde ein eindeutig linksrheinisches, also fränkisches Gepräge, während die Grab-Befunde dies nur teilweise bestätigen, sich in anderen Teilen aber deutlich hiervon absetzen. Versuchen wir hier jetzt den Abgleich mit Schriftquellen, sind die Grenzen schnell erreicht. Zwar sind für das 5. und 6. Jahrhundert vielfach Kriegszüge der Sachsen – allein oder mit anderen Stämmen zusammen – erwähnt und dass 557 ein fränkisches Kastell in Deutz von Sachsen gestürmt wurde, über Territorien, Machtgebiete oder dauerhaft besiedelte Länder sagt dies aber nichts aus.
    [Ab 7. Jahrundert:]
    In den Jahrzehnten um und nach 600 ist kurzfristig eine besondere Entwicklung zu spüren: An mehreren Stellen sind gut bis sehr gut ausgestattete Gräber zu finden, die teilweise sogar als „Adelsgräber“ – den Begriff mit aller Vorsicht genutzt – bezeichnet werden können. Am bekanntesten ist sicher der Fürst von Beckum (...) mit seiner kompletten Bewaffnung, Geschirr und goldenen Taschenbeschlägen (Winkelmann 1974). Ihm zur Seite gestellt werden können Kriegergräber aus Fürstenberg (... Melzer 1991) oder Warburg-Ossendorf (Siegmund 1999a), die schon als fränkische Statthalter im eroberten Westfalen gehandelt wurden. Sozusagen ihr weibliches Pendant – als Adelige, nicht als Statthalterinnen – bilden Gräber aus Soest mit reichem Goldschmuck (Melzer 1999). Auch hier ist wieder die Herkunft der Gegenstände sicher im linksrheinischen Gebiet zu suchen.

(C. Grünewald, Archäologie des frühen Mittelalters vom 5. bis zum 9. Jahrhundert in Westfalen – ein Überblick –  in; Archäologie in Ostwestfalen  9 [ISBN 3-89534-569-5], Saerbeck 2005, pgs 71–86, see pgs 73–75.)
 
[Transl.: (…) Regarding 6th century, we must entirely draw upon the analysis of burial grounds, because settlements with findings for clear and good interpretation are infrequent. The map (…) shows altogether 15 burial grounds, almost all their positions very close to the Lippe-Hellweg zone. All peripheral regions such as the northern region of Münster, South-Westphalia and also the area of many 5th-century findspots on the Weser are excluded. This can be taken for evidential conclusion that the ‘southern expansion of the Saxons' is no more relevant in 5th-century, whilst western influences are now dominating.
    The burial and piece adding customs must be regarded more differentiated. They vary much both from cemetery to cemetery and also within a burial ground (…)
    Summarizing, the finds of these graves show unequivocal dispositions from the left side of the Rhine, thus being Frankish. Nonetheless, the findings about these graves are proving this only partially, although significantly diverging even in parts. Now trying to weigh this against bibliographical sources, we will be soon stretched to the limits. There are frequently mentioned martial campaigns of Saxons – or in common with other tribes – in 5th and 6th century, e.g. a Frankish fortress at Deutz raided by Saxons in 557. However, these expeditions are not relevant for an inference on territories, orbits of power or permanently settled lands.
 
Up to this point in Grünewald’s summary, which contextually includes the burial grounds of Soest on the Hellweg, Grünewald does not differentiate between first and second half of 6th century. Now about and after 7th century:
 
    A special short-time-development must be noted for the centuries about and after 600: There are several locations of well and very well endowed graves which partially can be called – with utmost care – ‘Noble Graves'. The best known of them is certainly the grave of the ‘Ruler of Beckum’ (…) with his complete armament, equipment (harness) and golden bag fittings (Winkelmann 1974). We can put on his side the warrior graves of Fürstenberg (… Melzer 1991) or Warburg-Ossendorf (Siegmund 1999a) which have been already discussed as graves of Frankish governors in conquered Westphalia. So to say that the graves of Soest represent their female pendants – as noblewomen but not governors – with wealthy gold jewellery (Melzer 1999). Right here the origin of the found pieces has to be researched certainly in the area left of the Rhine.]
 
Regarding again the Frankish-Thuringian War, the above-mentioned manuscript De Origine Gentis Swevorum, 9, relates that Irminfridus, overthrown opponent and, finally, tributary armistice partner of Frankish king Theodericus, moved with 'merely five hundred' to an 'Attila' after a lost battle:
 
At illi confederationes regum metuentes, ne vel Theoderici sponsionum fraudarentur vel regum conspiratione ex provintia propellerentur, decreverunt noctu vadum per Gozholdum monstratum transire ac Thuringiorum castra ex inproviso irrumpere. Quo peracto tantam stragem de hostibus dederunt, ut vix quingenti cum Irminfrido evaderent, qui etiam commigravere ad Hunorum regem Attilam.
 
Cf. Codex Palatinus No. 1357, fol. 152v–153v, Vatican Library. Codex No. 4895 A, fol. 123–124, Bibliothèque nationale de France. M. H. Goldast, Scriptores rerum Suevicarum (Francof. 1605, 8°), pgs 15–20. Latin text at MGH C 30b - 60.

In common with the 'Annals' of Quedlinburg this message seems to substantiate a Lower Germanic Atala of 5th/6th century whose date of death estimates Ritter only a short time before that of Þiðrek. Furthermore, as indicated above, the notice quoted above from the De Origine Gentis Swevorum does not contradict the Saxon-Thuringian 'notions of history', from wherever adapted by 'homeland historiographers'. Hilkert Weddige (op. cit. p. 88f.) points out that the author of De Origine Gentis Swevorum must have known the Chronica by Frutolf of Michelsberg, i.e. esp. its part De Origine Saxonum.
 
When Þiðrek returned home from a disastrous Susat to his residence in the outer Eiffel, he knew that some region of the later Westphalia and Lower Saxony was too weak to repulse any further attack coming from the other side of the Rhine. When Theuderic was back on home location in the outer Eiffel, as Gregory remembers the years about A.D. 531, he removed the deprived last king of Thuringia. This is conceivable political strategy of Frankish expansion appearing in first half of 6th century.

Roma Secunda – the dark decades in the reign of Clovis I

We must state again an incredibly shrinking area for two different Theoderics when turning once more towards the vitae of Þiðrek and Theuderic. This is encyclopaedic quotation referring to Clovis' eastern successor Theuderic I who in third decade of 6th century reconsolidated Trier = Roma II after its period of obvious destructive arbitrary rule:
 
...It was while abbot that King Theoderic I (511–534) learned to know and esteem him, Nicetius often remonstrating with him on account of his wrong-doing without, however, any loss of favour. After the death of Aprunculus of Trier, an embassy of the clergy and citizens of Trier came to the kingly court to elect a new bishop. They desired Gallus, but the King refused his consent. They then selected Abbot Nicetius set out as the new bishop for Trier, accompanied by an escort sent by the king, and while on the journey had opportunity to make known his firmness in the administration of his office. Trier had suffered terribly during the disorders of the Migrations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicetius  (retrieved March 2009)

Hans Hubert Anton, an author of the RGA and expert in ecclesiastical Gallo-Roman and Frankish history, constates [transl.]:
 
The accumulation of names in the Episcopal Registry of Trier at the end of 5th and beginning of 6th century (Emerus, Marus, Volusianus, Miletus, Modestus, Maximianus, Fibicius, Abrunculus, Rusticus) suggests a period of politically troubled times, the weak testimonies of the aforenamed allow to conclude an (undoubtedly politically-based) isolation.
 
[Die Häufung der Namen in der Trierer Bischofsliste am Ende des 5. und zu Beginn des 6. Jahrhunderts (Emerus, Marus, Volusianus, Miletus, Modestus, Maximianus, Fibicius, Abrunculus, Rusticus) deutet auf politisch unruhige Zeiten, die schwache Bezeugung der Aufgeführten läßt dabei auf eine (zweifellos politisch bedingte) Isolierung schließen.
Hans Hubert Anton, Die Trierer Kirche und das nördliche Gallien in spätrömischer und fränkischer Zeit, in: Beihefte der Francia 16,2 (1989), p. 61.]
 
Eugen Ewig counts up six Episcopal dignitaries being affected by supersessions between 479 and 502/3 (op. cit. 1954, p. 88; i.e. Emerus, ... , Maximianus), and he contextually quotes from a letter of recommendation written by Avitus of Vienne on request of bishop Maximianus of Trier (op. cit. p. 60):
 
Quamquam nec illa vobis regionis suae subversio tamquam incognita exaggerari debeat, cum pietatem vestram quaerentem ubique misericordiae aditus, non lateat, ubi est misericordiae locus.

Starting from the 470ies, the Episcopal records related to Trier itemize ten predecessors of Nicetius, dignitary since c. 525: Jamlychus, Emerus, Marus, Volusianus, Miletus, Modestus, Maximianus, Fibicius, Abrunculus, Rusticus, the latter obviously ignored by Gregory of Tours, cf. Vitae Patrum VI, 3.

It seems too hard to accept that Gregory had no idea of the causality of this matter whose basic historical background should have been perceptible to him.

After the reigning period of Clovis I, plus a portion of time after his more uncertain than certain date of death (notably Ian N. Wood, see above), the amassing of names in the Episcopal Registry of this Roma cisalpina ended with Theuderic’s appearance on this location. Regarding King Þiðrek’s arrival on this location, within a difference of c. 2 years by means of Ritter’s timeline, he (had) liberated this metropolis from Ermenrik’s successor 'Sevekin', the Old Nordic 'Sifka'(24).

This is nothing less than a further compelling parallel pointing out another very important political event in the vita of Þiðrek–Theuderic. The Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts annotate King Þiðrek’s conversion into Christianity, undoubtedly in narrative context and spatiotemporal coherence with Roma II = Trier, in accordance with that moment when Bishop Nicetius talked seriously with Theuderic I at the metropolis of the Treveri.

Dénouements on literary genre

As already recognized by attentive elder scholarship (notably e.g. Gunnar O. Hyltén-Cavallius, Henrik Bertelsen, Bengt Henning), the scribes of the Old Swedish texts had left a chronicle or historia at least; neither one of those fornaldarsögur, sagas written before Iceland’s ethnological starting point, nor one of those riddarasögur, chivalric tales written thereafter by Old Norse 'fabulatores' apparently for amusement at mediaeval courts. Roswitha Wisniewski, whose postdoctoral work about the downfall of the Nibelungen by Þiðreks saga has been either attacked unconvincingly or ignored enormously by her colleagues, does not follow inappropriate methodological principles of elder and some newer scholarship for classifying the predominant literary gender of the Þiðreks saga. Although Wisniewski unpersuasively regards e.g. 'the Italian conqueror Samson' as a brainchild ('Erfindung') of Þiðreks saga, she justifiably points out (op. cit. 1961, op. cit. 1986) that its obvious comprehensive Lower German source is based on dominating narrational identities which are unquestionably belonging to the genre of the mediaeval chronicle and historiography [transl.]:
 
The literary design of Thidrekssaga is characterized by natures known from chronicles, historiographies and gestae (Droege, Wisniewski). The title »Dietrichschronik« for the Swedish version thus might be chosen not by chance. In contrast to heroic lays and epics, as they are personalizing and depolitizising sagas, politicizing is especially typical for chronicles and related literary forms.
 
[Für die Gestaltungsweise der Thidrekssaga sind Eigenheiten kennzeichnend, die aus Chroniken, Historien und Gesten bekannt sind (Droege, Wisniewski). Die Bezeichnung »Dietrichschronik« für die schwedische Fassung dürfte nicht von ungefähr kommen. Im Gegensatz zu Heldenliedern und Heldenepen, die Sagen personalisieren und entpolitisieren, ist für Chroniken und verwandte Formen gerade die Politisierung typisch.
Roswitha Wisniewski, op. cit. 1986, p. 79; cf. p. 35 on 'Samson'.]

Hans-Jürgen Hube (Humboldt Universität Berlin, Nordeuropa-Institut, em.) correspondingly estimates the manuscripts being based on a historia or chronicle written in 12th–13th century, and he reasonably detects some basic point of view provided by Susanne Kramarz-Bein, who has been not convincingly focussing on nothing else than riddarasögur and fornaldarsögur as the apparent literary genders of the Þiðreks saga, as spitzfindig.(25)

As regards the life of Theoderic the Great, his vita is more in detail than the biographical material we have on the Frankish Theuderic and his intimate advisor dux Hilpingus/Hildingus, as shortly annnotated in Gregory’s wartime records, cf. the name form Hilprant as the best companion of Dietrich von Bern in the keenly compiled 'World Chronicle' by Heinrich von München. Astonishingly, however, the Ostrogothic Theoderic had no confident or follower roughly named alike for an eminent relationship being already compared with King David and Jonathan by the ecclesiastical scribe of Mb 15 – as we urgently have to expect this for the incontrovertible literary connection. However, Widukind of Corvey does already know of this Frankish king’s reliable and familiar advisor who, albeit his name put aside and equated with an obvious 'highest-ranked servant', was appearing in Thuringian War:
 
Erat autem Thiadrico servus satis ingeniosus, cuis consilium expertus est saepius probum, eique propterea quadam familiaritate coniunctus. (Res gestae Saxonicae I, 9.)

Furthermore, the Annales Quedlinburgenses do already provide twelve of Theoderic’s noblest companions, and there is no solid literary evidence that the Old Norse scribes had endeavoured to create all those stories about their twelve heroes for the sake of the Annales' mention of the number of the Frankish king’s followers.

Roswitha Wisniewski quite rightly queries the missing scholarly consistency onto the cardinal questions and answers on the historical starting point of Dietrich von Bern saga tradition and the mental process for/of converting an historical Italian conqueror so emphatically into an Italian refugee! Referring to the prevailing scholarly opinion, she cognizes the conquest of Italy by Theoderic the Great and the assassination of Odoacer, but she cannot provide a good reason why Dietrichdichtung, categorized 'of southern origin', transforms such basic biographical context into extensive fabulous exile tradition (op. cit. pgs 44–45). Joachim Heinzle cluelessly wonders [transl.]:
 
Nonetheless puzzling is what matters most: how did come the conversion of Italy’s historical conquest by Theoderic into Dietrich’s expulsion from Italy into being?
 
[Rätselhaft bleibt indes die Hauptsache: wie es zur Verwandlung der historischen Eroberung Italiens durch Theoderich in die Vertreibung Dietrichs aus Italien kommen konnte.
Joachim Heinzle, Einführung in die mittelhochdeutsche Dietrichepik, 1999, p. 6.]

The Ambraser Heldenbuch already includes the eminent verse form poetry Dietrichs Flucht and Rabenschlacht, its literary gender misleadingly established as HISTORISCHE  DIETRICHEPIK by elder scholarship. Comparing the basic source context of the prose version known as 'Anhang zum Heldenbuch' (AHB), provided as either prologue or, more commonly, addendum in the 'Books of Heroes' released by Diebolt von Hanowe and some other editors, Joachim Heinzle concludes [transl.]:
 
It is out of the question that the author of the 'Heldenbuch prose' had an access to the 'Thidreks saga': saga and prose must, independently of each other, have selected eclectically from the same old narrative tradition.
 
[Es ist ausgeschlossen, dass der Verfasser der 'Heldenbuch-Prosa' Zugang zur 'Thidrekssaga' hatte: Saga und Prosa müssen unabhängig voneinander aus der gleichen, alten Erzähltradition geschöpft haben.
Op. cit. pgs 79–80.]

This statement implies significant divergences for intermediate and/or final edits basing on 'the same old narrative tradition'.

Alpharts Tod, seemingly the 'trilogical' or, at least, further outstanding rhyme epic dealing with Dietrich’s explusion and his attempt to regain his kingship, conveys a Franco-Rhenish paper manuscript of 15th century, while the text itself seems to be generated in 13th/14th century. Joachim Heinzle does not follow estimations pleading for an author based in Upper Germany [transl.]:
 
It seems hopeless to determine the native location of the text. The circumstantial evidences brought forward for the Bavarian and, lately, Alemannic space as linguistic area are all through unusable.
 
[Hoffnungslos scheint es, die Heimat des Textes bestimmen zu wollen. Die Indizien, die man für den bairischen und – zuletzt – für den alemannischen Sprachraum beigebracht hat, sind durchweg unbrauchbar.
Op. cit. p. 90.]

As regards mediaeval Dietrich epics, apparently placed into Upper Germany and/or North Italy, endemic authors might have seen rather a poetical necessity not least for compensating the pragmatic appearance of the equally named Ostrogothic politician, thus glorifying and mystifying him e.g. by replacing his grandfather with nothing more than an alluding surrogate Amelunc generated from an 550 years living HugeDietrîch who, interestingly, might have been taken rather from Frankish tradition. Taking this and other approaches into consideration, scholarly authorities as Kemp Malone and other researchers in mediaeval literature inclusively regard the literary North-South mainstream (Malone at least for Dietrich von Bern transmissions, notably already Simrock for Heldenbuch contexts) and place at the disposal the Frankish king and/or his best companion as the prototype(s) serving for some southern-based heroic lay or epic work.

Since the vita and death of Þiðrek’s foe Ermenrik do widely differ from the historical accounts on Odoacer and Ermanaric (d. 356), we may contemplate Heinzle’s axiomatic conclusion related to the poetical and spatiotemporal bandwidth of particular Upper German Dietrich von Bern traditions [transl.]:
 
The synchronisation of events and persons of different times is aiming at the construction of an exclusive world of heroes, where everthing is connected with all and everybody has to do with everyone.
 
[Die Synchronisierung von Ereignissen und Personen, die verschiedenen Zeiten angehören, zielt auf die Konstruktion einer geschlossenen Heldenwelt, in der alles mit allem zusammenhängt und jeder mit jedem zu tun hat.
Op. cit. p. 5.]

However, we may wonder whether this easily seen good conjecture meets final illation in the light of further distinctive explorations. For instance, it is obvious that some non-negligible relationships related to the epic vitae of not only Dietrich von Bern but also his most eminent foe are significantly at variance. In view of the complexity of mediaeval Dietrich epics, the conclusive disposition brought by Heinzle may point to hardly more than an allocation of heroic and/or historical names to the variables of poetical or unbelievable narration. Consequently, if we have to explore some narrative interrelation with obvious equally named figures provided by different environments of transmission and, implicitly in so far, unequal literary milieus (!), we rather have to care warily for some further interpretative step of dénouement and exposition.

Addressing undiscerning and intentionally ignoring communis opinio, Ritter’s general research provides convincing arguments that the Old Norse + Swedish texts cannot meet the conditional framework to relegate them convincingly to any Ostrogothic saga on 'Theoderic the Great'. Since there is actually no evidence to the contrary, it now seems clear that acknowledged historical plus historiographical contexts of Migration Period in Eastern Frankish, North German and Baltic regions cannot disprove both the basic political contents of these manuscripts and Ritter’s basic conclusions. Following his estimations, advanced explorations of these texts do not necessitate polemic argumentation by de facto obsolete research which, for instance, has been suggesting an oral-based 'process operative' called 'localization' for 'transmitted events', therewith arguing in favour of a special kind of 'pseudo-localization' for 'pseudo-history'. However, such dubious hermeneutical approach and solidification pays no attention to any further provision of evidence, but deducing smartly an overestimation of the exactness of history as preserved in oral traditions instead — pretty statements emending themselves significantly to another, more believable scholarly level of mediaeval German-Norse transmission of historiography (cf. Wikipedia’s Legends about Theoderic the Great; retrieved 2011-05-17 and 2013-03-24). Besides, as regards Wikipedia’s unbalanced source citations and preferences aiming against Ritter, The German Quarterly review by Henry Kratz versus Ritter (Vol. 56/4, 1983, pgs 636–638 on: Die Nibelungen zogen nordwärts, Munich 1981) does play no reliable rôle for progressive circumspect studies, as Ritter has already responded to inappropriate analytic approaches of scholars who either base their arguments on genuine but unproven pseudo-historical intention of the manuscripts or oversimplify history by focussing on monocausal ambit and explanation.(26)

Title Peringskiold Edition, Stockholm 1715
Johan Peringskiöld clearly distinguished in 1715 between Old Norse literary category SAGA and the script he provided under the title
HISTORIA WILKINENSIUM, THEODERICI VERONENSIS, AC NIFLUNGORUM.
Ritter has indicated the fundamental literary problem of the Þiðreks SAGA by questioning the relevance of its title, arguing finally that we have no sufficient evidence to ascribe its manuscripts to e.g. a 'noteworthy fictitious epic tradition on Migration Period' which has to be basing on an 'oral collection of traditions to be headlined with Legends about Theoderic the Great'. Rather, it seems more likely that the immediate source of all extant manuscripts might have been a German based 'Großwerk',(27) notably Roswitha Wisniewski and Hermann Reichert 1992 who specifies an unlikely relationship for immediate oral transmission.

Striking a balance between Ritter, who did not disregard narrational postmodernisms in the high mediaeval manuscripts, and his antagonists, we have to concede that he plausibly left a rational philological reconstruction of some very basic account provided by Þiðreks saga. In contrast to him, however, elder scholarship and its following modern representatives have not been ready to follow the distinctions drawn by Ritter. Characteristically, the corresponding modi operandi of these analysts amount to calling Upper German poetry plus noncontemporary Ostrogothic contexts as reliable witnesses against rather more realistic accounts, interpretative indications and basic congruences related to history of the 5th–6th-century eastern Franks and, predominantly, their north-eastern neighbours.

Reassessing again the geonyms at Mb 13 and Mb 276, however, we are allowed to identify them as legitimate south-eastern markers in a monumental Franco-German architecture. It is obvious that its pillars were founded by Þiðrek’s dynasty, then climaxing at Charlemagne, and ending in the eyes of the postulated German source provider as high mediaeval Sacrum Romanum Imperium or the Heiliges Römisches Reich deutscher Nation by elder German scholarship.(28)

With respect to the historical identification of Dietrich von Bern with Þiðdrek of Bern, there are overwhelmingly more reliable moments being geared for his synchronization with Frankish king Theuderic I. Hence, regarding the most important details in the vita of Þiðrek of Bern, Ritter consequently asks in the epilogue of his book  Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, p. 279 [transl.]:
 
What is in agreement with the life of Theoderic the Great?
Not the ancestors,
Not the youth with the fights against the giants,
Not the twelve loyal fellows,
Not the decision-making fight against Sigfrid,
Not the life-long quarrel with his uncle,
Not the long exile,
Not the combats against the Northeast peoples,
Not the futile attempt to regain his homeland,
Not the loss of the brother and the sons of the king ('Atala'),
Not the participation in the bloody
Niflungar downfall,
Not the lonely homecoming, the joyful reception in the homeland,
Not the conquest of the empire of »Rome«/Trier in old age,
Not the revenge on Wideke later on.
Nothing of this all belongs to the life of Theoderic the Great.
 
[Was stimmt überein mit dem Leben Theoderichs des Großen?
Nicht die Vorfahren,
nicht die Jugend mit ihren Riesenkämpfen,
nicht die 12 vertrauten Gesellen,
nicht der Entscheidungskampf mit Sigfrid um den Vorrang,
nicht der lebenslange Streit mit seinem Oheim,
nicht die lange Exilzeit,
nicht die Kämpfe gegen die Nordost-Völker,
nicht der vergebliche Versuch, die Heimat zurückzugewinnen,
nicht der Verlust des Bruders und der Königssöhne,
nicht die Teilnahme am blutigen Untergang der Niflungen,
nicht die einsame Heimkehr, der freudige Empfang in der Heimat,
nicht die Eroberung des »Rom«/Trierer Reiches im Alter,
nicht die späte Rache an Wideke.
Gar nichts von diesem allen gehört zum Leben Theoderichs des Großen.]
 
Although it may seem less relevant to connect the life of any Theoderic with a fight against a 'gigantic creature', an animal of the kind called an elephant (Haymes), this list may be supplemented with more very distinctive items which, however, finally do not meet reliable herioc interpretation of the life of an Italian king. For example, Ritter did not expressively state against phlegmatic or prejudicing scholarship that Þiðrek’s dynasty is nowhere connected with the 'gens Amalorum' in the Old Norse and Swedish manuscripts. Thus, besides other unreliable observations, extrapolations and conclusions pleading for an Italian king as the heroic representative of the Nordic Dietrich, a non-existing fact has been serving here for itemizing the identification of Þiðrek with Theoderic the Great by both elder and some newer research. Regarding the select circle of the latter, for instance, the essential genealogy and vita of the Italian ruler Vitege cannot underline an herioc environment of Þiðrek’s companion and later foe Widga. As the Old Norse + Swedish texts provide further, the genelogical and geographical root of Amlung, another follower of Þiðrek, cannot be taken for an eponymic hero who somewhat reflects the Ostrogothic Amali dynasty. Furthermore, neither an Italian Odoacer nor a Gaulish Odovacarius appears in the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts of Þiðrek of Bern, despite scholarship’s unjustified wishful thinking that Theoderic's historical opponent Odoacer is replaced by Dietrich's uncle Ermenrich. Moreover, it is obvious that this Theoderic could never meet an Ermanaric as his most influential antagonist in an Ostrogothic or Gothic sphere, but the first Frankish Theuderic be the historical contemporary and successor of another Ermenrik – that ruler who was responsible for the political desolation and isolation of Trier in 5th and 6th century, as clearly connoted by late antique clerics (e.g. Avitus of Vienne) and attentive historians (cf. e.g. Hans Hubert Anton, Eugen Ewig).

In all this respect, veritable modern research in Þiðreks saga and the Old Swedish texts would not longer assign neither unwritten content nor any clearly different context to Ostrogothic saga environment of Theoderic the Great, notably e.g. Walter Böckmann 1981, Helmut G. Vitt 1985, Ernst F. Jung 1986/87, Hanswilhelm Haefs 2004, Hans-Jürgen Hube 2009. Considering circumspectly the literary categories of Old Norse bibliography, the Þiðreks 'saga' rather has to be regarded as an  imported historical source. A material of literary gender that King Hákon’s scribes might have translated with same trustworthiness as, for instance, the Trójumanna saga, Alexanders saga, Rómverja saga, Gyðlinga saga, Veraldar saga. Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen, translator of German edition of Þiðreks saga, mentions in his foreword a Latin manuscript whose missing direct speech can be detected in the prosaic text, cf. Johan Peringskiöld 1715. Its source, not unlikely post-edited by a Scandinavian Latin writer, is exposed to further discussion in the author’s contribution Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici. Regarding this cleric as the prime author and provider of the Old Norse + Swedish renditions, he certainly could have either compared or reconfirmed his manuscript with eminent German lays:  seigia þyðersk kvæði.(29)

Clip CCXXXI Latin script

Clip CCXCVIII Latin script

Clip CCCXXVIII Latin script

Clip CCCLXVII Latin script

Clip CCCLXXXII Latin script
Clips from the Latin version provided with the Peringskiöld edition of 1715: passages referring to German sources. Although marked as 'translation', this script hardly seems retranslated from any extant redaction of Þiðreks saga; cf. an example for circumstantial evidence in the article Die Mosel im Licht von Thidrekssaga und Dietrich-Chronik [see 'Bild 4' at https://www.badenhausen.net/harz/svava/Thidrekssaga-Mosel.pdf].
Interestingly, the writers of the Old Norse redactions notice Mænstrborg or Mynstrborg for Westphalian Münster, recorded as one location of contemporary witnesses, whereas the Latin scribe places at that very passage (2nd clip from below) Monasterienses. This spelling appears in mediaeval German records on the civitates of Münster. Its locality is based on the former Mimigernaford, estimated as settlement of 6th century.
 
Even so we may ask: If Gregory and the pseudonymous Fredegar, both of them rather moralistic than conscientious raconteurs, had a solid idea of a large extant record relating the contents of Þiðreks saga and 'Didriks chronicle': Which accounts could they omit at first for saving renditions by own local sources?

Endnotes
1  See Appendix A1: Remarks on the evaluation of Þiðreks saga manuscripts. The contents of fragmentary Old Swedish K45,4° manuscript is closely affiliated to the Skokloster version.  back to text

2  H. Ritter detected the real topographical and geographical accuracy (up to nearly 99% of all key-words) of the Þiðreks saga manuscripts that subsequently seemed to have changed from a legend to a historia or chronicle. Thereupon, finally aged 92, he recommended to draw conclusions from the entire context of these texts.  back to text

3  
Map of Roman Eiffel
The small cutting from Kurt Stade’s comprehensive Roman map of Germanic territory has been published in various editions of educational German history maps. (Today’s current names of former Roman locations are printed in blue, Roman routes in red.) The historical localization of Þiðrek’s BERN by means of some first introduced probatory pictorial material is discussed at the largest appendix chapter of the author’s publication Die Nibelungen – Dichtung und Wahrheit, Münster 2005. Apart from own research based on the finds of Varne, the author mainly refers to publications by Wilfried Maria Koch, archaeological director of German state office LVR (Landschaftsverband Rheinland).   back to text

4 All source references 'Mb' are based on the Þiðreks saga’s subchapter partition by Carl R. Unger. His re-organized chapter system includes the Icelandic manuscripts and has been preferred by several modern philologists and text translators. Typical 'r'-endings of names of persons, as provided by the Old Norse manuscripts, may be frequently suspended by the author.
 
    Regarding quotations from the manuscripts, the author equates 'Old Norwegian + Old Icelandic' with 'Old Norse'.   back to text

5   Today: Trier on the Moselle.  back to text

6   i. Nevertheless, we should not ignore the Studies in Heroic Legend and in Current Speech (1959) by Kemp Malone who argues decisively against modern scholarship’s rash inscription of Theoderic the Ostrogoth onto the Rök Runestone. Malone’s discourse, first published in Acta Philologica Scandinavica, ix, pgs 76–84, casts also new light on high mediaeval Dietrich von Bern notions and its scholarly fixations.
 
    He combines by means of acknowledged history that
 
   in or about A.D. 520, the Gautish king Chochilaicus (Gregory of Tours) or Hygelac (Beowulf) made a piratical inroad upon the Frankish kingdom, then ruled by Theodoric, eldest son of Clovis. The forces of Theodoric, however (led by the king's son), inflicted a crushing defeat upon the Gauts, Hygelac himself losing his life in the battle. The fall of King Hygelac was still remembered in thirteenth-century Scandinavia, and the story of his death is told by Snorri in the Ynglingasaga, where he appears (cap. 22) as King of Sweden, while Saxo in Book IV of the Gesta Danorum gives him a Danish kingdom, in Book VI an Irish one. The difficulty about his proper kingdom was occasioned, of course, by the disappearance of the Gauts as a separate nation. But at the time when the Rök inscription was made the old Gautish kingdom was doubtless still remembered (among the Gauts at any rate), and we may with confidence presume that the ninth-century Gautish runemaster of Rök knew Hygelac (Hugleikr) as an ancient king of Gautland. If now we look at Snorri's account, we find that Hugleikr's death is localized not abroad but at home: the king is said to have fallen in battle with Haki, a sea-king who invaded the country and usurped the throne.(...) One may conjecture that the Rök inscription gives us a stage intermediate between the historical course of events (related by Gregory and the Beowulf poet) and the late tradition recorded by Snorri: the opponent of Hugleikr still bears his historical name, but he has been changed into a sea-king (i.e. an exile) and his victory over Hugleikr has in consequence been transferred from Frankish to Gaulish soil. (Op. cit. 1959, pgs 117–118.)
 
   Contemplating latest geo-ethnological analysis of the Hlöðskviða (part of Hervarar saga ok Heiðreks) by E. W. Oostebrink (op. cit., see ch. Chlodio and Hloðr in northern Húnaland), Hugleikr’s 'raid-gauts' seem to have had tribesmen already settling as Reiðgoths on a certain part of Frisian coastland stretching out to the region of Groningen.
 
   As regards the hero’s horse remembered by the Rök inscription, allusively the equestrian statue of the Italian Theoderic, then at the court (more precisely: bath) of Charlemagne, Malone detects rather a Frankish but not decisive Ostrogothic environment of cognition and transmission:
 
   Presumably the poet whom the runemaster is quoting had visited Aachen and, naturally enough, had taken for a statue of Theodoric the Frank the Theodoric statue which he saw in the Frankish capital. Moreover, if we accept A.D. 835 as the approximate date of the inscription (cf. Pipping, p. 109), and reckon back for nine generations as the runemaster bids us, allotting to each generation 35 years (i.e. half the traditional life-span), we arrive at A.D. 520 as the date of Þiaurikr's attack upon the Gauts. Now it was about the year 520, as we have seen, that the army of Theodoric the Frank attacked and destroyed the forces of the Gauts.(...) It is noteworthy, besides, that the historical records tell us of no other Theodoric who had dealings with the Gauts. The obvious connexion for Þiaurikr, then, would seem to be Theodoric the Frank, not Theodoric the Ostrogoth nor yet the hypothetical Samlandish Theodoric of  (the 20th-century author Otto) v. Friesen. (Op. cit. 1959, pgs 118–119.)
 
   Now turning to 'Theoderic’s time and place of misfortune', Malone regards receptions of the Mærings = Marika (the former mentioned in the OE. poem Deor) as being transferred to North Italian or Istrian Meran by Upper German poetry (cf. Dietrichs Flucht, König Rother, Kaiserchronik). He collocates these epics aside the twelfth-century Regensburg gloss Gothi Meranare plus the notoriously quoted and widely uncritically interpreted prologue provided with Notker’s Boethius:
 
   Odoagrum Turcilingorum et Rugorum regem, qui et Herulos et Scyros secum habuit, Romans et Italiam sibi subiugasse. Theodericum vero, regem Mergothorum et Ostrogothorum, Pannoniam et Macedoniam occupasse.
 
   As a matter of more historical priority, however, Malone contextually discerns rather Theuderic’s campaign against the Visigoths in A.D. 507–508, arguing (op. cit. 1959, p. 122)
 
   that when Theodoric became an exile-and-return hero, the scene [sic! – for further studies: reason]  of his exile was laid in Visigothic territory. When in due course the Oberdeutschen learned the tale, they made it their own by connecting the name Mæring with the geographical term Meran, which occurs (1) as a place-name: the Meran of the Tyrol, and (2) as a regional name, in the sense 'Illyria', or, more narrowly, 'Istria'. In other words, the traditional name succumbed to a popular etymology. Since the Tyrolese Meran, in the early Middle Ages, was a place out-of-the-way and unimportant enough to serve admirably as a place of exile, it is not unreasonable to conjecture that here we have the spot to which Theodoric's burg was shifted from the equally humble situation which it had to start with. (Affixed footnote 14: The term Mæringas, as the Deor poet uses it, must obviously be taken in a disparaging sense, while the burg which Ðeodric is represented as owning (and occupying) was just as obviously thought of as an out-of-the-way place of no importance. For the contemptuous attitude of the Franks toward the Visigoths, see F. Jostes, Sonnenwende I (1926) 32.)
 
   Malone seems to emend this special approach with an etymological explanation which, if replaced with an area somewhat east of early Frankish kingdom or the contents of the Þiðreks saga, complies well with modern research by Ritter and other analysts who have been connecting Dietrich’s place of exile with a bordering folk right next to the early 6th-century kingdom of the Franks. Thus, Malone resumes on Mærings or Mæringas (op. cit. 1959, p. 123):
 
   I connect this name with NE meaning 'boundary' (cf. R. E. Zachrisson, Studia Neophilologica VI 30), and take it to mean 'borderers' (...) The vocalism of the base agrees beautifully with my etymology: the original ai is reflected in the High German e (a Frankish loan), the English æ, (i- umlaut of a) and the a of the Rök poet (taken from the Frisians).
 
   Malone did not mainly consider the Þiðreks saga for his discourse which, however, does not appear disadvantageous to our context. He suggests that the 'sea-battle', if at all most relevant for the Frankish retaliation, fought by Theuderic’s son is in conjunction with the king’s exile, and, as regards its 'southern conception', he rather pleads for a basic literary motif taken from the original Frankish Dietrich von Bern (op. cit. 1959, p. 123):
 
   The conception of him as a sea-king reflects, of course, the legendary exile, tidings of which had evidently made their way to Scandinavia, and this motif would be equally applicable to Wolfdietrich and to Dietrich von Bern. The lordship of the Mærings, however, belongs properly to Wolfdietrich and, in spite of the Boethius prologuist, has no place in the story of Dietrich von Bern. Þiaurikr, therefore, is to be identified with Theodoric the Frank. His fame in Gautland rested solidly on his great victory over the Gauts, and it is this victory which the Gautish runemaster had in mind. He put the reference, however, in terms of the new conception of Theodoric as an exile, a conception imported from the south.

   6   ii.  Simrock, Malone an other analysts naturally could proceed on the assumption that either Gregory or the Þiðreks saga or both sources combine different genealogical perception with the Franco-Rhenish protagonist. In contrast to the Þiðreks saga that allows to detect its definite geographical limitation, the Wolfdietrich represents an example that fades over its obvious Frankish based characters to the large area being connected with the appearances of 'Theoderic the Great'.  back to text

7 Cf. Old Nordic 'samr' = black. Although it seems not uncomplicated to identify Samson with Childeric I, a real named 'Samson' was son of Chilperic I, King of Soissons, and Fredegund. Thus, we may wonder if their early died son should remember a merited ancestor of the early Merovings.
 
    Scholarly research into source material about Childeric I has been producing controversial or at least divergent redrawings of his remarkable fragmentary and hazy vitae. Since we know about Childeric’s activities especially in north-eastern Gaul, insufficiently, some of them obviously pro-Roman against invading tribes, source contexts seem to reveal him playing nonetheless a pro-Frankish rôle, too. In so far we cannot exclude his important influence on the former Germania inferior – on anti-Roman consolidations and final Franco-Rhenish conquests.
 
    Referring to Childeric’s sexual profligacy, Gregory of Tours colports a king called Bisinus as contemporary Thuringian king. As noted well in scholarly discussions, this constellation appears less authentic. Did Gregory rather mean the king of Tongres? A corresponding emendation was already provided by a scribe (copyist) of Gregory’s work, cf. Ian N. Wood 1994. Not less interesting: Eugippius equating the Thuringians with Toringi [Commemoratorium 27,2 & 31,4], cf. G. Scheibelreiter 2009. Gregory’s dubious genealogical horizon of 5th century does also question the real dynastical identity of Clovis' mother!
 
    Besides, the Blómstrvalla saga remembers some chapter of Þiðreks saga when forwarding narration related to the heroes from the bloodline of Samson’s first son Duke Aki. The Samson saga fagra, especially its first part, is based on chivalrous French epics on Samson by Lancelot patterns, while the Karlamagnús saga as well as Vilhjalms saga mention 'Samson' rather shortly. Although Henry Goddard Leach regards the Samson saga fagra originated in 13th century, its compilation seems to meet rather 14th-century sagas, as Rudolf Simek estimates. Nonetheless, this saga should not be left out for a glance at Samson’s action space. Its last chapter tries to give an historiographical outlook peculiarly dominated by events in Lower German and Westphalian lands ('Vestfal') exaggeratedly ascribed to Samson’s conquests: Valltari, recited as a son of Samson, received from his father a Westphalian realm, married 'Gertrud', daughter of a Duke of Brunswick 'Brunsuik', and finally became Duke of Holstein 'Hollzsetu landi'.
 
    There is a Salian 'Salernian' location called Samson, as this Wallonian village can be found approximately 6 miles east of Namur, Belgium. Its ruined Roman fort, partially restored to a castle with a surviving impressing limestone wall on the rocks 'Les rochers de plus de 80 mètres avec une formidable muraille de calcaire', is surrounded by Germanic war graves of 2nd half of 4th century.
 
    The scribe of the Icelandic redaction MS A provides at Mb 3 a Salernis borg, apparently conceived and forwarded as an urban location in translatory contexts.
 
    Sauvenière is today’s name of a location that also pertains to the district of the Wallonian Samson. Considering a potential relevance of contemporary Sauvenière, a former Roman estate of 2nd century has been proved on its Plateau d’Arlansart at the highest spring of Orneau river. This place is mentioned as »Salvenerias villa« in a copied deed certification of Emperor Otto the Great, issued on September 20, 946. The Salernitana urbis, as mentioned in the Latin script provided by Peringskiöld, might represent nothing more or less than a temporary place of residence on Salian territory.
Map of Sauveniere
    Ernst F. Jung, German historian of Roman Era and Late Antiquity, additionally remarks a Samson sword type that classifies weapon foundlings of definitely Childeric’s time in that region of Namur where Sambre river meets the Meuse. As regards this sword type, Jung refers in his book Der Nibelungen Zug durchs Bergische Land (published by Haider-Verlag company, Bergisch Gladbach 1987) to the expert Wilfried Menghin who notes in his book Kelten, Römer und Germanen (published by Prestel-Verlag Company, Munich 1980) the corresponding catalogue no 16/17 of Time Group A, 'the same to which the Nordic Snartemo sword has been classified'.  back to text

8 The scribe of Mb 246 locates Valslongu at certain 'western border' of Franka riki, cf. German Þiðreks saga translation by F. H. von der Hagen. Ritter identified Walslongu ('Valsløngva') as German Westerwald, a woodland which, as the MSS provide, partially belonged to the realm of that Salumon. A western or north-western border of his land actually seems plausible if the Franks had already taken their first new regions on the Lower Lahn and Main river ('Frank-furt').
 
    From second quarter to the middle of 6th century, the Franks invaded Thuringia on a Mid-German territory extending from the upper Main to the upper Weser and the Elbe. In so far the mediaeval writer certainly means an area known today as '(Unter-)Franken' with regional inhabitants still called 'Mainfranken'. The author of Mb 250 remarks that King 'Salumon' attended a colloquium of apparently 'Ripuarian Franks' (see en. 13) at King Ermenrik’s Roma [secunda]. Ritter has placed this event at the end of 5th century. Thus Salumon, a palpable nickname for a mighty Frankish chief seemingly related by a sophisticated clerical author, appears connected with the first (or an early) Frankish conqueror and new ruler of lower and mid Main regions. The ford ('furt') of Main river on an obvious outstanding former location related to the Franks – today the metropolis of a large area –, from the MS to be roughly determined in eastern position of the former Walslongu centre, was an important strategic passage presumably after the withdrawal of the Romans and certainly after Migration Period.
 
    Furthermore, regarding historical interpretation, the Valslongu episode might correspond with another good reason for Clovis to remove Franco-Rhenish king Sigibert of Cologne whose territory seemingly was ranging to confluentes region.
 
    Considering basic historical relations at this juncture, we should not subordinate the geopolitical message to the embedded story of Salumon and Apollonius, cf. en. 27.1 at Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici [German]. The primary literary motifs of this episode were remarkably explored by elder scholarship. For instance, Fine Erichsen (op. cit.) regards the MHG strophic epics Salmon und Morolf as nothing more than a 'possible source'. Accordingly, she imagines the love potion of the Celtic Isold now being transformed into a ring of the same strong appeal, although disguise performance to access to the court of Salumon may also appear somewhat connected with the afore-titled tradition. Nonetheless, Notker Labeo 'Teutonicus', eminent scholar at St Gall monastery, made known a grotesque part of 'Salomon' dialogue tradition in 10th/11th century. The different Old English versions dealing with Solomon and Saturn are estimated of same age.  back to text

9   We may regard shortly in this connection the dialogue between Grimhild and an isolated shown Þiðrek (Mb 376, Sv 319). Not less interesting appears the Guðrúnarkviða III (þriðja), where Gudrun exaggerates into worst situation of 'Þioðrek' and his champions at Atli’s court. The previous Guðrúnarkviða II (in önnur), 25, appears of geographical importance, since Gudrun’s mother 'Grimhild' claims herself being authorized to dispose (a part of) Hlǫðvés sali = Clovis' kingdom. Both the Guðrúnarkviða I (fyrsta) and Oddrúnargrátr allow to detect the territory of 'Hunaland' not far from Denmark.
 
The Vǫlsunga saga recounts that Brynhild titles Gunnar’s brother-in-law as thrall of King Hjalprek whom literary research has been identifying or partially comparing with Clovis' father Childeric. Furthermore, as brought out by this Nordic cycle of tradition, an obvious mighty ruler called Hjalprek put Regin, intertextually corresponding with Mime the Smith to a certain extent, in charge of raising up Sigurðr sveinn. It seems less important to annotate that the aforementioned interfigural ruler may not be confused with a riddari Hialprek known as a good kinsman of Þiðrek, cf. Mb 321. Likewise, the greivi and jarl Loðvigr–Hlodver, cf. Mb 107 + Mb 403, may not be confused with an equally named ruler of a kingdom.
 
These examples, basically belonging to an Elder Edda source content, seem to reflect rather the original Frankish than the late 5th- or early 6th-century Burgundian milieu of Þioðrek and the Niflungar  back to text

10  i. The Franks and Burgundian allies invading southern Gaulish territories of the Visigoths were afterwards repelled at first from Septimania and the Provence by Theoderic’s general Ibba, 508–c.510. Gregory’s  'summary'  for the Franks: hist. III, 21.
 
    Furthermore, however, the Frankish historiographer claims that Clovis placed himself a diadem on his head after an appointment to the 'honorary consulship' from the emperor Anastasius in 508, hist. II, 38. This seems to indicate nothing more or less than a concordance or an intended alliance between them, likely based on preceding development which made the Eastern Roman emperor and Theoderic the Great in opposition at that time. Since the former was sending a fleet to ravage the Italian coast in the year of Clovis' pretty appointment, modern research presumes a 'foedus' between the Byzantine sovereign and the Gaulish king, notably Patrick J. Geary, Guy Halsall. However, there are no reliable sources which allow to substantiate that the Italian Theoderic was coerced into terminating his campaign against the Franks and Burgundians henceforth, and it seems less likely that Theoderic the Great, guarantor of the Pax Gothica, had accepted the Franks as sovereigns of Auvergne and, consequently, Aquitaine with the Albigeois and the Rouergue after the death of Clovis (510/511). With Gregory’s words accordingly: Gothi vero cum post Chlodovechi mortem multa de id quae ille adquesierat pervasissent, Theudoricus [...]; cf. e.g. Jonathan J. Arnold, Theoderic, the Goths, and the Restoration of the Roman Empire. Doctoral thesis, p. 241, fn. 170.
 
        Gregory involves Theuderic in dubious context with the Auvergnat episcopates of Quintianus and Apollinaris (c. 515), notably I. N. Wood 1983 and E. James 1985. Frankish authority over the Auvergne at that time appears less believable considering Theuderic’s extensive military action of 523/524 by Gregory’s reports. He might have either misdated Theuderic who became by this impressing expedition sovereign of that territory or mistaken him for a more plausible protectorate of Theoderic the Great up to that point of time. Moreover, it is strikingly evident that Gregory has suppressed the name of the enemy whom the Frankish king defeated with this obvious forceful military campaign – against the Gothi protected once by a great leader whom Gregory tries to mention as less as possible? Interestingly, Gregory remarks a dux Hilpingus (an 'Hildingus' in Carolingian bibliography) as Theuderic’s intimate advisor to this conquest (Liber Vitae Patrum IV, 2)!
 
        As Gregory inserts at hist. III, 4, Theuderic had preliminarily finished his first unsuccessful Thuringian operation – its historical reality remarkably doubted by the RGA – before his second Auvergnat campaign. Gregory’s hist. III, 3–5 apparently date from c. 515 to c. 523. Within this span Theuderic is supposed to have not been able to take possession of the half of Baderic’s Thuringian realm which his brother Hermanfrid had promised him. Nevertheless, in case of creditibility considering also Þiðrek’s Gransport campaign (c. 510), it would not seem inconceivable that Theuderic therewith was depending on limited armed forces possibly strengthened insufficiently by an ally.
 
        Following Gregory’s Liber Vitae Patrum VI, 2, reporting on Theuderic and the cleric Gallus from Cologne (c. 523), there was serious menace to their obvious short Christian mission to most important Lower Rhineland area in the first half of 6th century. This item does not question the 'Return of Þiðrek' dangerously crossing the region of Babilonia and defeating its ruler Elsung the Younger (Sv 341–346, Mb 399–406).
 
        Furthermore, critical research in Gregory’s texts neither suggests nor conclusively propagates Theuderic’s participation in Burgundian War, hist. III, 6; cf. Theuderich I. in RGA 30 (2005), p. 462 for dubious hist. III, 4. While this latest edition of the RGA does not confirm Theuderic’s active involvement in this war, moreover Wood 1994 constates Theuderic ostentatiously avoiding the Burgundian campaign.
 
        Regarding the basic understanding of the protagonists' 'exile', the sources just allow to conclude that Theuderic was driven out of Auvergne (since 507/508) and thereafter could not rule over this most attracting Gaulish region (seemingly suggested by Gregory) until 523/524. Not contradicting this item, the other north-eastern sources of stronger limited geographical horizon relate that Þiðrek was coincidentally chased away from his Bern location by a kinsman ruling Roma II.
 
   10  ii. As regards measure of time related to Old German Dietrich von Bern tradition, see Ritter’s explanation of counting the years of Hildebrand: Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, pgs 205–207. Notably also H.-J. Hube 2009.
 
     10  iii. Considering Frankish territories at the death of Clovis I, E. Ewig, I. N. Wood and other analysts do not follow some dubious mapping by Vidal de la Blache as redrawn or published by English, French and German Wikipedia, e.g. 'Theuderic I', 'Clovis Ier ', 'Thierry Ier ', 'Chlodwig I.' – retrieved 2012-08-17.
back to text
 
   11 The Old Norse + Swedish texts do not provide that Þiðrek himself had initiated this military expedition against the kingdom or territory of Soest, his place of exile. This Frankish campaign, although unsuccessful in the end, seems to continue soon the expansionism of Clovis who already had taken over Sigibert’s kingdom of Cologne.
 
   The Frisian 'chronicler' Suffridus Petrus, certainly not exempt from justifiable criticism particularly for some patriotic distortion, relates that Soest was sieged and finally conquered by Frankish king Dagobert I. Suffrid’s De Frisiorum antiquitate et origine libri tres  II, 15, provides that Dagobert confronted the local commander Yglo Galama, apparently of 'Frisian descent', with invading forces. Following Suffridus, Dagobert’s large Austrasian campaign against Saxon tribes, most likely between 623 and 625, was significantly supported by his father Chlothar II († 629 or 630). Regarding these large Frankish campaign against the Saxons, there are some parallels between Suffridus and narration by the Liber historiae Francorum.  back to text
 
12  i. Reinhard Wenskus provides these arguements on the geographical appearance of Hlǫðr in Nordic tradition (Der ‘hunnische’ Siegfried ... pgs 717–719):
 
c) Hliþe: in der Hervararsaga Hlǫðr. Auch hier führt die Gleichsetzung zu lautlichen Schwierigkeiten. Dennoch wird sie nicht im Ernst in Frage gestellt.209 Seit einem Jahrhundert wird Hliþe auch mit Lotherus, dem Sohn des Humblus, des Saxo Grammaticus identifiziert. Es ist merkwürdig, daß man nicht auf die näher liegende Vermutung kam, daß hier der mythische Ahn der Frankenkönige, Chlodio, dem auch ein historischer König des 5. Jahrhunderts nachbenannt wurde, vorzuziehen wäre. Das würde jedoch bedeuten, daß das Húnaland, über das Humli, wie der Großvater des Hlǫðr im Hunnenschlachtlied heißt, die Herrschaft ausübt, schon lange vor der Thidrekssaga als "Hunnenland" verstanden worden wäre und dieses Mißverständnis bereits in Gregors Vorstellung von der Herkunft der Franken aus Pannonien vorausgesetzt werden sollte.
Das würde für die Entstehungsgeschichte des Hunnenschlachtliedes bedeuten, daß über die bereits bekannten Verlagerungen der Schauplätze hinaus, wie sie von H. Humbach dargestellt wurden,210 noch ein Ereignishorizont im altfränkischen Bereich eingeschoben werden müßte. Dies wird auch durch weitere Hinweise gestützt. Schon Humbach ist es aufgefallen, daß im Hunnenschlachtlied die Himmelsrichtung, in der das Land der Hunnen liegen soll, wechselt.211 Beim Angriff auf die gotische Grenzburg kommen die Hunnen von Süden – wie dies beim Kampf der Attila-Erben gegen die Goten in Pannonien ja auch angenommen wird. Aber
Hlǫðr reitet von Osten her (Hlǫðr  reið austan) gegen Arheim, den Königssitz des Angantyr. Dieses Árheimar bereitet schon lange Kopfzerbrechen. Ch. Tolkien sieht es als Ableitung aus ár-dagar 'days of old' = "the ancient abode" für einen gotischen Königshof in Südosteuropa, dessen eigentlicher Name vergessen war,212 während Humbach es in den nordischen Ereignishorizont verlagert und an das dänische Aarhus denkt.213 Es bietet sich aus unserer Sicht aber eher das niederländische Arnheim an, dessen Name in den Dialekten, die -n-lose Formen für die Bezeichnung des Adlers kennen (ahd. aro, got. ara, anord. ari), gerade im Norden eben Árheimar heißen konnte. Wenn man an das westfälische Húnaland im Osten bzw. im Südosten davon denkt, ist die erwähnte neue Richtungsangabe eher verständlich. Vielleicht bildete aber auch das in einem Überlieferungsstrang als größere Raumeinheit gedachte Árheimar/Arnheim eine wichtige Station beim Vordringen der Franken in das linksrheinische Gebiet. Schließlich ist sowohl der Name Humlis wie der seiner Tochter Sifka genau wie Hlǫðr als hunnischer Name nur verständlich, wenn man eine an sich sehr gut mögliche volksetymologische Umdeutung annimmt. Im Gegensatz zur Darstellung des Hunnenschlachtliedes wird der Name Humli mit dem in der Amalerstammtafel bei Jordanes Getica 79 genannten Hulmul verglichen,214 der aber eben auch kein Hunne, sondern ein Sohn des Heros eponymos Gapt/Gaut und damit Gote ist. K. Malone, der mit anderen die Lesart ' Humal' vorzieht, hat erwogen, ob Humli nur "by virtue of the phonetic pattern of his name" zum Hunnen geworden ist,215 was allein schon deshalb eine gewisse Wahrscheinlichkeit hat, weil die Hun-Namen unserer Traditionsgemeinschaft vielfach Nebenformen mit -m- aufweisen (so neben Hunfrid auch Humfrid). Zieht man es jedoch vor, den Namen Humli mit der Bezeichnung der Hummel (anord. Humla), die auch für andere Bienenarten gebraucht wird, zu verbinden,216 dann fällt einem sofort die Bienensymbolik des Childerichgrabes ein, ohne daß wir dies hier weiter ausspinnen wollen. Es kann ja auch die Bezeichnung für den Hopfen (anord. humla) dahinter stehen, was jedoch weniger wahrscheinlich ist.217

__________________
 
209 K. MALONE (wie Anm. 206), S. 170 ff.
[206: ...Widsith (1962)...]
210 H. HUMBACH, Die geografischen Namen des altisländischen Hunnenschlachtliedes, in: Germania 47 (1969) S. 145–162.
211 H. HUMBACH (wie Anm. 210) S. 151.
212 Ch. TOLKIEN, The Battle of the Goths and the Huns, in: Saga-Book of the Viking Society 14 (1953/54) S. 158.
213 H. HUMBACH, (wie Anm. 210) S. 150 Anm. 20.
214 H. HUMBACH, (wie Anm. 210) S. 146 Anm. 7; vgl. auch H. WOLFRAM, Die Goten (3. Aufl. 1990) S. 370:
Hulmul-Humli (sic!) ("Vater der Dänen") – wohl nach Saxos Konstruktion.
215 K. MALONE (wie Anm. 206), S. 171.
216 Vgl. etwa H. WOLFRAM, Geschichte der Goten (1. Aufl. 1979) Stammtafel a, Ende:
Hulmul-Humli "Hummelsommer".
217 Vgl. aber M. GYSSELING (wie Anm. 15) I S. 524 zu
Humluncamp (Gem. St. George, arr. Arras), der es als "Hopfenkamp" versteht.
[15: ...Toponymisch Woordenboek von Belgie, Nederland, Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en West-Duitsland (vóór 1226) (1960)...]
 
[Transl.:   c) Hliþe but in the Hervarar saga Hloðr. Here, too, the equation results in phonetic difficulties. Nevertheless, this is not seriously questioned.209 Hliþe has also been identified with Lotherus, the son of Humblus by Saxo Grammaticus, since a century. It is out of the ordinary that we did not come to the more obvious assumption that the mythical ancestor of the Frankish kings, Chlodio, serving for the naming of an historical 5th-century king, seems preferable. This would mean, however, that the Húnaland, ruled by Humli, grandfather of Hloðr in the Old Nordic Battle of the Goths and Huns, could have been known as "Hun-land" long before the existence of the Thidrekssaga and hence this misunderstanding should be premised already for Gregory's conception of the origin of the Franks in Pannonia.
Regarding the historical origin of the Battle of the Goths and Huns in so far, an horizon of event has to be inserted in the Old Frankish area which goes beyond the known translocations of the battlefields, cf. the presentation by H. Humbach.210 This is also supported by further clues. Humbach has already encountered that the cardinal point, at which the land of the Huns is positioned, changes in the Battle of the Goths and Huns.211 When the Huns attack the Gothic border fortification, they come from the south – as this is also assumed in the battle of the Attila’s heirs against the Goths in Pannonia. But Hloðr rides from the east (Hloðr reið austan) against Arheim, the seat of King Angantyr. This Árheimar causes quite a headache for a long time. Ch. Tolkien sees it as a derivation from ár-dagar 'days of old' = "the ancient abode" for a Gothic court in South-East Europe, whose real name was forgotten,212 whereas Humbach shifts this kingly seat into the northern horizon of event and thinks of the Danish Aarhus.213 From our point of view, though, the Dutch Arnhem could be called Árheimar, whose name is known from the dialects as the name of the eagle (Old High German aro, Gothic Ara, Old Nordic ari). If we think of the Westphalian Húnaland in the east or southeast, the new direction as being mentioned is fairly understandable. The Árheimar/Arnheim, conceived as a larger unit of space in certain narrative context, presumably formed an important stage in the advance of the Franks into the region left of the Rhine. After all, the name Humli as well as that of his daughter Sifka, just like that one of Hloðr, can be clearly understood as a Hunnish name if we assume an ethnic based etymological re-interpretation. In contrast to the introduction by the Battle of the Goths and Huns, the name Humli is compared with the Hulmul who is mentioned in the tribal chart of the Amals in Jordanes' Getica (79),214 who, however, is not a Hun but a son of the hero eponymic Gapt/Gaut and thus a Goth. Kemp Malone, who prefers ‘Humal’ with others, has contemplated whether Humli became a Hun by "virtue of the phonetic pattern of his name",215 which has a certain unique probability because the 'Hun' based names in the community of traditions often have secondary forms with -m- (such as Hunfrid, also Humfrid). But if we prefer to combine the name of Humli with the name of the ‘Hummel’ bumble bee (Old Nordic Humla),216 also used for other species of bees, the 'Beekeeper’s Symbolism' [(quot. rem.:) one of various interpretations] of Childeric’s grave will be immediately apparent to us. We can also think of hop (Old Nordic Humla) which, however, seems less likely.217
]
__________________
 
209 K. MALONE (op. cit. ann. 206), p. 170ff.
[206: ...Widsith (1962)...]
210 H. HUMBACH, Die geografischen Namen des altisländischen Hunnenschlachtliedes, in: Germania 47 (1969) pgs 145–162.
211 H. HUMBACH (op. cit. ann. 210) p. 151.
212 Ch. TOLKIEN, The Battle of the Goths and the Huns, in: Saga-Book of the Viking Society 14 (1953/54) p. 158.
213 H. HUMBACH, (op. cit. ann. 210) p. 150 ann. 20.
214 H. HUMBACH, (op. cit. ann. 210) p. 146 ann. 7; cf. also H. WOLFRAM, Die Goten (3. ed. 1990) p. 370:
Hulmul-Humli (sic!) ("Vater der Dänen") – likely following Saxo's construction.
215 K. MALONE (op. cit. ann. 206) p. 171.
216 Cf. e.g. H. WOLFRAM, Geschichte der Goten (1. ed. 1979) chart a (see end):
Hulmul-Humli "Hummelsommer".
217 But cf. M. GYSSELING (op. cit. ann. 15) I p. 524 as
Humluncamp (Municipality of Saint-Georges, L'arrondissement d'Arras), who understands it as "Hopfenkamp".
[15: ...Toponymisch Woordenboek von Belgie, Nederland, Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en West-Duitsland (vóór 1226) (1960)...]
 
12  ii. Reinhard Wenskus has centered the cultural and geographical side of early Merovingian history around its literary protogonist Chlodio with these arguements:
 
E. Zöllner hat auf die Tatsache hingewiesen, daß die aus einer Reihe von Inschriften in Niedergermanien (Birten bei Xanten, Holtedorn bei Nymwegen, Monterberg bei Kalkar, Iversheim bei Münstereifel) und Friesland (Beetgum bei Leeuwarden) bekannte Göttin Hludana in ihrem Namen, der von Jan de Vries als ,die Ruhmvolle’ gedeutet wird 35, die gleiche Stammsilbe aufweist wie Chlodio. Doch hält er es für „unsicher, ob daraus Schlüsse auf einen Hludanakult der Franken gezogen werden dürfen“  36. Es gibt jedoch einige Tatsachen, die diese Vermutung stützen.
In Süd-Limburg, d. h. in einem Raum, der zu dem Bereich gehört, in dem die merowingische Reihengräberkultur entstand
 37, liegt Lanaken (Lodenaken 1106/11, Luthenachen 1141/57, das bis 1106/11 Krongut war38 ), dessen Name als *Hludiniacas verstanden wird 39, wobei die Endung auf eine frühmerowingische Namenschicht weist. Der Name läßt freilich nicht erkennen, ob hier die mythische Gestalt – also Hludana – oder ein Frankenkönig gemeint ist, da seine Bedeutung („toebehorend aan Hludo“) beides zuläßt.
________________________  
35 JAN DE VRIES [Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte:] II, S. 322. Schon hier sei darauf hingewiesen, daß auch der Name der Pasiphae, der Gemahlin des Minos, die mit dem von Poseidon gesandten Meeresstier den Minotaurus zeugt, als Tochter des Helios ,die Allscheinende’ gedeutet wird.
36 ERICH ZÖLLNER, Geschichte der Franken bis zur Mitte des 6. Jahrhunderts, München 1970, S. 180. Zum Sprachlichen vgl. PIERGUISEPPE SCARDIGLI, Sprache im Umkreis der Matroneninschriften, in: Germanische Rest- und Trümmersprachen, hg. von HEINRICH BECK (Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, hg. von HEINRICH BECK u.a. 3) Berlin – New York 1989, S. 146f.
37 HORST WOLFGANG BÖHME, Die Eingliederung des spätrömischen Nordgalliens ins Frankenreich, in: 9. Kongreß der Union internationale des Sciences Pré- et Protohistoriques, Nice 1976, S. 71–87.
38 GUIDO ROTTHOFF, Studien zur Geschichte des Reichsguts in Niederlothringen und Friesland während der sächsisch-salischen Kaiserzeit (Rheinisches Archiv 44) Bonn 1953, S. 97f.
39 MAURITS GYSSELING, Typonymisch woordenboek van België, Nederland, Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en West-Duitsland (voor 1226) I (Bouwstoffen en Studiën voor de geschiedenis en de lexicografie van het Nederlands 6) Brussel 1960, S. 590. – Die Möglichkeit, den Namen in zweifacher Weise zu deuten, ergibt sich auch aus der Tatsache, daß in der Gemarkung von Lanaken ein Doesberg (in monte Dusenberg 1145; in monte Dulceberg – lies Dusceberg – 1146) zu finden ist; vgl. ebd. S. 275; dies erlaubt uns die Annahme, daß es sich um das Dispargum castrum des Gregor von Tours (Hist. II 9) handelt, in dem Chlogio/Chlodio habitabat. Diese Annahme ist jedenfalls wesentlich begründeter als die Gleichsetzung mit Duisburg südöstlich Brüssel, die noch ZÖLLNER (wie Anm. 36) S. 27f., mit Schmidt, Gilissen, Roosens u.a. als die wahrscheinlichste gilt (weitere Lit. bei HEINRICH TIEFENBACH, in: Reallex. d. germ. Altertumsk. 21984, S. 497f.). Jenes liegt in einem Ausbaugebiet und bereits im Bistum Cambrai, d.h. nicht im Raum der Civitas Tungrorum, als das man das in terminum Thoringorum Gregors doch wohl ansehen muß, und von wo aus erst Chlogio seinen Vormarsch auf das Gebiet von Cambrai plante. Dazu war Lanaken an der Römerstraße von Nijmegen –Tongern der viel bessere Ausgangspunkt.
Andererseits hat GYSSELING den Namen des Ortes als
dūsanda burg bzw. dutsanda burg d.h. ,duizelige, duttende, d.i. sluimerende burg’ (?) gedeutet. Diese Deutung könnte auf eine ,Entrückung’ weisen, die mit gewissen Heilsvorstellungen verbunden war. Das legen einige sprachliche ,Überlebsel’ nahe: mnd. dösich, ae. dysig ,betäubt’ (vgl. engl. dizzy ‚schwindlig, verwirrt’; dt. dösig, dösen) und die mit dt. Dusel (aus nd. dusel ,Betäubung') zusammenhängenden Wendungen; wenn einem trotz seines Rausches in schwieriger Lage nichts passierte, sagte man: „er hat Dusel gehabt“. Dem müßte weiter nachgegangen werden.
Bemerkenswert ist die Verbreitung der damit gebildeten Ortsnamen. Außer den schon erwähnten können folgende herangezogen werden:
1) Doesburg an der Jjssel im Hamaland (d.h. im Gebiet der Chamaven); dort befand sich noch in ottonisch-frühsalischer Zeit – wenn auch nur geringes – Königsgut; vgl. GUIDO ROTTHOFF, Studien zur Geschichte des Reichsguts in Niederlothringen während der sächsisch-salischen Kaiserzeit. Das Reichsgut in den heutigen Niederlanden, Belgien, Luxemburg und Nordfrankreich, Bonn 1953, S. 83.
2) Duisburg a. Rh. ursprünglich wohl im Gebiet der Chattuarier; der Ort war ein wichtiges Reichsgutzentrum.
3) Duisenburg Kr. Lingen/Ems im Gebiet der Amsivarier.

4) Duisdorf (zu Bonn) war Dingstuhl für eine ganze Reihe umliegender Orte; auch Lanaken war mit Petersheim ein Untergericht des Vroenhofs Maastricht; vgl. MATTHIAS WERNER, Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit, Göttingen 1980, S. 381, Anm. 64.
Der Befund ist deshalb bemerkenswert, weil alle im 4. Jahrhundert als Franken bezeichneten Stämme mit je einem solchen Ort versehen sind; aber eben auch nur diese und keine anderen. Auch hier müssen eingehendere Untersuchungen feststellen, wieweit wir einem Zufall zum Opfer fielen oder ob sich dahinter mehr verbirgt. Schon die Lesart Dulceberg (s.o.) legt den Verdacht nahe, daß eine romanische Volksetymologie auch andernorts zu einer Umdeutung der Namen ehemaliger Duisberge geführt hat. Das könnte bei einzelnen der nicht ganz seltenen Orte im nordfranzösischen Sprachgebiet, die Douchy-, Douzy- u.ä. Bestandteile haben und gewöhnlich als Dulciacum, d.h. eine gallorömische Ableitung vom lat. Personennamen Dulcius angesehen wurden, immerhin erwogen werden. Ähnliche Vorstellungen mögen auch hinter dem Ortsnamen Dutse (Geraardsbergen, Ostflandern, 866 Dulcia, 1213 Duche) verborgen sein. Möglicherweise ist auch Ucimont in den Ardennen von Belgisch Luxemburg mit einer spätrömischen Befestigung so zu verstehen, da sich 1 ½ km südwestlich davon ein ,Mont de Justice’, also ein Malberg, befindet; vgl. J. E. BOGAERS – C. B. RÜGER (Hgg.), Der niedergermanische Limes. Materialien zu seiner Geschichte, Köln 1974, S. 247. Romanische Umformung des Namens kann auch bei Dusemond (seit 1925 Brauneberg) bei Veldenz an der Mosel vorliegen, das 575/88 von Childbert II. an Verdun geschenkt wurde (vgl. EUGEN EWIG, Trier im Merowingerreich. Civitas, Stadt, Bistum, Trier 1954, S. 174 und 244). Sollte jedoch das zweite Namensglied (-mond) keinen Berg meinen, sondern die Mündung eines Gewässers, ergeben sich vielfache Beziehungen zu entsprechenden Parallelen. So hat TIEFENBACH z.B. den religiösen Zentralort von Toxandrien Deuso (= Diessen 20 km westlich Eindhoven), dessen Hercules Deusoniensis selbst auf römischen Kaisermünzen erscheint, mit dem Namen Dispargum verbunden, während die bisherige Forschung ebenfalls an eine Ableitung von einem Flußnamen dachte. Dieser Anregung sollte genauer nachgegangen werden, da sich folgende – vorerst vage – Hypothese anbietet. Sollte der kultische Bezug des ersten Namensgliedes sich generell auf Hercules/Donar beziehen? Die Möglichkeit scheint sich für Dispargum dadurch zu ergeben, daß Lanaken mit Petershe(i)m (s.o.) eine Einheit bildet und St. Peter häufig Kultstätten Donars fortführt, wie beim Namenspaar Godesberg (in Guodenes monte 801/14; Wodenesberch 1140)/Petersberg – wie Duisdorf im Umkreis von Bonn – vermutet wird. Diesem Petershem bei Lanaken entspricht in ähnlicher topographischer Anordnung Goudsberg östlich Maastricht an der Römerstraße nach Köln mit einer spätrömischen Befestigung; vgl. BOGAERS – RÜGER S. 177 Nr. 52. Wie es sich auch verhalten möge, daß bereits in Toxandrien diese Vorstellungen bei den Salfranken vorauszusetzen sind, dürfte u.a. der Ortsname Duizel (bei Eersel 13 km südwestlich Eindhoven; 1219 Dusele) nahelegen, der einen Ort bezeichnet, der nur 4–5 km südöstlich Hoogeloon liegt, wo eine der in Toxandrien sehr seltenen römischen villae festgestellt wurde. Da das -l des Namens wohl nicht – wie beim dt. Wort Dusel – Suffixcharakter hat, sondern wohl ein Kompositum mit dem Bestandteil -sali (,Einraumhaus') darstellt, hat der Ort wohl nur lokale Bedeutung.
 
(Reinhard Wenskus, Religion arbâtardi. Materialien zum Synkretismus in der vorchristlichen politischen Theologie der Franken in: Iconologia Sacra, ed. Hagen Keller, Nikolaus Staubach, vol. 23, pgs 179–248, quot. pgs 184–186.)
 
[Transl.:  E. Zöllner pointed out the fact that the goddess Hludana, known from a series of inscriptions in Lower Germany (Birten near Xanten, Holtedoorn near Nijmegen, Monterberg near Kalkar, Iversheim near Münstereifel) and Frisia (Beetgum near Leeuwarden), who has been explicated by Jan de Vries as ‘the glorious'35, has in her name the same root syllable as Chlodio. But he considers it to be "uncertain whether conclusions can be drawn from Hludana-worshipping of the Franks." 36 However, there are some facts supporting this assumption.
In Southern Limburg, pertaining to an area in which the Merovingian culture of row grave cemeteries is originated37, is to be found Lanaken (Lodenaken 1106/11, Luthenachen 1141/57 which was regnal domain until 1106/1138). Its name is known as *Hludiniacas39 with the ending pointing to an early Merovingian name layer. This name, however, does not reveal whether the mythical figure – i.e. Hludana – or a Frankish king is meant here, since its meaning (’belonging to Hludo’) admits both.
________________________  
35 JAN DE VRIES [quot. rem.: Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte:] II, p. 322. It should be already remarked here that Pasiphae’s name, the spouse of Minos who fathers the Minotaur with the sea animal sent by Poseidon, is interpreted as the daughter of Helios, the ‘All-Shining’.
36 ERICH ZÖLLNER, Geschichte der Franken bis zur Mitte des 6. Jahrhunderts, München 1970, p. 180. On linguistic matters cf. PIERGUISEPPE SCARDIGLI, Sprache im Umkreis der Matroneninschriften, in: Germanische Rest- und Trümmersprachen, Ed. HEINRICH BECK (Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, Ed. HEINRICH BECK u.a. 3) Berlin – New York 1989, p. 146f.
37 HORST WOLFGANG BÖHME, Die Eingliederung des spätrömischen Nordgalliens ins Frankenreich, in: 9. Kongreß der Union internationale des Sciences Pré- et Protohistoriques, Nice 1976, pp. 71–87.
38 GUIDO ROTTHOFF, Studien zur Geschichte des Reichsguts in Niederlothringen und Friesland während der sächsisch-salischen Kaiserzeit (Rheinisches Archiv 44) Bonn 1953, p. 97f.
39 MAURITS GYSSELING, Typonymisch woordenboek van België, Nederland, Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en West-Duitsland (voor 1226) I (Bouwstoffen en Studiën voor de geschiedenis en de lexicografie van het Nederlands 6) Brussel 1960, p. 590. – The possibility of explaining the name in a twofold manner also arises from the fact that a Doesberg is to be found in the landmark of Lanaken (in monte Dusenberg 1145; in monte Dulceberg – read ‘Dusceberg’ – 1146); cf. op. cit. p. 275. This allows us to assume the dispargum castrum, Gregory of Tours (Hist. II, 9), as the habitat of Chlogio / Chlodio. At any rate, this assumption appears much more reasonable than the equation with Duisburg to the southeast of Brussels, which has been ascribed to the most likely location by ZÖLLNER (see note 36) pp. 27f., Schmidt, Gilissen, Roosens et al. (See further literature by HEINRICH TIEFENBACH, in: Reallex. d. germ. Altertumsk. 21984, p. 497f.) The former is located in a development region, nothing less than in the diocese of Cambrai, but not in the region of the Civitas Tungrorum, which should be regarded well as Gregory’s in terminum Thoringorum where Chlogio planned his advance to the region of Cambrai. Lanaken, on the Roman road from Nijmegen – Tongern, was the much better starting point.
On the other hand, GYSSELING explicated the name of this location as dūsanda burg or dutsanda burg, i.e. ’duizelige, duttende’, i.e. ’sluimerende burg’ (?).
This interpretation could point to a ‘rapture’ connected with certain redemptive imaginations, as this suggest some linguistic remains: Middle Low German ‚dösich’, Old English ‚dysig’ (dazed, dizzy) [...]
The spread of the place names derived from this is remarkable. Except the afore-mentioned the following names can be additionally regarded:
1) Doesburg on the Jjssel, Hamaland (region of the Chamavi) with some minor regnal domain in from early Salian–Ottonic times; cf. GUIDO ROTTHOFF, Studien zur Geschichte des Reichsguts in Niederlothringen während der sächsisch-salischen Kaiserzeit. Das Reichsgut in den heutigen Niederlanden, Belgien, Luxemburg und Nordfrankreich, Bonn 1953, p. 83.
2) Duisburg on the Rhine, likely in the former region of the Chatti. This location was an important regnal domain centre.
3) Duisenburg, district of Lingen on the Ems, region of the Ampsivarii.
4) Duisdorf (pertaining to Bonn) was seat of justice for many surrounding locations. Furthermore, Lanaken and Petersheim belonged to the subsidiary seat of justice of the socage estate at Maastricht; cf. MATTHIAS WERNER, Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit, Göttingen 1980, p. 381, note 64.
The result is remarkable because one certain of these places belonged to each of all tribes designated as Franks in the 4th century, but only these and no others. Here, too, more detailed investigations must explore the extent to which we are fallen victim to a coincidence, or whether there is anything more concealed behind it. Even the reading of Dulceberg (see above) suggests that a Roman people’s etymology has also led elsewhere to a reinterpretation of the names of former Duisbergs. This could be taken into consideration by means of some of the not very rare places in the French speaking part of the country, which have douchy-, douzy-, and similar components; and which are usually regarded as Dulciacum, i.e. a Gallic-Roman derivation from the Latin person name Dulcius. Similar notions might also be hidden behind the place name Dutse (Geraardsbergen, East Flanders, 866 Dulcia, 1213 Duche). Ucimont, in the Ardennes of Belgian Luxembourg, could be understood likewise, since a ‘Mont de Justice’ is located 1½ km southwest of its late Roman fortification; cf. J. E. BOGAERS – C. B. RÜGER (Eds.), Der niedergermanische Limes. Materialien zu seiner Geschichte, Köln 1974, p. 247. A Romanesque transformation of the name could also be the case for Dusemond (since 1925 Brauneberg) near Veldenz on the Moselle, which was donated to Verdun by Childbert II in 575/88 (cf. EUGEN EWIG, Trier im Merowingerreich. Civitas, Stadt, Bistum, Trier 1954, pp. 174 and 244). If, however, the second name element (-mond) would not mean a mountain but rather the mouth of a body of water, many relations with corresponding parallels then arise. For example, TIEFENBACH has connected Deuso, the religious centre of Toxandria (now Diessen, 20 km west of Eindhoven) whose Hercules Deusoniensis appears on Roman imperial coins, with Dispargum, whereas current research has also suggested the derivation of a river name. This suggestion should be investigated more closely, since the following – preliminary vague – hypothesis will be offered. Should the cultic relationship of the first name element refer generally to Hercules / Donar? Such possibility seems to arise for Dispargum by the fact that Lanaken forms a unit with Petershe(i)m (see above) and St. Peter often carries on worshipping places of Donar, as suspected in the name pair Godesberg (in Guodenes monte 801/14; Wodenesberch 1140) / Petersberg – like Duisdorf in the vicinity of Bonn. In a similar topographical context Petershem near Lanaken corresponds with Goudsberg, east of Maastricht on the Roman road to Cologne, which has a late Roman fortification; cf. BOGAERS – RÜGER, p. 177, no. 52. Nonetheless, these ideas are to be presupposed in the case of the Salian Franks in Toxandria, as this may show the location name Duizel (near Eersel, 13 km southwest of Eindhoven, Dusele 1219) which refers to a place being located only 4 to 5 km southeast of Hoogeloon, where a found villa supplements the rare Roman villae of Toxandria. Since the -l of the name might not be related with a suffix form, as to be compared with the German word Dusel, it seems to be a composite with the component -sali (‘one room building’ [quot. rem. ‘hall’]). Thus, this place may be only of local significance.]
 
Jozef van Loon recently zoomed this topic more detailed and brought out this summary:
 
A new etymology of the Limburg place-name Lanaken leads to far-reaching conclusions with respect to the descent of the Merovingian dynasty and their Frankish origins. Traditionally, the name Lanaken, like many French place-names in -y, -ies etc., has been seen as containing the Gallo-Roman suffix -iniaca(s). However, this reconstruction runs into problems with the historical sound laws of Dutch and French. A finer distinction of the different variants which developed from the Celtic suffix -ākos, enables us to attribute these names to different eras more accurately, ranging from Late Prehistory to Early Carolingian times. The name Lanaken itself must be reconstructed as *Hluþenakōm, a name-form that presumably dates from the second century A.D. The first component contains the name of the Germanic goddess Hluthena, who was worshipped in the territory of the Sugambri, the Frankish tribe from which the Merovingian dynasty descended. The oldest known member of the dynasty, Chlodio, can be shown to be identical with Chlodebaudes, whose name is mentioned in some genealogies which had been considered unreliable until now. The article also discusses the etymology of the names Liedekerke, Luik, Montenaken, Salii, Sinnich, Thüringen and Vicus Helena.
 
(Jozef van Loon, Lanaken en de vroegste geschiedenis van Franken en Merovingen, in: Verslagen & Mededelingen van de KANTL, vol. 126, nr. 1–2 (2016) pgs 11–75, quot. pgs 11–12.)
http://www.verslagenenmededelingen.be/index.php/VM/article/download/111/114   (retrieved February 2017).
back to text

13 This equation is provided by the 'rhyme chronicle of Cologne' which has been ascribed to the authorship of Gottfried Hagen, clericus coloniensis, municipal clerk and clergyman of Cologne in 13th century. The author of this work mentions the appearance of Dederich van Berne, Dederige van Berne, Dederich der Wise in some reparteeing contexts. The newer transcription of line 61 is by Bunna, dat heis man do Berne. Note well that the Old German by (Neo Germ bei) does correspond with English nearby!
 
    One of the first ecclesiastical testimonies equating Bonn on the Rhine with Verona, which local mediaeval transmission also connects with Bern, is provided on an altar memorial plate that archbishop Folkmar (965–969) dedicated to St Pantaleon Church of Cologne. This donation apparently indicates a special historical relationship between both locations. Cf. Heinz Ritter-Schaumburg, Dietrich von Bern, Munich 1982, pgs 52–56. Rolf Badenhausen, Sage und Wirklichkeit, Münster 2007, pgs 346–348.  back to text

14 The first chronological appearance related to 'Ripuaria', the terra Riboariense, provides the Liber historiae Francorum in the context of the final quarrel between Theuderic II and his brother Theudebert II, as this event has been dated 612 by an author writing in 726/727. Neither an equivalent nor any roughly related form of an ethnological or geographical Ripuaria comes up in the texts written by Gregory of Tours. Thus, some elder scholars obviously applied this term incorrectly in ethnological and chronological contexts, e.g. Wilhelm Giesebrecht, German translator of Gregory of Tours. Other authors might just geographically regard 'Ripuaria' or 'Ribuaria' as nothing more than a region of unknown borders around the former Roman based 'civitas' of Cologne. Regarding Migration Period with its early Merovingian times, this region has been traditionally suggested from the Middle and Lower Moselle to the Middle and Lower Rhine, see RGA 24 (2003) or the more comprehensive analysis by Matthias Springer: Riparii – Ribuarier – Rheinfranken ... in RGA 19 (1998).
 
   Nonetheless, Eugen Ewig remembers that Jordanes mentions Ripari or Riparoli under the command of Aëtius in the Battle of Troyes in A.D. 451, cf. Trier im Merowingerreich – Civitas, Stadt, Bistum; Trier 1954, p. 62. back to text

15  Babilonia as an apposition for Cologne, apparently related to a retrospective view, can be found in an official clerical document of 11th-German century, see for more details en. 27 in the author’s article Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici.
 
    This Babilonia, that Roman history about Germania inferior reveals in figurative sense as the Babylon of luxury and vice, may be identified with Cologne in geographical context of the manuscripts. For example, Duna Crossing pertains to Jarl Elsung the Younger who is mentioned as ruler of Babilonia. Note well, interestingly, that Elsung the Elder was the former ruler of Bern!
 
    Following Clovis' control of power, he certainly would not have nominated the Niflungen for King Sigebert’s or Sigurð’s successor if they had been already rewarded with the administration of Þiðrek’s realm after his expulsion from Bern.
 
    If Zülpich that Gregory obviously calls Tulbiacum, s. hist. II, 37 + III, 8, had been remarkably destroyed in Alemannic-Frankish war, the Niflungen could have been forced to take a new place of residence nearby. Vernica or Verminza, as the original texts spell this seat, is only a few miles far from Zülpich = Tulbiacum which has been equated with Tolbiacum. The manuscripts note brightest full moon night when the Niflungen met the Rhine at Duna Crossing: since important campaigns were usually planned to start at full moon in Late Antiquity as well as (prae-)mediaeval times, the Niflungen with polished armour underneath their garments could have covered only c. 30 miles from their capital place.  back to text

16   i. Hunaland or Humaland, Hymaland, appear related to Lower German hûne, Middle High German Huine = large human. The historical Hünengräber are known as impressing burial places, characteristically in Lower Germany and northern countries. The afore-quoted geonyms, used by the mediaeval Scandinavian scribes, determine an obvious large territory centered between Lower Rhine and Lower Elbe. As already annotated above, the Guðrúnarkviða II indicates some geographical importance, since Gudrun’s mother 'Grimhild' feels strong enough to dispose (a part of) Hlǫðvés sali = Clovis' kingdom. Furthermore, both the Guðrúnarkviða I and Oddrúnargrátr situate (the later) Denmark in the neighbourhood of Hunaland. Regarding Icelandic poetry outside the Eddaic works, the 3rd chapter of the Icelandic Kormáks saga points to the twinship of Húnaland and Denmark:
 
Alls metk auðar þellu
Íslands, þás mér grandar,
Húnalands ok handan
hugstarkr sem Danmarkar;
verð es Engla jarðar
Eir háþyrnis geira
(sól-Gunni metk svinna
sunds) ok Íra grundar.
 
[In all I boldly appraise the woman (“pine-tree of riches”), who causes me harm, as equal to Iceland and — across the sea — the land of the Huns, as well as Denmark. She (“the goddess of the spears of the thorn-bush of the skin,” i.e., “the goddess of the comb/hairpins”) is worth the land of the English — I appraise the shrewd woman (“valkyrie of the sun of the sound,” i.e., “valkyrie of gold”) — and the territory of the Irish.]
 
Quotation and modern translation of this verse by Russell Poole, Composition Transmission Performance: The First Ten lausavísur in Kormáks saga,  in: Alvíssmál 7 (1997) pgs 37–60, see p. 40.
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~alvismal/7kormak.pdf  (retrieved Feb. 2017).
 
       Karl Simrock (op. cit. p. 13 f.) refers to the Old English Widsith, 33:
 
      Hún Hætwerum ond Holen Wrosnum  (cf. transcription at georgetown.edu/labyrinth)
 
     and he connects this Hun with the ruler of the Hattuarii or Chattuarii, a folk situated on the Lower Rhine in Migration period. Thus, it is certainly not out of the question that this Hun, enlarging his influence on adjacent regions of the later Westphalia and Lower Saxony, was equated light-mindedly with the leader of the south-eastern Huns on the Tisza. See correspondingly Reinhard Wenskus (Der ‘hunnische’ Siegfried ... p. 693) who notes well the geographical 'hunskr' apposition of Sigurð in two Eddic traditions which, however, do not contextually allow to identify Attila’s prominent southern area for believable geostrategical reasons. Cf. also 'Halfdan' for a personal geonym of Sigurð’s father Sigmunð apparently chosen by Saxo Grammaticus. However, Wenskus remarks further that the Beowulf claims Sigemund a son of the Wælsinges, as this points well to a region on Waal river not far from Xanten, Siegfried’s place of birth maintained by the Nibelungenlied. Thus, the Old Norse scribes could have meant the oppidum Bertunense of Xanten-Birten instead of the Bardengau as Sigmund’s kingdom on the one hand, but on the other the Vǫlsunga saga depicts him as a migrating king who disguises himself as a wolf – cf. German Wolfsburg in the former Bardengau.
 
      Reinhard Wenskus seems to complete the RGA 22 (2003), p. 189f., with this conjecture on the determination of Húnaland (Der ‘hunnische’ Siegfried ... pgs 687–689):
 
Immerhin wäre es denkbar, daß wir im Namen Húnaland einen Ländernamen des Typs Frýsland/Rugiland vor uns haben.11 Wie dem auch sei, man hat das um Soest im Helwegraum angesetzte, im Norden als Húnaland bezeichnete Reich Atlis/Attilas im Mittelalter (Thidrekssaga) darunter verstanden, wenn auch "sagengeschichtlich … keine Verbindung von Sigurd zu den Hunnen" führt.12
Dieser Sachverhalt hätte nun eine auffällige Parallele, wenn wir den Versuch Norbert Wagners akzeptieren, der die von Gregor von Tours (Hist. Franc. II 9) überlieferte Nachricht, die Franken seien aus Pannonien13 gekommen, aus einem Lautanklang erklären möchte, indem er für den mehrfach überlieferten Namen der salischen Franken (ae. Hugas, latinisiert Hugones) durch Synkope zu *Hūgno werden läßt, von dem aus der Ländername Hūgno land (Land der Hugen/Franken) gebildet werden kann, der einem *Hūnjo land (Land der Hunnen = Pannonien) so nahe stehen würde, daß eine Verwechslung leicht zu erklären wäre.14 Nun glaubt Wagner wohl zurecht, daß der Volksname der Hugen im Namen der Landschaft Hugmerki westlich von Groningen enthalten sei, wobei der Volksname wie bei Frysland/Rugiland in der Stammform erscheint.15 Danach wäre zu schließen, daß die Vorstellung, das fränkische Húnaland sei ein "Hunnenland" gewesen, durch die Verwechslung des letzteren mit einem Land an der südlichen Nordseeküste zustande gekommen ist.
Diese Vorstellung ließe sich gut mit der Hypothese in Einklang bringen, bei der Überlieferung von der pannonischen Herkunft der Franken hätte der Name des von Plinius für diesen Raum überlieferten Ländernamens Baunonia mit eine Rolle gespielt.16 Dies würde selbst dann möglich sein, wenn Baunonia keinen größeren Landstrich meinte, sondern nur die – damals ohnehin viel größere – Insel Borkum (Burcana/Fabaria).17
Leider hat Wagner nicht eine weitere Möglichkeit ausdiskutiert: Unmittelbar nordöstlich von Hugmerki ist ein Hunzego bezeugt, dessen Name von M. Gysseling18 an sich einleuchtend mit dem Namen des Flusses Hunze (Hunse, Drenthsche Diep) verbunden wird. Doch lassen die Lesarten aufmerken: in pago Hunergeuue (2. Hälfte 8. Jahrh./Kop. 12. Jahrh. Fulda), Hunusga (1. Hälfte 9. Jahrh./Kop. 1. Hälfte 11. Jahrh. vita S. Liudgeri). Mangels ausreichender Kompetenz soll dieser Faden hier jedoch nicht weiter verfolgt werden.

__________________
 
11 Dazu N. WAGNER, Zur Herkunft der Franken aus Pannonien, in: Frühmittelalterliche Studien II (1977) S. 222f. Anm. 36.
12 So H. BECK (wie Anm. 1) S. 99.

[1 H. BECK, Zu Otto Höflers Siegfried-Arminius-Untersuchungen, in: Beitr. z. Gesch. d. deutschen Sprache und Literatur 107.1 (1985) S. 92–107.]
13 Daß "das richtige Pannonien in der tatsächlichen Geschichte der Franken keinen Platz finden kann", wie N. WAGNER (wie Anm. 11) S. 219 voraussetzt, ist heute angesichts der starken danubischen Einflüsse bei der Entstehung der Merowingischen Reihengräberkultur doch wohl zu relativieren und neu zu bedenken.
14 N. WAGNER (wie Anm. 11) S. 226 f.; H. BECK (wie Anm. 1) S. 100 erwähnt eine Variante, die von E. BRATE und J. DE VRIES vertreten wurde, nach der ein lautgesetzlicher Wandel von
Hunar, Hunir < *Hūgwnōz anzusetzen sei.
15 N. WAGNER (wie Anm. 11) S. 222. M. GYSSELING, Toponymisch Woordenboek von Belgie, Nederland, Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en West-Duitsland (vóór 1226) (1960) S. 524 f. gibt für das später
Humsterland genannte Gebiet folgende Lesarten an: in pago Hugumarchi (786/787), Hugmerthi (1.H. 9.Jh./Kop. 1.H. 11.Jh.), in pago Humerki (zu 855/Kop. A. 10.Jh.). Er rekonstruiert germ. *Hūgamarkja, gebildet aus dem Volksnamen Hugas und *markō.
16 Vgl. R. WENSKUS (wie Anm. 6) S. 530.
[6 ... R.WENSKUS, Stammesbildung und Verfassung. Das Werden der frühmittelalterlichen Gentes (1961). S. 24.]
17 Der Zweifel von N. WAGNER (wie Anm. 1) S. 219 "wie dieser kleinen Insel die Rolle einer Wiege des Frankenvolkes zugekommen sein sollte", beruht auf einem unausrottbaren, in der Ethnologie längst aufgegebenen Denkmodell. Zahlreiche Beispiele einer weiten Ausbreitung eines ethnischen Namens von sehr kleinen Ausgangsräumen finden sich immer wieder. Das extreme Beispiel der Romani, anfangs als Bezeichnung für die Bewohner einer Ackerbürgerstadt im allen Italien, später als Großteil der Bevölkerung eines Weltreichs, ist nur eines aus einer langen Reihe. Vgl. R. Wenskus (wie Anm. 6) S. 72 ff. mit zahlreichen Parallelen aus dem germanischen Gebiet.
18 M. Gysseling (wie Anm. 15) I S. 527.
 
[Transl.:   Nevertheless, it might be conceivable that we are apparently faced with Húnaland as a form type corresponding with the geonyms Frýsland/Rugiland.11 In any case, the former was understood as the kingdom of Atli/Attila in the Middle Ages, established around Soest in the Helweg region, designated indeed in the north as Húnaland, albeit there is no "legendary … connection from Sigurd to the Huns".12
This circumstantial fact then may have a striking parallel if we accept the attempt of Norbert Wagner, who would like to explain the account by Gregory of Tours (Hist. Franc. II, 9): The Franks rather came from 'Pannonia'13 by means of a phonetic approach related to the repeatedly recorded name of the Salian Franks (= Old English Hugas, latinized Hugones) – in particular by a syncope –, so that *Hūgno appears as both phonetic and geonymic source. Thus, this derivation would be so closely related with *Hūnjo land (land of the Huns = Pannonia) as be easy to explain as a confusion.14 Wagner probably thinks to be right in so far as the popular name of the Hugi might reflect the name of the landscape Hugmerki, west of Groningen, so that the popular name [quot. rem.: i.e. Hūgno- or  Hūnjoland] appears in the original form according to the composition type Frysland/Rugiland.15 Then one may deduce reasonably on the assumption that the Frankish Húnaland was a "Huns-land", in so far caused by the confusion of the latter with a land on the southern coast of the North Sea.
This supposition could be reconciled well with the hypothesis that the form of Pliny’s native  geonym Baunonia had played a part in the tradition of the Pannonian origin of the Franks.16 This would be an acceptable possibility even if Baunonia would not mean a larger landscape but only the island Borkum (Burcana/Fabaria) which was at that time much larger.17
Unfortunately, Wagner did not discuss sufficiently another possibility: Directly north-east of Hugmerki an Hunzego has been attested, whose name connects Gysseling18 plausibly with the name of the river Hunze. But the readings draw attention: in pago Hunergeuue (2nd half 8th century / cop. 12th century, Fulda), Hunusga (1st half 9th century / cop. 1st half 11th century, vita S. Liudgeri). For lack of sufficient competence, this thread is not pursued any further here.

__________________
 
11 On this N. WAGNER, Zur Herkunft der Franken aus Pannonien, in: Frühmittelalterliche Studien II (1977) p. 222f. Ann. 36.
12 So H. BECK (op. cit. ann. 1) p. 99.
[1 H. BECK, Zu Otto Höflers Siegfried-Arminius-Untersuchungen, in: Beitr. z. Gesch. d. deutschen Sprache und Literatur 107.1 (1985) pgs 92–107.]
13 That "the right Pannonia can not find its place in the real history of the Franks," as N. WAGNER (op. cit. ann. 11) presupposes on p. 219, ought to be relatively reconsidered in view of the strong Danubian influence on the emerge of the Merovingian row grave cemeteries.
14 N. WAGNER (op. cit. ann. 11) p. 226f.; H. Beck (op. cit. ann. 1) p. 100 mentions a variant presented by E. BRATE and J. DE VRIES, according to which a change in the phonetic regularity from Hunar, Hunir < *Hūgwnōz should be considered.
15 N. WAGNER (op. cit. ann. 11) p. 222. M. GYSSELING, Toponymisch Woordenboek von Belgie, Nederland, Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en West-Duitsland (vóór 1226) (1960) S. 524 f. quotes these reading forms for the later Humsterland: in pago Hugumarchi (786/787), Hugmerthi (1st half 9th century / cop. 1st half 11th century), in pago Humerki (to 855 / cop. early 10th century). He reconstructs germ. *Hūgamarkja, as formed from both the people's name Hugas and *markō.
16 Cf. R. WENSKUS (op. cit. ann. 6) p. 530.
[6 ... R.WENSKUS, Stammesbildung und Verfassung. Das Werden der frühmittelalterlichen Gentes (1961); p. 24.]
17 The doubt of N. WAGNER (op. cit. ann. 1) p. 219, "how this small island should be casted for the rôle of the Frankish people’s cradle" is based on an ineradicable model of thinking that has long been abandoned in ethnology. Numerous examples of wide spread ethnic names from very small spatial initials are found again and again. The eminent example of the Romani, at first a designation for the inhabitants of a farming location [quot. rem: 'town', village, hamlet] in all Italy, later for the bulk of the population of a world empire, is only one of a long series. Cf. Reinhard Wenskus (op. cit. ann. 6) pgs 72f. with numerous parallels from the German(ic) region.
18 M.Gysseling (op. cit. ann. 15) I p. 527.
]
 
     The Venerable Bede apparently ascribes a folk called Hunni to Lower German(ic) tribes:
 
      ...quarum in Germania plurimas noverat esse nationes, a quibus Angli vel Saxones, qui nunc Britanniam incolunt, genus et originem duxisse noscuntur; unde hactenus a vicina gente Britonum corrupte Garmani nuncupantur. Sunt autem Fresones, Rugini, Danai, Hunni, Antiqui Saxones, Boructuarii; sunt alii perplures iisdem in partibus populi, paganis adhuc ritibus servientes, ad quos venire præfatus Christi miles, circumnavigata Britannia... [Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum V, 9]
Translation by J. A. Giles:
     ...many of which nations he knew there were in Germany, from whom the Angles or Saxons, who now inhabit Britain, are known to have derived their origin; for which reason they are still corruptly called Garmans by the neighbouring nation of the Britons. Such are the Fresons, the Rugins, the Danes, the Huns, the Ancient Saxons, and the Boructuars (or Bructers). There are also in the same parts many other nations still following pagan rites, to whom the aforesaid soldier of Christ designed to repair, sailing round Britain...
 
    Regarding the coherence of this geographical order, the Rugini might be the islanders of Rügen, Baltic Sea, whereas M. Springer rejects generally the equation of Boructuarii with Bructeri(i); op. cit. pgs 116–118, 121.
 
    Altfrid, bishop of Münster in 9th century, annotates in the vita of his uncle, the eminent Saint Ludger, that Charlemagne constituted him doctorem in gente Fresonum ab orientali parte fluminis Labeki super pagos quinque, quorum haec sunt vocabula Hugmerthi, Hunusga, Fivilga, Emisga, Fediritga et unam insulam ... (Vitae Sancti Liudgeri, I, lib. I, 22; ed. by Wilhelm Diekamp, Münster 1881; see pgs 25–26 with geonymic annotations. Diekamp quotes also Hunesga from the manuscripts. Besides, fluminis Labeci may be the Lavica in Suffrid’s De Frisiorum antiquitate et origine libri tres II, 15; cf. above.) Regarding geographical recitations by mediaeval scholarship, however, not all German historiographers and chroniclers allow a clear deduction of a second northern land of 'Hunes' in a German-Dutch area between the North Sea and the approximate centre of the later Westphalia. See, for instance, Magistri Adam Bremensis gesta Hammaburgensis Ecclesiae Pontificium, lib. I, 3, whose German translator Carsten Miesegaes seems to have reasons enough to plead for the prominent eastern Huns, cf. M. Adam’s Geschichte der Ausbreitung der christlichen Religion ... Bremen 1825, pgs 9–13.
 
    Some different but related spelling structures of the emphasized geonyms above correspond with the contexts by the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts. These texts as well as the source of Suffridus Petrus (op. cit.) provide the conquest of Soest in Migration Period by a Frisian invader. Thus, the region of Soest could have been named temporarily after his homeland, that region which has been geohistorically estimated e.g. somewhere between the Frisavones (or Frisii) and Chattuarii, and, more likely with an inclusion of the region around Soest, also between the rivers Hunte (mapped in this article) and Hunse (Hunze), district of Groningen.

   16  ii. Young-lord (Germ. 'Jungherr', 'Junker') was Sigurð’s previous noble title corresponding with a squire, as he was rightly known for his service at King Isung.   back to text

17 Emil Rückert, Oberon von Mons und die Pipine von Nivella; Weidmann’sche Buchhandlung, Leipzig 1836.  back to text

18 Fertur, super litore maris aestatis tempore Chlodeo cum uxore resedens, meridiae uxor ad mare labandum1 vadens, bistea Neptuni Quinotauri similis eam adpetisset. Cumque in continuo aut a bistea aut a viro fuisset concepta, peperit filium nomen Meroveum, per co regis Francorum post vocantur Merohingii.
 
[It is said that in the summertime at noon Chlodeo sat with his wife on the seashore, and she went to take a bath in the Labadian1 sea where a beast of Neptune which resembled a Quinotaur took possession of her. From this beast, as from her husband, she bore a son named Merovech, of whom the Frankish kings are called Merovings.]
 
    Does Fredegar’s version enable us to transfer this Greek scene to a shore of Chlodeo’s real domain somewhere on the North Sea? Regarding this passage from Fredegar’s book III, 9, the Old Norse + Swedish texts seem to have a corresponding motif in the history of Weland’s ancestry. King Vilkinus, his grandfather, is said to have made pregnant a 'mermaid' or 'sea-goddess' at a compulsory stopover somewhere in a coast forest of the Baltic Sea. However, the Old Swedish version does contribute less mystified narration, since its story allows easier to deduce that Vade’s mother was an attractive 'sailor woman' who, after the intercourse, could follow and stop King Vilkinus with her possibly better fitted or trimmed vessel (Sv 18).
________________
 
1  Fredegar most likely means  Labadus  or Lebedus (Lebedos), one of
the twelve cities of the Ionian League located on the Aegean Sea as the
urbs Ioniæ in Asia minori, maritima in parte Australi Isthmi
peninsul
æ Ioniæ; quæ etiam Labadus dicta est...,
as explained by the author of the Annales Veteris et Novi Testamenti...,
Jacobi Usserii Annales, Genev
æ MDCCXXII, Index Geographicus 'L'.

back to text

19  Wilhelm C. Grimm’s less exact translation of Altdänische Heldenlieder, Balladen... (Heidelberg 1811) was critically reviewed by F. D. Graeter in Heidelbergische Jahrbücher der Litteratur 11–13, 1813.  back to text

20  See for instance Skånska fornlämningar och deras äldre beskrivningar.
A collection by Sven Rosborn,
http://www.pilemedia.se/pdf/Forskning/Fornminnen%20i%20Skane.pdf   (retrieved March 2016).  back to text

21 The original texts have apparently connected a large lake or 'sea' with the residence of Queen Brynhild whose castle is named Sägard, Seaguard. Its most likely position, east of the Harz mountains, could have been in the district of Seeburg castle on lake 'Süßer und Salziger See', as suggested to the author by the American philologist August Hunt. (Incidentally, a Virgin in the Sea, being crowned in the rendition by the Wappenbuch von Waldeck 1987, is pointed out in the heraldic banner of BADENAUSEN Ancestry that has its roots in the Harz.) Walter Böckmann and the author localize the 'Seaguard' as Ilsenstein castle seemingly mentioned as Burg Isenstein in ownership of King Hermanfrid’s brother Berthar (cf. German Wikipedia at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radegundis  (retrieved Feb. 2006). Gregory of Tours recites Berthar’s daughter Radegund (518–587) as niece of King BADERIC. She became second spouse of Chlothar I and devoted her life to self-sacrificing clerical service. A rather contrarily depicted RADEGUND von BADDENHAUSEN is appearing as female warrior in the monumental German epic DREIZEHNLINDEN written by F. W. Weber who certainly implanted historical elements in his work.
The Badenhausen banner by Hessen-Waldeck
Regarding Sigurð’s literary genealogy, a noteworthy remark seems to come from the author of the Vǫlsunga saga who calls Aslaug a daughter of Sigurð and Brynhild, and he mentions Svanhild and Sigmund II as children of Sigurð and Guðrúnback to text

22 Suffridus (op. cit., see en. 11) has knowledge of different genealogical lines of Hengist and Horsa. After correcting Geoffrey of Monmouth, he requotes Bede (cf. Liber II ch. 15):
 
    Quare & Beda maternam stirpem Hengisti & Horsi referens cap. 15. lib. 1. Erant (inquit) filij Vergisti, cuius pater Vitta, cuius pater Vecta, cuius pater Voden, de cuius stirpe multarum provinciarum regium genus originem duxit.
 
    Suffridus then emends:
 
    Huic autem duci Udolpho nati sunt filij duo, quorum majorem Hengistum, minorem Horsum appellari voluit, ad solatium uxoris in memoriam eius defunctorum fratrum. Hos igitur nepotes suos avus maternus Vergistus in filiorum locum adoptavit [...] Hengistus enim patris naturalis familia per fortis acerbitatem privatus, familiam patris adoptivi secutus est.
 
    Ubbo Emmius, most noteworthy contemporary critic of Suffridus, prefers Bede on Hengist’s descent, but comprehends him Frisian; Rerum Frisiearum Historia III.
 
   The sources of Suffridus and other authors on the literary subject of Hengist the Hero regards Nellie Slayton Aurner, Hengest, A Study in Early English Hero Legend, University of Iowa Studies, Humanistic Studies, II  No. 1, p. 44f.  back to text

23    i.   Roswitha Wisniewski, Die Darstellung des Niflungenunterganges in der Thidrekssaga, Tübingen 1961. See further the author’s study on the most likely Lower German clerical authorship of the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts: Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici, National German Library DNB, urn:nbn:de: 0233-2009033115, at   https://www.badenhausen.net/harz/svava/MonasteriumLudewici.pdf.
 
    Regarding afore-going 'less believable epic episodes' in the Old Norse + Swedish texts, there are to constate receptive elements apparently serving for Sigurð’s fabulous birth (see above). Furthermore, the Iron and Isollde story (Mb 245–274) has been scholastically compared and equated with motifs of mediaeval Solomon tradition, cf. en. 8 regarding the historical background of the Apollonius and Herborg story. While some analyst likes to connect this narration also with a receptive pattern of Apollonius of Tyre, the 'wry episode' of Young Þiðrek, Herburt and Hilld seems to allude ironically to the work of the Greek artist Apelles of Kos, as he made a painting of the young Alexander the Great. Furthermore, either the 35th book of Plinius the Elder or a tale of Tristan milieu providing the 'Hall of Statutes' – cf. the translation-based Tristams saga ok Ísöndar – was palpably known also to the author of Weland’s biography who left the creation of a statue of Rygger or Reginn (Sv 63, Mb 66). As suggested by Hans den Besten (op. cit. p. 122) and other philologists, the narrative milieu of King Arthur in the manuscripts seems to be based on motif-borrowing which implicitly (mis)guides the reader to the venue of the Britannia minor; cf. e.g. Edward R. Haymes, King Arthur in the Thidrekssaga, in: Quondam et Futurus 8, No. 3 (Spring 1988), pgs 6–10.
 
    With respect to some other pattern apparently taken from mediaeval tradition dealing with the historiae of Alexander the Great, Roswitha Wisniewski has already remarked some correspondence with the conception, physical appearance and adolescence of Hǫgni, the Old Swedish Hagen (Roswitha Wisniewski, 1961, op. cit. pgs 242–244). However, she annotates well that a narrative pattern taken from an(y) extant account may be taken also for the exposition of similarity!
 
    Exploring the bridal-quest story of the Frisian prince Atala and the Wiltsian princess Erka, Willi Eggers has suggested a Lower German wooing tradition whose historical roots and basic motifs might have been serving also for the composition of the Helgakviða Hjǫrvarðssonar. (W. Eggers, Die niederdeutschen Grundlagen der Wilzensage in der Thidrekssaga. Doctoral thesis. Reprint: Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch LXII 1936, Hamburg 1937.) The wooing episode Osantrix & Oda obviously complies with the same basic construction, even though this story has some pattern in common with the first part of the verse epic King Rother; in particular the 'Shoe Trying' passage which is shortly remarked at en. 6 in the author’s article Zwölf um Dietrich von Bern – Heldenphysiognomie aus der Retorte? The high mediaeval Dutch poetry Van Bere Wisselauwe, an epic pertaining to the romance cycle of Charlemagne, appears interrelated with a death story of King Osantrix: While Isung(r) calls his special bear performed by Vildiver 'Vizleo', the Old Swedish scribes know this masqueraded being, the murderer of Osantrix, as wisa leon. (A wise lion does also appear in Ívens saga Artúskappa based on translation of imported source material.) The Dutch tradition relates that Gernout’s bear shocks the giants of Esprian’s castle to save Charlemagne and his followers, where this Esprian corresponds somewhat with Asprian the Giant of King Rother; cf. in contrast the rôle of Aspilian, a large noble fighter in service of King Osantrix.
 
 
Winder McConnell, reviewer of Thomas Kerth’s intertextual study on King Rother and His Bride. Quest and Counter-Quests, Camden House 2010, nevertheless takes basically into account:
 
    Kerth avoids the methodologically suspect temptation to suggest direct borrowing, although he does view Ósantrix’s courtship of Oda in the ›þiðreks saga‹ as being »[m]ore clearly related to [the first part of] ›König Rother‹« (p. 23). Motifs, and even structural elements, shared by individual works are unreliable evidence for direct borrowing, even though they are worth noting; the potential for another (third, and now unknown) source for such shared motifs, structures, or archetypal patterns should always be accorded appropriate consideration, a point that Kerth himself astutely makes at the conclusion of this particular comparison (p. 25). The same argument holds true for the comparison of ›König Rother‹ with ›Salman und Morolf‹ (ca. 1160), and Kerth concedes that »it is impossible to know if one of these texts borrowed from the other« (p. 27). Curschmann’s allusion almost half a century ago to »a canon of motifs […] employed in the minstrel epics, as well as in international folklore« (p. 27) has lost none of its validity in the interim, and Kerth is inclined to concur with it. (...)
 
    McConnell addressing mediaevalists who inattentively tend to indicate intertextual borrowing from different mediaeval genres:
 
    However, the Middle Ages have left us no clues in the form of epistolary allusions, chronicle entries, to say nothing of authorial revelations, that might allow the scholar to derive some near-definitive, if not definitive, conclusions on the direct connection between a protagonist and a historical, or fictional, predecessor.
 
(pbb 2013; 135(2): 283–289; quot p. 285.)
 
    Willi Eggers notes intertextual source divergences onto the wooing episodes, the Wiltsian wars and, as a narrative faux pas, the deaths of Osantrix in the Old Norse manuscripts, op. cit. pgs 98–108. Regarding in these texts the participation of Þettleifr, son of the 'Skånska' Biturúlfr, there is a further interliterary predicament of genre and chronology for the proto-tradition serving for the southern verse epic Biterolf and Dietleib. With respect to all these traditions, however, there is no evidence-based conclusion on the amount of untrustworthy depictions of history in the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts.
 
Nordic Giants
 
Since the author of the Wadhincusan episode has either rejected or no idea of an existing version of Aspilian’s death, he could use him to caricature the end of King Nordian’s most important son at the Westphalian monastery, as this story might have received its predicate seigia þydersk kuæði (Mb 433) in Iceland and/or Norway. Because the protector of the Westphalian monastery became the undefeated hero of a 'gigantic episode', he had to face his end afterwards in a duly tale which, however, can be also interpreted less fictitiously, cf. en. 12 in the aforementioned online article Zwölf um Dietrich von Bern – Heldenphysiognomie aus der Retorte.
 
    Nonetheless, we may wonder from where the obvious Westphalian author could have – must have – received the name and basic narrative profile of the Zealandish individual. Regarding transmission context of Þiðreks saga, it seems absolutely plausible that he knew Aspilian already from the Wiltsian tradition! Sv 136 and Mb 139 may represent a further but certainly not the last circumstantial evidence for a more complex rôle of Westphalian authorship: As these passages relate, the fur of Vildiver’s beary dress originates in the Lurvald, the woodland around Wadhincusan monastery which, incidentally, was not transformed to -holt, -mǫrk, -skógr, -viðr.
 
    Young-Þiðrek’s fight against Hild and Grim (Mb 16–17, Sv 13) and the Fasold story at the Osning can be classified as lesser realistic passages whose author apparently has embedded their most important protagonist into an environment of epic heroism. The former narration, likely misunderstood by the Old Norse + Swedish translators, seems to relate rather the destruction of an anthropomorphized machine belonging to an ore mine and forge (Badenhausen, Sage und Wirklichkeit, Münster 2007, pgs 427–428. Generally, as to annotate also in this context, mediaeval historiographers may equate large or very large individuals with giants; the small, Lilliputians and, potentially, individuals of lower social class with dwarves, notably Peringskiöld 1715.)
 
   The 'historical background' of latter episode at Rimslo is based on the authentic appearance of large prehistoric animals a few miles north of Riemsloh, cf. Mb 104, Sv 105. The impressing tracks of such reptiles, officially found in 1921 (!) near Barkhausen village and classified as 'Elephantopoides barkhausensis and Megalosauripus barkhausensis', inspired the prime author to enrich the story of Þiðrek and Fasold with a 'horrifying fil and a flying dragon', the former likely an animal of the kind called an elephant (Haymes). Ritter adverts that Þiðrek and his follower Fasold (onto ancestral items of the latter: Sage und Wirklichkeit, Münster 2007, pgs 424–426) could have originated this story when encountering these traces on their Osning expedition, as in this case they were ready to show an 'everlasting evidence'.
 
   Interestingly, the Karlamagnús saga forwards that Roland wins a horn called 'Olifant' from the Saxons.
Prehistoric Animal Tracks Barkhausen The preserved wall of the prehistoric tracks at their original place, 52.278333°N 8.413889°E.
 
   There are at least two interesting historical allusions in the passages about Dietrich’s Osning trip: First, the reception of the Roman politician and eminent commander Drusus (Mb 96, Mb 240, Sv 96 'Drusian, Drasian, Drocian') for the hero’s adequately ranked father-in-law who, howewer, is nowhere serving for any political or consequent important effect in the transmission by the historiographer serving for the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts. Second, we may state related name forms of the spouses of Þiðrek & Theuderic. Thus, the author remarks at
 
https://www.badenhausen.net/harz/svava/ZwoelfumDietrichvonBern.htm (retrieved Oct. 2015):
 
    Auch die Gattin des Markgrafen von Bakalar führt den Namen Gudelinda oder Godelinda. Nach Mb 240 wird also eine weitere und hier in Svava erkannte oder platzierte Gothelinde vorgelegt, der anspielende Name für Dietrichs Braut als Tochter eines ihm ebenbürtig darzustellenden historischen Schwiegervaters. Mit diesem lässt sich ein offensichtlich anachronistisches Erzählmotiv festmachen, das sich der Historiograf wegen damit nicht verknüpfter politischer oder anderer Entwicklung jedoch leisten konnte (...) Zu Dietrichs Vermählungen dankt der Verfasser dem Lektorat für einen nachträglichen Korrekturhinweis zu Bild 7 auf S. 179 in „Sage und Wirklichkeit“: Nach Mb 240 heiratet der junge Dietrich zuerst eine Tochter Gudilind (GudelindaGot(h)elinde) des verstorbenen Königs Drusian, siehe Osning-Berichte der Thidrekssaga. Diese Partie erscheint manchem Leser als pointierte Anspielung auf die Gemahlin SuavegottaSuavegotho von Theuderich I., deren Name und definitive eheliche Beziehung mit diesem Frankenherrscher bei Flodoard von Reims auftaucht. Die Forschung möchte sie als Tochter aus der Verbindung des Sigismund von Burgund mit Theoderichs Tochter Ostrogotho-Ariagne identifizieren, was jedoch zu einem erheblichen chronologischen Problem mit Suavegotho (* um 504) als Mutter der regina Theudechildis führt. Siehe dazu die Vita von Theuderich I.
Die geografische Interpretation des Eigennamens der Gemahlin Theuderichs würde auf deren blutsverwandtschaftliche Herkunft außerhalb von Burgund hindeuten.
Siehe zum Zeitstellungsproblem z. B. unter
http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/BURGUNDY_KINGS.htm   sowie ausführlicher Eugen Ewig 1991:50–52.
Allerdings hat zum figürlichen Identifizierungskontext bereits Gudmund Schütte [1936(II):192f.] für die räumliche Interpretation des Drusian eine Rezeption des römischen Feldherrn Drusus (bzw. von dessen Altar) im Osning erwogen.
 
[Transl.:  The wife of the margrave of Bakalar is also called Gudelinda or Godelinda. Mb 240 thus introduces a further Gothelinde, recognized or intentionally situated the Svava, to be Dietrich’s (= Thidreks’s !) bride as daughter of a very worthily introduced historical father-in-law. Thus, we can apparently fix this as an anachronistic narrative motif which the historiographer nonetheless could bring in the narrative milieu of an unrelated political or other development (...) Regarding Dietrich’s marriages, the author thanks the publisher’s lecturer for a corrective reference to fig. 7 on page 179 in "Sage und Wirklichkeit": According to Mb 240 the young Dietrich marries at first a daughter called Gudelind (GudelindaGot(h)elinde) of the late king Drusian, see Osning reports of Thidrekssaga. This part may appear to some readers as a pointed allusion to Theuderic’s the wife Suavegotta – Suavegotho whose name and definite marital relationship with this Frankish ruler provides Flodoard of Reims. Researchers like to identify her with a daughter from the matrimony of Sigismund of Burgundy with Theoderic’s daughter Ostrogotho-Ariagne which, however, leads to a significant chronological problem with Suavegotho (* c. 504) as the mother of regina Theudechildis, cf. the vita of Theuderic I.
The geographic interpretation of the name of Theuderic’s wife would point to their blood-related origin outside of Burgundy.
For more information about the deadline problem, see http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/BURGUNDY_KINGS.htm
or more detailed: Eugen Ewig 1991:50–52.
Regarding the figurative identification context, in particular the spatial interpretation of Drusian, Gudmund Schütte (1936,II:192f.) has already considered a reception of the Roman commander Drusus (or his altar) in the Osning.
]
 
    All Þiðreks saga redactions neither mention forms of 'Burgundy' nor provide the revenge-based epic depiction of Didrik’s death. (Note that the chapters Sv 383–386 have been ascribed to a later edit!)
 
   As concerns the Brictan episode on the river Lippá (Mb 84–89), the author of this part might have magnified his story with some pattern taken from a continental narration or just a scheme which had already inspired Chrétien de Troyes for his Erec and Enide. William J. Pfaff (1959:46,124–125) tried to show that the author of this episode has borrowed from Solomon and Marcolf.
 
Sigurð’s dragon
 
Regarding Mb 166 and Sv 158, dealing with Sigurð killing the 'dragon-worm', Ritter agrees and interprets with Paul Hermann’s German translation of the Vǫlsunga saga, cf. Ritter, Sigfrid ohne Tarnkappe, p. 235, en. 14. Lethally wounded, the brother of the sly smith finally made this confession, cf. Fáfnismál:
 
Hattest du nicht gehört, wie alles Volk sich fürchtete vor mir und meinem Schreckenshelm?... Den Schreckenshelm trug ich zum Schutz gegen alles Volk, seit dem ich auf dem Erbe meines Bruders lag... dass niemand noch mir zu nahen wagte; kein Schwert schreckte mich, und nie fand ich so viele Männer mir gegenüber, dass ich mich nicht weit stärker dünkte, alle aber hatten Angst vor mir...
 
Haven't you heard how that all folk was afraid of me and my shocking helmet?... I had on the shocking helmet to protecting myself against all folk for all the time I was keeping my brother’s heritage... so that nobody else dared to approach me; no sword was frightening me, and I never found so many men against me, methought being much stronger than them, so all were afraid of me... [Translation by the author.]

   23  ii. In contrast with Peringskiöld’s short consideration of sources that render interpretations of dwarves and giants (1715, 'fōretal'), the Addendum Writer of the Heldenbücher editions ('Books of Heroes', prose part) inter alia establishes nothing less than a special kind of biblical genesis. In this way providing 'proof of origin', he institutes this figment of the poetry’s suggestive imagination:
 
   There is further to know why God created the small dwarves and the large giants and, after that, the heroes. First, he created the dwarves because the lands and mountains were wild and unexplored1, and there was plenty of good ore, silver, gold and pearls in the mountains. Therefore, God made the dwarves even witty and wise, so that they could distinguish evil from good and know about the right use of all things. They also knew about the use of gemstones. Many of them gave huge strengths, while quite a few made the bearer invisible. This does [also] a so-called fog cap2. Therefore, God gave the dwarves artisanship and wisdom. Thus, they made fine hollow caves, and nobly given to them kingship and upper class the heroes alike, and given to them great wealth.
   And then God created the giants because they had to slay the wild beasts and big worms3, so that the dwarves were more safe for exploring the land. Then, after a few years, the giants caused the dwarves much suffering, as they even became evil-minded and unfaithful.
   After that God created the strong heroes, of middle rank within these three folks. And there is to know that the heroes were faithful and befitting4 for many years. And so they were helping the dwarves against the unfaithful giants, the wild beasts and worms. In those times the land was totally unexplored5. For this reason God created strong heroes, and gave them such nature that their boldness and sense were based upon honourable manfulness for quarrels and wars. There were many kings under the dwarves who had to serve the giants in some waste world, rough land and mountains near their dwellings. Furthermore, the heroes saw women of discipline and honour all around, and were obliged to the rightfulness to protect widows and orphans. They did not harm the women unless becoming destitute themselves, and came always to help the women in distress. On insult and severity, the heroes performed many deeds for the women’s sake. There is further to know that the giants were in all positions, emperors, kings, dukes, counts, and lords, vassals, knights und servants. They all were noblemen, and a hero never was a peasant. Therefrom came all lords and noblemen.
 
Chapter Wō den gezwergē, cf. 'Dresden edition' printed with added prose text at Hagenau, 1509. [Translation by the author.]
 
________________
 
1    Neo-Germ.  unbebaut  (cf. 'unbuilt').
2    See annotation Neffel in the author’s online article
     The Nibelungen Saga: The True Core by the Svava?
3    Commonly equated with dragons.
4    Neo-Germ.  bieder.
5    See above.
 
The so-called 'Historische Dietrichepik', keenly fabulating epics included e.g. in the Ambraser Heldenbuch, significantly contradict some important relation in acknowledged vitae of 'apparently comparable individuals' who were participating in or forming real historical events.
back to text

24    As noted farther above, he is also serving as treasurer for his king, titled 'fiarhirdi' (Mb 127; cf. Latin manuscript, ch. CIII: quæstore ex ærario pecuniam). His name forms by all texts – but none of his contextual actions being connected with 'Ermenrik' and Þiðrek – seem to remember 'Seafolan' by the Widsith and/ or/ 'who is' the Byzantine commander (consul) Sabinianus Magnus. The latter finally attacked successfully the rear part of Theoderic’s army in 479, but he was nowhere recorded as plotting advisor of Odoacer or any other historical foe of Theoderic the Great! Marcellinus Comes, chronicler of the Eastern Roman Empire, regards Sabinianus as a severe military disciplinarian of the old school, cf. PLRE.
 
   Interestingly, both Sabinianus and Clovis (cf. the South Gaul campaign and the Alemannic conflicts of the latter) can be interpreted as geostrategical antagonists of Theoderic the Great by means of historical sources.
 
   The Widsith (115–116):
 
   Seccan sohte ic ond Beccan, Seafolan ond Þeodric
   Heaþoric ond Sifecan    Hliþe ond Incgenþeow
 
   There are at least two different 'Sifkas'. Who is the right one? The apparent hero or very important individual at the beginning of 116 has been not satisfyingly identified by R. W. Chambers (1912). Explicitely contradicting him, Kemp Malone (1962) recognizes this figure as protagonist of the Hervarar saga, and with him R. Wenskus (1994, op. cit.) also allocating Hliþe ond Incgenþeow to the select circle of this tradition. The father of these half-brothers Hlǫðr and Angantyr is King Heiðrek, the capturer of a Hunalandish Sifka, King Humli's daughter (!) who became mother of the illegitimate Hlǫðr. Heiðrek seems responsible for the death of either her or, by confusing later edit, 'another female Sifka', as she was not willing to keep a fateful secret she had received from him. Called Sváfa in redaction U, her vita has consequently nothing to do with all those plots provided by Þiðreks saga and 'Didriks chronicle'. Nonetheless, Ritter remembers the rôle of Sifka’s wife in the Old Norse + Swedish transmissions submitting that Ermenrik had used violence on her (Dietrich von Bern, München 1982, p. 299, en. 96).
 
   As noted by A. Raszmann 1858, J. de Vries 1957, and H. Ritter 1982, 'Sifka' seems to reflect the meaning of the Nordic Bikkja, cf. the English bitch. Regarding the bandwidth of historiographical forwarding, 'Sifka' appears in our context as Nordic originated curse word for an advisor, hence serving as literary supplement.1 The hard sounding beginning of its second syllable does contradict a derivation basing on the Roman 'Sabinianus', however. Regarding more corresponding forms like this, Karl Müllenhof (op. cit.) already placed at the disposal an ethnographical and geonymic origin of Ermenrik’s advisor, as taking into consideration a Jutlandic Sabalingi and an Upper German Savalinheim, the latter mentioned in the CODEX LAURESHAMENSIS, likely meaning Savelheim as provided by the Topographia Alsatiae. However, Malone reasonably constates that Seafola and High German Sabene should not be equated uncritically in order to make Þeodric the great Ostrogothic king (1962, p. 195; 1959, p. 53, fn. 90).
 
   Malone presents an attention calling interpretation of Frankish individuals (!) with Theuderic I, his son Theudebert, and the Sigiwalds (father and son, the former put to death by Theuderic) by means of Gregory of Tours (hist. III, 13,16,23,24), the Wolfdietrich cycle and the knowledge of the Deor poet. After considering scholarship who has rashly equated this þeodric with the Theoderic the Great, Malone does not see him in a convincing historical or plausible literary connection with the other line-115-individual(s):
 
   But according to Guest 1838, 77 "the conqueror of Italy is not once alluded to" in the poem; so also Müllenhoff 1848, 458 and others. As is generally recognized, the identification of Þeodric 115 depends on that of Seafola, the name it is paired with in the off-verse of the line. Since Jiriczek's paper of 1920 (in Englische Studien liv. 15ff.) this question may be looked upon as settled: Seafola is the English equivalent of the villainous Sabene of the Wolfdietrich saga. In other words, the þeodric of Widsith 115 is þeodric the Frank  (1962, p. 195 & pgs 204–205; cf. 1959, pgs 164–167).
 
_______________
 
1  A mediaeval historiographer may augment in rhetorically sophisticated
manner, to a certain extent even speculatively or untrustworthily, as we
may regard this as an either subjective emendation or just an endeavour
to achieve 'comprehensiveness' of his work. However, these kinds of
'amalgamation' must not necessarily corrupt the basic narrative
consistency of a historical exposition.
back to text

25 ... So, wie die Einzelsagen nunmehr erscheinen, fügen sie sich doch eher zu einer Chronik aus dem 12. und 13. Jahrhundert zusammen (op. cit. p. 406). After the translations by F. H. von der Hagen 1814, A. Raszmann 1852 and F. Erichsen 1924, Hube provides the fourth German publication of the saga’s contents ('Nacherzählung') with geographical annotations generally complying with Ritter’s localizations.  back to text

26   i. See, for example, Ritter’s ripost in Sigfrid ohne Tarnkappe, Munich 1990, chs Irrwege bei der Deutung der Thidrekssaga, pgs 189–197, Die neue Sicht und ihr Echo, pgs 199–206; id. Soester Zeitschrift, 1985, Nr. 97, pgs 26–28; ibid. 1986, Nr. 98, pgs 150–154. Cf. also the reviews by the linguist Hans den Besten, Bemerkungen zu einer Kritik. Johannes Jonata u.a. zu Ritter-Schaumburgs 'Die Nibelungen zogen nordwärts', in: Amsterdamer Beiträge zur Älteren Germanistik, 33, 1991, pgs 117–130, and Fritz Droste, Der Nibelungen Not in Westfalen, in: Sauerland, 1982, Nr. 1, pgs 4–8; id. Sauerland, 1984, Nr. 1, pgs 13–15.
 
   In contrast to Heinrich Beck’s less convincing approach against Ritter, another example of an inexpedient perspective for a Thidrekssaga-Diskussion being based to a certain extent rather on the imperative twinship of monocausality and Migration Period historiography, as to be connected with 'literary transformation' (Beck op. cit. 1993), some scholarly reviewers seem more amenable to reason. As concerns Ritter’s general position on the eminent campaign and route of the Niflungen, Dietrich Hofmann argues onto the main pretensions that, first, »the people of Westphalian Soest had taken outlandish legends for own historical accounts« and, second, »they had little or no knowledge of their own history«:
 
   Die beiden Aussagen sind nun aber doch noch etwas zu modifizieren. Zum einen wird man annehmen dürfen, daß manche Menschen in Soest und anderswo über die wahre Geschichte der Stadt besser Bescheid wußten als der Erzähler der Niflungengeschichte. Schon wegen der Besitzverhältnisse müßte man wohl nicht nur beim Erzbischof in Köln, sondern auch in der Soester Geistlichkeit über den "Schlangenturm" richtiger informiert gewesen sein. Es ist aber damit zu rechnen, daß der Glaube an die Historizität der Niflungengeschichte als Soester Lokalgeschichte in der Bevölkerung weit verbreitet und stark verwurzelt war. Sonst hätte der Erzähler sich nicht so überzeugt äußern können, und diese Version hatte sich ja offenbar auch weit über Soest hinaus verbreitet. Einzelne "Intellektuelle" kamen dagegen nicht an. Die mündliche Tradition war im Mittelalter eine große Macht, weil man sie für historisch hielt und weitgehend halten mußte. Jahrhunderte –, ja jahrtausendelang hatte es überhaupt keine andere Art der Geschichtsüberlieferung gegeben, und die sich erst allmählich entwickelnde schriftliche Überlieferung war den meisten Menschen nicht zugänglich, so daß sie kaum Möglichkeiten hatten, die zur Sage gewordene mündliche Überlieferung an den historischen Fakten zu überprüfen und zu korrigieren. Deshalb treffen die oben gemachten Aussagen zur Geschichtsauffassung der Soester Bürger im 12./13. Jahrhundert nicht diese allein, sondern dürften für die Geschichtsauffassung breiter Bevölkerungsschichten im Mittelalter allgemein typisch sein.
   Durch eine weitere notwendige Modifikation der beiden Aussagen bekommt Ritter bis zu einem gewissen Grade doch noch Recht. Man muß nämlich auch die Frage stellen, wie es überhaupt dazu hatte kommen können, daß die Soester fremdes Sagengut als eigene Geschichte rezipierten. Die Existenz alter Mauerreste und eines verlassenen Turms, in dem Schlangen hausten, reicht allein sicher nicht aus, um das zu erklären. Man kommt hier nur weiter, wenn man annimmt, daß es in Soest schon vor der Rezeption der Nibelungensage alte Erzähltraditionen gegeben hatte, die man für historisch hielt, Geschichten etwa über einen mächtigen König in vorchristlicher Zeit, über schwere Kämpfe an der Westmauer der alten Stadtkernbefestigung usw. Ähnlichkeiten im Handlungsverlauf und in der Personenkonstellation könnten dazu geführt haben, daß man die Nibelungensage, die vor allem von fahrenden Sängern in der Form von Liedern in ganz Deutschland und darüber hinaus verbreitet wurde, in Soest mit Geschichten der eigenen Tradition – auch sie wohl in Liedform – identifizierte. Gleiche oder ähnliche Namen handelnder Personen konnten die Identifikation und somit die Rezeption der Nibelungensage natürlich wesentlich fördern.
   Von daher gesehen ist es keineswegs abwegig – wenn auch rein hypothetisch  –, auch den Namen
At(t)ano auf der Soester Scheibenfibel (Ende des 6. Jhs․) in die Diskussion einzubringen, wie Ritter es getan hat (S. 207ff.). In mittelniederdeutscher Zeit wäre *Attene daraus geworden, eine Namensform, die sehr wohl Anlaß zu einer Identifikation mit Attila hätte geben können  – dies übrigens eine literarisch beeinflußte Namensform, die zeigt, daß bei der Darstellung der Þidreks saga ein bißchen Gelehrsamkeit im Spiel war, die aber den Glauben an die Richtigkeit der mündlichen Tradition offenbar nicht beeinträchtigte [...] Entsprechendes wie für den Soester Teil der Niflungengeschichte gilt natürlich auch für deren in anderen Orten und Gebieten Westfalens und des Rheinlandes lokalisierte Bestandteile, über die Ritters Buch – wie schon seine vorausgegangenen Aufsätze – wichtige Erkenntnisse bringt. Natürlich konnten auch die Geschichten in den Bannkreis der Nibelungensage geraten, zu denen es keine Entsprechungen in ihr gegeben hatte, so möglicherweise eine Lokaltradition über den eingemauerten Toten im Hoh(l)en Stein von Kallenhardt im Sauerland, die auf Attila übertragen worden sein könnte.
 
[Transl.:   However, the two statements are still to be modified a tad. On the one hand, we may assume that some people in Soest and elsewhere knew better about the true history of the city than the narrator of the Niflungen history. Because of the conditions of ownership, not only the archbishop of Cologne but also the Soest clergy ought to have been more accurately informed about the 'snake tower' than anybody else. It is rather to be expected that the belief in the historicity of the Niflungen history as a local history of Soest should have been widespread and strongly rooted in the people’s mind. Otherwise the narrator would not have been able to express himself so convincingly, as this version had apparently spread even far beyond Soest. Some 'intellectuals', on the other hand, could not argue to the contrary. The oral tradition was a great power in the Middle Ages because it was thought to be historical and largely supported. There was no other form of historical tradition since centuries – even millenniums. The gradually developed written tradition was not accessible to most of the people. Thus, they had scarcely any means of examining and correcting the oral tradition in the matter of historical facts. For this reason, the statements made above on the conception of history might not only concern the citizens of Soest in 12th/13th century, but generally the perceptive opinion of history in the broad population of the Middle Ages.
Ritter is, to a certain extent, still right by further necessary modification of the two statements. One must also query how it could have happened at all that the Soesters had a reception of a foreign legend as their own story. The existence of remains of old walls and an abandoned tower in which snakes were living is by no means sufficient to explain this. We can only proceed on the assumption that old traditions were extant in Soest and esteemed there as historical before the reception of the Nibelungensage; for instance, stories about a mighty king in the pre-Christian era, about heavy fighting on the western wall at the old fortifications of the inner city, etc. Similarities in the course of action and the constellation of persons could have led to the fact that the Nibelungensage, spread mainly by minstrels all over Germany and beyond, was identified in Soest with stories of own tradition, presumably with ballads. Of course, identical or similar names of acting persons could significantly induce the identification and therewith the reception of the Nibelungensage.
From this point of view it is by no means absurd, albeit purely hypothetical, to argue with the name At(t)ano on the disk fibula, dated into the end of 6th century, as Ritter has done it, see pp. 207f. In the Middle-Low-German period, the name would have developed to the form *Attene which might well have given an inducement to an identification with Attila. This, incidentally, is a literary influenced form which shows that in Þidreks saga’s presentation a portion of scholarship was involved who, however, obviously did not affect the believe in the correctness of the oral tradition […] Of course, as regards the Soest part of the Niflungen history, comparably the same influenced constituents being localized in other places and regions of Westphalia and the Rhineland, on which Ritter’s book as well as his previous treatises provide important awarenesses. It seems clear that the stories could also have gotten into the influential circle of the Nibelungensage which, however, had no inherent correspondences such as, potentially, a local tradition about the walled-up dead in the Kallenhardt cave ‘Hohler Stein’ in the Sauerland, and which could have been transferred to Attila.
]
 
(Dietrich Hofmann, "Attilas Schlangenturm" und der "Niflungengarten" in Soest, in: Jahrbuch des Vereins für niederdeutsche Sprachforschung, 104, 1981, pgs 31–46, cf. pgs 44–45.)
 
   Hofmann concedes that a pallatium sive turris (residence building or tower), 'occupied by reptiles and other creatures', is provable to high mediaeval Soest. Regarding also its homgarðr, William J. Pfaff reasonably agrues (op. cit. p. 175) by means of Henrik Bertelsen’s source text transcription and Ferdinand Holthausen’s Studien zur Thidrekssaga:
 
    A document on the authority of the archbishop of Cologne (c. 1178) relates that a ‘palace or tower’ next to the old church of St. Peter had been full of reptiles, etc., and was then being used for charitable purposes, probably a reference to the Hohe Spital southwest of the church. There is no trace of the Nibelung name; perhaps Högnagarðr (B) and Niflungagardr were added when Hom appeared (for bom) and the obscurity had led to confusion with Holm- (II,310) for Norwegian scribes. There is, however, ample evidence that the Norwegian was not inventing these details; Holthausen (464) suggests that the Edda may have taken the snake-pit motif from Northern Germany.
 
   Challenging Ritter, Dietrich Hofmann attempted to indicate alternatively the possibility that the Soest localities, as specified by the manuscripts, had inspired a high mediaeval narrator for a pseudo-historical relocation. However, Hofmann apparently disregards that this 'reteller' – more likely – might have had only very little or no knowledge of the exact townscape in much former times and, therefore, had to refer to contemporary structural development for an impressing imagination of a former 6th-century 'Franco-Saxon' battle which, however, cannot be excluded. Furthermore, it seems less probable that the composer(s) of the Atlakviða, one of the eldest Eddic lays of presumably c. A.D. 900, had taken its ormar garðr motif from an apparently later erected episcopal site pallatium sive turris which was reported unkempt and, thereafter, noted on its restoration in 1178.
Old Centre of Soest
A plan with contour lines of the old centre by municipal registry of 1830. Hofmann refers to a corresponding reconstruction drawing by F. W. Landwehr, cf. p. 40. See Ritter 1981:193 who does not estimate the large building at the Episcopal place of residence ('Pfalz') as Gunnar’s 'snake tower', cf. also pgs 199–203.

According to the manuscripts, Hǫgni had left in Soest the obvious most impressive actions, as these are his bursting through the western wall, fighting ferociously against Irung and then Þiðrek, and, finally, generating a son for revenge on the patron, 'father' or 'Ata' of Soest. Since the place of Hǫgni’s ancestors has been suggested at Troyes, cf.
https://www.badenhausen.net/harz/ svava/svava_en.htm#Annotation_07,
it would be worth to think more complexly about all the reasons why Bruno, Archbishop of Cologne in A.D. 962, decided to transfer the relics of the holy Patroklus from Frankish Troyes to Soest as its new Christian patron.
   The Old Norse scribes have apparently distorted the original spelling form Iring (notably Widukind of Corvey, Frutolf of Michelsberg, Annales Quedlinburgenses, De Origine Gentis Swevorum) to Irung. Hilkert Weddige considers the possibility that 'Iring’s Way' or 'Iring’s Wall' could be geometrically derived from a circulus, a ring-formed passage or wall. Supporting his proposal, Weddige (op. cit. p. 66, 101–102) quotes an example from the Royal Frankish Annals whose user Regino has converted a fortress hringum gentis Avarorum into a chieftain Avarum principe Yringo.
 
   Dr Heinrich ten Doornkaat Koolman, a former Mayor of Soest, wrote on the obvious relicts of an elder or, relatively, the eldest known wall:
 
    Wie in der Zeitschrift des Soester Geschichtsvereins Nr. 14 Seite 22 ff. berichtet wird, kamen 1884 bei den Ausschachtungsarbeiten für ein neues Pfarrhaus an der Ecke des Petrikirchhofes und der Hospitalgasse alte Mauerreste zum Vorschein. Gücklicherweise hat man den Fund sorgfältig aufgemessen, und eine von dem Baumeister Lange am 16.7.84 angefertigte maßstäbliche Zeichnung ist in dem Heft 14 S. 24/25 wiedergegeben.
     Danach hat eine von Norden nach Süden verlaufende, 1,80 m in die Tiefe reichende Mauer den Petrikirchhof von dem zum Hohen Hospital gehörenden Gebiet geschieden. In einer anschließenden von Osten  nach Westen verlaufenden, aus großen behauenden Quadern aufgeführten Mauer von reichlich 1 m Dicke befanden sich unter der Erdoberfläche zwei etwa 2,20 m hohe und etwa 1,80 m weite rundbogige Torbogen. Weiter befand sich ein Haufen Bauschutt untermischt mit Resten verkohlten Gebälks.
     In dem Bericht ist weiter vermerkt, diese Mauer müsse zum Hohen Hospital in Beziehung gestanden haben, wenn sie auch keineswegs einen Teil des Gebäudes gebildet habe. Dafür, daß dies nicht der Fall gewesen, spreche die völlige Verschiedenheit des Mauerwerks.
     Dies Alles deutet auf eine ältere Burganlage hin, die vor der Errichtung der merowingischen Pfalz bestanden hat.
 
(Heinrich ten Doornkaat Koolman, Soest die Stätte des Nibelungenunterganges?  Rochol, Soest 1937, cf. pgs 10–11.)

Drawings on the right are taken from the article quoted by H. ten Doornkaat Koolman.
 
Elder Wall of Soest
[Transl.:  As reported in the magazine of the Soester Geschichtsverein, No. 14, page 22f., 1884, old fragments of the wall came to light during the excavation work for a new vicarage at the corner of the Petrikirchhof and the Hospitalgasse. Fortunately, this find was carefully measured, and a scaled plan drawn on 16 July 1884 by Mr. Lange, master builder, is reproduced in the booklet 14, pp. 24–25.
   According to that a wall extending from north to south, reaching a depth of 1.80 m, separated the Petrikirchhof from the area belonging to the Hohen Hospital. In an adjoining wall extending from east to west, not less than 1 m in thickness and consisting of large chiselled cuboids, two bows of arched gates, c. 2.20 m high and c. 1.80 m wide, were found under the ground. There was also a heap of building rubble mixed with the remains of charred timberwork.
   The report also notes that this wall must have been related to the Hohen Hospital, even though it was by no means a part of the building, as this might be supported well enough by the complete difference of the stonework.
     All this points to an older fortification which existed before the erection of the Merovingian Palatinate.]
 
   Ritter supplements on this article an obvious later excavation, 'commissioned by the Historischer Verein of Soest in 1951/1952' as he writes, whose experts had uncovered a wall (c. 2.5 m thick) even under the foundation level of the Pfalz. Ritter summarizes that the archaeologists of this excavation found under this wall strata with remains of carbonized material and scattershot skeleton fragments and, thereupon, drew the assumptive conclusion that on this location 'heavy combats had taken place in the early Middle Ages'. Omitting bibliographical reference to this excavation, Ritter quotes as follows from its report (1981:198):
 
   Unter den Fundamenten (...) fanden sich unter einer gleichmäßig waagrechten, tiefschwarzen Holzkohlenschicht von 2 cm Dicke in 1,30–2,30 m Tiefe (...) »in ihrer ganzen Stärke, besonders aber nach unten hin, wahllos zerstreut, menschliche Knochenreste, die zumeist, auch die Schädel, zertrümmert und zum Teil auch angebrannt waren. In 2,20 m Tiefe konnte noch eine 1–2 cm starke, scharf abgesetzte Holzkohlenschicht festgestellt werden, unter welcher unmittelbar wieder menschliche Schädel- und Knochenfragmente lagen. Da diese Schichten nur an der Südseite der sogenannten ›Wittekindsmauer‹ auftreten und noch weiter in die Tiefe gehen, liegen sie im Innern im Keller eines alten Bauwerks, das als Vorläufer des ›Hohen Hospitals‹ (= Veste) angesehen werden muß. (...) Das ganze Auftreten dieser Schichten mit ihrem auffallenden Inhalt in den Kellern eines Bauwerks, dessen Mauern 8 Fuß = rund 2,50 m breit waren, läßt an dieser hervorragenden Stelle des alten Burgbezirks schwere Kampfhandlungen im frühen Mittelalter vermuten.«
 
[Transl.:  Downwards the foundations (...) under a deep black charcoal stratum of 2 cm thickness, running undisturbed horizontally at a depth of 1.30 to 2.30 m were found (...) »in all of its dimension, increasingly downwards, randomly scattered human bone remains and skulls which were smashed and partly burned. Further, then at a depth of 2.20 m, a sharply stepped 1 to 2 cm thick charcoal stratum appeared again with fragments of human skulls and bones. Since these strata were found only under the south side of the so-called ›Wittekindsmauer‹ and lie further in the depths, they meet the inner domain of the basement of an old structure which must be regarded as the previous building of the (fortification =) ›Hohen Hospital‹ (...) The whole appearance of these strata, with their striking contents in the basement of a building whose walls were 8 feet or 2.50 m wide, admits to presume heavy fighting in the early Middle Ages at this eminent place related to the old fortification.«]
 
   26  ii. Further narrative and archaeological remarks
 
If the antique morticians of Soest had intended to leave remembrances of the most impressive occurrences on this location, a narrative exploration of the reports by the Old Norse + Swedish texts would provide these complying deductions:
1. No male kingly burial chamber since Attala died in Sigfrid’s treasure cave.
2. For that reason not less than two noble female burial chambers to be found side by side, because Attala married the mother of Hagen’s son Aldrian after the death of Grimhild.
3. Since Aldrian, the obvious son of Attala and Grimhild, died early by Hagen’s sword, his grave must be found close to one female burial chamber – the 'royal' one.
4. Regarding an important symbol for King Attala’s death, one female burial chamber, that of the concubine who shared with Hagen his deathbed, ought to contain a piece that either shows or is a key.
5. The female burial chamber of previous item should contain otherwise or in addition a symbol expressing an intimate ratio for the generation of Aldrian, designated avenger whose father’s coat of arms features an uncrowned eagle.
    In springtime of 1930, about a mile to the south of the old town centre of Soest, a burying place was found at an excavation work for a prospective building. The archaeological diggings and examinations of this discovery were directed by August Stieren.
 
   The most preciously equipped grave chambers are reckoned to Frankish burying, at least partially, and they might comply well with the aforesaid five conditions. For instance, there is a small male but distinguished burial chamber, archaeologically catalogued as a boy’s grave No. 17, between two noble female chambers (No. 106 and 105).
Plan of the Soest chamber graves Soest Chamber Graves: 1, 13, 18, 165, 170, 180 are female. Male chamber 179 is less precious for minor weapon parts of iron.
 
   A. Stieren estimates that some of these wooden burial chambers must have belonged to a burial mound. Furthermore, prints of a wooden bench were incontestably found in the female chamber No. 105. Hence, this chamber could have been accessible for a certain period after the time of burial. As regards numismatic dating, a coin or some other burial gift could have been deposed later. Some German criticism against Ritter, levelled at the key or other grave goods of chamber No. 105 (cf. items 4–5, a picture of its amulet below), appears inconsistent, however: The key could be either a symbolic replica or the death and burial of the involved person took place after Aldrian’s revenge.
 
   26  iii. The Golden Almandine Fibula
 
This so-called garnet or Cloisonné fibula of burial chamber No. 106, a picture below, appears as the most attracting piece. The younger solidus of this chamber, found close to this fibula, is a mint of East Roman Emperor Justinian I (527–565). It displays almost no evidence of usage. The elder solidus is a worn coin of Roman Emperor Valentinian I.
 
   As regards the history and dating contexts of the Cloisonné fibula and its chamber No. 106, it seems less likely at the first glance that either this brooch or its youngest rune engraving should have been created in the Christian reigning periods of the Austrasian kings succeeding Theudebert I (533–547/548). Gregory of Tours remembers that (c. A.D. 525) his father Theuderic himself was already on a Christianizing mission to Cologne. As noted above, however, Suffridus Petrus relates the Frankish conquest of Soest under Dagobert I who obviously made this campaign in the last years of his father Chlotar II, whilst the Liber historiae Francorum 41 situates at that time a course of Weser river as Franco-Saxon demarcation line. Since Theuderic consolidated Trier sustainably about 525, Cologne could have been already under the reign of a Christian governor when Theuderic’s son took over Austrasian kingdom at least one decade later. Thus, it seems less probable that the rune inscriptions on this piece were made on the left side of the Rhine after these time stamps.
 
   With respect to chronological specifics related to this brooch, the archaeological expert Daniel Peters, formerly at German LWL organization, deduces:
 
    Hier sprechen Abnutzungsspuren und mehrphasige Beschriftung mit Runen für eine spätere Deponierung eines benutzten persönlichen Besitzes (2011:151).
[Transl.:  Here, wear marks and multi-phased rune engravings indicate a depositon of a used personal possession.]
 
   Referring to the cross-type monogram on the fibula, he constates:
 
   Dieses Runenkreuz, als eine Art Verschlüsselung oder Geheimzeichen, ist zeitnah nur in einem weiteren Fall, dem Schretzheimer Männergrab 79 der zweiten Hälfte des 6. Jhs., bekannt geworden und wurde dort anhand der Kenntnisse der Soester Inschrift entziffert (2011:57)
[Transl.:  This rune-cross-type, as a sort of encryption or secret code, is only known in another case closer to the time, that one the Schretzheim male grave No. 79 of the second half of the 6th century, which has been deciphered there by means of the knowledge about the inscription on the fibula of Soest.]
 
  –  since:
 
   Eine wenige Funde umfassende frühe Gruppe begegnet im nordgermanischen Gebiet bis etwa 500 n. Chr., die Soester Fibel ist dagegen einem schwerpunktmäßig in Südwestdeutschland verbreiteten Horizont von etwa 60–80 Inschriften zuzuordnen, die auf Gegenständen der relativ kurzen Zeitspanne von 530/40 bis 600/20 n. Chr. vorliegen (2011:55).
[Transl.:  A small group of early finds encompasses the North German region until c. A.D. 500, while the fibula of Soest has to be assigned to a broadly circumscribed South German horizon of c. 60 to 80 inscriptions on objects of the relatively short period from A.D. c. 530/540 to 600/620.]
 
   Max E. Martin connects the rune inscriptions on fibulas of an early Christian horizon of the Franks with the 'beginning of Merovingian rune writing of c. A.D. 530/40', as Theuderic's conquests of Thuringian territories seem to indicate the geocultural context of rune usages also in more northern regions. Regarding bow fibulas with rune inscriptions, which have been found commonly in southern areas of Germany, Martin estimates that its former upper class leadership, eventually related with northern dynasties, might have played a transferring rôle. Furthermore, it seems noteworthy to remark that Volker Bierbrauer, another modern archeologist, describes a fibula of Dunningen, Black Forest, whose basic structure on its obverse is formed by five concentric circles. Thus, this piece of the Dunningen parish grave No. 17 does correspond well with the very noticeable pattern of the Soest version, albeit the inner circular area of the former is domed shaped and, therefore, may point to a younger creation of c. A.D. 600.
 
   As far as presently known, apart from speculative estimations based on relative dating, absolute physicochemical dating methodologies have not been applied to skeleton fragments and inorganic material of the aforementioned chamber graves. Regarding numismatic aspects, the youngest coin of grave 106, of Justinian I period (527–565), could have been already available for Frankish acquisition in the early 2nd half of 6th century.
 
Related bibliography:
 
Volker Bierbrauer, Alamannischer Adelsfriedhof und frühmittelalterliche Kirchenbauten von St. Martin in Dunningen, in: Heimat an der Eschach, 1986, pgs 19–40.
 
Max Martin, Die Runenfibenn aus Bülach Grab 249 (...) in: K. Stüber, A. Zürcher (Hrsg.), Festschrift f. Walter Drack (...). Zürich 1977, pgs 120–128; ibid.: Kontinentalgermanische Runeninschriften und „alamannische Runenprovinz“ aus archäologischer Sicht, in: Alemannen und der Norden (...) RGA Eränzungsband ('supplemental edition') 43 (2004), pgs 165–212.
 
Daniel Peters, Das frühmittelalterliche Gräberfeld von Soest. Aschendorff 2011.
 
Heinz Ritter-Schaumburg, Die Nibelungen zogen nordwärts, Munich 1981, pgs 203–216.
 
August Stieren, Ein neuer Friedhof fränkischer Zeit aus Soest. Germania, Korrespondenzblatt der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, XIV 1930. Heft 3. (Pgs 166–175.)
Medallion of grave 105
Filigree disc fibula of grave 165
Top picture on the left: The medallion (c. 10 cm in diameter) of burial chamber No. 105 which also contained an iron made key. Top picture on the right: The filigree disc fibula of grave No. 165 (c. 3.5 cm in diameter).
Both photos by the author.
Pictures below: Golden Cloisonné rune fibula of chamber No. 106 and its contour sketch from the reverse (c. 5 cm or c. 2 inches in diameter). Several rune-reading analysts read the cross-type engraving A-T-A-N-O  or  A-T-A-L-O. See also: Further information to read the fibula.
Rune fibula of grave 106 (Obverse) Rune fibula of grave 106 (reverse)
back to text

27   The so-called Prologue of Þiðreks saga, taken by elder scholarship for classifying its transmission or content 'Ostrogothic', is not provided by its eldest manuscript. This text, an obvious assumption of an unknown author, has been critically reviewed by Frantzen (Neophilologus 1916), notably also Ritter (Reprint of German translation by F. H. von der Hagen, pgs 743–744), Hube (op. cit. p. 410).
 
   Roswitha Wisniewski provides this hierarchical diagram showing an interrelated connectivity of traditions referring to Dietrich von Bern and the Nibelungen:
Literary stemma of Dietrich von Bern
The Upper German stem on the left represents epic tradition detracting Burgundian fall to the homeland of a fictive 'Hungarian king' called 'Etzel'. Roswitha Wisniewski notes well that her so-called 'Zweite Quelle' has to be regarded as principal source of Þiðreks saga, while she regards the 'Ältere Not' only rendering epic influences of 'Duna crossing', recovery at Margrave Rodingeir’s 'Bakalar' (MHG: 'Markgraf Rüdiger's Bechelaren') and the arrival of the 'Niflungen' at the residence of King Atala. We may also consider the 'Ältere Not' providing the Nibelungen character 'Giselher', notably Leon Polak, Roswitha Wisniewski. He seems to be taken from the 'Lex Burgundionum' as an interfigural character in order to boost the Old Norse Gunnar with an 'accompanying actor' originally spelled 'Gislahar(ius)'. He defeated Rodingeir who might also represent an interpolative figure. His German noble title 'Markgraf' has been ascribed to the era of Charlemagne.
 
   Hilkert Weddige (Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, Institut f. Deutsche Philologie, em.) notes generally on Roswitha Wisniewski’s narrative stemma:
 
   Angesichts dieser Symbiose von mündlichen und schriftlichen, von ober- und niederdeutschen, von altnordischen und lateinischen Quellen in ungebundener und gebundener Rede wird man mehr noch als beim Nibelungenlied dazu übergehen müssen, die Thidrekssaga in ihrem »Sosein« synchronisch zu erfassen. Gleichwohl ist es Roswitha Wisniewski zu einem guten Teil gelungen, die Kontaminationen in der Darstellung des Niflungenunterganges zu entwirren:
    Sie erschließt für die Saga im genauen Vergleich mit dem Nibelungenlied konkrete Züge eines »zweiten« Quellenbereichs neben der Älteren Not. In jenem scheinen niederdeutsche Dietrich-Dichtung und eine Historia Dietrichs von Bern, die womöglich im Kloster Wedinghausen aufgeschrieben und mit Soester und westfälischen Lokalisationen versetzt wurde, zusammenfließen. Die Methode, nach Dopplungen zu suchen, deren Ergiebigkeit Bumke für die Vorlagen-Rekonstruktion der Brünhildfabel demonstriert hat, wird hier allerdings gelegentlich überstrapaziert, weil jede Dopplung systematisch auf zwei Vorlagen, nämlich auf die Ältere Not und jene zweite Quelle zurückgeführt wird
.
 
[Transl.:  In view of this symbiosis of oral and written sources, from Upper and Lower German, Old Norse and Latin accounts in prose and verse, one will have to go beyond the Nibelungenlied to synchronizing the Thidrekssaga for its 'being so'. Nevertheless, Roswitha Wisniewski succeeded to a great extent in unravelling the contamination in the presentation of the 'Niflungenuntergang':
    In close comparison with the Nibelungenlied, alongside the 'Ältere Not', she extrapolates concrete features of a second source account. In the latter seem to conflate a Lower German Dietrich poetry and a historia of Dietrich von Bern which may have been written down in Wedinghausen monastery and set up in a transferring manner with locations of Soest and Westphalia. The method of searching for duplicates, the yielding that Bumke has demonstrated for the original reconstruction of the Brünhildfabel’s source is, however, occasionally overstretched here, because each doubling is systematically recurring to two source-based templates, namely the 'Ältere Not' and that second source.
]
 
(Hilkert Weddige, Heldensage und Stammessage, Tübingen 1989, p. 112f.)
 
   Clearing the authoress of the latter critical argument, there is however no sufficient literary indication that, first, we must actually refer to more than the two basic sources she has been dealing with, and, second, the so-called Zweite Quelle (= second source) would not predominantly reflect basic historical accounts of Migration Period.
 
   Roswitha Wisniewski reminds us on the subject of literary composition of heroic transmissions by chronicles and historiae which James Westfall has reworded as fundamental characteristics of both narrative forms:
 
   The medieval Chronicle was neither a mere table of dates nor the representation of a time; it was a detailed arrangement of events in the order of time. The medieval History was neither a generic term encluding all classes of materials nor the simple narration of a spectator. Whether according to its earliest use, it may have been an exposition of the results of research, or of the process of research itself, it was now understood to mean an exhibition of events in their deeper relations of cause and effect, in their moral and political bearings, and in an approach to a dramatic or pictorial form. The history was a work of art, the chronicle a faithful narration of acts and an orderly arrangement of dates.

Some general remarks with respect to the Old Swedish manuscripts

The treatise which Ritter has appended as epilogue to his translation of the Old Swedish manuscripts provides strong indication that the 'chronicle Didrik af Bern' cannot be a mere translation from Þiðreks saga. As Ritter points out in his book Die Nibelungen zogen nordwärts, the Old Swedish 'Haghen' cannot be taken directly from a Old Norse source that spells 'Hǫgni', while 'Goroholth' may not represent a translated 'Gernoz', 'Gislher' not result in 'Gyntar' (!). Regarding the original source context of/for the Old Swedish scribes, the lingual pattern shining through their work shows rather more Danish than Norwegian influence, as Ritter cites Bengt Henning who underlines that the so-called 'Norvagism' are playing almost no role against the 'Danism' of remarkable frequentness. Henning nonetheless votes for the Old Norse-Norwegian manuscripts as the source of the Old Swedish scribes, whereas Ritter would not follow this estimation.
 
    Regarding both a Þiðreks saga manuscript, brought early enough to the Östergotlandish Monasterium sanctarum Mariæ Virgìnis et Brigidæ at Vadstena, and, apparently, a further important source of the Old Swedish redactions which are so consequently dealing with both 'Gyntar' and 'Gunnar' in all chapters, it seems less likely that this special bifigural configuration could be based on an unintentional permutational action by the Old Swedish scribes providing their source-based manuscripts; cf. Wisniewski 1961 and Ritter who contradicts some arbitrary assumption on this subject. As already placed at the disposal, the Old Swedish scribes might have been either actively reorganizing or fairly reproducing an historiographical (con)text that does not deal with any factual appearance of the two younger Nibelungenlied brothers of Burgundia. Interestingly, however, Ritter has not sufficiently discussed this item which might appear to some philologists as subtle emendation by the Old Swedish scribes.
 
    Thus, we may be obliged to postulate a significant source content which the Old Swedish scribes have been forwarding besides the Þiðreks saga texts. Therefore, Roswitha Wisniewski starts her postdoctoral thesis with the approach that the basic source of the Old Norse manuscripts came rather as a comprehensive work from Lower Germany, as she reasonably votes for a 'chronicler' at Wedinghausen monastery near Soest; cf. the author’s supplementary article Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici.
 
    Regarding missing and unequal narrative elements in the Old Norse texts, apart from the aforementioned interfigural divergence related to the Niflungen, it seems evident in case of some synoptical item that the Old Swedish scribes added some minor but not major detail provided also by the Nibelungenlied with its vast anachronistic source complex; e.g. a lønnaløff (maple leaf) for underlining the vulnerability of the hero (Sv 158). Since both the Old Norse + Swedish texts are significantly based on closely related source material, however, we thereby can not generalize that Ritter has committed a fundamental anachronism for his differentiated intertextual analyses, i.a. considering that the manuscripts may provide territorial ascriptions referring to geographical relationships in High Middle Ages. For example, we have to understand Polarnaland as region of the later Poland 'Pulina'. However, the Icelandic texts do occasionally replace 'Vilkinaland' by noncontemporary 'Pulina land' (cf. Mb 294; Bertelsen: ch. 3484). Almost correspondingly, the Old Swedish scribe just discards the former geonym. Historically, the Veleti ('Wiltsians') were apparently moving from Migration Period to Middle Ages at least to western parts of the later Pomerania.
Dietrich von Bern: Survey 'Nordic manuscripts'
Progressive survey of Old Norse 'Membrane' (A), Swedish (B ), and Icelandic (C) manuscripts; cf. Rolf Badenhausen 2007 referring to Kay Busch, Grossmachtstatus & Sagainterpretation. Doctoral thesis, FAU Erlangen-Nürnberg 2002. As regards Peringskiöld’s own bibliography, however, he did not consider B- and/or C-branch to  complete the A-manuscript for his edition of 1715.

Hermann Reichert convincingly points out that the immediate prior source serving for the A-B-C manuscript branches cannot be oral tradition. Regarding the results and conclusions by Reichert’s diligent analysis of the A-B-C manuscript family, we are certainly allowed to replace the hierarchical placeholder Narrative Account »Dietrich von Bern« with a paper manuscript called 'Großwerk' or '*Th' by Reichert. His work Heldensage und Rekonstruktion, Vienna 1992, generally deals with substance and philological place value of phrasemes, theoretical aspects of phraseological research and, consequently, practical application. Regarding some outstanding passage in the MSS, Reichert has been able to show mainly by comprehensive synoptical recognitions of the A-B-C texts that the Icelandic + Swedish MSS are more related to each other than the elder Membrane (Perg. fol. nr 4) to both younger texts of the C-branch; cf. Zur Transmission der Thidrekssaga und altschwedischen Didrikskrönikan.
back to text

28 The ephemeral as well as fallacious Ostrogothic conflation at Mb 13, i.e. the appearance of the 'Sea with the Isles of Greece' (Gricklandz hafui ... eyia), has been serving for the Old Norse writer’s erroneous reception of the Aðrimar and some Byzantine relation, cf. Mb 276. As a result, his Gothic imagination of this era appears roughly mapped with a central 'Adriatic Sea' and, regarding a later geographical development related to the expansion of Frankish kingdom, the territorial importance of Bulgaria in 9th and 10th century (Mb 276); cf. its eminent alliance with Charlemagne and bounding to the west on the great Frankish empire stretching out its influence to the Tisza after A.D. 796. It seems unnecessary to annotate that also the Balkan Peninsula has not been connected with any scene of action in the manuscripts. Contextually regarding 'Greece', its special meaning is subject of bibliographical sightings by Hans-Jürgen Hube who reminds us that an eminent Northern German historiographer of High Middle Ages evidently preferred to write down 'Graecen' instead of 'Slavs' (see above).
 
   However, the Old Swedish texts do not provide these paralogisms and distracting statements; cf. Sv 10, Sv 230.
 
   Thus, Hans-Jürgen Hube (op. cit. p. 24, fn. 2) evaluates the Ostrogothic geonyms at Mb 13 and Mb 276 as being based on misunderstanding/misleading later edits made by the Old Norse redactors ('compilers'):
 
   Die späteren nordischen Kompilatoren dachten aber eher an italienische Gebiete und das Reich der früheren ostgotischen Könige. Auch Greken, eigentlich Graach, wurde in diesem Zusammenhang als „Griechenland” gedeutet, und damit hatte man eine „europäische Dimension” und Thidrek von Bern/Bonn gleichsam mit Theoderich gleichgesetzt.
[Transl.:  The later Nordic compilers, however, rather tought of Italian territories and the empire of the former Eastern Gothic kings. Greken, rather Graach, was interpreted as "Greece" in this context, and thus there was a "European dimension" which seemed sufficient enough to equate Thidrek of Bern/Bonn with Theoderic.]
     Op. cit. p. 233, fn. 2:
»Bolgernland«: Bulgarien. Der norwegische Kompilator denkt hier an die Reichsdimensionen nach Theoderich und an oströmische Kaiser.
[Transl.:  The Norwegian compiler thinks of the regnal dimensions of Theoderic and of the East Roman emperors.]
 
   Since the Ostrogothic Ermanaric (d. 356) was not a contemporary of both Theoderic the Great and Þiðrek, that former ruler, scholastically and uncritically equated with 'Odoacer', can not be identical with the most significant antagonist of the latter. Furthermore, as both the Old Norse + Swedish texts provide, neither a Roman Odoacer nor any Ermanaric was ever killed by Þiðrek. Thus, as an example for wrong literary approaches based on inappropriate methodological premises finally brought forward against different genres of bibliography, this interfigural fact can hardly be 'correctively converted into the contrary' for the purpose of demonstrating potential historiographical manuscripts as an epic material of inacceptable coherence and rationality.
 
  As regards the country just north of the afore-quoted 'Bolgernland', some modern scholar attempted to point out the 'obvious anachronistic appearance of high mediaeval Hungary' by means of contemporary Teutonic/German Order, cf. Kronstadt built by Germans as the 'City of the Crown'. However, the prominence of this nation, as well not connected with any place of action thereabout, on the subject of nothing more than the authorship’s intention of his own great national identification would be more likely ascribable to a German manuscript provider than mainly translating Old Norse redactors. Not less interesting, likewise for interpretation of the national identity of the predecessive 'Großwerk' author, some Baltic report appears connected with a 13th-century point of presence of German Order. Regarding an 'Hungarian area' reckoned to a great kingdom of a Slavic ruler (cf. Mb 22), the eastern wartime accounts provided by the texts, as far as not being disproved by consistent research, could nevertheless relate historical events in this large area of Migration Period; cf. Ella Studer, Russisches in der Thidrekssaga. Doctoral thesis, University of Bern, Switzerland 1929. Reprint 1931.
 
   With respect to high mediaeval currency in the texts, remarkably appearing in the Þettleif parts of all manuscripts, we have to consider not only a translated German source for those 'marka gulls' and 'penninga', cf. Old Norse MSS, but also the intention of the source provider to leave a further German mark of origin by implementing these currency units in his narrative material.  back to text

29 As already mentioned, both the Þiðreks saga and the Old Swedish manuscripts do not connect Niflungar to any Burgundian geonym. Conclusively, source research has been rightly considering an archaic material for the works written by the postulated Lower German and the Old Norse + Swedish scribes and, definitely, those Upper German authors, because the Nordic ones do augment with some receptive detail provided by the Nibelungenlied, resp. its suggested earlier version Ältere Notback to text

Appendix
 
A1   Remarks on the evaluation of Þiðreks saga manuscripts (Quotation from The Nibelungen – The True Core by the Svava?, cf. A3.4)     

Ritter’s method of dealing with Þiðreks saga is principally based on his answer to the cardinal question whether a tradition being assumed remarkably pregnant with historical facts may be dissected in twilight mixture of mythological narratives. As Ritter has expressively underlined at his lectures, rather less significant as well as detectable noncontemporary adapting implementation by an evident group of Old Norse editors might have induced scholarly evaluation, especially of the Membrane texts, to evaluate Þiðreks saga basically as less authentic or fabulous pool of originally unrelated single tales. Beside other indication, Ritter regards the source of the Old Swedish manuscripts principally 'guiding' Þiðreks saga, and he considers these texts of such recognizable literary selectivity that subsequently will allow efforts to estimate them as historiographical sources.
    Theodore M. Andersson, reviewer of a symposium-based supplement edited by Susanne Kramarz-Bein for Walter de Gruyter’s encyclopaedia of Germanic antiquity, comments the contradicting cataloguing of Þiðreks saga. Andersson, obviously seeing a clear literary difference between 'Old Norse' and 'of old Norway', was apparently remembering Ritter’s publications with this introductory remark of 1996:
  »... Þiðreks saga, which had not received much scholarly attention for several decades, came back into fashion about ten years ago ...«

   This English review, available at http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~alvismal/7susanne.pdf  (retrieved May 2005), follows Heinrich Beck’s general position by means of his paper Þiðreks saga als Gegenwartsdichtung? who, stringently against Ritter’s postulation and reasoning, notoriously exposes the Þiðreks saga to the light of poetry somewhat and somehow inspired by history. Andersson writes:
 ... Heinrich Beck’s "Þiðreks saga als Gegenwartsdichtung?" ... points out that Þiðreks saga ... synchronizes events from legendary prehistory with near-contemporary events in the twelfth century (campaigns against the Slavs on the eastern frontier of Germany). Time in Þiðreks saga is thus a variable quantity ...«
   Moreover, Heinrich Beck classifies the message of Þiðreks saga expressively more subtle than its naïve reader would imagine. Addressing Ritter, he underpins Germanism’s fundamental attitude towards the general understanding of SAGA with this manifesto:
    »Germanistic saga research has recognized long since (...) that saga tradition is not an ancient forwarding but derives from topic adoption.« (Transl. from  Zur Thidrekssaga-Diskussion, in: Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie. 112, 1993, pgs 441–448.)
    However, Ritter’s research does not disregard the fact that the Old Norse scribes evidently processed to title translated historiographical and chronicled material as 'saga'. Thus, in so far, critical research would be not satisfied with some subtle or at least 'very interpretative' explorations of the Old Norse texts which have been provided by Heinrich Beck and other scholars in literature.
    Ritter’s translation of the Old Swedish 'Didriks chronicle' was not called in question on literary subject. For elaborating research he therein left his comparing analysis of both chronological and historiographical structures of the Svava and Þiðreks saga manuscripts. In the addenda provided with his translation (pgs 399–455) he exemplarily scrutinises and finally refutes the Svava’s dependency from the Membrane and Icelandic manuscripts against scholastic evaluation of mainly Scandinavian researchers. Ritter also implemented into his posthumous publication Der Schmied Weland a supplementary analysis that points out the different literary style of these texts anything but less insignificant through exemplary synoptic studies which provide the Þiðreks saga’s special predilection for certain subjective notional forwarding and, as a result, also for mythologizing, cf. Quotations from Der Schmied Weland (German).
    Seasoned practitioners have not rejected Ritter's methodical deciphering of 'the geographical and ethnic names in the Didriks Saga', an analysis of noteworthy consistency that considers rational contemporary circumstances of time and location. In 1959 William J. Pfaff had already introduced an equally titled book with 'a study in Germanic heroic Legend', who, however, failed in geostrategical plausibilities for the unbelievable Ostrogothic milieu attributed by means of Upper German poetry. Thus, reviewing research would hardly believe that the Old Norse editors had done essentially more than a mere translation of an imported tradition, mainly a Lower German Historia Dietrich von Bern; especially considering that, apart from only a very few cases of Ostrogothic misunderstanding and misinterpreting, the translators obviously never attempted to change any location name there.
    To boot, it seems implausible that the Old Norse scribes of King Hákon IV would have had any good reason to implant any own narration or compilation on such unfamiliar small locations as Vernica, Thorta, Brictan, such rivulets as Duna, Wisara, Eydissa, such mountain forests as the Osning and Valslanga.


A2   Edward R. Haymes' translation The Saga of Thidrek of Bern

Apart from joining William J. Pfaff’s implausible geographical and geostratecigal interpretation of the manuscripts (except for some congruousness with Ritter’s identifications), on an Ostrogothic milieu inappropriately chosen for Thidrek, Haymes tries to provide a verbatim translation of Þiðreks saga. Thus, regarding any considerable difference between the Membrane, the younger Icelandic redactions and Old Swedish Didriks krönikan, it would not concern Haymes' excellent translation.
    His introduction to the translation nonetheless considers scholars who apparently want to promulgate any mediaeval account including narration of hunting a deer or winning a bride as unbelievable historical source. Haymes writes that the Þiðreks saga in particular seems to propagate an image of kingship based on the support of the nobility and turns to suspect Artistic Achievement which, however, would basically lose rational ground of reality when ascribing a numeral quantity of a dozen to poetic dimension (notably Andersson). He is certainly right in case of some evident incongruity the saga bears in its texts, but he would not specify the major contradictions in the story apart from at least two different deaths in Osantrix’s vita. Incidentally, the Old Swedish texts do not refer to the second death of Osantrix provided by Mb 292. Regarding Sv 247 instead, relating the battle at Brandeborg, the Old Swedish scribe does only convey this notice on Osantrix:
    'Osantrix king had a brother’s son in Wilcinaland called Hernid. He became king of Wilcinaland.'
    Of course, there is also some literary influence mainly of Greek antiquity (notably Roswitha Wisniewski) that 'contaminates' the original purport of both the 'saga' and the Old Swedish texts – just as the bulk of chronicles and historiae from or referring to Late Antiquity and Migration Period. Such amalgamation, of course, can be recognized in the Þiðreks saga, e.g. the birds advising Sigurð to slay his foster father which, however, may be rather an author’s showing-knowlegde-reception of e.g. the Greek Augur and Melampus.
   Haymes furthermore notes conservative scholars who obviously have no idea of neither German(ic) Hunas nor an origin of an 'Attila' there, who would not allow the historical roots and appearance of these ancient people in that time Haymes rightly calls 'Period of Migration', who turn a blind eye to Frankish actions of 5th and 6th century in that large area he already specified as (a part of today’s) Lower Saxony.
   One of the most incredible points Haymes conveys is scholarship’s opinion that the Swedish texts have to be regarded as an obvious mere or pruning translation of the Old Norse texts, though he states that the Old Swedish version
                provides useful information when the other sources disagree.
   If he had explored the source he lists as Roswitha Wisniewski’s postdoctoral thesis under his Select Bibliography even in this connection, he would have been able to conceive the significance of her so-called 'Second Source' and draw his conclusions more exactly against the work of Horst Pütz and other authors supporting the fundamental position of Heinrich Beck, Susanne Kramarz-Bein and other scholars. William J. Pfaff, another protagonist of some obsolete Germanistic bibliography about Þiðreks saga by means of Ritter’s research, does not agree with Westphalia as location of clerical recording of historical events related to the vita of Dietrich von Bern by the Old Norse + Swedish manuscripts which, however, Roswitha Wisniewski tried to query as 'pseudo-chronicle'. Thus, the very difference between Ritter and the encyclopaedists is that he indicates a fairly homogenous rendition of history, fitting at least as a historia in a Frankish and Lower German(ic) lacuna of 5th and 6th century, whilst other scholars assign the Þiðreks saga to either fundamental poetry or, at least, a very suspect depiction of history.

A3   Appended documents

       A3.1 Who is King Atala?
       A3.2 Summaries of Scientific Analyses: Weland’s Steel
       A3.3 Merovingian Origin Location(s)
       A3.4 The Nibelungen – The True Core by the Svava?
       A3.5 Synopsis Vitae Thidrek of Bern vs Theuderic I
       A3.7 Geographical and Ethnic Glossary of Thidrek Saga – Svava
       A3.8 Ritter’s Timeline of Thidrek Saga – Svava
       A3.9 Translation: Niflungen Parts of 'Didriks chronicle'

German articles by the author:

Dietrich von Bern – Chronicle or Poetry?
Ritter about his Principle and Position of Researching the Thidreks saga
Ritter’s Priority of the Old Norse and Swedish texts – An extract from  Der Schmied Weland
Zur Schuldfrage von „Attila“ und Grimhild, Atli und Gudrun
Swanhilds Spuren in der Thidrekssaga?
Zwölf um Dietrich von Bern – Heldenphysiognomie aus der Retorte?
Zur Transmission der Thidrekssaga und altschwedischen 'Didrikskrönikan'
Die Mosel im Licht von Thidrekssaga und Dietrich-Chronik
Wadhincúsan, monasterium Ludewici
Theuderich I, Vita Rex Francorum


Books by the author:
 
Hardcover Edition, 2005
301 pages [ISBN 978-3-86582-044-1]
€ 19,90
bsaw.de
[Shipping only within Germany.]
Hardcover Edition, 2007
574 pages [ISBN 978-3-86582-589-6]
€ 24,90 
bsaw.de
[Shipping only within Germany.]