From oldnorsenet@hum.gu.se Fri Jan 23 17:49:42 1998 Received: (from mail@localhost) by ratatosk.squirrel.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA06655 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 1998 17:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from humserv1.hum.gu.se(130.241.40.21) by ratatosk.squirrel.com via MultiNet SMTP Gateway (V1.3) id sma006653; Fri Jan 23 17:49:32 1998 Received: from humserv1.hum.gu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by humserv1.hum.gu.se (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA10152; Sat, 24 Jan 1998 02:47:45 +0100 (MET) Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 02:47:45 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199801240140.UAA26484@magicnet.magicnet.net> Errors-To: server@hum.gu.se Reply-To: oldnorsenet@hum.gu.se Originator: oldnorsenet@hum.gu.se Sender: oldnorsenet@hum.gu.se Precedence: bulk From: "William Reaves" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Voluspa 9-10: Creation of the Dwarves X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Nordic Philology Discussion List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1162 Status: O Content-Length: 11365 Lines: 243 Hello, I am going to send an email I recently received regarding Voluspa 9-10, and the dwarf-list from a friend of mine named Eysteinn Bjornsson. I am sending it to this forum for two reasons. One, because it is an excellent discussion of the topic and which I am sure will be of interest to many of you, and secondly because I am preparing a posting on The MEad Myth and this letter touches on a point I wish to discuss there. Rather than discuss this topic in an already too lengthy post, I thought it best to forward this message first. I have not asked Eysteinn permission, but as it is an explantion and translation of information available on his website, I do not believe he will mind. The below words are his own, not mine. But please make any comments you would like to the list regarding it, as it is a topic worthy of discussion and a "new" finding in the field. I have added a title. Regards, William Reaves ************************************ Regarding the Creation of the Dwarves I was truly shocked the other day, when I finally got around to taking a good look at the recently published Volume One of the History of Icelandic Literature (Mal & Menning, 1992). In his treatment of Völuspá, the eminent scholar Vésteinn Ólason states the following about stanzas 9 - 10 of this poem: The next major act was the creation of Man, and for this the Dwarves were chosen, being the most skilled in handicraft. The Dwarves seem to have grown from the earth, and it is therefore quite likely that they may be brothers to the Giants. They made human shapes from earthly matter, among them two shapes from wood, Askur and Embla, which are then found by Óđinn, Hćnir and Lóđurr, and endowed with life and divine shapeliness. Snorri relates this episode in a different way, and many scholars prefer to interpret Völuspá in a way conforming more to his account, but recently a scholar has shown us very convincing reasons for accepting a new interpretaion of the text." The reason why this was quite a shock to me is that I figured the same thing out 15 years ago, but have hardly dared to mention it to anybody, at least not as an amateur to an academic. At that time such an interpretation was, of course, utterly iconoclastic, because it would have implied that Sigurđur Nordal, Ólafur Briem, et al. were wrong (as witnessed by their editions of Völuspá). Therefore it really came as a warm breeze on a winter night to see one of our most respected Eddic scholars state such a theory more or less as a proven fact. I will now try to present the basis of this new interpretation of Völuspá 9 - 10. The two stanzas in question can be found in 3 major sources: Konungsbók (R), Hauksbók (H), and Snorra-Edda (S). Snorra-Edda exists in 4 major manuscripts: Konungsbók, Trektarbók, Ormsbók, and Uppsalabók. Many minor variants may be found in all of these, but I will here concentrate only on those which are relevant to the matter in hand. Below I have set out the two stanzas, side by side, using modern spelling (since this is most easily understood by all). The crux of the matter is lines 5-6 in stanza 9. (It is tempting to treat lines 7-8 here as well, but this would make the treatment far too long for the present purpose.) Line 10:7 is important as well. Konungsbók: Hauksbók: Snorra-Edda: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 9:1 Ţá gengu regin öll Ţá gengu regin öll Ţá gengu regin öll 9:2 á rökstóla, á rökstóla, á rökstóla, 9:3 ginnheilög gođ, ginnheilög gođ, ginnheilög gođ, 9:4 og um ţađ gćttust, og um ţađ gćttust og um ţađ gćttust, 9:5 HVER SKYLDI DVERGA HVERJIR SKYLDU DVERGA AĐ SKYLDI DVERGA 9:6 DRÓTTIN SKEPJA DRÓTTIR SKEPJA DRÓTT OF SKEPJA 9:7 úr Brimis blóđi úr Brimis blóđi úr Brimis blóđi 9:8 og Bláins leggjum. og Bláins leggjum. og Bláins leggjum. 10:1 Ţar Mótsognir Ţar var Móđsognir "Móđsognir var 10:2 mćztur um orđinn mćztur of orđinn ćđstur, og annar 10:3 dverga allra, dverga allra, Durinn" (given in 10:4 en Durinn annar; en Durinn annar; prose). 10:5 ţeir mannlíkun Ţeir mannlíkan Ţar mannlíkun 10:6 mörg um gerđu, mörg of gerđu mörg of gerđust, 10:7 DVERGAR ÚR JÖRĐU, DVERGA Í JÖRĐU, DVERGAR Í JÖRĐU, 10:8 sem Durinn sagđi. sem Durinn sagđi. sem Durinn sagđi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jón Helgason, Sigurđur Nordal, and Ólafur Briem all agree that 9:5-6 should read thus: hver skyldi dverga dróttir skepja It is a fact that none of the mss. actually have the text in this form, but I don't think any repectable scholar would insist on "dróttin" here. Even Snorri supports this slight emendation of (R), which is also supported by (H) anyway. The difference between "hver" (R) and "hverjir" (H) is basically irrelevant, although (H) seems more natural in the light of what follows. I don't have an English translation handy, but I'm fairly certain that all of them agree, more or less, as follows: "Then all the gods went into assembly, and decided who should create the race of Dwarves from earth. Mótsognir was the mightiest of all Dwarves, and Durinn second to him. They, dwarves, created many man-like shapes from earth, instructed by Durinn." There are serious reasons to doubt such an interpretation. First, if this is all about dreating Dwarves, how can the Dwarves Mótsognir and Durinn be the creators? They are Dwarves themselves! Did they create themselves? Second, the word "dróttir" is exclusively used of MEN. It is never applied to gods, elves, dwarves or any supernatural being. To make a long tale short, the most natural way to interpret here is: Who of the Dwarves (hver Dverga) should create MANKIND (dróttir). It is not the origin of Dwarves which is being described her, but the origin of MAN, whom the Dwarves create! If any more proof is needed, let's look at stanza 10: "Mótsognir was the mightiest of all Dwarves, Durinn second". The Dwarves obviously already exist ("all Dwarves"), since M. and D can be described as their leaders. And what do they do? "They, the dwarves, created many human shapes from earth, as Durinn instructed." "Manlíkun" means "man-likenesses, human shapes". No fluent reader of the Icelandic language needs more to see the truth of this (as in fact I've tested extensively). You may ask: If this is so obvious, why have generations accepted the earlier interpretation? This is easy to answer: From an early age, we are presented with the Eddic poems in school. We are basically taught that there is no possibility of doubt in the accepted interpretations. The early scholars' words are presented to us as holy scripture. Especially Snorri is sacrosanct. Doubting *him* amounts to a deadly sin. Only recently are the academics beginning to realize that Snorri may, indeed, have been wrong sometimes. (Rydberg saw this a century ago, but we've all seen what happened to *his* theories. He was far ahead of his times - as a matter of fact modern scholars are slowly starting to accept some of his theories, but most of them assume he's safely dead and buried, and therefore present them as their own. Sad, but true.) And now we can see why Snorri emended like he does, creating new variations to fit his mistaken ideas. First he gets rid of the awkward "hver": ađ skyldi dverga drótt of skepja "that the race of dwarves should be created". Then he brazenly cuts 10:1-4 out of the poem, and incorporates it into his prose in a way that indicates that M. and D. only existed AFTER the Dwarves were created. Finally he shamelessly rewrites 10:5-8. He couldn't easily delete line 8, though, which really reveals the absurdity of it all: ţar manlíkun mörg of gerđust dvergar í jörđu sem Durinn sagđi "There many human-likenesses took shape in the earth, as Durinn said". Here the Dwarves are automatically created, as he states "like worms in dead flesh". Please! And I wonder how he would account for Durinn here, if only we could ask him. I think I've made the point carefully enough, so let's continue: After the two stanzas discussed above, the Dvergatal (Dwarf Rigmarole) follows. Not many modern scholars can be found which still stick to the ridiculous idea that this belongs here. The author of Völuspá was extremely economical in his style, and indeed he would have to be so in order to squeeze the complete history of the world into such a short space. Why on earth would he have chosen to spend 10% of the poem on a meaningless list of Dwarves, which have nothing to do with his swift, but sure, recounting of the epic of the world, reaching from Creation to Ragnarök? He was obviously depending on his listeners' inside knowledge: his art isn't shown by the facts he presents, but in HOW he presents them. Surely the audience would have thrown eggs at him, as soon as he started chanting the Dvergatal? If we accept (and how could we not?) the new reading of Völuspá 9 - 10, the absurdity of the Dvergatal becomes even more obvious. This misinterpretation goes back centuries. Even Snorri was guilty of it. At some point a scribe, thinking that the subject here was the creation of Dwarves, must have thought it a good idea to insert here a nice list of Dwarves he had handy. I can easily enter his mind, and see exactly why he thought it was a good idea. It seemed to him to belong there, and there it would stay. Now he could scrape the bloody Dwarf List off the original, and re-use the precious skin! But the proof that the Dvergatal is an interpolation is really this: If we delete it, stanza 17 follows immediately upon stanza 10. Stanza 17 has long caused problems, first and foremost because it begins with "unz", meaning "until", which has no obvious connection with stanza 16. Scholars have thus presumed that something is missing from the poem. A stanza can not easily start with "unz" like this. But if we accept the new interpretation of 9 - 10, and throw away the Dvergatal, all is explained! In Völuspá 17 - 18 we learn how Óđinn, Hćnir and Lóđurr find the lifeless bodies of Askur and Embla, and endow them with spiritual gifts, which turn them into living, radiant human beings. The connection here should be obvious: The Dwarves create the material bodies of Men (from earth). These bodies are lifeless shapes, *UNTIL* Óđinn and his brothers find them and give them the gifts of the gods: Spirit, Mind, Warmth, Movement, etc. Those who want to be sure that the above is really based on the research of academics, should read Tryggvi Gíslason's ground-breaking article, "hverr skyldi dverga dróttir skepja" (Festskrift til Ludvig Holm-Olsen, 1984), and for additional support Gro Steinsland's article, "Antropogonimyten i Völuspá" (Arkiv för Nordisk Filologi, 1983). Short synopsis: Völuspá 9-10 has long been misinterpreted as describing the creation of Dwarves. Recently it has been convincingly shown that the two stanzas describe the creation, by Dwarves, of the material bodies of Men. This interpretation also indicates that the Dvergatal is an interpolation, and that stanza 17 should be seen as a direct continuation of stanza 10. Eysteinn Bjornsson