“The Symmetrical Battle” Extended: Old Norse Fránn and Other Symmetry in Norse-Germanic Dragon Lore
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Macksey Journal Volume 1 Article 31 2020 “The Symmetrical Battle” Extended: Old Norse Fránn and Other Symmetry in Norse-Germanic Dragon Lore Julian A. Emole University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://www.mackseyjournal.org/publications Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Classical Literature and Philology Commons, European Languages and Societies Commons, German Linguistics Commons, Indo-European Linguistics and Philology Commons, Medieval Studies Commons, and the Scandinavian Studies Commons Recommended Citation Emole, Julian A. (2020) "“The Symmetrical Battle” Extended: Old Norse Fránn and Other Symmetry in Norse-Germanic Dragon Lore," The Macksey Journal: Vol. 1 , Article 31. Available at: https://www.mackseyjournal.org/publications/vol1/iss1/31 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Johns Hopkins University Macksey Journal. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Macksey Journal by an authorized editor of The Johns Hopkins University Macksey Journal. “The Symmetrical Battle” Extended: Old Norse Fránn and Other Symmetry in Norse-Germanic Dragon Lore Cover Page Footnote The title of this work was inspired by Daniel Ogden's book, "Drakōn: Dragon Myth & Serpent Cult in the Greek & Roman Worlds," and specifically his chapter titled 'The Symmetrical Battle'. His work serves as the foundation for the following outline of the Graeco-Roman dragon and was the inspiration for my own work on the Norse-Germanic dragon. This paper is a condensed version of a much longer unpublished work, which itself is the product of three years worth of ongoing research. I am indebted to Professor Erica Benson, who answered many of my questions regarding Norse and English literature; Professors Joshua Brown and Johannes Strohschänk for their help with the medieval German sources; and, most of all, Professor Matt Waters, whose constant guidance and praise has been pivotal in my continued enjoyment and success in academia. This article is available in The Macksey Journal: https://www.mackseyjournal.org/publications/vol1/iss1/31 Emole: “The Symmetrical Battle” Extended “The Symmetrical Battle” Extended: Old Norse Fránn and Other Symmetry in Norse-Germanic Dragon Lore Julian Emole University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire Abstract Previous endeavors to identify a common origin of the dragon-slayer myth (and its many derivatives) in the Indo-European language family have produced mixed results, due in part to the ubiquity of dragon lore. Calvert Watkins’s (1995) ambitious project to reconstruct a poetic formula with PIE *gwhen- (‘to smite, slay’) has garnered both praise and criticism (see, e.g., Daniel Ogden, 2013). Christine Rauer (2000) has demonstrated that Beowulf was influenced by the Latin hagiographic tradition but finds that “the imagery which seems to be so typical for the hagiographical genre is extremely rare” in the secular Scandinavian material (82). However, not much has been said about the Norse-Germanic dragon’s relationship to the dragons of classical antiquity. To determine whether the Norse-Germanic dragon was demonstrably influenced by the Graeco-Roman dragon, this project focuses on the pattern to portray symmetry between serpent and adversary in the Graeco-Roman literature and identifies analogous examples in the Norse- Germanic extant literature. Although such a discovery further complicates Watkins’s project, it aids in clarifying the origin of certain features of the dragon lore in at least one of the Indo- European language branches. Keywords: Dragon, Classics, Norse, Germanic, Indo-European, Mythology. Published by JHU Macksey Journal, 2020 1 The Macksey Journal, Vol. 1 [2020], Art. 31 INTRODUCTION Dragons are a widespread motif in myth, and their ubiquitous nature therefore makes it exceedingly difficult to establish any connection between distinct mythologies or traditions with certainty. Given the multitude of dragons in both Graeco-Roman and Norse-Germanic literature, this project focuses on symmetry between serpent and adversary in Graeco-Roman literature and identifies analogous examples in the Norse-Germanic extant literature. These symmetries can be found on many levels throughout the works analyzed and arise from the descriptions of dragons and serpents; heroes and gods; and the weapons (swords, lightening, fire, and poisons) that they have at their disposal. Through these symmetries we can connect these distinct traditions through their treatment of dragons and the dragonesque and argue that medieval writers analogized features of the ancient Graeco-Roman dragon into their own mythology. Despite the difficulties faced by scholars, many have attempted to identify the origins of the dragon lore found in the various Indo-European cultures, some of which have compared distinct mythologies in order to demonstrate, what we may call, either vertical influence, i.e., an Indo-European inheritance as evident in a lexical analysis of the Indo-European daughter languages (Watkins 1995), or horizontal influence, i.e., influence on one tradition’s dragon-slayer narratives via an adjacent culture, including both Indo-European and non-Indo-European cultures as the source (Fontenrose 1974). Most Indo-European scholars are in agreement with Watkins’s w w proposal, providing the full formulaic expression *(h1e)g hént h1óg him (‘he killed the serpent’) with lexical substitutions in Greek, Hittite, and Germanic.1 However, other scholars are skeptical of Watkins’s hypothesis: what is missing, and would perhaps be the most convincing evidence in 1 Mallory and Adams (1997), 579. See esp. the entire section titled ‘Three-Headed Monster’ (578-81). The formula is informed by OInd áhann áhim (‘he killed the serpent’, attested in Rigveda 1. 32. 1, etc.) and Av janat ažīm (‘[who] killed the serpent’, attested in Avesta, Yasna 9.8, etc.). https://www.mackseyjournal.org/publications/vol1/iss1/31 2 Emole: “The Symmetrical Battle” Extended favor of Watkins’s argument, is a set of cognate lexical items that make up this formula and pervade the key Indo-European daughter languages.2 In addition, it is well established that the Greek drakōntes are at least partially indebted to the dragons of the ancient Near East. Typhon is most securely demonstrated, being influenced by the Canaanite-Ugaritic Baal-Sapon against Yam and Litan and the Hittite Tarhunna against Illuyanka and Teshub against Hedammu, while others are less certain.3 Nonetheless, it is erroneous to assume that the Greeks did not have a set of myths which were entirely their own, but it seems to be equally as fallible to assume that Typhon would be the only Greek drakōn to be analogized with dragon-like monsters of adjacent cultures. Cross-cultural influence, after all, does not occur in a vacuum. We may also briefly note Gunkel’s (1895) Chaoskampf (literally ‘struggle against chaos’) hypothesis, which suggests that the battle between the supposed “culture hero” deity and the chaos monster, most often in the form of a serpent, is a ubiquitous feature in not only Indo-European culture but also certain cultures of the ancient Near East.4 As for previous work on the Germanic dragon, Rauer (2000) has firmly established Latin hagiographical influence on Germanic texts such as Beowulf but finds no convincing evidence in her examination of secular Scandinavian material, saying, “the imagery which seems to be so typical for the hagiographical genre is 2 Ogden (2013) is skeptical of the vagueness and plasticity of this formula, especially since the only term for which there are cognate words in the daughter languages is arguably ‘SLAY’, and he is even surprised by West’s endorsement of the “lax attitude to lexical substitutions” in Watkins’s work. See Ogden (2013), 21; and West (2007), 78-9. 3 Fontenrose (1974), 145; Ogden (2013), 10-15, 75; and Watkins (1995), 448-459. 4 See Gunkel’s original work titled Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Enzeit: Eine religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung über Gen. 1 und Ap. Jon 12. An English translation can be found in Gunkel (2006). Gunkel’s work has been debated and criticized since its original publication in 1895. For a contemporary reassessment of his work, see Scurlock and Beal (2013). Published by JHU Macksey Journal, 2020 3 The Macksey Journal, Vol. 1 [2020], Art. 31 extremely rare” (82).5 The dragon slain by the hero in Beowulf is therefore excluded from this examination. The sources included in this examination cover a large span of time, ranging from the earliest of antiquity to the beginning of the Early Modern Period. Ancient Norse myths and legends survived through oral transmission, and, as a result, we have few written records of these myths before the twelfth century, shortly after writing was introduced in Iceland. Fortunately, there exist stone reliefs of some of these myths, which predate the literature of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and some myths are also mentioned in other Germanic texts.6 Changes between the oral histories and written texts were inevitable, and we know little about them. In contrast, we know much more about the ancient cultures which had a productive writing system at their disposal, such as the Greeks and Romans. The Norse-Icelandic literature is divided into two groups, ‘eddic’ and ‘skaldic’.7 The main divergence between these groups of poetry is content: whereas the anonymous eddic literature details Norse cosmology and the adventures of gods and heroes, the authors of the skaldic literature, who are known to us, wrote about contemporary history. The poetry of the latter is generally of a laudatory nature, either praising chieftains or commemorating warriors and battles. Although the subject of skaldic poetry was not pagan myths and legends, there are many allusions to the old religion, and therefore the skaldic literature will be useful throughout the course of the present examination. The skalds, as we call them (from ON skald, ‘poet’), adhered to a much stricter meter, counting and measuring down to the syllable, which contrasts the more loosely 5 See also Sorrell (1994), 57-87; and Ogden (2013), 21.