visits to Alboin, Gunther, and Eormanric, and the band of warriors imagined as acknowledging allegiance to the Gothic king.' The passage describing the "innweorud Eormanrīces" is evidently early at bottom, as the lines locating the Goths on the Vistula in contests against "the people of Attila" indicate. An imaginary incident of especial interest in connection with Eormanric is the part taken by the minstrel in accompanying Ealhhild, presumably the sister of Alboin, on her bridal journey to the Gothic court. While its main object was apparently to recount the various worthies visited, this lay was apparently far from being mere bald cataloguing, but possessed considerable literary merit. Such enumerations as it contained, however, may well have given the hint for continuing the process farther and in a more mechanical way. It was probably composed upon the Continent,' although any conclusive evidence of this is lacking, and not later than the latter half of the sixth century, as the reference to Alboin indicates. If the Alboin passage be regarded as interpolated, it is possible to place the date earlier, but such interpolation is not probable, and other reasons for assuming composition earlier than this are not convincing. The poem cannot have been a record of personal experience, and there is no reason for believing that such a person as "Widsith" ever existed.

This lay was provided with a prologue in England, as the

1 How far ll. 10-87 may be taken from various sources it is difficult and dangerous to conjecture. It has been seen that ll. 14-34 and ll. 75-87, although so unlike each other, show strong evidence of having been inserted. L. 76 appears to be a feeble imitation of 1. 20. Apart from the metrical discrepancy, 11. 57 ff. are suspicious; contrast the mention of the Huns and Goths with what follows (cf. n. 1, p. 338); 11. 35-49 do not agree with the character of the later part of the poem, while ll. 10-13 and especially 11. 50-56 do. But any attempt to assign these portions to definite sources must prove unavailing. Such lines as 10-13 for example, may be among the earliest in the poem-or they may be among the latest.

Early lays of such a sort as the one here postulated as the basis of the present poem are not unknown in early literature. Heinzel, in his recension of Möller (Anz. f. d. Alt., Vol. X, p. 232), remarks that there are parallels to the divisions II and III of Möllers analysis in Old Norse and in Anglo-Saxon, and gives references.

2 Walker, after reviewing the evidence, says (Grundriss, p. 329): "Der altere Teil des Gedichtes weist sehr entschieden auf die Zeit, wo die Angelsachsen noch auf dem Festlande sassen. There seems to be no reason to dissent from this. The acquaintance with saga, especially with the Eormanric saga, which was little known in Britain, apparently, and the intimacy of this acquaintance (cf. ten Brink, Paul's Grundriss, Vol. II, p. 541) point to a continental composition. The "merkwürdige Ansicht" of Maurer (Zs. f. d. Philol., Vol. II, p. 447), who places the composition of the poem after the time of Charlemagne, hardly seems to require refutation. As Wülker suggests, Maurer evidently came to the criticism of the poem "ohne gehörige Beachtung der darüber erschienenen Litteratur."

phrase eastan of Ongle indicates. The epilogue (11. 135-43) may well have been added at the same time.' It was further altered by the insertion of material intended to perpetuate information, some of which (ll. 18–34 ?) may have existed previously, and may be as old as the narrative portion, or perhaps even older; other passages, particularly ca. 11. 79-87, bear evidences of lateness, as references to the Picts and Scots and to biblical peoples indicate. Christian coloring appears also in l. 131-34. Portions of the original lay were doubtless sacrificed in the process of alteration. It seems likely that the prologue may have been added before the main portion received its present form, as it shows an acquaintance with a part of the Ealhhild-Eormanric narrative which has apparently been lost, and an interest in mentioning this which would hardly be expected from the man who is responsible for the addition of the cataloguing. The chronological order in which the prologue, epilogue, and other portions were added cannot, however, be definitely ascertained.

The great discrepancy in the matter and manner of various passages in the narrative precludes the hypothesis that the whole is a unit, the work of one man. It is impossible, then, to set any one "date of composition" for Widsith, since a poem which has taken shape in such a fashion as this must be called rather a growth, an evolution, and must be judged by critical standards of a different sort than those which apply to more homogeneous compositions. It seems most probable that but a small portion of it antedates the end of the sixth century, while the present form of the piece, considering all the changes, and the presence of Christian influences in it, is not likely to be older than the latter half of the seventh century, and may be much later. While the

1 Mallenhoff, Möller, and ten Brink all separated 11. 131-34 from the following, assigning them to a different source. Möller remarks: "Das eine der beiden stücke ist ohne zweifel auf grund des andern gemacht, denn wie Müllenhoff s. 293 zeigt es wiederholen sich dieselben ausdrücke und gedanken," etc. (p. 35). Repetition of the same thought in slightly changed words is really exceedingly common in AS. poetry, cf. the references in n. 1, p. 353. As for the fact that both divisions begin with swa, cf. the instances of similar beginnings of sentences in Kistenmacher, Die wörtlichen Wiederholungen in Beowulf, Diss., Greifswald, 1898. The fact that one division reflects Christian conceptions and that the other does not proves nothing conclusively in regard to their origin. An interesting example of the danger of dogmatizing about such a passage as this is afforded by the epitaph in Timon of Athens (v, 4, 70 ff.). The two couplets of which this is composed are inconsistent with each other, yet Shakspere evidently allowed both couplets to stand.

general drift of the history of the poem may still be observed, after careful study, attempts to trace this in minute detail must prove fruitless. The exact limits and boundaries of the various insertions cannot be definitely fixed, nor can anything like a reconstruction of the earliest form of the piece be successfully accomplished, if for no other reason than that so much has been lost. Precise results give an air of scientific exactness, but in the analysis of Widsith are to be distrusted. When one remembers the inevitable changes in oral transmission, the complexity of which the English and Scottish ballads well illustrate, and the arbitrary behavior of scribes, one hesitates to make any dogmatic statements at all about the original form of such a text as this. For in the earliest stages of the development it is by no means impossible that oral transmission must be reckoned with; in the latest ones it seems plain that someone has been at work with pen in hand. Widsith is probably far more changed than has hitherto been supposed. If the singer of the original lay were to "unlock his word-hoard" for us today as he did for his hearers in the beginning, we should hardly recognize his song at all in the mutilated, distorted, and debased version which we read some thirteen centuries later.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

WILLIAM WITHERLE LAWRENCE

EIN BRIEF GOETHES

Hiermit sende ich die ersten Scenen' meines Stücks bey dessen Ausführung ich mich nur um Ein Jahr Arbeit verrechnet habe. Was es geworden ist mag das Publicum entscheiden.

Nun empfehle ich die allerstrengste Fürsorge bey den Correcturen. Die vorigen Bände sind leidlich, doch nicht ohne Mängel, bey diesem Stücke werde ich auch den geringsten Fehler durch einen Carton zu verbessern bitten. Bey der höchsten Sorgfalt die ich auf dieses Stück gewendet, wünsche ich auch dass es ganz rein in die Hände des Publicums komme. Wann Sie das Exempl. mit lateinischen Lettern anfangen wollen, ist mir ganz gleich.

Was H. Vulpius betrift, wiederhohle ich dass mir eine Gefälligkeit geschieht wenn Sie diesem jungen Mann Ihren Rath und Beystand gönnen wollen. Er hat manche gute Eigenschaften und es fehlt ihm nicht an Talent. Bey den weitläufigen Bedürfnissen der Buchhandlung, sollte es mich wundern wenn er nicht, gut geleitet, sich einen mässigen Unterhalt sollte verdienen können. Ich bin auch nicht abgeneigt ihm von Zeit zu Zeit einige Unterstützung zu gönnen, nur was seine Einrichtung betrift, darin kann ich nicht reden, das ist ganz seine Sache.

Leben Sie wohl. Das Mst von Tasso folgt nun nach und nach. Senden Sie mir ja gleich 3 Exemplare der abgedruckten Bogen.

W. E. 22 Jun. 89
v Goethe

Der Brief ist abgedruckt in der Weimarer Ausgabe, Briefe, 9. Band, Seite 134-35. Er ist an Göschen gerichtet, dessen Geschäftsvermerk am oberen Rand des zweiten Bogens steht: Weimar d. 22. Juny 89. v. Goethe empf. d. 24. Die vorstehende Fassung ist dem Original entnommen, das sich nebst einem von mir im vorigen Jahre veröffentlichen, bis dahin unbekannten Briefe Schiller's, im Besitze von Frau Rossmässler in Germantown, Pennsylvanien befindet.

Vergleichung mit der Weimarer Ausgabe ergibt eine beträchtliche Anzahl Lesarten. Da die oben mitgeteilte Fassung urkundengetreu, ist dies die Rechtfertigung der Mitteilung. Nur einige Bemerkungen zu den Unterschieden.

1 Act ist gestrichen, Scenen drübergeschrieben.

Darein

(W. A. S. 135, Z. 5) ist offensichtlich Lesefehler für darin, ebenso Stück für Stücke (Ebenda, S. 134, Z. 14). Nach den orthographischen Änderungen der Weimarer Ausgabe-wie bei statt bey, wiederhole statt wiederhohle, betrifft statt betrift— fallen besonders auf die vielen Anderungen in der Interpungierung. Zweimal ist, und zwar das zweite Mal ohne jede innere Berechtigung, ein Semikolon statt eines Kommas gesetzt, S. 134, Z. 14 nach Mängel, S. 135, Z. 6 nach reden. Einmal (S. 135, Z. 1 nach Buchhandlung) fehlt Goethes Komma. Achtmal hat schulmeisterlich-subalterne Pedanterie ein Komma ein

gefügt, wo Goethe keins hat. Goethe interpungiert sinnenfällig nach rhythmischen Grundsätzen, nach der musikalisch-logischen Art des Sprechstils. Selbst wenn dies nicht der Fall wäre und so unsern ästhetischen Sprachsinn weniger befriedigte, wäre uns der genaue Text eines von Goethe eigenhändig geschriebenen Briefes an sich sakrosankt.

BRYN MAWR, Pa.

KARL DETLEV JESSEN