Nytt om runer

Old English and Old Frisian Runic Inscriptions: Databank at Katholische Universität Eichstätt, Germany (1998)

Two-part project

The project at the Katholische Universität Eichstätt in Eichstätt, Germany, concerning Old English and Old Frisian runic inscriptions consists of two parts: the databank for the Old English and Old Frisian inscriptions and a paper edition of the Old English inscriptions (see Nytt om runer 10 (1995, publ. 1996), 20-21). Eventually, the Eichstätt databank will be united with the one from Kiel and edited on a CD-ROM. Until now we have mainly concentrated on the paper edition and therefore would like to report on it. Basically, the paper edition is organized like the databank (see Nytt om runer 9 (1994), 35 (figure: "Projektstruktur")). Generally speaking, there are also four sections (Object, Text, Linguistic part, Bibliography). In comparison to the databank the corpus of the paper edition is smaller (see below) but its information is more detailed since we are not restricted to the limited capacity of data fields (254 characters). Therefore the paper edition is not confined to an overview but leaves more space for our own research.

The contents of the paper edition

With few exceptions (e.g. Brunswick casket) the paper edition consists of the genuine corpus of Old English inscriptions containing more than two runes, whereas the databank will include both genuine and doubtful inscriptions as well as single-rune inscriptions. The corpus of our paper edition encompasses c. 100 objects (viz. slabs, stone crosses, bones, rings, brooches, weapons, urns, writing tablet, tweezers, sun-dial, comb, bracteates, caskets, font, dishes, graffiti). A list of runic objects which have been lost will be attached. The databank includes, in addition, 16 inscriptions containing a single rune, all runic coins (the number of which at the present time is uncertain) and 8 cases of dubious runic character (runelike signs, perhaps Latin characters, weathered runes).

The four sections of the paper edition are as follows:

In the section on the OBJECT the user will find all the object's names, a description of the item, its history and provenance, date, method of dating, date of discovery, place of discovery and present location if known. As an example of "all the object's names", the Brunswick whalebone casket has been called: Nethii's casket (Stephens (1866/67:379)), Gandersheim (Elliott (1989:124)), the Brunswick casket (Mitchell (1994:Br3)), Brunswick (Braunschweig)/Gandersheim casket (Page (1994:179)), Braunschweiger Reliquienschrein (von Grienberger (1909:431)), Braunschweiger Reliquiar (Holthausen (1910:322)), Braunschweiger Runenkästchen (Dietrich (1869:94))..

The section on the INSCRIPTION encompasses: the runes, the text (i.e. transcription, reading, translation) and the interpretation of the text. Concerning the runes, authenticity (e.g. Brunswick casket), tradition (e.g. Continental influence) and particularly the form and sound value of individual runes are discussed. In the part concerning the text, the reader will find - besides general information on the layout and description (e.g. runic text, mixed text, cryptic runes) - a master transcription, reading and translation plus a critical apparatus. Normally, the master transcription is in small Latin letters unless unusual variants require the presentation in runes. The top line of the right side of Franks casket is therefore transcribed as follows:

FIGURE - not yet available on WorldWideWeb.

The reading of the entire right side of the casket is, according to Page (1973:180ff.), as follows (TL = top line, RL = right line, BL = bottom line, LL = left line):

As illustrations of alternate readings a few examples may suffice here: TL1-3: Eichner (1991:605Vers1): her; TL4-6: Wadstein (1900:33): hos; Eichner (1991:610Vers2): hoss; TL1-6: Becker (1972:31ff.;37): herhos; TL7-11: Wadstein (1900:33): sitæð; Krause (1959:54): siteþ; Becker (1972:31ff.;37): sitæþ; Eichner (1991:610Vers2): siteþ.

The LINGUISTIC SECTION is divided into: dialect, phonology, morphology, word-formation, syntax, semantics, etymology, spelling and the glossary. This part reflects not only the tremendous amount of research work published until now but it is also intended to shed more light on problematic fields of Old English linguistics in general: Thus substantival categorization is not based on the runic material exclusively but on the whole Old English corpus found in A. diPaolo Healey, R. L. Venezky, et. al., eds., A Microfiche Concordance to Old English (plus The List of Texts and Index of Editions), Publications of the Dictionary of Old English 1, repr. with revisions (Toronto 1985). One example from our morphology section may suffice here:

-cæstri- (BL21-26) [Note: The sign - indicates that the word is not the beginning or end of the inscription.]
NOUN: DC2-Fem [Note: DC2 = declension class 2 (ô-stems).]
mainly fem. (288x); rarely masc. and neut. (8x) in Li[ndisfarne Gospels], Ru[shworth Gospels], and late texts.
[BT (1891:149): generally fem. but sometimes neut.; ceaster; G.Sg. ceastres.]
[DOE (1988:193): DC2-Fem.; rarely masc.]
[Note: BT = Bosworth, J., and T. N. Toller, An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, Oxford 1882-1898; DOE = diPaolo Healey, A, et al., eds., Dictionary of Old English, Toronto 1986- .]

After this section the user will find a discussion of motifs, when this is necessary. For example, the discussion of the motifs on the one side of Franks casket is as follows: The various descriptions of the first scene on the left side can be summarized as follows: There are two figures (1), A (2) and B (3), facing each other. Figure B is sitting on something (4). Figure B's body (5), and particularly its thighs (6), calves (7), feet (8), upper part of the body (9), neck (10), head (11) and its arms (12) are subject to detailed description. Figure B holds an object (13) and has an object in its mouth (14). There is an object in front of figure B (15). Figure B is clothed (16).
Notes:
(1) Dalton (1909:28) sees in figure A a "warrior with round target and spear". For Imelmann (1920:326) A is dressed and equipped (helmet, lance, shield) in the same way as that particular Roman on the Titus side, looking at B "irgendwie in einer Beziehung dazu gedacht", for the naive Anglo-Saxon a wer, wiga (wigend) with helmet, sceaft, scyld. For Page (1973:180ff.) a warrior with helmet, shield and spear is represented.
(2) Peeters (1996:20;24) calls it "the sentry" with shield and spear.
(3) Dalton (1909:28), Page (1973:180ff.) label it a "monstrous figure"; Imelmann (1920:326) calls it "eine seltsame Gestalt"; acccording to Boer (1911:232) the figure could be a human being whose name is Hors, Hoss; the artist might have had an allusion in mind when he gave him a horse's head and hooves or the artist had intended to draw a horse but had not been able to fit in the animal in a sitting position on the "harmberge", therefore he decided on a half-human figure. For Peeters (1996:20) it "looks like a kind of monster".
(4) Dalton (1909:28): mound or stone; Imelmann (1920:326): "Stein oder Hügel"; Page (1973:180ff.): mound. It is "more than questionable" for Peeters (1996:21) that the seat is a hill.
(5) Dalton (1909:28) considers it a human body. Page (1973:181) classifies it "with a beast's head, wings but apparently human hands and feet".
(6) According to Imelmann (1920:326) they are "bekleidet, so daß eine menschliche Gestalt vorgestellt erscheint".
(7) To Imelmann (1920:326), however, its calves and feet look like those of a quadruped.
(8) For Imelmann (1920:326) see No 7; Boer (1911:229) sees hooves on the hind legs.
(9) Imelmann (1920:326): The upper part of its body is apparently that of a bird.
(10) Imelmann (1920:326): the figure has a bird's neck.
(11) Dalton (1909:28) describes it as a horse's (or ass's) head, whereas Boer (1911:229) only sees the former (horse's head) and Imelmann (1920:326) ascribes a quadruped's head (wolf, donkey, horse) to the figure.
(12) According to Dalton (1909:28) it holds branches at which it appears to nibble; Imelmann (1920:326): In its right hand the figure holds a rather lengthy branch with leaves which almost reaches up to its mouth. Its left hand holds a branch branching off the other branch above the bird's foot. The right branch starts in the figure's lap. Peeters (1996:20) describes "the mystery man('s)" arms and shoulders as "covered with feathers" and his hands as "very clumsy. They clutch cut off branches, which partly cover him."
(13) Accoring to Imelmann (1920:326) a wing covers part of its body revealing the right arm which is, however, similar to a bird's foot. The left one can be seen above the right arm.
(14) Imelmann (1920:326) is of the opinion that the object in the figure's mouth could be part of the right branch.
(15) Imelmann (1920:326) sees in it "eine runde Verzierung, die als Füllung wirkt".
(16) For Peeters (1976:20) "He is scantily clad".

There is an individual BIBLIOGRAPHY for every object as well as a separate bibliography of all runic objects in alphabetical order.

Due to limited space our report reveals only few facets of the project. The examples given reflect our work in progress and are therefore subject to alteration.

Prof. Dr. Alfred Bammesberger and Dr. Gaby Waxenberger
Katholische Universität Eichstätt
D-85071 Eichstätt, Germany

Go or return to the main page for Nytt om runer.