SAGA-BOOK - Viking Society Web Publications

Saga-Book of the Viking Society
not be inclined to connect with this geographical name the
Eddie word Gnitaheior, where Siguror slew the dragon,
especially when we take into consideration, that the
Icelandic abbot Nikolas in his Itinerary remarks,
concerning the pilgrim road to Rome between Minden and
Mainz: here is the Gnitaheior, where Siguror slew the
dragon Fafnir? Hofler comes to the conclusion that the
glorious feat of Arminius has been sublimated into
a heroic tale; historical facts are cast into the mould of
heroic fiction. Siegfried may in fact have been the
Germanic name of Arminius. The Roman army has been
symbolized in the well-known legendary form of a dragon.
The idea and the word dragon have come to the Germans
from classical tradition. Here in the legend of Arminius
is probably one of the first instances of transmission. It
is a well-known fact that dragon-standards were used in
the Roman army; we know from later Scandinavian
tradition that standards with the image of an animal had
a kind of religious meaning. So it seems not at all
improbable that the Roman army with its flying dragonstandards
could be symbolized as a fiery dragon.
But this original heroic legend did not yet contain the
figure of Hagen, nor, since the catastrophe of Varus was
a military one, that of Brunhild, They may have been
added at other times and in other places. The Cheruscan
tale has broken loose from its roots in the native soil and
wandered through the Germanic tribes everywhere; the
tale of the young hero, fighting successfully with a dragon
and dying in the prime of his youth through the treachery
of his own relatives.
Hagen, however, is connected with the town of Xanten.
He may even have originally been a mythical figure, as
Franz Rolf Schroder suggested some years ago,24 and as
has been further emphasized by Otto Hofler. 25 A new
stage in the development of this famous heroic legend has
as loco cit. 64 ff.
24 Cf. Deutsche V ierteljahrschrift fur Literatursoissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte
LII (1958), 55-56.