Stephen Flowers - Archaic Germanic Psychology

7/27/2019 Stephen Flowers - Archaic Germanic Psychology

1/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGYSTEPHEN E. FLOWERS

University of Texas, AustinDepmtment of Germanic Languages

This article is concerned with the structure of ancient Germanicsoul conceptions and represents an attempt to establish semanticfields for the terms involved, as well as a tentative effort to determine their structural relationship. It is concluded that at least the coreelements of the common Germanic psyche were probably conceivedof as a three-fold structure of 1) a breath concept, 2) an emotivefaculty and 3) a cognitive faculty.I. Contexts

Any attempt to determine the nature of the psychologicalconceptions held by the ancient Germanic peoples and to formulate a structure in which these conceptions might have functioned (1) is beset with a variety of difficulties due to the disparate nature of the textural evidence and general discontinuityof the pre-Christian contexts for the lexical items involved.Since documentation of the old Germanic dialects only began after Lhc Christianization process had commenced, most ofthe texts yield either ecclesiastical contexts, or secular oneswhich must be understood within an at least partially Christianized cultural matrix . (2) Only Old Norse preserves the preChristian terminology within an indigenous ideological frame-

(1) Most of the handbooks have dealt with this problem to some extent, e.g.Grimm 1875, II, 689-99; II, 728-30, Rydberg 1886, 545-58, Meyer 1891, 61-75;1903, 68-91, de Ia Saussaye 1902, 289-303, Herrmann 1903, 35-37; 1906, 3-44, deVries 1937, II, 348-58, Helm 1913, 132-47; 1937, II, 10-21; 1953, II, 13-35, deVries 1956, I, 217-41, Turville-Petrc 1964, 221-35. A number of studies of ON soulconceptions have appeared, but most deal only with limited, usually magical, aspects,cf. Ellis (Davidson) 1943, 121-69, Falk 1926, Gronbech 1931, I, 105-227, Mundal1974, Strombiick 1935, 160-90; 1975. Polome 1969 presents a study of the moredynamistic ON conceptions (qnd 6/lr, etc.), but no comprehensive studies in a Germanic framework have appeared.(2) This article examines material from Gothic (Go.), Old High German (OHG),Old English (OE), Old Saxon (OS), Old Frisian (OFris.), and Old Norse (ON). Theprincipal sources for Go. are: Strcitberg 1919 and Felst 1923; for OHG: Sievers repr.1966, Piper 1882, Sehrt-Starck 1933-34, von Steinmeyer 1916, Zipper 1960; for OE:Krapp-Dobbie 1931-53, Holthauscn 1974, Bosworth-Toller 1898; for OS: Sievers1878, Bcrr 1971: for OFris. Richthofen 1840; and for ON: Neckel-Kuhn 1962,Finnur Jonsson 1931, G u ~ n i Jonsson 1946-49; 1950, Cleasby-Vigfusson 1957,Johannesson 1951, and de Vries 1961.(3) The main ON sources are the Codex Regius (Neckel-Kuhn 1962), the EddaSnorra Stltrlusonar (Finnur Jonsson 1931), and the saga literature, especially theJslrmdinga sl:lgur (Gullni Jomson 1946-49), and the Fornaldarsogur (Gu5ni J6nsson1950). Cleasby-Vigfusson 1957 is a convenient ON glossary, while de Vries 1961 isperhaps the best etymological dictionary for ON.


2/22

118 JOURNAL 01' INDOEUROPEAN STUDIESwork.(3)

Archeological evidence, especially with regard to grave findsand burial customs,(4) is also important for an overall understanding of this topic; as is the investigation of certain otherreligious practices and bdicl's, e.g. the pagan 'baptism' (ONve'l'pa vatn a, or vatni ausa), shape-shifting, the peculiarly (;crmanic type or 'metempsychosis,' ctc.(5} However, due to COil sidcrations of space we must here confine


3/22

-:l'OWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 119I. embodied soulII. disembodied soulIII. separable soul

5ince this article mainly concerns the psychological world ofth e living individual, considerations are usually restricted to::;ategory I, with some references to II and III.The general effect of Christianization seems to have been a

;implification of each of the concepts coupled with a tendencytoward sharper divisions between them in a primary dichotomy:body:soul) and a secondary trichotomy (body:soul:spirit):?ased upon ecclesiastical models. (7)

For purposes of this article, the term 'soul' may be under; tood to designated a substance or quality which seems to be:Iistinct from the body at a certain level.A number of items in the West Norse vocabulary must be::;onsidered separately, both because they are functionally dist inct from that which we usually refer to as 'soul,' and becauseth e other Germanic dialects do not offer a corresponding vo::::abulary for comparative purposes. The special West Norseterms seem to fall into two distinct groups: 1) the semi-physical , and 2) the 'magical' or animistic. (8)'Semi-physical' applies to those qualities which are said toh.ave divine origin in Old Norse mythological texts, and whichtend to have a visible manifestation or apparent organic funct ion. The best sources for the study of these concepts areVQluspa 17-18 (Neckel-Kuhn 1962, 4-5) and Gylfaginning ch.9 (Finnur Jonsson 1931, 16). Here we read of a triad of godsw ho endow the primal man and woman with certain essentials-ifts distinct from their physical shape. The gifts of the firsttwo gods are better discussed below, however, those of the third(L65urr in the Vqluspa) seem to have a physical and/or sensoryquality, e.g. ta: 'hair,' or perhaps 'mien,' litir g6l5ir:'good complexion' (Polome 1969, 283ff.). Other terms which appear in

(7) This analysis can only be valid for the conceptual world of extant texts -th e popular contemporary conceptions must remain obscure due to the lack of textsL1naffected by Christian ideas.(8) Here, 'magical' might indicate an entity or power by which one is able to: :ause changes to occur in the environment, to alter physical shapes, to attack another:Jo r to defend one's self by 'non-physical' means, etc. For the distinction between theterms 'animistic' and 'dynamistic,' cf. van Gennep 1960. Van Gennep essentially uses'animistic' for those things which are concept1falized as living (often conscious):Joeings, while 'dynamistic' refers to non-personal power concepts, e.g. mana.


4/22

120 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDmSthis context seem to support this idea. (9) The fact that thesegenerally physiological qualities arc so firmly coupled in thesame 'shaping' process with the more 'spiritual' qualities onlyfurther emphasizes the fundamentally inextricable nature ofthese categories in the conceptual world of the N orsc.The more animistic soul conceptions also seem to have stronglinks to the physical world. This type of soul plays an importantrole in the West Norse literature (Mundal 1974; Kelchner1935), and it has been much discussed in the scholarly literature which deals with archaic: Norse psychology. While this isundcrst.'(10) According to Skeat 1879-82, 724, English 'wrnith' wu probably borrowedfrom Scandinavian vprllr, and it first appears in (16th t:cntury) Aynhirc us 'wrath'> wraith' with metathesis, cf. also 01: weard:'guardiun.' llut Klein 1967, II, 1953sees a possible derivation from Olr. arracht:'appnrition, a p ~ t : t e r . ' Sim:e 'wmith' isonly a t t c ~ t e d from modern times, an c:tymology r ~ m a i m difficult. The English'fetch' is even more obscure. It seems to be indigenous, but the only possible attestation is the questionable faecce in the Corpus mossary, ca 800. The word does notappear (again?) untill787, and is restrkted to the North Country nnd Irelnnd, cf. OEfeccan (?).(11) Cf. for example OHG lfh-hamo :'body' (and lflllldhamo in the llildr.lmmd.r-Ued:'war-corslet'), and OE trchamo:'body.'


5/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 121paratus was never lost, for example, if the hamr of an individualwas injured, the 'normal' physical body would receive the samewound. ( 12) The hamz'ngja carries a three-pronged de finiLion:1) 'shape-changing forcc, '(l3) 2) ' luck' or 'fortune,' and 3)'guardian spirit' (Cleasby-Vigfusson 1957, 2%). All of these arcin om way or another linked with the notion of hamr (de Vries1 l5!i, I, 224:; Mnndal 1974, SG), but each indicates its dynamicand magical function. Another concept similar to the hamingjais the fv {f{ja: 'guardian spirit' (Clcasby-Vigfusson 195 7, 179).Etymologically i l is probably derived from the verb Jylgja: 'tofollow' ) 'following spirit' (de Vries 1961, 147-4:8 and 1956,I, 124-25). The 'guardian' aspect is cmphash:cd by the v9rZ>r:'guardian,' a personification of a sing!{! aspect of the ltamngja-.f'ylgja complex. ( 14) The Old English wcard is used in a similarsense, but in a Christian context. ( 15)

These terms occupy an important position within the Norsepsychophysical structure, but it is significant that none of themtncroachecl upon the semantic fields of the other soul conceptions, allhough hugr increasingly Look over seman lie quali ticscontaim:c.l in the hamz'ngja-fylgja cornplcx. ( 1G) There can bel i l l l t ~ doubt that these terms rcflccl an archaic, pre-Christianickology in the North. Any ( \ ~ r l h c r discussion would lead usastray of our central purpose, but it is nccessa1y to note the distinction between these concepts ..... magical in function, quasiphysical in origin, and capable of anthropomorphic or L:o(hnorphk ( J 7) conceptualiimtion; and the m c m ~ dynamistic 'spiritual'qtmlitks necessary Lo psychic life considered below.

Tht'rc is a widely represented group of terms which seems tohave originally i n d i c a t < . ~ c l a variety of physiological life proc c s s t ~ s . T h t ~ s c a r c ~ best left out of this psychological analysis, butthey could not be ignored in a comprt!hcnsivc examination of

(1::!) This is discussed by de Vries 1956, I, 223, and n good example of it may befuuncl in Fri/'Jj(ilf.r sa!(tl ch, 6.(lll) A gcncrnlly ccmvincing etymology is provided by Falk 1926,17l.Hamingja< f


6/22

122 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIESthe entire complex. Two examples of these would be PIE *leip-:'to stick, adhere; fat' > PGmc. *lif-:'life,' cf: ON l{f, OE lif,OHG lib; and PIE *perk-:'to enclose(?)' > PGmc *ferh-:'life,'cf. Go.fairhus: 'world,' andON.fj'or, OHG ferahNferh, OEfeorh,OS ferah, all meaning 'life.' I f we can connect PGmc. *ferh- toSkt. parfu:'rib,' and/or to Gk. n6p./C'f/\ :'a ring to hold a spearhead on the shaft' (cf. Wiedemann 1904, 17; Feist 1939, 103;Pokorny 1959, I, 820), then the idea of 'life' as a substancewhich 'holds body and soul together,' or encloses the soul inthe body might be suggested. But any etymology remainstenuous.II. Root Concepts

These Proto-Germanic roots, many of which became termsfor aspects of the psychic structure in the Germanic dialects,must be examined in order to determine something of theiroriginal semantic content so that some basic conclusion concerning the nature and structure of the archaic Germanic soulmay be reached.*ah-PIE *ok-: 'to (mentally) reflect, ponder' ( 18) > PGmc. *ah-. Gk.

~ K v o c : ' d o u b t f u l n e s s , ' b ~ < . v e w : 'to hesitate,'OIC'f/poc: :'slothful.'Within Germanic *ah- is reflected in several dialects: OEeaht:'deliberation,' eahtian:'to consider;' OHG ahta:'thought,contemplation,' ahton:'to consider; ON cetla < *ahtilOn:'tothink, mean, suppose.' These are all within the psychologicalfield, but only Gothic employs this root for a true soul conception. It is found in two distinct lexical items: aha: 'mind,understanding' (Ulf. trans. vo)c;) and ahma: spirit' (Ulf. trans.nvev /.La) which is used for the 'holy spirit' ( cf. Matt. 3:11; Mark1:12) as well as for 'evil spirits' (cf. Matt. 8:16). Aha reflectsthe simple root, while ahma (< *ah-ma) reflects a suffixed form(cf. Go. mal-ma:'sand,' milh-ma:'cloud,' ect.). It seems clearthat this root originally indicated an 'internal mental process,reflection,' which Go. expanded by means of the suffix -ma intonew sematic territoty.*an-J*and-

(18) Pokomy 1959, 774, cf. also Uhlenbeck 1902, 115, who derives PGmc. *ah> *oqU:'to see' - which is phonologically impossible since it would yield *ah- inGo.


7/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 123PIE verbal root *an(a)-:'to breathe,' Skt. aniti:'(it) breathes,'anilah:'brcath' (with no psychic qualities); Lat. animus/anima:'spirit, life, etc.,' MWel. en cit: 'soul;' and a PIE *-t suffixednominal stem *ant-:'breath' developed in ON as (!nd'Vandi.

Both roots arc represented in Germanic, and both containsome psychological sense. In the strong compound Go. verbus-anan:'to expire,' this 'spiritual' sense is perhaps only palelyreflected. It is attested twice in the third person singular preterite u::on (Mark 15:37, 39) where it refers to the expirationof Jtsus. Because of this particular context it is tempting toconclude that *an- had a more 'spiritual' original sense inGothic. The tenuous psychic quality present in us-anan is moreckvdopccl in the Old Norse, where we find rnd altemating withmuli, both apparently derived from PIE *ant-> PGmc. *and-:'(life-giving) breath.' Later Christian uses of this word introduced semantic contents of Lat. spiritus,(19) however, preChristian contexts tend to present a more dynamistic qualityfor a n d i / r ~ 1 u l , which seem Lc> indicate it was conceived of as alife-giving power.(20) The most revealing pagan context isV(Jluspa )1:3 and Gylfaginning ch. 9 where it is identified as the)l;ift of O ~ i n n (or the first son of Borr) during the process ofshaping Lhc primal man and woman, Askr and Embla. It seemsmost reasonable to conclude that, at least in NGmc., *andoriginally indicated a dynamistic life-giving and life-sustainingpower (MiV(:n by the gods?) contained in the breath, but that itdid not d c m o n s l r a t t ~ the psychoid characteristics of the LatinChristian stJi1itus. (21)

' f i i ' ) m l a ~PIE *i7tmcn-:'breath, vapor. > PGmc. *e]nna-:'brcath, spirit.'Skt. atman:'brcath, soul;' Gk.. b.rgo


8/22

124 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIESreality of the process of the radical. (22)

The two PIE roots *an( a )-/*ant- and *f.tmcn- seem sematically identical, but phonological quite ,distinct. Both developedside by side in Indic; however, only *i;tnwn- look on a psychological significance. A similar, but dialectally distributed processoccurcd in G e r m ~ m i c . There, eprna- is absent in NGmc., andEGmc., cmd within SGmc. ;m interesting sematic distribution isevident. A survey of this SGmc. material shows: OE mom:'breath, vapor;' OS a5am:'breath;' OFris. ethma:'breath,' and inOHG it is only attested in Bavarhm, Alemanic and East Franconian as iitum: 'breath, spirt't.' This is possibly a synonymiclo


9/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 125nature of the term. In OE we see the verb giiJstan: 'to frighten,'(24) and in Go. there is us-gaisjan:'to frighten;' us-gaisnan:to become frightened,' while ON has geisa:'to rage.' Perhapsmost revealing of all is the Go. past participle usgeszjJs whichtranslates Gk. b ~ e a r 7 1 in Mark :3:21. Thus it seems reasonablethat *gaist might have indeed originally indicated 'u burstingforth of emotive ( 25) cm:rgy within a person. This is emphasized by constructs which dearly place the term in the emotivepsychological field. This is also a basic idea for which a religious and cultic importance is well attested in the Germanic cultures and languages (cr. also *wolJ- and *ntoo-). In the heathenvocabulary the word was probably part of a religious 1 perhaps'shamanistic 1 ' terminology, and denoted an inner (emo Live)movement of ecstatic exciterm:nt.*hertPIE *hcJr-cl-: ' s p r i n g t ~ r , lt:aper : ceu ter; heart! (it is universallyknown in I-E, d. ~ : t . c m c r e n y i 1970a, I 10; 157-8.) > PC1mc.*M:rt(on): 'heart, middk.'This Pc;mc. root re


10/22

126 JOURNAL OJI INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIEStive (Go. hugs: 'mind' [Ulf. trans. I J O U ~ J; OIIG hugu: 'spirit,mind, sentiments;'(26) OS hugt':'spirit, mind heart;' OE hige:'mind, heart, soul;' OFris. het':'mind;' ON hugr:'mind; mood,heart; desire; foreboding; courage'). Nominal ;.mel verbal derivatives arc too copious to enumerate, but a review of these itemsseems to indicate a basic cognitive function. *Ilug- is the bestattested Germanic term for the abstract seat of various psychicfunctions. No other word is so widely distributed and so firmlyestablished in the psychological fidd, tmd it would seem plausible to suggest that *hug represents an extremely archaic concept of the soul. However, the major problem n:ma.ins the lackof any certain t y m o l o ~ r y outside Germanic. Therefore, we mustturn to a comparative study of archaic Germanic contexts inorder to come to any viable conclusions. The compounds andverbal constructs reinforc(: the results of such a study whichindicates a synthetic yet limited func Lion for * f a t ~ : in the semantic field of cognition, especially in the rdlective and volitiveareas. This term may have had a non-specific quality aroundwhich certain intellectual qualities aggregate (probably duringthe Common Germanic period). The derivation from PIE*keuk- might make the most sense here, since 'shining, brightness, etc.' is an ambiguous quality by itself, tttHl yet within Germanic we often find it used to indicate (divine) i n t c l l i g ( ~ n c c andpower, or other numinous qualities.(27)*minp-f*mund-PIE *nwn-:'Lo think, rdlc!


11/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 127fumzct!: 'remembrance,' Lith. atmintts: 'memory' reflect theif>-gradc form.

This vigorous IE root which takes in many of the senses of*!tug- in Germanic, but *m11}/*mund-remains well represented in the Germanic dialects in Lhe more restricted sense of'memory with an archaic secondary shift to 'loving memory (ofthe ancestors, gods, etc.),' d. OHG minnz'/ntz'nna:'lovc,' OS minl l f l : 'love,' OFris. 1ninne :'love,' but ON rninni: 'memory; memorial,' OE gemynd ( lion, nevertheless, these dealects provide important dues lo its underlying meaning, e.g. ON molJr:'excitcmcnL,angn' and Go. 1no])s:'anger' (UIL trans. Ov!).oc; and bvrf1).Thtsc a n ~ clearly not soul conceptions, but they remain withintlw tnwlivcfvolitivc psychological field and probably indicate

s o n H ~ t h i n g of the more primary sense of the word. In SouthGermanic this root universally bt!came a soul conception, cf.011(; muot :'soul, spirit; mind; mood, heart; excitement; desire;conragt',' OE mocl:'spirit, soul; courage; arrogance; power;violence,' OS mod:'soul; heart; will,' OFrls. m8d:'couragc;rnind; will,' These SGmut with more complex sense which includesvolition.*saiwaltJ-'l'his root. is unknown outside Germanic, nnd its usc withinGermanic is limited in such a way that any etymology remainsconjt'ctural. (28)

(28) The etymology offered by W ~ i s w c i l e r 19!39, 25ff. which connects this termw Nimc, ,..saiwltz:'the sea,' as ,..saiwa-lo:'the one fmm the sea' (i.e. the 'soul' as an


12/22

128 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIESI t is attested in all the Germanic dialects, where we find:OHG srmla seola sela, OE saw(e)l, OS scala, 0 Fris. sele, Go.saiwala (Ulf. trans. t/1 v x ~ ), and ON sal(a) - all with the unif

form meaning 'soul, life.' This term is not indigenous to NorthGermanic and was brought by missionaries at a relatively latedate and only occurs in Christian contexts (Clcasby-Vigfusson1957, 516-17). Therefore, *saiwalO seems to be common toSouth and East Germanic only. Moreover, it appears to be aterm of particularly Christian content. It is rare in Beowulf (Goccurrences as a substantive); all except one (2422) arc unquestionably within a Christian context, and all are in the mouth ofthe poet and concern life: death situations. (29) It has been speculated that *saiwalo was originally a life-term similar in function to *lif- and *ferh- (Eggers 1957, l7ff.). While this may go abit too far with too little evidence, it docs seem that it originally might have denoted some life process, but one of the secondsoul-type which could exist after physical death. Many of thepassages in Ulfilas refer to the life:clenth situation and the survival of the s a i w a l a / t / J v x ~ (e.g. Matt. 2:20, 10:28, 29; Mark 3:4,8:35-37; Luke 2:35). In OHG scula often translates Lat. anima,but only in the 'transcendental' sense. When anz'm,a simplymeans '(earthly) life,' ferah or lb arc more often found (Becker1964-, 167ff.).*saf- ~ *sefPIE *sap-: to taste; perceive'> PGmc. *sa;: (with i-umlaut) innominal and verbal constructions. Evidence for the original Germanic *sc"il is limited to the preterite forms OIIG suob andMDu. besoef 'tasted, perceived.' Possible cognates arc Lat.sapio: 'taste, discern,' Arm. ham: 'taste,' Oir. sair: 'experienced,clever.' However, the etymology remains difficult.

The root is only found as a soul conception in the OS l!eUandsetJo: 'heart; mind,' OE sefa: 'understanding, mind; soul,' and ONsefi:'mincl, affection.' Its most archaic meaning is also revealedin a number of verbs, e.g. OHG intseffcm:'to perceive, notice,'OS afsebbz'an:'perceive,' ON sefa:'to soothe (of anger, etc.).'The terms, common to the North Germanic and Ingvaconic

entity which originates in the water and returns to it a f t ~ 1 death), is not generallyconvincing, while that provided by Eggers 195 7, 21, which associates "'sm'walo wilhthe concept 'shadow' still remains conjectural.(29} Cf. also in this regard the compounds sawuldfor:'life-blood,' and .wiwoltlia.s:'lifeless.' The Christian element In Beowttlf is discussed by Klaeber 1911.


13/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 129dialects, clearly indicates a sentient aspect of the psychic complex. (;30)*sinp-PIE *sent-: 'to take direction, go;' primary nominal derivation*scn/.o-: 'the walk; way.' This developed an intellectual meaningof 'perception' in Lat. sentio sensus.

The root occurs in all Germanic dialects, but only OHG (Bavarian, Alemanic, South Rhine Franconian) sin: 'mind, undcrstancling, reason, thought, sense,' and OFris. sz'n:'mind, sense,understanding,' developed it into a psychologic PGmc. *)wnh-:'. Lat. tongere:'toknow, Osc. tangimtd:'a way of thinking.'An unsuffixed and suffixed from developed in Germanic, cf.*)Janh- > OIIG gedanh: 'thought, OE ~ a n k : 'thought, feeling, OSthan/e:'thanks, ON )'{JMt:'thanks,' Go.}Janlt (ace. sg.):'thanks,'ancl *(ga-)panh-tt'- > *(ga-)]Jiihtz'- > OS gz'thaht:'thnugbt,' OEgc:)Jeaht: 'thought;' and Go. anda]Jlihts: 'temperate, reasonable.'Allhough this root is well represented in the psychological field,with pervasive cognitive qualities, it seems to be a late development as a true psychological category under the influence ofLat. cogito and cogtatus in OI:IG, OE, and OS. As with othersor this type, *)'anh- encroached upon the semantic field of*hug-, and to some degree replaced it in certain aspects (Becker19G4, 1 6 4 ~ - 6 5 ) .*wit-PIE *uel-:'to wish, will' > PGmc. *wil(-1-)jan,...*wil-jon. Skt.varas:'choice, desire,' Lat. volo :'to be willing, wish,' voluptas:

~ ) l c a s u r c , ' Lith. viltiJ:'hope,' OCS veljr,r.:'to command,' Gk.bMoJ.taL:'io long (for something).'This word also became a 'soul conception' in post-Christiantimes, although its wide distribution and rich content indicateiL was a vigorous root in more archaic times. It is found in all

(30) The term sofa occurs 14 times in Beowulf, many times in ambiguous passageK; however, it is clearly in the reflective category, often combined with adjectivessuch as goomor (Sx), hreoh (lx), and grim (2x), or verbs such as greotan (lx), orsweorcan (lx). Only once does it have volitive force in the phrase).>in sefa hwetto(Beow. 490), cf. also Becker 1964, 161-62.


14/22

130 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIESGermanic dialects, Go. wilja, OHG willio "' wllo, OE willa,OFris. willa, OS willio, ON vil - all with the general meaning'will, desire, wish, etc.', but nuances of pleasure, activity, andthe results of activity are strongly present. This was most certainly a 'sacred' concept to the ~ n c i e n t Gernumic peoples aswitnessed by the ON divine triad Ooinn, Viii, Ve originally analliterative formula: *Wo5anaz, *Wz'ljan, *Wihaz) from at leastbefore ca 600 C.E.*wa5-PIE *uiit-:'to be of excited mental state '> PGmc. *wo()., Lat.vates:'soothsayer,' Olr. faith:'seer, prophet,' MWel. gwawd:'song, peotry.'In Germanic this root is also of sacred importance (cf. thedivine nam ON Q'{)inn, OE Wodan, OHG Wuotan, OLG WBdan, butit only occurs as a psychic term in ON obr:'(scat of[?]) inspirednuminous activity.' I t has often been misinterpreted as a termfor mind, wit, reason, understanding, etc., but at least in theoriginal sense this is hardly possible. (31) Adjectival forms inother Germanic dialects show a less religious context, Go. wo}Js:'angry, possessed' (cf. Ulf. Mark 5:15, 18), OE wocl:'mad,raging, furious' (cf. also the noun wocl:'madness'), OHG wuot(f(:'raging, mad, furious.' Originally, *wo5- seems to have belongedto the same semantic field as *gaist- and *molJ-, and denoted anemotive state of ecstatic intensity.III. Structures

An analysis of this PGmc. psychological lexicon seems toreveal a definite functional structure on the most archaic level.Terms of late formation or re-definition, i.e. *sz'njJ- and *hert-,must be eliminated from our considerations before we proceedto classify the remaining items according to their most archaicmeanings.Certain classifications emerge from the analysis of the PGmc.root forms discussed above. The principal criteria for theseclassifications must remain the apparent primary function ofthe term, while secondary dialectal functions should also be

(31) This mistake is noted by Polome 1969, 269, and that this error had oftenbeen made earlier is evidenced in Rydberg 1886, 551-52. Also cf. ON oe(Ji:'rage, fury'


15/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGYconsidered in context. A survey of this material indicates theexistence of a breath concept (*and-j*e)nna-), an emu tiveaspect (*gaist-. *woo-. *moo-) all of which indicate some typeof release of ecstatic inner power, and a manifold cognitiveaspect with what would appear to be rcleclivc (*min)J/*mund-,*ah-, *panh-), perceptive (* ef), and v o l i t i v < . ~ (*wt'l-) subsets.Moreover, this cognitive aspect is represented by a 'synthetic'conccp t, *hug- (dialectally also *moi?-), which functioned asthe seat of the various cognitive aspects from an extremely earlytime. Ils difficult etymology and apparent neutral origins seemto reinforce this conclusion, as docs the fact of its eventualreplacement in South Germanic by later analytical terms.*SaiwalD- remains a problem. As ncar as can be determined itdocs not seem to have originally belonged in the same fidel astlwsc psychological terms, but rather tn a more spcdalit.cdV()ntbulary of death, which was probably involved with taboos(Eggtrs 1957, 21; Becker 19G4, 1G9). It might he hest under-stood together with ON draugr:'a ghost, spirit (of the dead),' asan active post mortem essence or 'shade.'(32)

For t h t ~ sake of context and wholeness, the structural alignn H ~ n t p n ~ s e n t c d here indud


16/22

132

"sinb-*minp-/*mund

*bank* . i l l J . ~

*&1-*lli* ~ p m a -

*.!!!2-/*rul\1.*gaist

* m o ~ * w 1 5 ~ -

*saiwalo-

JOURNAL OF INDO"EUROPEAN STUDIES

Table I

soul conceptionattested as adj ec1;i ve anct/or substan"ti ve inpsychic :fieldattested as verb in psychic f ieldattested as verb and/or substantive in oaychic:!'leldattested outside psychic fieldunat-tested


17/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 133

Table I I

BREATil'ol I t ~ l l d .,.,111111

*ah-

*gaist-* ~ - REFLECTIVE ~

I ~m o ~ -0

tt l * ~ - c."):> csERCEPl'IVE :z""' H...

t-il0

H.... 00


18/22

134 JOURNAL CH' INDOEliROPEAN STUDIEStion within the emotive field, where *wofl- and *gaisl- arc incomplementary distribution in North and South ( ~ e r m a n i c . Dueto secondary shifts, terms such as * m o ~ - have perhaps aquireda whole set of cognitive qualities, and similarly the rt'flcctiveterm *ah- has been 'spiritualized' (cL Go. ahma). These mightrepresent underlying nuances present in the :u,haic root whicharc ret1ected in these secondary functions. Such Considerationshelp to form a conceptual model (Table II) which shows apparent interplays on the secondary level. Any final conclusions onthese matters must, by the very nature of the material, remainin the realm of shadows.IV. Summary

From the results presented h e n ~ it seems reasonahlt to conelude that there is a d e f i n i t t ~ functional structure tltHlcrlying therich Germanic vocabulary of the psydw, and that it is, in tlwstrict 'psychological' field, divided in to Lhret main t'ill l'gnrics,1) breath concept, 2) emotive force, und t:ogni t ivt Sl'at andfunctions. Two observations in this regard might l ~ t that thebreath concept is much less promin en t than might o tlwrwist'been thought,(33) and that the emotive force is in l'a('t a domi-nant factor in the constitution of tlw psychic world ol' theancient Germanic peoples.

(33) ~ v i d e n c e for the importance of the magical, 611inic,' runctiun nf tlw hrc;athconcept .s perh.aps f ~ u n d on a number (Jf brncttates (1'()1'1'1 the Germunic MigrntiunA_ge, which dep1ct a figure (the god 65inn ur Bnldr (?)with n rush uf nir iHHUing rromh1s mouth, cf. Hauck 1970, 340 et passt'm,


19/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 135REFERENCES

Bahder, Karl von1886 Die Verbalabstrakta in den germanischen Sprachen. Halle:Niemeyer.Becker, Gertraud1964 Geist und Seelc im Altsachsischen und im Althochdeutschen.ljeidelberg: Winter.Benveniste, Emile1948 Nom d'agcnt et noms d'action en indo-europeen. Paris: AdrienMaisonneuve.Berr, Samuel1971 An Etymological Glossary of the Old Saxon Heliand, (= Euro

pean University Papers. Ser. I, vol. 33) Bern, Frankfurt: Herbert Lang.Betz, Werner1959 " L e h n w ~ r t e r und Lehnpragungen im Vor- und FrUhdeutsch

en." In Deutsche Wortgcschichte, eds. F. Maurer and F. Stroh.Berlin: de Gruyter, 127-47.Bosworth, Joseph and T. N orthcotc Toller1898 An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Braune, Wilhelm1917-18 "Althochdeutsch und Angelsachsisch." Bet'l:rll.ge zur Geschichtedar deutschen Sprache und Literatur 43: 361-445.Cleasby, Richard and Gudbrand Vigfusson195 7 An Icelandic-English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.Eggers, Hans1957 "Altgermanische Seclenvorstcllungen im Lichte des Heliand."

Jahrbuch des Vereins filr niederdeutsche Sprachforschung 80:1-24.Ellis, Ililda R.1943 The Road to He!. Cambridge: University Press.Falk, Hjalmar1926 "Sjelen i Hcdentroen." Maal ogMinnc 3. 169-74.Feist, Sigmund1939 Etymologisches Worterbuch der gotischen Sprache. Leiden:Brill, 3rd ed.

Finnur J 6nsson, ed.1931 Edda Snorra Sturlusonar. Copenhagen: N ordisk Forlag.Grimm, jacob1875 Deutsche Mythologie. Berlin: F. Dummler, 4th ed., 3 vols.Gr8nbcch, Vilhelm1931 The Culture of the Teutons. London: Oxford University Press.Guoni Jonsson, ed. ,1946-49 Islendinga sogur. Reykjavik: Islendingasagnautgafan, 13 vols.1950 Fornaldar sUgur Nor5urlanda. Reykjavik: fslendingasagna

utgafan, 4 vols.


20/22

136 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIESHastings, James, ed.1920 Encyclopredia of Religion and Ethics. Edinburg: T. and T.

Clark, 13 vols.Hauck, Karl

1970 Gold aus Sievem. Miinchen: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.Haugen, Einar1950 "The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing." Language 26: 210-31.Helm, Karl1913-5 3 Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte. Heidelberg: Winter, 2vols.

Herrmann, Paul1903 Nordische Mythologie. Leipzig: W. Engelmann.1906 Deutsche Mythologie. Leipzig: W. Englemann.

Holthausen, Ferdinand1974 Altenglisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Heidelberg: Winter,3rd ed.Johannesson, Alexander, ed.1951 Islandisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Bern: Francke.Kelchner, G.D.1935 Dreams in Old Norse Literature and their Affinities in Folklore. Cambridge: University Press.Klaeber, Friedrich1911 "Die christliche Element im Beowulf." Anglia 35: 453-82.Klein, Ernst A.1967 A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the EnglishLanguage. New York: Elsevier.

Krapp, George P. and Elliott van Kirk Dobbie, eds.1931-53 The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records. New York: Columbia Uni

versity Press 6 vols.KrUger, Bruno, ed.1976 Die Germanen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

Kuhn, Adelbert1855 "Abhandlungen: Die Sprachvergleichung und die Urgeschichte

der indogermanischen Volker." Zeitschrift fiir vergleichendeSprachforschung 4: 81-124.MacDonell, A.A.189 7 Vedic Mythology (= Grundriss der indo-arischen Philologieund Altertumskunde III, l.A.). Strassburg: Triibner.Meyer, Elard Hugo1891 Germanische Mythologie, Berlin: Mayer and MUller.1903 Mythologie der Germanen. Strassburg: Triibner.Mikkola, J oos J.1897 "Baltische Etymologien." Bezzenbergers Beitrage 22: 239-55.

Mundal, Else1974 Fylgjemotive i norrn Iitteratur. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Neckel, Gustav, and Hans Kuhn eds.1962 Edda: Die Lieder des Codex Regius nebst verwandten Denkmalern. Heidelberg: Winter, 3rd ed.

Perrot, Jean1961 Les Derives Latins en -men et -mentum(= Etudes et comment-


21/22

TOWARD AN ARCHAIC GERMANIC PSYCHOLOGY 137aires 3 7). Paris: Klincksieck.Piper, Paul, ed.

1882 Otfrids Evangeleinbuch. Freiburg i. Breis.: Akademische Verlagsbuchhandlung.Pokorny, Julius1959 Indogermanisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Bern: Francke,2 vols.Polomc, Edgar C.1969 "Some Comments on V?luspa, Stanzas 17-18." In Old NorseLiterature and Mythology: A Symposium. ed. E. Polome'.Austin: University of Texas Press, 265-90.Richthofen, Karl Freiherr von1840 Altfriesisches Worterbuch. Aalen: Scientia [repr. 1961].Rydberg, Viktor

1886 Undersokningar i germanisk mythologi. Stockholm: A. Bonniers FBrlag.Saussayc, P.D. Chantepie de la1902 The Religion of the Teutons. New York: Ginn and Co.Sehrt, E.H. and Taylor Starck, eds.1933-34 Notker des deutschen Werke (= Altdeutsche Textbibliotheknos. 32-34). Halle: Niemeyer.Sievers, Eduard, ed.1878 Heliand. Halle: Niemeyer.1966 Tatian. Paderborn: Schoningh, repr. of 2nd ed.Skeat, Walter W.1879-82 An Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Oxford:Clarendon Press.Steinmeyer, Imas von, ed.1963 Die kleineren althochdeutschen Sprachdenkmiiler. Berlin:Weidmann, 2nd ed.Streitberg, Wilhelm, ed.1919 Die gotischc Bibcl. Heidelberg: Winter.Strombllck, Dag1935 Sejd. Stockholm: Hugo Gebers Forlag.1975 "The Concept of the Soul in Nordic Tradition." Arv 31: 5-22.Sz:emerenyi, Oswald

1970a EinfUhrung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.1970b "The Indo-European Name of the 'Heart.'" In Donum Balticum: To Professor Christian S. Stang. ed. V. Riike-Dravina.

Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 515-33. ' 1Turville-Petre, E.O.G.1964 Mytll and Religion of the North. New York: Holt Rhinehartand Winston.1966 "Dream Symbols in Old Icelandic Literature." In FestschriftWalter Baetke. Wiemar: Bohlaus, 343-54.Uhlenbeck, C.C.1897 "Etymologisches." Beitrage zur Geschichte der deutschenSprache und Literatur 22: 536-42.1902 "Zur gotischen Etymologie." Beitriige zur Geschichte der


22/22

138 JOURNAL OF INDO-EUROPEAN STUDIESdeutschen Sprache und Lit'eratur 27: 113-36.Vries, Jan de1935-37 Altgennanische Religionsgeschichte (= Grundriss dcr gennan-ischen Philologie 12, I-II). Berlin: de Gruytcr.

1956-57 Altgennanische Religionsgeschichte (= Grundriss dcr gcrmanischen Phi!ologie 12, I-II). Berlin: de Gruyter.Weisweiler, Josef1939 "Seele und Sec: Ein ctymologischcr Versuch." lnclogerman-ischen Forschungen 57: 25-55.Widengren, Geo1965 Die Rcligionen Irans (= Die Religionen der Menschhcit 14).Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.Wiedemann, Oskar

1904 "Etymologien." Beitrage zur Kunde dcr inclogermanisclw11Sprachen 28: 1-83.Zipper, Eva M.1960 An Etymological Glossary to the Old High German Tatian.Diss. New York University. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.

Stephen Flowers - Archaic Germanic Psychology

Documents

Transcript of Stephen Flowers - Archaic Germanic Psychology