Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Original
Blackwell
Oxford,
Early
EMED
©
0963-9462
XXX
2007
Philip
The Articles
Medieval
The
UKPublishing
Author.
theophoric
Shaw Europe
week Journal
inLtd Compilation
the Germanic © Blackwell Publishing Ltd
languages
The Germanic terms for the days of the week that contain the names of
Germanic deities are often taken to result from Romano-Germanic inter-
actions in the fourth century AD. Yet this need not be the case: the
linguistic arguments underpinning this view are not decisive. A reassessment
of these names suggests that an early medieval process of transfer in scholarly
Christian contexts may be equally, if not more, plausible.
This article addresses a simple question: when and how were the
planetary names of the days of the week, used in Latin, borrowed into
the Germanic languages? Although the question is a simple one, how we
answer it could have considerable implications for our view of the pre-
Christian religious life of Germanic-speaking groups. It is usually
supposed that the processes of transfer took place around the fourth
century AD, with the adoption of the names by pagan Germanic-
speaking communities. This model can be used as the backbone of an
argument for a group of more or less pan-Germanic deities, worshipped
from at least the first century AD onwards. For convenience, we will
refer to these deities as the ‘great gods’. This article will, however, cast
some doubt on claims that these deities were employed in Germanic
names of the days of the week as early as the late Roman period. This
may have implications for the case for the centrality of these deities
among most Germanic groups. The discussion below will suggest that
* This article began life as a few paragraphs in my doctoral thesis, and I have therefore accrued
many debts in its production. My supervisors, Joyce Hill, Mary Swan and Ian Wood, all
contributed to the embryonic version of this piece, and I have also benefited from a great
deal of good advice from colleagues in several disciplines at the University of Sheffield. I am
very grateful to Morn Capper and Siân Prosser for reading and commenting on versions of
this paper. I am also indebted to Alaric Hall for stimulating discussions of the problems
involved, and to James Palmer for his very considerable efforts (and great patience) in bringing
this set of essays to fruition. The errors and idiosyncracies of the finished product are, of
course, all my own work.
1
A good, recent summary of the main points outlined in this paragraph is D.H. Green, ‘Zu
den germanischen Wochentagsnamen in ihren europäischen Beziehungen’, in W. Haubrichs,
W. Kleiber and R. Voß (eds), Vox Sermo Res: Beiträge zur Sprachreflexion, Literatur- und
Sprachgeschichte vom Mittelalter bis zur Neuzeit (Stuttgart and Leipzig, 2001), pp. 223–35, at
pp. 223–7.
2
D.H. Green, Language and History in the Early Germanic World (Cambridge, 1998), pp. 243–
53. Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, pp. 224–8. K. Helm, Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte, 2 vols
(Heidelberg, 1953), II.2, pp. 231–3.
3
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, pp. 224–5.
4
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, pp. 225–7.
5
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, pp. 226 and 232.
6
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, pp. 225 and 227.
7
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, p. 227.
8
Green, Language and History, p. 249.
9
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, p. 228.
10
A. Campbell, Old English Grammar (Oxford, 1959; repr. 1997), §495 and §504.
11
Campbell, Old English Grammar, §530.
12
Green, Language and History, pp. 236–53. Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’.
13
Green, Language and History, p. 246.
In early medieval Latin texts we also find both still in use, although
some authors make a point of recommending the Christian forms.
Isidore of Seville, for instance, having explained the origins of the
planetary day-names and drawn a careful distinction between the Judaeo-
Christian numerical names and the planetary names used by pagani,
saeculares and gentiles, gives a statement – substantially dependent on
Augustine of Hippo’s Enarrationes in psalmos – of the usage Christians
should adopt: ‘but in the matter of naming the days, the ecclesiastical
habit of speaking comes better from the Christian mouth’. 18 Caesarius of
Arles also complains of the use of the planetary week, and recommends
the use of numerical names: ‘let us never say day of Mars, day of
Mercury, day of Jove, but let us name them first and second or third
day, according to what has been written’. 19 Like Isidore, Caesarius was
no doubt influenced by Augustine’s views on the matter, but we might
be unwise to suppose that either author was emptily repeating the now-
irrelevant prohibitions of earlier centuries. 20 Whether or not Isidore or
Caesarius paid much attention to quotidian speech patterns in the
populace at large, the usage in Spain and France continues up to the
present day to include direct descendants of most of the Latin planetary
day-names. It is clear, therefore, that quotidian speech in early medieval
Spain and France made use of such names.
If we turn to much later sources, moreover, we find that Latin usage
apparently remains mixed throughout much of the Middle Ages.
Johannes Beleth, writing in twelfth-century France, discusses the
planetary names as follows:
18
‘Melius autem in vocabulis dierum de ore Christiano ritus loquendi ecclesiasticus procedit’:
Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi Etymologiarum sive Originum Libri XX, ed. W.M. Lindsay, 2 vols
(Oxford, 1911), I, Book V, c. 30, section 11. My translation. For Augustine’s discussion of
the day-names, see Sancti Aurelii Augustini Ennarationes in Psalmos, ed. E. Dekkers and
I. Fraipont, 3 vols, CCSL 38–40 (Turnhout, 1956), II, 1302–3 (psalm 93, section 3).
19
‘nunquam dicamus diem Martis, diem Mercurii, diem Iovis; sed primam et secundam vel
tertiam feriam, secundum quod scriptum est, nominemus’: Sancti Caesarii Arelatensis Ser-
mones, ed. G. Morin, CCSL 104, 2nd edn (Turnhout, 1953), p. 785 (no. 193). My translation.
20
As Yitzhak Hen has pointed out, Caesarius was not greatly concerned with paganism and
superstitions, but does appear to have recognized ‘that the practices he condemned as pagan
were often detached from their pagan-religious meaning’ (‘Paganism and Superstitions in the
Time of Gregory of Tours: Une question mal posée! ’, in K. Mitchell and I. Wood (eds), The
World of Gregory of Tours (Leiden, 2002), pp. 229–40, at p. 231).
to front. For the moon is less than a planet, and Saturn is greater
than all the others. The pagan commons used to name them in this
way because they believed them to be gods, the Sun and the Moon and
Mars and the others, from whose names the philosophers labelled the
days, because these are the names of planets, from whose motions
and characteristics all things, according to them, derive their impulse.
Sacred scripture, however, has not received these names. In the
usage of the common people, nevertheless, they are maintained. 21
21
‘Apud gentiles uero, tum secundum uulgus, tum secundum philosophos, eisdem uocabulis
denominantur, sed diuersitas est in causis nominum. Prima dies dicitur dies Solis, secunda
dies Lune, tertia dies Martis, quarta dies Mercurii, quinta dies Iouis, sexta dies Veneris,
septima dies Saturni, ordine tamen retrogrado. Luna enim inferior est planeta, Saturnus
omnibus superior. Vulgus gentilium sic eos nominabat, quia credebat eos deos esse, Solem et
Lunam et Martem et alios, a quorum nominibus dies denominabant philosophi, quia hec
sunt nomina planetarum, ex quorum motibus et naturis omnia suam uegetationem secundum
illos trahunt. Hec autem nomina sacra scriptura non recipit. In usu tamen uulgari habentur.’
Iohannis Beleth Summa De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, ed. H. Douteil, CCCM 41 and 41A, 2 vols
( Turnhout, 1976), II, 8 – 9 (c. 3). My translation.
22
See A. Tobler and E. Lommatzsch, Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch, 11 vols (Wiesbaden, 1925–
2002), s.v. lundi, marsdi, mercredi, juesdi, vendredi.
23
Tobler and Lommatzsch, Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch, s.v. deluns, demars, demerques, dijuès, divenres.
24
Philippe de Thaon: Comput (MS BL Cotton Nero A.V), ed. I. Short, Anglo-Norman Text
Society, Plain Texts Series 2 (London, 1984), pp. 11–12 (lines 493 –578). Prior to this passage,
Philippe outlines the etymological derivations from the classical gods, and in this passage
proposes a set of unetymological Christian relationships, relating, for instance, marsdi to
martyrie and jusdi to the adjective joius (pp. 10 –11, lines 423–82).
25
Handley, Death, Society and Culture, p. 111 suggests that the use of numbered feria ‘may have
been adopted in western Iberia’ around the mid- to late sixth century AD.
26
For a summary of the case, see R. Wright, A Sociophilological Study of Late Latin, Utrecht
Studies in Medieval Literacy 10 (Turnhout, 2002), pp. 3 –17.
the possibility that the inscriptions reflect a pre-existing interpretatio germanica which could
have influenced Tacitus’s interpretatio romana, although he makes a convincing case for the
equations between Germanic and Roman deities as ‘a specific selection [of equations]
connected with native perception of the Roman pantheon’ (p. 100).
34
C.E. Fell, ‘Paganism in Beowulf : A Semantic Fairy-Tale’, in T. Hofstra, L.A.J.R. Houwen
and A.A. MacDonald (eds), Pagans and Christians: The Interplay between Christian Latin and
Traditional Germanic Cultures in Early Medieval Europe, Mediaevalia Groningana 16 (Groningen,
1995), pp. 9 –34, at p. 18.
35
M. Lapidge, ‘The School of Theodore and Hadrian’, in M. Lapidge, Anglo-Latin Literature,
600–899 (London, 1996), pp. 141–68, at pp. 153–5 (originally published in Anglo-Saxon England
15 (1986), pp. 45–72).
36
M.W. Herren, ‘The Transmission and Reception of Graeco-Roman Mythology in Anglo-
Saxon England, 670 –800’, Anglo-Saxon England 27 (1998), pp. 87–103, at p. 102.
37
Herren, ‘Transmission and Reception’, p. 103.
38
Jonas of Bobbio, Vita Columbani, I.27, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hanover, 1902),
pp. 64–152, at p. 102. Jonas de Bobbio, Vie de Saint Columban et de Ses Disciples, trans. A. de
Vogüé and P. Sangiani, Vie Monastique 19 (Bégrolles-en-Mauges, 1988), p. 159 (n. 9) suggests
that this equation is a later interpolation from Paul the Deacon’s Historia Langobardorum.
39
Carl Edlund Anderson suggests that the somewhat mysterious Old Norse form laugardagr
(‘bath day’) may also be the result of difficulties in finding an obvious equivalent for saturni
dies (‘Scandinavian Days: Old or New’, pp. 10 –11, published at <http://www.carlaz.com/phd/
Scandinavian_Day_Names.pdf>, accessed November 2006). G. Rausing, ‘The Days of the
Week and Dark Age Politics’, Fornvännen 90 (1995), pp. 229 –39, at pp. 233 – 4, suggests, quite
implausibly, that laugardagr derives from an alternative name of the god Loki, used as an
equivalent for Saturn. L. Hermodsson, ‘On Some Names of Days’, Fornvännen 92 (1997),
pp. 202–3, quite rightly rejects this claim on linguistic grounds. J. Ekermann, ‘Second
Thoughts on Some Names of Days’, Fornvännen 93 (1998), pp. 201–2, responds to Hermods-
son with some extraordinary claims, including the suggestion that ‘Saturday’ itself derives
from an otherwise unattested Saxon god called ‘Sater(n)e or Sæter(n)e’ (p. 201).
40
Green, Language and History, pp. 243 –5.
41
Handley, Death, Society and Culture, pp. 110 –16.
of the planetary week from Latin, and could have happened at about
the same time, although this need not have been the case.
The adoption of sambatum dies as sambaztag in Old High German
suggests a quite different line of transmission. Green relates it to modern
French samedi, noting the distinction between the Vulgar Latin form
sambatum, which produces the <m> in both samedi and Samstag, and
the literary sabbatum.42 As has been shown above, the French form
samedi must have replaced saturni dies sometime before the twelfth
century, but when exactly cannot be determined with any certainty. We
could suppose that the change in the ancestor of French precipitated a
parallel change in some neighbouring Germanic dialects, producing
Old High German sambaztag. On the other hand, as we have seen, it is
likely that both sambatum and saturni forms were in use at the same time
in the first few centuries of the early Middle Ages: perhaps Anglo-Saxon
authors chose to loan-translate the planetary variant, while in areas of
what is now southern Germany the explicitly Christian variant was
borrowed instead. This may be partly the result of the particular interest
in engaging with pagan classical literature in England in the seventh and
eighth centuries, and especially a consequence of the emphasis in England
on finding vernacular equivalents for Roman mythological figures.
A similar interpretation is possible for the distinction between north-
western Wednesday (‘Woden’s day’) and southern Mittwoch (‘mid-week’),
although in this case the southern loan-translation of the Latin media
hebdomas seems more likely to reflect ecclesiastical attempts to provide
a vernacular Christian term. This loan-translation is similar to the
more geographically and chronologically restricted forms sunâbent and
aftermontag, discussed above, which may be the result of less successful
efforts in this direction. Loan-translating media hebdomas serves to
make very clear to the populace at large that the term is neutral, and
does not refer to a pagan god. The fact that Wednesday is most heavily
targeted could reflect interactions between pagans and Christians in
the southern German area, since the Lombards and Alamanni provide
the contexts for the earliest explicit accounts of worship of Wodan. The
Lombard ethnogenesis, as it appears in the Origo Gentis Langobardorum,
Fredegar’s Chronicon, and Paul the Deacon’s Historia Langobardorum,
seems to present Wodan as a deity with a special tribal significance
for the Lombards.43 Jonas of Bobbio’s Vita Sancti Columbani describes
42
Green, ‘Wochentagsnamen’, p. 226.
43
Origo Gentis Langobardorum, ed. G. Waitz, MGH Scriptores rerum Langobardicarum et
Italicarum, Saec. VI–IX (Hanover, 1878), pp. 2– 6, at pp. 2 –3. Fredegarii Chronica, III.65, ed.
B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 18–193, at p. 110. Paul the Deacon, Historia
Langobardorum, I.8–9, ed. L. Bethmann and G. Waitz, MGH Scriptores rerum Langobardi-
carum, pp. 45–187, at pp. 52 –3.
48
Anderson’s arguments for pre-Christian adoption of the day-names in Scandinavia are open
to some criticisms. He claims, for instance, that ‘if the same kind of interpretatio Scandinavica
that could turn wodnesdæg into ó9insdagr were applied to Old English sunnandæg or OSax
sunnondag, then the expected result might have been an Old Norse **sólsdagr’, rather than
the attested sunnudagr (‘Scandinavian Days’, p. 8). While this is true, it is also clear that
contacts between speakers of Old English and Old Norse produced different kinds of trans-
lation, including the sort of phoneme-by-phoneme translation which could have produced
sunnudagr even if the Old Norse word sunna (which Anderson discusses) had not existed (see
M. Townend, Language and History in Viking Age England: Linguistic Relations between Speak-
ers of Old Norse and Old English (Turnhout, 2002), pp. 43–68, for a discussion of evidence
for this phenomenon – for which Townend uses the term ‘switching-code’ – in the Danelaw).
A similar objection can be raised to Anderson’s similar argument regarding Old Norse
mánadagr (p. 9). Nevertheless, Anderson’s emphasis on the problems and uncertainties
surrounding these names is wise. We should emphasize that the claim being made here is not
that adoption of the day-names and conversion or Christianization went hand in hand, but
that the impact of Christian culture on contacts of all sorts between pagan and Christian areas
and communities provides a plausible context for the transmission of these names.
University of Sheffield