Dear Fernando,

Interesting. Do the continental king's mirrors share this
explanation? I wonder if the reason given in Konungs skuggsiá could
be a rationalisation of a common linguistic tendency, found all over
the world. In a lot of languages the issue of the 2nd person plural
becomes fraught. It often becomes embarrassing and impolite to use
the normal direct mode of address, perhaps because it carries
unwanted associations of commands and insults: "Oi you!" (and
worse!), and different languages develop various perephrastic
strategies.

On the other hand, the present British monarchs have the formula "My
government and I". And one's pronouncements certainly seem to carry
more weight if they are presented in the plural, as if to say that
it's impossible to argue with this, because it's the universally
held opinion. Another idea someone suggested to me was that the
plural might imply "me and God", since so many documents and
pronouncements were made in Christian times "in the name of God".
Of course, these are modern *speculations*...

I just had a casual look in Beowulf, and as far as I can see Hroþgar
is always modestly singular, both in his own speeches, and when
Beowulf addresses him. The late 7th century West Saxon laws
begin "Ic Ine..." The English king Ælfred sometimes uses 3rd person
of himself, but reverts to 1st singular, rather than plural. The
Gothic Bible follows the Greek in making Herod and Pilot singular.
What was normal in Latin? Julius Caesar refers to himself in the
3rd person, but what did the Roman Emperors do?

I see in Konungs skuggsiá the king actually uses 1st sg., although
his son addresses him in the plural. Do you know of any relevant
runic inscriptions?

Llama Nom




--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Fernando Guerrero"
<cualfer@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Fernando Guerrero
> To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 8:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [norse_course] Re: engu játum vér öðru en þessu er

vér höfum áðr ætlat

>
>
> Dear Llama,
>
> Concerning the fact that kings are usually referred to in the

plural of the frirst person; there are several references to it
which you may find interesting.There is a very good explanation for
the fact in Konungsskugja (The King's Miror) an ON version of the
continental king's mirrors. Even though the source is late, it is
just as late as any of the sagas. In there it is explained that
since the king represents the sciety as a whole, therefore he must
be addressed in the plural, as he himself is not a singe person, but
an institution representing himself andall his people.

> I don'tknow if tis was also applied to the pre-Christian kings,

but, since all the saga material is Chrstian, it would be worth
doing some research in the few older sources that we have in order
to find out if this was an imporo or also a traditional way of
addressing the kings and petty kings before AD 1000.

> Very good point, and maybe worth researching.
>
>
> Fernando Guerrero
>
>
>
>
> Fernando Guerrero
> Centre for Medieval Studies
> University of York
> York
> YO1 7EP
> Northern Yorkshire
> Uk


> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: llama_nom
> > To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:33 PM
> > Subject: [norse_course] engu játum vér öðru en þessu er

vér

> höfum áðr ætlat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I wonder if anyone can tell me why Auðun "goes plural"

here?

> In Old
> > Norse, as in English, I think it's normal for a king to

talk

> of
> > himself as "we", and Auðun very wisely addresses Harald

with

> > respectful 2nd person plural pronouns (yðru, þér), but

is it

> unusual
> > for someone non-royal to call themselves "we" in front

of a

> king?
> >
> > I was just wondering if this was intended to add to the

humour

> of an
> > already quite fun scene, that poor little Auðun very
> respectfully
> > and innocently talks back to the king, as if his own

decisions

> carry
> > as much weight as whatever the great Harald might decide-

-and

> the
> > fact that the king good humouredly ignores the affront,

or is

> rather
> > amused by it himself.
> >
> > Llama Nom