Re: engu játum vér öðru en þessu er vér höfum áðr ætlat

A possible early example. In Völundarkviða the queen seems to
address Níðuðr first in the plural:

sníðið ér hann sina magni
ok setið ér hann síðan í sævar stöð

(unless she means "you and your men"?), but later--in more worrying
times--in the singular: "vakir þú, Níðuðr...?"

Llama Nom

--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Terje Ellefsen"
<radiorabia@...> wrote:

> I remember reading the saga of Håkon Håkonsson last year. It said

in the

> preface that it was the first royal saga where the king is

adressed in the

> plural. In Snorris sagas, the kings are singular.
>
>
>
> Terje
>
> >From: "llama_nom" <600cell@...>
> >Reply-To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
> >To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [norse_course] Re: engu játum vér öðru en þessu er vér

höfum áðr

> >ætlat
> >Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 19:11:17 -0000
> >
> >
> >
> >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

> >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

> >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

> >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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-

filter. Gratis!