Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature: The "Kinder- und Hausmärchen" by the Brothers Grimm 3662659999, 9783662659991

Citation preview

Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature The “Kinder- und Hausmärchen” by the Brothers Grimm Lothar Bluhm

Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature

Lothar Bluhm

Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature The “Kinder- und Hausmärchen” by the Brothers Grimm

Lothar Bluhm Campus Landau, Universität Koblenz Landau in der Pfalz, Germany

ISBN 978-3-662-65999-1 ISBN 978-3-662-66000-3  (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Responsible Editor: Oliver Schuetze This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Heidelberger Platz 3, 14197 Berlin, Germany

Preface

The first edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen concludes with the short story Der goldene Schlüssel, which was always supposed to be the final story in the following revised and improved editions of the collection: A poor boy finds a golden key while chopping wood in winter and, when he starts digging, soon finds an iron chest as well. The story remains quite unfinished, because when the boy finally puts the key in the lock and turns it, the story ends with the note that we have to wait “until it is fully open, then we will see what is inside.” The editors and publishers of the story collection clearly play with the expectation of a resolution and the hint of a secret that remains hidden. The Grimms have repeatedly made it clear that their own collection appeared to them as a “treasure chest,” which they understood as a “repository of a lost German myth,” which they saw as the central task of “fairy tale work.” The present study also opens the box of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. It makes the collection accessible as a literary compendium, which is the product of literature and which more or less concealed its literary heritage. From a scattered mass of fragments and mosaic stones, which were collected over the years and decades of their own “fairy tale work,” the following will outline a general picture of the Grimm fairy tale as a literature made of literature, which explicitly opposes the explanatory pattern of wanting to recognize a collection of “folk tales” in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Instead, the stories are fixed as re-, new- and continuation of older literature and are trying to be categorized. Those who are looking for “wonderful and delicious things” in the fairy tales of the Grimm collection, as the poor boy hopes to find them in the chest, can find them in the often forgotten and disregarded literary evidence, which finally became “fairy tales” as part of an often confusing transformation history. And certainly he will find them in the fairy tales themselves, which tell more than it seems at first glance. Landau in der Pfalz 28.11.2021

Lothar Bluhm

v

Contents

1 Introductory Remarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1 Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Notes on the History of Attribution of the Grimm’s “Fairy Tales”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.3 Cornerstones of a Younger Fairy Tale Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.4 To the Current Methodological Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.5 Fairy-Tale Research and Kunstmärchen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 Concept and Genre of Fairy Tales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.7 On the Problem of Delimitation from Other Simple Narrative Forms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.8 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen from a Genre-Related Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’: Forms of the History of Origin and Transformation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 3.1 Direct Text Adoptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.1.1 The Example KHM 157 Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.1.2 The Example KHM 69 Jorinde and Joringel . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 3.2 Text Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 3.2.1 Simple Editing—The Example KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 3.2.2 Purifying Reworkings—The Example KHM 12 Rapunzel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 3.2.3 Stereotypical Reworkings—The Example KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 3.3 Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

vii

viii

Contents

3.4 Complex Text Stories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 3.4.1 The Genesis of the Matter in the Horizon of a Dynamic History of Genres and Functions—The Example KHM 107 Die beiden Wanderer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 3.4.2 Composition stories—The example KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 4 Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 5 Postscript. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Collected by the Brothers Grimm. Second volume. 2nd, verm. and verb. Berlin: G. Reimer, 1819 [frontispiece by L.E. Grimm]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Fig. 3.1 First edition of Henrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Berlin, Leipzig: Decker, 1777 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Fig. 3.2 a Preusje von Schlüchtern, b Das Preusje von Schlüchtern. Hessian State Archives Marburg (fonds 340 Grimm No. B 82) . . . 110

ix

1

Introductory Remarks

As explained on the website of Unesco, the Grimm’s collection of Kinder- und Hausmärchen is probably the “most well-known and widely distributed book in the German language” next to the Luther Bible.1 Its status as a cultural document is undisputed. In educational discussions, it is often pointed out that the fairy tale collection may be the last testimony of a general literary education in Germany. The classifications of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are always manifold. Depending on the point of view, they are the point of reference for a variety of attributions as folk tales and evidence of an oral storytelling tradition, as national literature, building blocks of a history of German poetry, as children’s or entertainment literature, and much more. The history of these attributions refers directly on the editors of the collection—not authors, as is sometimes narrowly—back to the Brothers Grimm, Jacob and Wilhelm, who have started around 1807 with the collection and later processing of the stories, to publish them in 1812 in new versions and to comment. This “fairy tale work” ran throughout under the sign of the “Brothers Grimm”, but was since the second edition actually the sole field of activity of the younger Grimm brother Wilhelm: “my brother could do other more important work because of the second volume of the first edition little”, wrote Wilhelm Grimm retrospectively to the friend Karl Simrock. “The second newly worked edition in 1819 and the whole third volume 1822 fell to me alone, and so it has remained […].”2 The project should accompany him until his death in 1859. We connect the “Brothers Grimm” with the fairy tale work the reminiscence of a Grimm’s program—just that of the “brotherhood”—and an early practice of fairy tale edition, not the claim

1  https://www.unesco.de/kultur-und-natur/weltdokumentenerbe/weltdokumentenerbe-

deutschland/maerchen-brueder-grimm; accessed on 29.09.2021. 2 Ottendorff-Simrock

(1966, p. 61). Letter from February 1851.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 L. Bluhm, Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3_1

1

2

1  Introductory Remarks

of a permanent actual employment relationship. In this sense, it is also justified to continue to use the term as a working formula. The Kinder- und Hausmärchen are characterized in a special way by their own attribution history. Their peculiarities include, in all their multifaceted nature, a strong traditionality. It has its roots not least in the fact that the collectors and editors of the fairy tales were at the same time the first scientific commentators and analysts of the narrative material and that they thereby determined the foundations of the subsequent fairy tale research to a large extent. As innovative as they were, the Grimms did not act without presuppositions, but rather moved within the horizon of their time and within the framework of the prevailing discourses. The attributions that can still be observed today with changing emphasis are, in central respects, quite obviously still based on the contemporary conceptual ideas of this publication project from the early 19th century and its conditions. The Kinder- und Hausmärchen enjoy an enduring popularity as a cultural project of the early 19th century and as a research subject, as hardly any other. The story collection has already been viewed, described and analyzed from various perspectives on numerous occasions. All editions of the two-volume set published during the Grimms’ lifetime are available in digital form. There are highly valued editions, wide-ranging documentation, introductions and an almost unmanageable wealth of different studies on a variety of topics from various disciplines that have been produced over the years and decades. Folktale research has developed into a field with many facets, on which, based on sometimes highly divergent and sometimes even fundamentally conflicting premises, literary, folkloristic, mythological and religious historical, pedagogical and didactic, psychological and many other types of knowledge interests are directed towards the subject matter. However, there are rarely any contacts and hardly any cooperation between the different approaches. With their respective disciplinary premises, each approach ultimately produces its own subject matter. In this way, the fairy tales are often only what the respective observer, guided by his or her own (disciplinary) interest, tries to recognize or wants to recognize in them. This is not a problem in itself, but could even contribute to a complex overall picture of the subject matter, the parts of which would then complement and enlighten each other. Moreover, the problem is that the attention to the subject matter, in its fixation on one’s own knowledge interest, all too often loses sight of, or even completely ignores, the basic facts and structural circumstances of the subject matter, which makes mutual reference impossible. In the corresponding narrowing of vision, the basic literary-historical and, in a narrower sense, the story-historical constitutive factors of the Grimm fairy tales are too often neglected or even completely ignored as objects of attribution. If fairy tale research wants to gain a reliable terrain, it must subject its object— the fairy tales—to an appropriate perspective, which includes that it takes its factual givenness seriously and makes it the starting point of any consideration. In the following study, the Kinder- und Hausmärchen should therefore not be considered from the point of view of what the stories are supposed to be as fairy tales, but what they—viewed soberly—actually are in their facticity. The focus should not be on the collection as a coherent corpus, which is well researched in its history

1  Introductory Remarks

3

of origin and printing;3 rather, the focus should be on the plurality of the assembled stories, which actually make up the diversity of the collection. In this way, the individual stories themselves serve as a reference. They confront us as text constructs with fictional content and are thus simply stories as such, even narrower: literary evidence. They are already literature in the sense that, as individual texts and in the compilation as a collection, they represent the product of a design will and are part of a cultural program. In a narrower sense, the stories also prove to be ‘literature on the second level’, to use a model of modern narrative theory. They are ‘palimpsests’, which are  texts that look back on other texts and refer back to them directly or indirectly. This structure element, which constitutes them as literature, should be the focus of the investigation. The fairy tales compiled in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are, beyond all attribution and interpretation, the result of material history that, in the course of literary historical development, underwent diverse processes of change with many genre and function changes. In the course of this history of origin, which, with regard to the over 200 fairy tales, actually represents a broad bundle of many different histories of origin, the texts later famous as Grimm fairy tales were not, contrary to some popular opinion, characterized by an atemporal constancy. Rather, the fairy tales are the product of a transformation process and represent literature of literature, often even literature of literature of literature. The complexity of this transformation process is due in part to the fact that, at the hinge positions of the genesis, a change of media in the form of an oral (re)mediation took place in many cases, palpable above all in those texts in the collection phase through the Brothers Grimm or their contributors as a written version of oral narratives. The change of media in the material history leading up to the fairy tale is of particular interest from a media history perspective, but is probably also not to be excluded in the pre-history of an intangible written tradition. The backbone of the material history leading to the fairy tale is, however, throughout the literary tradition. If one wants to describe the Kinder- und Hausmärchen and adequately grasp their specificity, not least their specific literariness, one must take these structural givennesses as the starting point of the observation. The following study wants to take the fairy tales in these given circumstances seriously and develops them fundamentally as ‘palimpsests’, that is as literary witnesses which would not be thinkable without previous literary texts which are superimposed and only appear covered up or in a veiled form. Forms of material genesis and transformation of genre and function are to be shown using paradigmatic examples. The aim of this investigation is to make the origin of the Grimm fairy tale transparent as a transformation process to a new genre. Focusing on the process of formation of this literature form, which is still significant today, a

3 Heinz Rölleke’s 1985 introduction The Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm, which has since been published in a number of editions and editions, can still be considered as fundamental. A concise summary can be found in Chap. 1: “On the History of the Collection” (Älteste Märchensammlung/Rölleke 1975, pp. 341–347).

4

1  Introductory Remarks

practice of ‘palimpsestuous reading’ of fairy tales is to be initiated, which understands the fairy tales as part of a transformation history, which is considered relevant, if not even essential, for the understanding of each individual fairy tale—for interpretation and interpretation. Without the knowledge of the genesis and without understanding it, every view of the individual fairy tale remains empty, the access itself speculative and arbitrary, scientifically certainly insufficient. Then it is not the structural conditions of the fairy tale in the horizon of its literary history that determine its analysis, but the exchangeable premises of the respective scientific or other approach and the associated—arbitrary—attributions. Since the publication of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen as the subject of ‘fairy tales’ itself has already been overshadowed by various interpretations and preconceptions in the conceptual phase of the edition, a study of the collection and its fairy tales can hardly avoid sketching this history of attribution at least in its most important developments in order to make the own approach and the landmarks of the description of the subject matter clear. Therefore, the opening of this small study is a problem-oriented introduction to the genre of ‘fairy tales’ and the history of research. The basics and the problems of each fairy tale research are to be shown essentially. The concept of the genre of ‘fairy tales’, the history of the concept, the question of the delimitation from other narrative forms and the genrespecificity of the Grimm’s fairy tales are discussed accordingly. Since the focus of the study is on the ‘palimpsestuous’ structure of the Grimm’s fairy tales, the explanation of the basics of the own approach follows the problem-oriented introduction to the ‘genre of fairy tales’ and its research. The talk of the fairy tales as ‘palimpsests’ already points to the modern theory of narration, whose description of ‘literature on the second level’ offers the model for the investigation of selected fairy tales as literature from literature. However, the basics of this model should only be briefly outlined, only to the extent that this model is used for the investigation. It is neither about its confirmation nor its differentiation; the model serves in its now scientific-theoretical classicism merely as a heuristic tool. The approach committed to modern structuralism is supplemented in the present study by the literary-historical and comparative, in the narrower sense genre-historical deepening. The study is thus fundamentally oriented towards literary studies in this foundation. The history of the subject matter of the individual fairy tales, which is to be exemplified in the main part of the investigation, asks, to put it simply, not only for the what and the how of changes in the course of the history of the subject matter, but also for the why and focuses on the problem of which shifts in meaning have arisen in the course of the genesis or geneses. The individual ‘text stories’ on the selected fairy tales open up a spectrum of different transformations in sum, but these are only for the overall of the fairy tales collection of the Brothers Grimm of central importance. Kinder- und Hausmärchen and the origin of the stories at least cum grano salis claim validity. So the following study wants to make the structure of the Grimm’s fairy tales and in some respects the modern fairy tale transparent at all. It is understood as a corrective for an oscillating fairy tale research and as a basis for a yet to be written literary history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen.

2

The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

2.1 Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction A scientific, even a merely factual engagement with the Kinder- und Hausmärchen of the Brothers Grimm takes place in a space full of preconceptions and outdated certainties, which are not always, but often problematic and sometimes even wrong. Many of them have a long history, some date back to the early days of fairy tale research by the Brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm. They are tenacious and sometimes surprisingly resistant to revision. They are not only encountered on the wide field of popular interest in fairy tales, but are also alive in science, even in highly valued standard literature of recent and very recent times. To represent and question the misconceptions and misjudgments in their entirety must be left to a research and interpretation history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen that still has to be written. In the following, only a few key words will be taken up as a kind of introduction to this little history of the Grimm’s fairy tales as literature of literature in order to illustrate the generality of these misconceptions and misjudgments by way of example and to help justify the literary historical perspective of this study. Some of the misconceptions and misjudgments can be easily corrected by simply documenting the facts. This includes the common talk of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a successful project of its time, which, with the seven two-volume and ten one-volume fairy tale editions that came onto the market during the lifetime of the Brothers Grimm, would have helped the genre to breakthrough. However, one should not be misled by the number of editions—the success of the edition was rather modest during the lifetime of the Grimms. A more recent fairy tale research has compiled the facts in a desirable clarity and determined the edition sizes. The seven editions of the two-volume “Great Edition” brought to market by the Brothers Grimm between 1812 and 1857, which are commonly

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 L. Bluhm, Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3_2

5

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

6

regarded as the carriers of the print tradition, have consistently only been published in small edition sizes: Edition Specimens

11812/ 11815

21819

31837

41840

51843

61850

71857

1000

1500

1000

1000

6000

3000

3550

(after Winzer 2021, p. 281)

Even the ten one-volume “Small Editions” published between 1825 and 1858, which brought a selection for a children’s audience and were decorated with copperplates, did not exceed these low circulation figures. The competing fairy tale businesses at this time were often much more successful. Ludwig Bechstein’s Deutsches Märchenbuch alone had sales of around 70,000 copies (according to Winzer 2021, p. 283) between 1845 and 1853, i.e. in this short period of time it sold about four times as many books as the Brothers Grimm with their collection in 45 years. Compared to other, often more presentable and better equipped fairy tale books, the Kinder- und Hausmärchen were extremely expensive. For example, the Lina’s Mährchenbuch by the educator and publicist Albert Ludwig Grimm, who was not related to the Brothers Grimm but in competition with them, was published in two volumes in 1816 on vellum paper and with 8 copperplates in the text 2 talers, without copperplates 1 taler, 8 groschen. For the second edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen published three years later, [the publisher of the Dieterichsche Buchhandlung] Reimer demanded 4 talers with four copperplates. In 1820 the first two volumes of A.L. Grimm’s Mährchen-Bibliothek für Kinder with retellings from Tausendundeiner Nacht in the version on better paper with one copperplate each were published at a price of 3 talers together, in the pictureless version on simple paper at 2 talers. (Winzer 2021, p. 287)

Of course, the poorer equipment and the much higher selling price meant a clear competitive disadvantage for the Grimm publication compared to the fairy tale book of the name relative who had long been established as a children’s book author. The price level of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen edition used for comparison becomes even more tangible when measured against the purchasing power equivalence. Based on this, the 4 talers of 1819 would correspond to a price of more than 140,- euros in today’s purchasing power. Just this price level, which is without doubt far too high, makes it clear why the two volumes of 1819, like the other (mostly also overpriced) KHM editions, could never develop into bestsellers during the Grimms’ lifetime.1 In addition, the Grimm fairy tale editions were published by publishers with a scientific profile, were meager in their equipment, were comparatively less present in public perception and were reviewed more critically, which may

1  A

conversion table is offered by the Scientific Service of the German Bundestag, Kaufkraftvergleich historischer Geldbeträge—2016: WD4-3000-096/16.

2.1  Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction

7

have contributed to the fact that the contemporary success of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen must be seen as relatively low. The first edition of the two-volume “Great Edition” of 1812/15 was published by the Realschulbuchhandlung in Berlin, where, for example, around the same time, Amalie von Helwigs’ and Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué’s Taschenbuch der Sagen und Legenden and, a little later, the Kinder-Mährchen by C.W. Contessa, Fouqué and E.T.A. Hoffmann as well as Ernst Moritz Arndt’s Mährchen und Jugenderinnerungen were published,2 but above all a schoolbook and science program was implemented. So in 1815 the Grimms also published the Lieder der alten Edda and Hartmanns von Aue Der arme Heinrich here. The second edition of 1819, the commentary volume of 1822 and the one-volume ‘Kleinen Ausgaben’ of 1825 and 1833 were published by G. Reimer in Berlin, who took over the Realschulbuchhandlung and expanded the schoolbook program with a wide range of humanities, then also natural sciences and mathematics, which secured the publisher a high scientific reputation. The following editions of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen up to the 7th edition of 1857 and the commentary volume of 1856 were published by Dieterichsche Buchhandlung in Göttingen. In this specialist publisher, Jacob Grimm’s treatise Ueber den altdeutschen Meistergesang had already been published in 1811 and later his Deutsche Grammatik, the Deutsche Mythologie,Deutsche Rechtsalterthümer and other scientific publications as well as Wilhelm Grimm’s 1821 Ueber deutsche Runen, his Grave Ruodolf—and the Freidank -editions, Die deutsche Heldensage and a multitude of mostly editorial publications on Middle High German literature were published. The ‘Kleinen Ausgaben’ up to 1858 were published by Carl Friedrich Wilhelm Duncker in Berlin, whose programmatic focus was also on the sciences, above all philosophy (as in the first Hegel Gesamtausgabe)3,4 and the history of science (for example, Rankes Werke).5 The publisher, price, book design and print run suggest that the Grimm brothers’ fairy tale editions were seen less in the spectrum of entertainment and children’s literature of their time than in the horizon of scientific specialist literature and are therefore to be classified accordingly. This is in line with Jacob Grimm’s remark: “The fairy tale book is not written for children at all, but they are quite right, and that pleases me very much […].” (Steig 1904, p. 271) The tireless

2 Taschenbuch der Sagen und Legenden. Ed. by Amalie v. Helwig und Fr. Baron de la Motte Fouqué. 2 volumes, Berlin 1812 and 1817; Kinder-Mährchen. Von C.W. Contessa, Friedrich Baron de la Motte Fouqué und E.T.A. Hoffmann. Berlin 1816; Ernst Moritz Arndt: Mährchen und Jugenderinnerungen. Erster Theil. Berlin 1818. Sales of Arndt’s collection were so slow that the publisher rejected a second volume projected in 1820. The second volume did not appear until 1843, when it was published by Reimer Verlag. 3 Johann

Wolfgang Goethe: Des Epimenides Erwachen. Ein Festspiel. Berlin 1815.

4  Georg

Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe durch einen Verein von Freunden des Verewigten. Berlin 1832–1845. 5 So Leopold Rankes three volumes Die römischen Päpste in den letzten vier Jahrhunderten (1834–1836) and the six volumes Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation (1839–1847).

8

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

efforts to produce new editions, which led to the relay of the seven “Great” and ten “Small Editions”, testify more to the efforts of the editors—and that means in the narrower sense of Wilhelm Grimm—to suggest success on the book market through the new editions than to an actual success story. In fact, the “success story” of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen is a much later phenomenon, which is closely linked to the imperial nationalism of the late 19th century and stands in the horizon of a corresponding interpretation history of the fairy tales, which were highly valued as “German narrative heritage”. The national-cultural tradition claimed by the Grimms was thus raised to a certainty that was not least of all politically founded.6 It is also not surprising that the classification of the Grimm’s fairy tales as specifically “German narrative” is one of the enduring misconceptions and wrong judgments, although as early as the first half of the 20th century, studies by Albert Wesselski completely different findings were brought forward, and also in modern fairy tale research—for example in the studies of Manfred Grätz, the investigations of Heinz Rölleke on the contribution or the commentaries of Hans-Jörg Uther—clear oppositions were formulated. The fundamental proof that the stories are actually to be situated in a European context of material and in a narrower sense often look back on a French provenance, has long been established. The claim of the Grimm’s fairy tales as specifically “German narrative” corresponds to the myth of a contribution, which would have consisted mainly of old women from the rural world and the lower classes and told the Brothers Grimm their fairy tales. With the discovery that the so-called “Old Marie”, a contributor who was often used as an ideal type of such mediation, was actually not an elderly housekeeper, but a “young Marie” from the upper Kassel bourgeoisie, Heinz Rölleke was able to correct this sociocultural misattribution.7 A central component in the structure of misconceptions and misinterpretations is the legend of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen as ‘folk tales’, which has been kept alive despite some counter-arguments in recent standard literature on Grimm research. The Grimms had already placed this idea in the public arena in the paratexts of their first edition; for example, in the “Preface” to the second volume they explicitly spoke of “folk tales” (KHM 1815 II, p. VII). This assessment can be found explicitly or implicitly in the work of scholars such as Lüthi (2004), Rölleke (1985a, 2000b) or Pöge-Alder (2007), but even Neuhaus (2017) remains committed to this model. It is not surprising that this problematic assignment is then also used in the further recent and latest research on fairy tale reception—for example

6 The

corresponding paradigm shift is probably nowhere better tangible than in a call by the young Kaiser Wilhelm II. at the Berlin School Conference in 1890. The programme of a national politicisation of the (higher) school advocated by him leads to the order to make the German the central point of reference and “to educate national young Germans and not young Greeks and Romans”. (Cf. Verhandlungen über Fragen des höheren Unterrichts 1891, p. 71–72).

7  Of

undeniably fundamental importance for the recent research history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen is Rölleke 1975. For an attempt at a new “remythification” see Bluhm 1989b.

2.1  Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction

9

in the collection of essays on the history and present of the fairy tale film edited by Dettmar, Pecher and Schlesinger (2017). The term is only rarely seriously problematic, as Dingelmaier (2019, p. 86) tries to do, who rightly demands that “the still widely used term ‘Volksmärchen’ and, related to this, the distinction in fairy tales research between ‘folk tales’ and ‘literary tales’ should be reconsidered”. Dingelmaier then specifies the fairy tale as a ‘narrative of nation building’. The use of the term ‘Volksmärchen’ for the Grimm’s fairy tales already reflects a revaluation on the basis of an invalid assumption: Around and before 1800, the term was firmly classified as a general term for romantically told— ‘romantic’—entertainment literature, which appeared in an antiquated outfit and presented itself as a continuation of folk tales, including the anonymity of the author. The term became its own ‘brand’ through the titles of successful collections such as the five volumes of Volksmährchen der Deutschen (1782–1786) by Johann Karl August Musäus, Benedikte Nauberts’ subsequent four volumes of Neue Volksmährchen der Deutschen (1789–1792), or Ludwig Tieck’s three volumes of Volksmärchen (1797), which contained literary versions of stories such as the ‘boots cat’ or ‘knight Blaubart’ as well as the novella Der blonde Eckbert. The program to assert an oral tradition was probably nowhere as explicit as in the Volksmährchen der Deutschen by J.K.A. Musäus. In the “foreword” it says: Uebrigens ist keins dieser Mährchen von eigner oder ausländischer Erfindung, sondern, soviel ich weis, sind sie ingesammt einheimische Produkte, die sich seit mancher Generation, bereits von Urvätern auf Enkel und Nachkommen durch mündliche Tradition fortgepflanzet haben. (Musäus 1782 I, S. [XXVII])

Clausen-Stolzenburg speaks with all decisiveness of a “Schwindeletikett” (Clausen-Stolzenburg 1995, p. 404). That the narratives are actually literarizations, in the words of Musäus the “processing” of “raw masses”, is conceded a little later by the author himself: “However, the author has allowed himself to localize the vagueness of these narratives and to set them in times and places that seemed appropriate to their content.” (Musäus 1782 I, p. [XXVIII]) The insinuation associated with the genre term “Volksmä(h)rchen” that orally transmitted folk tales have been (re-)written is reversed in later—and still today’s—use into a fact. The staging of high-quality oral storytelling and the fiction of an appropriate tradition that was associated with the literary “fairy tales” collections of the late 18th century undoubtedly also meant a new openness to the phenomenon of actual popular storytelling and thus a certain departure from the enlightened verdict of the contemptible “fairy tale”. So August von Kotzebue, a nephew of Musäus and in later years one of the most popular theatre authors in Germany, traced his uncle’s narrative talent back to his efforts to connect with the popular storytelling of his time: Wenigen aber ist vielleicht bekannt, daß, als er den Gedanken faßte Volksmährchen der Deutschen zu schreiben, er wirklich eine Menge alter Weiber mit ihren Spinnrädern um sich her versammelte, sich in ihre Mitte setzte, und von ihnen in ekelhafter Geschwätzigkeit vorplaudern ließ, was er hernach so reizend nachplauderte. Auch

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

10

Kinder rief er oft von der Straße hinauf, wurde mit ihnen zum Kinde, ließ sich Mährchen erzählen, und bezahlte jedes Mährchen mit einem Dreyer.—Eines Abends kam seine Frau von einem Besuche zurück. Als sie die Thür des Zimmer öffnete, dampfte ihr eine Wolke von schlechtem Tabak entgegen, und sie erblickte durch diesen Nebel ihren Mann am Ofen sitzend, neben einem alten Soldaten, der sein kurzes Pfeifgen zwischen den Zähnen hielt, tapfer drauf los schmauchte, und ihm Märchen erzählte.(Kotzebue 1791, S. 14–15)8

The always topical description of a popular narrative setting—“old women with their spinning wheels”; stories of an “old soldier” “by the stove” or by “children”—already betrays how much Kotzebue moved in the horizon of an idealizing representation with this memory. Kotzebue’s reservations against such popular storytelling are already tangible in the late Enlightenment thinker’s choice of words (‚alte Weiber‘, ‚ekelhafte Geschwätzigkeit‘, ‚Wolke von schlechtem Tabak‘). What Kotzebue introduced as a humorous anecdote appears in the form of scientific documentation with the Brothers Grimm. Since the question of an oral narrative tradition is regularly taken up anew in the most recent publications of fairy tale research and therefore necessarily also negotiated in this study in various ways, at this point let us at least briefly discuss a central argument for the actual implementation of such a tradition. The claim of a popular oral narrative culture and a corresponding narrative tradition is often based on confessions and memories from the time around 1800, comparable to Kotzebue’s. Especially in the late 18th century, such statements occur more frequently. For example, the “patriotic antiquarian” Friedrich David Gräter, a Nordicist and main editor of the “literary magazine” Bragur, referred on one occasion to “Ammenmährchen” and “orally transmitted Volksmährchen” (Gräter 1794, p. 239) and emphasized that “listening” to popular “songs and fairy tales” had “pleased him on many occasions”: Zuweilen fiel es mir ein, solche Verse und Mährchen aufzuschreiben, und so bin ich unvermerkt zu einer ganzen Sammlung gekommen. Wie viele würde ich hier mitzutheilen haben, wenn ich mich und die Leser von Geschmack nicht schonen müßte […]. (Gräter 1794, p. 240)

Despite his concern about the “spirit of the times”, Gräter finally offers an “example”: In dem Ammenmährchen von den drey Königstöchtern und dem in einen Frosch verzauberten Prinzen ist die ganze Erzählung in Prosa, die Gespräche mit dem Frosche und seine Forderung aber in Versen. So spricht er z. B. da er vor die verschlossene Thüre der jüngsten Prinzessin kömmt: Königstochter jüngste Mach mir auf! Weißt du nicht, was gestern

8 Kotzebue

was—like Vulpius—a pupil of Musäus at the Wilhelminum-Ernestinum Gymnasium in Weimar. Johann Gottfried Herder was director of this educational institution from 1776 to 1791.

2.1  Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction

11

Du zu mir besagt, Bey dem kühlen Brunnenwasser? Königstochter jüngste, Mach mir auf! Diese simplen Verse, die ich mich noch aus meiner Kindheit auch singen gehört zu haben erinnere, haben doch viel Lebhaftigkeit und Drang, und kommen dem Ton und Sylbenmaaße nach einigen Nordischen Stücken sehr nahe. (Gräter 1794, p. 241–242)

The variant sketched by Gräter to the fairy tale introduction preceding the Grimm’s collection Der Froschkönig oder der eiserne Heinrich probably corresponds to the “other [narrative]” (KHM 1856, p. [III]), which the Grimms summarized in the commentary section as another version. Because the story seemed to be documented as early as the 16th century by Georg Rollenhagen and subsequently by Johann Michael Moscherosch, the Grimms rated it as one of the “oldest in Germany” (KHM 1856, p. 5), which probably justified its special position as an introductory story. Similar to Gräter, Johann F.A. Kinderling also remembered oral tradition in one of the following volumes of the magazine: “in den Spinnstuben verkürzt man sich oft die Zeit durch Mährchen und Gesang” (Kinderling 1797, p. 35), and picks up a popular topos that spoke of a fairy tale tradition as a narrative from ‘spinning rooms’ or other domestic work or social spaces. By the way, Gräter’s hint at his collections also moved the Romantics—Achim von Arnim, the Grimms and others—to get in touch with him, whereby the exchange with the Brothers Grimm developed very unpleasant for both sides—but especially for Gräter.9 Gräter, Kinderling and many others, not least the Brothers Grimm themselves, therefore emphasize the existence of a known oral tradition. With a view to the later and still virulent discussion, the existence of an oral tradition is actually uncontentious in principle. However, its extent, in particular the durability of the evidence as a culture-generating and supporting force, and also its originas a supposedly old oral tradition based on anonymous creation or as a reproduction of heard (re-)oralized cultural artefacts, are disputed.10 The actual genre character of these often referred to as ‘fairy tales’ or ‘folk tales’ oral tradition is disputed. One must actually imagine them as genre-neutral, that is, that such stories were not fairy tales in the modern or Grimm sense. Reflections of such actual popular

9 Cf.

Bluhm 1997, p. 251–275, especially p. 272.—The Grimms tried in 1812/3 without success to get a variant of their ‘Hansel and Gretel’ fairy tale from Gräter, which Achim von Arnim had read in his collections. 10 See also Clausen-Stolzenburg in retrospect on her analysis of Grimm’s conception of fairy tales in terms of oral tradition, age and origin of the stories: “It is not the functioning of oral tradition in general that should be doubted […] But it should have become clear that in none of the cases mentioned […] an existing written culture would have remained without influence on oral tradition.” (Clausen-Stolzenburg 1995, p. 92).

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

12

oral stories can be found above all in non-literary writings.11 However, they hardly prove to be ‘fairy tales’ in the horizon of the wonderful, but rather mystification stories shaped by popular belief, not infrequently with mythical echoes. In the light of modern cultural anthropological studies, one can also generally remark on the question of oral narrative traditions that the functional memory of an era is based on the personal memories of a generation hardly more than a period of 80–90 years before the events remembered fall into oblivion. 12 A model like that of an ‘oral memory’13 probably goes past reality. Survival is only possible if memories are taken over into the archive memory of time in a fixed form, that is, if they are documented and stored in a memory-preserving way. This means that oral narratives are actually only relatively short-lived before they either disappear or are fixed in writing. In the case of a written fixation, we then have the beginning of a literary tradition that follows entirely different conditions than an oral one. Oral narrative traditions and the idea of ‘people’, as they are still often associated with the term fairy tale today, are, as Neuhaus rightly summarises, actually constructions that date back to the early 19th century. They should serve to “prepare for a national unification of the German-speaking countries through the ‘discovery’ of common cultural roots.” (Neuhaus 2005, S. 19, 2017, S. 27) However, here too there are differences between disciplines. From the perspective of folktale research, the “discourse on intangible heritage” is inextricably linked to the “discussion of the characteristic ‘orality’” (Pöge-Alder 2014, S. 115), as Kathrin Pöge-Alder has developed on occasion. This also applies from this perspective and perhaps even more so with a view to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen by the Brothers Grimm. After the question of the origin and development of fairy tales was determined for a long time by a primacy of oral tradition in KHM research, since the 1980s there has been an increasingly observed revaluation, which is based on a primacy of the written and, at its core, a literal tradition. Currently, however, a certain reversal can be observed again. This is most apparent in the context of the research on those guarantors through which the Brothers Grimm received a considerable part of their fairy tales, the so-called “contributors”—for example, the already emphasized by the Brothers Grimm Dorothea Viehmann, Marie Hassenpflug or the now identified as Elisabeth Schellenberg so-called “Marburg Fairy Tale Woman”. In the horizon of a detailed—and highly appreciated—biographical historical illumination of this immediate contribution, the concrete observation of a personal mediation of stories is raised in a certain

11 As

an example, the notes of the executioner Franz Schmidt could be mentioned, who between 1573 and 1615 kept a book about the numerous executions and corporal punishments he carried out in Bamberg and Nuremberg, and occasionally noted down particularly interesting lies and deception stories told by the malefactors; see Das Tagebuch des Meister Franz (1980, pp. 71 and 143; Nos. 182 [1598] and 119 [1587]). The sketched stories can be easily traced back to contemporary entertainment literature.

12 For 13 So

example, Assmann 1992, especially pp. 50–52.

Murayama 2005, insb. S. 342–349.

2.1  Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction

13

reduction to evidence for an underlying oral tradition.14 In the context of this argumentation pattern, the literary traditions in which the Grimm’s fairy tales stand are relativized or completely ignored. In individual cases, an explicit opposition even takes place.15 A fundamental difference in interpretation in the current Grimm and KHM research with regard to the question of the origin and development of the Grimm’s fairy tales is obvious. In the section “Certificates” of their KHM commentary, the Brothers themselves had already gathered together evidence from and about literature that was supposed to document a popular narrative tradition. Testimonies were collected from antiquity up to the immediate present of the commentators, who reported the existence of oral narratives, especially for children, and their own memories of them. In the course of time, 37 of these testimonies, especially numbers 17 and 19, became important as certificates of authenticity and description patterns: 17. Kirchhof (Wendunmut Frankf. 1581 S. 178) Davon merk diese Fabel (von den drei Wünschen Nr. 87), welche ich in meinen kindischen Jahren spinnende Meidlein Abends hab sagen hören. […] 19. Rollenhagen in der Vorrede zum Froschmeuseler. Was auch der alten Deutschen heidnische Lehr gewesen, vernimmt man am besten aus den wunderbarlichen Hausmärlein von dem verachten frommen Aschenpössel und seinen stolzen spöttischen Brüdern, vom albern und faulen Heinzen, vom eisern Heinrich, von der alten Neidhartin und dergleichen. Welche ohne Schrift immer mündlich auf die Nachkommen geerbet werden und gemeinlich dahin sehen daß sie Gottesfurcht, Fleiß in Sachen, Demut und gute Hoffnung lehren, denn die allerverachtetste Person wird gemeinlich die allerbeste. […] (KHM 1856, S. 276–277)

The function of such hints and their literary character as topoi were evidently not recognized or at least not taken seriously by the Grimms. However, the 16th-century authors used the quotations from Karl Wilhelm Kirchhof’s collection of farces Wendunmuth and from Georg Rollenhagen’s fable collection Froschmeuseler primarily to highlight the style of narration and the entertaining content of their literary works, which in turn they drew from the literary tradition. Kirchhof’s Wendunmuth is mainly based on the genre of facetiae, in particular Heinrich Bebel, as well as contemporary collections of farces and Rollenhagen’s Froschmeuseler on the late Hellenistic pseudohomeric fable, the Batrachomyomachia. The talk of an oral tradition is a moment of staging in both

14 In

a recent study, for example, Heinz Rölleke emphasizes the status of a “genuine oral tradition” for KHM 44 Death (Rölleke 2013, p. 395), just as Holger Ehrhardt, with a view to KHM 36, understands the fairy tale contributor Eleonore Storch as a “guarantor” who “stands in the oral tradition of a very well-known fairy tale at the forefront.” (Ehrhardt 2017a, p. 227).—See also Ehrhardt (2017b, pp. 149–152, especially p. 152), where the contributions of the fairy tale editor Philipp Hoffmeister are traced back to “the early collecting ethos of the Brothers Grimm, according to which the fairy tales were ‘collected orally’”. 15 So

Ehrhardt 2016, p. 60.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

14

early modern authors—above all—which was then misinterpreted as reality particles and is still being misinterpreted today. When quoting from Kirchhof’s Wendunmuth the character of (entertainment) literature is actually already tangible when one takes into account the subtitle of the volume, where a compilation of “polite / decent / and amusing stories / insults / and similes” is announced, which are “taken from old and contemporary writers”. By the way, the quote by Grimm himself comes from the story Von einem geitzigen Weib ein Fabel, which unmistakably looks back on a origin as a sermon example.16 Grimm’s authentication strategy in the “Certificates” department is based on a pattern. For example, the Grimms, to give and deepen another example, quote from the memoir of the early modern preacher Anton Menon Schupp, from whose collection Fabul-Hanß they took the story Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder almost verbatim—with Schupp a sermon example and in a narrower sense an ‘Easter story’. With their quote they refer to his efforts to give the sermon example a ‘place in life’: “As was the custom in former times on Easter Eve, a sermon was preached from the pulpit. These were foolish fables and fairy tales, such as were told to children in the rocking chairs. This was to make people happy.” (KHM 1856, p. 277) However, in their evaluation of Schupp’s ‘confession’ to have resorted to fairy-tale stories for children in ‘rocking chairs’, the Grimms miss the necessary source criticism. Of course there was certainly a telling and retelling ‘in the rocking chairs’, but the stories that then entered the sermons and from there were taken over by the Grimms as ‘fairy tales’—such as Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder—are actually literary traditions from medieval and early modern fabulist literature. Schupp’s and Kotzebue’s memories are not reports, but literary homages in one case as in the other. It is also undisputed that Musäus actually used narrative pieces for his Volksmährchen, which he took from oral communication. If one wants to emphasize actual oral tradition—which is necessary in a number of cases—one must, in order to be able to classify it appropriately, focus on the contribution—similar to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen—and ask about its siting in the given literary culture. The contributers to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, who are  often also identified storytellers from the contemporaries of the Grimms, from whom the collectors of fairy tales have received a part of their story corpus, have always had a prominent position in the history of fairy tale evaluation and are gladly used as evidence for the character of the Grimm’s stories as orally transmitted ‘folk tales’ even in the most recent scholarly literature. In particular, the idea of “mutual influence” of oral and written tradition on the narrative form of Kinder- und Hausmärchen has established itself as a modern variant, with “orality and literariness conditioning each other” (Pöge-Alder 2007, p. 64). She continues older assessments of an oral substratum character as it would be tangible in medieval literature. The description is based on the idea of a “dialectic between oral and written tradition” and

16 See

Kirchhof 1563, p. 194–195; Quote: p. 194.

2.1  Misconceptions and Misjudgments—An Introduction

15

the thesis that the medieval “culture of writing of the folkloristically oral substrate requires its self-understanding” (Wolfzettel 2005, p. 30). However, it should be noted here that “in the Middle Ages, the fairy tale not only existed as a word and concept, but also as a genre did not exist” (Wolfzettel 2005, p. 16). The point of reference is rather a cultural constitution in which the mythical and wonderful as a form of reality had a completely different status than in modern times, so that one must speak of two epistemologically different cultural epochs.17 The characterization of the epistemically differently structured culturality and, in a narrower sense, literality in the medieval world as fairy-tale is a retrospective of modernity. Also the more recent determination of “writtenness“ as “materialization of ‘oral’ texts in letters (for reading) and as (also moving) image for viewing”18 is not really convincing, especially since it reintroduces the older idea of a “substrate character” of the oral. The talk of an oral tradition in fairy tales is highly problematic in view of modernity and the time around 1800, actually false at its core, and in need of clarification: Basically, the concept and the idea of an oral tradition must be distinguished from the concept of authorship and the process of oral transmission and further transmission of narrative content by authors. Tradition is a much wider process than transmission. While authorship and the transmission of narrative content are initially only an remembrance culture phenomenon, tradition refers to a memory culture process, with the story serving as an immaterial document in both cases. The concept and the idea of a narrative tradition emphasize the continuous further transmission of narrative content within a fixable narrative community, which is characterized by constancy and definitely extends over several generations. The talk of an oral tradition of narrative content—also beyond fairy tales—is often characterized in research by a certain short circuit, insofar as the effect of literary traditions is too easily equated with oral survival. The process of an oral narrative tradition is actually not given in view of the transmission history of the Grimm fairy tales, at least not tangible at any point. Nor is the assumption that in temporal gaps in the documentation of the history of origin or tradition of such oral narrative tradition the narrative content has been kept alive by oral tradition, verifiable and ultimately wishful thinking. The history of the origin and the formation of ‘fairy tales’ knows in the mediation of narratives only the remembrance cultural process by which an oral narrative is passed

17 In

this context, the “thesis” can also be seen that “it is only the separation of written and popular culture, which is associated with the enforcement of humanistic epistemes and becomes apparent in the 16th century, which created the prerequisite not for the emergence, but for the prominence of the genre ‘folktale’ in Europe, since only now the paradoxical concept of a ‘littérature populaire’ was filled with content.” (Wolfzettel 2005, p. 18) 18  Diana

Kühndel and Ursula Offermann: Hörendes Lesen und Sehen von Märchen. Zur Einführung. In: Kühndel / Offermann (eds.) 2017, pp. 7–14, here p. 8. The problem with the “expansion” of the term introduced here is that the process of re- or retelling of what has been read in recent fairy tale reception is not distinguished from the process of literary historical fixation of the “fairy tale production”.

16

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

on to a recorder. If a modern Grimm and fairy tale research in their studies on the “contributors” asks after the people who have passed on oral stories to the Brothers Grimm or from whom stories were orally given to informants, it is aimed at this process of a cultural memory transmission and documentation. A tradition is neither tangible nor provable in this way. The assertion of an “oral tradition” as a cornerstone of cultural development in the early or middle of the 19th century ignores the process of the general “literarization of life” and the “literarization of the vernaculars” (Giesecke 1980, p. 39–40),19 which began in the Middle Ages and had accelerated enormously since the 15th century. It led to a “explosion” of writing and to a scripturally shaped culture in general. By the early modern period at the latest, one had to deal with a continuous literarization of cultural practice in Central Europe. Through the often so-called “media revolution” of the 18th century, the expansion of the print market and the career of a magazine and newspaper business, combined with an alphabetization boom and an enormous increase in reading ability, the knowledge and knowledge transfer culture had also fundamentally changed again in the early modern period. The literarization of the modern world included the development of a literary market with a book offer that went hand in hand with a career in entertainment literary genres in the 18th century, which provided a broad reservoir of fairy-tale material that was received and consumed. For good reason, the “Enlightenment Century” has been referred to as an “outstanding fairy-tale century” (Hühn and Matuschek 2014, p. 2). The claim of an oral tradition in the 18th and early 19th centuries thus does not reflect actual cultural practice, but is a romantic concept and, with regard to fairy tales, a programmatic premise that is ultimately a construction—not least because it is based on the Grimms. If one were to put it bluntly, the claim of an oral tradition is an ideologically charged relic that should be seen for its normativity and assessed as factually false. As an ideologue, the claim belongs to the essentialist and primordialist ideology construct of a “folk community” that seeks to legitimize its group identity as an ethnicity through shared social and cultural memories, the “irrational, subjective belief […] in a shared origin, shared history, shared customs” (Rompel 2008, p. 657) and to distinguish itself from other communities. In research history, however, the idea of an oral tradition of fairy tales has remained a beloved convention—but it is just not that anymore. The contemporary contributors of oral narratives and narrative variants to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are an oral hinge in an overall literal tradition. Accordingly, the theory of the “sunken cultural asset” put forward by Hans Naumann against Jacob Grimm’s conviction of an oral narrative culture emerging from and in the “folk” in the early 1920s also points in the wrong direction. The concept of the “narrative context” is more meaningful, as Maren Clausen-Stolzenburg has based her study

19 Giesecke

point.

can already refer to a number of studies by J. Erben, W. Besch or Hugo Kuhn at this

2.2  Notes on the History of Attribution …

17

on the continuation of historically significant works and successful texts and their importance for the creation of the Grimm fairy tales.20 The focus on the orally contributing mediator, as it can be found in parts of Grimm and fairy tale research, runs the risk of overrating a temporary change of media and elevating this moment of mediation to a fundamental feature of the text and story history. Nevertheless, the investigations into the mediatorship, which have been intensified in recent decades, are of importance for the specification of the history of the formation of fairy tales. However, the identification and socialhistorical embedding of contributors in the cultural space of their time does not give us a view of the continuation of an oral narrative tradition, but rather a view of the process of oral adaptation of a literal tradition, which then leads back into a literary form. Ultimately, it is the entry into the search for the literary model or source to which the oral narrative can be traced back directly or indirectly. In times of a literal culture dominated by the book, as it was given in Central Europe at the latest with the Modern Age and the explosion of book printing, the idea of an oral narrative tradition untouched by this literal culture is simply anachronistic.

2.2 Notes on the History of Attribution of the Grimm’s “Fairy Tales” Fairy tale research has long been in the shadow of the early fairy tale studies of the Brothers Grimm and their successors and still is in important ways today. Grimm’s fairy tale work itself was part of the process of the formation of German philology in the first half of the 19th century21 and are thus a facet in the context of the constitution of science in the course of social modernization.22 For the Brothers Grimm, the collection of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen in their beginnings in the horizon of an ambitious educational and national political, but above all scientific interest, which aimed to “help establish the science of the origin of our poetry.” (KHM 1815, p. VIII) The multidimensionality of the fairy tale project corresponded to a multiple address, which has made the fairy tale the subject of different attributions over the course of its research. In accordance with the claim of a scientific collection, the stories in the first edition were accompanied by a scientific appendix with references, comments and a bibliography, which was then summarized in separate volumes in 1822 and 1856. With this claim to science, the collection of the Grimms stood in sharp contrast to other fairy tale collections

20  See

in particular Chap. 2 of her study, where she examines the reception history of the Bible, Eilhart’s Tristrant, Barlaam and Josaphat and the “Trojan War” accordingly (ClausenStolzenburg 1995, pp. 94–308). 21 For context, see Bluhm 1997. Dehrmann 2014 concisely develops the important aspect of the philologically-historical reflection of orality after 1800 and in particular with regard to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. 22 Still fundamental Schmidt 1989.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

18

of the time, which were conceived as children’s and youth literature entertainment offers with a certain educational claim, such as the two-volume Buch der Maehrchen für Kindheit und Jugend by the theologian and educator Johann Andreas Christian Löhr, who had emerged as a children’s book writer.23 As a scientific project, the publication of the fairy tales was in the vicinity of editions of medieval works, such as those undertaken by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm—individually or together -, but also by other representatives of early German philology. The Grimms were clearly oriented towards the editorial practice of this early period of German philology, in particular towards the principle of the “leading version” represented above all by Georg Friedrich Benecke.24 So the Brothers Grimm—and in the following Wilhelm Grimm alone—are rightly to be seen as ‘editors’ and ‘revisers’ of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, not as ‘collectors’,25 as an older historical research often names them, and also not as ‘authors’, as a younger literary research occasionally tries to label them, since these terms are associated with incorrect implications and represent other models of text design. This is problematic in the case of Köstlin (1993, p. 36) and much more recently in the case of Schmiele, who is trying to fix Grimm’s “montage technique” as a “way of working” that “can rightly be considered as authorial work”. In the context of this interpretation and from this point of view, the Grimms are “not authors against their will”, but those who tried to “veil” their authorship (Schmiele 2020, p. 23 et seq.). In Schmiele’s literarizing edits, she recognizes ‘secret author signatures’ that she tries to interpret biographically. Authorship and traces or signatures of an editorship are, however, clearly to be distinguished from each other. More sustainable are then rather assignments which try to adapt the concept of authorship further, as Stephan Pabst does it insightfully with the formula of a ‘scattered authorship’.26 or attributions that are based on a specific authorial role, according to which the Grimms—and in particular Wilhelm Grimm -” as authors … did not find their own genre type, but gradually created it through the revision of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen ” (Hühn and Matuschek 2014, p. 3). Conceptually, the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are first and foremost a work project within early German philology with a text-documentary focus at its core. In

23 In

his “Freundlichen Gruß zuvor”, which serves as a preface to the first volume, Löhr speaks of a “little fairy tale book” (1818, p. [III]), which is supposed to “really lovely and funny” to the “sweet [n] gold hearts” ([V]) young readers, the fairy tales “like to hear and read” ([V]), but also “[…] instructive.” ([III]) Löhr draws on a variety of well-known fairy tale collections of his time—also on the Kinder- und Hausmärchen published shortly before: “I did not make most of the fairy tales myself, […] but I tinkered with them a little and prepared them in my own way […]. ”([IV])

24 Cf.

more detailed Bluhm 2006b, especially p. 373.

25 Of

course, the processes of ‘collecting’, ‘screening’ and ‘ordering’ belong to the editorial work quite self-evidently.

26 Pabst

(2014, p. 138) emphasizes that the known or presumed pretexts “would indeed entitle them to authorship” in the case of the anonymous ‘Kinder- und Hausmärchen’ and that “not always the same anonymity in terms of quality” would apply to the stories.

2.2  Notes on the History of Attribution …

19

cooperation with Georg F. Benecke and Carl Lachmann and in the interlocking of their different areas of expertise—the text criticism of Lachmann, the lexicography of Benecke, the historical linguistics of Jacob Grimm and the heroic song and reception studies of Wilhelm Grimm—the foundations for the subsequent understanding of science as a ‘strictly critical’ philology were formed in the first third of the 19th century, in distinction from the traditional scholarly culture and in competition with the public-oriented concepts of someone like F.H. von der Hagen and J.G.G. Büsching. The Kinder- und Hausmärchen belonged to this context as an edition, but without taking center stage in the scientific discussion. Due to the narrowing of the subject matter that the development of German philology entailed, the fairy tale collection—like other projects (such as mythology or legal history)—soon found itself on the margins of the new scientific discipline and was functionally open to other attributions. So the scientific project of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen took part in the development of philologization, but subsequently had no share in the further professionalization of a science of the German language and literature, but rather merged into the history of mythology and folkloristics in the course of the further differentiation process of the modern sciences. In the course of their fairy tale studies, the Brothers sketched a story of the fairy tale, which was to remain influential in essential elements right up to the most recent fairy tale research. The ‘fairy tale’ was raised to a genre constant lasting over time, the origins of which were anchored in the early days of a human culture, which one still did not think of as too far away in time in the essentialist world of pre-Darwinian developmental thinking.27 Regardless of the problematic theoretical fixation of ‘fairy tales’, the importance of the scientific accompaniment apparatus of the Grimms for the research of the individual fairy tales remains undisputed. Grimm’s appendices to their fairy tale editions, which appeared as a separate print in book form from the second edition, still represent an indispensable paratext in their references for each fairy tale research to this day—but not as a reception-controlling text part, which of course it was at the time, but factually as a documentation of the templates and sources used by the editors as well as the known oral traditions. For a subsequent fairy tale research, they offer in this respect still highly appreciable starting points for the elucidation of the material story and the literary tradition determining each fairy tale narration, even if they can not be considered exhaustive for each “for different reasons” (Friemel 2012, p. 39). Not only the “notes” to the individual fairy tales are of interest, but also the overview parts of the Grimm scientific apparatus. Thus, the appendix finally offers the outlines of a history of fairy tale literature, which has remained binding to this day. That this is a construction, is not taken away from it.

27 See

also the clarification that Pabst (2014, p. 137) formulates in relation to Grimm’s idea of ‘people’: “The material represented by the fairy tales does not seem to originate from a particular people, but from an anthropological deep structure or divine inspiration […]. People means […] rather something like a transcendental originator.” Nevertheless, the concrete orientation with the Grimms remains throughout primarily national-cultural.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

20

Fig. 2.1  Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Collected by the Brothers Grimm. Second volume. 2nd, verm. and verb. Berlin: G. Reimer, 1819 [frontispiece by L.E. Grimm]

The Brothers Grimm’s fairy tale research was equally determined by a literary-historical as well as a systematic impulse. The literary-historical interest is reflected in detail in the “Notes on the individual fairy tales” in the appendix of the first edition or in the later separate volumes. Whenever the state of knowledge allowed, the individual fairy tales were placed in a tradition line with known narratives or collections of stories or other evidence within the framework of a comparative material and motif-historical consideration. A new five-volume edition by Johannes Bolte and Georg Polívka continued the project from 1913 to 1932, and modern handbooks continue to profitably write this research line today.28 They all show to what extent the fairy tales of the Grimm’s collection were embedded in literary history. Beyond the ideogram of an “oral tradition”, which had the consequence of blurring authorships and even a systematic “suppression of the author by the narrator” (Pabst 2014, p. 142) in general, the annotation parts of the Grimms and their subsequent additions are nevertheless fundamental documentation for the anchoring of the “fairy tale” in a history of literature. The comprehensive bibliography of the KHM separate volumes should also serve as a benchmark for subsequent fairy tale research.29 As librarians, the Grimms had the widest possible overview of the historical book stocks and the newer text collections of the time.30 They had a detailed insight into the diverse

28 See

in particular Uther 2013/2021.

29 Cf.

KHM 1856, p. 283–418.

30 See

also Schäfer/Denecke 2003.

2.2  Notes on the History of Attribution …

21

mainstreams and tributaries of literary history in Germany and beyond, often gained from their own reading and, in individual cases, even from their own excerpting.31 Not least because they themselves had a considerable, increasingly expanding and arrondierende private library.32 In their literature review, the Grimms essentially offer a history of the ‘fairy tale’, which presents the Kinderund Hausmärchen as the end and goal of a literarily recorded narrative tradition. In strict narrowing of the actually given variety of genres, this history declared the previous textual witnesses and, above all, the collections of tales highlighted by them as ‘fairy tales’ and ‘fairy tale’ collections. As the basis of such a ‘fairy tale’ tradition, they marked Giovanni Francesco Straparola’s Italian collection of tales Le piacevoli notti (1550/53), Giambattista Basile’s collection of novellas Lo cunto de li cunti written in the Neapolitan dialect (1634/36), which was later renamed Il Pentamerone (1674), and the late medieval Latin exemplum collection Gesta Romanorum. In doing so, they recognized the Neapolitan collection of Basile as having a special importance for the formation of tradition: “One can […] consider this collection of fairy tales as the basis of the others […]” and then went on to specify: “Two thirds of them are based on the German tradition and are still alive today.” (KHM 1822, S. 277 and 278) However, the Grimms locate the beginning of the “proper fairy tale collections” (KHM 1856, S. 299) in France in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. Starting from Charles Perrault’s Contes de ma mère l’oye (1697) and the approximately contemporary publications by Marie-Catherine D’Aulnoys and her imitators in the 18th century present the literary tradition of the entertaining genre Contes des fées in detail and claim it to be the literary version of a recent oral narrative tradition. In their own country contributions, the then well-known stories and story collections of the world, which were considered expressions of popular storytelling by the contemporary “learned world”, are dealt with. The Germany chapter of Grimm’s literature report offers a partly annotated bibliography of stories and story collections since 1764, including Johann K.A. Musäus’ Volksmährchen der Deutschen (1782–86), the two volumes of the Ammenmärchen (1791/92) probably written by Wilhelm Schumann, which the Grimms however attributed to Goethe’s brother-in-law Christian A. Vulpius,33 Albert L. Grimm’s Kindermährchen (1809), but also the Kinder-Mährchen by 31 Studies

that specifically address Grimm’s ‘fairy tale work’ in relation to the library holdings are far too rare and are among the desiderata of philological Grimm research. An exemplary model of this type of insight into the ‘fairy tale workshop’ can be found in Friemel 2012. 32 See Denecke/Teitge 1989. 33 KHM

1856, p. 328. The incorrect attribution of the Ammenmärchen to Vulpius (KHM 1822, p. 28; KHM 1856, p. 27) can also be found in the comments to KHM 17 Die weiße Schlange.— It can be assumed with certainty that Wilhelm Schumann and not Vulpius is the author of the Ammenmärchen: “The most reliable source is the catalogue of the HAAB [Herzogin Anna Amalia Bibliothek in Weimar], which lists a ‘D,d’ sign for the Ammenmärchen, i.e. the entry is probably from the Goethe period and lists Schumann as the author. The Hofmann Bookshop in Weimar delivered compulsory copies to the Herzogliche Bibliothek in 1791/2. Here they knew of Schumann’s authorship, either through the publisher or through Schumann himself. Vulpius was registrar at the library from 1797 onwards, i.e. he was responsible for the catalogue. If he

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

22

C.W. Contessa, Fr. de la Motte Fouqué and E.T.A. Hoffmann (1816/7) lists. That these were all literary witnesses was lifted in the conception of an axiomatic explanatory model, which attributed the narrative content of an alleged previous oral narrative tradition of the ‘people’ to the story. The narrowing down to a ‘fairy tale’ tradition and the declaration of the ‘fairy tales’ as a fundamentally orally founded narrative genre was not an attempt at deception, but the result of a circular argumentation with the unquestioned premise of a culture-generating ‘folk poetry’ at the Grimms. The claim of such folk cultural forces was fed not least by the opposition to ideas of the (late) Enlightenment, which was characterized by a primacy of scholar and elite culture and a discrediting discourse with regard to popular culture. The Brothers Grimm moved in the horizon of ideas as they had been conceptualized and popularized by Gottfried August Bürger in his popular poems and by Johann Gottfried Herder in his writings.34 Not least Herder had dealt intensively with the history of the ‘fairy tale’, its further transmission and literary transformation before the Grimms. For example, in 1801 in the third volume of his Adrastea in comments on “fairy tales and novels”:35 Da es hieher nicht gehört, den Gang des Mährchens und der Erzählung unter Morgen- und Abendländern, unter Juden, Heiden, Moslims und Christen, unter diesen in den dunklen Jahrhunderten Euro[ro]pa’s in Spanien, Italien u. f. zu verfolgen; so haben wir hier nur vorerst zu zeigen, wie sie das vorige Jahrhundert empfing, wozu im Zeitalter Ludwigs, das dem ganzen Europa Ton gab, auch das Mährchen, die Erzählung, der Roman wurde. (Herder 1801, p. 137)

Before and behind every literary development, a “folk poetic” force was assumed to generate culture, which in history was effective and, in the course of cultural

had found a work by himself with a different attribution, it would not have remained like this.” (Notes from Professor Andreas Meier, Wuppertal, of 4.3.2021)—Grimm’s false attribution leaves its mark even in recent research literature; for example, Waltraud Maierhofer (2013, p. 270) complains in her review of a collected volume on the work of Vulpius about the “gaps” in the text recording, which she finds “incomprehensible”: “So werden etwa die Ammenmärchen in einem […] Eintrag erwähnt, haben aber keinen eigenen.” Even in the Wikisource collection of digital copies, the first volume is listed as a Vulpius work (https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Christian_ August_Vulpius—accessed on 11.04.2021). 34 A

good overview of the development is provided by Reiling 2019, who shows how the poetological model of folk and art poetry was theoretically interpreted and practically handled from the Sturm und Drang period via Romanticism to the late 19th century. The focus of the study is on the reception history of the figure of thought in literary 19th century; for Herder’s importance for the concept and the tradition of ‘folk poetry’ see Reiling 2019, pp. 17–42, for Herder’s ambivalent judgments on the ‘fairy tale’ in particular pp. 35–36.—From 1796 Herder turned to the fairy tales more intensively; plans for a fairy tale anthology for Christmas 1802 were not realized, however; see Arnold 1984.

35 See

comprehensive Herder 1801, p. 132–176.—For his time, Herder saw in tradition material for an art that forms people: “It is now up to us to choose from this wealth, to give new meaning to old fairy tales, and to use the best ones with the right understanding.” (Herder 1801, p. 157)

2.2  Notes on the History of Attribution …

23

individualization, increasingly deformed and concealed, as the modern period with its culture of writing produced it. For this reason, the Grimms were convinced that at least in relevant parts, a oral tradition was the basis for all publications declared by them as building blocks of a “fairy tale” story. This dictum becomes the basis for that “mythification of nature poetry” which, with the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, leads to a “reconstruction of the fairy tale” (Hühn and Matuschek 2014, p. 8). In the eyes of the Grimms, “pure inventions” were therefore not taken into account, so that, for example, J.W. Goethe’s Mährchen of 1795, Sophie Bernhardi’s collection of fairy tales Wunderbilder und Träume in eilf Mährchen of 1802 or the sentimental-romantic Drei Mährchen by Caroline de la Motte Fouqué, written under the pseudonym Serena, were not annotated. Nor did Karl Christoph Schmieder’s collection Frau Holle. Ein hessisches Volksmährchen of 1819, conceived as a tourist travel companion, receive much attention.36 Such stories were considered by the Grimms to be “art poetry”, ultimately mannered. The systematic impetus of the early fairy tale research of the Grimms is shown in the individual notes to their Kinder- und Hausmärchen in the focus on materials and above all on motifs. The Grimms saw the formative core of the history of the ‘fairy tale’ ultimately in the ‘popular’ motif, as it had developed in the tradition of oral storytelling claimed by them and had been passed on. The basis for a large number of their publications on fairy tales and literary history was an extensive collection of ‘popular’ motifs which was probably begun in 1807, but at the latest in 1809 and which was never completed. This collection was not edited in its entirety until 2006. The collection, which Gunhild Ginschel referred to as a “saga concordance” (Ginschel 1989, p. 282), was an early attempt at that empirically comparative fairy tale typology which then prevailed in international fairy tale research in the second half of the 19th century with decisive success through the geographically historical method of the so-called ‘Finnish School’.37 The catalogue The Types of the Folktales, which goes back to Antti Aarne (1910) and was revised and extended by Stith Thompson in 1927 and again in 1961, may be considered the basic work of this research interest. It was revised and supplemented once again by Hans-Jörg Uther in 2004. For the history of attribution and, as a result, research, however, not only the parts of the fairy tale edition clearly marked as scientific appendices were of importance, but also—and perhaps even more—the prefaces of the editions. Grimm’s insistence on the concept that the presented stories had been “collected from oral tradition” and were a memory document of folk culture in danger of extinction had a special effect: “It was perhaps time to record these fairy tales,” the preface to the first volume of the edition justified the need for Kinder- und Hausmärchen from 1812, “since those who are supposed to preserve them are becoming increasingly rare […].” (KHM 1812, p. VII) The understanding of fairy

36 Jacob

Grimm nevertheless wrote a critical review of it in the Leipziger Literatur-Zeitung, no. 229 of 15.9.1819, p. 1830; see also Friemel 2012, pp. 50–52. 37 Cf.

Pöge-Alder 2007, pp. 85–98.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

24

tales was thus inscribed, among other things, with the idea of a cultural heritage that—even after its transcription—had to be preserved. The preface to the second volume of 1815 concretized and personalized this claim in a stereotypically formative way as a documentation of an oral tradition of folk tales by pointing out one of the contributors, Dorothea Viehmann, as “a peasant woman from the village of Zwehrn near Kassel” and thus insinuating a model for the transmission of the stories as a whole.38 In subsequent editions, this was to be further intensified by the addition of a title engraving or later a steel engraving, in which the ‘Viehmännin’ was set in scene as a typically rural, folkloric old woman in regional costume (see Fig. 2.1). The model of the grandmother who tells her children and grandchildren further won an image-based authentication39, the effect of which can be observed in the most recent research literature in the high valuation of this contributor as a personal mediator of an oral narrative tradition.40 The idea of an oral tradition and the associated problematic categorization of the Grimm’s fairy tales as “folk tales” find a reception-controlling security in this image program. The description that “the imagination of an oral tradition by ‘Dorothea Viehmann’ […] the conditio sine qua non of the KHM” (Sennewald 2004, p. 52) is not exaggerated.41 Also through the prefaces of the Grimm solidified, the attribution and research history has been predisposes up to the present by the assertion that in the compiled “folk tales […] nothing but urdeutscher Mythus” (KHM 1815, p. VII) had been preserved. In addition to the moment of popular culture, it is here especially the high value of the stories as remnants of a national cultural heritage, which has made them to that national document as the Kinder- und Hausmärchen gladly seen. With this, the Grimms moved in the discourse space of an early German Philology, which combined the medieval literature and their world with the idea of a ‘fairy tale time’.42 That this ‘urdeutsche Mythus’ had its origin in the old 38 The

model character is already evident in the reception. For example, Georg van Gaal complains in the “Preface” to his Mährchen der Magyaren of the vain efforts of his own long search for storytellers or storytellers, “but nowhere did a woman Viehmännin tell a story willingly” (Gaal 1822, p. IV).

39 See

Bluhm 2014, especially pp. 223–227.

40  For

example, in Murayama 2019, who accentuates the “meeting with the fairy tale teller Dorothea Viehmann” in the first sentence of his research contribution to the intermedial stylization of the “Viehmännin” as the ideal fairy tale teller: “The meeting with the fairy tale teller Dorothea Viehmann must have deeply touched the Brothers Grimm, because they probably had the experience of a real existing carrier of the cultural memory for the first time and could observe their narrative performance personally […] with their own eyes and ears.”(Murayama 2019, p. 218)

41 An

interesting aspect is mentioned by Dehrmann (2014, p. 163), who points out that the copper engraving portrait of the “Viehmännin” takes up the “traditional scholarly practice” of “a collection of writings with the image of the author. But of course she modifies this practice, because the Viehmännin is the medium of the fairy tales and not the author.”

42 For

example, Friedrich H. von der Hagen in the preface of his ‘renewal’ of the Nibelungenlied of 1807: “Kein anderes Lied mag ein vaterländisches Herz so rühren und ergreifen, so ergötzen und stärken, als dieses, worin die wunderbaren Mährchen der Kindheit wiederkommen und ihre

2.3  Cornerstones of a Younger Fairy Tale Research

25

Norse and Germanic mythology, is in Grimm’s preface to a number of motif similarities almost programmatically exhibited—“Das von der Spindel zum Schlaf gestochene Dornröschen” as “die vom Dorn gestochene Brunhilde”, the sleeping “Schneewitchen” as “Snäfridr”, at whose grave “Haraldur” watched, and other examples more. (KHM 1815, p. VI–VII, here VI) In the wake of such attributions, the Kinder- und Hausmärchen have become witnesses of their own German national literature—and are still often treated as such.

2.3 Cornerstones of a Younger Fairy Tale Research The research of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen was carried by the work of a small number of highly active fairy tale and storytellers in the late 19th and early to mid-20th centuries, often outside of the university research community. Herman Grimm, the son of Wilhelm Grimm and Professor of New Art History at the University of Berlin, high school teacher and titular professor Reinhold Steig, Johannes Bolte, high school teacher and member of the Academy, publicist Albert Wesselski, Heidelberg cultural historian Richard Benz, who as a freelance writer and publicist focused on German literature, art and music history, particularly around 1800 in Heidelberg, or the director of a girls’ school and local historian Wilhelm Schoof, determined with their studies the fairy tale research well into the 1970s. Their studies remained anchored in central premises of the Grimm fairy tale understanding with all the sometimes fundamental differences. In individual cases, the location of the stories in a nationally fixed German cultural space and the conviction of the oral tradition were very different in nature. From today’s perspective, there is often a certain proximity to a racialist way of thinking.43 However, the Grimm’s oral axiom was indeed critically reflected in individual cases and had a strong critic in Albert Wesselski. As early as the 1920s, Wesselski emphasized the literary tradition of the narrative content, but this aspect was only taken up and continued by a new generation of narrative researchers such as Lutz

dunkelen Erinnerungen und Ahnungen nachklingen […].” Hagen, Der Nibelungen Lied 1807, p. [II]. 43 A history of ideology of German fairy tale research is a desideratum of the self-assurance of this branch of science. Within such a history of ideology, the national political convictions of the Brothers Grimm would have to be included, as well as, for example, Herman Grimm’s positioning in the “Berlin Anti-Semitism Dispute” from 1879 to 1881, the racial mixings of fairy tale researchers of the 1910s and 1920s, and later the NS membership of Hans Naumann, who appeared as one of the main protagonists and speakers at the National Socialist book burning on May 10, 1933, of André Jolles, who joined the Security Service of the Reichsführer SS, of Ludwig Denecke, who was active as an ideological trainer of the SS, of Lutz Mackensen, Karl Schulte Kemminghausen, as well as other well-known fairy tale researchers of the middle and late 20th century.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

26

Röhrich, Elfriede Moser-Rath or Wolfgang Brückner in the 1960s and 1970s.44 Although the Brothers Grimm already pointed out literary sources in their comments on their fairy tales, this aspect was still too little considered in subsequent research. Even basic works such as Hermann Hamann’s study of the literary sources of Kinder- und Hausmärchen and their processing by the Brothers Grimm from 1906 or the many references in the annotation volumes of Johannes Bolte and Georg Polívka were unable to sustainably shake the axiom of oral tradition. On the contrary, this line was only taken up and continued very late by a younger research, for example in 1988 by Manfred Grätz in his much too little noticed study of the fairy tale in German Enlightenment, path-breaking 1998 by Heinz Rölleke with the synoptic documentation of sources and fairy tale texts.45 or from a subsequent generation in a series of individual studies.46 However, the Grimm and fairy tale research is still far from a paradigm shift. The reference to the “Finnish School” had already made the jump into a fairy tale research that looked beyond the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Wladimir Propp, the founder of morphological or structuralist folkloristics, had undertaken to tread his own path of systematization in his book Morphology of the Fairy Tale, which was published in Russian in 1928. After its publication in English in 1958 and finally in German in 1972, his study was able to gain some influence on fairy tale research. The goal was to identify basic elements of the fairy tale, which Propp called “functions” and which he sought to recognize in constant figure actions that would be strung together in the fairy tale in a certain variability. With regard to the KHM research, however, no real research tradition has arisen from these approaches. Similarly oriented to “basic forms” of narrative “folk poetry” was the Swiss literary scholar Max Lüthi. His publications on the fairy tale have determined German fairy tale research to the greatest extent since the 1940s and continue to do so today. Above all, his “Realienbuch” on the fairy tale, which was first published in the “Sammlung Metzler” in 1962, may be considered the most influential textbook on the genre to date. It was published in revised editions until 1979, which were continued in slightly revised and supplemented form by Heinz Rölleke since 1990. In a last updated edition, the Realienbuch was published again in 2004. Lüthis’ study, which was first published in 1947 and appeared in its 11th edition in 2005, was similarly successful. Das europäische Volksmärchen to the ‘form and essence’ of the folktale. Unlike the representatives of the ‘Finnish School’, Lüthi does not emphasize the specific motives, but rather, comparable to Propp, but less schematic, tries to fix the action structures of fairy tales and emphasizes their artistic character. Lüthi’s description catalogue for fairy tales has established itself: The fairy-tale figures are drawn as ‘one-dimensional’,

44 See, 45 See

for example, Röhrich 1962/1967; Moser-Rath 1964; Brückner (ed.) 1974. Rölleke 1998 as well as 22004.

46 These

included, for example, Lauer 1993; Bluhm 1989a, 1995a, 2001, 2011, among others; Friemel 2012; Ehrhardt 2020 or Messerli 2020.

2.3  Cornerstones of a Younger Fairy Tale Research

27

without relevant psychology and without awareness of the different dimensions of a this-worldly and a transcendental world. For Lüthi, the world of fairy tales is characterized by ‘flatness’ in relation to the representation, by an ‘abstract style’ in the design of the figures, by the social and other contextlessness of the ‘fairytale heroes’ and their ‘isolation’, which at the same time makes them a ‘potential all-connectedness’: “The abstract-isolating, figurative style of the fairy tale takes hold of all motives and transforms them. Things like people lose their individual nature and become weightless, transparent figures.” (Lüthi 2005, p. 63) As further constituent features, Lüthi fixes ‘sublimation’ and ‘worldliness’. As a “worldly poetry”, the fairy tale “mirrored all the essential elements of human existence” (Lüthi 2005, p. 72). The ‘sublimation’ of the real takes place in the “emptying of all motives” (Lüthi 2005, p. 69), so that in the fairy tale “everything is possible” (Lüthi 2005, p. 72). Lüthi had the ‘European’ fairy tale and, in a narrower sense, the so-called ‘folktale’ in mind. But his point of orientation was above all the Kinder- und Hausmärchen of the Brothers Grimm. The unbroken influence of Lüthi’s ‘fairy-tale phenomenology’ can be seen in recent introductions to fairy tales, especially in the ‘feature’ description and in the opposition of ‘folktales’ and ‘artificial tales’.47 A fundamental paradigm shift came about in the middle of the 1970s with the studies of Heinz Rölleke on the contribution of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. In a variety of individual studies, Rölleke was able to correct the common opinion of “in the people” told fairy tales without the tradition of a “folktale” as a reference point of an tradition being called into question. In his editions of the Kinderund Hausmärchen, the studies of contributors and many individual Grimm fairy tales, Rölleke showed that the majority of the texts submitted to the Brothers Grimm by contributors did not come from storytellers from the “simple people” and also not—as claimed by the Grimms and transmitted by subsequent science—of “Germanic” origin. Contributors could be identified primarily as literarily educated, often Huguenot-influenced young ladies from the upper class of Kassel and the Westphalian nobility.48 Grimm philology and fairy tale literature research of a younger age could be linked to Rölleke’s research in many ways.49 Even where a differently sociologically assignable group of contributors existed from less educated, rural milieus, like the “Viehmännin”, the inherited nationally culturally shaped patterns of interpretation could not be held,50 but turned out to be stagings of the Grimms.51 Sennewald is absolutely right when he states that the position of the “ Contributor […] in a certain way part of the fairy-tale world

47 Cf.

Neuhaus 2005, pp. 1–9; also Neuhaus 2017.

48 Last

Rölleke 2015a, p. 17–28.

49 For

example, Clausen-Stolzenburg 1995, p. 405: “In the end, only this conclusion can be drawn: The fairy tale contributors of the first hour have, in all innocence, unearthed a repertoire dominated by French sources from their memories. ” 50 Last Ehrhardt (ed.) 2012. 51 So

Bluhm 2014.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

28

[is], which she tells ”(Sennewald 2004, p. 31). Maren Clausen-Stolzenburg’s fundamental work on fairy tales and medieval literary tradition from 1995, which is unfortunately much too little noticed in Grimm and fairy-tale research, may be the most important, analytically strongest fairy-tale study of the last decades. ClausenStolzenburg’s investigation offers an explanatory model of how, via story chains from the literary tradition, fairy tales finally emerged in the work of the Brothers Grimm at a sequence of fixable stations. The recent history of research on Kinder- und Hausmärchen has developed particularly productively and richly within the general field of fairy-tale research and has now achieved considerable intensity. This applies to sources and concepts, tradition, poetics and motifs, the wide history of fairy-tale illustrations, as well as the adaptations and media transformations,52 the position of fairy tales in children’s and youth literature, didactics and psychology, their effect and international reception, as well as their connection with the further philological and mythological work, as well as the work on legal history, of the Brothers Grimm.53 However, with regard to the specific literariness and its structural foundation, even the most recent history of research is still moving on uncertain ground.

2.4 To the Current Methodological Discussion The history of general fairy tale research has been to a good extent also a history of interpretation differences, which can be continued in this form into the present. Especially with a view to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen as the most important and ultimately exemplary testimony of a fairy tale collection in Germany, one can even speak of a history of disputes.54 The occupation with the Kinder- und Hausmärchen has created a field in which the most diverse academic, popular scientific and popular interests meet. The most diverse self-evidences meet each other and produce a system of intense mutual irritations. The prevailing reactions to each other are misunderstanding, rejection and opposition as well as the practice of perceptual narrowing or—especially often—the refusal to perceive. Even if one concentrates on the academic approaches to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, there are sometimes fundamental differences with regard to the object reference and its classification. A good starting point to at least sketch the state of scientific discussion, which is characterized by opposites and incompatibilities, is Stefan Neuhaus’ introductory book Märchen from the UTB Literature series of the A. Francke-Verlag, which was published in first edition in 2005 and as a 2nd, revised edition in 2017,

52 An

overview is provided by Brinker-von der Heyde et al. (eds.) (2015): Part 1.

53 An

overview is provided by Brinker-von der Heyde et al. (eds.) (2015): Part 2.

54 See,

for example, Bluhm 2006a, especially pp. 478–483.

2.4  To the Current Methodological Discussion

29

and can thus claim to offer a current view of the history of interpretation.55 The declaredly literary approach is based on the conceptual decisions to be observed and oriented towards the history of genres and hermeneutics. Neuhaus certainly does not provide a genuinely own research contribution, but a problematic introduction to the theory of fairy tales and an overview of the history of fairy tale research. Since the author of the introduction does not come from any of the traditional “fairy tale schools”, whose research interest or methodological approach he would be obliged or at least connected to as a result, he is able to deal very freely and unbiasedly with the common approaches to the fairy tale and to question their respective functional value. Not surprisingly, one reviewer of the second edition speaks approvingly of an introduction that “frees the fairy tale as much as it determines it!” (Ladenthin 2017, p. 489) Thanks to the unbiasedness of the approach and the interest in applicability, the explanations provide a good starting point for the disclosure of the various “frontlines” and oppositions in fairy tale research and their methodological backgrounds. According to traditional classification, Neuhaus’ introduction belongs to the field of general fairy tale research. For the most part, it presents a relay of short articles on the history of fairy tale literature between the Erzählungen aus den Tausendundein Nächten from the 8th to 10th centuries and Cornelia Funke’s Tintenherz from 2003. For the author, the text corpus is “always primarily literary texts that therefore have an author or several authors or editors, even if earlier versions are unknown or the genesis of the texts cannot be represented.” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 7, 2017, p. 10) Consequently, in the introductory part, for example, the common distinction between ‘art’ and ‘folk’ fairy tales is made and discussed, but remains secondary overall, so that Grimm’s Kinder- und Hausmärchen are listed chronologically between Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué’s Undine and Adelbert von Chamisso’s Peter Schlemihl without any problem. For an introduction to the discussion of methods, the presentation and discussion of the interpretation approaches of modern fairy tale research in the introductory part of the introduction is of particular interest. A look at the individual, sometimes polemical, statements of the author can first of all make the fundamental differences between the general literary and non-literary approach to fairy tales sharply visible. In addition to the literary approach represented by him, Neuhaus makes five other research areas relevant for today’s science of fairy tales. He differentiates between folkloristic, social historical, structural, depth psychological and psychoanalytical interpretation approaches with their corresponding methodological approaches. The main criticism of the non-literary interpretation approaches is their deductive character: “Exaggeratedly said: They take their theoretical assumptions, set them absolutely by neither questioning nor otherwise relativizing them, and use fairy tale examples to illustrate these assumptions.” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 39, see also 2017, p. 49) With a view to

55 Cf.

Bluhm 2011, esp. pp. 6–10.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

30

folkloristic interpretation approaches, Neuhaus criticizes the unquestioned assertion of a longer oral tradition in the “people”. With reference to social historical facts, he generally objects to the late Middle Ages: “For the oral transmission of ‘popular’ material and its narration by the cozy fireplace, the conditions simply did not exist.” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 19, 2017, p. 27) Neuhaus is by no means alone in this assessment. On the contrary, it finds support in the most diverse sub-areas of a literary oral tradition research: From their perspective, for example, with regard to the literature appearing as popular at the time—be it Priamel, carnival play, farce or others—rather of a simulated oral tradition must be spoken, especially since the corresponding evidence usually turn out to be obliged to an earlier culture of writing. In addition, the late Middle Ages was precisely a period in which the far-reaching “process of becoming literary of customary” can be observed, as Ingeborg Spriewald, for example, made evident with the “Klopfan” sayings of Hans Folz: “The literature contributes directly to the restriction and eventually to the displacement of the customary” (Spriewald 1990, p. 65–66).56 From a literary perspective, this is at the latest the beginning of an autonomous literary development line, in which the “popular”, “custom” etc. only have an scenic character and are increasingly detached from the facticity of social relations. Genre-historically, this literary development line is particularly the “phenomenon of the short story”, which “appears as a Mære since the 13th century”, in order to transform itself into a prose form, which we could call “fable”, since the 15th century (Classen 2009, p. 21). In terms of story history, two tradition lines in particular come into play, which connect with each other in early modern times, namely the humanist facetiae literature, which goes back to Italian and Latin literature, as well as the medieval exemplum literature in its different forms of design. In relation to these research-historical emphases, further context determinations can be made: Even today, in connection with the question of the origin of narrative material in courtly epic, researchers repeatedly point to the possibility of a previous oral tradition of narrative material. Kurt Ruh had already named the fundamental difference and the difficulty of a definitive decision with regard to the sources of Chrétien’s narratives, for example. So at the mentioned example a central “dispute”, which actually runs through the entire Chrétien research, is still not decided: Is Chrétien the actual inventor of the Arthurian romance, i.e. did he draw solely from the pseudo-historical tradition (Geoffrey-Wace) and, in addition, dip into the motifs of world literature (Thesis 1), or could he fall back on another, essentially oral tradition of Celtic stories, which in some, even if crude, form reported on King Arthur and the Round Table (Thesis 2)? (Ruh 1977, p. 102)

56 Accordingly,

the known “Klopfan” sayings are also not evidence of an oral tradition, not “sayings from the people”, but art products.

2.4  To the Current Methodological Discussion

31

Expanded to the comprehensive research spectrum, the fundamental question may perhaps be considered an open one, but in the practice of individual studies it is actually regularly found to be clearly answered: Even there, where narrative researchers explicitly confess to the second thesis of the priority of an oral tradition, as Hans Blosen did in an article on the relationship between the Arthurian romance and the ‘folktale’, such studies lead to an opposite finding as soon as they deal with the problem on a concrete case example. Blosen’s comparison of a Danish ‘folktale’ and the Iwein romance—against his own, only half revised basic conviction—leads to the well-founded insight that ”it is probably more likely that the Danish fairy tale becomes a form of reception of the romance, than that this fairy tale should be a late, independent testimony of that material which also forms the basis of the romance.” (Blosen 2003, p. 95) The further discussion of interpretation approaches of modern fairy tale research is only mentioned briefly, as these approaches are only of marginal importance for the present study. In his introduction, Neuhaus also critically deals with the practice of “identifying motifs in fairy tales” in order to set them “in analogy to rituals and customs of societies” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 20, 2017, p. 27). Such a practice would only be promising if it were accompanied by a “contextualization” of the textual evidence, i.e. if it asked about their “social historical conditions of origin and transmission”. However, a pure analogy of motifs with extratextual realities of history makes little sense: “The scientific value of such observations seems to lie in the observations themselves,” the author concludes with a certain sharpness. With social historical interpretation approaches, Neuhaus criticizes the outdated ideological-critical tendency of the direction, the generalization of the judgments—for example in the characterization of the function of fairy tales as escapism—and the “implicit assumption that fairy tales primarily have a mimetic function by mirroring the contemporary reality in which they arise” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 24, 2017, p. 32). Also the structural interpretation approaches, to which Neuhaus counts not only Propp’s fairy tale morphology, but also the historicalgeographical ‘Finnish school’ and—in a certain methodological simplification—the fairy tale phenomenology of Max Lüthi, are criticized. As already with reference to the folkloristic research on motif analogy, he criticizes the overall functionality of these approaches: “The question is finally,” he intervenes with a view to the categorizations and schematizations of this research method, “who benefits from such a classification.” For Neuhaus, it makes no sense at all in its fact-oriented positivism and formalism, but is exhausted in mere “self-purpose”, ultimately—so the final remark—in a only “telephone book-like classifying and dividing according to features” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 26). Neuhaus is also not convinced by the deep psychological and psychoanalytical approaches from his perspective of literary studies. While he sees in the former “schematic methods“ that are “closer to astrology than to literary interpretation” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 28, 2017, p. 37) and “individual or historically socially constructed dispositions as naturally and universally given” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 30, 2017, p. 39), in the latter—specifically Bruno Bettelheim’s Kinder brauchen Märchen—he admits that they generally make a correct functional determination

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

32

of fairy tales and their use, but in the concrete text analysis they do not go beyond a “simple decoding scheme” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 34, 2017, p. 44). A discussion of the critical-rational approach undertaken by Neuhaus cannot and should not be entered into here. However, it should be pointed out that Neuhaus complains in his often somewhat generalised research criticism, which one can certainly allow in a single case, but without doubt rightly, that fairy-tale research often acts too text-related, makes false or at least problematic contextualisations and is committed to an irrelevant, often diffuse, certainly not convincing interest in knowledge. The methodological approaches outlined here from the mediate perspective of criticism are each based on introduced and extensively tested scientific methods and are committed to the most diverse disciplines. Within the respective fairy-tale specific research, the stories each have quite specific fairy-tale specific relevant functions, within the framework of which they gain their own objectivity. The procedure is absolutely admissible, as the results of the different subject-specific approaches within the functionally determined problem horizons are consistent and relevant. But if they are related to the reference field of the stories as the literary-historical documents, as they actually appear in their tangible form, then this consistency and relevance is often no longer or only partially given. However, due to the common object reference, the research on the Kinder- und Hausmärchen has a certain closeness despite all the differences, which are sometimes even fundamental. Accordingly, in recent and very recent times, efforts have been made to eliminate the existing interpretive differences in a common model. Neuhaus himself tries this from the perspective of an overarching history of genre, by trying to integrate the Kinder- und Hausmärchen into the history of the so-called ‘fairy tale’. Other literary scholars try to initiate a synthesis from the adjacent perspective of a history of genre and function by showing the possibilities for the various approaches and questions in the historically critical text reference.57 Whatever path the further fairy-tale research will take, the central task remains not to lose sight of the object itself in its factual givenness as a literary-historical document.

2.5 Fairy-Tale Research and Kunstmärchen The genre-historical approach of Neuhaus has already made the model of the ‘Kunstmärchen’ clear as a reference. If one looks at a fairy-tale research, which the Kinder- und Hausmärchen by the Brothers Grimm cannot neglect the sidelong glance at the complementary formation of the “Kunstmärchen” and its negotiation in narratology. Although it has been repeatedly denied, the still current talk of the “Kunstmärchen” only came about relatively late in the 19th century. The term can already be found in the correspondence of the poetic realists, where Theodor

57 So

Bluhm 2015b, S. 123–132.

2.5  Fairy-Tale Research and Kunstmärchen

33

Storm complained to Theodor Fontane about the sparse share of such texts in current literary production.58 Probably based on the common term “art song”, the designation was not used as a scientific term until the beginning of the 20th century. The introduction of the term had the goal of highlighting the literary specificity of Goethe’s or the Romantic fairy tale poetry.59 From the beginning, however, the term was and remained bound to the complementary term “folktale”, which actually functioned as a kind of “leading term” and reference field, openly or covertly,60—and still does today. For much of the history of research, this dependence was often associated with an evaluation, insofar as the ideological high esteem of the idea and the term “people”, as well as the reference to “nature”, corresponded to a more or less concealed devaluation of the artificial.61 Even in later efforts to establish the artistic character as a criterion of value, the dependence on a model of the ‘Kunstmärchen’ remained despite all opposition. Friedmar Apel, Paul-Wolfgang Wührl and above all Volker Klotz’s studies on Kunstmärchen began a systematic research of the genre in the late 1970s and 1980s.62 With these studies, the research on Kunstmärchen broke away from the narrowness that had been imposed by the view until then, which was limited to the period ‘after Goethe’ and Romanticism. With the extension of the literary-historical perspective, the 17th and 18th centuries also came into focus of research in their importance for the fairy-tale genre. Klotz’s genre-typological definition of Kunstmärchen was to be fundamental, in which he saw “literary, historically and individually shaped variations of the non-literary, historically undefined, anonymous genre of fairy tales by well-known authors”. Accordingly, the Kunstmärchen is, at its core, an “independent literary genre” (Klotz 1985, p. 2), which “has its principal denominator not in itself, but outside of itself”, namely in the ‘Kunstmärchen’ as an “altered orientation pattern” (Klotz 1985, p. 8). Klotz sees the beginning of the history of Kunstmärchen in the Renaissance and the end of an independent development of the genre with Kafka. After Kafka, the “image of the genre could no longer gain radical new aspects” (Klotz 1985, p. 3). The distinction between ‘folk’ and ‘Kunstmärchen’ has been largely retained in fairy tale research in the following—despite a number of reservations—and is declared binding in recent introductions: “The distinction […] still appears to be 58  “[…]

because nothing is represented as sparsely in our literature as—the expression is allowed—the art-fairy tale, which of course lies in the nature of the thing.” Storm-Fontane 2011, p. 136 (letter of October 17, 1868). 59 See Benz 1907; Todsen 1906. 60 A

trace polemically to Wührl 1984, p. 15: “Benz introduced the nonsense of repeatedly measuring the fairy tales of German poets against the allegedly folkloric ‘natural poetry’ (J. Grimm) of the folktale. But Wührl (1984, p. 16) also assumes the facticity of the “traditionally transmitted fairy tale” as the “‘simple form’”. 61 See

Lüthi 2004, p. 5: “The term Kunstmärchen is not a value concept, it does not only refer to high-ranking artistic achievements, but also to simple inventions of an imagination that takes pleasure in making flowers, animals or furniture talk, fly, or act.” 62 See Apel 1978; Wührl 1984; Klotz 1985.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

34

meaningful because it—at least from the 18th century to the middle of the 19th century—the idea of the fairy tale authors determined” (Mayer and Tismar 2003, p. 2). However, the dependency relationship is now considered to be rather low. In the essay “Das Kunstmärchen—eine moderne Erzählgattung”, the afterword to his anthology of German Kunstmärchen from Wieland to Hofmannsthal, which appeared for the first time in 1987 under the title Zauberei im Herbste, HansHeino Ewers tried a remarkable new beginning.63 Possibly because of the somewhat peripheral location, the approach has unfortunately been too little noticed and has not had the resounding effect in the specialist discourse that the approach would have deserved. For Ewers, the dependence of a determination and description of the so-called ‘Kunstmärchen’ from the also called by Ewers ‘folk tale’ as problematic, ultimately as obsolete. The history of the ‘Kunstmärchen’ as an independent European literary genre begins for him at the beginning of the 18th century. Ewers sees beginnings as early as the late 17th century in the development of the French fairy tale and the soon thereafter fashion of French Oriental stories in the wake of translations of the Arabian collection Tausendundeine Nächte. Between 1704 and 1717, the orientalist Antoine Galland had published a total of 12 volumes of ‘Contes arabes’ with translations,64Les Mille et une Nuit, which had a considerable impact and were translated into German by Johann Heinrich Voß in the 1780s.65 Among the best known of the “Oriental fairy tales” written in Germany are Benedikte Naubert’s five volumes Alme oder Egyptische Mährchen (1793–1797).66 Of a German fairy tale literature that draws on various French models and patterns, one can only speak from the second half of the 18th century. For the period between Goethe’s Mährchen and Mörike’s Der Schatz, that is, between the mid-1790s and the mid-1830s, Ewers recognizes a determining importance in the European history of the fairy tale genre in the “German space”. According to him, the development lines in German fairy tales have diverged, with the fairy tale concept narrowing under the influence of the Grimm fairy tale

63 Cf.

Ewers 1987, pp. 645–678.

64 Contrary

to a common assessment, Galland did not provide a translation, but a transfer, an adaptation; concisely summarized by Heinz Grotzfeld (2005, p. 10): “He had no qualms about incorporating stories into his translation that did not appear in his source. In short: he treated the text of 1001 Nights just as he would have treated a text written by himself: he improved it and changed it if he saw fit.” Similarly, Grotzfeld’s conclusion (2005, p. 14): “We must recognize that Les Mille et une Nuit by Galland, even though the sources of the stories come from the Orient, are a French production.”

65 How

much the “Arabian stories” were seen in the horizon of the genre of fairy tales is already revealed by the preface that J.H. Voß placed before the first volume of his Galland translation: “The Arabs undoubtedly possess a large number of small love stories, gallant narratives in the style of our novellas, and small wonderful stories in the style of our fairy tales […]. (1001 Nights / Voß 1781 I, p. III)

66 Cf.

Oerke 2006, esp. pp. 28-29.—Naubert’s Alme oder Egyptische Mährchen did not receive the same appreciation from the reading public as her Neuen Volksmährchen der Deutschen had before, but nevertheless achieved a second edition after one year.

2.6  Concept and Genre of Fairy Tales

35

concept and the independent development of the “Kunstmärchen” leading to stagnation and a certain conclusion towards the end of the 19th century. Not surprisingly, Ewers ends his anthology with Hofmannsthal’s Märchen der 672. Nacht and Ricarda Huch’s Lügenmärchen. Despite all reservations, the Kunstmärchen concept can still be considered established with regard to the general research discourse, even if it is repeatedly contested and occasionally even put up for “pseudoscientific” disposal (Arendt 2012, p. 9).

2.6 Concept and Genre of Fairy Tales Despite the specific terminology used to fix the “genre” in its different appearances, one usually has to do with a common basic concept. The history of the concept of fairy tales is in contrast to the history of the genre relatively undisputed.67 The content, outdated in many parts, the fairy tale introduction by Max Lüthi, which was decisive for years and decades as the standard work, still offers a valid summary of the origin of this term: “The German words ‘fairy tale’, ‘fairy tale’ (Middle High German maerlîn) are diminutives of ‘fairy tale’ (Old High German mârî; Middle High German maere f. and n., customer, report, story, rumor), originally denoted a short story.” (Lüthi 2004, p. 1) In late medieval, the term acquired an increasingly pejorative connotation, which, however, was soon covered by other semanticizations with the emergence of a literary fairy tale tradition in the 18th century. In the discourse of the Enlightenment, the pejorative use facet served to specify and discredit ideas of superstition and popular fear stories68 or to mark alleged derivations, for example, of fable literature.69 So the lexicographer Johann Christoph Adelung could, at the end of the 18th century, oppose a wide range of older meanings to a newer understanding of the concept: The diminutive forms “fairy tales, Upper German fairy tales” are noted under the lemma “fable”, which is marked as a “very old word”, of which “only a few remnants have been preserved”. Outdated basic meanings are the “rumour”, a “report of an event” and “[a] true story”, as well as the current main variant “[a]n invented story, a false story”. Adelung encounters this variant mainly in the diminutive form in his time,

67 Clausen-Stolzenburg

1995 offers an equally extensive and thorough development history of the

concept, pp. 3–93. 68  For

example, in Becker’s Noth- und Hülfsbüchlein from 1788, meteorological explanations are brought together with reference to the “fact” that “simple people still believe the fairy tale of the witches and think that the devil or the witches make the weather.” (Becker 1980, p. 257) Comparable Eberhard 1783 in his speech from the “fairy tale of the so-called white woman” (Eberhard 1783, p. 3), which he wants to expose as ‘superstition’. In his ‘postscript’ to Eberhard’s study Gedike (1783, p. 42): “It is always only pardonable for the mob to believe in fairy tales of the kind, as in the one of the white woman.” 69 For example, Herder in section 5 “Fable” in his Adrastea: “Luxurious times degrade everything; so gradually from the great nature teacher and human educator, the fable became a coquettish gossip, or a fairy tale.” (Herder 1801, p. 87–96, here p. 92)

36

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

“[w]here it is most often used of improbable inventions which are merely invented for the purpose of amusement, in order to distinguish it from the fable and other types of poetry.” (Adelung 1798, p. 34) In this sense, the term was also used for the mytho-poetic narratives from Antiquity and the Middle Ages.70 With the interest of Classicism and, in particular, Romanticism in the genre of fairy tales, the term became a high-value term around 1800, but quickly—and ultimately still valid—split into two separate discourse lines of fairy tales as children’s stories and as highly artificial art forms. In contrast to the history of the concept, the clarification of the genre concept ‘fairy tale’ is rather difficult. In fact, the term ‘fairy tale’ as a genre designation is subject to a variety of fluctuations in popular and all too often also in scientific usage. A certain inflation of the use of the term contributes to the confusion. Even in the wider horizon, a reliable distinction between fairy tales, folk tales, folk tales, popular tales, simple stories and more is hardly possible. But even within the framework of the common triad of ‘fairy tale’, ‘folk tale’ and ‘art fairy tale’ in the European, more precisely: in the German-speaking cultural area, the clear differentiation is often lacking. Not surprisingly, the storyteller Felix Karlinger began his meritorious Geschichte des Märchens im deutschen Sprachraum with the somewhat resigned confession: “Defining the term ‘fairy tale’ is more difficult than that of all other literary genres and subgenres.” (Karlinger 1988, p. 1) Karlinger rightly emphasized the opposites of the terminological use in the different disciplines—above all in literary studies and historical narrative research or folklore—and the lack of “a core of the genre or a prototype” in the following, so that one in research too often has to fall back on the most different “terms of convenience” (Karlinger 1988, p. 1) or have to. The definitional determination of the term is still moving in the field of tension between different disciplinary assumptions and against the background of numerous specifications and subtypes. If you look at the keyword index of such a fundamental reference work as the Enzyklopädie des Märchens, you will come across a wide range of entries in the genre field: In addition to a lemma “fairy tale”, there are separate articles on the “fairy tale”, the “book fairy tale”, the “children’s fairy tale”, the “art fairy tale” and a whole series of other narrative forms and various sub-areas of the genre field.71 With the subject field fairy tales, or overlap in the Encyclopedia also comprehensive articles in particular to the “children’s and youth literature” and the “fantasy, fiction.”72 A problem of any definition of fairy tales results from the juxtaposition literary history specifications of texts as ‘fairy

70 As

one example of many, the reference to the mytho-poetics of the swan in Friedrich Justin Bertuch’s Bilderbuch für Kinder (1801, p. 113): “That the swan, which otherwise has a rough unpleasant voice, should begin to sing sweetly when he wants to die, is false, and a fairy tale of the ancients.”

71 Bausinger

1999, pp. 250–274; Moser-Rath 1977, pp. 463–464; Bausinger 1979, pp. 974–977; Scherf 1993, pp. 1329–1336; Grätz 1996, pp. 612–622.

72 Tomkowiak

1993, pp. 1297–1329; Bausinger 2002, pp. 972–983.

2.6  Concept and Genre of Fairy Tales

37

tale’, ‘fairy tale’, ‘fairy tale’ and others. and narrative-systematic approaches that make assignments and exclusions of texts based on a feature catalog, which may contradict the literary genre concepts. If you look in the narrower dimensioned literary lexicons, the terminological diversity (and differentiation) of Historical Narrative Research, as manifested in the Enzyklopädie des Märchens, is reduced to a simple opposition. As a rule, you encounter—as in the fundamental Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft73 or in the Metzler Lexikon Literatur74—only two separate but related articles on the lemmas “fairy tale” and “Kunstmärchen”. Lemmata related to fairy tale forms are usually not offered by literary lexicons, but, comparable to the Encyclopedia of the Fairy Tale, usually more comprehensive articles on “children’s and youth literature”75 and “fantastic literature”.76 A look into the handbooks and encyclopedias shows the fairy tale as an interference phenomenon, in which the research premises of various disciplines overlap and question each other: Historical narrative research projects the fairy tale onto the basic model of an oral narrative form: “Stories that root in popular tradition are fairy tales, specifically specified as ‘folk’ fairy tales […]. They are variable to a certain degree during oral tradition and reach a fixed form in their state as book fairy tales” (Pöge-Alder 2007, p. 29). Even the interpretation pattern, which sees fairy tales characterized by the concept of a “reciprocal penetration” of oral and written tradition, is based on a primacy of the oral. Historical narrative research does not consider “fairy tales” as literary art products, for example. In contrast to historical narrative research, literary studies, as the second major discipline in fairy tale research, emphasize the literariness of the genre form. The fairy tale is seen as an artistic-literary form. The possible tradition of a genreunspecific oral “folk story” remains largely excluded from the disciplinary interest of literary studies. From a literary perspective, such an oral tradition can be taken up, but it is not seen as constitutive for the development of a fairy tale genre. Orality is instead primarily seen as an staging moment that is invested in texts for representational reasons and for the purpose of reader guidance. The (de-)differentiation of the object definition goes beyond this rough division in practice. The occupation with the fairy tale takes place on the most different fields and generates correspondingly different ideas of the object. From their each own scientific interest out individual highly specialized departments of the German studies like the children- and youth literature or the Phantastik research, but also further scientific disciplines like the pedagogics or the psychology are concerned with fairy tales. Not only the object itself, but also the limits of the genre are often set very differently in these cases. In most cases these approaches

73 Rölleke 74 Bluhm

2000b, S. 513–517, 2000c, S. 366–368.

2007a, S. 472–474, 2007b, S. 413–414.

75 Kümmerling-Meibauer 76 Wünsch

2000, S. 254–258; Kliewer and Kliewer 2007, S. 379–382.

2003, S. 70–74; Antonsen 2007, S. 581–582.

38

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

refer to strongly reductive definitions of fairy tales which make part phenomena or stereotype formations to the point of reference of their fairy tale studies, whereby in particular the characteristics ‘orality’ and ‘children’s story’ come into effect. The confusion of the concept definition results ultimately from an inclusive character of the concept. But even if one tries to “restrict oneself to the genus M [fairy tale] as a whole” (Bausinger 1999, p. 250) and thus to a basic model, different accentuations can be grasped depending on the respective access, which often enough stand crosswise to the disciplinary orientations from which they are formulated. So the literary historian Heinz Rölleke defines the fairy tale in the Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft as “[m] orally or written down, anchored in internationally widespread motifs, prose narrative in which the conditions of reality seem to be lifted.” (Rölleke 2000b, p. 513) The emphasis on a possible oral tradition and the reference to an international motif make the model of the “so-called folk fairy tale” (Rölleke 2000b, p. 513) used explicitly in the article appear, thus a ultimately belonging to the horizon of folkloristics or Historical Narrative Research Paradigm. The starting point is likely to be above all the fairytale phenomenological fairy-tale definition of a Max Lüthi, who claims as the main feature of the ‘fairy tale’ focused by him that this “has lived for a long time in oral tradition and has been shaped by it” (Lüthi 2004, p. 5). Accordingly, the complementary concept “fairy tale” treated by Heinz Rölleke in the Reallexikon presents itself according to a common categorization as “prose narrative after the pattern or with motifs of the fairy tale, especially by inclusion of the wonderful” (Rölleke 2000c, p. 366). The ‘fairy tale’ is considered to be a pattern after which the ‘Kunstmärchen’ is oriented and by which it is to be measured. In this as in many other genre definitions, the fairy tale is also brought closer to a “Grimm genre” and thus committed to an older concept definition by André Jolles, who described the fairy tale as “a narrative or a story in the style” “as the Brothers Grimm have put together in their fairy tales and household fairy tales.” Jolles expressly includes the fairy tale as “literary work” (Jolles 1930, p. 219). This tradition is also reflected in the definition of the term provided by Heike Mayer in the Historischen Wörterbuch der Rhetorik. Mayer lists the fairy tale as “one of the basic types of freely invented and, in this sense, literary narratives” (Mayer 2001, p. 945). She too uses the model of a historically existing ‘folktale’ as a template. Mayer differentiates between the fairy tale as “anonymous, orally transmitted tradition” (Mayer 2001, p. 945) and a fairy tale “in the sense of a literary genre with relatively clearly delineated content, formal and stylistic requirements”, which is specified as “a modern phenomenon” and based on the model of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen by the Brothers Grimm. (Mayer 2001, p. 946) A more recent development deviates from this definitional line in one central point by negating the facticity of the so-called ‘folktale’ and instead assuming the fictionality and construction of this basic model.77 Following in the footsteps

77 See

in particular Fehling 1977, p. 99, who describes the “stable tradition of folk epic” as nothing more than a “pure myth”.

2.6  Concept and Genre of Fairy Tales

39

of Albert Wesselski, the fairy tale is basically understood as a literary form in its written form.78 It is defined as “a shorter fictional prose narrative that draws on a motif catalogue considered to be folkloric.” (Bluhm 2007a, p. 472) The term ‘fairy tale’ is rejected as scientifically problematic and ideologically loaded. Nevertheless, the status of a (literary-)historically effective “ideal concept” is ascribed to it as a reference for a romantic and post-romantic fairy-tale literature. As a historical fiction, this ideal-typically refers to “shorter prose narratives” with the characteristics of “anonymity, oral tradition and folkloric tradition, an indeterminate and indeterminable ‘high’ age; stereotyped, but varied storytelling within the framework of a given (culturally determined, usually national or ethnic) motif catalogue, ahistoricality, naivety, purposelessness and entertainment value”. In particular, in the popular form of the ‘magic fairy tale’, the “further determinants of the wonderful (the partial suspension of natural laws) and the moment of wish fulfilment” (Bluhm 2007a, p. 472–473). As a literary genre, the fairy tale draws back on the “ideal concept” and the associated ideas of staging in this horizon of understanding. This ideal concept itself unmistakably refers to the concept formation and the programmatics of Romanticism. With the publication of the Kinderund Hausmärchen, the reference to an understanding of the fairy-tale genre has narrowed considerably to this text collection and the programmatics associated with it, while various models competed with each other until the early 19th century—in particular the pejoratively charged idea of orally transmitted ‘nursery tales’ in lower classes and the entertaining literary form of the ‘fairy tale’. The model of the Erzählungen aus den 1001 Nächten gained its own importance, insofar as the moments of the wonderful and—even more conspicuous—the exotic came to the fore here. In recent developments in terminology, the distinction between ‘folk tales’ and ‘Kunstmärchen’ is no longer relevant. Fairy tales presented as written records and documentation of an oral storytelling tradition, such as the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, are no longer categorically separated from so-called ‘Kunstmärchen’, but are specified as one variant. In this perspective, they also do not serve as a standard, but are at most highly valued source material and motif suppliers for further fairy-tale or fantastic narrative literature due to their popularity. A specific feature is that such ‘Buchmärchen’, when viewed from a literary historical perspective—especially with regard to the Grimm collection—brought about a “normalization” (Hühn and Matuschek 2014, p. 4). The dilemma of terminology is lost when only fairy tales or fairy tales are spoken of in general. However, fairy-tale research and lexicology are conservative institutions in which a traditional terminology—and corresponding traditional ideas—are all too often continued and thus in a way petrified over and over again. Following the traditional terminology, the newer lexica of literary studies still offer the complementary term “Kunstmärchen” as its own lemma, so that one cannot

78 Wesselski

(1925, p. XI) emphasizes, in contrast to the “triumph of so-called fairy tales”, the importance of the “so-called literary fairy tales”.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

40

get around the terminological branching in practice. The genre form “fairy tale” is fixed accordingly as “shorter prose narrative of wonderful content”, “which recognizable for the reader to a known model of the so-called ‘folk tale’ fairy tale”. This process is seen as an artistic act. As an additional feature, it is emphasized that it is “an individual invention with an unadulterated artistic character” (Bluhm 2007b, p. 413), which uses its narrative form in a self-reflective way. Hans-Heino Ewers is quite right to speak of a “genuinely modern, independent narrative genre” (Ewers 2001, p. 656), which is closest to other modern narrative genres such as the novel or the novel and derives its specific genre character from the fact that it imitates a traditional “material reservoir” back. As “material stimuli” the ‘fairy tale’ uses above all “the so-called. Fairy-tale motives, to which the wonder motives would be to be counted ”, in addition to the “adoption of individual action patterns and -segments, typical initial and final situations, for example, or whole action sequences”. (Ewers 2001, p. 658) While a literary historical narrative research still oriented at the historically inherited terminology, a literary systematic narrative research is looking for ways to avoid the branched and diverse terminology by new assignments. In a narratological narrative research, therefore, the “Passepartout concept” of “metatextuality” is used to describe the reference relationship of texts to “fairy-tale”.79 Instead of “folk”, “book” or “art fairy tale (Kunstmärchen)” is spoken of “fairy-tale metatexts”. However, the narratological narrative research is not able to completely dissolve the constraints and patterns of a traditional Historical Narrative Research or Folklore. Its concept of the “fairy-tale” only shifts the dependency, insofar as it remains fixed to the “motives, contents, structures and actions, in particular of the fairy tale or wonder tale” (Kreuzer 2007, p. 287). Also the literary systematics grabs over the provided by the “Finnish School” large-scale fairy tale type catalogues on the pattern of alleged folk tales of oral provenance back. In practice, the term fairy tale is to be seen as a comprehensive genre term for literary texts that are based on reception concepts of oral tradition and fictionality and have the entry of a self-evident wonderful in a everyday world as an obvious narrative element, where an “event” occurs, “which can not be explained from the laws of this familiar world” (Todorov 1972, p. 25). The reference point is the perspective of the modern scientifically oriented world view. The historicity and recipient dependence of ideas of the wonderful or fantastic would have to be specified in each case. Constitutively, fairy tales defined as fairy tales are fed from a marked fairy-tale motif catalogue, which is oriented at the literarily transmitted cultural knowledge of the time. They can always recur to a text pattern knowledge, insofar as the classical form of the fairy tale—like the Kinder- und Hausmärchen about their worldwide fame they now represent—long since become part of a general literary education. The traditional concept of the ‘folktale’ evokes an idealized image that has no historical factualness, but which provides a number of

79 See

Kreuzer 2007, p. 282–302, in particular p. 287.

2.7  On the Problem of Delimitation from Other …

41

authenticity certificates such as ‘folksiness’, ‘orality’, etc., which give the story its own non-literary value. Entirely separate from this are actual stories of an oral storytelling culture, which, however, are genre-indeterminate and not historically connected with the literary form of the fairy tale, but which can imitate them in the context of an ‘oralization’. In individual cases, such oralization can, of course, be taken up again by literature in the form of a ‘secondary orality’ in the course of a transmission, editing or literarization process. The also traditional concept of the ‘art fairy tale’ goes back to the general genre concept of the fairy tale as a variant of the literary genre form like the ‘book fairy tale’. In essence, it is usually limited literarily to artistic fairy tale productions between the late 18th and late 19th centuries. Beyond this time frame, fairy tales are to be thought of as a literary form of modernity in the form of ‘fairy-tale metatexts’. The enormous success story that is connected with ‘the fairy tale’ in its various forms in the past 200 years can certainly be assessed against the background of the historical development of modernity. If one includes the early European history of fairy-tale literature since the late 17th century and the career of the fairy-tale entertainment literature of the 18th century, one can even span a wider arc. The success of the entire fairytale literature is carried in its history by a “seduction by the wonderful” (Hühn and Matuschek 2014, p. 2). In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, fairy tales were—and is the collection of Kinder- und Hausmärchen themselves—thereby “one of the numerous designs for overcoming the modern fragmentation […], to which Schiller’s theory of ‘aesthetic education’, Friedrich Schlegel’s concept of the ‘new mythology’ and Novalis’ postulate of the ‘romanticization of the world’ also belong” (Muruyama 2005, p. 10). To this day, the ‘fairy tale’ model as a complementary salvation and compensation phenomenon reflects a cultural reaction to the diverse loss experiences of this epoch.80 The genre derives its power from the fiction of a whole world that, when disrupted, is miraculously brought back to a whole again.

2.7 On the Problem of Delimitation from Other Simple Narrative Forms The determination of the genre of the fairy tale was from the beginning linked to the delimitation of neighboring genres and narrative forms. Already in the preface to volume 1 of the Deutsche Sagen (German Legends) Jacob Grimm distinguished between the two essential forms of narrative “folk poetry”: “The fairy tale is more poetic, the legend more historical” (Deutsche Sagen 1816, p. V). The distinction between “simple forms” made by André Jolles in 1930, in which fairy tales,

80 To

what extent the “wonderfulness of the fairy-tale world” can also claim validity as a “productive means of the Enlightenment discourse” (Hühn and Matuschek 2014, p. 5), as can rightly be claimed with regard to the ‘Enlightenment century’, must be ascertained by corresponding cultural-historical research.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

42

legends, sagas, myths, puzzles, sayings, case studies, memorabilia and jokes were linked as pre-literary linguistic genres with a respective typical “mentality”, was of considerable influence in fairy tale research. Jolles remained closely attached to the model of the Grimm’s fairy tales and to Jacob Grimm’s ideas of a “self-creating” “natural poetry” in the people, which he set apart from the literary form of the novel. The basic model of this delimitation can be found in many subsequent receptions and still shows its effects today. This is particularly evident in the introduction by Max Lüthi, who delimits the fairy tale from the “neighboring genres” (Lüthi 2004, p. 6) saga, legend, myth, fable and farce. Even Kathrin Pöge-Alder seeks the “boundaries to the genres of popular literature” (Pöge-Alder 2007, p. 31) by distinguishing the fairy tale from myths, legends, farces, jokes and puzzles, proverbs and proverbial sayings. The foundation of the concept of fairy tales in such delimitations is almost always located in the horizon of genres of the popular, whereby the fairy tale is mostly understood as part of a supposed oral (folk) tradition. A delimitation of the then so-called “art fairy tales” as an own literary development is programmatic. The recent tendency to replace the former, ideologically understood concept of “folk culture” or “folk literature” by the more general and neutral terms “popular culture” or “popular literature” is conspicuous.81 When the fairy tale is considered as a literary document, it is above all differentiations within children’s and youth literature and in relation to fantastic literature. Bettina Hurrelmann quite exemplary differentiates “three large [n] groups of classics for young people”, namely works “with folkloric origin”, “youth adaptations of texts of world literature” as well as the “so-called ‘specific children’s and youth literature’”, which she subsumes under “works composed specifically for young people” (Hurrelmann [ed.] 1995, p. 9–10). The Grimm fairy tales belong to the first, E.T.A. Hoffmann’s Nußknacker und Mausekönig and Otfried Preußler’s Die kleine Hexe to the last group. In recent children’s literature research, the trend towards separation and delimitation is intensified. For Bettina KümmerlingMeibauer, fairy tales and children’s literature are different genres against the background of research history of the last years.82 Problematic about this delimitation is the narrowing of the fairy tale concept to the idea of a “orally transmitted [n], but often not written down literature for children” (Kümmerling-Meibauer 2012, p. 10). As in many other places in fairy tale research, the influence of the traditional idea of fairy tales as ‘folk tales’ is again evident here. The proximity of the fairy tale to fantastic literature is a constant in the genre descriptions of both genres. This is most clearly seen in the definition of fairy tales proposed by Stefan Neuhaus as a working basis for his genre-historical introduction: “Märchen sind fantastische, d. h. ‚über den Realismus hinausgehende‘ Texte, erweitert um die Kategorie der nicht primär religiös geprägten Transzendenz, die sich als das Wunderbare bezeichnen lässt.” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 17, 2017, p. 21)

81 Cf.

generally Hecken 2007.

82 Cf.

Kümmerling-Meibauer 2012, p. 14.

2.7  On the Problem of Delimitation from Other …

43

As a genre concept, the fairy tale includes “als weiteres Merkmal die (wie immer geartete) Verwendung von Stoffen und Motiven ein, die sich (literar-)historisch innerhalb der Gattung entwickelt haben.” (Neuhaus 2005, p. 17, 2017, p. 22) The self-evident handling of the wonderful as something numinous, which characterizes the fairy-tale action in fairy-tale research, serves as a link to the wide field of the fantastic, in which the fairy tales can be inserted in this way. The wonderful and the fantastic are almost identical in this terminology. The distinguishing features are materiality and motifs, insofar as fairy tales rely on a narrow, traditionally determined catalogue, while fantastic literature goes beyond that. Neuhaus’ efforts to dissolve genre boundaries are a recent development that is clearly aimed at fixing the connection of different genre characteristics to individual works, rather than searching for general systematic boundaries. Nevertheless, this newer genre history remains oriented towards traditional differentiations at its core. With regard to the relationship between fairy tales, grotesque and fantastic literature, for example, Winfried Freund sharply distinguishes: “If the wonderful describes people as God’s image, grotesque human caricatures take shape, so the fantastic contours the human being as the demonic counterpart to the creator.” (Freund 2005, p. 146) This makes the Romantic fairy-tale literature, such as Ludwig Tiecks’ Der blonde Eckbert, in the horizon of German fantasy, no longer one (art-) fairy tale literature. Ideally, the fantastic appears as the “antithesis to the wonderful” (Freund 2005, p. 11). While the fairy tale generates a new order with the integration of the wonderful into the everyday world, which is tuned to hope and redemption and suggests the (re-)establishment of a meaningful world context, fantastic literature “simulates” the chaos as a reality that is always possible: “mercilessly, all visions of redemption are cut off, the world reveals its face of destruction.” (Freund 2005, p. 10) The carriers of the fantastic in epic poetry are, according to Freund, the ‘fantastic story’, the ‘fantastic novel’ and the ‘fantastic novel’. A similar differentiation is made by Marianne Wünsch. Fantastic literature is her “invention of obviously impossible” (Wünsch 2003, p. 71). The fairy tale differs (like the myth) from this literature in that it “lacks the difference between two culturally incompatible worlds”: the fairy-tale world is valued by the figures of the story as “self-evident” and not as “textual questioning of the concept of reality”. (Wünsch 2003, p. 72) In the end, it is the different value that is attributed to the moment of ‘uncertainty’ with regard to the causality of the narrated relationships that distinguishes fairy tales from fantasy. While the fairy tale lives in the certainty of—quite wonderful—causality, which is predictable in the context of a told world and in the horizon of expectation of a reader, fantasy lives precisely in the opposite of the unexpectedly appearing non-existence of such causality. The fantastic generates ambiguity and represents it on the level of a fictional world, while the fairy tale fundament the certainty of quite wonderful consistency. The differentiation within fantastic literature also includes the distinction between fairy tales and fantasy literature. The similarities are manifold, but fantasy literature “not only picks up fairy tale motifs, but also elements of mythology, saga and legend, religious rituals.” In addition, the central criterion for

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

44

differentiation is the fact that, unlike in fairy tales, in fantasy literature, space and time are “concretized to the last detail” (Bausinger 2002, p. 982). Ultimately, the individual analysis will have to decide whether a text can be classified as a ‘fairy tale’ for good reasons or should be assigned to a neighboring genre. With regard to the tales from the Grimm’s collection of Kinder- und Hausmärchen, the assignment to the ‘genre fairy tale’ is based solely on the fact that, by their inclusion in this exemplary collection and the corresponding paratextual assignment, they have received an undisputed authentication as ‘fairy tales’ in terms of their effect and reception history.

2.8 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen from a Genre-Related Perspective The Kinder- und Hausmärchen by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm have been the central point of reference for fairy tale research since the early fairy tale studies of the brothers. However, with regard to their analysis, it is important to keep the special features of this collection in mind. The stories have been edited by the editors of the collection on the basis of immediate creation and subsequent printing history according to programmatic ideas of fairy tales. If one follows a newer definition, the Grimm’s stories are “book fairy tales”, that is, written, usually textually revised stories that follow an ideal concept of “folk tales” and form their own literary form. The popularization of the “ideal concept” “folk tale” constituted a contemporary reading public and activated a later audience with a traditional horizon of expectations, into which the fairy tales are then perceptually fitted again, which contributes to the further popularization and solidification of this understanding of fairy tales. If the term “book fairy tale” is used in a newer—especially Grimmor fairy-tale philological—fairy-tale research, however, a certain accentuation is inherent in it compared to a previous use. While an older use of the term meant that in the “book fairy tale” an ultimately orally conceived “tradition solidifies into a binding—historicized and archaic—form” (Bausinger 1979, p. 974), the newer use of the term in the context of an Albert Wesselski understands “book fairy tales” as evidence of a tradition carried by literature, which claims to represent an oral, popular tradition. This assignment is also followed by the present study. As “book fairy tales” the stories of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen could quite be located in the horizon of the traditional genre “fairy tale”. But since this term is categorially oriented towards the problematic complementary concept “folk tale”, this assignment will be omitted in the following. Formal, the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are short prose narratives, the narrative action and personalization of which are determined to a high degree by typification.83 Historically, they are adaptations from a literal or literature-based

83 Cf.

Bluhm 2000 in general.

2.8  The Kinder- und Hausmärchen from a Genre-Related Perspective

45

oral-literal tradition that presents itself as folkloric. Ultimately, they are literature from literature from literature. They are either directly based on a literary model or indirectly, if the stories came to the Grimms via the mediation of an oral contributor. The reference texts come from the 16th to early 19th centuries for the most part and can be assigned to the most diverse genres and their functional areas: jests, sermons, exempla and short tales, fables, curiosities and compilations literature, lies and riddles stories, fairy tale novellas, the contes des fées and other mostly entertainment-oriented literary forms. These reference texts are not “fairy tales” in the later sense themselves, but partly serve as formal models and are definitely the reservoir of material that later fairy tale production drew on. The recorded stories were transformed and adapted according to literary or literarized model texts in the course of the editing for the Kinder- und Hausmärchen and subjected to progressive strategies of popularization.84 Even if they were passed on orally to the Grimms in the last stage of transmission, the fairy tales by the Brothers Grimm are products of mediated text knowledge. In addition to baroque narratives, these model texts included internal narratives from Johann H. Jung-Stilling’s autobiographical novels as well as examples by Philipp O. Runge and others.85 The collection and editing of the tales by the Brothers Grimm are to be seen in the context of the editorial practice of early German philology and the romantic revitalization efforts of a national cultural tradition. The progressive editorial revision by Wilhelm Grimm remained committed to these parameters and in addition strengthened the child- and entertainment-literary elements. In the beginning, the texts were considered by the editors to be witnesses of a worth preserving oral narrative tradition, referring to a “Germanic myth” that had been preserved in the stories, despite their knowledge of their literary history. The purpose of the editing was to reduce the narrative material to the form of an (alleged) archetype, whereby the intended reconstruction actually represented an unintended construction of something new. Editing practices for the editing of the collected stories included—depending on the need—extrapolation, that is, the removal of text parts from an original text environment, de-contextualization, in essence the de-historicization of the corresponding text witness and the deletion of genre features of the reference texts, if necessary the prose-ification and the contamination of narrative parts from different traditions and narrative variants to a new narrative structure. In addition, there were the tendency towards

84 An 85 For

overview is provided by Bluhm 2010.

this, see Rölleke 1985a, especially pp. 52–60. See also Älteste Märchensammlung/Rölleke 1975, p. 341; Rölleke points to Brentano’s Badische Wochenschrift and Arnim’s Zeitung für Einsiedler, where “numerous legends and fairy tales” were published: “Brentano’s contribution after Moscherosch inaugurated [this] … and Rung’s fairy tale Von dem Machandelboom was particularly influential in determining the direction of the Brothers Grimm’s collecting activity. However, the personal encounter with Brentano and Arnim was decisive [for the Brothers Grimm] … At that time, works such as Fischart’s Geschichtklitterung, Moscherosch’s Philander, Grimmelshausen’s Simplizissimus, Nehrlich’s Schilly, Schütze’s Idiotikon, which were used for the Wunderhorn, left clear traces in the [Brothers Grimm’s] collecting activity.”

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

46

purification, enterotisation or desexualisation,86 the smoothing of boorishness and of faecal comedy as well as the substitution of foreign particles from the original texts. Overall, the Grimms’ contemporary romantic and increasingly bourgeois, definitely bourgeois-Protestant horizon of ideas and the ancillary intention of a “household and children’s book” shaped the design of the fairy tales and determined the hidden value and virtue catalogue of the collection.87 By a stricter motivic linking of the individual narrative parts and the observance of the principle of escalation, the reinforcement of intra-textual symmetries and a mild psychological motivation of events, the content and action experienced a compositionally refined structure closer to the contemporary romantic “fairy tale”. This tendency was supported by a linguistic-stylistic editing of the texts, the emphasis on the temporal succession by means of temporal adverbs, conjunctions or explanatory subordinate clauses. The frequent use of the copulative “and” was a special stylistic feature.88 Not least, the proportion of direct speech in the narrative texts of the Grimm collection has been continuously increased in the edition in order to name another element of “popular poetical” shaping of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. A more recent KHM research has once again sharpened the view for the specific share that Wilhelm Grimm came to play in the literarization on the linguistic level; with a view to the history of the edition, this was done to good effect by Axel Winzer (2021, especially pp. 131–132 and 137–141) and more generally in the search for “secret author signatures” by Corona Schmiele (2020). In addition, there are attempts at an objective fixation of “narrative oral tradition”, the narrator in the narrative.89 A typification based on early modern narrative forms made the fairy-tale figures into available functions of the fairy-tale plot during the editorial processing, whose event character dominates the narratives. Phenomenologically considered, the narratives can be traced back to a manageable number of basic types formed according to their own laws of structure in this way.90 The style of narration is characterized by unidimensionality, flatness, abstraction, isolation and sublimation, according to Lüthi’s still fundamental determination.91 This also allows for a detailed description of the typifying characterisation of fairy tales: The narrative figure encounters the numinous when it meets it, as if it were self-evident; it has no inner life and is only determined by the events within the narrative. This is ultimately also due to the fantastic play character of the fairy-tale plot. Figures

86 A

separate interpretation is offered by Schmiele 2020, S. 13: „Die Grimms haben vielleicht alles Zotige oder grob Obszöne entfernt, aber gerade diese leichte Sublimierung verleiht ihren Texten eine allgegenwärtige Sinnlichkeit, wenn nicht geradezu Erotik.” 87 Uther concisely in KHM 1857 / Uther 1996 III, p. 242–249; see also Uther 2013, pp. 488–492, 2021, pp. 491–496. 88 Cf.

Ginschel 1989, especially pp. 216–217 and 440–441.

89 Cf.

Offermann 2017.

90 Cf.

Propp in particular.

91 See

Lüthi 2005 in detail.

2.8  The Kinder- und Hausmärchen from a Genre-Related Perspective

47

and events show a clear antinomic structure. This can be traced back to the motifbased contouring of the individual narratives, which, for example in the case of reward and punishment, show a preference for extremes. The course of the action is usually one-dimensional and has a mostly threefold variation of the events with an “eighth weight”,92 with the initially introduced main actor of the plot being successful. Based on their model texts, the Grimm editorial team in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen have successively established their own style of language. It is oriented towards the model of an idealized childishness and simplicity and, like the often interpreted “good-evil” antinomic structure, aims at clarity. Individual archaisms that give the text a certain antique character are still dependent on the older reference text. A clear contouring of the language serves the purpose of description or narration, which largely dispenses with individualizing characterization and flatly names things without individualizing characterization. A characterizing distinction is made by means of clear attribution or unambiguous props in the context of simple and clear images. Even the pictoriality is obliged to clear typification (city, castle, forest etc.). The clarity is also served by figurative, occasionally alliterative, idiomatic expressions, repeatedly tautologies, formulaic adjectives and proverbial-proverbial sentences, which were often interpolated or intensified in later text editions.93 Used for staging, especially the proverbs and idioms evoke the claim to folk tradition of the stories. Like the metaphor, they often originate in the natural area and are particularly rural. They are ultimately elements of an staged oral tradition within the framework of an overall conceptual orality. The occasional dialectical insertions, which are not coincidentally often from Hesse, also evoke their own folk tradition in accordance with the origin of the Grimms and many of their contributors. The formulaic shaping of the language includes the often rhymed conjuring and memory verses that suggest a magical background of the story. The number typology of the Grimm fairy tale can also be considered formulaic, which is limited to a few number values—in particular the one, two, seven, twelve, hundred and above all the three. The childishness is reflected in the preference for child protagonists and linguistically and stylistically often in the inclination to form diminutives.As particularly ‘fairy-tale-typical’, the opening and closing formulas with their own fiction signals, which are often referred to vaguely as “traditional, well-known formula[s]” (Offermann 2017, p. 281), but which actually have a fixed literary tradition, are considered. Thus, the Grimms knew the most famous of these opening formulas “Once upon a time”, which subsequently became a signal word for the Grimm fairy tale par excellence, from a whole series of model examples such as Jung-Stilling’s Historie von Joringel und Jorinde (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 114), but also from further literature.

92 It

is an element of description based on Gudmund Schütte, which, since Axel Olrik, has been considered one of the relevant “epic laws” of “folk poetry”; cf. Olrik 1909. 93 Comprehensive Bluhm/Rölleke 2020, where all proverbs and idioms in the KHM are ascertained and analyzed with regard to the procedure of the “folk poetic shaping”.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

48

Johann Heinrich Campes’ successful novel ‘for pleasant and useful entertainment for children’, Robinson der Jüngere from 1779, does not begin by chance with the formula: “Once upon a time there was a large family […]” (Campe 1779, p. [XXXI]). The Grimms definitely knew the formula from Benedikte Naubert’s ‘new fairy tale’, Genoveve oder die Träume,94 from the opening story of Wilhelm Schumann’s ‘fairy tale’, Prinz Löwenzagel,95 the story Der Sterndeuter from the same volume96 or from Siegmund Friedrich Gehres’ Pforzheim’s Kleine Chronik, which was used for the Deutschen Sagen (German Legends).97 The Brothers Grimm were also familiar with the corresponding opening in the Psyche et Cupido story from the Metamorphoses by Apuleius: “Erant in quadam civitate rex & regina.”98 In the “Histories” tradition of the Early Modern period, variants of such opening formulas were part of the self-evident repertoire of literary storytelling.99 In the early 19th century, these opening formulas were to become very quickly a common signal of “folk” or “childlike” illuminated literary storytelling culture.100—even in the case of irony.101 In some collections of narratives presented

94 Naubert

1792 IV, p. 3: “Once upon a time in the Holy Roman Empire there was a knight […].”—See Naubert 2001 IV, p. 7.

95 Schumann

1791 I, p. 9: “Once upon a time there was a king and a queen.” (Prinz Löwenzagel oder: Was seyn soll, schickt sich wohl.)

96 Schumann 97 Gehres

1791 I, p. 145: “Once upon a time there was a prince in Persia […].

1792, p. 19: “Once upon a time in the city called Pforzheim there was an old woman.”

98 Apuleius

1628, p. 133 [= Metamorphoses, Book IV, Chapter 28.1 (translation: There was once in a city a king and a queen)]. The edition is documented in the Brothers Grimm Library. Also documented is the later edition: Apuleii Psyche et Cupido. Recensit et emendavit Otto Jahn. Lipsiae: Breitkopf & Haetel, 1856 (Denecke and Teitge 1989, p. 109; nos. 890–891).

99 A

beautiful example, which at the same time makes the literary tradition transparent, can be found in Albrecht von Eyb’s Ehebüchlein of 1472, which was published several times. In the final chapter “Das kein sunder verzweyfelen solle” (“That no one should despair or doubt his sins”), a wide-ranging “History” begins as follows: “It should be understood from this that no one should despair or doubt his sins in his sins […] and I will give this first of all through a pretty story that I also brought from Latin into German, and thus it goes: There was once a mighty, noble emperor or king […].” (Albrecht von Eyb 1890, p. 91 ss)

100  As

an arbitrary example, the well-known fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm Magyaren Mährchen may be mentioned, where a large part of the fairy tale narration—Die Speckfestung, Fischer-Mährchen, Die dankbaren Thiere, Der Vogel Goldschweif, Die geitzige Bäuerinn and Kutschermährchen (Gaal 1822, S. 77, 127, 175, 195, 276, 429)—begins with this fiction signal.—In the literature review of the KHM (1856, S. 335), Löhr’s fairy tale book for children is also mentioned with the derogatory remark ”many from our collection”, the first story of which begins in the first volume with “Es war einmal, vor vielen, vielen Jahren” (Löhr 1818, S. [3]). In Löhr’s work, fairy tales often begin with this opening formula. 101 A very catchy example can be found in Ernst Koch’s (published under the pseudonym Eduard Helmer) humorous story Prinz Rosa-Stramin from 1834: “Es war einmal ein Mädchen, die hieß Marie, und ein junger Bursche, der hieß mit dem ersten Buchstaben Gabelstich.” The subsequent—satirical—narrative sketch ends with the character’s speech: “Das ist keine Geschichte, das klingt wie ein Mährchen.” ([Koch] 1834, S. 198)—See also Wilhelm Grimm’s letter to Hirzel from 28.1.1859 (Briefwechsel der Brüder Grimm 2007, S. 554).

2.8  The Kinder- und Hausmärchen from a Genre-Related Perspective

49

as ‘folk literature’, which are contemporary with the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, the opening formula is ostentatiously displayed as a phrase of ‘folkloric’ narration.102 Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué, who was operating at the time in various competitive relationships with the Grimms, situated his Stories of Rübezahl in 1815 in a peasant story circle in the inn, whereby, in the opening of his stories, he wanted to set the different functional areas for such stories between popular entertainment and scholarly exegesis narrativ in scene: In einer Schenke […] saßen mehrere Bauern beisammen und fingen nun an, einen jungen Menschen zu necken, der […] anzusehen war wie ein fahrender Student. Man hatte ihn furchtsam zusammenducken sehn, als man zufällig einigemal den Namen des wunderlichen Berggespenstes Rübezahl nannte […]: „Dieweil Ihr, lieber, blasser junger Herr, aussehet wie ein Schüler, solltet Ihr aus allen Historien etwas Verständiges und Erbauliches zu ziehen wissen […].“ […] Da lachten die Bauern allesamt, verhießen ihm guten Frieden und freie Zeche obendrein, falls er aus jeglicher Rübezahlsgeschichte etwas Erbauliches herausdeuten könne, worauf einer aus ihnen folgendermaßen anhub:: „Es ist einmal ein Mensch auf dem Riesengebirge umhergegangen […].“ (Fouque 1977, S. 287)

The formula is clearly a signal for a popular story, which is here humorously incorporated into a literary game. But the final formulas that occur in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are also shaped by literature. They occasionally show formulaic features of courtly narrative culture (in particular of the ‘Reih-um-Erzählen’), as they were then taken over by the ‘Feenmärchen’ literature. In individual cases, they are set in scene in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen in a metalepic way, with even autoreferences occurring. Thus, since the third edition of 1837, the metalepic final formula: “My fairy tale is [out] / and now goes in front of Gustchen’s house” (KHM 1837 II, p. 126) can be found as a later addition in KHM 108 Hans mein Igel. With regard to the formula, in 1842, in a congratulatory letter to the philologist Georg Friedrich Benecke, Jacob Grimm quoted a number of other literary evidence and, in addition to references to oral storytelling, also mentioned an autoreferential dimension: “From my childhood, it vividly reminds me of the Steinauer woman Gottschalkin, who told us fairy tales and always ended with the words: ‘My fairy tale is [out] and now

102 Less common is the later beginning of the Grimm fairy tale: “In olden times, when wishing still helped, there lived a king […]” (KHM 1837 I, p. 1), with which, starting with the second edition of the “Small Edition” from 1833 and then with the third edition of the “Large Edition” from 1837, KHM 1 The Frog King or the Iron Heinrich and thus the entire fairy tale collection begins. The opening formula already occurs in the second volume of the first edition; No. 41 The Iron Oven begins with a similar phrase: “At the time when wishing still helped […]” (KHM 1815, p. 211). Possibly the famous later opening of the story was then reformulated by the Grimms based on Gaal’s The Glass Hoe: “In those adventurous times when the fairies still ruled over the destinies of men, somewhere a count lived […]. (Gaal 1822, p. 53) Georg van Gaal was already familiar with the fairy tale editions of Musäus and the Grimms and oriented himself towards them.

2  The Genre ‘Fairy Tale’ and its Research

50

goes in front of N.N.’s house’, in order to indicate that it had been fulfilled and had to be told elsewhere or by someone else.” (J. Grimm 1842a, p. 23) The assignment to “Gustchen” in the mentioned fairy tale of 1837 offers, among other things, a hidden metalepic play with Wilhelm Grimm’s daughter Auguste—“Gustchen”— who was born in 1832. The Kinder- und Hausmärchen ultimately owe their design to the editing trends of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. In this time horizon, they also have their specific ‘situation in life’ and are functional to be situated in this historicalpolitical and socio-cultural context of origin.103 They were oriented towards the constructed ideal image of a supposed archetype and sought to set the model of a national “folk poetry” with the epithets “pure”, “natural” and “simple” against an elite culture discredited as mannered and foreign.104 Regardless of their claim to authenticate folkloric tradition as a generic typical feature, the editions are to be valued as moments of staging in sum. It is a game with an intermedial “system mention qua transposition”, whereby in the linguistic-stylistic design elements of a popular oral narrative culture were introduced here, which “are conventionally perceived as belonging to a foreign medial system” (Rajewsky 2002, p. 159). The aim of such editing is to produce, evoke and simulate the impression of folkloric tradition and in parts childlike tradition and more, in order to make this “illusionistically fruitful for the constitution of meaning of the text”. (Rajewsky 2002, p. 159) The fairy tales are, as Berthold Friemel aptly summed up on one occasion, “inspired by oral storytelling” (Friemel 2012, p. 35), but the linguistic ductus ultimately proves to be oriented towards literary practices and patterns and hardly corresponds to an actual popular oral tradition, but rather offers a form of conceptual orality.

103 Gunkel’s

“formula of the ‘Sitz im Leben’” is used here and in the following only in the general conceptual sense, according to which, when considering literature, the historical-political and socio-cultural conditions of its time of origin and the discourse context valid at that time are to be taken into account.—Gunkel’s religious-historical approach can be grasped in nuce in the much-cited dictum: “Whoever wants to understand an ancient genre therefore has to ask first where it has its seat in popular life” (Gunkel 2004 [1906], p. 3). It is the demand to take into account the time of origin of biblical texts, the spiritual and mental constitution of society, the known form of language and the situational functionality when interpreting them. Text analysis therefore has to take into account content, form and social function at the same time. 104 Cf.

Bluhm 1995a, in particular pp. 6–7.

3

The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’: Forms of the History of Origin and Transformation

The stories of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are the product of a design will. Convinced that a traditional culture form threatened with oblivion in its time had to be reconstructed in order to promote the revitalization of a national culture considered endangered, the Brothers Grimm actually created a new literary genre. Against the background of different and also changing attributions, this new genre should experience its own high value in further reception as a national literary and increasingly as a children’s literary testimony. With the publication of the Kinderund Hausmärchen and the narrowing of the term “fairy tale” to the “Grimm genre”, something like a new architext was created, which, as part of the further genre discussion, became a mandatory reference point for any fairy tale discussion. The Kinder- und Hausmärchen were elevated to “folk tales” and, in a circular argument, used as evidence for the existence of a corresponding popular narrative tradition. In the abbreviation to the superficial simplicity of the narrative form with a stereotypical narrative personal and manageable catalog of props, one lost sight to a large extent of the fact that behind the simplicity of the concrete narrative is a complex history of origin and transformation, which not only fundamented, but also constituted the individual texts. The Grimm story texts show an intertextual or—in the sense of a Gérard Genette—transtextual structure1 and are the product of fixable transfer processes, not the result of an indefinite and indeterminable diffusion.2 The palimpsestuous constitution of fairy tales disappears behind their architextual reduction. In this act of reduction, the central moment of Grimms' will to design is to be seen: By incorporating texts into their collection, the editors

1 Cf.

Genette 1993, esp. p. 9.

2 The

concept of diffusion, however, is well suited to describing the career of the term ‘fairy tale’ itself. A reflective discussion of the concept of ‘diffusion’ is offered by Johannes Helmrath with regard to Humanism: Diffusion of Humanism. Introduction, in: Helmrath et al. (eds.) 2002, pp. 9–29. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 L. Bluhm, Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3_3

51

52

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

declared the disparate text material used by them as concretions of a claimed specific genre—the architextually more or less adapted pretexts were homogenized in the course of this recourse to ‘fairy tales’ and, in the (justified) retrospective view, also received as ‘fairy tales’. This compositional process of declarative homogenization was accompanied by a corresponding editorial procedure. In their own editorial process, the texts were further adapted to the self-designed architext from the time of their takeover. Irrespective of the claim to actually carry out a reconstruction of a historically preceding model and to present a documentation in essence, the overall process of fragmentation, collection, editing, publication and, in the sequel, further editing is in practice a dynamic and occasionally rupture-like as well as artisanal process. Without having to or wanting to use the concept of author differently, the editorial activity of the editors—of the Grimms, in particular of Wilhelm Grimm—actually produces literature without an explicit artistic intention3: The stories of the Grimm collection are in the presented form ultimately literature.4 In doing so, one can quite speak of a ‘self-becoming’, insofar as the Grimms by no means acted as ‘literati’ or ‘authors’ of their fairy tales in their self-conception—not Wilhelm and even less Jacob—but are to be classified as editors, thus as processors. Against the background of these specific circumstances, the literariness of fairy tales must be better understood: the literariness of Kinder- und Hausmärchen does not only result from the practice of editorial and redaction design, but also from their palimpsestuous structure. Grimm’s fairy tales are texts that have layers, which, from a reception-aesthetic point of view, means that they offer very different reading options. Behind the “exoteric” outer view, there is—more or less hidden—an “esoteric” dimension.5 If you only look at the surface of the text presentation, the fairy tales appear in a simple form that can be received as entertainment or children’s literature without any prerequisites. The content results from a naive moral, which is associated with a quite open interpretation offer. Depending on the disclosure of the palimpsestuous structure, however, the text gains additional references that give it new facets of meaning and present it as the complex literary text that it is through its history of origin. About the references—concretely: the previous texts with their respective horizons of meaning and function—then certain content of statements can be grasped for the individual fairy tale, which are inherent in its history of origin, but which have been lost in the

3 Heinz

Rölleke (1985, p. 36) quite rightly speaks of a “widely unconscious reconstitution of a literary genre”.

4 An

“outline of the constructions of the fairy tale book […] as a consequence-rich modern literature” tried in its own way also Sennewald (2004, p. 13). Sennewald, inter alia, shows which influence the “form” of the collection had on its success and by “which poetological means” the book could be read “as an authentic tradition” (Sennewald 2004, p. 15). As a specifically ‘romantic book’, the Grimms produce for Sennewald a “literature that draws its imaginative power from a materiality of language that it gains in the philological context” (Sennewald 2004, p. 346). 5 For

the distinction, see in particular Schlaffer (1978), who applies this description model to Goethe.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

53

course of the editing. This is not to claim a dominance: the fairy tales are substantively different from their pre-texts. They are a genre sui generis and remain specifically genre-specific through the openness and vagueness that they have experienced in the course of their editing. The possibility of additional assignment of meaning and foundation-based concretization of a statement content aims at the disclosure and clarification of implications as well as the disclosure of their complex literariness. That the fairy tales of the Grimms are shaped by layers is not a new discovery. Nevertheless, the fairy tale research has been having some difficulty implementing this discovery. As early as 1931, Albert Wesselski complained in his attempt at a Theorie des Märchens about how little this basic insight has found its way into research in order to, with regard to the dissemination of the fairy tale, specifically declare the primacy of the literary tradition and, with regard to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, their character as a “book fairy tale”: In deutschen Landen ist es also das Buch, das die mündliche Verbreitung des Märchens bestimmt: das Buch tötet Überlieferungen, das Buch erhält Überlieferungen lebendig, das Buch läßt Neues Überlieferung werden. (Wesselski 1931, p. 180)

With reference to an article by Lutz Mackensen from 1930, he emphasizes that the “emergence of a double layer of our folktale heritage (old narrative material— newly popular book fairy tales)” must be considered a “fact”. He recommends to a fairy tale research focusing on the oral that it should first of all “take into account the influence layers to the full extent” before it addresses “the question of the autochthonous fairy tale heritage of the homeland”. It would then find that “the extent of what we can claim as our indigenous heritage” is actually “small” (Wesselski 1931, p. 180). This discovery may be attached to. It may even be extended: Instead of being guided by the mere assumption of an “old narrative heritage” in an oral narrative tradition and thus elevating a programmatic claim of the early 19th century to a scientific certainty, fairy tale research would be well advised to turn to the verifiable and actually tangible literary tradition of the later popularized materials. Since the text materials that were declared to be fairy tales when they were taken over into the collection each look back on their own text history, the fairy tales of the Grimms are structurally “hypertexts”, i.e. texts that have come about through transformation from a previous “hypotext”.6 In a large number of cases, these “hypotexes” were themselves “hypertexts” that in turn looked back on earlier “hypotexes”. The transformations of this genetic process were associated with a variety of genre and function changes. Each of the previous texts or each of the previous narrative versions has its own “place in life”. They stand as narrative forms in their own functional contexts and thereby provide their own services in

6  Schmiele (2020, p. 33) rightly emphasizes that “the KHM are a beautiful example of hypertextuality”.

54

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

the socio-cultural field of their time. In particular, the last transformation during the edition and editing by the Grimms resulted in the decontextualization of the earlier texts and their amalgamation into a model “fairy tale” as an accompanying phenomenon, which has made this narrative form so adaptable and versatile to this day.7 As adaptations, the Grimm fairy tales are in certain respects perhaps even a model for the process of literature becoming. If literature—as is often the case—comes about through the “finding” and processing of what is already there and not through the “invention” of something new, then the fairy tales are a perfect example of this. In the transformation into a fairy tale, literature is created from disparate text material. Against the background that they are based on hypertext, the “Kinder- und Hausmärchen” in the narrower sense represent a literature “on the second level”. The fairy tales are “palimpsests” that, on closer inspection, refer back to their hypotexts. Since these are themselves directly or indirectly of a literary nature, it is possible to trace and document the process of their creation. Literary-theoretically perspectivated, a process can be observed in which literature is created of literature of literature. The interpretation openness inherent in the fairy tales is a feature of the final stage of the transformation process. However, since the knowledge of the hypertextuality of the fairy tales obviously challenges the reader and, in particular, the scientific observer to a “relational” or “palimpsestuous reading” (Genette 1993, p. 533),8 offers of interpretation that are wellfounded in literary history result, which are actually interpretations “on the second level”. Understanding fairy tales against the background of their transformation history offers fairy tale interpretation and -interpretation the opportunity to free themselves from the self-inflicted “Integumentum” trap in which they have been trapped since the Grimms’ attempts at fairy tale interpretation.9 This captivity produced and still produces in individual cases even attempts to extract a ‘truth’ of its own from one of the fairy tales.10 In fact, however, the fairy tale does not carry its own truth, but rather, as a story generated from other literary forms, only carries an—often unrecognized and often manifold—heritage with it, quasi a meaning on ‘second level’, which can be discovered as substrate and used for the interpretation of the fairy tale on ‘second level’. ‘Second

7 Using

a fairy tale concept that is much broader, Goethe very nicely captured the phenomenon in Truth and Poetry: “The emptiest fairy tale already has a high appeal for the imagination, and the slightest content is gratefully received by the intellect.” Goethe 1981, p. 447. 8 With the term “palimpsestuous reading”, Genette refers to Philippe Lejeune. 9 Just

as the Middle Ages tried to make use of the pre-Christian world of myths in its Christian interpretation system by interpreting it as a ‘veil’ of a hidden truth that had to be discovered and ‘translated’ into the horizon of its own interpretation system and integrated into its own system of knowledge, since the Grimms fairy tale interpretation has tried to make the stories usable as disguises of a to be discovered meaning for their respective systems of knowledge. See Gebert 2014 for the Middle Ages.

10 For

example, Ursula Offermann in her efforts to generate an interpretation from the description of an ‘oral storytelling’ in the ‘Kinder- und Hausmärchen’ Frau Holle which “should lead us to the truth of this fairy tale” (Offermann 2017, p. 287).

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

55

level’ interpretations cannot restrict the autonomy of the fairy tale as a work of art, which has developed as the final phase of a transformation process, but they can convey a framework and a direction to the interpretation. With regard to the origin of fairy tales, a fairy tale interpretation should always be relational, taking into account the functional history of the genesis of the material. Only in this way can an interpretation—like any fairy tale consideration at all—take into account the complexity inherent in the fairy tales and only in this way does a fairy tale interpretation escape the danger of arbitrariness and speculation and gain scientific validity. The focus on the palimpsestuous or, if you will, layered structure of the narratives in Grimm’s Kinder- und Hausmärchen brings the genesis of the individual ‘fairy tales’ to the fore. With a view to the over 200 narratives in the collection, it is not, on closer inspection, a single, but many, each very individual genesis. Developing these must remain the task of a comprehensive history of the Grimm fairy tales. Maren Clausen-Stolzenburg has already shown the way: Since the narratives gathered in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen can be traced back to specific literary sources in many cases—in various cases even directly—this provides the indication that, in the cases where an assignment does not succeed immediately, the individual fairy tale text must be examined in each case and only then, if possible, be assigned to a ‘family’ with closely related narratives. (Clausen-Stolzenburg 1995, p. 309)

Clausen-Stolzenburg’s attempt to fix literary stations on the path of the fairy tales’ genesis11 is an important step on the way to a yet to be written literary history of the (Grimm) fairy tale. In the present study, another step should be taken. For this purpose, the—at least basic—models of such developments of ‘fairy tales’ should be presented using exemplary cases. First of all, text adoptions from literary sources will be analyzed using examples. A distinction is made between the direct text adoption, as can be seen in a exemplary way in KHM 157 Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder or in KHM 69 Jorinde und Joringel, and forms of text processing of literary sources or templates. These include the simple editing, such as the processing of a farce by Hans Sachs in KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas, as well as reworkings, such as the purifying text processing in KHM 12 Rapunzel or the stereotyping text processing at KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn. In addition to direct, often also indirect text adoptions can be observed, where a known as an oral contributor or—predominantly—oral female contributor has obviously or presumably relied on a literary source. Such indirect text adoptions are to be valued as a form of post-, re- or new narration of a read or heard narration. Philologically, this can be done at KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel. Not a few stories from the Grimm’s collection show extremely complex text histories, for example with material genesis, which move in the horizon of a dynamic genre and function history, as can be observed in KHM 107 Die beiden Wanderer or in composition

11 See

Clausen-Stolzenburg 1995, p. 309–406.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

56

processes, which in the context of editorial processing bring individual stories to a new presentation form by the inclusion of different templates or different narrative variants, as for example in KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel. But whatever model the genesis of a fairy tale may be obliged to, the fairy tale remains fundamentally recognizable as literature of literature.

3.1 Direct Text Adoptions 3.1.1 The Example KHM 157 Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder The simplest procedure of text adoption at least at first glance is the direct recourse to a literary source, which remains largely unchanged in this process. In individual cases, this can even be the adoption of a narration, which is already marked as a popular narration in its original publication context—in the sense of 'for the people’. A good example in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen is the fairy tale narration Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder. The title already signals a animal fable. It is told how a sparrow’s four young ones are torn from the nest and blown into the world by a gust of wind after the willful damage to his swallow’s nest, without the sparrow being able to sufficiently instruct them about the dangers of life. When he happily meets them again the next autumn, he wants to make up for the missed instruction, but he finds that the young ones have acquired the best knowledge of the world from their own experience. In particular, the youngest sparrow impresses him with his insight into the comprehensive protection by God. “For whoever commands his affairs to the Lord, / […] / God will be his protector and helper,” the story concludes accordingly with a saying of the sparrow father (KHM 1812, p. 156–160, here p. 160). The fairy tale is characterized by its didactic character, which is marked as Lutheran even in individual quotations—once again from the father’s speech the final advice to the youngest: “Traun! mein lieber Sohn, fleuchst du in die Kirchen und hilfest Spinnen und die sumsenden Fliegen aufräumen, und zirpst zu Gott, wie die jungen Räblein, und befiehlst dich dem ewigen Schöpfer, so wirst du wohl bleiben, und wenn die ganze Welt voll wilder tückischer Vögel wäre.” (KHM 1812, p. 160) With reference to the underlying sermon story, Elschenbroich (1979, p. 470) illuminates the imagery: “The youngest son had found refuge in a church […]. In this holy place he lives on spiders and flies. By reading them from the windows, he helped to clean the house of God. Spiders and flies denote all those who distort the pure doctrine and try to disturb the proclamation of the word of God, Catholics and enthusiasts alike. ”

In addition to other Lutheran allusions in the text, the final image is a quote from the perhaps best-known Luther song A Mighty Fortress: In the third stanza it says: Und wenn die Welt voll Teufel wär. und wollt uns gar verschlingen,

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

57

so fürchten wir uns nicht so sehr, es soll uns doch gelingen.12

Written in the 1520s, it quickly found its way into the Protestant hymnals of the time and soon acquired programmatic significance. Perhaps it was precisely the obvious Lutheran didactic character that caused the Sperling fairy tale from the Kinder- und Hausmärchen to find its way into teaching material volumes during the Grimms’ lifetime. At any rate, in 1843 Gustav Schwab—in addition to his literary activity also a pastor and official in the church administration—included it in his model collection of German prose for the ‘higher teaching profession’.13 The animal fable can be found as No. 35 already in 1812 in the first volume of the first edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen and goes back immediately to a preacher story told by Johann Mathesius, a student of Luther, which was reproduced in Anton Menon Schupp’s Fabul-Hanß from 1660. Since the second edition, it has been listed as No. 157 in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Wilhelm Grimm excerpted the story during a visit to Berlin in 1809 from a print edition,14 which was in the possession of his friend Clemens Brentano: abul-Hanß / Oder Eine schöne anmuthige Predigt / Welche der Geistreiche und Hochgelahrte Theologus, Hr. M. Johann Matthesius Sel. Doctoris Lutheri gewesener fleissiger Zuhörer und Haußgenosse im Joachimßthal gehalten hat / von der Fabul / welche Jotham den Bürgern zu Sichem erzehlet hat / Jud. 9. […] Gedruckt im Jahr 1660 (Hanau 1663). Accordingly, the Grimms noted in the appendix to the fairy tale in the first edition of 1812 as a source reference: “Aus Schuppii Schriften. (Fabul Hans. P. 837. 38.)” (KHM 1812, p. XXIV). Without a doubt, the Grimms also knew Schupp’s source. The pastor, reformer, and table companion of Luther, Johannes Mathesius, had written a portrayal of Luther’s life, which was conceived as a result of 17 sermons, and was printed after the biographer’s death in 1566 under the title Historien / Von des Ehrwirdigen in Gott Seligen thewren Manns Gottes / Doctoris Martini Luthers / anfang / lehr / leben vnd sterben.15 The Brothers

12  For

example, in Johann Spangenberg’s Kirchengesenge Deudtsch / auff die Sontage und fürnemliche Feste / durchs gantze jar . Magdeburg 1545. Further references to Luther’s Bible translation can be found especially in the speeches of the youngest Sperling son, e.g. “dem lieben Gott all Abend und Morgen treulich befiehlt” (KHM 1812, p. 159–160) with reference to Ps 37,5 (according to Luther-Bibel 1545): “Befelh dem HERRN deine wege / vnd hoffe auff jn / Er wirds wol machen.” 13  Schwab

(ed.) 1843, pp. 634–637. From the collection of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen Schwab also took the ‘children’s legend’ The Twelve Apostles . 14 Cf.

Steig 1904, pp. 19–51.

15 This

and the following are quoted from the edition of the Histories from 1566.—But the fable story is also easily accessible in Elschenbroich 1990a, pp. 161–163; see also the commentary section in Elschenbroich 1990b, pp. 218–221.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

58

Grimm had an edition of the Historien from 1592 in their library, which was worked through completely by Jacob Grimm.16,17 Johannes Mathesius (1504–1565) worked as headmaster of the Latin school and later as preacher and pastor in Joachimsthal, where he also delivered the Historien sermons.18 His importance for the development of the sermon “as an autonomous literary genre” (Elschenbroich 1979, p. 454) has been emphasized several times. One of the innovative achievements was rightly highlighted that he consistently “broke with the custom of publishing German sermons only in Latin translation”. In doing so, he unmistakably revised many of the sermons for publication in a literate way, but always in such a way that the character of the spoken word was retained. He has made outstanding contributions to the development of a learned-popular, accurate and vivid German prose. (Elschenbroich 1979, p. 454)

As the author of the Historien, but above all as one of the recorder of Luther’s “table talks”, Mathesius also shaped the reception of Luther in a lasting way. The source of the Sperling fairy tale can be found in the Historien sermon for Shrove Tuesday 1563, which tells the ‘Jotam story’ from the Buch der Richter (Ri 9,8–15) of the Tanach or of the Christian Old Testament as the starting and reference point took: „Die siebende predig / von Jothans Mehrlein / Judicum am IX. zur Faßnacht. M.D.LXIII.“ (Mathesius 1566, p. LXVII–LXXVI) Following the preaching practice of a Luther, Mathesius uses a number of sermon examples as a form of metaphorical speaking in the service of proclamation for entertainment, illustration and instruction.19 The sermon is not only text interpretation, but also a critical reflection of practice, integrating entertaining materials into sermons.20 Committed to the Lutheran principle sola scriptura, he refers to the Bible itself as a model and pattern for the justification of his approach, in extenso to the ‘Jotamfabel’, the best-known apology of the Bible. In the Buch der Richter the story of the trees that

16 Cf.

Elschenbroich 1990b, p. 221.

17 See

the proof in Denecke and Teitge 1989, p. 544 (= no. 6793). The Grimm library also holds the Arnim edition of 1817 (Denecke and Teitge 1989, p. 544, no. 6794) and other writings by Luther’s table companions Mathesius (Denecke and Teitge 1989, pp. 250 and 549 [nos. 2931 and 6856]). Some of these 16th-century writings also show clear signs of editing by Jacob Grimm.

18  A

short biographical and work-historical sketch can be found in Elschenbroich 1990b, pp. 218–221.

19 For

the functionality of the sermon example, see, for example, Moos 2005, p. 125: “[…] the essence of the exemplum lies in its rhetorical intention, in the leadership (and manipulation) of feelings and understanding by an imaginary (mostly objectively false) historical analogy. The procedure must more or less suppress what does not only since Kant, but already in the Middle Ages the maturity of man in his self-thinking makes.”—See also in general Moser-Rath 1964 and Rehermann 1977.

20 Concisely,

Leibfried / Werle 1978, p. 136: “This 7th sermon […] is therefore of importance because it extensively documents on which occasions and in which way Luther used the fable he so much appreciated. “Likewise:” On the other hand, the text shows with which justification the fable is finally assigned to the Protestant sermon goods […] ”. ”

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

59

seek a king in their circle and finally find him in the thorn bush, which is told to the figure of Jotham as a warning speech to the inhabitants of the city of Shechem, who had entrusted themselves to a despot, is attributed to Jotham. That the Bible uses an “old morelein”, as Mathesius calls it, or a “fable”, as he writes in the following, proves to the preacher of the 16th century the legitimacy of his narrative embellishments. He also points out that in the story “kluge leut mit verdeckten vnnd verblümbten reden / vndanckbaren vnnd vngeschlachten leuten” have been preached to in various ways and with success and “verdeckte vnd vermentelte warheyt vnd weyßheit mit thierleins heutlein vnnd sprüchen vberzogen” (Mathesius 1566, p. LXVIII) have been covered. In addition, Luther already appreciated and used appropriate older literature collections and worked on a German translation of the Esopus . Last but not least, it is the personal authentication of the table companion Luther that is quoted: “Vber tische habe ich etliche gute fabeln vnnd sprichwörter von ihm gehöret.” (Mathesius 1566, p. LXIX)21 The detailed justification of the practice of providing or even starting the Sunday sermon with a ‘morelein’ refers to a certain unease of the Protestant preacher, who, like many other reformist theologians of his time, stood in front of the Catholic practice of providing sermons with entertaining elements and example stories with reserve and even rejection. The fable of the sparrow and his four children, later taken over by Grimm as a fairy tale, belongs to a series of stories that Mathesius finally presents as his own offers within the context of this Fastnacht sermon. The general theme is the message that neither reward nor gratitude, but only ingratitude and disloyalty, can be expected from the world. Reward and gratitude are experienced by man alone in and through God. At the same time, the story refers to the specific obligation of man towards God: „[…] wir sind nicht zu disem leben / wie die armen vögelein / erschaffen / vnd mit Christi blut erlöset / vnd mit seinem geyst beseliget / sondern das wir hie glauben vnnd gut gewissen bewaren / vnd auff ein ander vnd ewigs leben in gedult hoffen vnd harren wollen.“ In addition to this teaching, another biblical reference is activated, which is particularly tangible in the conclusion of the seventh sermon: „Amen Herre Jesu Christe / Amen / Der du vns in deinem wort auch auff die armen Sperling weysest / vnd stellest / sie vns zu Doctorn vnd lerern für / Amen.“ (Mathesius 1566, p. LXXVI) In this conclusion, the close connection of the sermon to Luther becomes tangible again, since Mathesius ultimately calls up a quotation assigned to Luther here. In Luther’s interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount, in the context of a weekly sermon on Matthew 6:26–27 with regard to the well-known verse „Sehet die Vogel vnter den himel an / Sie seen nicht / sie erndten nicht / sie samlen nicht in die Schewnen / Vnd ewer himlischer Vater neeret sie doch. Seid ir denn nicht viel mehr denn sie?“, it says according to Luther 1906, p. 452: „Sihe also macht er [sc. Christus] die vogelin zu Meistern

21 In

the commentary volume to the KHM, the Grimms list this evidence in the “Testimonies” section next to other indications of Luther’s plan to “create a renewed and fortified Märleinbuch” (KHM 1856, p. 277).

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

60

und lerern, das ein omechtiger sperling zu unsern grossen, ewigen schanden im Evangelio stehen mus als des aller weisesten menschen Doctor und prediger […]“22 In his interpretation, the reformer expressly states with reference to the biblical word that Jesus had set an “example and parable” (Luther 1906, p. 461) with the image of the birds in heaven. Without a doubt, Mathesius and ultimately also his fable of the sparrow and his four children refer to this Luther word and indirectly to the biblical teaching character which is connected with the reference to the ‘powerless sparrow in the Gospel’, which can serve ‘man as doctor and preacher’. Both Luther and Mathesius refer indirectly to a passage from the Gospel of Luke. In chapter 12 of the Gospel of Luke, the apostles and believers are called upon to muster up courage, however insignificant they may seem as individuals. The biblical text very clearly uses the image of the sparrow: 4JCH sage euch aber meinen Freunden / Fürchtet euch nicht fur denen die den Leib tödten / vnd darnach nichts mehr thun können. 5Jch wil euch aber zeigen / fur welchem jr euch fürchten solt / Fürchtet euch fur Dem / der nach dem er getödtet hat / auch macht hat zu werffen in die Helle / Ja / Jch sage euch / fur dem fürchtet euch. 6Verkeufft man nicht fünff Sperlinge vmb zween pfennige? Noch ist fur Gott der selbigen nicht eines vergessen. (Lk 12, 4–6; according to Luther-Bibel 1545)23

In biblical usage, the sparrow represents the insignificance and meaninglessness of man. The later fable of the five sparrows, whose existence is shaped by the fear of the (human) world’s violent attacks, serves the purpose of the sermon first and foremost as a classic ‘Easter tale’, that is, an Easter story intended for entertainment and amusement, which is intended to animate a liberating cheerfulness and the so-called. ‘Easter laugh’.24 The tradition dates back to the Middle Ages and was an extraordinary way to bring the theologian’s actually discredited laughter into Christian liturgy or later into Protestant worship service as an expression of joy over the resurrection of Christ. In Mathesius, the animal fable serves as an exemplary model for the genre of the sermon fable for entertaining design and instructive illustration of a biblical doctrine, while he was moving in the discourse field of a contemporary dispute. In the dispute initiated by Wolfgang Capito De

22  Luther

gave the weekly sermons in Wittenberg on behalf of the parish priest Johannes Bugenhagen between November 1530 and April 1532; they were published in 1532.—The early modern literature frequently referred to Luther’s words on the ‘powerless sparrow’ in biblical bestiaries; see, for example, Frey 1595, p. 27.

23 Elschenbroich

(1979, p. 469) refers to Mt 10,29 and 31: “Mathesius has invented his fable of the sparrows in order to exemplify these words of Christ […].” See also Elschenbroich 1990b, p. 133. 24 See Grimm’s quote from Schupp’s memoir again in the commentary volume on the KHM in the section ‘Testimonies’ on how people used to tell ‘Osterneu’ from the pulpit at Easter vespers. These were foolish fables and fairy tales, as they were told to children in the rocking chairs. This was supposed to make people happy.

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

61

risu paschali (Basel 1518) of the Basel reformer Johannes Oekolampad, this tradition had been criticized in principle before.25 Mathesius did not get the subject matter of the fable from the sparrows themselves from Luther. Rather, the subject matter is taken from the medieval fable tradition,26 while Mathesius changed the cast of characters by introducing the biblical sparrow instead of the raven or crow common in fable literature. The fable thus refers to a story ultimately traceable back to ancient fable literature. The basic model shows the similarities: “The children of the crow (the raven) no longer need their mother’s instructions about the tricks of humans.” (Dicke and Grubmüller 1987, p. 405 [No. 355]) The fable has its origin in the story repertoire of Romulus (LBG), a larger collection of fables in Latin prose, which goes back to the Greek collection of Phaedrus and had found wide dissemination in the Middle Ages through many manuscripts. As a story part, the fable can also be found in Hugo von Trimberg’s didactic moral teaching Der Renner,27 which the Brothers Grimm knew very well. With Hugo, the story is attributed to a magpie (‘aglaster’). Anton Menon Schupp let the Mathesius sermon 1660 (or 1663) go into print again—as he emphasizes in the title page—for “strange reasons”. The theologian and preacher of the 17th century resumed the sermon by Mathesius immediately. The reference to Luther served Schupp for legitimation in his own homiletic dispute about the appropriate preaching practice.28 With his writing, Schupp continued a debate in which his father Johann Balthasar Schupp had already been a prominent party,29 and set the authority of Luther and Mathesius against the recent criticism of the use of entertaining sermon parts. In the end, it is a line of conflict that has been continued since the time of Luther. After all, in the early church orders of the time of Luther—to varying degrees—one had already confronted the Catholic belief in miracles, the practice of legends and the veneration of saints.

25 How

much the practice was still in the homiletic discussion in the years and decades around 1800, for example, the critical reflections of the theologian and youth book author J.A.C. Löhr in his extensive Investigation of the question: Why does the preaching office have so little effect on the morality of people from 1792, where he deals with the “custom of introducing funny anecdotes and fairy tales in public sermons” (Löhr 1792, p. 344), among other things with explicit reference to Mathesius, but also to Erasmus, for example; see Löhr 1792, p. 257 et seq. 26 Anders

Elschenbroich (1979, p. 469), who calls Mathesius’s Sparrow Fable his “own story”, in which Mathesius “freely spun the widely transmitted motif of the warning of a young animal by father or mother against the treacherous dangers threatening it from humans without a firm model and transferred it entirely into his world of housekeeping and child-rearing.” See also Elschenbroich 1990b, pp. 133–134. 27 Hugo 28 A

von Trimberg 1970 II, p. 233 (v. 14955–14969). Hugo calls it “Ein mêre”.

concise sketch is provided by Leibfried/Werle 1978, p. 142–143.

29 For

this Leibfried/Werle 1978, p. 141: “To a certain extent, the discussions arose from the serious concern of understanding the correct form of proclamation, to a certain extent, however, they were […] the result of […] down-to-earth interests. Because the fables […] decided on the number of listeners, thus on the influence (and income!) of the preachers. The case of Johann Balthasar Schupp can be taken as exemplary for the latter.”

62

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

The criticism often referred to a word of Paul from the first letter to Timothy: “Preach the word” and the warning “Denn es wird eine zeit sein / da sie die heilsame Lere nicht leiden werden / […] / Vnd werden die ohren von der Warheit wenden / vnd sich zu den Fabeln keren.” (1 Timothy 4: 2–4; according to Luther Bible 1545) Against this purism, which was oriented towards a very narrow concept of truth, a homiletics turned, which saw itself justified by the reference to parables, allegories, examples and miracle stories in the Bible, the preaching doctrine of a Luther and the practical teacher experience still to bring entertaining material into the sermon and which felt obliged to a ‘higher truth’.30 Schupp takes up the defamation of Johannes Mathesius as ‘Fabul-Hansen’ in the title of his work and turns the insult into a positive. The animal fable of the sparrow and his four children therefore stands in the tension field of a sermon-political, in the narrower sense homiletic dispute in the Protestant learnedness of the early modern period and practically served as a model example for the institution of the ‘Easter story’, ultimately but paradigmatically for the sermon example at all. As an ‘Easter story’, the sparrow story was soon widespread and was reissued and drawn out in various ways in the 17th and 18th centuries. By the beginning of the 19th century, the story even became a literary subject in the context of the Brothers Grimm. Achim von Arnim, who was closely friends with the Grimms, had already included the slightly modified fable in the then unpublished “History of the Preacher Tanner and What He Learned in the Women’s School” in 180931 and added it as a story told by an old servant in his novel Armut, Reichtum, Schuld und Buße der Gräfin Dolores in 1810.32 The Grimms—in particular Wilhelm Grimm—were already familiar with the text production of both projects and knew the novel in particular well, which they evaluated differently in their intensive exchange with Arnim.33 The extraordinarily great interest in this fable in the time proves that Arnim still published an edition of the 30 See

the discussion in “The Truth of Histories”, in “Exkurs: On the Relationship of the Terms ‘Fable’ and ‘History’ in the 16th Century” and in “Aspects of the Literary Concept of Truth” in Knape 1984, pp. 346–365.

31 Cf. Arnim 1990, pp. 455-457, Comm. P. 1194.—With the exception of mild modernizations, a version in the speech of the youngest sparrow is particularly noteworthy. While it says in Schupp, as later also with the Grimms: “You, my dear father, who nourish yourself without harming other people, come along, and no hawk, buzzard, eagle or stork will harm him, if he especially commends himself and his honest nourishment to the dear God every evening and morning. […].” (KHM 1812, pp. 159–160), Arnim changes ‘his honest nourishment’ to “his honest name” (Arnim 1990, p. 457). 32 Arnim

1989, pp. 484–487.—Arnim retains the change that can already be found in the ‘History of the Preacher Tanner’ here as well.

33 Cf.

Steig 1904, pp. 52–93.—See in particular Jacob Grimm‘s reservations after his reading of the novel in Steig 1904, pp. 72–73 (letter of 3 September 1810). Arnim’s answer a little later reveals some of the functional background of the adaptation: “In general, I have tried to lay a true foundation everywhere in the book that touches the times, so that one may well believe them to be fictitious, but finds the times themselves interpreted truthfully in it.” (Steig 1904, p. 76) Wilhelm Grimm wrote a very positive review of the novel in: Heidelbergische Jahrbücher der Literatur 3rd year (1810), pp. 374–383. Reprinted in: W. Grimm, Kleinere Schriften 1881 I, pp. 289–293.

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

63

Mathesius sermons in 1817, in which the story of the sparrow and his four children can also be found.34 While the fable is still expressly assigned to a preacher in Arnim’s earlier project according to the source, in the novel the assignment is shifted to an old servant. Ultimately, this change of perspective in the course of the progressing literarization within this tight timeframe of 1809/1810 reflects the re-purposing of a story from the world of scholars and preachers to the ‘popular’ world of the servant. Grimm’s adaptation of the sermon fairy tale for the collection of Kinder- und Hausmärchen follows this process of re-purposing and re-functionalization. With the exception of a slight modernization and a reading35 the Grimms took the Sparrow-fable from Schupp’s template absolutely literally into their collection. And within the Kinder- und Hausmärchen the text has remained largely unchanged across all print editions between 1812 and 1857. Despite the literary context known to the fairy tale editors between biblical apologetics, fable literature and modern sermon literature, which explicitly saw itself as committed to the model of Aesop, the Grimms nevertheless believed that they could recognize an orally transmitted story in the Sparrow story. Why Schupp and not Mathesius is mentioned as a source in the Grimm’s notes to the fairy tale is not clear. A simple explanation would be simple negligence. Wilhelm Grimm supplemented the references and references in the later annotation volumes to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen to a similar story in Georg Rollenhagen’s animal epic Froschmeuseler from 1595 and its reprint by Wilhelm Wackernagel.36 Wilhelm Grimm dealt comprehensively with the sparrow story in the context of a speech on Thierfabeln bei den Meistersängern in front of the Royal Academy of Sciences in 1855. But here too his main focus was on the story version by Rollenhagen. The sparrow fable used for the Kinder- und Hausmärchen is mentioned, but related solely to the Schupp collection. In doing so, Wilhelm Grimm makes a misattribution, which has been written on in research to this day, insofar as he does not attribute the Fabul-Hanß to Anton Menon Schupp, but to his—quite famous—father Johann Balthasar Schupp: […] etwa in der mitte des 17ten jahrhunderts[,] erscheint die fabel bei I. Balth. Schuppius (Fabelhans s. 837). aus dem froschmeuseler hat er sie nicht genommen, bei aller übereinstimmung im ganzen und in den grundzügen weicht er in der ausführung zu weit von ihm ab, und wir werden auch hier auf die mündliche überlieferung als quelle geleitet. (W. Grimm 1855, p. 17)

34 See Arnim

1817, pp. 42–43.

35 In

all fairy tale collections of the KHM, the Sparrow-Father warns his third son: “Bergbuben haben manchen Sperling mit Kobold (sic!) umbracht.” (KHM 1812, p. 159; KHM 1857 II, p. 290), while in Schupp it is correctly “Kobald”. However, it cannot be ruled out that this is a deliberate rewording based on the popular saying about the “Kobolderz”. Arnim writes the correct “Kobalt” in his novel. 36 See

KHM 1856, p. 239. Already in a handwritten addition in the hand copy of KHM 1812, appendix, p. XXIV, and then in print in KHM 1822 / Rölleke 1999, p. 1100: “[…] but earlier already in the Froschmeuseler. Magdeburg 1595.”

64

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

Wilhelm Grimm apparently remained with the state of knowledge that he had acquired in 1809 with the transcription from Brentano’s book, where he had obviously not seen or simply forgotten the context—both in terms of the editors, as well as in view of the character of the Fabul-Hanß as a postscript of sermons by Luther’s pupil Mathesius. However, since the most important information is typical of the time and an appropriate edition by the friend Achim von Arnim is in his own library, one must assume a conceptually conditioned specific distortion of perception. Probably the unshakeable conviction that the fable is not a popular story 'for the people’, but a 'from the people’ or 'of the people’ led to the recognizable blind spots in Grimm’s perception. At least in this way a story has remained in the collection of Kinder- und Hausmärchen which might otherwise have been sorted out by the editors. Schematically, KHM 157 Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder offers an example of fairy tales that can be described structurally as direct transfers from literature. The source is specifically a sermon example, in the narrower sense a Easter fairy tale. The context was a sermon collection from the 16th century, by means of which a Luther disciple brought the life of his teacher into a historical sequence. The ‘histories’ like the postscript from the 17th century, which Wilhelm Grimm relied on as an immediate template, stand as early modern scholarly writings ‘for the people’ in a sermon-political dispute about the usefulness and legitimacy of entertainment elements in worship, specifically in the context of the sermon. The story of the sparrow and his children is at the same time a plea as a model text for the practice of such sermon examples. The story material itself is taken from the fable literature of the Middle Ages, which refers back to antiquity. In its adaptation as a sermon example, the story material is adapted motivically. The late adaptation of the sermon example as a ‘fairy tale’ by Wilhelm Grimm released the story from the functional context of early modern scholarly literature and transferred it into the new context of his own collection. The story itself remained unchanged in form and content, but by the change of genre and function it was placed in a completely different context of meaning. Over all genre and function changes, the development history of the material remained consistently in the horizon of a literary tradition. Its didactic basic orientation as a fable story is still manifoldly graspable in the fairy tale of the Grimms.

3.1.2 The Example KHM 69 Jorinde and Joringel As another example of a direct text transfer from literature, let us look at KHM 69 Jorinde and Joringel . In the Grimms’ assessment, it was also a popular story’ from the people’. The story is one of the best-known fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm.37 It is told of a young couple who are caught in the spell of an “old castle

37 Heinz

Rölleke sees in the story “one of the few German-language fairy tale publications before Grimm”, which is why the text “deserves special attention” (Grimms Märchen / Rölleke 1998, p. 123).

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

65

in the middle of a large, thick forest”, where the girl, Jorinde, is transformed into a nightingale by a witch-like “arch-sorceress”. Her fiancé Joringel can only save her when he dreams of a “blood-red flower in the middle of which is a beautiful large pearl”, he finally finds it and with its help then defeats the sorceress (KHM 1812, p. 328–332). The story has been part of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen since the first volume of 1812 and has also been included in the ‘Kleine Ausgabe’. In the appendix, the Grimms referred to a testimony of the autobiographical confession literature of their time: “From Heinrich Stilling’s Youth I, 104–108.” (KHM 1812, p. XLVI)38 The literary evidence meant the first part of the ‘life story’ by Johann Heinrich Jung, later called Jung-Stilling, a bestseller of the years and decades around 1800.39 How much Wilhelm Grimm appreciated Jung-Stillings’ novel work and in particular the first volumes of his ‘life story’ is revealed in a remark in his critical review of Franz Horn’s Die schöne Litteratur Deutschlands während des Achtzehnten Jahrhunderts in the Heidelbergischen Jahrbüchern der Litteratur Grimm complains about some “gaps” in Horn’s literary historical overview: mancher Bessere ist übergangen, der vor anderen offenbar eine Stelle verdient, z .B. Stilling Jung, es sei nun seiner Romane, seiner einfachen und herzlichen Romanzen oder der ersten Bände seiner Lebensbeschreibung wegen, welche letztere niemand ohne Gefallen und Theilnahme lesen kann und deren Erscheinung Goethe selbst veranlasste. (W. Grimm 1881 I, S. 266–88, here S. 284)

Jung, who came from relatively simple rural conditions, had worked his way up to a elevated bourgeois scholar existence through diligence and skill, and had gained considerable fame as an ophthalmologist, economist, and administrator, and as an edifying literary writer.40 The first part of the “Life Story,” written in 1772 solely for the study friends, had been brought to publication by his Strasbourg friend and study colleague Johann Wolfgang Goethe without the author’s knowledge. Goethe had already asked his fellow student to write this sensitive autobiographical narrative during their shared time in Strasbourg. The finished manuscript was taken by Goethe

38 The

Grimms had at least the part Heinrich Stilling’s Alter published by Jung-Stillings grandson in 1817 (Denecke / Teitge 1989, p. 264 [No. 3111]). 39 A

total of six parts of the ‘life story’ have been published: Henrich Stillings Youth (Berlin, Leipzig 1777), Henrich Stillings Young Years (Berlin, Leipzig 1778), Henrich Stillings Wanderings (Berlin, Leipzig 1778), Henrich Stillings Domestic Life (Berlin, Leipzig 1779), Henrich Stillings Years of Learning (Berlin, Leipzig 1804) and Henrich Stillings Old Age (Heidelberg 1817). 40 G.A.

Benrath’s introduction to his edition provides a very nice summary of the life story: “After unsuccessful work as a tailor’s apprentice, village schoolmaster, and tutor in his Silesian homeland, he broke away from the poor, although well-ordered, conditions of his peasant family and environment in order to rise to the position of commercial administrator (1763–1770), doctor and ophthalmologist in Elberfeld (1772–1778), and professor of cameralistics in Kaiserslautern (1778–1784), Heidelberg (1784–1787), and Marburg (1787–1803); but at the age of sixty-three he finally took up the task of a religious-edifying writer as his true, God-willed profession.” (Jung-Stilling 1992, p. IX)

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

66

to Elberfeld in July 1774 with the intention of promoting its printing. That he then shortened it by about half, Jung-Stilling, as he was called after publication, reported himself; where and to what extent Goethe also edited the text will probably remain unresolved. In any case, the book Henrich Stillings Jugend soon established the author’s literary reputation and fame through its wide distribution. (Schwinge 2014, p. 121)

For Goethe, the “life story” documented—as he described in Dichtung und Wahrheit with friendly-distant—the unverwüstliche[n] Glaube[n] an Gott und an eine unmittelbar von daher fließende Hülfe, die sich in einer ununterbrochenen Vorsorge und in einer unfehlbaren Rettung aus aller Not, von jedem Übel augenscheinlich bestätige. (Goethe 1985, p. 400)

The edifying literary character of the “life story” and its function to convey to a contemporary audience his life as a testimony of a guidance by the providence of God, were to gain a considerable intensification in Jung-Stilling’s later work and the author, who can be quite rightly referred to as a “religious enthusiast” (Kiefer 2004, p. 197), to become a much-read religious popular writer and magazine publisher.41 In particular, with the “periodical” Der Graue Mann which he edited and which he operated as the sole author between 1795 and 1816 in 30 issues or “pieces”, JungStilling managed to address another circle of “Stilling friends”. The periodical was published like the entire religious writings of Jung-Stilling since the mid-1790s by Johann Philipp Raw, a member of the Nuremberg Particular Society of the Basel Christian Society. Jacob Grimm mentioned the bookshop in a postscript to his letter to his brother Wilhelm of 18.1.1815 from Vienna: „Bader [recte: Franz von Baader] will den ganzen Jacob Böhme neu laßen auflegen, verm. bei Rau [Raw] in Nürnberg, einer frommen Stillingsbuchhdlg, die Brentano große Lust hat, einmalzu kaufen.“ (Correspondence of Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm 2001, p. 410) For their KHM first edition, the Brothers Grimm extrapolated from the first two volumes of the unfinished “life story”, Henrich Stillings Jugend from 1777 and Henrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre from 1778, three of their fairy tales— in addition to KHM 69 Jorinde and Joringel in the first volume still KHM 78 Der alte Großvater und sein Enkel as well as in the second volume (as No. 64) the fragment KHM 150 Die alte Bettelfrau. They also took over two stories in the first volume of their Deutschen Sagen, the legendary story of the robber Johann Hübner as No. 12842 and as No. 234 Der Kindelsberg.43 Within the­

41 See

Schwinge 1994.

42 German

Legends 1816, p. 195–198.—Based on a narration, it is ranked in the collection as No. 129: Johann Hübner. As a source reference, the Grimms note: “Stilling’s Life. I. 51–54.” 43 German Legends 1816, p. 315–317. The Grimms noted as a source reference: “Stilling’s Life. II. 24–29.” The tragic story of a faithful fiancée—“a very beautiful virgin” (German Legends 1816, p. 316)—on a castle near the Geisenberg, who vainly waits for her lost fiancé, shows motif similarities with the ‘Jorinde and Joringel’ story. Grimm’s page references do not fit any of the tangible editions of 1778 or 1780 by Jung-Stillings Henrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre. However,

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

67

autobiographical novel of the life path of Henrich Stilling, determined by divine guidance, a figure of speech that is closely linked to the person of the author, but in essence still an autofiction, a “noticeable literary ambition” “poetic glorification” (G.A. Benrath in Jung-Stillling 1992, p. X), it is all text adoptions of the Grimms. In späteren Kommentaren wiesen die Redaktoren bei KHM 69 Jorinde and Joringel in addition to a slightly different “oral story from the Schwalm region” (KHM 1856, p. 119), which, however, can be assessed as directly or indirectly dependent on Jung-Stilling’s story, thus to be evaluated as an oralization of a literary work. With good reason, Hans-Jörg Uther referred on occasion to Grimm’s “unconcerned handling of sources that were re-cited without autopsy” (Uther 2004b, p. 295). While the Grimms probably relied on the unannounced edition of 1780 (Frankfurt and Leipzig) for the second volume of the ‘Life Story’, Henrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre, they cannot precisely attribute their bibliographic reference of the first volume, since the page references do not fit either the first edition or one of the known editions of 1779, 1780, 1806 or 1811.44 Grimms’ bibliographic short title suggests most of all the ‘Neue Original-Ausgabe’ from 1806 or the Berlin edition from 1800. After all, Jacob Grimm 1860 in the ‘Zweiten neuhochdeutschen Quellenverzeichnis’ of the second volume of the Deutschen Wörterbuchs: “Heinrich STILLINGS jugend. eine wahrhafte geschichte. Berlin 1777; jünglingsjahre

the first edition of 1778 was published in “4 different production variants with different page numbers” (Pfeifer 1993, p. 3, to No. 8), so it is possible that the Grimms resorted to one of these editions. There is an edition in the Kassel library collection, but the Grimm’s page references do not fit it. 44 Grimm’s

evidence “104–108” is not verifiable in the tangible editions of Henrich Stillings Jugend for the ‘Historie von Joringel und Jorinde’ (1st edition: Berlin and Leipzig: Decker, 1777; 2nd edition: Berlin and Leipzig: Decker, 1779; Frankfurt and Leipzig: without publishing information, 1780). The Grimm’s information also does not fit the editions of 1806 and 1811: Heinrich Stillings Leben. Erster Theil: Heinrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Neue Original-Ausgabe. Basel und Leipzig: Heinrich August Rottmann, 1806; Lebensbeschreibung von Heinrich Stilling. (Sonst Heinrich Jung genannt.) Enthaltend I. Heinrich Stillings Jugend; II. Dessen Jünglings-Jahre; III. Dessen Wanderschaft; IV. Dessen häusliches Leben, und V. Heinrich Stillings Lehrjahre. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Erste Amerikanische Ausgabe. Reading, gedruckt u. hrsg. v. Heinrich B. Sage. 1811.—Pfeifer (1993, S. 19 [Nr. 135]) lists in his Jung-Stilling-Bibliographie as further editions: “Henrich Stillings Jugend, Jünglingsjahre, Wanderschaft. Tübingen 1780.” [Not tangible]; 22, Nr. 172: “Heinrich Stillings Jugend. Berlin. 1800”; Nr. 173: “Henrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Henrich Stillings Jünglingsjahre. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Henrich Stillings Wanderjahre. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Berlin. 1800.” [Location: Stadtbibliothek Siegen; Universitätsbibliothek Basel]; 24, Nr. 200: “Heinrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Berlin, 1806.” [Location: Kongress-Bibliothek Washington]. This edition is probably closest to the “Second improved edition” mentioned by G.A. Benrath in the commentary of Jung-Stilling (1992, S. 759), namely Berlin, Leipzig 1806. G.A. Benrath also mentions ibid. a “low-cost edition” of the first edition published by Decker in 1777, but without a traceable findspot.

68

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

1806. am häufigsten ist eine ausgabe, Berlin 1800, in 5 cited by bands.” (German Dictionary 1860, p. XVI) Nevertheless, the most likely variant is that the Brothers Grimm also relied on an edition from 1780 for this first volume of the “Life Story”, since a corresponding volume was available in the Kassel library stock of the time: Henrich Stillings Jugend. A true story. Frankfurt and Leipzig: [publisher not determined], 1780.45 In the end, however, there were also no changes in the text in the tangible text editions of the time. When taking over the text, the Grimms allowed themselves minor interventions in relation to Jung-Stilling, which, however, remained so minor that one can speak of an overall almost unchanged text takeover. The editorial work was mainly limited to the narrative introduction: „Historie von Joringel und Jorinde“ fromHenrich Stillings Jugend,1780

KHM 69Jorinde und Joringel First edition 1812

Es war einmal ein altes Schloß, mitten in einem großen dicken Wald; darinnen wohnte eine alte Frau ganz allein, das war eine Erzzauberinn. Am Tage machte sie sich bald zur Katze, oder zum Hasen, oder zur Nachteule; des Abends aber wurde sie ordentlich wieder wie ein Mensch gestaltet. Sie konnte das Wild und die Vögel herbeylocken, und dann schlachtete sie’s, kochte und bratete es. Wenn jemand auf hundert Schritte nahe bey’s Schloß kam, so mußte er stille stehen und konnte sich nicht von der Stelle bewegen, bis sie ihn los sprach; wenn aber eine reine keusche Jungfer in diesen Kreis kam, so verwandelte sie dieselbe in einen Vogel und sperrte sie denn in einen Korb ein, in die Kammern des Schlosses. Sie hatte wohl sieben tausend solcher Körbe mit so raren Vögeln im Schlosse. […] (Jung-Stilling 1780a, S. 114)

Es war einmal ein altes Schloß, mitten in einem großen, dicken Wald, darinnen wohnte eine alte Frau ganz allein, das war eine Erzzauberin. Am Tage machte sie sich zur Katze, oder zu Nachteule, des Abends aber wurde sie wieder ordentlich wie ein Mensch gestaltet. Sie konnte das Wild und die Vögel herbeilocken, und dann schlachtete sie’s, kochte und bratete es. Wenn jemand auf hundert Schritte dem Schloß nahe kam, so mußte er stille stehn, und konnte sich nicht von der Stelle bewegen, bis sie ihn lossprach: wenn aber eine keusche Jungfrau in diesen Kreis kam, so verwandelte sie dieselbe in einen Vogel und sperrte sie dann in einen Korb ein, in die Kammern des Schlosses. Sie hatte wohl sieben tausend solcher Körbe mit so raren Vögeln im Schlosse. […] (KHM 1812, S. 328)

Even in the opening of the story with its editorial changes, it is obvious that the Grimms have made an immediate text transfer. The editorial changes mainly concern the motif of the transformation of the “witch” into a rabbit, which probably did not seem appropriate to the Grimms for the ugly character of the story

45 For

the “Historie von Joringel und Jorinde” see ibid., P. 114–118. Grimm’s evidence “104108” can be regarded as a cataloging error. This also applies to Grimm’s source reference to the robber story by Johann Hübner in their Deutschen Sagen: “Stilling’s Leben. I. 51–54.” (German Legends 1816, p. 195) In Jung-Stilling (1780a) the story can actually be found on the following pages 55 to 59.—Grimm’s uncertainties in the evidence of the stories taken over by JungStilling are also reflected in the vague source reference in the commentary to KHM 150 Die alte Bettelfrau, which does without any page reference: “A fragment and confused. Is told in Stillings Jünglingsjahren, but seems to be an old folktale […].” (No. 64 in KHM 1815, p. XXXXVIII [= XLVIII])

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

69

figure, the pleonasm of “pure” and “chaste” as well as the consistent replacement of “maiden” by “virgin”; in addition, there are only minor stylistic changes. As a result of the text transfer, only one more major editorial change can be observed. After Joringel found the “blood-red flower” that broke the spell and carried it “day and night to the castle” (KHM 1812, p. 331), Jung-Stilling still has a metatextual insert, which the Grimms omitted: “Well! I was fine!” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 117) The fact that the order of the story figures was changed in the title of the fairy tale and now Jorinde was listed first may well have been due to the fact that the title “sounded more familiar” after the rearrangement of the two names, as HansJörg Uther (2013/2021, p. 159) speculates on occasion. That the Grimms obviously considered the story from Jung-Stillings to be an autobiographical ‘life story’ in its core, may have had various reasons. First of all, the Grimms apparently understood the subtitle of Jung-Stillings’ book—‘A true story’—rather in terms of theme than in terms of rhetoric, thus not as a literary classification in the horizon of sensibility and late-pietistic edifying literature, but as a documentary and interpreted it as a sign of authenticity. But this also reflects a quite general phenomenon of Grimm’s text interpretation, namely the tendency to understand text statements verbally to a certain extent. A very decisive moment in the assessment of Jung-Stillings’ inner story as a testimony of oral tradition will have been the narrative context in which the story is embedded. In Johann Heinrich Jung, a genre episode from the arduous but peaceful simple life of the Stilling family is set in scene. The widowed grandfather, a former charcoal burner, his daughter Marie and his grandson Henrich are in the forest to chop wood. While the grandfather “in this lonely place” goes further into the forest, Marie and her eleven-year-old nephew remain “confidential” and in “pious romantic feeling”. At the child’s request, the aunt now tells the “history of Joringel and Jorinde” (JungStilling 1780a, p. 113) for his entertainment—apparently for the umpteenth time. The highly stereotyped narrative constellation corresponds to the naivety ideal of the Grimms and their idea of a ‘folk poetry’ of the simple rural population to the point. Not least, the story introduced with the classical fiction formula ‘Once upon a time’corresponds in its—apparently—so simple narrative, with its transformation and redemption motifs and its almost romantic-looking sensitive symbolism with dream and flower, props like forest and castle, the narrative personnel of young man, girl, witch and enchanted animals down to the last detail to the Grimm’s fairy tale ideal. A direct link between Jung-Stillings’ sensitive autofiction and Grimms’ romantically conceptualized fairy tale understanding will certainly have been Herder, whom Jung-Stilling deeply revered and who had a certain godfathership for Grimms’ idea of ‘natural poetry”. However, in Grimm’s perception of the simple world of life in the “life story”, Jung-Stilling’s contouring of the protagonists as entirely reading and retelling figures is a “blind spot”. Thus, during the joint wood collection, the young Henrich

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

70

“passed on the history of the four Haymon children” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 112) that he had previously read in a “folk book”. The central role played by printed literature in the transmission of narratives is particularly evident in the context of the young Henrich’s early educational history: Was aber sein größtes Vergnügen ausmachte, war eine kleine Bibliothek des Schulmeisters, die er Freyheit zu gebrauchen hatte: Sie bestund aus allerhand nützlichen Cöllnischen Schriften; vornehmlich: der Reinecke Fuchs mit vortreflichen Holzschnitten, Kaiser Octavianus nebst seinem Weib und Söhnen; eine schöne Historie von den vier Heymons Kindern; Peter und Magelone; die schöne Melusine, und endlich der vortrefliche Hanns Clauert. So bald nun Nachmittags die Schule aus war, so machte er sich auf den Weg nach Tiefenbach und las eine solche Historie unter dem Gehen. […] Abends kamen dann unsere fünf lieben Leute zusammen, schütteten eins dem andern seine Seele aus, und sonderlich erzählte Henrich seine Historien, woran sich alle […] ungemein ergötzten. (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 109)

The young Henrich therefore relies on a wide range of “popular books” as a reader, in a way the canon of early modern entertainment literature.46 It becomes clear that he not only reads the “histories” of this popular literary culture, but also retells them, just as his stories are probably also retold by his listeners. At its core, Jung-Stilling sketches the often misunderstood process of oralization of printed sources.47 Even the grandfather, who is clearly marked as a coleman, is by no means illiterate and uneducated, on the contrary he recommends his grandson “good books, especially the Bible, then also what Doctor Luther, Calvinus, Oecolampadius and Bucerus” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 112) have written. Jung-Stilling’s sensitive representation of the educational world of rural populations differs sharply from Grimm’s later idealization and their restriction to an orally transmitted “folk poetry”. What the Brothers Grimm obviously interpreted as documentation of an oral narrative tradition, is in Jung-Stilling’s work actually the staging of such an oral tradition, thus a literary representation. What at first glance appears to be a folktale told within the framework of a biographical documentation of simple rural life in the Sieg Valley of early and mid18th century Germany is in fact a literary building block within a highly artificial narrative and a work that foreshadows the modern novel of development. Henrich Stillings Jugend is—like the following parts of his “Life Story”—a testimony to that 18th century autobiography career that went hand in hand with the establishment of the concept of individuality in this time—Hans Esselborn rightfully called it an “written individuality” on one occasion (Esselborn 1996, p. 195). The literariness of the “life story” is already apparent in the action-structurally and

46  For

Jung-Stilling’s reading, see Schwinge 2014, pp. 139-158, in particular pp. 140–142: “Reading in Youth and Learning Years (until 1770)”.

47 The

process is to be distinguished from the ““re-oralization of printed sources” or the various “phenomena of a second oral tradition”, which Pöge-Alder (2007, p. 64) makes with regard to a contemporary fairy tale telling.

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

71

motivically strictly composed structure. Henrich Stillings Jugend is divided into four parts, the hinge points of which are each marked by a comparable motif composition. Within the narrated events, these cuts are each biographical breaks in the family life of the Stillings. The dominant appearance of “old Stilling”, Henrich’s grandfather Eberhard Stilling, a farmer and charcoal burner, with whom the “life story” begins and ends with his death, is part of the framework design. The final tableau is very obviously dominated by motifs of sensibility: “Sein Grab bedeckt kein prächtiger Leichstein; aber oft fliegen im Frühling ein paar Täubchen einsam hin, girren und liebkosen sich zwischen dem Gras und Blumen, die aus Vater Stillings Moder hervorgrünen.” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 134) Death and love are central themes that are brought together motivically in this tableau. The step from the sensitive to the edifying representation is tangible in the Christological connotation. The first part leads up to the wedding of Eberhard Stillings’s son, the tailor and schoolmaster Wilhelm, and the preacher’s daughter Dorothea—Dortchen—who, despite her poverty being reinforced by marriage, received the blessing of the ‘old Stilling’. A key moment is the unshakeable confidence in the “divine providence” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 13). The biographical break at the wedding celebration is associated with a walk of the bride and groom into the forest: But Wilhelm and his bride wanted to be alone and talk; so they went deep into the forest. With the distance from the people their love grew. Ah, if there were no needs of life! no cold, frost and wet, what would this couple have lacked in earthly happiness? (JungStilling 1780a, p. 25)

The second part describes the difficult circumstances of the young couple, the birth of the son Henry, and the increasing melancholy of the mother. The conclusion of this part is again a forest walk, which is already connected with the foreshadowing of Dortchen’s death to follow: Almost a year and a half old was Henry Stilling, when Dortchen on a Sunday afternoon asked her husband to take a walk with her to the Geisenberg castle. Never before had Wilhelm refused her anything. He went with her. As soon as they came into the forest, they threw themselves into each other’s arms and went step by step under the shade of the trees and the manifold twittering of the birds up the mountain. There Dortchen began: “What do you think, Wilhelm, should one know each other in heaven?” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 52)

This second part concludes with Wilhelm’s story of the robber Johann Hübner, who is said to have lived on the castle, which the Grimms included in the first volume of their German Legends in 1816. The dark story casts “a deadly chill” on the young woman, who subsequently falls victim to a “fiery fever” and dies. (JungStilling 1780a, p. 61) Over the death of his beloved wife, Wilhelm hardens in the third part, subjecting himself and his son to a strict, world-renouncing way of life. From this selfenslavement he finally finds release during a joint hike with his son to the nearby

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

72

Geisenberg Castle, where father and son are reunited. The importance of both the place of the event and the event itself for the “life story” told is already revealed by the title engraving of the first print edition of 1777 by Daniel Chodowiecki, which shows father and son48 in intimate embrace in front of the graphic representation of the “Geisenberg Castle” ruin—a hidden reference to the ruin of Burg Ginsburg in the Siegerland49—represents (see Fig. 3.1). This part also comes to an end with a story told by the father, who familiarizes his son with the family history. With this third part and the fourth part, Henrich Stilling’s way out of the family relationships into the world of the Latin school and education begins. The fourth part is concluded once again by a scene at the edge of the forest, namely the one in which Marie tells her nephew the ‘Story of Joringel and Jorinde’. In this inner story, the previously developed motives—the walk of a loving couple; forest; Castle; Birds (chirping)—and themes—in particular death—are taken up again in a narrative and transformed into a story of hope and redemption. In doing so, the biographies told of the ‘old Stilling’ as well as of his son Wilhelm and his—deceased—wife Dortchen are brought together. For the listening Henrich, the ‘History’ reflects the love story of his parents and the readership of this sensitive story wonderfully and consolationingly at the same time. Within the frame story, however, the story also means the encounter with a magical world of evil for the young Henrich, which scares the God-fearing Henrich: “Baase! sagte er endlich, das könnt einem des Nachts bang machen.” (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 118) Figuratively, in the conclusion of this fourth part, another connection is made with regard to the grandfather. The ‘History’ is immediately followed by a vision of the ‘old Stilling’, which he reports after his forest walk: Wie ich von euch in Wald hinein gieng, sah ich weit vor mir ein Licht, eben so als wenn Morgens früh die Sonne aufgeht. […] Ich gieng drauf an; wie ich vorn hin kam, siehe da war vor mir eine Ebne, die ich mit meinen Augen nicht übersehen konnte. Ich hab mein lebtag so herrlichs nicht gesehen […]. Da standen viel tausend prächtige Schlösser, eins nah beym andern. Schlösser!—ich kanns euch nicht beschreiben! als wenn sie von lauter

48 Hans-Jörg

Uther’s overall helpful KHM commentary in his handbook shows some deficiencies in KHM 69. This includes the incorrect description of the engraving: “The title engraving […] shows Jorinde and Joringel closely embracing […].” (Uther 2013, p. 161, 2021, p. 161). Similarly, in Uther 2004b, p. 303: “The importance of the scene between Anna and Stilling within the first part of the memoirs can be seen from the fact that an unknown, imaginative illustrator placed the couple closely embracing on a stone bench surrounded by bushes [!] in the title engraving of the 1778 edition […].”—The edition of Jung-Stilling’s memoirs of 1780 used by the Grimms probably had no illustrations, only decorative woodcut vignettes.

49 Cf.

Jung-Stilling 1807, p. 94: “A few years earlier, I was one Sunday afternoon all alone on the old ruined castle, which I have called Geißenberg in my life story; its real name is Ginsberg […].” The high medieval fortress Burg Ginsburg, which was already in ruins during JungStilling’s lifetime.

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

73

Fig. 3.1  First edition of Henrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Berlin, Leipzig: Decker, 177750

50  First edition of Henrich Stillings Jugend from 1777. https://www.lot-tissimo.com/de-de/ auction-catalogues/doebritz/catalogue-id-doebritz10005/lot-51660917-156a-41a6-8c7ba6fd00ebb666, freely accessible (accessed on 24.09.2020).

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

74

Silber wären. Da waren Gärten, Büsche, Bäche. O Gott, wie schön! (Jung-Stilling 1780a, p. 119–120)

The pictoriality of the intra-literary ‘history’ and the connection to the memory site of the ‘Geisenberger Schloss’ from the frame story are taken up motivically and introduced into the vision of a ‘paradisiacal encounter’ in which the deceased daughter-in-law announces the ‘old Stilling’ as a messenger from heaven: Aus der Thür dieses Schlosses kam jemand heraus, auf mich zu, wie eine Jungfrau. Ach! ein herrlicher Engel!—Wie sie nah bey mir war, ach Gott! da war es unser seliges Dortchen! […] Sie sagte gegen mich so freundlich, eben mit der Mine die mir ehemal so oft das Herz stahl: Vater, dort ist unsere ewige Wohnung, ihr kommt bald zu uns.—Ich sah, und siehe alles war Wald vor mir; das herrliche Gesicht war weg. Kinder, ich sterbe bald; wie freu ich mich drauf! (Jung-Stilling 1780a, S. 120)

In the narrative-mediated certainty of a later family reunion in a paradisiacal world in the afterlife, this gives the events a consoling character and ties life and death into a wonderful, naturally Christian-based salvation world. A source for the intra-literary “History of Joringel and Jorinde” adapted by Jung-Stilling is not known, while his—explicitly referred to as “sensitive history[ies]”—grandfather-grandson story in the second volume of his “Life Story”, Henrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre, which the Grimms also took over for the first volume of their fairy tale collection, ultimately goes back to the Baroque poet Johann Michael Moscherosch.51 But regardless of whether Jung-Stilling invented the “History of Joringel and Jorinde” or—not yet recognized—found it elsewhere or transformed a literary model, the functional literary value of the intra-narrative within the “Life Story” is unmistakable. The narrative is an integral part of a plot and motif-wise very skilfully composed narrative. With Henrich Stillings Jugend it is ultimately a autobiographically marked and without a doubt also autobiographically founded novel of sensibility, which—as is not uncommon in this literary stream—had a character shaped by Late Pietism. What the Grimms certainly took from Jung-Stilling’s intra-literary narrative stories for young Stillings was probably the fact that this sensitive edifying writer, unlike the contemporary enlighteners in their popular pedagogical writings—for example Rudolph Zacharias Becker in his influential Noth- und Hülfsbüchlein für Bauersleute from 1788—did not set the scene as popularly presented ‘histories’ in order to ridicule and lead to enlightenment the superstition of an unenlightened rural population. Jung-Stilling served the intra-literary narrative stories to mirror and authenticate the world’s alleged salvation character in such a ‘folk story’.52 51 The

Grimms clearly based the second volume Heinrich Stilling’’s Youth Years on the 1780 edition. See Jung-Stilling 1780b, p. 8: “[…] and then he told them all sorts of beautiful, sensitive histories”.—A summary of the state of research can be found in Uther 2013/2021, pp. 158–161 and 174–176.

52 In

the later productive literary reception, this ‘salvation character’ was indeed received and implemented critically; see, for example, Köhlmeier (2019, S. 438–442), whose adaptation of the “Joringel und Jorinde” story obviously refers back to Jung-Stilling’s “Historie”, not to Grimms’ ‘Kinder- und Hausmärchen’.

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

75

On April 15, 1809, Jacob Grimm reported to his brother Wilhelm, who was on a book tour, about the state of his scholarly research. With a view to the joint preparation of a fairy tale collection, he asks the brother about his library findings in the meantime: “Are there no new children’s fairy tales? I still don’t have Grimm, but I finally got Stilling.” (Correspondence of Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm 2001, S. 110) The reference to ‘Grimm’ refers to the Kindermährchen of the namesake and competitor Albert Ludwig Grimm, which came out in 1809 with Mohr and Zimmer in Heideberg. Hans-Jörg Uther assumes that the reference to ‘den Stilling’ is to be made to the “first two parts” of the ‘life story’ (Uther 2013/2021, S. 158),53 while the comment of the ‘Critical Edition’ of the Grimm correspondence assumes that Johann Heinrich Jung-Stilling’s Theorie der Geister-Kunde from 1808 is meant.54 Since Jacob Grimm wrote a little later, on 3 May 1809, to his brother that he “now has ‘the Stilling’ and that the first part, i.e. the presentiments, predictions have affected him infinitely more than the second part on the apparitions” (Briefwechsel Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm 2001, p. 116), it is without doubt the Theorie der Geister-Kunde that is meant. Wilhelm Grimm’s reply of 13 May 1809 must have referred to this book, which, like a Jung-Stilling apology relating to the ensuing dispute over the writing, was demonstrably present in the brothers Grimm’s book collection:55 Theorie der Geister-Kunde received not only mention but evidently also some high regard in the context of the brothers Grimm’s work on fairy tales and was used for both the first and second parts of the Deutsche Sagen.56 Even though Wilhelm Grimm’s impression from his reading appears more subdued, it is nevertheless conspicuous that Jung-Stilling’s Theorie der Geister-Kunde was not only mentioned but evidently also highly regarded by both Grimms and was used for both the first and second parts of the Deutsche Sagen.57 Since Henrich Stillings Jugend and the ‘Historie von Joringel und Jorinde’ incorporated in it are so obviously characterized by visions and the phenomenon of apparitions, at least a glimpse of this Theory of Ghostlore should be added. In this

53 Already

in Uther 2004b, S. 294–295.

54 Cf.

Briefwechsel Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm 2013, p. 82.

55 See

Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 428 (nos. 5280 and 5281).

56 The

commentary volume provides no evidence.

57 See

in Volume 1 (German Legends 1816, p. 357) in the notes to DS 267 rau Berta oder die weiße Frau: “Stilling’s Theorie der Geisterkunde. P. 351–359.” Grimm’s note is wrong. The note actually refers to the 4th main section “Von Gesichten (Visionen) und Geistererscheinungen” in Jung-Stilling’s Geisterkunde; with the appearance of the ‘white woman’ the paragraphs 245 to 255 are concerned; with the ‘white Bertha’ $ 251–255 ( Geisterkunde 1808, p. 271–279; Bertha: p. 276–279). See also in Volume 2 (German Legends 1818, p. 376) in the notes to DS 579 The Countess of Orlamünde: “Cf. Jung’s note to the title page of his Ghostlore. “The Grimms refer to the explanation:” True image of the appearing so-called White Woman Agnes Countess of Orlamunda called.”—The commentary in the 1994 edition offers no explanations for this (cf. Deutsche Sagen 1994, p. 819 and 983).

76

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

way, Jung-Stilling’s perspective on his ‘life story’ can be supplemented from this obviously important point of view for him and, at the same time, perhaps another facet can be gained with regard to the Grimms’ interest in the ‘Historie’ as a ‘folkpoetic’ narrative. Jung-Stilling’s highly controversial theory at the time Theorie der GeisterKunde is driven by the intention to show, “that there are still some true and undeniable intuitions, visions, and ghost appearances among the thousand dreams, deceptions, poems, and phantasies, with which Satan and his angels have nothing to do.” (Jung-Stilling 1808, p. 6) The investigation may still be regarded as part of that “flood of occultism” (Kiefer 2004, p. 28) which had engulfed Immanuel Kant’s famous essay Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? from 1784. The basis of the Theory is the conviction that many “intuitions, visions, and ghost appearances” bear witness to the existence of an “invisible ghost world”.58 The ‘ghost world’ proved beyond doubt to be the “abode of departed souls, good and bad angels, and ghosts” and thus “the continuation of our souls after death” (JungStilling 1808, p. 9). Accordingly, in the second half of his work Jung-Stilling provides a wealth of examples of the ghost world entering the everyday reality of human beings. He cites as evidence of such ghostly existence, for example, the “Leichensehen” (Jung-Stilling 1808, p. 182) or the “Gesicht”, whereby above all “Erzählungen von solchen Erscheinungen […], daß abgeschiedene Menschenseelen, nach ihrem Tod wieder erscheinen” (Jung-Stilling 1808, p. 220) are of importance to him. Jung-Stilling expressly opposes superstition, as well as pure rationalism and its rejection of the inexplicable. Ultimately, he pleads for accepting the ‘ghost world’ in its existence and effectiveness with regard to the life of the individual, but to engage only with those elements which are conducive to the life of the soul because they are filled with the spirit of God: “Wir sind auf das Wort Gottes, auf den Herrn, und auf seinen Geist angewiesen, alle andere Geister gehen uns nichts an” (Jung-Stilling 1808, p. 139)59 One will certainly not be able to relate Jung-Stilling’s ‘Spirits-Knowledge’ to Grimm’s interest in ‘fairy tales’ as evidence of a ‘folk poetry’. But Jung-Stilling’s insistence on the existence of ghostly apparitions will certainly not have been foreign to them and their ideas of the reality of popular folk tales will have been quite affine. After all, the reality of a dream apparition also determines the redemption story in Jorinde and Joringel. In their text transfer of the ‘Jorinde and Joringel’ story from Jung-Stilling’s Henrich Stillings Jugend the Grimms adhered very closely to the model, so that one can speak of an immediate transfer without reservation. In the case of the ‘sensitive history’ of the grandfather and his grandson from the second volume of the ‘Lebensgeschichte’, Henrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre, the principle can still be seen, although the editorial changes here are much more profound. However,

58 For

“ghostseeing in the 18th century” see Kiefer 2004, pp. 175–190; for the appearance of the ‘white woman’ in particular see pp. 185–187.

59 Gerhard

Schwinge (2014, p. 65) classifies Theory of the Spirits-Knowledge among “these abstruse, spiritist-like, although not at all singular books of his time”.

77

3.1  Direct Text Adoptions

the text model—unlike the ‘Historie von Joringel und Jorinde’—is much more closely integrated into the narrative text of the ‘Lebensbericht’ by Jung-Stilling, which made editorial changes necessary during a transfer. It is reported how the young Stilling tells his ‘sensitive histories’ to other children and then animates even more children to tell. The story of the old grandfather and his grandson is subsequently put into the mouth of a boy. A brief look at the two narrative introductions is taken: Die ‚empfindsame Historie‘ vom Großvater und seinem Enkel ausHenrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre,1780

KHM 78Der alte Großvater und der Enkel Erstausgabe 1812

Neben uns wohnt ein alter Frühling, ihr wißt, wie er daher geht, und so an seinem Stock zittert; er hat keine Zähne mehr, auch hört und sieht er nicht viel. Wenn er denn so da am Tisch saß und zitterte,so verschüttete er immer vieles, auch floß ihm zuweilen etwas wieder aus dem Mund. Das eckelte dann seinem Sohn und seiner Schnur, und deswegen mußte der alte Großvater endlich hinter dem Ofen im Eck essen, sie gaben ihm etwas in einem irdenen Schüsselchen, und noch dazu nicht einmal satt, ich hab ihn wohl sehen essen, er sah so betrübt nach dem Tisch, und die Augen waren ihm dann naß. […] (Jung-Stilling 1780b, S. 8–9)

Es war einmal ein alter Mann, der konnte kaum gehen, seine Knie zitterten, er hörte und sah nicht viel und hatte auch keine Zähne mehr. Wenn er nun bei Tisch saß, und den Löffel kaum halten konnte, schüttete er Suppe auf das Tischtuch, und es floß ihm auch etwas wieder aus dem Mund. Sein Sohn und dessen Frau ekelten sich davor, und deswegen mußte sich der alte Großvater endlich hinter den Ofen in die Ecke setzen, und sie gaben ihm sein Essen in ein irdenes Schüsselchen, und noch dazu nicht einmal satt, da sah er betrübt nach dem Tisch, und die Augen wurden ihm naß. […] (KHM 1812, S. 355–356)

The similarities are obvious, but the degree of processing is noticeably more intense than in the editorial version of the “Jorinde and Joringel” story.60 But one can still speak of an immediate text transfer. Jung-Stilling used the story several times in his writings and authenticated it as an autobiographical memory from his school days in his “tenth or eleventh year in Hilgenbach, in the Principality of Nassau = Siegen”: “ehnten oder eilften Jahr zu Hilgenbach, im Fürstenthum Nassau = Siegen“: „Ich hab in meiner Lebens-Beschreibung und auch sonst hin und wieder, eine Geschichte erzählt, die mir ewig unvergeßlich bleibt.“(Jung-Stilling 1803, p. 31) A large number of motif similarities, however, suggest that Jung-Stilling—similar to the figure of the storyteller Henrich Stilling in the first volume of his ‘Life Story’—was oriented towards a literary model from the 17th century, the “Children’s Mirror” in Johann Michael Moscherosch’s marriage and education treatise Insomnis Cura Parentum from 1643.61 A look at the literary genesis illuminates the character of

60 A

complete synopsis is available—based on a reprint—in Rölleke 1998, pp. 108–109. An overview of the genesis of the material is sketched in Uther 2013/2021, pp. 174–176; see also Uther 2004b, p. 299. 61 Compare, for example, in Moscherosch 1647, pp. 252–254.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

78

the grandfather-grandson story as a “prototype of a Protestant parable for the relationship between parents and children” (Uther 2013, p. 174), as it can be found in various sermon and example compilations of the early modern period and previously in the moral literary tradition. So the Baroque author explicitly refers to a literary tradition that he continues: “Einmahls ein Sohn gewesen ist / Wie man in den Historien lißt […]” (Moscherosch 1647, p. 252) The literary tradition can be traced back at least to the 13th century, to Vincentius Bellovacensis and his encyclopedic work Speculum maius or the part ‘Speculum morale’, for example. Even though Grimm in the “Notes” to KHM 78 emphasizes that the editors had “heard the story just as often” (KHM 1822, p. 131, 1856, p. 127), thus authenticating the assumption of an oral tradition, the literary evidence dominates this section of the notes next to the reference to the story of Jung-Stilling. They range from references in Meistersang manuscripts to various ‘old German stories’, a Danish variant, an old French fabliau, French and Italian novellas of the early modern period via the German Schwankliteratur of the 16th century to a poem by Walther von der Vogelweide.62 That the orally transmitted stories heard by the Grimms were oralizations of literary models can be assumed with certainty. What becomes clear from the Grimms’ text adoptions from Jung-Stilling’s ‘life story’ is that, similarly to the recourse to Schupp or Mathesius, a text was extrapolated almost verbatim from a larger literary context, whereby the original character of the text excerpt was completely lost. With the extrapolation, the original context-determining functional context disappeared. After the shift from the source, the story is something completely different and new—despite a possibly even word-identical appearance. The entire process reflects the emergence of fairy tales from literature of a different genre.

3.2 Text Processing 3.2.1 Simple Editing—The Example KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas Direct adoptions are relatively easy to fix and describe in their functional change. Textual editing that reworks a literary model and gives it the shape of a fairy tale text is more difficult. KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas is an exemplary model of the basic procedure of simple editing. The story is particularly suitable for explaining the procedure of textual editing because, due to the fact that it is a scientific publication, an intermediate step in the editorial process of fairy-tale constitution is revealed: When editing an early modern rhyming jest about the unequal children of Eve, Wilhelm Grimm used a prose version that his brother Jacob

62 Cf.

KHM 1856, p. 127–128.

3.2  Text Processing

79

Grimm had created as part of a story for a scientific publication.63 Thus, what appears to be a simple editing job turns out to be a actually quite complex adaptation process. Grimm’s fairy tale belongs to those texts that were only added to the Kinderund Hausmärchen in later editions. Wilhelm Grimm included the story in the 5th edition of the collection in 1843. “This fifth edition,” he wrote in the preface, “again contains a significant number of new fairy tales; others have been rewritten or supplemented according to complete tradition.” (KHM 1843 I, p. XXIX) Together with the stories Meister Pfriem (KHM 178), Die Gänsehirtin am Brunnen (KHM 179), Die Nixe im Teich (KHM 181), Die Erbsenprobe (KHM 182; from the 6th edition onwards), Der Riese und der Schneider (KHM 183), Der Nagel (KHM 184), Der arme Junge im Grab (KHM 185), Die wahre Braut (KHM 186), Der Hase und der Igel (KHM 187), Spindel, Weberschiffchen und Nadel (KHM 188), Der Bauer und der Teufel (KHM 189), Die Brosamen auf dem Tisch (KHM 190), Der Räuber und seine Söhne (KHM 191; in the final edition), Der Meisterdieb (KHM 192) and Der Trommler (KHM 193), Grimm’s fairy tale collection was expanded to now include 194 stories. Almost all of the texts newly added in this edition were rewritten by Wilhelm Grimm. The younger Grimm brother primarily relied on Ludwig Aurbacher’s Büchlein für die Jugend (Stuttgart, Tübingen 1834) and the philological journal Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum edited by Moriz Haupt. The latter also provides the immediate source for Die ungleichen Kinder Evas. The fairy tale does not necessarily belong to the known texts of the collection. The content of the Grimm fairy tale is about a visit by God to Adam and Eve after they had been expelled from paradise. The expelled have meanwhile built a house, begotten children and are trying to secure their lives through field and housework. The children from the connection are very different, they are partly beautiful, partly ugly. When the Lord announced his coming through an angel to look after Adam and Eve’s household, the joy over this grace was great. Eve cleans and decorates the house and bathes her children. However, she is only concerned with the eight beautiful children who are dolled up and admonished to greet the Lord properly and modestly during his visit and to answer his questions modestly and intelligently. The twelve ugly children are instructed not to be seen during the visit and are hidden everywhere in the house. When he appears, the beautiful children who have been dolled up are presented to the Lord, who then begins to bless the children one by one and appoints them as king, prince, count, knight, nobleman, citizen, merchant and scholar. When Eve recognizes the mildness of the heavenly father, she spontaneously decides to present her shapeless children to the Lord. Brought out of their hiding places, she presents them to him “die ganze grobe, schmutzige, grindige und rußige Schaar” (KHM 1843 II, p. 423). These children too are joyfully accepted and receive God’s blessing. However, the assignments

63 This

is detailed in Bluhm 1995a, pp. 43–57.

80

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

are of a different character. They are used as farmers, fishermen, in various crafts, as sailors, messengers and servants for “a lifetime” (KHM 1843 II, p. 424). When Eve complains to the Lord about the unequal treatment of her children, since they were all born of her and God should therefore distribute his grace equally over all of them, he rejects the accusations with reference to Eve’s limited human insight into the world: “Eve, you don’t understand that.” The Lord explains to her that it is his right and his task to provide the whole world with its children. But in the world there could not only be princes and lords, but there also had to be people who, with their own work, provided for the necessities of life. Everyone should represent their own station, so that everyone would receive and be nourished “wie am Leib die Glieder” (KHM 1843 II, p. 424). In the Grimm story, Eve recognizes the wisdom of the Lord, asks for forgiveness and confirms his divine will.64 Even though the story by Wilhelm Grimm was not included in the fairy tale collection until 1843 and was dealt with by Jacob Grimm the year before as part of a story, the material of Eve’s unequal children and Hans Sachs’ treatment of it was already well known to the Grimms.65,66 the material and its various adaptations, and explained the editorial situation and history of the edition.67 The Grimm conviction that they had reconstructed the remains of a “Germanic myth” in the stories of their collection is reflected in their commentary on Die ungleichen Kinder Evas in the reference to an old Nordic tradition, the song Rígsþula of the so-called Lieder-Edda, in whose center the figure of the wanderer Rígr stands, who as “ott Heimdallr zu den drei Menschenpaaren zieht und den Unterschied der Stände begründet. Die uralte Sage trug sich zuletzt auf Adam und Eva über.” (KHM 1856,

64 Even

though the story does not belong to the more prominent texts of the Grimm collection, it can at least claim to have been adapted by one of the most famous fairy tale writers of our time and to have been given a prominent place as number 100 in his fairy tale collection of 2019. Köhlmeier (2019, pp. 522–526, 2011, pp. 86–90) renews it as “The most secret of all secret fairy tales”, with God distributing the different gifts out of anger at Eve’s lie. Even the gifts differ: The children shown “and also their children and grandchildren and all subsequent generations should have it good, and they should become good people”; the hidden children, on the other hand, “should not have it good and also not their descendants, they should become evil people” (Köhlmeier 2019, p. 524, 2011, p. 88).

65 Referring

to a document from the estate, Rölleke (2021, p. 182) specifies: “Jacob Grimm showed interest in the topic as early as 1807 at the latest: He annotated a literary study that was published that year with numerous marginal notes and kept it for his lifetime.” Rölleke—following the Grimms—thus claims the material as “apparently ancient and orally transmitted story” (Rölleke 2021, p. 182).

66 Hans

Sachs/Büsching 1816, pp. 143–176 (“Play. The unequal children of Eve, as they address God.”). Büsching does not go back to the farce from 1558, but to a dramatic version from 1553. In the version that was probably familiar to the Grimms, Hans Sachs explicitly names his source: “A play and lovely poem, / That originally was created / By Philipp Melanchthon in Latin” (Hans Sachs/Büsching 1816, p. 144).

67 Jacob

Grimm’s review was published anonymously in: Leipziger Litteratur-Zeitung für das Jahr 1819. Erstes Halbjahr. No. 7 from 8 January 1819, pp. 51–55; for the reference to the material of the unequal children of Eve, see ibid., p. 54.—The review was mistakenly included in Wilhelm Grimm’s later collection of Kleinere Schriften (1882 II, pp. 227–232).

3.2  Text Processing

81

p. 253) The old Nordic tradition, which provided a narrative justification for the later medieval Scandinavian class division into serfs, peasants and nobility, is the Grimms as evidence for a prehistoric ‘ancient saga’. In the transformation process of an oral narrative, this would finally have been adapted from a Christian tradition and would have developed into the story of the unequal children of Eve, which would then have been literarized in the 16th century. The Grimms refer to a letter by Philipp Melanchthon as a model for Hans Sachs and suspect the processing “after a Latin source” (KHM 1856, p. 252). The commentary basically argues on two different levels: Thus, the Grimms factually refer to the verifiable literary tradition of the subject matter, but then make the jump to a level of assertion and, guided by premises, anchor the origin of the subject matter in an oral tradition. As evidence, they serve the similarity of the subject matter to an—also literary—old Nordic tradition, which is assumed to be a testimony of a general Germanic tradition of oral tradition. The change from the level of description of facts to the level of interpretation and speculation is obvious and a general feature of the Grimm’s fairy tale studies on this question. Convinced of the reality of their assumptions, the editorial processing of the subject matter of the unequal children of Eve for the Grimms therefore ultimately represented the process of restoring a narrative basic form in new clothing. The constitution of KHM 180 shows in nuce how, in the course of the material history and editing, the literary form of the fairy tale emerged. When Wilhelm Grimm edited the story for the fairy tale collection in 1843, he—as only hinted at in the commentary—based it on a material and motif historical study by his brother Jacob Grimm, which the latter had published in 1842 in the second volume of the Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum (Journal of German Antiquity) edited by Moriz Haupt.68 Against the background of the insufficient edition situation for Early Modern literature at the time, Jacob Grimm had compiled a number of literary versions of the story of Eve’s unequal children from older editions for the learned public of his time. This story had experienced a considerable career in literature, particularly in the Reformation period, and was used differently depending on the genre. Prominent among the literary versions were those by Hans Sachs, with Wilhelm and Jacob Grimm both considering his 1558 farce version to be the best and giving it special attention.69 The assessment is fixed in the “Anmerkungen zu den einzelnen Märchen” in the commentary volume by Wilhelm Grimm:

68 See 69 In

Jacob Grimm 1842b.

their appreciation of the farce, the Grimms were undoubtedly in the tradition of an earlier scholarly interest, which occasionally even made its way into the literary journals of the time; see, for example, the article by W.F.H.R.: Ueber einen mehrmals erwähnten alten Schwank: „Die ungleichen Kinder der Eva .“ In: Allgemeiner Litterarischer Anzeiger. 5. Band, Nr. 70 vom 5. May 1800, S. 693–695.—The librarian Wilhelm Friedrich Heinrich Reinwald, who was Friedrich Schiller’s brother-in-law, was hiding behind the pseudonym W.F.H.R.

82

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ … Nach Hans Sachs, der diese Überlieferung dreimal behandelt hat, zweimal dramatisch im Jahr 1553 (Nürnb. Ausg. 3, 1, 243. 1. 1, 10) und einmal als Schwank 1558 (2. 4, 83), in diesem am besten. Im Ganzen stimmen sie überein; die dramatischen Dichtungen sind umständlicher angelegt und ausgeführt: die Verschiedenheiten werden in Haupts Zeitschrift 2, 258–260 angegeben, wo man noch weitere Nachweisungen findet. (KHM 1856, S. 251–252)

The Grimms did not know the fourth literary version by Hans Sachs in the form of a Meisterlied. In his scientific contribution, Jacob Grimm offers a compendium of content paraphrases of the various literary versions by Johann Agricola, Georg R. Widmann, Hans Sachs and others, whereby he converted the rhymed poetry into prose, deleted incomprehensible terms, but largely adhered to the wording of the originals. A younger genre research has taken on this specific text type in the interface between philological practice and literary small form in the meantime. As “small pragmatic or scientific everyday forms”, the purpose of which lies “outside of themselves”, such retellings and summaries are often found in the Brothers Grimm. In their function of making difficult or inaccessible “source texts more tangible”, their “official task is not the literarization of a template, but rather its deliterarization” (Kraut 2021, p. 159). Nevertheless, it is obvious that these ‘miniatures’ remind us more or less of the so-called ‘Grimm genre’. As a result, they have a “specific literary aesthetics” of their own, which goes beyond their purely functional character, despite their undoubtedly superior “philological-pragmatic functions”. Philip Kraut, who has taken a closer look at a number of these ‘retellings and summaries’, is right to point out that these everyday forms in the scientific work of the Grimms are “related to the Grimm fairy tales both in terms of their philological purpose and their literary form” (Kraut 2021, p. 160). In the specific case of KHM 180, one of these ‘everyday forms’ even became the immediate template for a Grimm fairy tale. Wilhelm Grimm actually directly used Jacob Grimm’s content reproduction of the Reimschwank from 1558 when constituting KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas, which actually makes KHM 180 literature after a literature paraphrase. A synopsis of the beginning of the story illustrates that one can speak of a processing here, which ultimately took place in two stages.

3.2  Text Processing KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas 51843, Bd. 2, S. 422

83 Jacob Grimm: Die ungleichen Kinder Evas. In: ZfdA 1842, S. 258

Als Adam und Eva aus dem Paradies vertrieben waren, so mußten sie auf unfruchtbarer Erde sich ein Haus bauen, und im Schweiße ihres Angesichts ihr Brot essen. Adam hackte das Feld, und Eva spann Wolle. Eva brachte jedes Jahr ein Kind zur Welt, die Kinder waren aber ungleich, einige schön, andere häßlich.

Als Adam und Eva aus dem paradies vertrieben waren, bauten sie die unfruchtbare erde

Nachdem eine geraume Zeit verlaufen war, sendete Gott einen Engel an die beiden, und ließ ihnen entbieten daß er kommen und ihren Haushalt schauen wollte. Eva, freudig daß der Herr so gnädig war, säuberte emsig ihr Haus, schmückte es mit Blumen, und streute Binsen auf den Estrich. Dann holte sie ihre Kinder herbei, aber nur die schönen. Sie wusch und badete sie, kämmte ihnen die Haare, legte ihnen neugewaschene Hemder an, und ermahnte sie in der Gegenwart des Herrn sich anständig und züchtig zu betragen. Sie sollten sich vor ihm sittig neigen, die Hand darbieten, und auf seine Fragen bescheiden und verständig antworten. […]

nach dem verlauf der zeit liess ihnen der allmächtige gott durch einen engel entbieten dass er zu ihnen kommen und ihren haushalt schauen wollte. da war Eva froh der gnade gottes, kehrte und schmückte das ganze haus mit gras und blumen

und erzeugten viel kinder mit einander.

und begann ihre schönsten kinder zu baden strählen und flechten, legte ihnen neugewaschne hemden an und ermahnte sie wie sie sich vor dem herrn höflich neigen, ihm die hände bieten und züchtig prangen sollten. […]

Hans Sachs: Schwanck. Die vngleichen Kinder Eue [1558]. In: Sehr herrliche, schöne, und warhaffte Gedicht, 2. Buch, 4. Teil, f. LXXXIIIr/v […] Als aber sie nach dieser That Nach des Sathanas falschen rath Assen von der verpotten speiß Trieb sie Gott auß dem Paradeiß Vnd waren in Gottes vngnaden Nach diesem verderblichen schaden Bawt Adam die vnfruchtbar Erdt Im schweiß seins angsichts mit beschwert Eua aber das Weib fürwar In schmertzen viel Kinder Gepar Die warn eins theils schön vnd Adelich Subtiel Geliedmasiert vntadelich Sinnreych/geschickt/höflich/geperlich Doch het sie viel Kinder geferlich Toll/töllpet/grob vnd vngstalt Vngleich den Kindern oberzalt Derhalb Eua die Mutter klug Die schönen Kinder fürher zug Vnd het sie gar holdt/lieb vnd wert Der andern Kinder sich beschwert Vnd achtet sich jr nicht so hart Weil sie warn gschlagen auß der art Nun der vngstalten Kinder zal Der waren sehr viel vberal Die ließ Eua gehn wie sie giengen Aber kürtzlich nach diesen dingen Der Allmechtige gütig Gott Eua durch sein Engel enpot Er wolt zu jr kommen hinauß Schawen wie sie auff Erd hielt Hauß Mit jren Kinden vnd Adam Bald Eua die potschafft vernam Do war sie fro der Gottes gnaden Dacht sein zukunfft/wird sein on schaden Keret vnd schmucket das gantz Hauß Mit Graß vnd Blumen überauß Stecket Meyen in alle Gaden Vnd thet jr schöne Kinder baden Strelen/Flochten vnd schmückt sie schon Legt jhn Newgwaschne Hembder on Thet jhn auch fleissigklich anzeigen Wie sie sich höflich solten neygen Vor dem Herren/vnd ihn enpfangen Ir Hend bitten/fein züchtig prangen […]

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

84

If you start from the text of the fairy tale, you will quickly see that Wilhelm Grimm was moving on the basis of his brother Jacob’s paraphrase, which he took over almost word for word in parts—for example in the opening sentence—but he processed the text as a whole.70 This edition included the linguistic transformation of too sober paraphrases—for example, the phrase “and generated many children with each other” became the more pleasing “Eva gave birth to a child every year” or “after the course of time” became the more narrative “After a considerable time had passed”. The design included the renunciation of designations that were perhaps no longer familiar to the contemporary audience, such as “streaks and braids”, and their replacement by “combed their hair”, “modest and intelligent answers” by “modest and intelligent answers” or the adaptation to common procedures such as the scattering of “rushes on the floor”, where the paraphrase still— following Sachs—spoke of ‘grass’. At the same time, it can be seen that Wilhelm Grimm also relied on the Hans Sachs text itself when editing it. In the commentary on the fairy tale, Grimm refers to the “Nürnb. Ausg.” (KHM 1856, p. 251), which he had at his disposal. Four of the five volumes of this large Nuremberg Folio edition (1558–1579), which Hans Sachs had organized himself, were in the private library of the Brothers Grimm.71 Wilhelm Grimm’s direct reference to the Hans Sachs-Schwank is a literary-productive one. So, when editing the fairy tale, he used the allusion to a biblical quotation from Genesis in the verse of the Sachs farce “Im schweiß seins angsichts mit beschwert” in order to interpolate the quotation completely into the fairy tale text: “in the sweat of their faces they shall eat their bread.”72 Jacob Grimm had left out the passage in his paraphrase of the content—possibly precisely because of the conspicuous biblical allusion. However, Wilhelm Grimm’s editing of the fairy tale remained the decisive source for his brother’s article on the history of the subject, not least because of the paraphrase of the Sachs farce. This is tangible, for example, in the “folk poetic” designs that the younger Grimm brother made by interpolating paroemiological source material from early modern subject variants into his fairy tale text, which was based on the Sachs-Schwank. This procedure already points to the editorial practice of the subsequent sixth edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen Grimm deliberately incorporated popular language forms into the text: “I have constantly been trying to insert proverbs and peculiar expressions of the p­ eople,

70 Röllekes

assessment in the commentary of his valuable edition does not really do justice to the degree of processing of the editorial: “Wilhelm Grimm took over his brother’s version in the 5th edition of KHM with small but particularly informative changes.” (Unknown Fairy Tales / Rölleke 1987, p. 156)

71 See 72 Cf.

Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 253 (= no. 2958).

Gen 3,19: “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread.” (after Luther Bible 1545) Grimm also knew the saying from Julius Wilhelm Zincgref’s Der Teutschen scharfsinnige kluge Sprüch. Cf. Zincgref 1985, p. 98. In their library, the Brothers Grimm possessed and used an edition from 1653 (see Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 210 [= no. 2340]).

3.2  Text Processing

85

which I always listen to […].” (KHM 1850 I, p. XXII)73 Thus, in the opening of his fairy tale told from the material history of his brother’s source, Wilhelm Grimm interpolated the pithy saying “Adam hacked the field, and Eva spun wool”, which is latent with class criticism, insofar as it implicitly lets the continuation known from the time sound: “When Adam hacks and Eva spins, / Where was the gentleman then?”74 Wilhelm Grimm interpolated the proverb, which was implemented in the fairy tale editing into a moment of action, with reference to a Low German variant quoted in Jacob Grimm’s motif investigation, the Magdeburg print of Agricola’s collection of proverbs from 1528, which the brothers received as a gift from their friend Baron Karl Hartwig Gregor von Meusebach at Christmas 1822.75 Jacob Grimm wrote in his motif investigation: Wichtiger aber ist uns eine stelle aus Agricolas sprichwörtern, die über die jahre 1558 1553 1539 hinauf, bis zu 1528 zurückweist. ich hebe darum die ganze erzählung nach dem plattdeutschen Magdeburger druck aus, no 264 bl. 127b. Etlike seggen yn schertzes wise, de vörsten, heren vnde eddellude hebben eren ortsprung dar her, do Adam radede vnde Heua span, krech Heua vele kinder. […]. (J. Grimm 1842b, S. 262)

Jacob Grimm focused only on the fable in his summaries, so that the frame introducing the Schwankfassung and the didactic resolutions were left out by Hans Sachs. So Hans Sachs begins his Schwankfassung with the note that his story is based on a literary source, and a short summary of the second biblical creation story up to the expulsion from paradise, before he starts with the visit of God. The fable then ends with Eve’s insight into the wisdom of the Lord: Ach HErr vergieb / ich war zu jech Dein Göttlicher will der geschech An mein Kinden nach deiner Ehr Ich wil dir nichts einreden mehr. (Sachs 1560, S. LXXXIIIIv)

Jacob Grimm’s content paraphrase remains closely based on the template: “Oh Lord, forgive me! I was too hasty to argue with you; your divine will be done to my children.” (J. Grimm 1842b, S. 259) Wilhelm Grimm’s adoption for the fairy tale version is only of a stylistic nature: “ach, Herr, vergieb, ich war zu rasch, daß ich dir einredete. Dein göttlicher Wille geschehe auch an meinen Kindern” (KHM 1843 II, S. 424).

73 See

Bluhm/Rölleke 2020 for the procedure. Hamann (1906, p. 92–94) already pointed to the editorial references made by KHM 180 to various early modern literature. 74 Zincgref

1985, p. 98. Agricola: Drehundert gemener Sprickwörde, der wy Düdschen uns gebruken, unde doch nicht weten, woher se kamen. Magdeburg 1528.—See Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 209 (No. 2332). 75 Johann

86

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

With the change in text types and genres from the early modern Reimschwank to the content paraphrase to the fairy tale, a change in function is given. Hans Sachs had taken the story of the unequal children of Eve and adapted it in four adaptations—as a master song, as a comedy, as a carnival play and as a Schwank. His literature was located in the horizon of early modern urbanization and the development of an early bourgeois urban culture. The urban literature reacted to the new mobility and the dynamics of social processes, which were accompanied by a variety of social unrest and threatened to lead to the dissolution of the traditional social order. The didactic “conclusion” of the Sachs Schwank, which the Grimms did not include, makes the functional connection clear within which this story is to be situated: […] Darbey spürt man heimlich allein Wie Gott so wunderbar regiert Vnd also weißlich ordiniert All Stendt das im Wesen besthe Menschlich Gschlecht vnd orndlich ghe Wiewol Ober vnd Vnterthan Vnser zeyt gröblich felen dran Da keiner bleibt in seim beruff Darzu jhn Gott der HErr beschuff Wil gar nicht dran begnüget sein […]. (Sachs 1560, S. LXXXIIIIv)

The final moral of the Sachs-Schwank refers to and insists on the medieval and early modern ‘Ordo’ system. The program of the Epimythion is obviously: Sachs aims with his adaptation of the material at the justification of the estate order as an institution given by God. The traditional social order is presented narratively as the result of a ‘wonderful’ and ‘wise’ arrangement, which is to be preserved and defended against a social disorder that is spreading. Sachs pursues a socially conservative program for the preservation of the actual urban order, which is flanked by the Schwank entertainment literature. How closely Hans Sachs was associated with these ideas is also revealed in a passage in his “Vorrede” dated December 24, 1567, to the Eygentlichen Beschreibung Aller Stände auff Erden: Daß aber die vngleichheit ist in Menschlichen Sachen / Händeln / vnd anschlägen / auff daß ich widerumb zu meinem fürhaben komme / kann on Göttliche Prouidentz vnd willen nicht geschehen / man kann jr auch in Menschlicher Gesellschafft niht entrahten. Denn man muß not halben Reiche haben / die den Armen handreichung vnd hülff beweisen / so muß man widerumb auch Arme haben / welche den Reichen mit Handwercken / vnd sonst zu arbeiten geschickt seyen. Denn wer wolt [s]onst allerley nutzbarliche vnd notwendige Arbeit / dem Menschlichen Geschlecht dienstlich / vollbringen? Niemand zwar / wo wir alle in gleichem Standt vnd Reichthumb lebeten. Man muß hohe vnd gewaltige Oberkeit haben / vnter welcher Regiment / schutz vnd schirm / vns Gott setzt hat / wie das der Apostel Rom.13. bezeugt. (Sachs 1568, S. III)

3.2  Text Processing

87

The reference to the Epistle to the Romans by the Apostle Paul76 is for Sachs evidence and confirmation of the necessity of social inequality among people and at the same time divine guidance. Jacob Grimm’s recourse to the material is entirely different. The functional connection of his material history is determined by the scientific program of early German philology at the beginning and in the middle of the 19th century. In this phase of the genesis of science, the collection and screening of older German literature played a decisive role. This was associated with diverse archival research, the excerpting and the information about text stocks and their contents. The still undeveloped state of editions had the consequence that not only a wider interested public, but even the small circle of early German philologists simply did not have access to a large number of older texts, and often enough were even unknown. Jacob Grimm’s paraphrase of the content of the rhyme of Hans Sachs and the other material adaptations reacted to this desideratum and offered in the material history mosaic stones for further scientific clarification of the German literature of the 16th century. The contribution of the older Grimm brother unmistakably follows the task and the description of function of the used publication organ, which the editor Moriz Haupt had fixed in his foreword to the first issue in 1841. For him, the “destiny” of the new journal is “double”, insofar as it is to serve on the one hand to “process unknown or newly found material scientifically” (Haupt 1841, p. IV), and on the other hand not to lose sight of the scientifically interested non-specialist, since “not every reader […] has enough practice or time” (Haupt 1841, p. V) to acquire the original texts. In the end, the audience should be given an understanding of literary contexts and overviews in an understandable form. Even if Jacob Grimm’s processing of the literary model was intended for the pragmatic provision of science within the functional horizon of a deliterarization strategy, it nevertheless has a “strong aesthetic will to shape”, which makes it—like other comparable scientific miniatures of the Grimms—itself become “a link in the chain of textual tradition” (Kraut 2021, p. 169). The—if you will—semi-literary character of Jacob Grimm’s processing is continued in the decided reliterarisation of his brother. By making a content paraphrase of his brother’s work into a fairy tale, Wilhelm Grimm deliberately releases Jacob Grimm’s text block from its scientific context and transfers it into the national-political and pedagogical framework of the Vorwort zum ersten Hefte The decontextualisation or recontextualisation in the course of genre changes causes individual structural phenomena of the text to become an expression of the specific fairy-tale character of the narrative. As a text only inserted into the collection at a later stage, its inclusion in the collection is certainly shaped by its own circularity, to the extent that a certain catalogue of features had solidified, which was now sought in other texts and interpreted as evidence of their fairy-tale character.

76 The Epistle to the Romans and in particular Romans 13 have an unusually wide range of interpretation history, which can only be hinted at here. For an overview of the reception lines of the Epistle to the Romans, see Markschies 2006.

88

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

The story of the unequal children of Eve, for example, shows the features fixed as typical of the “Grimm genre” almost exemplarily and corresponds to the model of the “simple form” still used in historical narrative research: the action of the story is place- and time-less, it is single-stranded and stereotyped, the narrative figures are one-dimensional and typical, and they show no or—in the figure of Eve—at most a slight psychologicalisation. The language is simple and makes use—reinforced by Wilhelm Grimm’s editing—of the formulaic and the dramatisation. In the opposition of clearly outlined decisions, a simple world view is put into practice, which ends in a happy ending, and the fundamental characteristic of the selfevident wonderful is made tangible in the everyday encounter of people with God. The story is commonly classified as a “legendary fairy tale” (Uther 2013, p. 352) or “Christian fairy tale” (Moser 1982a, b) in narrative research, occasionally with reference to its fluctuating features (Bluhm and Rölleke 2020, p. 120). Unlike the story Des Herrn und des Teufels Getier (KHM 148), which has been part of the collection since the first edition and can be interpreted as an originally Christian mission story and which may even point to a certain oral tradition in individual features, Die ungleichen Kinder Evas looks back on an exclusively written, strictly literary tradition. The Christian-legendary character of the story is already apparent in the narrative personnel with God, angels, Adam and Eve and in the setting of a meeting story between God and humans after the expulsion from paradise, where the references to the second biblical creation story (especially Gen 3,16-23) are unmistakable. In addition, the Christian reference is directly tangible in some biblical quotations. With the stations of the text processing taken into account, the procedure of the simple editing of KHM 180 is outlined in its immediate adaptation history. If one would like to further expand the palimpsestuous structure of the Grimm fairy tale with regard to its character as literature from literature, one can nevertheless extend the story. In their commentary on the fairy tale, the Grimms already pointed to Philipp Melanchthon as the model for Sachs and to a Latin poem already mentioned by Sachs.77 In fact, this Latin source is a Middle Latin eclogue from the mid- or late 15th century in the horizon of the sermon exemplum literature of that time. The author—and probably the inventor—was the Italian Carmelite monk Baptista Mantuanus from a Spanish family.78 Born Giovanni Battista Spagnoli, Baptista Mantuanus (or Battista Mantovano) became a poet and humanist known beyond the borders, and later the general of the Carmelite order.

77 So

Jacob Grimm 1842b, p. 260-261. Bolte/Polívka 1918 III, p. 308–309: “As a student in Padua around 1470, he wrote eight pastoral dialogues after the model of Virgil. When he came across this work from his youth again later (1498), he published it again in revised form and with two eclogues added, to great acclaim.”

78 See

3.2  Text Processing

89

His Bucolica from 1498 found wide dissemination around and after 1500.79 In the Ecloga VI “Cornix de disceptatione rusticorum et civium,” which the Grimms themselves were not aware of, the material was used to reference apocryphal and legendary narrative literature, in order to present the difference between city and country, and between secular rule and peasantry, as given by God, in the form of the tradition-rich “pastoral poetry.”80 Even if the eclogue is quite obviously subject to an antiquarian form, the Christian content remains clearly visible. The corresponding eclogue in the Bucolica is set in hexameter verses as a dialogue between a crow (“Cornix”) and a moorhen (“Fulica”), within which the crow invites the moorhen to tell the story of the origins of the differences between city and country: “Incipe, et enarra discrimina ruris et urbis.”81 The ruffled grouse then tells from the perspective of a mythical figure— “Mantous Amyntas”—borrowed from Vergil’s pastoral poetry, but in which the author himself has also inscribed himself by means of an allusion, how after the creation of the world and the first couple of humans, this was given the task of bringing children into the world. After fifteen years, God visits the household. While the woman is just combing the children, she sees the Lord approaching from the threshold of the house (“Dum pignora pectit / femina prospiciens venientem a limine vidit.”). For fear of being accused by God of ‘excessive desire’ (“libidinis ingens”), she hides a number of her many children in the hay and in the straw (“faeno sepelit paleisque recondit”). God is full of joy at the children presented to him. He presents the first son with the royal scepter and appoints him king: “rex eris”, the second with war weapons and appoints him duke (“dux […] eris”), just as he awards the next ones with military honors. However, the children hidden by the mother and also presented to him, who are still full of straw and dirt, are not received by God with joy, but with displeasure (“non arrisit eis, sed tristi turbidus ore”): They should in future also continue to smell of hay, earth and straw, be tied to the plow and the yoke, be farmers, cattle breeders, mowers, plowmen, sailors and ox drivers (“aratores eritis pecorumque magistri, faenisecae, solifossores, nautae atque bubulci”), while others are active in cities as poultry dealers, butchers, caterers and bakers and should be a generation that gets dirty (“sed tamen ex vobis quosdam donabimus urbe, qui sint fartores, lanii, lixae

79 Following

the Grimms in principle, Bolte/Polívka (1918 III, p. 310) assume that “the Italian poet drew from a folktale,” but then goes on to show a wide literary tradition of fable and didactic poetry (ibid. p. 310–319). 80 A

translation in the form of a paraphrase of the content is provided by Bolte/Polívka 1918 III, p. 309–310. 81 See

here and in the following Baptista Mantuanus 1911, p. 91–92.—The text is also easily accessible as an excerpt in the appendix to the edition of Valentin Schumann’s Nachtbüchlein (1976, p. 372–373).

90

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

artocopique et genus hoc alii soliti sordescare”): their common fate is to serve the first presented and awarded forever (“semper sudate et toto servite prioribus aevo”). The declared intention of the story of the waterfowl is to show how the difference between city and country and the divinely ordained order of the estates were introduced (“Sic factum est servile genus, sic ruris et urbis inductum discrimen”). Primarily, the unstable eclogue of Baptista Mantuanus was directed against the contemporary phenomenon of rural flight. As an area of greater individual freedom with the possibility of social advancement and economic independence, the cities in the late Middle Ages and early modern period had a magnetic effect on a legally unfree and economically oppressed propertyless rural population, whose influx brought about a dynamic development for the cities, but also constantly unrest and change. Baptista Mantuanus opposed this moment with the medieval ‘Ordo’ concept, the invocation of a fixed, divinely guaranteed social order. In a wider sense, the Christianitas idea also comes into play in the eclogue. The conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans and the collapse of the ChristianOrthodox Byzantine Empire in 1453 led to a wide-ranging debate about the need for unity of the Christian world, in the shadow of which the sermon example can also be seen. The traditional concept of a fixed order was opposed to the social and economic changes of the time and at the same time legitimized both Christian and cultural-historical by the Roman model. Without directly addressing it, the Latin narrative text at its core already plays with the Pauline passage on the Christian community as a body with many members introduced in the catechetical story that follows, which is intertextually taken up in Hans Sachs’ and his followers’ narration of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen,82 which in turn stands in a wide tradition of ancient stories. In ancient literature, the image of the members of a body as a metaphor for a functioning community was widespread, and is still associated today in the educational tradition primarily with the parable of Menenius Agrippa.83 In the story of the unequal children of Eve, the imagery refers back to the tradition of the sermon tale and the catechetical interpretation of the Pauline biblical narrative. Baptista Mantuanus provided a classic “little story” with his bucolic sermon example, which was used in sermons to illustrate biblical teachings and in a literature that was socially and politically

82 See

Hans Sachs 1560, p. LXXXIIII r/v: “Das ein Standt den andern erhalt / Mit hilff auß meim Göttlichen gwalt / Sie doch alle erneeret werden / Yeder in seinem standt auff Erden / Das also gantz Menschlich geschlecht / Bleib einander eingleibet recht / Gleich wie in einem Leib die Glieder” And in Wilhelm Grimm’s KHM 1843 II, p. 424: “Everyone should represent his estate, so that one supports the other and all are nourished like the members of a body.”

83 The

concise formula of the estates points to Menenius Lanatus Agrippa, who in 474 BC, by means of his famous speech delivered on the occasion of the first “successio plebis,” persuaded the plebeians to return, by applying the parable of the relationship between the stomach and the members to Roman society. This is reported by Livius (Ab urbe condita 2,32,9) and Dionysius Halicarn. De Antiquit. Rom. Lib. IV, p. 62–63.

3.2  Text Processing

91

diverse in character. The starting point of the story in KHM 180 is therefore, in a narrower sense, a learned poem of a homiletic character. A “fundamental transformation” on its way to literary material for Hans Sachs and other—especially Protestant—writers in the 16th century experienced the sermon-poetic bucolic poem in the context of a Latin teaching letter, which the humanist and reformer Philipp Melanchthon “addressed to Count Johann IV. from Wied on March 23, 1539 and published at the same time by printing” (Bolte and Polívka 1918 III, p. 314). 1541 already appeared a German translation by Stephan Vigilius in his memorial book De Rebus Memorandis.84 As a relevant new element, Melanchthon made the “difference of the estates dependent on a catechism examination, which the Lord conducts with Eve’s children” (Hamann 1906, p. 93), as Johannes Stigelius does at the same time in an epithalamium on the marriage of Henry VIII. from England with Anna von Cleve.85 Melanchthon probably did not directly refer to Baptista Mantuanus, but only indirectly via Johannes Stigelius.86 In any case, the reformer brought in the “simple legend tone” (Bolte and Polívka 1918 III, S. 315), which was then also to determine many material designs in the following Germanizations and literary adaptations up to the Grimm fairy tale. The appearance of God in the narrative as a catechist is to be understood against the background of the new Protestant children’s doctrine and of Melanchthon’s efforts at educational reform. Bolte and Polívka describe this development step of the material genesis as the emergence of a “new protestant legend” (Bolte and Polívka 1918 III, S. 315). Roughly outlined, the palimpsestuous layering of KHM 180 can be seen as follows: The fairy tale is the adaptation of a paraphrase of content, which, as part of a scientific material history, textually proselytizes a reduced Reimschwank story of the 16th century, which in turn represents the social-political literarization of a “Protestant legend” with didactic character. The Protestant didactic poetry is connected with the process of a Germanization and in turn refers to a bucolic learned poetry of the late 15th century, which moved in the horizon of the sermon example literature. A multitude of features of the story about the unequal inequality, invented by Baptista Mantuanus, points back to the fable literature and shows in its catechetical use a reference to a passage from the first Pauline letter to the

84 Cf.

Winzer 1908, p. 22.

85  Around

the same time, Johannes Winzer turned to the history of the subject matter in his Greifswalder dissertation in order to characterize the literary processing sequence as follows: “The representations of Baptista Mantuanus, Johann Agricola, Johannes Stigelius and Philipp Melanchthon were fundamental. Each subsequent one has changed, omitted, added to the representation of the predecessor, so that one must recognize a certain independence to all four. Mantuanus created the form, Agricola clarified and Christianized the subject matter and form, Stigelius introduced the examination and removed the objectionable of Mantuanus, Melanchthon finally popularized what Stigelius had created and gave it the form that was decisive for the later poems. “ (Winzer 1908, pp. 11–12) Winzer (1908, pp. 53–54) only briefly mentions the literarizations by Hans Sachs. 86 So

Winzer 1908, S. 17–18.

92

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

Corinthians. The material genesis has thus been subject to a continuous change of genre and function throughout its long history. The problem of interpretation attempts of Kinder- und Hausmärchen lies in the multiple addressing of the collection as well as in the fact of the history of origin that the narratives were often subject to genre changes and re-functionalization during their development. In contrast to most other Grimm fairy tales, Die ungleichen Kinder Evas already offers the reader an clear interpretation offer in the story itself: Already in the title of the fairy tale the theme of the inequality of the human children is revealed. The story explains the social inequality of humans with an act of appointment by God. A recent research therefore rightly calls the fairy tale a “didactic story” and interprets it in the horizon of an early Lutheran ethics of order, which “sought to legitimize the different social order and the distribution of poverty to wealth”. At the same time, the story is also an “explanatory tale (etiology) for the origin of the social classes and a paraphrase about the comment of Paul to the unity of all members of the church” (Uther 2013, p. 352). In any case, a teaching program is offered, which has conservative features and aims at the preservation of a social status quo. The givenness of the social order is presented to the individual as unchangeable. The mother Eve’s critical reservations and objections to the divine act of constitution are pacified and rejected and lead to a confirmation of the ethics of order, whereby at least a slight misogynist undertone is clearly audible. An interpretation of the fairy tale cannot be separated from the function assignment that the fairy tale editors and -redactors themselves have ascribed to the text. The inclusion of a rhyming jest by the Nuremberg cobbler and poet, who was highly valued at the time as the “national poet”, meant for the Grimms the connection of their story collection to a national German cultural tradition and its continuation. The connection to Sachs, whose poems had already been used for other fairy tales (especially for KHM 147 Das junggeglühte Männlein and KHM 148 Des Herrn und des Teufels Getier), was first of all certainly a moment of status transfer. The recourse cannot be separated from the brothers’ scientific interest, which was focused on the documentation of “folk tales” that were believed to be lost. With the national political goal of reconnecting to a national story tradition that was seen as interrupted or at least endangered, the effort to revitalize an “old German” catalogue of virtues was also connected. That the brothers Grimm also understood their collection as “a proper educational book” (KHM 1819 I, S. VIII) drew its expectations of educational effectiveness from the entertainment value of the stories, to which the comical elements contributed in The Unequal Children of Eve . While the multiple address creates a constitutive openness of interpretation of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, a—historically derived—clear intention results from the recourse to the history of origin. The fairy tale Die ungleichen Kinder Evas offers in its core the programme of a social order founded by God and stands at the end of a story history that was largely known to the Grimms, which went hand in hand with a change in text type and genre, in which the story was updated

3.2  Text Processing

93

in different functional contexts. The new story shape only became a fairy tale through the act of insertion into the Kinder- und Hausmärchen . The short sketch has turned to the editorial of Kinder- und Hausmärchen by the Brothers Grimm and shown how the text form, the own popular style of narration and the openness of interpretation of the narration have come about. The editorial work was conscious text interventions, which primarily did not aim at the creation of a popular narrative form with entertainment character, but were committed to the idea of reconstructing a lost archetype of popular narration. So the Grimm’s editorial work is popularization strategies that, so to speak, created a new literary form from a scientific material collection against the intention of the editors. The story of the unequal children of Eve is, like many other fairy tales, also in the language usage of the Brothers Grimm itself. So Jacob Grimm did not call him by chance in the introduction to his speech on Über einige deutsche schriftsteller des funfzehnten und sechzehnten jahrhunderts on 31 January 1853: “The history of literature is sometimes unfair and while she loves children richly and prominently displays others, bristling hair dusty and uncombed in the corner, not even calling their names. “ (J. Grimm 1884, p. 107) The keyword ‘unfair’ offers a certain accentuation of the description of inequality and implies an evaluative statement that takes sides for the disadvantaged ‘children’ of historical developments. But then this is no longer part of the Grimm’s fairy tale interpretation.

3.2.2 Purifying Reworkings—The Example KHM 12 Rapunzel A specific form of text processing is purification, that is, the editorial ‘cleaning’ of fairy tale templates as part of adaptation and subsequent reworking. Places or passages considered objectionable were cleansed of coarse language and scatological elements, and sexualized. The process of desexualization can be shown in detail using the example of KHM 12 Rapunzel, where purification took place step by step. It affected both the immediate genesis of the rewriting of a literary template into a fairy tale, and the further printing history of various KHM editions. Even Grimm’s Rapunzel story provides evidence, in its well-researched origins in the tradition of transnational European entertainment literature87 and in its narrower sense of genesis, of how much the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are actually to be defined as literature of literature. The story is one of the best known in the collection: When a man is caught by a fairy while trying to steal rapunzels from a fairy’s garden for his pregnant wife, he promises to give her the newborn after it is born. When the child is twelve years old, the fairy locks the girl, whom she has named Rapunzel, in a tower, where she is well cared for but cut off from the world. The fairy herself regularly climbs up to Rapunzel’s long hair hanging out the window. A king’s son observes and

87 See

Lüthi 1960 and Lauer 1993.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

94

eavesdrops on the process and, when the fairy has left the tower, climbs up himself to visit Rapunzel regularly. When she becomes pregnant, the fairy discovers the deception, banishes Rapunzel to a desert, and blinds the king’s son. After a long search, the king’s son finds Rapunzel and his now-born children and regains his sight through the tears of his beloved. Jacob Grimm wrote the text in 1812 after a story by the writer Friedrich Schulz, who had published it in one of his Kleinen Romane in 1790.88 In 1801, the publication was posthumously reissued in the first volume of a new edition.89 Already Friedrich Schulz’s story—contrary to what is occasionally documented90—was titled Rapunzel. Jacob Grimm’s handwritten excerpt of this template is probably no longer preserved. However, in the Grimm estate there are still notes of the Grimms on the collections about the literature of the fairy tales. A partial collection of French fairy tales offers an overview of Jacob Grimm’s contents of Volume 4 of Friedrich Schulz’s Kleine Romane. The neatly written notes were obviously added by Jacob Grimm at a later time in cursive: “ In the fifth volume there is a beautiful fairy tale Rapunzel which is set out. “91 In this ‘extract’ one will be able to see the immediate source for the first printed version of the Grimms. The 1798 deceased Schulz—in his early youth a student of the educator and writer Johann Gottlieb Schummel at the monastery school of Our Lady in Magdeburg—was always highly respected as an author around the turn of the century, who had made a name for himself as a translator and editor of French literature, but also through his own novels.92 His work can justifiably be classified as high-quality entertainment literature. He belonged “to that group of competent literati who tried to exist as ‘freie Schriftsteller’ [free writers] since the 1780s”, whereby they “were obliged to be versatile and had to serve fashionable literary trends” (Seifert 2004, p. 93). The audience included not only representatives of the nobility and the upper and middle bourgeoisie, but also that new readership which consisted of “hairdressers, chambermaids, servants, shop assistants and the like” (Rebmann 1968, p. 54), as Georg Friedrich Rebmann described it in 1793. Rebmann particularly emphasized the establishment of lending libraries, which 88 Occasionally

it is said that Schulz has incorporated a kind of inner story into a novel context. For example, Lauer writes: Schulz “skillfully integrated this story […] into the fifth volume of his Kleine Romane […]” (1993, p. 10). In fact, the Kleine Romane are the compilation of separate stories or actually small novels. Volume 5 offers the continuation and conclusion of the novel Leopoldine (Schulz 1790 V, pp. 1–150) as well as the stories Sophie (pp. 151–268), Rapunzel as the narrowest text (pp. 269–288) and Antönchen und Trudchen (pp. 289–347).

89 Cf.

Lüthi 1960, p. 105.

90 For

example, in the source citation in Märchen vor Grimm 1990, p. 288, while the text is correctly titled “Rapunzel”. 91 Berlin,

SB, Nl. Grimm C 2, 3 Bl. 38. Information from Mr. Dr. Berthold Friemel, Grimm Correspondence Working Group, Berlin. Email dated 02.02.2020. The reference to the note is also provided by Rölleke in his index to KHM 12 (KHM 1857/Rölleke 1980 III, p. 447). 92 A good overview is provided by Gerhard Kosellek’s introduction to his edition of letters; see Schulz, Briefe 2001, pp. 7–43, however, which largely omits the Kleinen Romane [little novels].

3.2  Text Processing

95

contributed significantly to the dissemination of popular reading matter. The contemporary appreciation of the author Kind is shown, for example, in an extremely positive review of his narrative work by August Wilhelm Schlegel and Caroline Schlegel, in which the “merits” are expressly “highlighted”, which Friedrich Schulz had “acquired for contemporary German literature through translations, adaptations of foreign works and his own poetry” (Schlegel 1801, p. 217).93 In the horizon of art understanding around 1800, the appreciation was equally given to the editor of foreign works as well as the author of own works, whereby the adaptations and translations were obviously attributed with their own literary value. As much as Schulz served as a model for ‘fairy tale literature’ in his time, the— slightly ironic—“foreword” that the author of Ammenmärchen Wilhelm Schumann placed in front of the first volume of his collection of stories in 1791 reveals: Folgende Märchen sind nicht von einer Amme, die viel Romane gelesen hat, wie die Amme in des Herrn Rath Schulz kleinen Romanen, viertem Band, und daher nicht so gut erzählt. Sollte man aber doch bey dieser hier und da Spuren finden, die verriethen, daß sie wenigstens etwas belesen sey: so muß man wissen, daß sie, nachdem sie mich erzogen hatte, zu Leuten von gutem Stande kam, von denen sie, wie sie sehr bescheiden sagte: „manchmal’ was aufgeschnappe hätte, das sie aber freilich nicht wieder so gut von sich geben könnte.“—Da sie alt war, nahm ich sie zu mir und ließ mir von ihr durch die Erzählung der Märchen, die ich hier liefre, die langen Winterabende vertreiben. ([Schumann 1791] I, S. [3–4])

Schumann refers to the editor’s preface, which Schulz had placed in front of the story Die gute Frau (Schulz 1790 IV, pp. 171–216) in the 4th volume of his Kleine Romane: Diese Erzählung ist von einer Amme, die viel Romane lies’t. Die kluge Frau that sehr erschrocken, als ihr der Herausgeber sagte, daß dieses und ein paar andre ihrer Mährchen gedruckt werden sollten, und sie hätte sich gewiß derb dagegen erklärt, wenn sie nicht in einem vornehmen, mithin feinen Hause Amme wäre. Doch hat sie gebeten, daß man dem Publicum sagen möchte, es sollte nicht denken, daß sie solche Schnurrpfeifereyen (ihr eigner Ausdruck) selbst erdacht hätte. Sie höre zuweilen dergleichen von einer französischen Dame, Namens de la Force, bey ihrer gnädigen Herrschaft erzählen, und sie dichte nur immer hinzu, was sie ihr nicht recht verstanden hätte. (Schulz 1790 IV, S. 172)

It is probable that the figure of the ‘nurse’ as a narrator will be seen as a literary fiction and a narrative topos. But regardless of whether or not the descriptions in

93  It

is considered certain that the review is a coproduction. August Wilhelm Schlegel and Friedrich Schlegel’s Characteristics and Critiques offered an excerpt from a comprehensive criticism by A.W. Schlegel and Caroline Schlegel of: 1) Little Romances by Friedrich Schulz, 2) Leopoldine. A Sidepiece to Moritz. By Friedrich Schulz, 3) Little Prosaic Writings by the Author of Moritz, 4) Collected Romances by Friedrich Schulz, Third Part: Henriette of England, in: Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung, Vol. 1797, No. 130 (25 April), pp. 217–224, and No. 131 (26 April), pp. 225–232.—See also Reulecke 2010, p. 88.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

96

this ‘foreword’ and the editor’s preface are fiction, or if the reference to the nurse as a guarantor must be seen as real, the peritexts in both cases reveal that the telling of these fairy tales was firmly embedded in literary culture. In the case of Schulz, this is even made explicit with regard to the fact that the French contes des fées by Mlle de La Force are named as the source.94 The figure of the ‘nurse’ is presented as merely an intermediary of a literary world of narration. The cliché of the old woman from the people, which the Grimms then introduced as a factuality, becomes immediately tangible, while in the Kassel brothers’ version the connection with literary culture remains unnoticed. The moment of de-contextualization, which characterizes the Grimm adaptation process with regard to their fairy tales, also characterizes their description of contemporary narrative culture and their situating of contributions. It boils down to the process of ignoring irrelevant facts. In fact, the descriptions by Schumann and Schulz can certainly be transferred to the later Kinder- und Hausmärchen by the Brothers Grimm. They make it transparent how a literary culture transmission can become an oral one, which is then supposed to experience a re-literarization. The model can certainly be related to the transmission of stories to the Brothers Grimm by contributors. What may have been fiction for Schumann and Schulz, but was certainly literary staging, is glorified by the Grimms as documentation of reality. As the side view of Schumann’s “Vorerinnerung” shows, Friedrich Schulz is recognized as an author who shaped the style of contemporary fairy tales in the years around and after 1800. However, Jacob Grimm’s opinion of the writer differed significantly from the general appreciation and already foreshadowed the subsequent history of valuation and forgetting of this author. When Grimm decided to adapt a story from the narrative oeuvre of the entertainment writer, the literary character of the model played only a subordinate role. What was decisive for the selection and processing was rather the conviction to be able to fix a concealed testimony of oral tradition in the Schulz story. Accordingly, it says in the commentary part to the first volume of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen with regard to the Rapunzel story of the collection: im Pentamerone II, 1. (Petrosinella), wo vieles anders und besonders die zweite Hälfte lebendiger ist, als im deutschen Märchen. Dieses hat schon Friedr. Schulz in s. kleinen Romanen Bd. 5. Lpz. 1790. S. 269–88. nur zu weitläuftig erzählt, wiewohl ohne Zweifel aus mündlicher Sage. Wie weit übertrifft es dennoch seine übrigen Märchen! (KHM 1812 I, Anhang, S. VIII–IX)

94 Schulz

transfers the fairy tale La Bonne Femme by Mlle de La Force (Caumont de La Force 1698, pp. 451–545).—This allows motives of the Schulz adaptation to be traced back to the Kinder- und Hausmärchen . If in Schulz’s version the tyrannical king threatens the good woman that he would “make a pit and throw all snakes, otters and toads into it” (Schulz 1790 IV, p. 213) in order to then imprison her there, he adapts the version of Mlle de La Force, where it is said of “un abîme de couleuvres, de viperes & de serpens” (Caumont de La Force 1698, pp. 538–539). In Grimm’s fairy tale Die weiße und die schwarze Braut from 1815, the king orders the coachman to be “thrown into a pit full of otters and snakes” (KHM 1815, p. 257). The mention of otters and snakes refers back to the Luther Bible; see, for example, Ps 58,4 or 1. Mos 49,17.

3.2  Text Processing

97

However, Grimm is clearly aware of the literariness of the model and the literary tradition in which the story is actually to be situated. So his comment does not only refer to the immediate literary reference text of 1790,95 but also to the supposed source of the story, the story Petrosinella from Giambattista Basile’s novella wreath Pentamerone.96 This reference to the source is quite clearly placed at the beginning of the commentary of 1812, thus highlighting the importance of the literary tradition contrary to the obvious intention of verifying an orally transmitted folkloric tradition. Even if one—as the Grimms did—sees in the Pentamerone a “collection of fairy tales” (KHM 1856, p. 290) and thus a testimony of orally founded popular narrative culture,97 the catalogue, which the Grimms reveal in their commentary, shows that they surveyed the overall tradition to then nevertheless subject it to a specific prioritization strategy and reorder it. So it is not surprising that there is a significant shift in the presentation of the evidence in the following commentary volumes of 1822 and 1856, which moves the reference to the origin from the Neapolitan narrative literature of the 17th century to the end of the commentary (KHM 1822, p. 23, 1856, p. 22). In the bibliography of their commentary volume of 1822, the Grimms offer a translation by Jacob Grimm of Basile’s Pentamerone after a copy in their possession from 1788 (KHM 1822, pp.

95 Pabst

(2014, S. 138) certainly formulates too strongly when, with a view to Grimm’s—in the temporal horizon not atypical—adaptation process, he speaks of the fact that in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen the authorship of Schulz “has been almost suppressed”. 96 First and foremost Lo Cunto de li Cunti overo Lo Trattenemiento de Peccerille. As a translation, the ‘Tale of Tales’ is easily accessible in Basile 2000, pp. 134–138. The story Petrosinella is the ‘First Entertainment’ of the ‘Second Day’. Even the contemporary summary at the beginning of the entertainment makes the proximity to the Rapunzel fairy tale clear: “A pregnant woman eats parsley from the garden of an Orca and, caught red-handed, promises her to give her what she will give birth to; she gives birth to Petrosinella, the Orca takes her and locks her in a tower. A prince abducts her, and with the help of three acorns they escape the pursuit of the Orca. Petrosinella, after her lover has brought her home, becomes a princess” (Basile 2000, p. 134).— The Neapolitan ‘original text’ is offered by Lauer 1993, pp. 13–17. 97  The

high esteem for Basile’s Pentamerone already quite unvarnishedly reflects Grimm’s “Preface” to the first volume of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen: “Richer than all others are older Italian collections, first in the nights of Straparola, which contain much good, but then especially in the Pentamerone of Basile, a book in Italy just as well-known and popular, as in Germany rare and unknown, written in the Neapolitan dialect, and in every respect excellent. The content is almost without lacunae and false additions, the style overflowing with good speeches and sayings. To translate it quite alive belonged to a fish kind […] and his age; we think, however, to clarify it in the second volume of the present collection, in which also everything else that foreign sources provide, is to find its place.” (KHM 1812, pp. XVII–XVIII)—In the hand-written copy of the brothers, the grammatical error by Jacob Grimm is corrected by hand to ‘im’. The Grimms had borrowed a copy of the Pentamerone from 1714 from the Weimar Library (cf. Vulpius Correspondence 2003 I, p. 167; see also the commentary II, p. 231–232; see also Jacob Grimm’s letter of 5 [and 8] June 1811 in: Briefwechsel zwischen Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm 2001, p. 227). In the following they acquired a copy from 1788 (Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 126; No. 1129).

98

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

279–369),98 one “overview of the fairy tales”, which in the Pentamerone and the Kinder- und Hausmärchen “in general agree” (KHM 1822, p. 370), follows. In the context of the transfer, Basile’s story Petrosinella - with Grimm as Petrosinelle—is also introduced (KHM 1822, pp. 299–300). In the course of the printing history, Jacob Grimm’s Rapunzel adaptation in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen was then subjected to further stylistic revision by the younger Grimm brother Wilhelm.99 Just as the fairy tale in the Grimms was an adaptation from contemporary literature, the story had already been an adaptation for Schulz, the origin of which was probably connected with the never realized plan for a fairy tale edition, which Schulz mentioned in his correspondence with the publisher Friedrich Justin Bertuch.100 Schulz had reworked his Rapunzel story after a French fairy tale by Mademoiselle de La Force from 1698, Persinette, which in turn looked back to Basile’s Neapolitan novella Petrosinella .101 The author of the fairy tale belonged “to the first generation of courtly storytellers at the court of Louis XIV.” (Wolfzettel 2005, S. 165) Unlike what the Grimms proclaimed from their state of knowledge in the preface to their collection to the literature report of their last KHM commentary, Basile’s novella was not “an almost unknown work abroad” (KHM 1856, S. 290). Rather, it belonged Il Pentamerone in the late 17th and 18th centuries became a fixed repertoire of a transnational European literary tradition, from which, inter alia, French entertainment and, in a narrower sense, fairy tale literature drew extensively. After the posthumous publication of the first edition of the “Tale of Tales” in 1634-1636, “further editions appeared in 1637, 1645, 1654, 1674 and 1697 in Naples with different publishers, and in 1679 in Rome”. This work of fiction, in which the author lets ten old women from the lower classes tell 50 fluctuating stories to entertain a prince and his pregnant wife on five days, already contains the literary topos of the old storytellers from the people. Also in the 18th century, at least “eight more Neapolitan

98 How

thoroughly the Grimms—and in particular Jacob Grimm—worked on their Pentamerone edition of 1788 is shown by Friemel 2012, pp. 39–42. Here you will also find references to other editions used by the brothers. 99 See Lauer 1993, pp. 10–12.—Lauer offers, on pp. 13–31, all relevant versions of the story and thus allows a comprehensive view. 100 On 22.06.1789, Schulz wrote from Paris: “As you can imagine, it is quite impossible for me to deliver the first volume of the fairy tales to Michael. I have had absolutely no time for anything but collecting material for my travelogue for the last three or four months.” (Schulz, Briefe 2001, S. 79)—Schulz’s reference to his “travelogue” certainly refers to his contributions to the Journal des Luxus und der Moden and the Deutsche Monatsschrift . See also the eyewitness account of the development of the Revolution between June and August 1789 published by Friedrich Vieweg u. d. T. Geschichte der großen Revolution in Frankreich (Berlin 1789) as well as—also published by Vieweg—Über Paris und die Pariser (Berlin 1791). 101 Cf. Märchen vor Grimm 1990, S. 288.—Lüthis (1960, S. 108) assessment that Mlle de La Force “adhered to the sequence of motifs in the folktale that must have come to her ears” and thus to an oral tradition, ignores the literary tradition of this story. Lauer (1993, S. 7-8) rightly speaks of a “widening of the material” with regard to a direct reference by Mlle de La Force to Basile’s collection.

3.2  Text Processing

99

and Italian editions” of this highly skilfully composed work of fiction are documented.102 In the second half of the 18th century, evidence then increases for an immediate and soon also productive reception in Germany.103 In terms of its history of composition, the Pentamerone is a literary testimony of a “counter-literature” of sorts, as Rudolf Schenda (in Basile 2000, p. 480) aptly put it, and was directed against the Italian standard literature of the time, against social ills that were burlesquely presented and ridiculed, and not least against the Spanish court language and culture in the Spanish-ruled Kingdom of Naples, to which the literary work in the Neapolitan dialect opposed a document of regional identity and cultural self-assertion. The wonderful worlds of his fairy and other otherworldly figures Basile—as other poets of the early modern period, but also of the Middle Ages—took from the literary tradition and the mythology: “Instead of speculating about the ‘oral’ in the Early Middle Ages, we can since the High Middle Ages to fixed, fixed tradition hold “(Schenda in: Basile 2000, p. 484), which can be traced back in detail in terms of content and motifs. The model of Giovanni Boccaccio’s Novellenkranz Decameron from 1470 is clearly visible and an influence of the well-known Oriental fairy tale tradition is probably. Persinette, the French fairy tale of Mademoiselle de la Force, belongs to the strand of a transnational European tradition of—first of all courtly, then increasingly also bourgeois—narrative literature of the late 17th and 18th centuries. It is motivically embedded in “numerous correspondences in the broad corpus of courtly fairy tales” (Wolfzettel 2005, p. 166), thus in the courtly entertainment literature of the time, and also points back to the traditional medieval world of literature between chanson de geste, romance and pastourelle in many ways. The literary motif designs can often be identified in the time horizon as reflections of social conditions and make transparent that “the respective fairy-tale element is to be seen as a correction of reality with a clear wish-fulfilling character” (Wolfzettel 2005, p. 167). The story of the French lady-in-waiting can certainly be considered well-known in the 18th century; for example, it was taken over in 1785 in the well-known collection Cabinet des Fées edited by Charles-Joseph Mayer .104

102  Rudolf Schenda: Basiles Pentamerone. Mediterrane Lebenswirklichkeit und Europäische Literaturtraditionen. Ein Nachwort. In: Basile 2000, S. 480. 103 See

Schenda, in Basile 2000, S. 504–510: “Basile Reception in Germany”.

104 Mayer

(ed.) 1785, pp. 36–48. See also Lüthi 1960, p. 105.—The collection was published between 1785 and 1789 in forty-one volumes, presenting the texts of about forty storytellers, including Mlle de La Force, Charles Perrault, Madame d’Aulnoy, Mademoiselle Leprince de Beaumont, Mademoiselle Lhéritier or Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Each volume is illustrated with three etchings by Clément-Pierre Marillier, engraved under the direction of Nicolas Delaunay.

100

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

In German translation, the fairy tale could already be found in 1765 as part of the collection Das Cabinet der Feen.105 In his fundamental little source study on the origin of the Grimm Rapunzel fairy tale, Max Lüthi already brought together all three relevant text versions— Persinette by Mlle de La Force, Rapunzel by Friedrich Schulz and by Jacob Grimm—in 1960 and made the dependencies transparent. For him it is obvious that “Schulz offers nothing more than a free translation of Persinette, whereby he replaces the French persil (parsley) with Rapunzel” (Lüthi 1960, p. 95). Misunderstanding the consistently literary character of the French fairy tale, Lüthi remains committed to the dictum of oral tradition, thus ultimately discrediting the literary character of this text history: “Schulz’s story ultimately goes back to a folk tale, not to a German one, but […] to a French one” (Lüthi 1960, p. 95). Manfred Grätz also remains committed to the dictum of oral tradition, but significantly stronger emphasizes the literary genesis. With regard to Schulz’s processing of the French fairy tale, he obviously follows Lüthi and leads him to the fact that “Schulz’s Rapunzel is simply a translation of the French version almost literally,” without any “omission,” whereby only from the “exotic plant ‘persil’ […] the ‘Rapunzel salad’, and consequently […] from the heroine ‘Persinette’ a ‘Rapunzel’ “ (Grätz 1988, p. 79) became. A closer look at the text processing of the German entertainment writer, however, shows that the processing by Schulz was more intensive and stylistically already anticipated the Grimms. Already the narrative introduction shows that Schulz offered a text-related, but not an almost literal translation. His processing was rather associated with quite remarkable textual interventions: Mlle de La Force: Persinette. Conte, 1698, S. 97–98

Friedrich Schulz: Rapunzel, 1790, S. 269

Deux jeunes amans s’étoient mariés ensemble après une longue poursuite de leurs amours; rien n’étoit égal à leur ardeur, ils vivoient contens & hereux, quand pour combler leur felicité, la jeune épouse se trouva grosse, & ce fut grande joye dans ce petit menage: ils souhaitoient fort un enfant, leur desir se trouvoit accompli. […]

Zwey junge Liebesleute waren endlich Mann und Frau geworden, nachdem sie viel von ihren Muhmen und Vettern über ihre Liebe auszustehen gehabt hatten. Sie waren sehr vergnügt, und lebten wie Kinder mit einander. Noch vergnügter wurden sie, als es sich zeigte, daß die junge Frau ‘was unter ihrem Herzen trüge. Sie hatte sich immer einen kleinen Erben gewünscht, und nun, dachte sie, würde er wohl nicht mehr ausbleiben. […]

105 Das Cabinet der Feen. Achter Theil. Nürnberg 1765, pp. 38–48. The translator is Friedrich Immanuel Bierling.—Lüthi (1960, pp. 105–106) assumes with good reason that the translation had only minor effects on the Rapunzel story by Friedrich Schulz. The text is available from Lauer 1993, pp. 17–27.

3.2  Text Processing

101

Grimm’s entrance should appear shorter and more lapidary later: “Es war einmal ein Mann und eine Frau, die hatten sich schon lange ein Kind gewünscht und nie eins bekommen, endlich aber ward die Frau guter Hoffnung.” (KHM 1812 I, p. 38-39) Schulz tells the story of Mlle de La Force recognizable by adding motives and making stylistic changes. From the very vague hint of pressure from her close environment in the first sentence of the French original, Schulz talks about the ‘aunts and uncles’ who were obviously disapproving of the love of the couple. Schulz comes very close to the Grimm style with the infantilization of love, according to which the young married couple lived ‘like children together’. The same linguistic ductility is taken into account in the formulation that the young woman finally ‘bore a child under her heart’, while Mlle de La Force only talks about the fact that she became pregnant. A similar tendency to adapt is also shown in the Schulz version of the ‘little heir’ compared to the simple ‘enfant’ in the French original. Nevertheless, the closeness of the Schulz translation is undisputed. The first printed version of the Rapunzel story within the Kinder- und Hausmärchen shortened the version of the template. The reunion of the blinded prince with his wife and children and their subsequent life in misery, which are told empathically by Schulz, are shortened in Jacob Grimm’s adaptation to the factual report. Above all, the Grimm editorial changes the genre-specific contour of the Schulz story as a fairy tale. In Schulz, the figure of the fairy, who as a punishing instance had plunged Rapunzel and her family into misery, comes back at the end of the fairy tale according to the genre of the fairy tale, which is completely omitted in the Grimm fairy tale: Aber es kam nun auch Hülfe. Die Fee ließ sich rühren, und ihre ehemalige Liebe zur schönen Rapunzel kam zurück. Sie kam auf einem herrlichen Wagen durch die Luft gefahren, nahm sie alle hinein, setzte sie auf prächtige Küssen und führte sie in das Schloß, worin der Vater des Prinzen seine Hofstatt hielt. (Schulz 1790 V, p. 287)

In accordance with the narrative conventions of the fairy tale, the narrative figure acts as a kind of ‘deus ex machina’, which brings the events that have gone out of control back into balance through its wonderful intervention and makes the happy ending possible. So Rapunzel’s stay in the tower in the fairy tale is explicitly motivated by the caring godmother’s efforts to keep the child from harm: “Da aber die Fee wußte, daß ein unglücklicher Stern bey ihrer Geburt geschienen hatte, so beschloß sie, alles anzuwenden, daß sie davor sicher wäre.” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 275) With the elimination of these genre-typical narrative moments, Grimm frees the story from the entertaining literary genre context, making the story new again and able to be adapted and redefined within the Kinder- und Hausmärchen . Jacob Grimm’s treatment is much freer with its German template than Schulz was with its French one. Even the strongly shortened opening in the first printed version of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen 1812 shows the differences clearly: “Es war einmal ein Mann und eine Frau, die hatten sich schon lange ein Kind

102

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

gewünscht und nie eins bekommen; endlich aber ward die Frau guter Hoffnung.” (KHM 1812 I, p. 38–39) The adaptation to an imagined “fairy tale tone” is already tangible in the initial fiction signal of the narrative form “Once upon a time”. The individualized “lovers” who “finally became man and wife” are now reduced to “man and wife” in a typical abbreviation. The reduction to the narrower narrative course includes the elimination of narrative contexts—here, for example, the indication of the Schulz story of the rejection in the family circle. The flatness and one-dimensionality of the narrative figures striven for in the Grimm fairy tale ideal is implemented narratively by the fading of psychological insights, so that Grimm completely dispenses with the indication that the young wife had always “wished for a little heir” and, after the discovery of her pregnancy, hoped for the birth of the latter. In the subsequent print editions, the younger Grimm brother then successively edited the Rapunzel story, which is already tangible in the opening sentence. In the third revised and improved edition of 1837, a further re-narration takes place: “Es war einmal ein Mann und eine Frau, die wünschten sich schon lange vergeblich ein Kind, endlich machte sich die Frau Hoffnung der liebe Gott werde ihren Wunsch erfüllen.” (KHM 1837 I, p. 76) The—however strongly stereotyped—figure of the “dear God” is newly introduced. Smaller editorial changes are also due to the fairy-tale style of the Grimm stories, for example the transfer of indeterminacies into a clear scheme. This process can be seen, for example, in the introduction of clear numerical values. When the prince happily meets Rapunzel again, her tears dissolve the veil of his blindness: With Schulz “some of her tears had fallen on the prince’s eyes, so he got them back, and he could see as clearly as before […]” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 285); in contrast, Grimm specifies: “Zwei von ihren Thränen fallen in seine Augen, da werden sie wieder klar, und er kann damit sehen, wie sonst.” (KHM 1812 I, p. 42–43). This last example, however, once again makes it clear to what extent Grimm, despite all the differences from the source, remains obliged to it not only in terms of plot structure, but also in terms of language. Some of the linguistic-stylistic literarisms that are characteristic of Rapunzel and immediately point to the Schulz story are unmistakable. Grimm’s adoption of a beauty topos that is rather atypical in its literariness provides a very beautiful example. Schulz describes Rapunzel’s beauty as follows: Als sie [die Frau] in die Wochen kam, erschien die Fee vor dem Kindbette. Es ward ein Mädchen, und sie hieß sie Rapunzel. Sie wickelte sie in Silber- und Goldstoff, sie sprengte sie mit einem kostbaren Wasser ein, das sie in ihrem Büchschen hatte, und nun wurde sie das schönste Kind unter der Sonne. (Schulz 1790 V, p. 274)

At first glance, it is noticeable that the figure of the fairy is emphasized as a determining factor. As godmother, she gives the child its name and bestows the girl’s beauty through the use of magical beauty products. The active, intentional act is minimized in Grimm’s version. It is still the fairy who, in her function as godmother, determines the name, but she has nothing to do with the girl’s beauty. However, the beauty topic remains as such: “This Rapunzel became the most

3.2  Text Processing

103

beautiful child under the sun […]. (KHM 1812 I, p. 40) Grimm’s dependence on the source is immediately tangible in the adoption of the phrase. Grimm’s adoption of salient linguistic parts is also evident elsewhere. Replacing a pale formulation by Mlle de La Force, Schulz already offers the formulaic utterance: “Rapunzel, let your hair down so that I can climb up.” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 277)106 Grimm’s modification makes the formulaic and highlighted by blocking request into a magical spell, which is set off by verse form from the narrative text: “Rapunzel, Rapunzel! / Let your hair down.” (KHM 1812 I, p. 41)107 The doubling of the named call serves at Grimm the rhythmic and linguistically strengthens the evocation of the magical. To a dramatization of the action, the doubling of the onomatopoeic interjection contributes to the description of the violent cutting of Rapunzel’s hair after the discovery of the love affair. With Schulz, the fairy gets upset and “finally wrapped her braids around her hand, cut them down with a jerk […]. (Schulz 1790 V, p. 281) In this scene it says much more detailed at Grimm “took the beautiful hair of Rapunzel, wrapped it a few times around her left hand, took a pair of scissors in her right and snip, snip, they were cut off.” (KHM 1812 I, p. 41–42) The passage is subsequently subjected to successive text editing by Wilhelm Grimm, the additional supplement “and the beautiful braids lay on the ground” (KHM 1837 I, p. 79) and in the ablaut game by the modification of the interjection to “snip, snip” (KHM 1850 I, p. 77) now an unmistakably also proverbial contouring. The proverbial shaping of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen points to a strategy of narrative technical processing that Wilhelm Grimm concentrated on in the sixth, enlarged and improved edition. So from this edition on, the father who was caught in his garden by the fairy asks her to “let grace prevail over justice” (KHM 1850 I, p. 74), just as the fairy later rages against the prince using a whole relay of newly inserted proverbial turns of phrase: “[…] the beautiful bird no longer sits in the nest and no longer sings; the cat has got him and will also scratch your eyes out” (KHM 1850 I, p. 77).108 These are later revisions in the course of the printing history. In the process of the genesis of the rewriting of the Schulz story, Jacob Grimm did not take up proverbial turns of phrase of the model in 1812, but rather dispensed with them. So, for example, Schulz explains that Rapunzel had “stewed and roasted, marzipan and almonds and biscuits […]” to eat in the tower (Schulz 1790 V, p. 276), while nothing of the sort can be found with Jacob Grimm at

106 In the following three times included: “Rapunzel, let your hair down so that I can climb up.” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 278 and 279); in the second speech of the prince with the variant “[…] so that I can climb up.” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 282) 107 With little variation in the punctuation in KHM 1812, p. 41 and 42; at the beginning with linguistic deviation: “Rapunzel, Rapunzel! / Let me your hair down.” (KHM 1812, p. 40) 108 See

Rölleke/Bluhm 2020, pp. 48–49.

104

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

this point. However, it is noteworthy that the twin formula ‘stewed and roasted’ is used several times in other tales of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen . In the no less well-known Grimm fairy tale No. 24 Frau Holle and in KHM 63 Goldkinder (the later KHM 85), it is already used in the first edition (KHM 1812 I, p. 108 and 63), while in KHM 36 Tischchen deck dich, Goldesel und Knüppel aus dem Sack only in the course of a revision in the second edition (KHM 1819 I, p. 183) and in KHM 54 Der Ranzen, das Hütlein und das Hörnlein in the third edition (KHM 1837 I, p. 327) is interpolated. A similar situation can be found in another idiomatic expression. Schulz summarises the misery of Rapunzel and her loved ones, after they have finally found each other, in a picturesque way: “It would have been pitiful if he had seen it like this.” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 287) Jacob Grimm radically shortened this part of the Schulz story and Wilhelm Grimm did not use the idiom any further in his editing of his Rapunzel version. Within the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, however, the idiom is one of the phrases that is often used—it is added in KHM 1 Froschkönig oder der eiserne Heinrich and in KHM 80 Von dem Tode des Hühnchens in the third edition (KHM 1837 I, p. 2 and 476), in KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn the phrase was interpolated retrospectively into the first ‘Small Edition’ of 1825 (KHM 1825, p. 278; in the ‘Great Edition’ finally as KHM 110). The idea that Wilhelm Grimm may have thought of Friedrich Schulz’s fairy tale Rapunzel when making his ‘folk poetic’ adaptations of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen in the cases mentioned above is attractive, but cannot be proven and is rather unlikely. With a view to both the adaptation and the editorial history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, the focus in the following should be on the process of purification and, in a narrower sense, the desexualisation of the fairy tale. If one compares Jacob Grimm’s adaptation with the reference text, the story by Friedrich Schulz, one finds a blatant example of such a text adaptation. In the Grimm fairy tale, the love affair between Rapunzel and the prince,109 who has just found his way into the tower, in the horizon of a—quite modern—bourgeois sense of morality as well as the naivety ideal of the editors associated with the fairy tale form: “, Rapunzel was now initially frightened, but soon liked the young king so much that she agreed with him that he should come every day and be pulled up.” (KHM 1812 I, p. 41) The love scene is completely omitted. What is deleted by the editors is the wide-ranging and partly highly indecent seduction of Rapunzel, as offered by the Schulz story. The telling of the love encounter can also be found in the underlying French fairy tale of Mlle de La Force and in the Neapolitan farce of Basile and is actually part of the narrative. In Schulz, the prince rushes into the girl’s room: Aber sie fürchtete sich doch, und schrie ganz erbärmlich, hörte auch nicht eher auf, als bis sie so verliebt in den Prinzen war, als er in sie, und da wurde sie stille. Er sagte ihr sehr

109 The figure of the story is inconsistently named as “a young king’s son” or “king’s son”, as “the young king” and as “the prince” (KHM 1812, p. 40-42).

3.2  Text Processing

105

viel schöne Sachen, und sie war bloß bestürzt und antwortete nicht. Das machte ihm gute Hoffnung, und endlich ward er so dreist, daß er Heirathens vorgab, und sie gleich nehmen wollte. Sie sagte ja, ohne zu wissen, wozu, es geschah, ohne zu wissen, wie, und es war ihr wohl und weh, ohne zu wissen, wo. Das war recht artig! (Schulz 1790 V, p. 280)110

The differences to the editorial of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are clearly visible—they already begin with the character description of the prince, who—as it is expressly called—only “pretended” to want to marry the uneducated girl with Schulz. The act of seduction almost has something violent to it and the sexual implications are unmistakable. In an indecent form, the act of defloration is ultimately described in a veiled manner. The Schulz passage is certainly not fairytale-like in the sense of the Grimm’s ideal of naivety—and it should not be as entertainment literature for an adult audience. But already Schulz showed differences compared to his source Persinette: elle s’effraya d’abord, elle cria, un moment aprés elle trembla, & rien ne fut capable de la rasseurer, que quand elle sentit dans son cœur autant d’amour qu’elle en avoit mis dans celuy du Prince. Il luy disoit les plus belle choses du monde, à quoy elle ne repondit que par un trouble qui donna de l’esperance au Prince; enfin devenu plus hardy, il luy proposa de l’épouser sur l’heur, elle y consentit sans sçavoir presque ce qu’elle faisoit, elle acheva de même toute la ceremonie. (Caumont de La Force 1698, S. 114–115)

Even with this comparison of passages, the textual similarities and closeness are clearly visible, as are the differences. While the prince only pretends to want to marry Rapunzel with Schulz, the proposal is made without the secret reservation with Mlle de La Force. In the same way, the indecent ambiguity can be found in the prince’s speech that he “wanted to take her right away”, which is not yet present in the French fairy tale. And the final sequence with Schulz is a self-contained elaboration of the rather pale French source: “[…] and she was well and unwell, without knowing where. That was really nice!” (Schulz 1790 V, S. 280). The process of purifying desexualization and enterotisierung of the Rapunzel story in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen continues with the editorial revisions of subsequent print editions. Especially in the second edition of 1819, in the third edition of 1837 and in the sixth edition of 1850, the revisions are partly considerable. The following excerpt reproduces the scene when the witch discovers the secret love affair of the girl with the king (son) through the girl’s naivety. KHM 1812: […] bald aber gefiel ihr [d.i. Rapunzel] der junge König so gut, daß sie mit ihm verabredete, er solle alle Tage kommen und hinaufgezogen werden. So lebten sie lustig und in

110 See also fairy tales before Grimm 1990, p. 29–37, here p. 33. Uther’s text adoption is not quite reliable; so it says in this passage, for example, “Heirathens vorgab” and not “he pretended to marry her”.

106

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

Freuden eine geraume Zeit, und die Fee kam nicht dahinter, bis eines Tages das Rapunzel anfing und zu ihr sagte: „sag’ sie mir doch Frau Gothel, meine Kleiderchen werden mir so eng und wollen nicht mehr passen.“ Ach du gottloses Kind, sprach die Fee […]. (I, S. 41)

KHM 1819: […] bald aber gefiel ihr der junge König so gut, daß sie mit ihm verabredete, er solle alle Tage kommen und hinaufgezogen werden. So lebten sie lustig und in Freuden eine geraume Zeit, und hatten sich herzlich lieb, wie Mann und Frau. Die Zauberin aber kam nicht dahinter, bis eines Tages das Rapunzel anfing und zu ihr sagte: [„]sag’ sie mir doch Frau Gothel, sie wird mir viel schwerer heraufzuziehen als der junge König.“ Ach du gottloses Kind, sprach die Zauberin […]. (I, S. 68)

KHM 1837: Da verlor Rapunzel ihre Angst, und als er sie fragte ob sie ihn zum Manne nehmen wolle, und sie sah daß er jung und schön war, so dachte sie ‚der wird mich lieber haben als die alte Frau Gothel,‘ und sagte ja, und reichte ihm ihre Hand. Sie verabredeten daß er alle Abend zu ihr kommen sollte, aber die Zauberin die nur bei Tage kam, merkte nichts davon, bis einmal Rapunzel anfieng und zu ihr sagte ‚sag sie mir doch, Frau Gothel, wie kommt es nur, sie wird mir viel schwerer heraufzuziehen, als der junge Königssohn, der ist in einem Augenblick bei mir.‘ ‚Ach du gottloses Kind,‘ rief die Zauberin […]. (I, S. 79)

KHM 1850: Da verlor Rapunzel ihre Angst, und als er sie fragte ob sie ihn zum Manne nehmen wollte, und sie sah daß er jung und schön war, so dachte sie ‚der wird mich lieber haben als die alte Frau Gothel,‘ und sagte ja, und legte ihre Hand in seine Hand. Sie sprach ‚ich will gerne mit dir gehen, aber ich weiß nicht wie ich herab kommen kann. Wenn du kommst, so bring jedesmal einen Strang Seide mit, daraus will ich eine Leiter flechten und wenn die fertig ist, so steige ich herunter und du nimmst mich auf dein Pferd.‘ Sie verabredeten daß er bis dahin alle Abend zu ihr kommen sollte, denn bei Tag kam die Alte. Die Zauberin merkte auch nichts davon, bis einmal Rapunzel anfieng und zu ihr sagte ‚sag sie mir doch, Frau Gothel, wie kommt es nur, sie wird mir viel schwerer heraufzuziehen als der junge Königssohn, der ist in einem Augenblick bei mir.‘ ‚Ach du gottloses Kind,‘ rief die Zauberin […]. (I, S. 76)

When comparing the different stages of editing, it is immediately apparent that the first print version from 1812 is the shortest and that the last print version, which can be read in the fairy tale collection from 1850, is the longest version and is told in great detail with many details and its own plot motives. In the first version, two—in the synopsis marked—readings are particularly noticeable: On the one hand, it is said that a ‘fairy’ and on the other hand, the girl innocently mentions the fact that her clothes had become so tight and no longer fit. Both are taken from Schulz, where the prince soon notices Rapunzel’s pregnancy without, however, clarifying it: “But it did not take long before her clothes no longer fit.” And so the inexperienced Rapunzel complains to the fairy, “that all her clothes would become so tight” (Schulz 1790 V, p. 280), whereupon she then discovers the connections. In the second edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, the ironic-amusing

3.2  Text Processing

107

discovery scenario with its hardly veiled hint at the unwanted pregnancy of the girl is changed. From 1819, the figure of the fairy, which was still quite clearly delineated in the source, is now clearly negatively connoted as a sorceress. The first print version still shows the fairy as a fairy-tale figure with the tradition of French fairy tales, that is, the entertainment literature of the 18th and early 19th centuries, where the motif of pregnancy was also introduced. But since the Grimms were interested in the tradition of a ‘German’ national culture in a narrower sense, they now also erased an open reference to the French background with the delineation of the figure of the fairy as a sorceress. A sorceress is, like the more frequent witch, in contrast to the fairy, a German-cultural connoted figure. In his Basile translation as part of the commentary volume, Jacob Grimm also explicitly calls the figure referred to as ‘Orca’ by Basile a “witch” (KHM 1822, p. 299-300). With regard to the desexualization and enterotization of the story, the modification of the motif is significant in the discovery of pregnancy. Instead of the clothes that had become too tight, Rapunzel in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen from 1819 gives away his secret by carelessly mentioning the young king, who is then standardized as the king’s son from the third edition of 1837. The elimination of the motif of the clothes that have become too tight shows the tendency of the de-eroticisation of the texts. The French fairy tales were courtly entertainment literature and often had an erotic or at least suggestive character. The indirect reference to the love affair of the girl in the first printed version of the KHM story and its consequences—namely a pregnancy, which is why the clothes are too tight after all—is replaced by a unverfängliche, but also pale description. The love relationship itself is in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen recognizable from 1819 sentimentalized: they “had a lot of love for each other, like man and woman”. The tendency is continued in the third version. From 1837, the 1819 definitely still illegitimate relationship—one loved each other “ like man and woman”, but not ‘ as man and woman’—made into a quasi-marital: Before the girl gives herself to the beautiful, young king’s son, he makes her an official marriage proposal (he asks her, “if she wanted to take him as a husband”), which she accepts: she “said yes, and gave him her hand”. With the sixth edition of 1850 this act is intensified in its ritual binding again: Rapunzel “said yes, and put her hand in his hand”. This makes you officially engaged and in the bourgeois-legal sense and according to the conventions of the time quasi married: There is now no longer any obstacle to a sexual connection. The editors eventually insert a betrothal scene that gives the pregnancy a quasilegitimate framework that is adapted to the contemporary bourgeois—and not least to their own—moral concepts. In these changes in the text, it becomes clear how the Kinder- und Hausmärchen were increasingly adapted to the bourgeois notions of morality of the time and made into a children’s literature that was adequate to the moral concepts of the early and middle 19th century as part of the purifying editing of their print versions. The de-eroticisation and desexualisation of the Rapunzel story in the course of the Grimm’s editing of the fairy tale into their own ‘Kinder- und Hausmärchen’ and the later deletion of any remaining lewdness and even hints are evidence of a purifying editorial practice and the creation of a

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

108

new type of fairy tale that was thus also accessible for a classification as children’s literature in the subsequent and even the current reception practice. The—admittedly quite lewd—humour of the original with its clear sexual implications was left behind.

3.2.3 Stereotypical Reworkings—The Example KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn Another specific form of text editing of stories in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen is the stereotypical reworking. Characterisations are written into common templates. This is in itself a familiar procedure in popularly contoured texts that seek to implement the genus humile, the ‘lower style’. Against the background of the genesis of many Grimm fairy tales, one will look above all to the model of early modern farce literature and its poetics. The implementation of such stereotypes then becomes problematic when they affirm and continue contemporary enemy images and social discredit, especially when this happens in times of social crisis. In the early 19th century and in Romanticism in the narrower sense, this is particularly true for the literary representation of Jews. The figure of the Jew is mentioned by name in the story Der Jude im Dorn in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen.111 The story belonged to the basic repertoire of the first edition as Der Jude im Dorn and could be found as number 24 in the second volume of 1815. In the later editions of the two-volume “Great Edition”, the text is ranked as number 110 up to the “Final Edition” of 1857. During the text editing of the “Small Edition” of 1825, the story was changed, with the figure of the Jew receiving additional typification. The two-volume “Große Ausgabe” had been intended by the brothers primarily as a scientific edition. However, the later triumph of the fairy tale stories as children’s literature was based on the “Kleine Ausgabe” published for the first time in 1825, which offered a selection of 50 stories in one volume and was intended for a wider range of readers and not least for a younger audience.112 A total of 10 editions of this children’s edition were published by 1858 with a text selection that remained largely unchanged, to which Der Jude im Dorn always belonged as number 42. With regard to its reception history, the story has always been part of the prominent wreath and the narrower canon of popular fairy tales, in a series with, for example, Froschkönig,Rotkäppchen,Bremer Stadtmusikanten,Dornröschen,Sneewittchen,Kö nig Drosselbart or Rumpelstilzchen, to name just a few. The Kinder- und Hausmärchen may be regarded as the central text document for the further reception of this story, even though Der Jude im Dorns was also included in other collections of the time; the story found lithographic treatments

111 This 112 See

has already been discussed by Bluhm in 2017 and 2020.

Bluhm 2010 in general.

3.2  Text Processing

109

and was popularized in the form of picture books in the 19th century. For a whole range of generations of the 19th and 20th centuries, Der Jude im Dorns was probably a familiar bedtime, reading, and storytelling material in children’s bedrooms. After 1945, the text was “taken out of the KHM-partial editions in a kind of selfcensorship” (Uther 2013, p. 240) because of its content, which was considered antisemitic, and it has not returned to the canon of more famous stories since then. When the Governing Council of the German Bundesbank decided in 1990 to issue a new series of banknotes and the largest banknote, the 1000 DM note, was equipped with the portrait of the brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, there was again some excitement because, in particular, Jewish newspapers questioned the justification for such a symbolic honor with reference to the story and its possible antisemitic background. But the awareness of the problem of the German public and also of Grimm research remained remarkably dull. If the antisemitism manifest in the story was recognized at all,113, it was seen only as a reflection of the legal situation of the time, which “would have contributed to a ‘reinforcement of prejudices against Jewish fellow citizens’” (Uther 2013, p. 239).114 After a long period of restraint, however, narratology has finally taken a closer look at the problems of this story in recent times, as well as at the problematic image of the Jews in the Brothers Grimm themselves.115 In fact, the content of Der Jude im Dorn is problematic. It tells the story of a servant who is cheated out of his fair wage by his employer and sets off on his way like Hans in Luck. Despite his poverty, he remains charitable and is therefore given three magical items by a numinous helper, a little man: a bird pipe that hits everything, a fiddle that everyone has to dance to, and the ability that no one can refuse him. On his further journey, the thus equipped servant meets “an old Jew” (KHM 1815 II, p. 135). At the Jew’s request, the servant shoots a bird with his bird pipe, which the Jew then tries to fetch from the thorns. When the Jew is in the midst of the thorns, the servant, out of mischief, forces him to dance to his fiddle until the Jew, pierced by the thorns, promises him a bag of gold in his distress. With his loot, the servant goes on, but is brought before the judge in the next town, where the tortured Jew sues him. The servant’s justification that the Jew would have offered him the money of his own free will if only he would stop playing the fiddle, finds no belief with the judge. Under the gallows, the servant begs as his last request, which of course is granted, to play his violin again. He plays it

113 Shojaei Kawan counts KHM 110 among the “most repulsive stories of fairy-tale literature”, which is “questionable not only because of the occupation of the figure of the opponent with a prejudiced stereotype figure”, “but it also offers the example of an indescribable hypocrisy and baseness with which unjustified or at least unproven accusations are declared to be true.” (Shojaei Kawan 2007, p. 180) She rightly points out that the text by the Grimms was “turned into anti-Jewish propaganda” (2007, p. 181). 114 Diederichsen recognizes a “particularly irritating story from a legal point of view” in KHM 110 (Diederichsen 2008, p. 34). 115 See

Bockwoldt (2011), Bluhm (2017) and Henschel (2019).

110

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

until the judge, like everyone else forced to dance, saves his life and sets him free. Instead of him, the Jew is led to the gallows after the servant has forced him to confess with his violin that he actually stole the money given to him. The story belongs to the type of the Schwankmärchen. The figure of the Jew is unmistakably caricatured in the narrative representation. The Jew wears stereotypical “anti-Jewish features” and is referred to as “greedy, tormentor and cheat” in the servant’s figure of speech (Uther 2013, p. 238–239). In a certain sense, he is a kind of refiguration of a common pejorative idiomatic use of the word ‘Jewish’: The figure of the Jew in the thorn stands “for the metaphorical meaning of the adjective ‘Jewish’ in the sense of dishonest economic behavior, which has been common since the 16th century and also taken up by authors such as Lessing, Börne, Heine or Marx (Horch 1985, p. 149), even stronger for theft and fraud.” Grimm's clichéd figure representation reminds us of etchings that Grimms younger brother Ludwig Emil Grimm had made in 1815 from the “Preusje von Schlüchtern” called Jewish small trader Mordechai Löb (see Fig. 3.2). In literary and clichéd history, the Grimm fairy tale is clearly in the tradition of early modern farce literature and the development of a “fixed type of Jewish figure”. In this tradition, “Jewish figures are always characterized by fixed epithets, above all ‘usury’ and ‘blasphemy’ and ‘obstinacy’ […] they are as protagonists […] stereotyped figures and serve as representatives of the entire Judaism.” (Gutsche 2014, p. 84) The function of such discrediting by and in the entertaining literature of the time was ultimately the “consolidation and preservation of the given order, i.e. the Christian, as well as the entertainment through mockery”. (Gutsche 2014, p. 85)

Fig. 3.2   a Preusje von Schlüchtern, b Das Preusje von Schlüchtern. Hessian State Archives Marburg (fonds 340 Grimm No. B 82)

3.2  Text Processing

111

Historically, the story Der Jude im Dorn is committed to this entertainmentliterary discredit of the figure of the Jew—and ultimately of Judaism itself—from the first print version. She should even be strengthened in the further editorial history of the story. The textual edits between Volume 2 of the first edition of 1815 and the second edition of 1819 are small; above all, the derogatory and dialectal “Jud’” is neutralized to “Jude”. After the second edition, however, the caricature is intensified in a conspicuous manner in the text edits. In the ‘Small Edition’ of 1825, Wilhelm Grimm qualitatively pushed forward the derogatory stereotyping of the story figure through additions. A look at the most important changes in the story text between the ‘Large Edition’ of 1819 and the 1st edition of the ‘Small Edition’, the edits of which should then also determine the text of the subsequent editions of the ‘Large’ and ‘Small Edition’, shows the extent and character of the work:

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

112

KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn 21819, Bd. 2, S. 120-122

KHM 42 Der Jude im Dorn (‚Kleine Ausgabe‘), S. 277–280

11825

[…]

[…]

Mein Knecht aber, war er vorher froh gewesen, dünkte er sich jetzt noch zehnmal froher, und ging nicht lange zu, so begegnete ihm ein alter Jude. Da stand ein Baum und obendrauf auf dem höchsten Zweig saß eine kleine Lerche und sang und sang. „Gotts Wunder! was so ein Thierlein kann, hätt’ ich’s, gäb’ viel darum.“

„Herz, was begehrst du nun!“ sprach der Knecht zu sich selber, und zog lustig weiter. Bald darauf begegnete er einen [sic!] Juden mit einem langen Ziegenbart, der stand und horchte auf den Gesang eines Vogels, der hoch oben in der Spitze eines Baumes saß. „Gottes Wunder!“ rief er aus, „so ein kleines Thier hat so eine grausam mächtige Stimme! wenns doch mein wäre! aber wer kann ihm Salz auf den Schwanz streuen!“ „Wenns weiter nichts ist, sprach der Knecht, der Vogel soll bald herunter seyn, legte an, und traf aufs Haar, und der Vogel fiel herab in die Dornhecken. „Geh, Spitzbub, sagte er zum Juden, und hol dir den Vogel heraus.“ „Mein, sprach der Jude, laßt den Bub’ weg, so kommt der Hund gelaufen; ich will mir den Vogel auflesen, weil ihr ihn doch einmal getroffen habt“ legte sich auf die Erde, und fieng an sich in den Busch hinein zu arbeiten. Wie er nun mitten in dem Dorn steckte, plagte der Muthwille den guten Knecht, daß er seine Fidel abnahm, und anfieng zu geigen. Gleich fieng auch der Jude an, die Beine zu heben, und in die Höhe zu springen, und je mehr der Knecht strich, desto besser gieng der Tanz. Aber die Dörner zerrissen ihm den schräbigen [sic!] Rock, kämmten ihm den Ziegenbart, und stachen und zwickten ihn am ganzen Leib. „Mein, rief der Jude, was soll mir das Geigen! laß der Herr das Geigen! ich begehre nicht zu tanzen!“ Aber der Knecht hörte nicht darauf, und dachte, du hast die Leute genug geschunden, nun soll dirs die Dornhecke nicht besser machen, und fieng von neuem an zu geigen, daß der Jude noch höher aufspringen mußte, und die Fetzen von seinem Rock an den Stacheln hängen blieben. „Au weih geschrieen! rief der Jude, geb’ ich doch dem Herrn, was er verlangt, wenn er nur das Geigen läßt, einen ganzen Beutel mit Gold.“ „Wenn du so spendid bist, sprach der Knecht, so will ich wohl mit meiner Musik aufhören, aber das muß ich dir nachrühmen, du machst deinen Tanz noch mit, daß es eine Art hat;“ nahm darauf den Beutel, und gieng seiner Wege. Der Jude blieb stehen, und sah ihm nach, und als der Knecht weit weg, und ihm ganz aus den Augen war, so schrie er aus Leibeskräften: „du miserabler Musikant! du Bierfiedler! wart, wenn ich dich allein erwische! ich will dich jagen, daß du die Schuhsohlen verlieren sollst! du Lump! steck einen Groschen ins Maul, daß du sechs Heller werth bist!“ und schimpfte weiter, was er nur

„Wenn es weiter nichts ist, die soll bald herunter,“ sagte der Knecht, setzte sein Rohr an und schoß die Lerche auf das Haar, daß sie den Baum herabfiel, „geht hin und leset sie auf,“ sie war aber ganz tief in die Dornen unten am Baum hineingefallen. Da kroch der Jud’ in den Busch und wie er mitten drin stack, zog mein Knecht seine Fiedel und geigte, fing der Jude an zu tanzen und hatte keine Ruh, sondern sprang immer stärker und höher; der Dorn aber zerstach seine Kleider, daß die Fetzen herum hingen und ritzte und wundete ihn, daß er am ganzen Leibe blutete. „Gotts willen! schrie der Jude, laß der Herr sein Geigen seyn, was hab’ ich verbrochen?“ Die Leute hast du genug geschunden, dachte der lustige Knecht, so geschieht dir kein Unrecht, und spielte einen neuen Hüpfauf. Da legte sich der Jude auf Bitten und Versprechen und wollte ihm Geld geben, wenn er aufhörte, allein das Geld war dem Knecht erst lange nicht genug und trieb ihn immer weiter, bis der Jude ihm hundert harte Gulden verhieß, die er im Beutel führte und eben einem Christen abgeprellt hatte. Wie mein Knecht das viele Geld sah, sprach er: „unter dieser Bedingung ja,“ nahm den Beutel und stellte sein Fiedeln ein; darauf ging er ruhig und vergnügt weiter die Straße. Der Jude riß sich halb nackt und armselig aus dem Dornstrauch, überschlug, wie er sich rächen möchte, und fluchte dem Gesellen alles Böse nach.

3.2  Text Processing

Lief endlich zum Richter, klagte daß er von einem Bösewicht unverschuldeter Weise seines Geldes beraubt und noch dazu zerschlagen wäre, daß es erbarmte, und der Kerl, der es gethan hätte, trüge ein Rohr auf dem Buckel und eine Geige hinge an seinem Hals.

Da sandte der Richter Boten und Häscher aus, die sollten den Knecht fahen, wo sie ihn könnten sehen, der wurde bald ertappt und vor Gericht gestellt. Da klagte der Jude, daß er ihm das Geld geraubt hätte, der Knecht sagte: „nein, gegeben hast du mir’s, weil ich dir aufgespielt habe,“ aber der Richter machte das Ding kurz und verurtheilte meinen Knecht zum Tod am Galgen.

Schon stand er auf der Leitersprosse, den Strick am Hals, da sprach er: „Herr Richter, gewährt mir eine letzte Bitte!“ – „Wofern du nicht dein Leben bittest, soll sie gewährt seyn.“ „Nein, um mein Leben ist’s nicht, laßt mich noch eins auf meiner Geige geigen zu guter Letzt.“ Da schrie der Jude: „bewahre Gott! erlaubt’s ihm nicht! erlaubt’s ihm nicht!“ allein das Gericht sagte: „einmal ist es ihm zugestanden und dabei soll’s bewenden,“ auch durften sie’s ihm nicht weigern, weil er die Gabe hatte, daß ihm keiner die Bitte abschlug. Da schrie der Jude: „bindet mich fest, um Gotteswillen!“ mein Knecht aber faßte seine Fiedel und that einen Strich, da wankte alles und bewegte sich, Richter, Schreiber, und Schergen und den Jud’ konnte keiner binden, und er that den zweiten Strich, da ließ ihn der Henker los und tanzte selber, und wie er nun ordentlich in’s Geigen kam, tanzte alles zusammen, Gericht und der Jude vornen und alle Leute auf dem Markt die da wollten zuschauen.

113 losbringen konnte. Und als er sich damit etwas zu Gute gethan und Luft gemacht hatte, lief in die Stadt zum Richter. „Herr Richter, au weih geschrien! ich bin auf offener Landstraße beraubt und übel zugerichtet worden von einem gottlosen Menschen, ein Stein auf dem Erdboden möcht’ sich erbarmen; die Kleider zerfetzt! der Leib zerstochen und zerkratzt! das Gold mit dem Beutel genommen! lauter Ducaten, ein Stück schöner, als das andere! um Gotteswillen, laßt den Menschen ins Gefängnis werfen.“ Sprach der Richter „wars ein Soldat, der dich mit seinem Säbel so zurichtet hat?“ „Gott bewahr’! sagte der Jude, einen nackten Degen hat er nicht gehabt, aber ein Rohr hat er gehabt auf dem Buckel, und eine Geige am Hals, daran ist er leicht zu erkennen.“ Der Richter schickte seine Leute nach ihm aus, die fanden den guten Knecht, der ganz langsam weiter gezogen war, und fanden auch den Beutel mit Gold bei ihm. Als er vor Gericht gestellt wurde, sagte er „ich habe den Juden nicht angerührt, und ihm das Gold nicht genommen, er hat mir’s aus freien Stücken angeboten, weil er meine Musik nicht anhören konnte, damit ich nur aufhörte zu geigen.“ „Gott bewahr! schrie der Jude, er greift die Lügen, wie Fliegen an der Wand!“ Aber der Richter glaubte es auch nicht, und sprach „das ist eine schlechte Entschuldigung, das thut kein Jude,“ und verurtheilte den guten Knecht zum Galgen. Als er abgeführt wurde, schrie ihm noch der Jude zu „du Bärenhäuter, du Hundemusikant, jetzt kriegst du deinen wohlverdienten Lohn!“ Der Knecht stieg ganz ruhig mit dem Henker die Leiter hinauf, auf der letzten Sproße aber drehte er sich um, und sprach zum Richter „gewährt mir noch eine Bitte, ehe ich sterbe.“ „Ja, sprach der Richter, wenn du nicht um dein Leben bittest.“ „Nicht ums Leben, antwortete der Knecht, ich bitte, laßt mich zu guter Letzt noch einmal auf meiner Geige spielen.“ Der Jude erhob ein Zetergeschrei: „um Gotteswillen! erlaubts nicht, erlaubts nicht!“ Allein der Richter sprach „warum soll ich ihm die kurze Freude nicht gönnen, es ist ihm zugestanden, und dabei soll es sein Bewenden haben.“ Auch konnte er es ihm nicht abschlagen, wegen der Gabe, die dem Knecht verliehen war. Der Jude aber rief: „au weih! au weih! bindet mich an, bindet mich fest!“ Da nahm der gute Knecht seine Geige vom Hals, legte sie zurecht, und wie er den ersten Strich that, fieng alles an zu wabern, und zu wanken, der Richter, die Schreiber, und die Gerichtsdiener, und dem, welcher den Juden festbinden wollte, fiel der Strick aus der Hand; beim zweiten Strich hoben alle die Beine, und der Henker ließ den guten Knecht los, und machte sich zum Tanze zurecht, und bei dem

114

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

Und anfangs ging’s lustig, weil aber das Geigen und Tanzen kein Ende nahm, so schrien sie jämmerlich und baten ihn, abzulassen, aber er that’s nicht eher, bis ihm der Richter das Leben nicht nur schenkte, sondern auch versprach die hundert Gulden zu lassen. Aber noch rief er dem Juden zu: „Spitzbub’ gesteh’ wo du das Geld her hast, sonst hör’ ich dir nicht auf zu spielen.“ „Ich hab’s gestohlen, ich hab’s gestohlen und du hattest es ehrlich verdient“ schrie der Jude, daß es alle hörten. Da ließ mein Knecht die Geige ruhen und der Schuft wurde für ihn an den Galgen gehängt.

dritten sprang alles in die Höhe, und fieng an zu tanzen, und der Richter und der Jude waren vorne, und sprangen am besten; bald tanzte alles mit, was auf den Markt aus Neugierde herbei gekommen war, alte und junge, dicke und magere Leute untereinander, und die Hunde, die mitgelaufen waren, setzten sich auf die Hinterfüße, und tanzten auch mit. Und je länger er spielte, desto höher sprangen die Tänzer, daß sie sich einander an die Köpfe stießen, und anfiengen jämmerlich zu schreien. Endlich rief der Richter ganz außer Athem, „ich schenke dir dein Leben, höre nur auf zu geigen.“ Der gute Knecht ließ sich bewegen, hörte auf, hieng seine Geige wieder an den Hals, und stieg die Leiter herab. Da trat er zu dem Juden, der auf der Erde lag, und nach Athem schnappte, und sagte: „Spitzbube, jetzt, gestehe, wo du das Gold her hast, oder ich nehme meine Geige vom Hals, und fange wieder an zu spielen.“ „Ich hab’ es gestohlen, ich hab’ es gestohlen, schrie er, du aber hasts redlich verdient.“ Da ließ der Richter den Juden zum Galgen führen, und als einen Dieb aufhangen.

The intensification of negative stereotyping can already be seen on the level of representation: whereas in the first and second editions of the “Great Edition” the servant only met “an old Jew”, from the children’s edition of 1825 Grimm supplemented the description of the figure of the story with an additional stigmatizing feature. The servant now meets a “Jew with a long goat’s beard”. The “Jewish beard” was “the most conspicuous identifying feature of traditional Judaism” well into the 19th century (Ter-Nedden 2015, p. 22–23). In the disqualifying naming as a “goat’s beard”, the descriptive feature becomes an insult. The defamation and negative stereotyping of the figure of the story is intensified in the further narration. The one-time speech of the Jew as a “rascal” is doubled and the figure of the story’s greed for money is proverbial: “all ducats, one piece prettier than the other!” Obviously in Grimm’s editing of the fairy tale, the intensified linguistic marking of the figure’s speech, which makes the Jew speak a somewhat queer “Jewish German” in the dialogical passages, is also stigmatizing: “Au weih geschrieen! cried the Jew, I give the gentleman what he wants, if only he leaves the fiddle […]. “and more. This type of linguistic marking of Jewish story figures belongs “as a recurring important element” (Gelber 1986, p. 165) both to German literary anti-Judaism and later to corresponding literary anti-Semitism. In view of the tradition of the discrediting portrayal of the figure of the Jew in entertainment literature, the text history of the fairy tale is interesting. Like a good part of the narratives, Der Jude im Dorn is also recorded as a testimony of a mixed oral-literal narrative tradition, whereby—as mostly—the literal tradition represents the backbone of the tradition. In the commentary section of their scientific appendix to the collection of fairy tales, the Grimms refer to both oral variants and literary sources, to which their text is then also essentially related.

3.2  Text Processing

115

Albrecht Dieterich „Historia von einem Bauernknecht und München, welcher in der Dornhecken hat müssen tanzen“ s. l. 1618. 8. (auf der Götting. Bibl.) ein Lustspiel, daß aber vermuthlich im 16 Jahr. verfaßt ist. Etwa gleichzeitig damit: J. Ayrer’s Faßnachtspiel von Fritz Dölla mit seiner gewünschten Geigen im opus theatricum Bl. 97–101. Auch bei Dieterich heißt der Bauernknecht Dulla, ein mythischer Name, der an Till oder Dill Eulenspiegel den lustigen Schalksknecht erinnert […]. Die Wünsche sind wie hier; statt des Juden, haben beide einen klosterentlaufenen Mönch […]. (KHM 1815 II, Anhang, S. XXVI–XXVII)116

The explanations are thus also taken over into the separate commentary volumes of 1822 and 1856,117 but the reference to the allegedly ‘mythical’ character of the name forms ‘Dölla’ and ‘Dulla’ is omitted. Jakob Ayrer’s Fasching play Fritz Dölla mit seiner gewünschten Geigen served as the source for the ‘children’s and household fairy tale’, which the Grimms knew from a version of 1618,118 as well as above all Albrecht Dietrich’s comedy Historia / Von einem Bawrenknecht vnd München from 1618, which looks back to a rhymed version from 1599. The proximity can be traced back to linguistic similarities, although the linguistic correspondences within the story can appear to be displaced: So Dulla jubilates about the gifts of the “spirit”: “Wie köndt ich höher seyn erfrewt auff Erd / Weil ich hab was mein Hertz begehrt?” (Dietrich 1618, [p. 7 v]), while in the Grimm story it is the fraudulent peasant who accompanies his too low wage payment with the words to his servant “so hast du was dein Sinn begehrt.” (KHM 1815 II, p. 135) Dulla asks the judge before the gallows for his fiddle again: “So wil ich euch ein Täntzlein klein / Zu guter letzt vor hören lahn.” (Dietrich 1618, [p. 13 v]), comparable to Grimm “laßt mich noch eins auf meiner Geige geigen zu guter Letzt.” (KHM 1815 II, p. 137) The monk of the early modern comedy asks the judge: “Ich bitt euch last ihn bald nach jagen” (Dietrich 1618, [p. 11 r]), as in the fairy tale the maltreated and robbed Jew since the edition of 1825 proverbially flees “ich will dich jagen, daß du die Schuhsohlen verlieren sollst!” (KHM 1825, p. 278) The figure of the ‘spirit’ in Albrecht Dietrich appears in the Grimm story as a “little man” (KHM 1819 II, p. 134) and thus corresponds to the speech of the ‘spirit’, which titles Dulla as “My dear little man” (Dietrich 1618, [p. 6 r]). The historical background makes it clear that the “laughing at Jews” in Grimm’s fairy tale belongs to the tradition of stereotyping and discrediting characters, especially in early modern farce literature, which made use of various and interchangeable references from a manageable type catalogue. “Constructions of the Jewish” were also among these discreditations (Gutsche 2014, p. 47).119 However, with regard to Grimm’s fairy tale, it is noteworthy that the figure of the Jew as a discrediting figure does not occur at all in the aforementioned sources.

116 See

also KHM 1856, p. 191–192.

117 See

KHM 1822, p. 198-199, as well as KHM 1856, p. 203.

118 The

bibliography of the Grimms lists Jacob Ayrer’s Opus thaeatricum in the Nuremberg edition (1610-)1618 (Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 254; no. 2972). 119 See

Gutsche 2014 as a whole, Sect. 3.1, pp. 47–85.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

116

The type of fairy tale narration is probably familiar to historical narratology. There is a wide tradition that probably has its origins in an English poem from the 15th century.120 Already the title of Dietrich’s comedy Historia von einem Bawrenknecht und München reveals that in the earlier literary versions of the story used by the Grimms, instead of the figure of the Jew, a thieving monk was actually at the center of events. In their commentary on the fairy tale, the Grimms also explicitly point this out and list their motif collection under the keyword “ Tanzen machen” (Sagenkonkordanz 2006, S. 389–390) the story as “Fabl. vom Mönch in der Dornhecke”. The literary text versions with the figure of the monk in the hedge were witnesses of the wide anti-clerical narrative culture of the early modern period, which had developed its own bloom against the background of the contemporary religious dispute. Grimm’s decision to replace the figure of the monk in the hedge in the way it happened in 1815 is remarkable in itself. It is possible that the knowledge of orally transmitted variants that operated with the figure of the Jew could have motivated this decision—after all, the Grimms mention an “oral story from Hesse” as well as another from the “Paderbörnischen” (KHM 1856, S. 191). The Paderborn version comes from the family of Haxthausen, an old Westphalian noble family of Catholic confession, where the anti-clerical or anti-Catholic tendency of the story could have experienced the mentioned transformation. As an orally documented witness, this variant may have been regarded by the Grimms as an expression of authentic folk tradition and may have won priority over literary witnesses. Nevertheless, the anti-Jewish tendency of this fairy tale fits the manifest anti-Judaism of German Romanticism and is to be located primarily in this context. But even within the Grimm's works, this Der Jude im Dorn as an anti-Jewish story is not a singular phenomenon. The anti-Jewish stories Der Judenstein and Das von den Juden getödtete Mägdlein from the 1816 published Deutschen Sagen by the Brothers Grimm belong to the temporal horizon of the fairy tale. Especially with this second story of the so-called ‘Pforzheim children’s murder’, a conspicuous anti-Jewish editing tendency can be observed in the Grimm's processing for their collection. The story came about through a city chronicle, Siegmund Friedrich Gehres’ Pforzheim’s Kleine Chronik from 1792, 121 into the Deutschen Sagen . In the processing of the report for the Deutschen Sagen, the distancing of the Pforzheim chronicler, shaped by the spirit of the Enlightenment, were completely eliminated by the Grimms. A look at the different narrative opening makes the editing tendency clear. In his report on the “miracle in Pforzheim” of July 1, 1267, Gehres explains in detail: Es war einmal in der Stadt, die da heißt Pforzheim, ein altes Weib. Die Vettel war, wie die meisten ihres Gelichters, ein bischen sehr geizig, so sehr, daß sie ein junges unschuldiges Mägdlein, genannt Gretchen, an die Juden verkaufte. Damals, meine lieben Leser! waren

120 Bolte/Polívka 121 Gehres

1915 II, S. 490–503, here 491.

1792, pp. 18–24.—A second edition was published in 1811.

3.2  Text Processing

117

die Juden in Deutschland gar ein unglückliches Völkchen. Man haßte sie wegen ihrer Reichthümer. Nun wenn etwa einmal an der Ruhr, oder, der Himmel weis, an welcher andern epidemischen Krankheit, mehr Menschen, als gewöhnlich, starben, so hieß es gleich: die Juden haben die Brunnen vergiftet. Und nun, mir nichts, dir nichts, wurden die armen Hebräer, Mann, Weib und Kind entweder genöthigt, an den ihnen so verhaßten gekreuzigten Nazaräer zu glauben, oder wollten das die verstockten Dümmlinge nicht, in Scheunen zusammengesperrt und so verbrannt. Der Geist der Zeit, der dergleichen Bartholomäusnächte im übrigen Deutschland über die Juden brachte, rührte sich auch in Pforzheim. Nun vernehmt weiter, wie unsere Historia gar tragisch fortlautet.—(Gehres 1792, S. 19)

With the Brothers Grimm, the beginning of the short note: “Im Jahr 1267, war zu Pforzheim eine alte Frau, die verkaufte den Juden aus Geitz ein unschuldiges, siebenjähriges Mädchen.” (Deutsche Sagen 1816, p. 456; No. 353) The reduction to the story itself leaves the doubts formulated by Gehres and his explanatory approaches to the contemporary pogroms outside and factionalizes the ‘saga’ as a form of authentic report. With this accent shift, a story about anti-Judaism becomes an anti-Judaistic story itself. Since the stereotyping reworking of KHM 110 is accompanied by discreditations that are to be seen in the horizon of social development of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the view must be expanded from the history of the text to the socio-cultural and political conditions, thus the contextual framework of conditions. Anti-Judaism is actually not a specific feature of Kinder- und Hausmärchen or Deutschen Sagen and also not one of the Brothers Grimm alone. Rather, more or less intense manifest anti-Judaism can be observed throughout the period between approximately 1790 and 1830 and with almost all representatives of the romantic movement. Not surprisingly, it experienced an enormous condensation precisely in the years between 1810 and 1815.122 As one of the constants of romantic anti-Judaism, Wolfgang Frühwald quite rightly called the “conflicts surrounding the bourgeois emancipation movement, whereby romantic denigration of the Jews was particularly noticeable because it was directed against Prussian reform policy” (Frühwald 1989, p. 80). With the Hardenberg reforms—the educational and military reforms of 1810, the financial edict of the same year, the secularization of church property, the freedom of trade and the emancipation of peasants of 1811 and the Jewish and gendarmerie edicts of 1812—a “culture revolution from above”, according to the French model and for the purpose of state modernization, was imposed on an “old-standing opposition of the nobility, which in certain areas (such as precisely the emancipation of the Jews) was joined by parts of the educated bourgeoisie” (Frühwald 1989, p. 83). From the perspective of the aforementioned affected parties, these reforms concretely overturned the economic and social foundations of the previous order and adversely affected the concrete living conditions of the opposing groups in some

122 See

Bluhm 2020.

118

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

cases to a massive extent. In addition, the reforms and emancipation efforts were in complete contradiction to the historically-genetic developmental thinking of many contemporaries in their enlightened radicalism. Romanticism remained and remained decidedly pre- and anti-modernist in conviction. The crisis awareness of the time came together in the Romantics to a “specifically romantic diagnosis of the times”, to a “globalization of the crisis and to a quasi-apocalyptic alarm of the consciousness of the present”, in which the “survival of mankind, its downfall or its rebirth” (Oesterle 1992, p. 58) was estimated as being at stake. Romantic literature reacted in very different ways to the state-sponsored emancipation efforts of the Jewish bourgeoisie. In literature itself—for example in the novel—there was a largely “suppression of the Jewish” (Lezzi 2006, p. 64), almost a refusal of the growing together in the real social life of the city, which was taking place in the space of possibility and desire of literary design. The exception was satirical writing. Günter Oesterle probably correctly describes the background when he sees the relevant cultural-psychological strategy of the Romantics in coping with the crises they perceived in the attempt to bring “temptations, laughter, ridicule, ridicule” to the fore, “but not themselves, but the others” (Oesterle 1992, p. 59). The decreed emancipation of the Jews is “symbolically reversed” (Oesterle 1992, p. 68) in a corresponding literarization. And so it is certainly no coincidence that it is precisely a wavering text with caricaturing features with which the figure of the Jew is introduced into the collection in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. The discrediting motifs used by the Grimms suggest a comparative look at neighboring fairy tale projects. For it is no coincidence that in another wellknown romantic text of the time, the caricatured portrayal of Jews also occurs in the form of a fairy tale. Between 1810 and 1812, Clemens Brentano wrote his now famous collection of stories Die Mährchen vom Rhein. For various reasons, he did not publish them during his lifetime; they were not published until 1846 in an edition of the estate organized by Joseph Görres. Three storytellers have to entertain the Father Rhine with stories in order to win back beloved people who have been taken away from them by the Rhine. The fourth and last story is the Mährchen vom Schneider Siebentodt auf einen Schlag. Even the title reveals that the basic model is the story Das tapfere Schneiderlein known from the Kinderund Hausmärchen . The comparative look is also worthwhile because the Grimm fairy tale collection as a whole goes back to an initiative by Clemens Brentano, who had commissioned the young Brothers Grimm to compile a collection of fairy tales for him from literature and oral contributions. Only after Brentano showed no further interest in publishing the planned and partially carried out literizations, did the Grimms decide to bring out the transcriptions of their material collection as their own, now scientific documentation, namely the Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Brentano’s Mährchen vom Schneider Siebentodt auf einen Schlag is, like all of his stories, a composition rich in allusions to various sources. The opening of the

3.2  Text Processing

119

story offers a burlesque plot which is nothing other than a comical representation of a pogrom: After one morning in the city of Amsterdam, it refuses to become daytime again and “the people’s fear rose to the highest,” the city’s tailors decided to storm the Jewish ghetto and reclaim the “long day” (Brentano 1983, p. 302) which the Jews had stolen. The first attack fails because the Jews—according to the story—“took their big, old scapegoat from the cemetery” and used him for defense. Only after the tailors overcome him through trickery and drive all the pigs of the city to the Jewish ghetto to make them storm it, do they succeed in breaking through the defense line: Nun erbrachen die Schneider die Judenschule, in der es zu ihrem Erstaunen ganz hell war; denn da saß der lange Tag, so lang, als er war, mit Zopfband an einen Pfeiler angebunden, und hatte ein großes Stück Matzekuchen in den Händen, an dem er aß, und sang mit vollem Maule ein hebräisch Lied. (Brentano 1983, p. 305)

The anti-Jewish tendency is just as clearly visible as the criticism of the Enlightenment which is inscribed in the image requisites (‘light’; ‘pigtail’). Even more: The Enlightenment is presented as secretly domesticated and seduced by the Jews. The portrayal of the pogrom in Brentano’s fairy tale loses much of its comedy when one considers the violent riots against Jews which broke out a few years later in other parts of Central Europe and, in particular, in Germany. These antiJewish riots were known as the Hep-Hep Riots of 1819. It should only be mentioned in passing that these riots were the reason for the Karlsbad Decrees which followed and, as a result, for the Restoration, during which a good portion of the reforms—not least of all the emancipation of the Jews—were undone. Only one moment of the Jews-caricature, which was taken up by Brentano in his fairy tale and was common at that time, is left out because it was also inserted by the Grimms in the course of their reworking of the fairy tale in 1825: The billy goat belonged to the common tailor’s mockery in popular literature, but here Brentano also associates it in a caricaturing and disparaging way with the Jews in connection with the Old Testament tradition. Brentano very consciously—as also the Grimms in their fairy tale—drew on the traditional repertoire of anti-Jewish images. The caricaturing and disparaging Jewish portrayal also found wide resonance in the time of a vigorous emancipation and, in a narrower sense, anti-Semitic romantic publicism. It had its “incubator” in social forms such as the “Christian-German Table Society” in Berlin, to which women, Jews and “Philistines”—“the epitome of the Common” or the “Representatives of the Normal” (Oesterle 1992, p. 63), in the narrower sense the representatives of the Enlightenment, reformers, traders

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

120

and the financial world—had no access. “We wage war […] against the Jews,” declared the philosopher and state theorist Adam Müller on his farewell speech on 18 June 1811, “against a brood that with wonderful audacity […] is trying to creep, to push and to squeeze into the state, into science, into art, into society and finally even into the chivalrous rules of duelling,” (quoted from Frühwald 1989, p. 79). With the reference to the “chivalrous rules of duelling”, Müller alluded to the “Arnim-Itzig affair” from the same year, which received wide attention—and probably also cost Ludwig Achim von Arnim a desired diplomatic career. Arnim himself, together with Müller co-founder of the “Table Society”, had already given a table speech Über die Kennzeichen des Judentums a few months earlier, which, among other things, lamented the abolition of the dress code for the Jews, since Jewish men were no longer immediately recognizable without their beards and the “Jewish women” could hide the “moorishness and bristliness” (Arnim 1992, p. 369) of their hair behind bonnets and wigs. Wide attention was also paid to the table speech by Arnim’s “heart brother” and Wunderhorn -co-editor Clemens Brentano was allocated: Brentano’s “much acclaimed speech” Philister vor, in und nach der Geschichte from March 1811 appeared in an expanded form later that year in an edition of 200 copies as a printing product.123 The speech, conceived as a humorous essay, is at its core a romantic ‘Philistine criticism’, a citizen’s scolding in the wake of a Tieck or a Novalis. The criticism is given its own sharpness by the connection with the Jewish satire: “The Philistine makes the lower part of the Jew the North Pole, the Jew makes the lower part of the Philistine the South Pole, both trample the world with their feet […]” (Brentano 1980, p. 1007), it says with a view to a corresponding caricature illustration by the author. So the ‘humorous essay’ is characterized by anti-Semitism over long stretches. Part of the overall picture is that Arnim and Brentano were regular visitors to the salons set up by Jewish women, in which the cultural life of the city found its own focal points, or that Karl August Varnhagen von Ense, the future husband of Rahel Levin, who ran the perhaps best-known of these salons in Berlin, was the author of anti-Jewish narrative passages as a member of the so-called ‘Nordsternbund’ in the context of its experimental community novel Die Versuche und Hindernisse Karls .124 Arnim and Brentano were the closest friends and promoters of the young Grimms at that time and the spiritual godfathers of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen.Der Jude im Dorn belongs, with its anti-Jewish tendency, to the context of romantic anti-Semitism described here, like Brentano’s ‘Rheinmärchen’. The romantic anti-Judaism only ebbed away in the 1820s to the extent that reforms were partially withdrawn—including Jewish emancipation. With the State Law of 1871, the Jews in Germany, as is well known, attained de facto equality

123 See Brentano 1980, commentary part, p. 1209.—Oesterle 1992 is still fundamental, especially pp. 55–64. 124 Cf.

Oesterle 1992, p. 57.

3.3  Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel

121

before the law, which they were to lose again a few decades later through Nazi Jewish legislation. The rejection of the ideas of emancipation and tolerance, and in the narrower sense of Jewish emancipation, was not purely a romantic phenomenon, but can be found in a comparable way, for example, with Goethe, who rejected the “progress that was apparent in the Jewish community in Frankfurt through Napoleon’s legislation,” and pleaded “for the reconstruction of the Jewish ghetto that had burned down in 1796.” He made legal and social equality of the Jews dependent on their assimilation and acculturation.125 The view of KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn has shown how this text has undergone stereotyping reworkings in its history of adaptation in the formation of the fairy tale and its further printing history. In a first step, a well-known type of narration received an anti-Jewish orientation through a change in the character ensemble, which was intensified in the progressive motif development in its discreditatory tendency. It has become clear that the specific anti-Jewish form of discredit can also be found in other Grimm’s fairy tales and also in neighboring fairy tales in Romanticism in the relevant time horizon. The extension of the view to the socio-cultural and political developments in particular of the early 19th century served to prove how the stereotyping processing of the fairy tale is linked to the history of romantic anti-Judaism and its conditions. The functionality of the stereotype becomes tangible in this way in its contextual relationships. The focus on the specific, derogatory stereotyping in Der Jude im Dorns reflects the fact that this fairy tale has been part of the core of Kinder- und Hausmärchen since its first edition and also consistently part of the “Kleine Ausgabe” series, which brought this story into the children’s bedrooms for generations.

3.3 Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel In fairy tales that can be described as adoptions from literary sources and as source material processing, we are dealing with adaptations, the history of the emergence of which can be described to a certain extent as obvious. This is more difficult in the case of indirect text adoptions. These are those group of fairy tales that were orally or written transmitted by contributors to the Grimms and used by traditional fairy tale research as the central argument for the existence and importance of an oral narrative tradition and the status of the Grimm fairy tales as “folk tales”. A—yet to be written—literary history of fairy tales will, however, according to the current state of knowledge, prove these witnesses transmitted by

125 Cf.

Sauder 2016, p. 73.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

122

a group of contributors as oralizations of literary sources, which have thus entered the Kinder- und Hausmärchen indirectly. That in the course of these indirect text adoptions the stories have developed a considerable amount of variance in relation to the original reference text, often makes the identification of these pre-texts a detective-like search for clues. Using the example of KHM 57 Der goldne Vogel or from 1837 Der goldene Vogel such an indirect text adoption should be followed exemplary and shown.126 In focus are the fairy tale figure of the golden bird and the various adventures of a young man as the main character of the action. The action itself is determined by the changing events that accompany the search and the efforts of the fairy tale hero to obtain the golden bird. The story should be briefly referred to at least: A king has a pleasure garden with a tree that bears golden apples. When an apple disappears, the three sons of the gardener take turns on night watch. Only the youngest manages to solve the puzzle: A golden bird is the apple thief. In order to obtain the valuable animal, the three young men now set out one after the other, each meeting a fox that offers its support. The two older ones rudely reject the help and drive away the magical animal. In the joy and bustle of an inn, they soon forget their mission and, after squandering their property, commit “all sorts of bad deeds” (KHM 1812, p. 268)—as the Grimms say. The good-natured youngest, on the other hand, confides in the fox, which finally takes him to the castle where the golden bird is kept. When trying to steal the bird, the young man does not lock it in a wooden cage, as the fox advises, but chooses a golden one, which leads to his arrest. The gardener’s son is released on condition and promised the bird if he brings the king of the castle the golden horse, “as fast as the wind” (KHM 1812, p. 264). With the help of the fox, the young man also gets the horse; when he again ignores the fox’s advice and puts a golden saddle on instead of a simple one, he is caught again. Here he is released on condition that he bring the beautiful princess from the golden castle. Once again, the young man fails at the last moment because he ignores the fox’s advice. However, with the help of the fox, he finally manages to win the princess. Following the fox’s instructions, the two kings are deceived when the treasures are handed over, so that the bird and horse also come into the possession of the young man. With that, the story is actually finished, but a second sequence of events follows: Contrary to the advice of the animal helper, on the way back to the king’s castle, the young man buys his brothers who have fallen into bad ways from the gallows. However, the brothers repay him the good deed badly by throwing him into a well and claiming the bird, horse and king’s daughter as their own achievements at the king’s court. With the help of the fox, the youngest is saved again and disguised as he goes to the king’s court, where he reveals the truth and marries the king’s daughter. The ungrateful brothers find their just punishment. At the end of the story, the fox takes action again. He asks the young man to be beheaded by

126 See

already Bluhm 2011.

3.3  Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel

123

him and is released by the killing: The tireless animal helper turns out to be the brother of the king’s daughter. The story already appears in Volume 1 of the first edition in 1812 as KHM 57 and probably already belonged to the handwritten original version of the Kinderund Hausmärchen from 1810; the corresponding transcript has not been preserved.127 In the revised and improved third edition, the story receives a slightly different narrative opening in 1837 and it is now no longer the gardener’s sons, but the king’s sons themselves, who set out. But already in the second edition, the youngest gardener’s son in the middle of the story suddenly mutates into a “prince” (KHM 1819 I, p. 291). The story is generally attributed to the so-called. ‘Fairy tales’ and the type ‘bird, horse and princess’. The narrative type is—as Diether Röth summarized in his Kleines Typenverzeichnis - “widely represented in Europe (partially rich), in addition in the Near East to India and the Philippines, in North and East Africa” (Röth 1998, p. 117). A number of motifs are known from the medieval Arthurian tradition and outline the adventures of the Arthurian knight Gawan. But these relationships should not be pursued here. They belong in the context of the further history of origin. In the following, only the question of the immediate genesis of the Grimm story should be dealt with, as far as it is plausible and verifiable from a literary historical point of view. In narrative research, reference is repeatedly made to Der treue Fuchs from Wilhelm Christoph Günther’s Kindermährchen aus mündlichen Erzählungen gesammlet . The collection was published anonymously in 1787 by Georg Adam Keyser in Erfurt and the Grimms, who indisputably owned a copy of the anthology,128 is well-known. In the notes to the first volume of KHM from 1812, the Brothers Grimm already showed the connection between the two fairy tales: “In the fairy tales collected from oral tradition, Erfurt at Keyser 1787. our fairy tale is told on p. 94-150. in the wrong tone.” (KHM 1812, Appendix, p. XXXVI)129 What must have appeared to the Grimms as a ‘false’ tone becomes immediately apparent when one collates a similar narrative scene from Grimm and from Günther; for example, the scene of the first meeting of the departing gardener’s or king’s son with the helpful animal: Der treue Fuchs Wilhelm Christoph Günther: Kindermährchen (1787) Erster Abend. […] Am Eingange stund der Fuchs und rief ihn an: „Prinz Nanell! wo kömmst du her? wo willst du hin?“ Der Prinz verwunderte sich einen Fuchs reden zu hören, hielt stille, und fragte ihn: „Wie kömmts, mein lieber Fuchs, daß du sprechen kannst? und woher

127 Cf.

Älteste Märchensammlung/Rölleke 1975, p. 318; no. 51.

128 See

Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 202 (no. 2207).

129 Jacob

Grimm already pointed out the correspondence in the unfinished sagas concordance of the Brothers: “riding on a fox’s tail // erfurter K.M. from the faithful fox” (Sagenkonkordanz 2006, p. 352; no. 657).

124

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

kennst du mich? Ich habe dich an meines Vaters Hofe nie gesehen.“ „Wenn du ein wenig absteigen wolltest“, versetzte der Fuchs, „so solltest du alles erfahren.“ Prinz Nanell stieg ab, band den Mantelsack vom Pferde, ließ es grasen, und setzte sich neben den Fuchs. Er öfnete seinen Mantelsack, und nahm den besten Schinken heraus. „Warte, mein lieber Fuchs“, sprach er, „ehe du weiter erzählest, du wirst ohne Zweifel hungrig seyn.“ Er zog sein Messer aus der Tasche, und theilte redlich mit dem Fuchse. Während des friedlichen Mahls erzählte der Prinz seine ganze Geschichte: daß er, als der jüngste Prinz des kranken Königs Romwald ausgezogen sey, den Vogel Phönix zu suchen, um seinem Vater zu helfen. „Es ist traun“, sprach der Fuchs, „ein schweres Unternehmen, doch wenn du mir folgen willst, so soll es dir schon gelingen.“ Über diese Nachricht war der Prinz voller Freuden, und es fehlete nicht viel, so hätte er seinen lieben Fuchs umarmt. „Laß das jetzt seyn“, sprach der Fuchs, „bis zu einer andern Zeit, wo es sich besser schicken dürfte, bis dahin verspare auch deine Neugier, wegen meiner Person und, sey zufrieden, daß ich dir verspreche, dein Freund zu seyn, und dich nicht zu verlassen, auch einst dir meine Geschichte zu erzählen. Jetzt laß uns aufbrechen, damit wir keine Zeit versäumen, Pferd und Mantelsack mußt du da lassen, denn du würdest sonst den Räubern, die in diesem Walde hausen, in die Hände fallen. Setz dich nur auf meinen Rücken, und ich bringe dich bald zur Stelle.“ Der Prinz stieg auf, so wehe es ihm auch that, sein Pferd zu verlieren, der Fuchs wickelte seinen Schwanz um ihn herum, und nun giengs Vogelschnell fort, daß dem Prinzen die Haare pfiffen. […] (Günther 1999, S. 72 u. 81–82)

In comparison, the Grimm version according to the “last hand” edition: Der goldene Vogel Brüder Grimm: KHM 57 […] Vor dem Walde saß wieder der Fuchs, bat um sein Leben und ertheilte den guten Rath. Der Jüngling war gutmüthig und sagte „sei ruhig, Füchslein, ich thue dir nichts zu Leid.“ „Es soll dich nicht gereuen,“ antwortete der Fuchs, „und damit du schneller fortkommst, so steig hinten auf meinen Schwanz.“ Und kaum hat er sich aufgesetzt, so fieng der Fuchs an zu laufen, und da giengs über Stock und Stein daß die Haare im Winde pfiffen. […] (KHM 1857 II, S. 292)

What the Grimms give back in extreme abbreviation, almost in a reduction to the narrative framework, Günther tells in a much more elaborated way. The difference becomes even more obvious when comparing Grimm’s fairy tale narration in its first printed version: […] und vor dem Wald begegnete ihm auch wieder der Fuchs, und gab ihm den guten Rath. Er war aber gutmüthig, und schenkte ihm das Leben, da sagte der Fuchs: steig hinten auf meinen Schwanz, so gehts schneller. Und wie er sich darauf gesetzt hatte, fing der Fuchs an zu laufen, da gings über Stock und Stein, daß die Haare im Winde pfiffen. […] (KHM 1812, p. 262-263)

Günther’s story, in contrast to the Grimm’s, is provided with a multitude of contouring details, with backward and forward looks, the overall story is segmented into individual evenings of narration, the narrative figures bear art names with partly French connotations and the name of the bird refers to ancient mythology. Günther’s narrative version is a deliberately designed work of art, written primarily for the

3.3  Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel

125

entertainment of children, while the Grimms were trying to (re-)construct their ideal model of folktale. Günther deliberately wrote himself into the literary tradition of the Contes des fées, which he sought to make usable as children’s literature, while the Grimms were interested in dissociating their text from this context. With good reason, with a view to the connection between ‘fairy tales’ and ‘human childhood’, it has been pointed out that this idea was probably first propagated by Günther and that his collection of stories shows clear “forerunners of the romantic fairy tale conception” (Pape 1981, p. 103). The ‘false tone’ later criticized by the Grimms was already criticized by contemporary book critics after the publication of the Kindermährchen . In a review in the ‘Children’s Writings’ section of the Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung one could read in 1788: “The author believes he has hit the children’s tone, but sometimes his style is ornate, and sometimes poetic […]. “ The review ends with a certain sufficiency in the recommendation: “If you want to write for children, you have to be careful not to damage them with your good will.” (ALZ 1788, p. 255-256) Possibly the rather critical reception then also led to the fact that Günther did not write any more children’s books in the following. At the time of the publication of his Kindermährchen Günther was, on Herder’s recommendation, assistant preacher in Weimar, later court preacher, who, inter alia, officiated the wedding of Goethe and Christiane Vulpius in 1806, as well as director of the local orphanage. From the Grimm’s perspective, which is reflected in the verdict of Günther’s narrative tone, the main deficit of his Kindermährchen the violation of the ‘folk poetic’ paradigms of ahistoricity and naivete that they set. The explicit devaluation of the collection remains in place thereafter. In the literary report of the KHMAnnotation volume of 1856 one reads of the Kindermährchen: “The indication on the title is correct, they are based on oral tradition, but they are meager, and the story is clumsy and bad.” (KHM 1856, p. 327) Three of the four stories— Das Vögelchen mit dem goldenen Ey;Weiß-Täubchen and Die Königin Wilowitte mit ihren zwei Töchtern - are more or less paraphrased in detail, and the parallels to their own stories are mentioned. For the fourth story of the Günther collection, however, the Grimms reduce their literary note to the extremely laconic and comment-free listing of the variance: “The faithful fox S. 94-150. The fairy tale of the golden bird (No. 57)” (KHM 1856, p. 327). In the section on KHM 57 itself, there is also only a general reference to the previous collection.130 Despite this obvious reserve and the sharp criticism of Günther’s narrative style, there was nevertheless a recognizable interest in the content of the treuen Fuchses on the part of Jacob Grimm, which was already evident in the corresponding listing in the context of the legend concordance.131 When the older Grimm brother received Anton Dietrich’s translations of Russian fairy tales in 1830/1831—now rather distant from the former interest in fairy tales—he wrote to Dietrich with great

130 KHM

1856, p. 98: “According to other stories in the Erfurt fairy tales S. 94-150”.

131 “Animals

give magical objects to the humans who have helped them, with which they can summon them to their aid again. […] 8. the helpful fox in the fairy tale of the wonderful bird” (Sagenkonkordanz 2006, p. 395; no. 754). See also Ginschel 1989, p. 390.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

126

enthusiasm: “I have read your translation of Russian fairy tales with great pleasure and advise you to print them just as soon as possible.”132 His particular interest was in the story Der Feuervogel und der graue Wolf, which Dietrich had already considered to be the finest fairy tale,133 and which subsequently became one of the most prominent Russian fairy tales. In an advertisement for Dietrich’s collection, to which he had also contributed a foreword, Grimm sketched a wide horizon of the story type in the renowned Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 1832: es gibt Märchen, die seit vielen Jahrhunderten fast ganz Europa durchziehen, z. B. das russische von dem Feuervogel und dem grauen Wolf […], welches der goldene Vogel und der fuchs in Deutschland ist (no. 57 der Sammlung), aber schon im vierzehnten oder fünfzehnten Jahrh. den Isländern in ihrer Artus Fagra Saga bekannt war und hier ist der Vogel kein anderer als der wunderbare Phönix. (J. Grimm 1871, p. 138)

Similar to the preface dated September 30, 1814 to the second volume of Kinderund Hausmärchen: Der innere gehaltige Wert dieser Märchen ist in der Tat hoch zu schätzen, sie geben auf unsere uralte Heldendichtung ein neues und solches Licht, wie man sich nirgendsher sonst könnte zu Wege bringen. […] Die Sage von der güldnen Feder, die der Vogel fallen läßt, und weshalb der König in alle Welt aussendet, ist keine andere, als die vom König Mark im Tristan, dem der Vogel das goldne Haar der Königstochter bringt, nach welcher er nun eine Sehnsucht empfindet. (KHM 1815, Preface, p. VI–VII)

The fairy tales of the Grimms very early gained attention and imitators. The theologian and pedagogue J.A.C. Löhr already included the tale in 1820 under the title Der Goldvogel, das Goldpferd und die Prinzeßin in the second volume of his Buchs der Maehrchen für Kindheit und Jugend, though he restructured the text linguistically.134 The interest in the fairy tale type has also persisted over time, even if the conviction of the Grimms that they can fix the remains of a “primordial German myth” in the tales is hardly still seriously held. Especially the variant of the fairy tale written down by Wilhelm Christoph Günther may enjoy special literary-historical attention: Thus, for example, Hans-Jörg Uther and Thomas Eicher included the text in 1990 and 1996 in their (qualitatively very different) anthologies Märchen vor GrimmFootnote135 and Das Zauberschloß136 . The special attention is reflected especially in the reprint of Günther’s Kindermährchen published in 1999.

132 Letter

of 3.2.1831. Edited and commented in Bluhm 1995, p. 108.

133 Dietrich’s

letter of 08.11.1830. In: Hexelschneider 1963, p. 117-118.

134 See

Löhr 1820, p. 248-257.—That Löhr used Grimm’s version as a template can be seen from a number of striking linguistic similarities. Significantly, the Grimms, who knew Löhr’s collection, do not mention this version of 1820 at any point in their notes on the fairy tale, which has so far remained unnoticed in fairy tale research. 135 Fairy 136 The

Tales before Grimm 1990, pp. 131–160; Commentary, pp. 301–302.

Magic Castle 1996, pp. 9–39; Word and Object Explanations, p. 284. Here the tales are listed under the incorrect name “Christian (!) Wilhelm Günther”.

3.3  Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel

127

The connection of the story with the Günther’s fairy tale, already noted by Grimm, has often been overlooked by later research. Thus, for example, Thomas Eicher remained strangely blind to this important relationship in his (generally unreliable) editions. Even where the connection was noticed, the explanations were not always convincing: ‘Der treue Fuchs’, recapitulates, for example, Manfred Grätz in his study of fairy tales in German Enlightenment, entspricht dem Kinder- und Hausmärchen Nummer 57 (Der goldene Vogel) der Brüder Grimm und handelt von den drei Söhnen, die ausziehen, für ihren Vater das Wasser des Lebens zu holen (= AaTh 550: Vogel, Pferd und Königstochter). Auch hier wird gegen Schluß noch ungeschickt eine Fee eingeführt, die angeblich an allen Verwicklungen Schuld ist. Insgesamt gesehen ist dies aber die geglückteste Erzählung der ganzen Sammlung, die neben der Grimmschen Fassung durchaus bestehen kann. (Grätz 1988, p. 204)

Hans-Jörg Uther follows this description in his 1990 anthology; with regard to the sudden appearance of the fairy at the end of the story, he complains: “The fairy, introduced by Günther almost at the end of the fairy tale as the cause of all evil, appears quite implausible.” (Fairy tales before Grimm 1990, p. 301)137 But in fact it is not an ‘awkwardly introduced fairy’ who is responsible for the complications, but a rejected royal suitor and his companion, the giant and sorcerer Raschader. The only fairy who appears in this fairy tale is explicitly referred to as a “benevolent fairy” and, invisibly, leads to the rescue of the king’s daughter and the enchanted brother.138 Even the “Water of Life” is only found in a transferred sense in Günther, insofar as the king, named Romwald, dreams that the song of the wonderful bird Phoenix would free him from his severe gout and podagra. The motif is central to the neighboring and related fairy tale type AaTh 551, which has its earliest known literary expression in the Latin exemplum collection Scala coeli by the French Dominican Johannes Gobius Junior from the 15th century.139 Probably this example of the advice-giving captive bird next to the later French fairy tale by Jean de Préchac about the little green frog, La petite grenouille verte, from Le Cabinet des fées140 can be considered as a possible source for both narrative types.

137 In Uther’s commentary volume of his KHM edition, a similar remark can not be found; see KHM 1857/Uther 1996 IV, p. 115-117. 138 Günther 1999, p. 103: “A benevolent fairy appeared to me soon after my transformation,” the fox reports, “and promised me her assistance in my liberation, since she was unable to break the spell.” 139 Johannes Gobius Junior: Avaricia IX. In: Tyroller 1912, Appendix, No. 33, p. 256. See also: [Johannes Gobius Junior:] Scala coeli. Ulm 1480, fol. 99–100. Reprint in Wesselski 1925, No. 28. 140 Le Cabinet des fées 1786, p. 155–178: “La petite grenouille verte”. The fairy tale can be found in the section “Nouveaux contes de fées”.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

128

In their notes to KHM 57, the Grimms explicitly refer to this French fairy tale, which was published one year before Günther’s edition.141 Hans-Jörg Uther and Heinz Rölleke in particular provide information on the history of the origin of KHM 57 and its proximity to Günther’s Kindermährchen . However, there are already preliminary studies by Albert Wesselski.142 In the commentary volume of his KHM edition from 1996, Uther very rightly points out the “close similarity (including adopted idioms)” (KHM 1856/Uther 1996 IV, p. 115) to Günther’s fairy tale. Earlier, Rölleke had already pointed to the oral transmission by the so-called ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’ and thus to a central aspect of the history of the Grimm fairy tale: KHM 57 hatte Wilhelm Grimm im September 1810 von einer alten Frau im Marburger Elisabeth-Hospital („aus Hessen“) gewonnen und wohl als Nr. 51 in die hs. Urfassung eingereiht. Die zu Beginn der Anmerkung [sc. im Grimmschen Kommentarband von 1856] angesprochenen Varianten aus Hessen bzw. „im Paderbörnischen“ (durch die Familie von Haxthausen) wurden so bereits 1822 wiedergegeben. Aus den weiterhin genannten Erfurter Kindermärchen (von Christian [!] Wilhelm Günther, erschienen 1787, S. 94: „Der treue Fuchs“) wurden u.a. die Redensart „daß die Haare pfiffen“ und das Motiv des Verbots, Galgenfleisch zu kaufen, in den Grimmschen Text übernommen. (KHM 1857/ Rölleke 1980 III, Nachweise, p. 467)

The oral contribution by the so-called “Marburg Fairy Tale Woman” had been able to clarify Rölleke’s role in a fundamental way.143 Made aware of an older woman in the Marburg Elisabeth Hospital by the friendly Clemens Brentano, who was said to have a considerable repertoire of stories, the Grimms tried to get stories told to them by intermediaries and finally by Wilhelm Grimm himself. However, “the Oracle did not want to speak,” as the younger Grimm brother lamented in a letter to Brentano on October 25, 1810, dismayed: und so wäre leicht alle meine Mühe verloren gewesen, hätte ich nicht jemand gefunden, der eine Schwester des Hospitalvogts zur Frau hat und den ich endlich dahin gebracht, daß er seine Frau dahin gebracht, ihre Schwägerin dahinzubringen, von der Frau ihren Kindern die Märchen sich erzählen zu lassen und aufzuschreiben. Durch so viele Schachte und Kreuzgänge wird das Gold ans Licht gebracht. (Steig 1914, p. 118)

To this “gold” belonged—as Rölleke made evident in the course of a negative argumentation—also Der goldene Vogel, the origin of which the Grimms specified as “from Hesse” in the notes. As a result, the following situation arises: The Grimms received the story from an unnamed “old woman” from a Marburg hospital, thus

141 See KHM 1856, p. 98.—With regard to the “social exclusion” and the “poor living conditions” of Elizabeth Schellenberg, Ehrhardt expressly states that “the French influences, which are comprehensible for other fairy tale contributors, can be ruled out for the ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’.” (Ehrhardt 2016, p. 58 and 59) 142 Cf. 143 See

Wesselski 1938, pp. 79–114. Rölleke 1974, pp. 87–94.

3.3  Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel

129

from an oral source. They still referred to further oral traditions, as well as to written or literal contributions which they knew and noted. These included, in particular, the so-called “Erfurt Collection” by Wilhelm Christoph Günther. In the meantime, Holger Ehrhardt has researched the contribution of the Kinderund Hausmärchen succeeded in identifying this “Marburg Fairy Tale Woman” as an Elisabeth Schellenberg and giving her a social historical profile. The identification becomes for Ehrhardt the proof that “Elisabeth Schellenberg, the ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’,” can thus definitely be determined as “a contributor from the simple people,” “who further told the fairy tales she had heard.” With regard to literal traditions, from which the narrator’s narrative could directly or indirectly originate, he judges with all determination: “the living conditions of Elisabeth Schellenberg make the oral transmission of written sources [appear] unlikely.” (Ehrhardt 2016, p. 60) Accordingly, Ehrhardt expressly opposes literary historical derivations with regard to KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel and a philological Grimm research, which sees the oral narrative of the “Marburg Fairy Tale Woman” as a retelling of the children’s literary story from Günther’s Kindermährchen from 1787 and in turn connects it with the tradition of the Contes des fées and a Latin sermon example from the 15th century.144 Ehrhardt, on the other hand, locates “possible paths of transmission” in the family history of Elisabeth Schellenberg (Ehrhardt 2016, p. 57). The explicit rejection of a literary tradition and the relocation of a narrative into an oral tradition ‘in the simple people’, specifically in a family tradition, nevertheless fails to recognize the givenness of the real ‘folk culture’ in the early 19th century, which was already fundamentally shaped by literature. Elisabeth Schellenberg’s oral contribution is already to be valued as an oralization of a heard or indirectly transmitted literary document from a cultural historical point of view. That the identified literary source is Günther’s “fairy tale” Der treue Fuchs can be shown by linguistic and stylistic as well as by motif-related features. The already repeatedly observed and annotated by the Grimms similarity of the Grimm’s and the Günther’s fairy tale manifests itself not only in the typical parallelism of a comparable course of action, but extends to the linguistic detail. Especially the in Grimms text three times repeated formula “da gings über Stock und Stein, daß die Haare im Winde pfiffen” and the motivation of the prohibition to buy gallows meat point to a closer text-genetic relationship of the “fairy tale” to the Günther’s fairy tale. The in Günther’s fairy tale used phrase “daß die Haare im Winde pfiffen” is unusual in the literature of the time and documented in the Grimm’s fairy tale only in KHM 57.145 For how remarkable Jacob Grimm considered the phrase, is reflected in the fact that he marked the phrase in the manuscript

144  For example, Bluhm 2001, pp. 10–19. Against this, expressly Ehrhardt 2016, p. 57: “In addition, the […] comprehensible living conditions of Elisabeth Schellenberg hardly allow the assumption that she had seen Günther’s […] Kindermährchen from 1787 in Erfurt.” 145 Ehrhardt 2016, p. 57-58, evaluates the demonstrable use of this phrase in pedagogical literature of the time, however, as evidence for the contemporary popularity of the phrase.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

130

of the printing of 1812 by underlining and explicitly highlighted.146 The special attention to the peculiarity of the phrase manifests itself also in a handwritten marginal note, with which he pointed to literary evidence of similar phrases in medieval literature.147 In total, one may accept the inclusion of the phrase in the fairy tale of the Grimms as a strong linguistic and stylistic indication for the dependence of this text on the action- and motif-similar Der treue Fuchs, where at the corresponding position also “the prince’s hair whistled in the wind” (Günther 1999, p. 82). In an attempt at interpretation, Rölleke proceeds from a contamination of various narrative versions in KHM 57 and thus offers an explanation that accords with the Grimms’ usual working method: “In this process of contamination, it seems that the Marburg contributions were lost, so that they [sc. in Grimms’ notes] were no longer listed individually.” (Rölleke 1974, p. 92) The consideration is convincing and can be continued: If one compares the narrative sequences in Günther and Grimm, one notices that the main differences are to be found in the motivation of the narrative action and the shaping of the motif at the beginning of the narrative and at the end of the narrative. Let us confine ourselves to the beginning of the narrative: In Günther, the starting point is the king’s illness, Romwald’s severe gout and podagra, and the dream according to which he would recover if he heard the bird Phoenix sing. In the Grimms’ version, on the other hand, two variants can be found—once in 1812 and comparable with changed narrative personnel from 1819/1837—the narrative sketched at the beginning. If one looks at the Grimms’ notes on the fairy tale, one finds the Günther variant at the beginning of the explanations—namely as an oral narrative: Aus Hessen; doch wird dieses Märchen hier und im Paderbörnischen auch häufig, wo nicht besser doch älter, mit folgendem Eingang erzählt, ein König war krank (nach andern blind) geworden, und nichts in der Welt vermochte ihn zu heilen, bis er einstmals hörte (oder es ihm träumte) daß weit davon der Vogel Phönix wäre, durch dessen Pfeifen (oder Gesang) er allein genesen könne. Nun machen sich die Söhne nach einander auf […].. (KHM 1856, p. 98)

It is noteworthy that this initial variant of the Hessian tradition is attributed, thus the so-called ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’ Elisabeth Schellenberg can be credited. Grimm’s addition “but this fairy tale is told here …” must be read with reference to the localization “From Hesse”. The story of the ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’ thus shows, in addition to the numerous similarities, both in the course of action and in the motifs and in the idiomatic expressions, correspondences with Der treue Fuchs. The correspondences are thus so close that the thesis that the oral story of the ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’ actually represents nothing other than the retelling of the heard or read Günther’s Kindermährchens must be granted a high

146 See

KHM 1812, p. 262.

147 See

also the “transcriptions and comments” to KHM 1812, supplement, p. 29.

3.3  Indirect Text Adoptions—The Example KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel

131

plausibility. It definitely has a stronger explanatory value than the mere assumption of an oral tradition, possibly carried by a family tradition. Thus, Der treue Fuchs can be classified not only as a mere preceding variant, but definitely as a source of Grimm’s Der goldene Vogel ; the ‘Marburg Fairy Tale Woman’ Elisabeth Schellenberg stands between them as an oral mediator. Folktale research has with KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel a quite exemplary example of the practice of mixed oral-written or even closer: oral-literary mediation and the genesis of such Grimm fairy tales, the immediate origin of which can be traced back to a personal contribution. The text genesis presented does not least offer the most obvious and the simplest explanation for the given facts. That the Grimms included the story in the KHM despite the—as the “notes” finally show—known adaptation of their text version to the previous Günther’s version is due to their conviction that in the little appreciated edition of 1787 real oral traditions can be found: After all, Günther had signaled this in his title page, which the Grimms—as often—obviously read verbally: Kindermährchen aus mündlichen Erzählungen gesammlet. “Oral story” means with Günther but above all that they are “told in the children’s and nursing tone”—as the dialogic foreword of the collection formulates. In addition, Günther referred to his own memory of childhood: “The majority [sc. Fairy tales] hung on me from my earlier youth, in memory.” But an appropriate placement of the intended is only given if one takes into account the argumentative context that highlights that only the “basics” from “oral stories” (Günther 1999, Foreword, p. 16) were taken. Presentations of literarizations of popular story material are to be thought of as retellings of fairy tales in the ‘nursing tone’ themselves—if one reads the statement as a description of the facts and not as a topos at all.148 Abstractly formulated, the genesis of KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel once again shows how a so-called ‘folktale’ came into being: It is the condensed form of a ‘booktale’, which can be traced back directly or indirectly to a written and, in a narrower sense, literary model, here a fairy tale. If one wants to sharpen the focus even further, the text-genetic analysis ultimately shows the emergence of the ‘folk-’ or ‘booktale’ as an ‘art tale’ adaptation. To a certain extent, this confirms an observation with which Friedrich Schlegel tried to caricature the contemporary overestimation of a supposedly ‘popular poetic’ tradition in his review of Johann G. Büschings and Friedrich H. von der Hagens Sammlung Deutscher Volkslieder in 1807: Man nehme das erste beste Gedicht von Gellert oder Hagedorn, und lasse es von einem Kinde von vier oder fünf Jahren auswendig lernen; es wird gewiß an romantischen

148 With regard to the general process of such ‘retelling’, Clausen-Stolzenburg (1995, p. 405) expressly states: “The facts of the matter, concerning children’s and youth literature around 1800, are as follows: In Germany, masses of fairy tales are devoured. They also serve as reading material for children and adolescents. The oral stories […] reproduce content of the Contes des Fées.” The same process of ‘retelling’, of adaptation or translation characterizes much of the fairy tales themselves.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

132

Verwechslungen und Verstümmlungen nicht fehlen und man darf dieses Verfahren nur etwa drey bis viermal wiederhohlen, so wird man zu seinem Erstaunen statt des ehrlichen alten Gedichts, aus dem goldenen Zeitalter, ein vortreffliches Volkslied nach dem neuesten Geschmack vor sich sehen. Manche der eigenthümlichsten und wunderbarsten unter den neuesten Volksliedern verdanken einem ähnlichen Verfahren des Zufalls oder der Absicht ihre geheimnißvoll natürliche Entstehung.149

Schlegel’s speech, which is equally perceptive and biting, could easily be transferred to the oral transmission of narrative forms and applies even to the possibly only one-time re- or retelling. The importance and function of personal contribution in the creation of a fairy tale must be weighed in each individual case, but must not be overestimated as a whole. Structurally, the narratives of this group generally prove to be documents of indirect text transfer.

3.4 Complex Text Stories 3.4.1 The Genesis of the Matter in the Horizon of a Dynamic History of Genres and Functions—The Example KHM 107 Die beiden Wanderer The uncovering of the palimpsestuous structure of the fairy tales in the Kinderund Hausmärchen is most difficult there, where complex text stories exist and the genesis of the matter has developed in the horizon of a dynamic history of genres and functions. In order to make it transparent that and to what extent such fairy tales can ultimately be described as literature from literature, the Grimm fairy tale Die beiden Wanderer is to be examined model-like for its origin and development.150 Just taking this story as a paradigmatic example for the genesis of a Grimm fairy tale makes sense: First of all, the material situation is very good. Already the Brothers Grimm have delivered important hints on the origin and genesis of the text in their “Notes” in the commentary volume of 1856.151 Subsequently, a thorough historical and comparative narrative research by Johannes Bolte and Georg Polívka152 about Hans-Jörg Uther153 up to Maria Chr. Maennersdoerfer154 have worked on the history and typology of the tale and its variants in a broad and intensive way. Likewise, the question of origin in relation

149  Friedrich Schlegel, Rez. ‘Sammlung Deutscher Volkslieder’ [1807], in: Heidelbergische Jahrbücher der Literatur für Philologie, Historie, Literatur und Kunst, 1. Jg., 1. Heft, Heidelberg 1808, S. 140-141. 150 Already Bluhm 2019. 151 See

KHM 1856, p. 188–189.

152 See

Bolte/Polívka 1915 II, p. 468–482.

153 Uther

2013, p. 230–232; 2021, p. 231–234.

154 Maennersdoerfer

2013, p. 476–483.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

133

to the Grimm brothers’ contribution to the tale has been clarified155 and biographically expanded again recently;156 even the narrower genesis of the fairy tale 157 has already been taken into account. KHM 107 is particularly suitable for a basic treatment of the question of the origin and genesis of fairy tales, not least because in the discussion of the primacy of oral or literal tradition, this story was already early on negotiated as a paradigm. A current discussion can be seamlessly added here. As early as 1925, Albert Wesselski had devoted himself in-depth to the question of the origin of KHM 107 and, in contrast to the classification of the “Finnish School”, had fixed a wide tradition in medieval literature.158 For Wesselski, the fairy tale is actually literature from literature from literature: Unser Märchen mag also folgendermaßen entstanden sein: eine ursprünglich wohl indische Motivbildung—guter und schlechter Bruder, Blendung des guten durch den schlechten, Wiederherstellung des guten durch die Gerechtigkeit des Schicksals—hat bei ihrer Wanderung aus der Literatur in die Literatur einerseits den Einzelzug, daß die Träger der Handlung Brüder sind, verloren, andererseits die in Indien fremde Verbindung zweier Motive—Belauschung und mißglückte Nachahmung—aufgenommen. Der, der diese Verquickung zuerst durchgeführt hat, mag, mit Rücksicht auf den hebräischen Apolog von dem Juden und dem Heiden[,] ein Jude gewesen sein, der das übrige etwa durch eine persisch-arabische Vermittlung […] kennengelernt hat.

On the premise that the fairy tale of the two wanderers, like the Grimm fairy tales in general, is to be understood as a testimony of a tradition carried by literature, a younger philological fairy-tale research also describes KHM 107 Die beiden Wanderer on this basis as part of a literary tradition.159 When Wilhelm Grimm edited the fairy tale for the 5th edition of the collection in 1843, he had a submission by the student Ludwig Meyn in Low German before him, which he translated into High German, adjusted linguistically, and above all supplemented with individual narrative elements in the conclusion. In their scientific notes in the commentary volume of 1856, the Grimms pointed out that the fairy tale had been written “[a]

155 In the estate of the Brothers Grimm there is a note by Ludwig Meyn in a bundle with the note “Varia 2”: “[…] Vun den Schoster un den Snider (Student Mein from Kiel, 04.12.1842) (KHM 107)” (Nachl. Grimm 1757,12). Breslau 1997, p. 600. 156 Tute 2016, p. 165–173; Tute 2019, p. 167–181. 157 Bluhm

2011, p. 5–31.

158 As

Wesselski (1925, p. XII) expressly notes, he has chosen the Grimm story of the two wanderers “not without ulterior motive” as an example. At that time, representatives of the geographical-historical method had applied the story “literally” in exemplary studies in order to be able to establish a tradition of oral narration that pointed far back into the past on the basis of comparative motif research. Wesselski’s confrontation with the concern is harsh: The “results of this investigation” appear to him in the light of the literary examples of a literary tradition as “quite wrong”, shaped by “superficiality and carelessness”, whereby he recognizes the “main blame” in the “attitudes” on which the “method is based.” 159 Cf.

especially Bluhm 2011 and 2019; see also Bluhm 2015a, esp. pp. 250–251.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

134

ccording to a story from Holstein” (KHM 1856, p. 188). The contributor Ludwig Meyn, who studied chemistry in Berlin at first, then mineralogy, but probably also attended lectures by the Grimms, had transmitted a narrative variant according to the model of Kinder- und Hausmärchen that was recognizable in narrative typology and motifs as being based on the story Die wahrsagenden Vögel from an entertaining fairy-tale edition of 1801.160 The Grimms listed it in the annotation section to KHM 107 as the “Braunschweig Collection” (KHM 1856, p. 189). The orally transmitted story that Meyn had transmitted to the Grimms in a recognizable literary form appears from the perspective of philological fairy-tale research to be a retelling or re-narration of this literary source, and thus dependent on it, and, viewed solely from the perspective of style criticism, itself a piece of literature.161 It can thus be said that a “oralization” of an entertainment literary source took place. In their “Notes” to KHM 107, the Grimms pointed to further examples of the literary dissemination of the fairy tale type. The reference “Bohemian with Gerle Vol. 1, No. 7 St. Walburgis Nachttraum or the three apprentices” (KHM 1856, p. 189)162 for example, mentions a variant similar in motifs in a collection of fairy tale adaptations from 1819, which in many respects appears similar to the story “The prophetic birds” from 1801. However, motif-related stories occur quite often, not least in the “Cabinet des fées” or the stories from the 1001 nights, but also in German literature much earlier, for example in Christoph Helwig’s collection of Jewish histories. In the story “Von einem der von dem grossen Walfisch verschlungen war vnd hernach durch eine Krä zu grossem Reichthumb kam,” fish and crows meet the son who fulfills his father’s commandments as helpful animals.163 After the son—like Jonah— was swallowed and abandoned by the whale, a crow wants to peck out the eyes of the sleeping man, but is caught and released after the crow father betrays the location of a treasure. The Grimms and certainly many of their contributors were familiar with similar stories from contemporary collections; for example, from Georg van Gaal’s Märchen der Magyaren from 1822, in which, in number 8 Die dankbaren Thiere, two jealous brothers eat the youngest, Ferkó’s, bread on their joint journey and, in exchange for a piece of bread, poke out his eyes and break his legs. The miserable one left behind overhears the Ravens on a hill about the healing power of a pond and the dew at the foot of the hill. The one who has recovered helps a wolf, a mouse and a queen bee in turn. In the next kingdom, Ferkó finds his malicious

160 Feen-Mährchen

2000, pp. 122–144.

161 The

literary and, in a narrower sense, the material historical tradition context remains outside the focus on the last stage of transmission. Thus, Hannelore Tute emphasizes the contribution by the Kiel student: “Meyn is likely to have heard the story of the tailor and the cobbler as a child from his mother […] in Pinneberg.” As a reference space, Tute highlights a regional oral tradition: “It can be assumed that the fairy tale, which the Brothers Grimm received from Ludwig Meyn in 1842, was still alive in the oral tradition of the Pinneberg area at the beginning of the 19th century.” Tute 2016, p. 170. 162 See

“St. Walburgis-Nachtstraum [!] Or the three apprentices.” In: Gerle 1819, pp. 347–380.

163 Cf.

Helwig 1617, p. 93–97, no. XII [recte: XIII].

3.4  Complex Text Stories

135

brothers in the service of the king, who, out of anger and fear, slander him. The king forces the hero of the fairy tale to solve unsolvable tasks—to build a castle in one day, to read the grain from the fields, to gather all the wolves in the country—which he nevertheless manages with the help of the animals. After the wolves have eaten the king and the brothers, Ferkó marries the beautiful princess and becomes king. In terms of content, van Gaal’s story, like the literary fairy tale from 1801 Die wahrsagenden Vögel, Gerle’s version from 1819 and certainly a large part of the other realizations, probably goes back to the story Von falscheit vnd betrügnis from the Schwanksammlung Schimpf und Ernst by the Franciscan monk Johannes Pauli from 1522.164 which in turn represents the transfer of a Latin sermon fairy tale from the late 15th century.165 The following is a look at the text history of KHM 107 Die beiden Wanderer . Since this story was transmitted to the Brothers Grimm by a contemporary contributor, it can of course be valued as a testimony of oral tradition at first. Like KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas, this fairy tale was also new in the fifth edition of the Grimm’s collection in 1843. It replaced the similar version registered by the Grimms as a “Mecklenburg” story Die Krähen, which the brothers had received from their friend August von Haxthausen in a letter in 1814. Wilhelm reported to his brother Jacob in a letter that, as a soldier in the Verden Hussar Regiment in 1813, he had heard the story at night on a watch at the Danish border: […] auf einer Vorpostenwacht in der Nacht hat er sich ein Märchen von seinem Cameraden erzählen laßen, der am andern Tag hinter ihm todt geschoßen wurde: er hat es mitgeschickt, es ist eins von den besten, von den Vögeln, die ein Blinder reden hört und die ihm Heilungsmittel verrathen (in der Braunschw. S. ist etwas davon).(Correspondence between Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm 2001, p. 268. Letter from 18.01.1814)

The similar version that has been in print since 1843, Die beiden Wanderer, was then received by the Grimms from a student named Meyn from Kiel, who told it to them in Berlin on December 4, 1842. It is known about this student that he belonged to the circle around the Berlin professors Grimm and was the spokesman for the student birthday tribute to Wilhelm Grimm on February 24, 1843.166 Both Grimm versions of the fairy tale thus point to the north of Germany, to

164 Johannes Pauli 1866, pp. 284–286.—The Brothers Grimm possessed two early editions of the collection from 1550 and 1555 as well as Karl Veth’s study On the Barefoot Johannes Pauli and the Folk Tale Composed by Him “Schimpf und Ernst” with 45 Samples from the Same (Vienna 1839). Cf. Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 251 (nos. 2940–2942). See also Bolte/Polívka 1915 II, p. 471. 165 A German translation of the Latin sermon fairy tale is offered in the anthology Märchen vor Grimm 1990, pp. 215–217 (“The Bet for the Eyes”) as well as commentary, pp. 313–314. On the importance of the Schwanksammlung of Johannes Pauli as a reception medium with regard to German sermon literature of the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Times, see Classen 2003. 166 Ludwig Meyn (1820–1878), later factory owner and professor of natural science. His father Andreas Ludwig Adolph Meyn taught as a professor of medicine in Kiel from 1833. See Gerhardt 1995, pp. 94–96 for comprehensive information.

136

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

Mecklenburg on the one hand and to Holstein on the other, and have been classified accordingly by the Brothers Grimm in the scientific notes to this fairy tale. The replacement of Die Krähen by the story Die beiden Wanderer was mainly motivated by aesthetics. “The story from Holstein,” according to Grimm, “is better and more complete than in the earlier editions.” The Grimms’ notes also point to the north of Germany with the double mention of a version in the anonymous “Braunschweiger Sammlung” (Braunschweig Collection), which, according to the Grimms, “agrees with ours [fairy tale] [better than other versions], but is badly renewed” (KHM 1856, p. 188). The later print version Die beiden Wanderer. The story is known: A cobbler and a tailor go on a hike together. When the good-natured, but careless tailor is without bread, the cobbler, who is jealous of his apprentice’s luck, forces him to give up his two eyes in exchange for bread. He then leads the blind man to a gallows, where he leaves him alone. Sitting under the gallows, the tailor overhears magical secrets from the crows that restore his sight. On his further journey, the tailor spares a foal, a stork, a few ducks and a beehive and thus acquires the gratitude of the magical animals. However, through a intrigue of the cobbler, whom he meets again in the city, he is forced to fulfill a number of impossible tasks for the king, which he nevertheless succeeds in with the help of the grateful animals, so that at the end he can marry the king’s oldest daughter. The evil cobbler, on the other hand, experiences his mirror-image punishment when, sitting under the gallows, the crows peck out his eyes. The story can certainly be seen as a prime example of the Grimm fairy tale ideal. It is composed in detail and marked by a wealth of proverbs and idioms on the linguistic level: “Mountains and valleys do not meet, but children of men do” (KHM 1843 II, p. 188), the text is introduced almost programmatically.167 It is the most paroemiologically rich fairy tale of the Grimm collection, with the density and clarity of the material and the concise formulaic character, which is often also found in embedded direct speech, speaking for the awareness with which the linguistic formulas were handled here. A whole series of them “Wilhelm Grimm more or less took over verbatim from the Low German version that Ludwig Meyn sent him in 1842” (Bluhm and Rölleke 2020, p. 119). In addition, the text plays with ideas of popular and child belief of the time, such as the fairy tale of the stork that brings the children. So the magical stork can comfort the tailor in his last task—he is to provide the king with a son within nine days: “I will help you out of need. For a long time I have been bringing the swaddling children into the city, so I can once again fetch a little prince from the well.” (KHM 1843 II, p. 130) As this ironic quotation passage makes clear, the story strains the Grimm naivety ideal of the fairy tale to the utmost and makes the poetic content of the text evident. The nevertheless unnoticeable—and in view of the “popular poetic” design quite ostentatious—redemption of the Grimm’s fairy tale ideal is undoubtedly the

167 Cf.

Bluhm/Rölleke 2020, pp. 113–119 for the stock of proverbs and idioms.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

137

result of one of the later fairy tale collections own circularity: The contributors— in this case even a student of the Grimms—were with the stories of the Kinderund Hausmärchen, the program and the text structure very familiar and oriented themselves in the transmission of new stories quite obviously at this pattern. So appeared evidence of an allegedly oral tradition, which was on the one hand obliged to a text pattern immediately and on the other hand as oralizations of literary templates or sources was influenced by literature indirectly. This can neither be obscured by the references to the oral contribution, nor those to previous anonymous story collections—such as the “Braunschweiger Sammlung” mentioned by the Grimms in their notes. This collection is the book Feen-Mährchen. Zur Unterhaltung für Freunde und Freundinnen der Feenwelt, which appeared in 1801 without author’s name at Friedrich Bernhard Culemann in Braunschweig. The Grimms possessed a copy, which was used by Jacob and especially by Wilhelm verifiably.168 As was the case with the designation of Wilhelm Christoph Günther’s Kindermährchen of 1787 as the “Erfurt Collection,” the naming of the FeenMährchen of 1801 as the “Braunschweig Collection” is also a case of anonymization and a certain degree of concealment. When the “Notes” of the Grimms appeared in print, both collections of stories were probably no longer familiar to most readers and disappeared completely behind the anonymization. What remained was the apparently intended impression of a popular fairy tale collection with a strong local flavor—Erfurt or Braunschweig region. In fact, as was the case with Günther’s Kindermährchen, the Feen-Mährchen are the typical entertainment literature of the late 18th century and the turn of the century, specifically fairy tales, as the authentic title of the “Braunschweig Collection” and the subtitle “For the Entertainment of Friends and Lovers of the Fairy World” also explicitly indicate. The story from this “Braunschweiger Sammlung” that the Grimms referred to is entitled Die wahrsagenden Vögel and is the seventh of a total of 16 texts. It tells of two wanderers, Klermont and William, who argue over the answer to the question: “What lasts longest in the world: honesty and loyalty, or falseness and treachery?” (Feen-Mährchen 2000, p. 123) The question is put to a decision by three apparently random actors—a monk, a “young, beautiful woman” and an old man—in order to win William’s eyesight as a stake. After all three have reported their own internal stories of betrayed honesty and disappointed loyalty, the cruel Klermont violently robs the poor William of his sight and abandons him under a gallows, while also informing him that he has been deceiving him from the beginning and is in league with two storytellers. As in the Grimm fairy tale, William also eavesdrops on the soothsaying birds and learns their secrets, regains his sight, and is able to achieve wealth with the help of the experienced secrets and finally heal and marry the daughter of the King of London. The relay of deeds shows

168 See Denecke et al.l 1997, p. 33; no. 2208a.—Friemel 2012, pp. 42–45 offers an insight into the Grimm’s reading based on their handwritten notes.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

138

clear kinship with that in KHM 107: Common plot motifs are a dried-up well that is brought to life and a magical horse. The reunion with the former treacherous companion is also found in the fairy tale, but William knows how to defend himself against the persecution and get the enemy out of the country. Sitting under the same gallows as William once did, the birds fall upon Klermont at the end, peck out his eyes and kill him. But William is “convinced that honesty leads much further than falseness.” (Feen-Mährchen 2000, p. 144) The most striking feature of the narrative style is the clear localization and the fact that the narrative figures have names. In contrast to the one-dimensional fairy-tale figure, the FeenMährchen figure develops from the dumb fool to the clever world man who can no longer be duped. The fact that Die wahrsagenden Vögel from the Feen-Mährchen from 1801 were the model which the unfortunate hussar on the outpost watch 1813 and the student Meyn 1842 retold or re-enacted, and on the way of a literal-oral-literal mediation of an entertaining fairy tale to the Grimm fairy tales 107 Die Krähen and Die beiden Wanderer became, shows in view of the many similarities in the plot and with regard to the comparable history of other Grimm’s fairy tales a high plausibility value, but is philologically in this case probably not exactly verifiable. Comparable indications as in the case of KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel and Günther’s Der treue Fuchs can not be established. This reflects a fundamental problem in the proof of complex text histories as well as indirect text adoptions. In place of an obvious text equality, text similarities or parallels of the plot or the motif design occur, and in place of the clear text evidence, the assessment of plausibilities occurs. A plausibilization that goes beyond the similarities in action promises to be primarily the look at the regional location of the traditions. KHM 107 is clearly marked geographically in both printed story variants. The Grimms explicitly pointed out the Holstein and Mecklenburg regions in their presentation of the history of origin and tradition. Even the publication of the Feen-Mährchen mentioned by them was given a corresponding assignment with the designation as “Braunschweiger Sammlung”. However, if you take a closer look at the Grimm’s notes on their fairy tale, you will also come across other literary references. From a literary historical point of view, it is less the wide references that are of interest, which document the analogies and motif correspondences of a trans-European and West Asian narrative literature, but the closer reference to Johannes Pauli’s collection of tales Schimpf und Ernst from 1522. The story Von falscheit vnd betrügnis, which was mentioned en passant, is a sermon fairy tale at its core and corresponds to the story from the Feen-Märchen from 1801 in a striking way: In Johannes Pauli’s Schimpf und Ernst a rich citizen debates with his servant about the validity of truth and justice. They bet 100 guilders or the price of the two eyes and appoint three judges, a merchant, an abbot and a nobleman. As in the fairy tale from 1801, their verdict, “das die falscheit regier”,169 is illustrated narratively in

169 Johannes

Pauli 1866, S. 285.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

139

internal stories. The servant who lost the bet has his eyes gouged out; at night he eavesdrops on bad spirits under a tree and learns that a herb under this tree restores sight. After the servant has healed, he also makes a rich lord’s daughter see again and receives her with great wealth in marriage. His former lord then also wants to acquire such wealth and goes to the tree where the spirits but gouge his eyes out at night. The similarities are obvious. Johannes Pauli was an Alsatian barefoot monk, possibly of Jewish origin, whose collection of sermon examples, fairy tales and farces at the beginning of a great early modern Alsatian farce tradition is particularly associated with the names Georg Wickram, Jacob (or Jakob) Frey and Martin Montanus—all familiar to the Grimms. Pauli’s stories always move between moral sermon and social satire. Schimpf und Ernst was one of the most popular entertainment books of the 16th century and found a wide reception especially among early Protestant burghers. The reception history of the collection was considerable and is reflected in a variety of editions and reprints, translations and imitations that have not yet been fully processed in their extent. With the emergence of historical interest in the late 18th century, Pauli and his collection have become known to at least another circle within the cultural elites. However, it is not possible to say on the basis of the known data how the anonymous author or the anonymous author of the “Braunschweiger Sammlung” came to the story of the Alsatian barefoot monk. Nevertheless, it can be assumed with a high degree of probability that Die wahrsagenden Vögel of 1801 are the end product of some kind of reception process. With the re-binding of the North German narratives of the early 19th century to the Alsatian sermon template, the geographical factor loses some of its relevance. It is noticeable that the search and the finding of records are generally determined by so many gaps and coincidences that the specification of special regional narrative traditions always has to be subject to a certain reservation. In this particular case, by the way, this is all the more true because the narrative of the Alsatian monk merely represented the transfer of a Latin sermon fable of the Hungarian Franciscan Pelbár of Temesvár from the late 15th century.170 And if you look at the relevant specialist literature—for example Bolte-Polívka’s reworking of the Grimm KHM annotation volumes,171 Hans-Jörg Uther’s commentary volume to his KHM edition 172 or even Diether Röth’s Kleines Typenverzeichnis der europäischen Zauber- und Novellenmärchen173—one learns that this type of narrative can already be found in the literature of the Middle Ages and in the European-Jewish literary tradition of this epoch. The story “demonstrates”, as Uther summarizes, die Gerechtigkeit Gottes als ein planvolles, manchmal zunächst

170 Bolte

/ Polívka 1915 II, pp. 471–472.

171 Bolte

/ Polívka 1915 II, pp. 468–482.

172 See

KHM 1857 / Uther 1996 IV, pp. 205–208.

173 Röth

1998, pp. 141–142.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

140

für den Menschen nicht zu durchschauendes Handeln, das aber letztlich zu seinem Wohl gerät. Dieser Gedanke liegt KHM 107 ebenso zugrunde.” (KHM 1857 / Uther 1996, p. 208) Uther is right to point out that “numerous Christian references” (Uther 2013, p. 230) are interwoven into the story Die beiden Wanderer, which can be pursued in more detail in order to further specify and plausibilize the palimpsestuous structure and the layers of the fairy tale stories. The Christian references are made explicit in the text itself again and again and contribute significantly to the opposition of the two central narrative figures. Above all, the figure’s speech of the tailor is characterized by this: “I hold on to God, and turn to nothing”, explains the figure in her planning actions certainly not very foresighted full of trust in God: “God in heaven must be happy that I am so cheerful.” (KHM 1843 II, p. 120) Also when the tailor runs out of bread, “he did not lose courage, but relied on God and on his luck” (KHM 1843 II, p. 120). And after the happy regain of the lost sight, the tailor “thanked” “God for the grace shown” (KHM 1843 II, p. 123). The basic terms characterizing the story are trust in God and grace of God. They fundament an understanding of morality, which is carried by the conviction of a divine justice, which manifests itself in reward and retribution for the deeds of people on earth. Central speech parts of the tailor formulate this explicitly. When the cobbler wants to take away his second eye as well, erkannte der Schneider sein leichtsinniges Leben, bat den lieben Gott um Verzeihung, und sprach thue was du mußt, ich will leiden was ich muß, aber bedenke daß unser Herrgott nicht jeden Augenblick richtet, und daß eine andere Stunde kommt, wo die böse That vergolten wird, die du an mir verübst und die ich nicht an dir verdient habe. (KHM 1843 II, p. 122)

The reciprocal relationship of mercy and reward as well as infidelity and retribution determines the fairy tale action. It offers exempla of those Old Testament ideas of divine justice in particular, which promise to repay both the good and the bad deed in this world already. Biblical studies have been calling this principle of divine justice the ‘Tun-Ergehen-’ or ‘Tat-Folge-Zusammenhang’ since Klaus Koch.”174 The spared filly promises the tailor “a time when I can repay you”, the stork—probably not entirely coincidentally “a holy bird”—wants to “repay” the merciful deed “another time” (KHM 1843 II, p. 124), similarly to the old duck. And accordingly, the helpful horse later explains: “Now the time has come, […] when I can repay you for your kindness.” (KHM 1843 II, p. 129) The ‘cause-andeffect relationship’ is explicitly emphasized as expectation and certainty in the figure of speech of the tailor. After he spared the filly, the stork and the duck, he believes that he has found his deserved reward in the beehive: “There I immediately find the reward for my good deed” (KHM 1843 II, p. 125). By the way, the

174 Cf.

Koch 1991, pp. 65–103.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

141

latter explicit references to the biblical ‘cause-and-effect relationship’ are not to be found in the Low German original of the student Meyn, which Wilhelm Grimm reworked for the Kinder- und Hausmärchen—they were interpolated later to reinforce the didactic character of the fairy tale narrative.175 This also applies to the memory of the mother’s admonition towards the end of the narrative, by means of which the fairy tale text refers to the folk wisdom character of the moral teaching underlying the fairy tale, which is typical for the Grimm collection: “My mother was right, she always said whoever trusts in God and only has luck, cannot fail.” (KHM 1843 II, p. 131)176 Wilhelm Grimm took over the Christian references in his revision from the Low German submission of his student Meyn, where they were available, but expanded them further for edification, by emphasizing the principle of reward and retribution in the language. The question of the ‘Tun-ErgehenZusammenhang’ is presented both in explicit form and in the fairy tale in the fulfillment of the Old Testament principle of the rewarding and saving justice of God, developed narratively. Thus KHM 107 is clearly recognizable in the horizon of a popularized biblical, in the narrower sense Old Testament, wisdom teaching. It also shapes the material history and the literary narrative tradition to which the Grimms Die beiden Wanderer connect, as they did before with Meyn’s Vun den Schoster un den Snider, and is their actual thematic framework. This is particularly evident in the ‘Feen-Mährchen zur Unterhaltung für Freunde und Freundinnen der Feenwelt’ Die wahrsagenden Vögel from 1801. The question of the “cause-effect-relationship” and the justice of God is developed in the fairy tale in the plot-motivating dispute of the narrative figures: “what lasts longest in the world: honesty and loyalty, or falseness and betrayal?” (Feen-Mährchen 2000, p. 123) It is the fundamental question that also determines KHM 107. In spite of all falseness and all betrayal, with which the malicious Klermont tries in the fairy tale to push the good-natured William into misery, honesty and loyalty finally prevail with the help of the grateful animals. Klermont ends up being “chopped and shredded in a terrible way, and both his eyes are torn out” by the birds of prey exactly under that gallows from which he had once left the former blinded William. In the narrative implementation, the “cause-effect-relationship” is brought to the principle of the mirror-image punishment in a retribution-dogmatic way. The compensatory justice finally confirms Williams conviction that “honesty leads much further than falseness.” (FeenMährchen 2000, p. 144) That and how far the fairy tale from 1801 is indebted to the jest story Von falscheit vnd betrügnis from the collection Schimpf und Ernst

175 Cf. Vun den Schoster un den Snider. In: Schulte Kemminghausen 1932, pp. 59–64, here pp. 62 and 64.—In the first figure of speech of the “brown pale one” it says at Meyn only: “ik kan di noch mal wat to’n Goden dohn”. In the figure of speech at the second appearance of the horse there is at Meyn no corresponding pretext at all.—A new transcription of the Low German text according to the manuscript of Ludwig Meyn is now available from Hannelore Tute 2019, pp. 175–180. 176 Cf.

by contrast Vun den Schoster un den Snider. In: Schulte Kemminghausen 1932, p. 64.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

142

by the Franciscan monk Johannes Pauli from 1522 is shown by the focus on the explicit wisdom teaching, as it is formulated in the dispute between the servant and his rich employer: […] da begab sich die red, das der knecht sprach. Es ist dannocht ein hübsch ding, das die warheit vnd gerechtekeit vff ertreich noch ein fürgang hat, vnd das paner tregt. Der her sprach das ist nit, falscheit vnd vntrüwe die haben das regiment vff erden, vnd nit erberkeit. Der knecht sprach, es wer nit. (Johannes Pauli 1866, p. 284)

The dispute is decided narratively in the fluctuating example story. In spite of all falseness and disloyalty, truth and justice prevail. The cheated and blinded servant regains his sight—he “was seen, he thanks God”—as well as the daughter of the lord of the land and “many good things”. And when a devil finally puts out both eyes of the fraudulent and greedy rich citizen under the tree, it finally becomes “obvious that the truth has been hidden for a while, but it has overcome and still leads the justice”. The character of the fluctuation as an example story is obvious. So it is also based on a Latin sermon from the collection Sermones Pomerii de tempore by the Hungarian Franciscan monk Pelbárt from Temesvár from 1498, which Johannes Pauli had translated into German. Wesselski had already pointed out the importance of this Latin sermon example for the story in 1925.177 Already with Pelbárt there is the dispute about the priority of justice or injustice and its narrative implementation: “Accidit, quod servus die quodam coram domino diceret, quod iustitia etiam in hoc mundo praevalet quam iniustitia.”178 Pelbárt’s sermon belongs in the context of the example stories about the relationship between Veritas and Falsitas, which were widespread in medieval (sermon) literature and beyond. The narrative texts form their own type of narrative and are all part of a story. Bolte and Polívka have concisely fixed the motif structure of the narrative variants conveyed by Pelbárt, Johannes Pauli and the fairy tales of the 19th century: Wir können […] folgende Motive unterscheiden: A1. Zwei Gefährten (Brüder) streiten, ob Wahrheit oder Lüge (wessen Religion) mehr gilt, und rufen mehrere Begegnende zu Richtern an; der Verlierende wird beraubt und (A2) geblendet.—A3. Ein hungriger Wandrer erhält von seinem boshaften Gefährten nur dann Brot, wenn er sich die Augen ausstechen läßt.—A4. Ein Wandrer wird von Gefährten aus Habgier beraubt und geblendet.—B1. Der Blinde (Beraubte) hört unbemerkt eine Unterhaltung von Geistern oder (B2) Tieren an und erfährt gewinnbringende Geheimnisse.—C1. Er gewinnt in Folge davon sein Augenlicht wieder, (C2) heilt einen kranken König (oder Prinzessin), (C3) öffnet einen versiegten Brunnen, (C4) bringt einen verdorrten Fruchtbaum zum Blühen, (C5) hebt einen Schatz.—D. Sein heimtückischer Gefährte fragt ihn, wie er zu solchem Reichtum gelangt sei, will ebenfalls die Geister (Tiere) belauschen und wird von ihnen zerrissen. (Bolte/Polívka 1915 II, S. 474)

177 Wesselski 178 The

1925, p. 202.

Latin version is tangible in Bolte/Polívka 1915 II, p. 471-472, here p. 471.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

143

The story refers to a rich literary history of effect and reception. Pelbárt’s Predigtmärlein must be seen as a hinge of sorts. His collections were among the most quoted sermon works in the late Middle Ages and early modern period and are hardly to be overestimated as a reservoir of material for a subsequent narrative literature. Pelbárt himself already drew from a rich “immaterial heritage” of previous world literature, which has contributed significantly to the development of the material basis of the Predigtmärlein.179 Already in 1925 Wesselski pointed to a “story of the southern Pañtschatantra ” which agrees with Pelbart’s sermon fables “in essential points” (Wesselski 1925, p. 204). The origin of the ancient Indian fable is set at the end of the 3rd century AD as a kind of literary prince’s mirror in Sanskrit. Via a Middle Persian version from the middle of the 6th century, whose translation into Arabic took place in the 8th century, and a dense succession of further adaptations, the work became known under the Arabic title Kalila wa Dimna with an extraordinary degree of popularity “in a large part of Asia, Africa and later also Europe”.180 For the history of reception and reception in Europe, the Latin translation of Johannes von Capua, which was known to the Brothers Grimm,181 based on a Hebrew original by the otherwise unknown Rabbi Joël from the 12th century, plays a central role. The Liber Kalilae et Dimnae, Directorium vitae humanae from the second half of the 13th century achieved a considerable popularity in all of Europe and caused a wide literary reception. Two print editions of 1480 initiated a translation into German by Antonius von Pforr. As Buch der Beispiele der alten Weisen, which also became known under the title Die Fabeln des Bidpai, the work was published in three editions in woodcuts in 1483 and 1484 and reached at least twenty-two print editions by 1592.182 The Schwankliteratur der Frühen Neuzeit—not least Johannes Paulis Schimpf und Ernst, but also Valentin Schumanns Nachtbüchlein von 1559 or Hans Wilhelm Kirchhofs Wendunmuth von 1563 nebst Folgebände—griff vielfältig auf das Schriftwerk zurück, ebenso die Märchenliteratur um 1800. Insbesondere Albert Ludwig Grimm betonte den Quellenwert der Bidpai-Fabeln und benannte sie als Vorlagen für eine Reihe seiner eigenen Geschichten in den Kindermährchen.183 In Kalila und Dimna helpful animals save a traveler from certain death out of gratitude in the story Der Juwelenhändler und der Reisende who has fallen into

179 How intensive the early, already medieval institution of the sermon fables or sermon examples was characterized by text-text relationships and the transfer of narrative content and motifs across language and cultural boundaries, Albert Wesselski has revealed in the introduction to his collection Monastic Latin with a wealth of beautiful examples. Wesselski 1909, pp. IX–LI ( “Introduction”). 180 Afterword 181 Cf.

in: Monschi 1996, p. 441.

the source index to the fairy tale concordance 2006, p. 501.

182 Buch 183 A.L.

der Beispiele der alten Weisen 1970, unpag. Vorwort.

Grimm 1809, S. VII-VIII.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

144

this predicament through the disloyalty and ingratitude of a jeweler—called a “goltschmid”184- . The example story illustrates the recommendation to the ruler to “pay more attention to the inner qualities [of the] servants [than to a] beautiful appearance, their appearance and their financial situation.” (Monschi 1996, p. 337) In addition to a number of comparable story elements and motifs, which can also be found in the later tradition of preaching and fairy tales, the basic wisdom teaching can also be found in the example story: “A good deed is never in vain, and whoever has committed a crime will not be able to escape punishment.” (Monschi 1996, p. 344) The tradition of storytelling can be traced back to the popular children’s literature of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. In August Jacob Liebeskind’s “oriental stories” from the collection Palmblätter, for example, a popular adaptation “for young people” can be found under the title Die dankbaren Thiere.185 The collection enjoyed wide popularity as youth literature. Pelbart’s sermon fables, like the following examples of literary variants of jest-books and fairy tales, are stoffgeschichtlich in the tradition of the Old Indian Mirror of Princes and its history of reception and effect. In terms of content, that is, the thematic orientation, one must look for the source of the fable-like narrative sequence of Pelbart’s sermon fables, which extends from the 16th century to the fairy tales of the 19th century, in another tradition, namely in the biblical wisdom literature and a subsequent edification literature, with the Buch Tobit as the central point of reference. A look at this work makes it possible to see the thematic reference line in the context of the palimpsestuous structure of the fairy tale transparent. In Catholic biblical tradition, the Buch Tobit belongs to the deuterocanonical texts, while in Luther’s Bible it is assigned to the Apocrypha . In terms of its history of origin, it dates back to around 200 BC, and its place of origin can be assumed to be the eastern diaspora. In terms of its reception history, the Buch Tobit plays a role “in Western European fine art” as well as in the development of popular piety, such as the belief in guardian angels.186 The book is a “rescue and healing story in which God’s care for his own is exemplarily illustrated”,187 and can be attributed to the “genre of wisdom tale”. Central to the “views of wisdom” is the conviction of the “correspondence of action and outcome”. Everything revolves around the “keywords ‘truth, justice and mercy’” as “guiding words for an integrated way of life”188 and its embedding in an unconditional trust in God. In the introductory biographical retrospective of his life, the fictional figure of the deuterocanonical or apocryphal book, the Naphtalite Tobit, who lives in exile

184 Buch 185 See

der Beispiele der alten Weisen 1970, unpag. (14th chapter).

Liebeskind 1786, pp. 26–48.

186 Beate Ego: Tobit. The Book of Tobit / Tobias. In: Septuaginta Deutsch 2011, pp. 1316–1352, here p. 1318. 187 Ego,

Tobit. In: Septuaginta Deutsch 2011, p. 1316.

188 Ego,

Tobit. In: Septuaginta Deutsch 2011, p. 1317.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

145

in Assyrian captivity in the diaspora, reports: “I, Tobit, have kept to the path of truth and justice all my life and […] helped a lot out of mercy.” (Tob 1:3)189 The figure of the story thus already gives the leading theme of the entire book. The way of life is concretized in acts of mercy of the Naphtalite towards the oppressed and needy of his people: “Ich gab den Hungernden mein Brot und den Nackten meine Kleider […].” (Tob 1:17) Tobit’s mercy and fidelity to God, among other things the morally commanded, but prohibited by royal decree, burial of executed Israelites, nevertheless does not protect him from blindness: Als ich ihn begraben hatte und in der Nacht nach Hause kam, legte ich mich an der Hofmauer zum Schlafen nieder, weil ich unrein geworden war. Mein Gesicht ließ ich unbedeckt, ohne auf die Sperlinge zu achten, die in der Mauer nisteten. Da ließen die Sperlinge ihren warmen Kot in meine offenen Augen fallen, und es bildeten sich weiße Flecken in meinen Augen. Ich ging zu den Ärzten, doch sie konnten mir nicht helfen. […] (Tob 2,9–10)190

Tobit’s continued unbroken life orientation towards “works of truth and justice” sometimes makes his wife despairingly and bitterly exclaim: “Where is the reward for your mercy and justice? Everyone knows what they have brought you. “ (Tob 2.14) Nevertheless, Tobit does not deviate from his godly path. He finally summarizes his credo in a life lesson for his son Tobias as follows: “Do justice every day of your life and do not walk on the paths of injustice. For if you do the truth, good success will be in your works.” (Tob 4.5–6)191 After all the setbacks and all the misery, the “action-result-relationship” finally turns to the good through the direct intervention of God. With the help of the angel Raphael, who was sent by God and accompanied Tobias, the son of Tobit, as a traveling companion to a relative in Media, and through his advice brought about the success of the enterprise and the acquisition of Sarah as a wife for Tobias, Tobit finally regained his happiness and his eyesight.

189 Cf. Tobit. The Book of Tobit (Tobias). In: Septuaginta Deutsch 2010, p. 635-663. For the sake of simplicity, the following common Bible translation is cited here: Neue Jerusalemer Bibel 1985, p. 569-609. The chapter and verse numbering is cited directly in the text. 190  In the German translation of the Old and New Testaments by the Ingolstadt theologian Johannes Eck from 1537, which was created as a Catholic reaction to Luther’s Bible of 1534 as one of the so-called “correction Bibles”, the word “swallows” is used. See also in the widely used “correction Bible” by Johann Dietenberger: Biblia 1534, S. CCXXVIII: “Es begab sich auff einen tag / das er todten vergraben hat / vn[d] fast müd worde[n] war / kam heim vnd legt sich an die wandt vn[d] entschlieff. Da fiel jm oben herab auß der schwalben nest der warm schmeiß auff seine augen / das er erblindet.//Dise anfechtung ließ jm Gott darumb begegnen / das die nachkommenden an jm ein beyspil der gedult hetten / gleich alß des heyligen Jobs. Dan[n] dieweil er von jugent auff allweg Gott geförchtet / vnd seine gebott gehalten hat / ist er nit leydig worden / oder vnlustig wider Gott / dz jm blindtheit zůgefallen war / sonder er bleyb vnbewegt vnd steiff inn der forcht Gottes / sagt Gott lob vnd danck alle seine lebtag.” 191 This is the translation according to the Septuaginta Deutsch 2010. The Einheitsübersetzung remains relatively pale at this point.

146

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

The novella-like narrative has, in addition to the thematic context, a number of conspicuous motif references to later narrative tradition, whereby the individual motifs are displaced in their context compared to later exemplary literature. Already in the scene of blindness, a whole range of these motifs are recognizable: the undeserved misfortune of blindness itself, the place or proximity of death, lying at the foot of a wall that houses birds (in KHM 107: at the foot of a gallows) or the function of birds as blindness-inducing pests. A large part of the motif references within the Buch Tobit can be fixed in the inner narrative of the journey of the son Tobias. The wandering itself is such a motif that two narrative figures are traveling together—Tobias and his helper, the angel Raphael (Tob 5)—the existence of supernatural helper figures—first and foremost Raphael, but also the fish (Tob 6)—the acquisition of the bride after the completion of magical tasks (Tob 8.2–3), the wedding (Tob 9), the obtaining of a remedy for blindness (Tob 6.9) as well as the act of healing, by means of which the father regains his sight: “Rub the gall on his eyes!” (Tob 11.8). The story of the Buch Tobit goes back to narrative traditions in the Near East, without these being able to be counted as part of the later edifying literary tradition from the late medieval sermon template to the entertainment literature of the 19th century. The Buch Tobit, which was written in the Jewish diaspora around 200 BC, explicitly refers to the narrative tradition of the Assyrian sage Achikar or Achiqar and uses it as a source of motifs.192 The narrative figure is “first mentioned in passing and quite self-evidently in the course of the narrative” in Tob 1.21–22.193 introduced, but not as an Assyrian sage, but as the nephew of Tobit: The Assyrian king Asarhaddon, the twice-exiled Tobit reports, “made Achikar, the son of my brother Hanael, lord over the whole accounting and the whole administration of his kingdom. Because Achikar spoke a good word for me, I was allowed to return to Nineveh. Achikar was cupbearer and seal-keeper as well as representative for the administration of the kingdom and the accounting.” The first appearance of Achikar as a figure of the story happens “almost as if he were one of the great biblical personalities” (Weigl 2006, p. 218). The story of Achikar is presented in the Buch Tobit as a subsequent parallel story of mercy, disloyalty, retribution and salvation: “My son,” Tobit admonishes his son Tobias and his children at the end of his life, wie Nadab [Achikars Neffe] an Achikar gehandelt hat, der ihn aufgezogen hatte; er hat ihn aus dem Licht in die Finsternis gestoßen und ihm seine Fürsorge übel vergolten. Achikar wurde gerettet; dem Nadab aber wurde sein übles Verhalten vergolten, und er stürzte selbst in die Finsternis. Achikar war barmherzig und wurde aus der tödlichen Falle gerettet, die Nadab ihm gestellt hatte. Nadab aber geriet selbst in die Falle und ging

192 A concise summary is provided by Weigl 2006, p. 220-221. For the figure of ‘Achicharos’ see Ego, Tobit. In: Septuaginta Deutsch 2011, p. 1325. 193 Weigl 2006, p. 218. See also Kottsieper 1996, p. 159: “Finally, the book of Tobit recognizes Ahiqar as the nephew of Naftali, which reflects an awareness of the inner kinship.”—Further mentions of the figure of the story can be found in Tob 2,10; 11,19 and 14,10–11.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

147

zugrunde. Daran könnt ihr sehen, meine Kinder, daß die Barmherzigkeit viel vermag und daß die Barmherzigkeit rettet. (Tob 14, 10-11)

The origin of the Achikar story, which was taken up by the Buch Tobit as a slide, is located by Assyriology and Aramaic studies between the late 7th century and 500 BC. At least in the Aramaic revision of the “teacher’s story”, the story consists to a large extent of a “combination of wise sayings and topoi” which make the figure of Achikar “almost interchangeable” and “strongly related to literary wisdom traditions of the Kassite and post-Kassite period” (Weigl 2010, p. 692).194 The “narrative incorporation” of the Achikar story in the Buch Tobit served the “appropriation” of these non-Jewish legend figures “for the Jewish tradition and the theological self-positioning of the diaspora community in a sea of otherness”. Through the common “practice of lived solidarity, the saving grace of God connects Jews and Gentiles to a great, eschatological salvation community.” (Weigl 2010, p. 18)195 The Achikar story arrived as a kind of subtext in later biblical literature via this explicit ‘appropriation’. The wisdom sayings collection adjacent to the Achikar story also offers quite a few points of contact with the material of the story, for example: “It is better for the eye to be blind than for the heart to be blind, for the blindness of the eye leads to the path of life and the blindness of the heart goes on a downward path.”196 Despite all the similarities in motifs, there are probably no direct dependency relationships or other close connections to the later exemplary literary tradition of the story. The Grimm fairy tale 107 Die beiden Wanderer has been analyzed as a complex text story with a view to origin and development, in order to show how the genesis of the material has developed in the horizon of a dynamic genre and function history. In the uncovering of the palimpsestuous structure of the fairy tale story, a exemplary literary tradition was recognizable as the stations of a sermon fairy tale of the Franciscan Pelbár of Temesvár from the sermon collection Sermones Pomerii de tempore from 1498, whose transfer as a farce story Von falscheit vnd betrügnis 1522 by Johannes Pauli as well as the fairy tale adaptations in the 19th century were fixed, 1801 as a literary fairy tale Die wahrsagenden Vögel, whose Low German after- and umerzählung Vun den Schoster un den Snider 1842 by Ludwig Meyn as well as Wilhelm Grimm’s expanding transfer Die beiden Wanderer in the fifth edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen from 1843. The material tradition can be traced back to the old Indian prince mirror Pañcatantra,

194 The ‘Kassite period’ is referred to in Oriental studies as the period between about 1580 and 1200 BC. 195 The functional importance concisely marks the opening question in Weigl 2006, p. 212: “How should a community of faith, which is in a minority situation, determine its social and theological place?” 196 Grünberg 1917, p. 46–47.—See also, for example, p. 28: “If your enemy meets you with evil, meet him with good and receive him.”

148

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

a fable work from the Indo-Iranian educational literature, the origin of which is set in the late 3rd century AD, as well as the subsequent adaptations in Middle Persian and later Arabic literature. In the ‘Story of the jeweler and the traveler’, the material passed from the Arabic fable work Kalila wa Dimna from the 8th century via a Latin translation in the second half of the 13th century in the Liber Kalilae et Dimnae by Johann von Capua and a German translation in the Buch der Beispiele der alten Weisen by Antonius von Pforr to the farce literature of the 16th century in various ways, not least in the collection Schimpf und Ernst by Johannes Pauli. The example-literary genesis shows the typical genre and functional change of such a material story in its literary-historical development, but also the thematic constancy, which often enough only appears to be hidden and often is probably no longer recognized immediately, but nevertheless remains in its core. The material story of KHM 107 is realized in variants of the Old Testament principle of a ‘TunErgehen-’ or ‘Tat-Folge-Zusammenhang’, in the conviction that earthly action— whether good or evil—already bears fruit on earth in the form of divine or fateful retribution. With a view to a number of motivic correspondences and the wisdombased didactic character, the Buch Tobit from the deuterocanonical or apocryphal part of the Old Testament could be fixed as the central point of reference for the example-literary tradition of the story. The fairy tale Die beiden Wanderer can thus ultimately be specified as a further story of the example-literature based on the Buch Tobit . Overall, this fairy tale also proves to be literature from literature from literature.

3.4.2 Composition stories—The example KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel As complex text stories, fairy tales are also presented which, in the course of their genesis within the printing history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, have successively undergone various reworkings, which were accompanied by adaptations. A striking example of such composition stories is KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel. It is the tale of a tailor who, after his death at the gates of heaven, is first rejected by Peter for his dishonesty during his lifetime, but then admitted out of pity. When the Lord and his heavenly entourage would like to visit the garden at noon, the tailor is given the task of taking care of the order in heaven and making sure that nothing is stolen. Out of curiosity, the tailor sits on the heavenly chair of the Lord, from where he can observe the small thefts of an old woman on earth. In his self-righteous indignation, he throws the heavenly footstool at her, which is noticed after the Lord’s return. Admonished by him, the tailor has to leave heaven

3.4  Complex Text Stories

149

again and goes “nach Warteinweil, wo die frommen Soldaten sitzen und sich lustig machen” (KHM 1819 I, p. 179). The history of research has already attempted to sketch the text development several times. In his “References” to this story, the editor of the commented fairy tale edition Heinz Rölleke summarises: Since the second edition (1819) as No. 35 instead of the story Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder (I, 1812, No. 35) which has since been moved to No. 157; contamination of the slightly diverging versions from Jakob Frey’s Gartengesellschaft (1556) and Hans Wilhelm Kirchhoff’s Wendunmuth (1563), which Wilhelm Grimm had already published in a much shorter form in the journal Wünschelruthe (Nr. 13, 12.02.1818, p. 50). Since the 4th edition (1840), the text has been redesigned according to the version from Jörg Wickram’s Rollwagenbüchlin (1555, chap. 110 […]) mentioned in the third note. (KHM 1857/Rölleke 1980 III, p. 457)197

In his “Notes” to the edition of ‘unknown fairy tales’, Rölleke then further specifies and corrects his description of the genesis of KHM 35: “The text taken up in 1819 […] is based almost entirely on a […] version which Jakob Frey had published in 1556 […]; from a parallel version in Hans Wilhelm Kirchhof’s Wendunmuth (1563) contributed almost nothing.“ (Unknown Fairytales/Rölleke 1987, p. 153) Already in 1906, Hermann Hamann had described the history of its origins, citing as a source for Frey and Kirchhof a farce from Heinrich Bebel’s collection of facetiae from 1508198 and also correctly fixed the weighting for the first print versions of the Grimm fairy tales: “The brothers mainly used Frey’s representation, but softened some offensive passages.” (Hamann 1906, p. 68) With reference to Hamann, the description can be found in a somewhat more general form in 1913 in the first commentary volume by Johannes Bolte and Georg Polívka, but supplemented with a large number of other variants of the fairy tale.199 In his handbook, Hans-Jörg Uther also points out that an “archive copy of Wilhelm Grimm’s hand” of Frey’s fairy tale has been preserved and that the “pun with God’s chair and the stool […] on Matthew 5,34–35” (Uther 2013, p. 86; 2021, p. 86-87) can be traced back to the Bible. The reference to the Bible is unquestionable; since the Matthew passage refers to the biblical prohibition of swearing, however, a reference to Isaiah 66,1 is probably more likely: “Thus says the

197 The reference from the Wünschelruthe must be corrected. W. Grimm’s contribution appeared in issue 15 of 19 February 1818, p. 50 [recte: 60]. The page number “50” is a printing error in the Wünschelruthe, in fact it is page 60. The reference to the print version in Rölleke’s edition Unbekannte Märchen (1987, p. 152) corrects the issue number, but does not improve the page number. 198 Hamann 1906, p. 67-69, here 67-68. However, Hamann names the printing year 1509. The first two books of Facetiae appeared in 1508, a third volume in 1512 in Opuscula nova. In the following years, a dense series of new editions appeared. As early as 1558, the first translation of the collection into German came out. See also Graf 2000, p. 179-194 on Bebel. 199 Bolte/Polívka

1913 I, p. 342–346.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

150

LORD / The heaven is my throne / and the earth is my footstool […]” (according to Luther-Bibel 1545). The “notes” of the Brothers Grimm on this fairy tale are the common point of reference for research literature. In the commentary volumes of 1822 and 1856, the immediate text templates from early modern Schwank literature were explicitly revealed. The narrative versions by Frey and Kirchhof are mentioned side by side: “According to a story in Frei’s Garten-Gesellschaft No. 51 and in Kirchhof’s Wendunmuth Thl. I, No. 230.” (KHM 1822, p. 67)200 If only Frey and Kirchhof are in the foreground in 1822, the commentary volume of 1856 finally completes the third version: “A slightly different [story] in Nebendingen in Wickram’s Rollwagen (Frankfurt 1590) p. 98 b and 99 b.” (KHM 1856, p. 64) The literary tradition and the state of the sources are clearly familiar to the Grimms. Nevertheless, they emphasize an oral tradition, referring to the settlement in contemporary writings: “The fairy tale still lasts among the people, and Möser mentions it in his miscellaneous writings I. 332 and II. 235.” (KHM 1822, p. 67)201 In fact, the lawyer and publicist Justus Möser reports in his treatise Etwas zur Vertheidigung des sogenannten Aberglaubens unsrer Vorfahren from the school story of a teacher, which had the jest as its subject: “Yes, as a certain teacher recently told his pupils on the country, when the dear God was taking a walk, a tailor in heaven sneaked up to his throne […].” (Möser 1797, p. 332) In a letter to the Secret War Council August Friedrich Ursinus, Möser later came back explicitly to this story and described it as a “folk story” as well as with regard to its motifs as “a work of holy mythology” (Möser 1798, p. 235). In this sense, the Brothers Grimm also looked at the jest, which in Möser’s report was actually explicitly the retelling of a literary source for school purposes by a literarily educated teacher. As a result, Möser also explicitly speaks of an “invention” and a “moral story” (Möser 1797, p. 332). In terms of text production, a number of specific features can already be mentioned in advance that characterize KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel as a composition story, based on the comments of the Grimms and research literature: Thus, the story already shows itself in the first printed version in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen 1819 as a ‘contamination’ of variants from the Schwank literature of the 16th century. Here, a text version predominate, which can also be described as a contamination. Grimm’s printed version of 1819 can look back on a ‘tighter’ early version that Wilhelm Grimm had published in a journal in 1818. In the course of the further printing history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, the story was ‘transformed’ in the fourth edition of 1840 according to a third text version from the Schwank literature of the 16th century. A look at the printing history of the Grimm’s collection also shows that the third edition of the Kinder- und

200 See 201 See

also KHM 1856, p. 64-65.

also KHM 1856, p. 65, where a cataloguing error has crept into the bibliographic reference from the first part or volume of Möser’s writings.—The reference to oral tradition has been maintained in the most recent research literature; for example, Uther emphasizes that Grimm’s version of 1840 “significantly influenced” (Uther 2013/2021, p. 87) the oral tradition.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

151

Hausmärchen from 1837 and the sixth from 1850 have text edits. So finally the text structure presents itself as the result of a stepwise amalgamation of different narrative versions from the literary tradition as well as individual text edits. The genesis of this text history is to be taken into account in its gradualness in the following and analyzed with regard to the procedure of composing a narrative text. The starting point within the printing history tradition according to Grimm is the journal publication by Wilhelm Grimm from 1818. According to Rölleke, the text version follows “the short version of the farce, as Justus Möser had offered it in his essay Etwas zur Verteidigung des sogenannten Aberglaubens unserer Vorfahren” (Unknown Fairytales and Rölleke 1987, p. 153). There are several reasons for this assignment: Möser’s essay is mentioned in Grimm’s commentary volumes from 1822 and 1856, but above all, the same motif of the ‘throne with three legs’ is tangible in both versions, which can otherwise be found neither with Bebel, nor with Frey, Kirchhof or Wickram, nor in Hans Sachs’ Der Schneider mit dem Panier from 1550, in his Schwank: Der Schneider mit dem Panier from 1563 or in other mentioned text versions. In these versions, the tailor does not only throw a chair leg like in the Möser report and in Grimm’s journal version, but the whole chair at the thieving old woman. In fact, Wilhelm Grimm’s text from 1818 is probably already a contamination of various farce versions. At least, features from the Sachs farce of the ‘tailor with the basket’ have entered Grimm’s version in addition to the Möser version. The reproof of the tailor by the lord shows similarities which are not to be found in the other farce versions: In the probably Bebel-based poem from October 5, 1550 Der Schneider im Himmel it says by Hans Sachs: “O tailor, tailor! / And if I had also thrown you to the same spot / Which you have stolen since then, / […], I would have thrown you […]” (Sachs 1904, p. 123), as well as similarly by Grimm: “Tailor, tailor, he calls, if I had thrown a chair leg at you every time […].” (W. Grimm 1818, p. 60) In addition, there is the common motif of the cloth thrown into hell, for example in Hans Sachs’ probably Italian facetious Master Song from May 5, 1550 Der Schneider mit dem Panier202 in the speech, that the tailor with his frauds had thrown “alle fleck” (Sachs 1904, p. 75) at the devil for a banner of sin, and at Grimm: “so often you have thrown a piece into hell” (W. Grimm 1818, p. 60).203 Possibly Grimm’s short version also contains borrowings from Georg Wickram’s farce Wie ein schneyder in himmel kumpt und unsers herrgotts fůßschämel nach einer alten frauwen härabwirfft . In any case, the description of the divine throne room in the version of the Wünschelruthe reminds us of the paintings by Wickram,204 which are not given in other farce versions.

202 Stiefel (1894, p. 48-50) refers to the facet Duna Bandiera di Varii colori, che apparue una nocte ad uno fartore by Piovano Arlotto de Maynardi. 203 See

also in the farce from 21 July 1563 Der Schneider mit dem Panier, which represents a contamination of the two tailor’s stories. Compare, for example, in the contemporary selection by Johann Adolph Nasser—Hans Sachs 1827, p. 185-192. This is a scholarly, not yet strictly scientific edition. 204 See in particular Wickram 1984, p. 181: “Zůletst so kumpt er zů vielen schönen und köstlichen stülen, under welchen in der mitte ein gantz guldiner sessel stůnd […]. For more information see Wickram 1973, p. 203.

152

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

The text, which then came into the Kinder- und Hausmärchen in 1819, is no longer based on the short version from the Wünschelruthe, but is a largely new composition. Already a comparative look at the narrative introductions with their different motifs and the different plot elements shows that the version in the Wünschelruthe and the following KHM version are similar, but ultimately represent quite different versions of the same farce type. Das Märchen vom Schneider der in den Himmel kam Wünschelruthe1818, S. 50 [recte: 60] Ein Schneider kam einst in den Himmel, und in dem großen Saal gefiel es ihm gar wohl, denn ringsum standen prächtige rothsammtene Stühle, darauf saßen die Heiligen, und am Ende des Saals stand ein großer goldner Thron, darauf saß Gott der Vater, und die himmlischen Heerschaaren standen um ihn her. Bald darauf hielt unser Herr Gott einen großen Umzug durch den ganzen Himmel, und alle folgten ihm nach. Nur der Schneider versteckte sich, denn er war neugierig und wollte alles recht genau sehen. […]

KHM 35Der Schneider im Himmel 1819, Band 1, S. 177–178 Es trug sich zu, daß ein Schneider starb, der lahm war und deshalb vor den Himmel nicht gegangen, sondern gehinkt kam. Er klopfte an die Pforte, der heil. Petrus aber, der dabei die Wache hat, wollte sie nicht gleich aufthun, sondern fragte: „wer klopft?“ „Ein armer, ehrlicher Schneider bittet um Einlaß.“ „Ja, ehrlich, wie der Dieb am Galgen,“ sprach der heil. Petrus, „du hast lange Fingern gemacht und den Leuten das Tuch abgezwickt. Geh in die Hölle, wo du das Gestohlne doch hingeworfen hast, in den Himmel kommst du nicht.“ „Ach du barmherziger Gott! rief das Schneiderlein, ich hinke und habe von dem Weg daher Blasen an den Füßen, ich kann nicht wieder umkehren. Laßt mich doch in den Himmel ein, ich will gern hinter dem Ofen sitzen und die schlechte Arbeit thun, ich will die kleinen Kinder halten und reinigen, die Windeln waschen, die Bänke, darauf sie gespielt haben, abwischen und säubern, laßt mich nur ein.“ Der heil. Petrus war mitleidig, ließ sich erweichen, und machte dem Schneiderlein die Himmelspforte so weit auf, daß es hereinschlüpfen konnte. Das geschah etwa um Mittag, als der Herr gerade mit den Erzengeln und dem himmlischen Heer in den Garten gehen und sich erlustigen wollte. Da befahl er dem Schneider, dieweil niemand zugegen wäre, den Himmel in Ordnung zu halten, und zu achten, daß nicht jemand käme und etwas hinaustrüge. […]

The differences are obvious. The entrance scene is completely different, also most of the figure personnel, the portrayal of the tailor and the justification for the following farcical action of the thrown chair leg or stool. While in the version of Wünschelruthe God goes on a procession-like ‘march’, in the KHM version he enjoys himself in the garden. The extent to which Wilhelm Grimm relied on the Schwank version in Jakob Frey’s Gartengesellschaft as the ‘leading version’ in editing his fairy tale collection Kinder- und Hausmärchen becomes visible when comparing the two texts side by side. Here is the opening of Frey’s Von einem hinckenden schneider, wie der in den himmel kam: Ein hinckender schneider starbe und kam für den himmel, wer gern hinin gewesen. Petrus aber wolt ihn nit heinein lassen darumb, das er so unbillich in seinem leben den leuten das

3.4  Complex Text Stories

153

thůch gestolen het. Der schneider gestunds, aber er bath umb verzeihung, er wollte es nicht mehr thůn, und sagt, er wer müd, er möchte nit wol fürbas kommen, begert, yngelassen, und hinder den ofen gesetzt werden; und alle unflätige arbeit, die niemands thůn wolt, als kinder schaissen tragen, wüschen, wäschen, und wann die kinder die bänck vol hofierten, das wolt er auch alles austragen, fegen, bauchen und dergleichen bossel arbeit als thůn, nůr das er nit fürt müsse gehen: er hab platern an den füssen gangen. Hindernach hat sich doch meister Peter über ihn erbarmt unnd yngelassen. Das was ongeforlich um den mitten tage. Eben dazůmal da wolt der groß herr mit allem himlischen heer für den himmel heraus in einen garten spacieren gehen und sich erlustigen, befilcht dem hinckenden schneider den himmel, und gůte sorg zů haben, das niemands nichts außhien trüge. (Frey 1896, pp. 124–125)

Grimm’s recourse to Frey is palpable in the opening of the story in the partly literal adoptions. The similarities are particularly clear in the fluctuating promise of the tailor: Thus, the tailor offers Frey that “all obscene work that no one wanted to do, as children shit carry, wash, wash, and when the children the bench full of hoarfrost, that he wanted to carry out all, sweep, belly,” and comparable, but the linguistic vulgarities mildernd then at Grimm 1819, he wanted “the bad work to do, I will hold the small children and clean, wash the diapers, the banks, on which they have played, wipe and clean”. Similarly, textually in the second paragraph, when Frey would like to “go around the middle of the day […] the great lord with all the heavenly army for heaven out into a garden and enjoy themselves”, where it then says at Grimm 1819, “at noon” wanted “the lord” with “the heavenly army in the garden and enjoy themselves “. What Wilhelm Grimm noticeably changes compared to his template in the editing is the indirect speech at Frey, which is then transferred to the direct speech in the fairy tale. In doing so, the editor obviously adds parömiological turns that are not yet to be found in the literary jest versions of the 16th century, such as the proverbial phrase of Peter ‘honest, like the thief at the gallows’ or the proverbial turns ‘you have made long fingers’ and ‘abgezwickt’. Frey’s version is so close to Bebel’s Fazetie Fabula cuiusdam sarcinatoris, in many parts of the text, that the translation can almost be called a translation.205 Frey only slightly embellishes the Latin original with entertainment literature by explicitly naming the ‘obscene work’ that the tailor promises to take over, namely ‘carrying, wiping, washing children’s shit’ and the other activities mentioned, while Bebel only says: “pollicitus est se tantum post fornacem velle delitescere sordidissimaque quaeque officia obiturum” (Bebel 2005, p. 24).206 In the course of the translation, the speech parts of the tailor were extended as a whole, the motivations were more explicitly explained and the actions were told in detail. The characterisation of the characters is also harsher—where Bebel only speaks of a ‘vetula’, an ‘old woman’,207 Frey describes her as “old, wild, slutty” (Frey 1896,

205 In Grimm’s comments on the fairy tale Der Schneider im Himmel Bebel’s collection is not mentioned; However, in the Grimm’s library catalogue there is evidence of a later edition of 1555 (Denecke/Teitge 1989, p. 114; No. 957). 206 Fuhrmann translates as follows: “he only wanted to crawl behind the oven and was ready to take on the most humble duties” (Bebel 2005, p. 25). 207 Cf.

Bebel 2005, p. 24.

154

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

p. 125), obviously orienting himself on the wording of the original. If one fixes Frey’s farce as the ‘leading version’ for the text editing of KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel in the second edition of the collection 1819, one can thus regard Bebel’s ‘Fabula’ as the actual—unnamed—source. However, the concise narrative conclusion of the original is extended independently and supplemented with a narrative sequence from another farce. If one extends the text comparison of the opening of the story to the other versions of the fairy tale mentioned by the Grimms, it becomes apparent that in 1819 not only Frey and additional paroemiological language material, but also passages from other fairy tale versions of the early modern period found their way into the Grimm story and shaped the text—albeit to a small extent. For example, Wilhelm Grimm interpolated the request of Peter “Go to hell, where you have thrown the stolen things anyway” into the “leading version”, which is not to be found in Frey. Possibly motivated by the Möser report, Wilhelm Grimm probably took the passage from the Hans Sachs-Schwank Der Schneider mit dem Panier from 1563, which he had probably already used for the journal version of 1818. The influence of Kirchhof’s variation Von einem hinckenden Schneider can be described as small. There are some obvious accent changes that do not occur in Grimm: For example, it is not said that the tailor dies, but rather that he is on his way “in search of work in heaven” and is not explicitly received by Peter, but rather by a “porter” (Kirchhof 1563, p. 252) in general. Even if the Grimms mention the variant in their commentary and research occasionally speaks of contamination from Frey and Kirchhof, interpolations from the story of Wendunmuth by Grimm cannot actually be verified. Kirchhof definitely knew Frey’s version, as some textual similarities show, but offers his own retelling of the Bebel Fazetie.208 There are only similarities between Grimm’s Der Schneider im Himmel from 1819 and Kirchhof’s Von einem hinckenden Schneider where they both go back to Frey. The palimpsestuous structure of the Grimm version of 1819 includes that its central source, Frey’s novella Von einem hinckenden schneider, wie der in den himmel kam, kept relatively close to the Latin original, but supplemented it in the final part with an intertextual narrative element, which is therefore also to be found in Grimm. Johannes Bolte and Georg Polívka showed this in their Anmerkungen zu den Kinderund Hausmärchen already: “With his final sentence, that the tailor who was expelled from heaven went to Warteinweil to the Landsknechte, Frey refers to Bebel’s Fabula de lanceariis (Facetiae 1, no. 84), which he himself had clarified in Cap. 44.” (Bolte and Polívka 1913, p. 343) The final sentence in Grimm’s fairy tale version of 1819— the tailor took “a stick in his hand and went to Warteinweil, where the pious soldiers sit and make themselves merry” (KHM 1819 I, p. 179) -, which was to be retained with only minor modifications up to the “last hand edition” of the Kinder- und

208 The title page of Kirchhof’s Wendunmuth already points to the importance of Bebel’s Fazetien for his own collection of jests. With regard to the “learned men” from whom he “drew” his narrative texts, it says: “item the Facetiis of the famous and learned Henrice Bebelii, late crowned poet […]. (Kirchhof 1563, title page)

3.4  Complex Text Stories

155

Hausmärchen of 1857, is first of all an adoption from Frey’s Von einem hinckenden schneider, wie der in den himmel kam: The tailor “name ein stecken an die hand und zohe gehn Beit ein weil zů den landsknechten. Da ist er noch, zecht, ist gůter ding.” (Frey 1896, p. 126) Frey’s interpolation of a narrative sequence, which introduces that intermediate space between heaven and hell “Beit ein weil” or “Warteinweil” in Grimm, is an inter- and intratextual allusion to another novella from the Latin Facetiae collection, which was also printed as a novella in Gartengesellschaft . The Grimms knew this Landsknechtserzählung well. They were familiar with it not least from Clemens Brentano’s 1808 novella published in Zeitschrift für Einsiedler, which goes back to Grimmelshausen. The history and origin of the first bear-skin is familiar, where it is used as an introduction. It is told of the Landsknechte who fell in the battle of Nikopolis 1396 against the Ottomans,209 who are sent to hell, but are rejected because of their Crusader flag and sent to the gates of heaven, where they are finally allowed in despite the doubts of the Lord of the merciful Peter. But after behaving completely inappropriately there according to their way of life, they are lured out of heaven by means of a trick and not let back in. The captain of the Landsknechte is insulted and shamed, but Peter promises them their own place in the afterlife: Liebe Freunde! Seyd still und schweigt, ich will euch ein eigen Dorf eingeben, das liegt zwischen Höll und Himmel und ist ganz neutral, es heißt Warteinweil, da werden mit der Zeit noch mehr Landsknecht hinkommen, da habt ihr euer Wesen allein, könnt spielen, saufen, würfeln und singen […]. Da nahm Petrus seinen Stecken und Hut, und führte sie gen Warteinweil […]. (Brentano 1808, H. 23, Sp. 173)

The background for this “neutral place between heaven and hell” “Warteinweil” is the theological concept of Limbo or, in common parlance, “Purgatory”. The intertextual play with the afterlife of the Landsknecht farce is an additional entertainment literary moment in Frey’s interpolation and, within his collection, a playful networking with his source from the literary tradition. In Grimm’s fairy tale, the final narrative part is initially simply a transfer from Frey, but also conceals a literary play with Brentano. The latter had published his story Geschichte und Ursprung des ersten Bärnhäuters in 1808 with a long critical note on Jacob Grimm’s understanding of sagas or fairy tales.210 Wilhelm Grimm’s fairy tale

209 The crushing defeat of the Crusader army had a great impact in Europe. The report of the Landsknecht Johannes Schiltberger, published in a number of manuscripts and later prints, found wide dissemination. The first printed edition appeared in 1460; in the early 19th century, editions were published in Munich: Schiltberger’s Reise in den Orient und wunderbare Begebenheiten. Hrsg. von Abraham Jacob Penzel. München: Verlag M. J. Stöger, 1813 and München: Verlag E. A. Fleischmann, 1814.—The Landsknechteschwank is adapted in various ways in literature, with the location of the battle varying. In Bernhart Hertzog’s collection of Schwanksammlung Schiltwacht, which the author—father-in-law of the much better known Johann Fischart—had put together around 1580, the battle of Pavia is mentioned in the story Wo der Landsknechte Wohnung sein werde / wenn sie sterben (Hertzog 1580, folio 5 b –7 a, here 5 b ). 210 Zeitung

für Einsiedler 1808, H. 22, Sp. 169–170, Fn.

156

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

revision of 1819 picks up the dispute, which, though friendly, remained unresolved in substance, by now offering the—in Grimm’s view—“artistic poetical” adaptation of the friend in the outcome of the fairy tale of the tailor in heaven a “conceptionally popular poetical” one. With this subtle allusion, he positioning himself in the programmatic dispute between the friend and the older brother, taking on a middle and mediating position with his hidden narrative comment. The text version of the fairy tale in the third edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen of 1837 largely follows the version of 1819. In the increased and improved edition, only some stylistic smoothing and minor additions have been made, such as that the Peter standing on “watch” no longer asks “who knocks?” (KHM 1819 I, S. 177), but, in accordance with the duty speech, “who is there?” (KHM 1837 I, S. 211), or that the tailor’s promises to do the “bad work” in heaven are supplemented by the promise to “mend the children’s torn clothes” (KHM 1837 I, S. 211)—an addition that highlights the tailor’s activity in the story. While the text changes in the third edition only represent minor editorial interventions, the fairy tale in the fourth edition is deeply revised and adapted to a new “leading version”. For the text version of 1840, the novella Wie ein schneyder in himmel kumpt und unsers herrgotts fůßschämel nach einer alten frauwen härabwirfft by Georg Wickram Rollwagenbüchlin is the basic one. No justification is given by the editors and, in a narrower sense, by Wilhelm Grimm, but one can assume the practice of using the oldest text witness for an adaptation as the reason, as the oldest text witness for an adaptation. Wickram’s Rollwagenbüchlein had already been published in the Editio princeps in 1555,211 while Jakob Frey’s Gartengesellschaft is dated 1556 and Hans Wilhelm Kirchhof’s Wendunmuth is dated 1563. Bebel’s earlier Fazetie was not present as a source. Wickram’s collection of stories certainly had a model function for the following German-speaking collections and certainly appeared to the Grimms as “real”, at least as original. Especially Frey, whose novella was the basis for “Kinder- und Hausmärchen” 35 so far, explicitly pointed out that and how much his compilation was indebted to his friend Wickram’s collection. The quality of the revisions and the closeness of the text version of 1840 to Wickram’s Schwank becomes apparent when the narrative opening is also compared synoptically:

211 In fact, the Schneider-Schwank is not even in the first edition of 1555, but only in a later printing of 1557/1559. Wickram is very likely the author, but the question of authorship is still unresolved; see the afterword by editor Hans-Gert Roloff in the volume of the Sämtliche WerkeAusgabe: Wickram 1973, S. 315–316.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

157

KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel 31837, Bd. 1, S. 211–212

KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel 41840, Bd. 1, S. 211–212

Georg Wickram: Wie ein schneyder in himmel kumpt und unsers herrgotts fůßschämel nach einer alten frauwen härabwirfft (Wickram 1984, S. 180–181; s.a. 1973, S. 203)

Es trug sich zu, daß ein Schneider starb, der lahm war, und deshalb in den Himmel nicht gegangen sondern gehinkt kam. Er klopfte an die Pforte, der heilige Petrus aber, der dabei die Wache hat, wollte nicht gleich aufthun, sondern fragte „wer ist da?“ „Ein armer ehrlicher Schneider, der um Einlaß bittet.“ „Ja, ehrlich wie der Dieb am Galgen,“ sagte der heilige Petrus „du hast lange Finger gemacht, und den Leuten das Tuch abgezwickt. Geh in die Hölle, wohin du das Gestohlne doch schon geworfen hast, in den Himmel kommst du nicht.“ „Ach, barmherziger Gott!“ rief der Schneider, „ich hinke, und habe von dem Weg daher Blasen an den Füßen, ich kann unmöglich wieder umkehren. Laßt mich doch hineinschlüpfen, ich will gerne hinter dem Ofen sitzen, und die schlechte Arbeit thun. Ich will die kleinen Kinder halten und reinigen, die Windeln waschen, die Bänke, darauf sie gespielt haben abwischen und säubern, ihre zerrissenen Kleider flicken, laßt mich nur ein.“ Der heilige Petrus war mitleidig, ließ sich erweichen, und machte dem lahmen Schneiderlein die Himmelspforte so weit auf daß es hinein schlüpfen konnte. Das geschah etwa um Mit-

Es trug sich zu, daß der liebe Gott an einem schönen Tag in dem himmlischen Garten sich ergehen wollte, und alle Apostel und Heiligen mit nahm, also daß niemand mehr im Himmel blieb, als der heilige Petrus. Der Herr hatte ihm befohlen während seiner Abwesenheit niemand einzulassen, Petrus stand also an der Pforte und hielt Wache. Nicht lange so klopfte jemand an. Petrus fragte wer da wäre und was er wollte. „Ich bin ein armer ehrlicher Schneider,“ antwortete eine feine Stimme, „der um Einlaß bittet.“ „Ja, ehrlich,“ sagte Petrus, „wie der Dieb am Galgen, du hast lange Finger gemacht, und den Leuten das Tuch abgezwickt. Du kommst nicht in den Himmel, der Herr hat mir verboten, so lange er draußen wäre, irgend jemand einzulassen.“ „Seid doch barmherzig,“ rief der Schneider, „ich hinke und habe von dem Weg daher Blasen an den Füßen, ich kann unmöglich wieder umkehren. Laßt mich nur hinein, ich will alle schlechte Arbeit thun. Ich will die Kinder tragen, die Windeln waschen, die Bänke, darauf sie gespielt haben, säubern und abwischen, und ihre zerrissenen Kleider flicken.“ Der heilige Petrus ließ sich aus Mitleiden bewegen, und öffnete dem lahmen Schneider die Himmelspforte so

Es hat sich begeben an einem schönen tag, das unser herrgott spatzieren wolt gehen, unnd nam all seine apostel und heyligen mit ihm, also daß niemands daheim im himmel blieb dann allein sanct Peter; dem befalch er, daß er gedächte und niemands eynliesse, dieweyl er auß wer, unnd zoch also darvon. Nun kam ein schneyder für den himmel; der klopffet an. Sanct Peter sprach: „Ich darff niemands eynlassen. Dann unser herrgott ist nit daheimen, und wie er hinweggieng, verbot er mir, ich solt gedencken unnd niemands eynlassen, dieweyl er auß wer.“ Aber der schneider ließ nit nach sanct Petern zu bitten und

bewegt in mit seinem langen bitten dahin, daß er ihn verwilliget hineynzelassen, doch mit dem geding, er solte in

158 tag als der Herr gerade mit den Erzengeln und dem himmlischen Heer in dem Garten sich ergehen und erlustigen wollte. Er befahl dem Schneider, dieweil niemand zugegen wäre, den Himmel in Ordnung zu halten, und darauf zu achten, daß nicht jemand käme und etwas hinaus trüge. […]

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ … weit, daß er mit seinem dürren Leib hineinschlüpfen konnte. Er mußte sich in einen Winkel hinter die Thüre setzen, und sollte sich da still und ruhig verhalten, damit ihn der Herr, wenn er zurückkäme, nicht bemerkte und zornig würde. […]

einem winckel hinder der thürenn fein züchtig unnd still sitzenn, damit, wenn unser herrgott keme, daß er seinen nit warneme unnd zornig wurde. […]

The first sentence makes it clear that the narrative version of 1840 has significant shifts compared to the earlier version in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen . So, despite the same opening formula “It happened that […]”, the course of events is different. While the story in 1837 starts directly with the appearance of the lame tailor at the gates of heaven, the representation in the version of 1840 is shifted to the circumstances in heaven, that is, the absence of the Lord and its reasons. At the same time, the narrative figures receive certain accentuations. This applies first of all to the figure of Peter. In the version of 1837, his role is much more active and his decision-making ability is much greater, since he and not the Lord is in charge of admission to heaven. In the version of 1840, however, Peter acts with limited authority solely on behalf of the Lord and in fear of his wrath if the narrowly set powers of action are violated. So the tailor has to hide behind the door so as not to be discovered later by the returning Lord. Although entitled “the dear God” in 1840, the figure of the Lord no longer appears only as an orderly housefather who is concerned that his household might be stolen during his absence, but noticeably stricter as the sole decision-making authority, the rigidity of which is already tangible in the motif that his house should remain completely locked during his absence. Overall, the figure of the Lord moves into the foreground to the detriment of Peter’s. The contouring of the tailor also receives additional facets, for example in the reference to his “gaunt body”. The connection of the narrative version of 1840 to Wickram’s Schwank is obvious and extends in places to literal adoption. The archangels and the heavenly host from the 1837 version are now the apostles and saints. However, a comparison of the text also makes it clear that Wilhelm Grimm, in composing his new text version, retains relevant parts of the older fairy tale publication. In particular, the 1840 version retains the erratic dialogue between Peter and the tailor, which does not exist in this form in Wickram, from the 1837 version. Also retained are the proverbial insertions, which already characterized the 1819 version. Only the Wickram-obligated justification of Peter’s behavior was inserted into these retained narrative parts: “der Herr hat mir verboten, so lange er draußen wäre, irgend jemand einzulassen.” The tendency to make the text paroemiologically is continued in 1840 and even implemented against the new Wickram-Schwank model. Whereas in Wickram, after the tailor had thrown the stool from heaven, it reads:

3.4  Complex Text Stories

159

[…] schlich er hüpschlich auß dem sessel unnd satzt sich wider hinder die thür an sein altes örtlin und thet dergleychen, als wenn er nirgends da gewesen wer.(Wickram 1984, p. 182)212

so after Wilhelm Grimm’s 1840 revision it reads: […] so schlich er sich sachte aus dem Sessel weg, setzte sich wieder an seinen Platz hinter die Thüre, und that als ob er kein Wasser getrübt hätte. (KHM 1840 I, p. 212)

The pale formulation “„thet […], als wenn er nirgends da gewesen wer“ Grimm revised to “that als ob er kein Wasser getrübt hätte”, introducing a common saying and thus already implementing a practice that was to be significantly intensified in the sixth edition of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen . The adaptation of the fairy tale Der Schneider im Himmel to the WickramSchwank within the framework of the redesign of the text version for the fourth edition 1840 is also given in the middle part and often goes down to the linguistic detail, for example in the replacement of the speech from the ‘alten, wüsten Weib‘‘ (KHM 1837 I, p. 212) by the formulation ‘alte häßliche Frau’ (KHM 1840 I, p. 212), which in turn Wickram’s ‘ein alte frauwen’ (Wickram 1973, p. 204; 1984, p. 181) typically sharpens. Extrapolated, however, is the somewhat crude sequence of events, which was taken from the Frey-Schwank, that the angry tailor threw the heavenly stool “into the ribs” (KHM 1837 I, p. 212) and that the stolen goods ultimately fell back into the hands of the owner. The entire final part of the fairy tale Der Schneider im Himmel from 1840 is different from the conclusion of the dialog between God and the tailor onwards, unlike larger parts of the opening and the middle part, no longer modeled on the new ‘leading version’ of the Wickram-Schwank. Only the address of the Lord to the tailor remains recognizable to Wickram: “O du Schalk” (KHM 1840 I, p. 213) shows the same language form as the early modern Schwank: “Hey, du schalck” (Wickram 1984, p. 182; see also 1973, p. 204). Also in the version of 1840 Wilhelm Grimm remains true to the final part of the previous text version and thus to the template of the Frey-Schwank. Likewise, the ‘Warteinweil’ sequence remains unchanged, with the exception of the smaller replacement of “Stecken” (KHM 1837 I, p. 213) by “Stock” (KHM 1840 I, p. 213). In sum, the narrative version of 1840 turns out to be even more clearly a contamination of different narrative versions from the tradition of early modern Schwank literature. The following editions of Kinder- und Hausmärchen show only minor changes to the story Der Schneider im Himmel that do not change the course of the story. The text of the fifth edition from 1843 remained completely unchanged, and in the sixth edition from 1850, Grimm interpolated a small new part of dialogue between the tailor and Peter: “small patches that fall off the table by themselves are not stolen and not worth mentioning” (KHM 1850 I, p. 208), the tailor tries

212 Cf.

Wickram 1973, p. 204.

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

160

to relativize his small thefts. The interpolation is not taken from any of the other literary sources used, but is probably Wilhelm Grimm’s own addition. However, it shows narrative similarities to the tailor stories of Hans Sachs, in particular to the Schwank: Der Schneider mit dem Panier from 1563. In the text version in the “last hand” edition from 1857, there are no more changes to the text. The genesis of the text history of KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel makes the fairy tale in its final form the result of a gradual amalgamation of different versions of the story type from the literary tradition transparent and allows a look into the composition process, which is fundamental for a whole number of texts from the Grimm collection. That the development of the fairy tale as literature from literature from literature was associated with a change in genre and function was only mentioned in passing in these necessarily small-scale text comparisons, but at least should be briefly outlined. In addition to the decisive motivation of reconnecting with a folk culture that was experienced as lost or at least existentially threatened through the adaptation of older narratives, the work of the Grimms with fairy tales was always also connected with the programmatic intention of fixing the assumed ‘remnants of a Germanic myth’. This level of function can be traced back into the motivic attention of the editors. For KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel the Grimms explicitly pointed out the motif of the heavenly throne in their comments from 1822 and 1856: Der Stuhl des Herrn, von dem man die ganze Welt überschaut, erinnert merkwürdig an Odins Sitz, Namens Hlidsciálf, von dem er alles sah, was auf Erden vorgieng und auf den sich zuweilen andere setzten, wie namentlich die Edda von Freyr erzählt. (KHM 1822, p. 67)213

The motif of the heavenly throne is not found in Grimm’s ‘Sagenkonkordanz’ [saga concordance], but at least the distant variant of the “Stuhl auf dem nur ein Untadeliger sitzen kann” (Sagenkonkordanz 2006, p. 387; no. 733). However, the mythological background of the motif of the heavenly throne relevant to the Grimms becomes tangible in Jacob Grimm’s German Mythology: Odhinn hat einen thron, Hlidhskialf genannt, auf dem er sitzend die gesammte welt überschauen und alles, was unter den menschen vorgeht, hören kann […]. das sinnliche heidenthum macht aber die göttliche eigenschaft alles zu durchschauen abhängig von der Stelle oder einrichtung des stuls, und wie sie dem gott, wenn er nicht darauf niedergelassen ist, abgeht, können andere, sobald sie ihn einnehmen, ihrer theilhaftig werden (J. Grimm 1835, p. 97).

Ultimately, Jacob Grimm refers to a motif from the Icelandic Snorra-Edda, in the narrower sense one of its main parts, the Gylfaginnîng. The “remains” of a “primordial Germanic myth” sought by the Grimms in the younger literary

213 See

also KHM 1856, p. 65.

3.4  Complex Text Stories

161

and narrative tradition, they understood and in particular Jacob Grimm as resilience phenomena of a previous paganism after Christianization: “The converted Christian rejected and abhorred the gods of the pagans, but in his heart there were still ideas and habits left behind” (J. Grimm 1835, p. 639). These “ideas” and “habits” were then sought to be fixed by literary archaeologists. The decision of the Grimms to include the story of the tailor in heaven, the at least Germanspeaking literary tradition of which was known to them, in the collection of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen was not determined by the noted motif correspondence with Odin’s seat to a large extent—in their eyes the “remains” of a “primordial Germanic myth” and ultimately the result of an oral tradition. The literary tradition that the Grimms used for this purpose in KHM 35 and adapted as a fairy tale narrative is that of the facetious and farcical literature of the early 16th century. This itself was in the horizon of the early modern break with tradition, which resulted from the opposition of the Italian humanism flowing into the (late-)scholastically shaped cultural world in Germany. In order to at least roughly mark the change in genre and function that resulted from the reception and processing of the farces, at least some of these moments that determined the break with tradition should be sketched. In general, the keyword of the efforts for a humanistic educational reform belongs here, which aimed at the reform of the institutions and the teaching, but also had a strong dimension of language criticism—Heinrich Bebel would be mentioned here. First of all, it meant the effort to renew Latin as the language of scholars and scientists by looking back to classical Latin. The facetious and farcical literature was particularly determined by the moment of satire and, in a narrower sense, by time criticism. Here, concerns of a Christian didactic were combined with social criticism. In any case, the moral claim lies at the bottom, by satirically pointing out human errors and weaknesses—in the narrative versions of the tailor in heaven, for example, self-righteousness—to contribute to their correction. So the early modern farces of the tailor in heaven certainly do not remind us by chance of the biblical warning from the Sermon on the Mount against judging and against desecrating the holy. 1 Richtet nicht, auf daß ihr nicht gerichtet werdet; 2 denn mit welchem Gericht ihr richtet, werdet ihr gerichtet werden, und mit welchem Maße ihr messet, wird euch gemessen werden. 3 Was aber siehst du den Splitter, der in deines Bruders Auge ist, den Balken aber in deinem Auge nimmst du nicht wahr? 4 Oder wie wirst du zu deinem Bruder sagen: Erlaube, ich will den Splitter aus deinem Auge ziehen; und siehe, der Balken ist in deinem Auge? 5 Heuchler, ziehe zuerst den Balken aus deinem Auge, und dann wirst du klar sehen, um den Splitter aus deines Bruders Auge zu ziehen. 6 Gebet nicht das Heilige den Hunden; werfet auch nicht eure Perlen vor die Schweine, damit sie dieselben nicht etwa mit ihren Füßen zertreten und sich umwenden und euch zerreißen. (Mt. 7,1–5 nach Luther-Bibel 1545)214>

214 Siehe

auch in der Feldrede (Lk 6,37–42).

162

3 The Kinder- und Hausmärchen as a ‘palimpsest’ …

In particular, the speech about the splinter and the beam in the eye has become proverbial in Luther’s time early on and even belongs to the paratextual frame of the farce versions in individual cases. For example, Hans Sachs made this biblical reference explicit in the conclusion of his farce from 1563. The rise of the Reformation led to a new formation of the early modern farce literature, which was reflected in, among other things, the church-critical elements of this literature. In the early 16th century, the high valuation of the popular brought with it an inner point of reference for the later revitalization of early modern farce literature in Romanticism. With the invention of the printing press, a new market had arisen, and with it a new readership with an increasingly bourgeois profile. The entertainment function of the Fazetien- and farce collections gained additional importance, as did the implementation in the vernacular. Thus, Bebel still offers a Latin-language collection, while only a few years later Wickram, Frey, Kirchhof and others use the German language. The new market developed very quickly into a self-expanding and accelerating cultural space, into which the farce collections fitted in just as much as they helped to constitute it. The farce collections were often highly successful book publications with many reprints, but also adaptations, imitations and rewrites, just as they themselves were often adaptations, often translations and transfers. Another inner point of reference of the Romantic revitalization culture to the early modern farce literature, which can only be partially concretely observed in the stories of the tailor in heaven, is a nationally cultural awareness, which was observed in various ways in the southwest German cultural space of the late 15th and early 16th centuries, which was not infrequently chauvinistic. Due to the different time horizons within which the story of the tailor in heaven was taken up in different genres and each with different functional contexts, there are ultimately very different literary witnesses despite all the closeness of the text. Grimm’s fairy tale is the culmination of a literary history with manifest genre and functional changes. The text design of the fairy tale was realized in the last stage of the genre history as a composition of similar text versions of literary provenance, which were successively introduced and amalgamated.

4

Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature

In this study, the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm were consistently taken into account as literature of literature. The focus was on their palimpsest-like structure. The aim of the study was to make this palimpsest-like structure transparent with regard to the history of origin and transformation that has generated this structure. The history of origin and transformation is manifold. The study has tried to differentiate and describe relevant forms in detail on the basis of a series of model studies. Further studies will certainly be able to extend this catalogue. The catalogue of forms is not the result of a deductive systematics, but has arisen from the observation of individual text histories. However, it should make the fundamental structural phenomenon of the Grimm fairy tale collection and the genre of fairy tales visible, ultimately their constitution as literature of literature as well as often enough as literature of literature of literature. The presentation of the various forms of the history of origin and transformation followed the methodological principle of proceeding from the simple to the complex. So the beginning of the overview is the process of direct text transfer. The example of KHM 157 Der Sperling und seine vier Kinder shows the almost verbatim transfer of a text from the literary tradition by the Brothers Grimm, which was mostly done by Wilhelm Grimm. At the core of the story is a fable about animals, which was used as an example in the context of early modern sermon literature and practice. In the contemporary context of this use, the example was first of all used to make a sermon entertaining in order to win and keep an audience. At the same time, the story extracted by Grimm was a model example in the dispute about whether and to what extent entertainment was admissible and perhaps even useful in the context of worship. Not least, the recourse to the medieval fable and its tradition was a quite programmatic, at least conceptual, connection to the previous tradition and part of that ultimately humanist-based effort of an early modern Protestantism for educational reform. In the direct text transfer by Wilhelm Grimm, a decontextualization of the story took place. This resulted solely from

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 L. Bluhm, Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3_4

163

164

4  Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature

the fact that the text context of the source was lost. In the course of extrapolation, the now isolated narrative text wandered into a new text context, the collection of Kinder- und Hausmärchen, and received a completely new function assignment as a “folk tale” in this environment. The transformation meant a genre- and functionspecific reformatting and the concrete creation of a “fairy tale”. The example of KHM 69 Jorinde and Joringel also shows the creation of a ‘fairy tale’ in the process of immediate text adoption. The source and text donor was a testimony of autobiographical confession literature around 1800, which was popular at the time in the horizon of a sensitive edification literature. As edification literature, the narrative work aimed to present a life story to a reading public that was mainly religious, in the narrower sense Protestant, as a happy guidance through divine providence. Within the fictionalized autobiographical life representation, the extrapolated literary piece from the Grimms had the function of an inner story, which had the character of a reference within the work. By extracting the inner story, the same phenomenon of decontextualization resulted as in KHM 157. A fairy tale story was told from a story within a literary work. When transferring, above all the edifying character of the text was lost, but also a good part of the literariness of the source. However, a not inconsiderable part of the narratives in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen does not follow this ultimately simple principle of immediate text adoption. Much more narratives turn out to be the result of text processing. Within the framework of these text processings, a wide range of possibilities can be seen, ranging from simple text editing to very complex amalgamations. The example of KHM 180 Die ungleichen Kinder Evas offers a simple edition. It was created from the reworking of a literary source, whose peculiarities were eliminated and which was adapted to the fairy tale ideas of the Grimms in the process. In the course of this reworking, an early modern rhyme was proselytized and adapted linguistically, with the editor taking care to stay as close as possible to the wording of the source. The special features of the genesis and transformation history of the fairy tale of the unequal children of Eve included an intermediate step. The elder Grimm brother had implemented the early modern rhyme as a content paraphrase within a scientific motif history, which the younger Grimm brother took up as a narrative form and transformed text-near into a fairy tale story. While the creation of the text is a simple way of telling a fairy tale, the history of the genre and function of the material from the unequal children of Eve is significantly more complex. Thus, the fairy tale narration directly accesses the content paraphrase of an early modern rhyme farce for scientific purposes. The rhyme farce itself is to be seen in the context of an developing urban and, in a narrower sense, bourgeois culture in the 16th century and transported a message aimed at stabilizing the existing social order. It took up a literary material that was used catechetically in the time and referred back to a Middle Latin eclogue of the previous century. As a hidden reference point, a Bible passage becomes tangible. The text history is in the processing of the material to the fairy tale narration—as often— still barely recognizable, but is strongly covered by the re-functionalization as a “fairy tale”.

4  Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature

165

The example of KHM 12 Rapunzel also provides the result of a text processing. As a special moment, this text history shows the process of a purifying reworking. This specific form of text processing aims at creating a narrative that meets the contemporary ideal of a child-friendly and purified fairy-tale figure. At the same time, the change of genre and function from the “fairy tale” of the 18th century to the “children’s and household fairy tale” of the 19th century is evident. In essence, Grimm’s fairy tale narration is the processing of an entertaining separate story of the late 18th century, which in turn represents the text-related transfer of a French story from the Contes des fées production of the time around 1700, which in turn was indebted to the vernacular Italian novellas of the 17th century. At any time, the story had a different function specific to the time. In the course of the text processing into their own fairy tale narration, the Grimms gradually erased or softened the text by increasingly desexualizing and enterotizing it. In this way, they increasingly shaped it into a model for their own narrative ideal of a fairy tale. Another form of text editing opens KHM 110 Der Jude im Dorn. This example shows the process of stereotypically reworking a narrative to give it an anti-Jewish tendency. A history of adaptation becomes tangible, in which a story is discredited by the change in the cast of characters to give it an anti-Jewish tendency. The potential for discrediting the story is increased even further in the course of the printing history by introducing additional anti-Jewish topics. It becomes transparent that and how intensively the “fairy tale work” of the Brothers Grimm was linked to the contemporary social and discursive development, specifically in this example with anti-Judaism. A considerable number of the stories in the Kinder- und Hausmärchen have not been constituted by direct text transfers, but rather the text origins are the result of indirect text tradition. The example of KHM 57 The Golden Bird presents one of those stories that does not look back directly on a literary model, but was transmitted by contributors. These stories are commonly regarded by traditional fairy tale research as central evidence for a general oral tradition of fairy tales, insofar as the process of transmission to the Grimms is elevated to a tradition. The example The Golden Bird nevertheless makes it evident that these oral contributions ultimately result in oralizations of literary models, which were only presented to the Brothers Grimm as witnesses of a “folk fairy tale” tradition after or instead of being told. The fairy tale The Golden Bird can be assigned to a literary “children’s fairy tale” in the German-language Contes des fées tradition of the 18th century on the basis of text and style comparisons, the motifs of which go back to Latin exemplary literature. The genesis and transformation history of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen certainly includes some of the most difficult stories to trace, due in part to the fact that the material was subject to numerous changes within the horizon of a dynamic genre and function history, with separate stories and themes coming together. One example of this is The Two Wanderers (Kinder- und Hausmärchen 107). This story, too, is first and foremost a document of an orally transmitted tale. This is evident from the fact that it is modeled after the Kinder- und Hausmärchen that were already available in print form, and that it follows their architextual guidelines

166

4  Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature

in detail. As a result of the intensive text editing carried out by Wilhelm Grimm, which included the transfer of the transmitted Low German text into the High German language, a sort of model example of a Grimm fairy tale came into being. The fact that the orally transmitted tale was obviously the retelling or reworking of a literary fairy tale, the material of which can be traced back to the early modern Schwankerzählung (a type of comic story) and Exempel- and Predigtliteratur (a type of didactic literature) of around 1500, is just one aspect of the complexity of the story’s genesis and transformation history. The many ways in which this development was indebted to medieval world literature are readily apparent. The Schwankliteratur (a type of comic story) of the 16th century can be identified as a pivotal point in the story’s genesis, within which a material tradition was combined with a theme-based tradition that had its roots in the biblical wisdom literature. While the focus on KHM 107 in the core focuses on the history of the material, in KHM 35 Der Schneider im Himmel the history of the printing of the fairy tale comes to the fore. A separate complexity arises from the fact that the immediate text takeover, which characterizes the adaptation history of this story, changes over the course of the printing history. So the Grimm fairy tale Der Schneider im Himmel is based on a different 16th century jest in each edition, each corresponded to the same narrative type, with all variants having the same source of a Latin facetiae as a source of material. A compositional procedure of the Grimm text production, which follows a common editorial practice of the early 19th century, is striking, in which parts of a story from neighboring variants are inserted into a “leading version”. The “fairy tale” turns out to be the result of a specific construction philology. As different as the individual forms of the history of origin and transformation of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen may be, they nevertheless consistently reflect that in the course of a text production from previous literary texts a new genre is constituted. What is formed or has been formed in the course of a often complex genre and function change as a fairy tale is in the core the result of a new framework. The process of text production itself produces, contrary to the intention of the editors, a new literary form. Contrary to the intention of the fairy tale editors to present a simple narrative text as a reconstruction of a “folkloric” archetype, they—above all the main editor Wilhelm Grimm—created a palimpsestuous text form that—on closer inspection—shows its literary history in many ways. Especially in the subsequent reception history as children’s literature, this text form and the Kinder- und Hausmärchen became and become a national and international benchmark for numerous other children’s literature and as a source of material and motifs became a reference point for now unenumerable references. In the current literary-poetological discussion, the model of the “continuation of writing” is occasionally highly valued as a form of literary production. “Some are intelligent and talk about a world that can be talked about. Others are artists, power-hungry, potent, blindly creating, radical, as if there were no nothingness,” for example, an author continues:

4  Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature

167

In addition, a few will count themselves among the continuation of writing, the busy monks who copy what is written with intelligent mistakes, from which, at some point, as with copying errors in evolution, a new genre of noticing may develop. (Strauss 1997, p. 135)

The author probably did not have the Brothers Grimm in mind, who created the Kinder- und Hausmärchen and their editing. Nevertheless, the description fits their work quite well. The stories of the Kinder- und Hausmärchen are such “continuations of writing”, not really copies in the sense of transcribing, but copies in the sense of recording literary tradition, which in the course of recording gave rise to a new genre—precisely the fairy tale.

5

Postscript

The study looks back on a planned publication that actually intended a compilation of own articles on the Kinder- und Hausmärchen that had arisen over the years and decades and had been published in various places. Above all, such articles were to be brought together, which, based on the concrete example of individual fairy tales, revealed how and to what extent these were committed to a literary tradition. However, it quickly became apparent that the often different thematic focus of the individual contributions would rather obscure than reveal the main concern of a small literary history of the Grimm fairy tales. As a result, these non-independent specialist articles have been transferred to the present study. The individual chapters and subchapters repeatedly refer—more or less intensively—to these contributions. The bibliography provides an overview of the previous studies. The fact that the study has been completed with some delay is due to the further development of own views and insights. The study has been completed with some delay. The impairments and burdens of recent pandemic history have contributed to this. Postscripts are always a good place to say thank you. Since this is a study on the Kinder- und Hausmärchen, I would like to express my special thanks to my fellow campaigners in this field. Over the years and decades, the personality and fairy tales of Heinz Rölleke have always been important points of orientation for my own fairy tales. In recent years, Stefan Neuhaus, Alfred Messerli and Holger Ehrhardt have been added, whose impulses I would like to gratefully record and with whom I feel friendly connected. A final thank you goes to Janin Aadam and Walter Kühn, who have taken the trouble to read and comment on the manuscript of the study in a competent manner.—“Mountain and valley do not meet,” it says in a fairy tale of the Grimms, “but the children of men.” And with that the fairy tale is certainly right.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 L. Bluhm, Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3_5

169

References

The index usually omits pure literature references as well as reviews, which are bibliographed in the footnotes.

Primary Literature Works by the Brothers Grimm [KHM. 1812; KHM. 1815] – Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Vergrößerter Nachdruck der zweibändigen Erstausgabe von 1812 und 1815 nach dem Handexemplar des Brüder Grimm-Museums Kassel mit sämtlichen handschriftlichen Korrekturen und Nachträgen der Brüder Grimm sowie einem Ergänzungsheft: Transkriptionen und Kommentare in Verbindung mit Ulrike Marquardt von Heinz Rölleke. 2 Bände. Göttingen 1986. [KHM. 1819] – Kinder- und Haus-Märchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Mit zwei Kupfern. Zweite vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. 2 Bände. Berlin. [KHM. 1822] – Kinder- und Haus-Märchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Dritter Band. Zweite vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. Berlin. [KHM. 1822/Rölleke. 1999] – Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Vollständige Ausgabe auf der Grundlage der dritten Auflage (1837). Hrsg. von Heinz Rölleke. Frankfurt/M., S. 863–1108 [= Anmerkungen von 1822]. [KHM. 1837] – Kinder[-] und Hausmärchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Grosse Ausgabe. Mit zwei Kupfern. Dritte vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. 2 Bände. Göttingen. [KHM. 1840] – Kinder[-] und Hausmärchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Grosse Ausgabe. Mit zwei Kupfern. Vierte vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. 2 Bände. Göttingen. [KHM. 1843] – Kinder[-] und Hausmärchen. Gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Grosse Ausgabe. Fünfte, stark vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. 2 Bände. Göttingen. [KHM. 1850] – Kinder[-] und Hausmärchen, gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Grosse Ausgabe. Sechste vermehrte und verbesserte Auflage. 2 Bände. Göttingen. [KHM. 1856] – Kinder[-] und Hausmärchen, gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Dritter Band. Dritte Auflage. Berlin. [KHM. 1857] – Kinder[-] und Hausmärchen, gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm. Große Ausgabe. Siebente Auflage. 2 Bände. Göttingen.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2022 L. Bluhm, Fairy Tales as Literature of Literature, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66000-3

171

172

References

[KHM. 1857/Rölleke. 1980] – Brüder Grimm: Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Ausgabe letzter Hand. Mit den Originalanmerkungen der Brüder Grimm. Mit einem Anhang sämtlicher, nicht in allen Auflagen veröffentlichter Märchen und Herkunftsnachweisen herausgegeben von Heinz Rölleke. 3 Bände. Stuttgart. [KHM. 1857/Uther. 1996] – Brüder Grimm. Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Nach der Großen Ausgabe von 1857, textkritisch revidiert, kommentiert und durch Register erschlossen. Hrsg. von Hans-Jörg Uther. 4 Bände. München. [Grimms Märchen/Rölleke. 1998] – Grimms Märchen. Ausgewählt und mit einem Kommentar versehen von Heinz Rölleke. Frankfurt/M. [Älteste Märchensammlung/Rölleke. 1975] – Die älteste Märchensammlung der Brüder Grimm. Synopse der handschriftlichen Urfassung von 1810 und der Erstdrucke von 1812. Hrsg. von Heinz Rölleke. Cologny-Genève. [Unbekannte Märchen/Rölleke. 1987] – Unbekannte Märchen von Wilhelm und Jacob Grimm. Synopse von Einzeldrucken Grimmscher Märchen und deren endgültiger Fassung in den KHM. Hrsg. und erläutert von Heinz Rölleke. Köln. Schulte Kemminghausen, Karl. 1932: Die niederdeutschen Märchen der Brüder Grimm. Münster. Deutsche Sagen. 1816. Herausgegeben von den Brüdern Grimm. Berlin. Deutsche Sagen. 1818. Zweiter Theil. Herausgegeben von den Brüdern Grimm. Berlin. Deutsche Sagen. 1994. Herausgegeben von den Brüdern Grimm. Ausgabe auf der Grundlage der ersten Auflage. Ediert und kommentiert von Heinz Rölleke. Frankfurt/M. Sagenkonkordanz. 2006. Briefwechsel der Brüder Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Kritische Ausgabe. Band 1.2: Briefwechsel zwischen Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Teil 2: Zusätzliche Texte. Hrsg. von Heinz Rölleke. Stuttgart. Grimm, Jacob. 1835: Deutsche Mythologie. [Band I]. Göttingen. Grimm, Jacob. 1842a: Frau Aventiure klopft an Beneckes Thür. Berlin. Grimm, Jacob. 1842b: Die ungleichen Kinder Evas. Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum. Hrsg. von Moriz Haupt. Zweiter Band. Leipzig, S. 257–267. Grimm, Jacob. 1871: Kleinere Schriften. Hrsg. von Karl Müllenhoff und Eduard Ippel. Band 5. Berlin. Grimm, Jacob. 1884: Kleinere Schriften. Hrsg. von Eduard Ippel. Band 7. Berlin. [Grimm, Wilhelm. 1818] – Das Märchen vom Schneider der in den Himmel kam. Wünschelruthe. Ein Zeitblatt. Hrsg. von H[einrich] Straube und Dr. J[ohann] P[eter] Hornthal. Jan. bis Juni 1818 und Zugabe Nr. 1–4. – Nro. 15 vom 19. Februar. Göttingen, S. 50 [recte: 60]. Grimm, Wilhelm. 1855: Thierfabeln bei den Meistersängern. (Aus den Abhandlungen der Königl. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1855). Berlin. Grimm, Wilhelm. 1881–1887: Kleinere Schriften. Hrsg. von Gustav Hinrichs. 4 Bände. Berlin 1881/82/83, Gütersloh 1887. Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm. 1860. Zweiter Band. Biermörder – D. Leipzig.

Other Primary Literature [ALZ. 1788] – Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung, 5. May 1788, Band 2, Numero 108. [Apuleius. 1628] – Apuleius Madaurensis Platonicus, serio castigatus. Amsterdam. [Arnim. 1817] – Predigten des alten Herrn Magister Mathesius über die Historien von des ehrwürdigen, in Gott seligen, theuren Manns Gottes, Doktor Martin Luthers Anfang, Lehre, Leben und Sterben. Mit einer Vorrede herausgegeben von Ludwig Achim von Arnim. Mit den Bildnissen Luthers und Melanchthons. Berlin. Arnim, Achim von. 1989: Werke in sechs Bänden. Bd. 1: Hollin’s Liebeleben; Gräfin Dolores. Hrsg. von Paul Michael Lützeler. Frankfurt/M.

References

173

Arnim, Achim von. 1990: Werke in sechs Bänden. Bd. 3: Sämtliche Erzählungen 1802–1817. Hrsg. von Renate Moering. Frankfurt/M. Arnim, Achim von. 1992: Werke in sechs Bänden. Bd. 6: Schriften. Hrsg. von Roswitha Burwick u. a. Frankfurt/M. [Baptista Mantuanus. 1911] – The Eclogues of Baptista Mantuanus. Edited, with introduction and notes, by Wilfred P. Mustard. Baltimore. Basile, Giambattista. 2000: Das Märchen der Märchen. Das Pentamerone. Nach dem neapolitanischen Text von 1634/36 vollständig und neu übersetzt und erläutert von Hanno Helbling u. a. Hrsg. von Rudolf Schenda. München. Bebel, Heinrich. 2005: Fazetien. Drei Bücher. Übersetzt und eingeleitet von Manfred Fuhrmann. Konstanz. Becker, Rudolph Zacharias. 1980: Noth- und Hülfsbüchlein für Bauersleute. Nachdruck der Erstausgabe von 1788. Hrsg. u. mit einem Nachwort von Reinhart Siegert. Dortmund. Bertuch, Friedrich Justin. 1801: Bilderbuch für Kinder: enthaltend eine angenehme Sammlung von Thieren, Pflanzen, Früchten, Mineralien, Trachten und allerhand andern unterrichtenden Gegenständen aus dem Reiche der Natur, der Künste und Wissenschaften; alle nach den besten Originalen gewählt, gestochen, und mit einer kurzen wissenschaftlichen, und den Verstandes-Kräften eines Kindes angemessenen Erklärung begleitet. Band 1. 2. Aufl. Weimar. Bibel. 1537. Alt vnd new Testamente/nach dem Text in der hailigen Kirchen gebraucht/durch doctor Johan Ecken/mit fleiß/auf hohteusch/verdolmetscht. Ingolstadt. Biblia. 1534. Beider Allt vnnd Newen Testamenten/fleissig/treülich vnd Christlich/nach alter/inn Christlicher kirchen gehabter Translation/mit außlegung etlicher dunckeler ort/vnnd besserung viler verrückter wort vnd sprüch/so daß anhere inn andernn kurz außgangnen theutschen Bibeln gespürt vnd gesehen. Durch D. Johan Dietenberger/new verdeutscht/Gott zur ewiger ehre/vnd wolfarth seiner heiligen Christlichen Kirchen. Mainz. Biblia. 1545: das ist: Die gantze Heilige Schrifft: Deudsch. Auffs new zugericht. Dr. Mart. Luth. Wittenberg. Brentano, Clemens. 1808: Geschichte und Ursprung des ersten Bärnhäuters. Zeitung für Einsiedler. [Hrsg. von Achim von Arnim und Clemens Brentano]. Heft 22 (15. Juni), Sp. 169–176; H. 23 (18. Juni), Sp. 177–182; H. 24 (22. Juni), Sp. 185–190; H. 25 (25. Juni), Sp. 193–198. Heidelberg. Brentano, Clemens. 1980: Werke. Bd. 2. Hrsg. von Wolfgang Frühwald und Friedhelm Kemp. 3. Auflage. München. Brentano, Clemens. 1983: Die Mährchen vom Rhein. Hrsg. von Brigitte Schillbach. Sämtliche Werke. Historisch-kritische Ausgabe, Bd. 17, Prosa II. Stuttgart u. a. Buch der Beispiele der alten Weisen. 1970. Unterschneidheim. [Le Cabinet des fées. 1786] – Le Cabinet des fées, ou collection choisie des contes des fées, et autres contes merveilleux. Bd. 31. Amsterdam. [Das Cabinet der Feen. 1761–1766] – Das Cabinet der Feen. Oder gesammlete Feen-Mährchen in neun Theilen, aus dem Französischen übersetzt. Nürnberg. Campe, Johann Heinrich. 1779: Robinson der Jüngere, zur angenehmen und nützlichen Unterhaltung für Kinder. Erster Theil. Hamburg. [Caumont de La Force, Charlotte-Rose de. 1698] – Contes des Contes. Par Mademoiselle de ***. Tome Premier. Paris. Deutsche Märchen vor Grimm. 1943. Hrsg. von Albert Wesselski. [Neuausgabe] Brünn, München, Wien. Dietrich, Albrecht. 1618: Historia/Von einem Bawrenknecht vnd München/welcher in der Dornhecken hat müssen tantzen: Gantz kurtzweilig zu lesen/vnd in Deutsche Reimen gebracht. (Verlag und Ort nicht ermittelbar.) Eberhard, Johann August. 1783: Ueber den Ursprung der Fabel von der weißen Frau. Berlinische Monatsschrift. Hrsg. von F[riedrich] Gedike und J[ohann] E[rich] Biester. Erster Band. Berlin, S. 3–21. Eckermann, Johann Peter. 1976: Gespräche mit Goethe in den letzten Jahren seines Lebens. Hrsg. von Ernst Beutler. München.

174

References

[Elschenbroich. 1990a] – Die deutsche und lateinische Fabel in der Frühen Neuzeit. Band I: Ausgewählte Texte. Hrsg. von Adalbert Elschenbroich. Tübingen. Elschenbroich, Adalbert. 1990b: Die deutsche und lateinische Fabel in der Frühen Neuzeit. Band II: Grundzüge einer Fabel in der Frühen Neuzeit. Kommentar zu den Autoren und Sammlungen. Tübingen. Eyb, Albrecht von. 1890: Das Ehebüchlein. (Deutsche Schriften des Albrecht von Eyb, Heft 4: Erster Band) Hrsg. von Max Herrmann. Berlin. [Feen-Mährchen. 2000] – Feen-Mährchen. Zur Unterhaltung für Freunde und Freundinnen der Feenwelt. Textkritischer Nachdruck der anonymen Ausgabe Braunschweig 1801. Hrsg. und kommentiert von Ulrich Marzolph, mit einem Vorwort von Jeannine Blackwell. Hildesheim. Fouqué, Friedrich de la Motte. 1977: Romantische Erzählungen. Hrsg. von Gerhard Schulz. München. Frey, Hermann Heinrych. 1595: Ornithobiblia: Biblisch Vogelbuch/Darinne alle zahme/wilde Vögel/auch andere fliegende Thierlein (deren in der Bibel meldung geschiehet) sampt jhren Eigenschafften unnd anhangenden nützlichen Historien beschrieben sind. Leipzig. Frey, Jakob. 1896: Gartengesellschaft (1556). Hrsg. von Johannes Bolte. Tübingen. Gaal, Georg van. 1822: Mährchen der Magyaren. Wien. Gedike, Friedrich. 1783: Nachtrag zu der Legende von der weißen Frau. Berlinische Monatsschrift. Hrsg. von F[riedrich] Gedike und J[ohann] E[rich] Biester. Erster Band. Berlin, S. 23–42. Gehres, Siegmund Friedrich. 1792: Pforzheim’s Kleine Chronik: Ein Beytrag zur Kunde deutscher Städte und Sitten. Memmingen. Gerle, Wolfgang Adolph. 1819: Volksmährchen der Böhmen. Bearbeitet von W.A. Gerle. Erstes Bändchen. Prag (= Fotomechanischer Nachdr. Leipzig 1976). Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. 1981: Dichtung und Wahrheit. Ders., Werke. Hamburger Ausgabe, textkritisch durchgesehen und kommentiert von Erich Trunz. Band 9, 10., neubearb. Aufl. München. Goethe, Johann Wolfgang. 1985: Sämtliche Werke nach Epochen seines Schaffens. Münchner Ausgabe. Hrsg. von Karl Richter u. a., Bd. 16. München. Gräter, Friedrich David. 1794: Ueber die Teutschen Volkslieder und ihre Musik. Erste Hälfte. Bragur. Ein Litterarisches Magazin der Deutschen und Nordischen Vorzeit. Herausgegeben von [Johann Heinrich] Häßlein und [Friedrich David] Gräter. Dritter Band. Leipzig, S. 207–284. Grimm, Albert Ludewig. 1809: Kindermährchen. Mit Kupfern. Heidelberg. [Grünberg. 1917] – Die weisen Sprüche des Achikar nach der syrischen Hs Cod. Sachau Nr. 336 der Kgl. Bibliothek in Berlin, herausgegeben und bearbeitet von Smil Grünberg. Phil. Diss. Grossherzoglich Hessische Ludwigs-Universität zu Giessen. Gießen. Günther, Wilhelm Christoph. 1999: Kindermährchen aus mündlichen Erzählungen gesammelt. Hrsg. von Thomas Eicher, Eva Laubrock und Tobias Moersen. Oberhausen. [Hagen, Der Nibelungen Lied. 1807] – Der Nibelungen Lied. Hrsg. durch Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen. Berlin. Haupt, Moriz. 1841: Vorwort zum ersten Hefte. Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum. Hrsg. von Moriz Haupt. Erster Band. Leipzig, S. III–VIII. Helmer, Eduard [Ps. Ernst Koch]. Helwig, Christoph. 1617: Jüdischer Historien, oder thalmuhdischer, rabbinischer, wunderbarlicher Legenden, so von den Jüden als warhafftige und heylige Geschicht an ihren Sabbathen und Feyertagen gelesen werden: darauss dieses verstockten Volks Aberglauben und Fabelwerck zu ersehen. Gießen. [Herder. 1801] – Adrastea. Hrsg. von Johann Gottfried Herder. Band III. Leipzig. Hertzog, Bernhart. [um] 1580: Schiltwacht/Die Schiltwache bin ich genant. Das ist/Ein kurtzweiliges Büchlein mit vielen Historien vnd Dichtungen/zu nutz und frommen angehenden Wach vnd Rottemeistern/sampt andern deren schlefferige vnd Melancholische Gemüter damit zuermuntern/mit vielen Schwencken augiret vnd gemehret. Magdeburg.

References

175

Hugo von Trimberg. 1970: Der Renner. Hrsg. von Gustav Ehrismann. Mit einem Nachwort und Ergänzungen von Günther Schweikle. 4 Bände. Berlin. [Jung-Stilling. 1777] – Henrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Berlin, Leipzig. [Jung-Stilling. 1779] – Henrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Berlin, Leipzig. [Jung-Stilling. 1780a] – Henrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Frankfurt, Leipzig. [Jung-Stilling. 1780b] – Henrich Stillings Jünglings-Jahre. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Frankfurt, Leipzig. [Jung-Stilling. 1803] – Der Christliche Menschenfreund in Erzählungen für Bürger und Bauern, von Dr. Johann Heinrich Jung […], sonst auch Heinrich Stilling genannt. Erstes Heft. Nürnberg. [Jung-Stilling. 1806] – Heinrich Stillings Leben. Erster Theil: Heinrich Stillings Jugend. Eine wahrhafte Geschichte. Neue Original-Ausgabe. Basel, Leipzig. [Jung-Stilling. 1807] – Der Christliche Menschenfreund in Erzählungen für Bürger und Bauern, von Dr. Johann Heinrich Jung […], genannt Stilling. Viertes Heft. Nürnberg. [Jung-Stilling. 1808] – Johann Heinrich Jung genannt Stilling: Theorie der Geister-Kunde, in einer Natur- Vernunft- und Bibelmäsigen Beantwortung der Frage: Was von Ahnungen, Gesichten und Geistererscheinungen geglaubt und nicht geglaubt werden müße. Nürnberg. Jung-Stilling, Johann Heinrich. 1992: Lebensgeschichte. Vollständige Ausgabe, mit Anmerkungen hrsg. von Gustav Adolf Benrath. 3., durchges. Aufl. Darmstadt. Kinderling, Johann Friedrich August. 1797: Beytrag zur Kenntniß der alten teutschen Volkslieder. Bragur. Ein Literarisches Magazin der Deutschen und Nordischen Vorzeit. Herausgegeben von Friedrich David Gräter. Fünfter Band. Leipzig, S. 20–38. Kirchhof, Hans Wilhelm. 1563: Wendvnmuth. Darinnen fünff hundert vnd fünfftzig höflicher/ züchtiger/vnd lustiger Historien/Schimpffreden/vnd Gleichnüssen begriffen vnd gezogen seyn auß alten vnd jetzigen Scribenten. […] Frankfurt. [Koch, Ernst. 1834] – Eduard Helmer: Prinz Rosa-Stramin. Erster Band. Kassel. Köhlmeier, Michael. 2011: Das Sonntagskind. Märchen und Sagen aus Österreich. Wien. Köhlmeier, Michael. 2019: Die Märchen. Mit Bildern von Nikolaus Heidelbach. München. Kotzebue, August von. 1791: Einige Züge aus dem Leben des guten Musäus, von der Hand eines Schülers entworfen. Nachgelassene Schriften des verstorbenen Professor Musäus. Mit Kupfern. Herausgegeben von seinem Zögling August von Kotzebue. Leipzig, S. 1–24. [Liebeskind, August Jacob. 1786] – Palmblätter. Erlesene morgenländische Erzählungen für die Jugend. Jena. [Löhr, Johann A.C. 1792] – Untersuchung der Frage: Warum wirkt das Predigtamt so wenig auf die Sittlichkeit der Menschen? Frankfurt/M. Löhr, Johann A.C. 1818/1820: Das Buch der Maehrchen für Kindheit und Jugend nebst etzlichen Schnaken und Schnurren, anmuthig und lehrhaftig. 2 Bände. Leipzig. [Luther-Bibel. 1545] – Die Bibel. Die ganze Heilige Schrift des Alten und Neuen Testaments. In der deutschen Übersetzung von D. Martin Luther. Mit Kupferstichen von Matthaeus Merian. [Nach der Luther-Bibel von 1545] Dreieich 1986. D. Martin Luthers Werke. 1906. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. [Hrsg. von Joachim Karl Friedrich Knaake u. a.]. 32. Band. Weimar. D. Martin Luthers Werke. 1914. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. [Hrsg. von Joachim Karl Friedrich Knaake u. a.]. 50. Band. Weimar. Märchen vor Grimm. 1990. Hrsg. von Hans-Jörg Uther. München. [Mathesius. 1566] – Historien/Von des Ehrwirdigen in Gott Seligen thewren Manns Gottes/ Doctoris Martini Luthers/anfang/lehr/leben vnd sterben/Alles ordendlich der Jarzal nach/ wie sich alle sachen zu jeder zeyt haben zugetragen/Durch den Alten Herrn M. Mathesium gestelt/vnd alles für seinem seligen Ende verfertigt in der Nürnberger Druckanstalt Vom Berg Erben sowie bei Ulrich Neuber. [Mayer, Charles-Joseph (Hrsg.). 1785] – Le Cabinet des Fées; ou Collection choisie des contes des fees, et autres contes merveillex. Tome Sixième. Amsterdam [recte: Paris]. Möser, Justus. 1797: Vermischte Schriften. Erster Theil. Nebst dessen Leben. Hrsg. von Friedrich Nicolai. Berlin, Stettin.

176

References

Möser, Justus. 1798: Vermischte Schriften. Zweyter Theil. Hrsg. von Friedrich Nicolai. Berlin, Stettin. Monschi, Nasrollah. 1996: Kalila und Dimna. Fabeln aus dem klassischen Persien. Hrsg. und übersetzt von Seyfeddin Najmabadi und Siegfried Weber. München. [Moscherosch. 1647] – Omnis [!] Cura Parentum. / Christliches Vermächtnuß. / oder Schuldige Vorsorg eines getreuen Vatters bey jetzigen hochbetrübtesten gefährlichsten Zeiten den seinigen zur letzten Nachricht hinderlassen durch Hans=Michael Moscherosch. […] Straßburg. [Musäus, Johann Karl August. 1782–1787] – Volksmährchen der Deutschen. 5 Bände. Gotha. [Naubert, Benedikte. 1789–1792] – Neue Volksmährchen der Deutschen. 4 Bände. Leipzig. Naubert, Benedikte. 2001: Neue Volksmärchen der Deutschen. 4 Bände. Hrsg. von Marianne Henn, Paola Mayer und Anita Runge. Göttingen. [Neue Jerusalemer Bibel. 1985] – Neue Jerusalemer Bibel. Einheitsübersetzung. Mit dem Kommentar der Jerusalemer Bibel. Neu bearb. und erweiterte Ausgabe. Deutsch herausgegeben von Alfons Deissler, Anton Vögtle, in Verb. mit Johannes M. Nützel. Freiburg i. Br. Pauli, Johannes. 1866: Schimpf und Ernst. Hrsg. von Hermann Österley. Stuttgart (= Amsterdam 1967). Rebmann, Georg Friedrich. 1968: Kosmopolitische Wanderungen durch einen Teil Deutschlands. Hrsg. und eingeleitet von Hedwig Voegt. Frankfurt/M. [Reinwald, Wilhelm Friedrich Heinrich. 1800] – W.F.H.R.: Ueber einen mehrmals erwähnten alten Schwank: „Die ungleichen Kinder der Eva.“ Allgemeiner Litterarischer Anzeiger. 5. Band, Nr. 70 vom 5. May. Leipzig, S. 693–695. Sachs, Hans. 1560: Sehr herrliche, schöne, und warhaffte Gedicht. 2, Das ander Buch Sehr Herrliche Schoene Artliche vnd gebundene Gedicht mancherley art: Als Tragedi, Comedi, Spiel, Gesprech, Spruech vnd Fabel, darinn auff das kuertzt vnd deutlichest an Tag gegeben werden, viel guter Christlicher vnd sittlicher Lehr, auch viel warhaffter vnd seltzamer Histori, sampt etlichen kurtzweyligen Schwencken, doch niemandt ergerlich, sonder jedermann nuetzlich vnnd gut zu lesen; Dreyhundert vnd zehen stueck vorhin im ersten Buch noch sonst im Truck nie gesehen noch außgangen. Nürnberg u. a. Sachs, Hans. 1568: Eygentliche Beschreibung Aller Stände auff Erden/Hoher vnd Nidriger/ Geistlicher vnd Weltlicher/Aller Künsten/Handwercken vnd Händeln/etc. vom grösten biß zum kleinesten/Auch von jrem Vrsprung/Erfindung vnd gebreuchen. Durch den weitberümpten Hans Sachsen Gantz fleissig beschrieben/vnd in Teutsche Reimen gefasset […]. Frankfurt/M. (Unveränderter Nachdr. Leipzig 2005). [Sachs, Hans. 1827] – Schwänke von Hans Sachs, hrsg. und mit den nöthigsten Worterklärungen begleitet von Johann Adolph Nasser. Kiel. Sachs, Hans. 1904: Sämtliche Fabeln und Schwänke. Band 5: Die Fabeln und Schwänke in den Meistergesängen. Hrsg. von Edmund Goetze und Carl Drescher. Halle a. S. [Hans Sachs/Büsching. 1816] – Hans Sachs ernstliche Trauerspiele, liebliche Schauspiele, seltsame Fastnachtsspiele, kurzweilige Gespraech’, sehnliche Klagreden, wunderbarliche Fabeln, sammt andern lächerlichen Schwänken und Possen. Bearbeitet und herausgegeben von Johann Gustav Büsching. Erstes Buch. Nürnberg. Schlegel, August Wilhelm. 1801: Romane und Erzählungen von Friedrich Schulz. Charakteristiken und Kritiken. Von August Wilhelm Schlegel und Friedrich Schlegel. Zweiter Band. Königsberg, S. 216–232. Schulz, Friedrich. 1790: Kleine Romane. Bände 4 und 5. Leipzig. Schumann, Valentin. 1976: Nachtbüchlein (1559). Hrsg. von Johannes Bolte. [Nachdruck der Ausgabe Tübingen 1893] Hildesheim, New York. [Schumann, Wilhelm. 1791/92] – Ammenmärchen. 2 Bände. Weimar. [Schupp, Anton Menon. 1663] – Fabul-Hanß/Oder Eine schöne anmuthige Predigt/Welche der Geistreiche und Hochgelahrte Theologus, Hr. M. Johann Matthesius Sel. Doctoris Lutheri gewesener fleissiger Zuhörer und Haußgenosse im Joachimßthal gehalten hat/von der Fabul/ welche Jotham den Bürgern zu Sichem erzehlet hat/Jud. 9. Itso Auß sonderbaren Ursachen mit einer Zugabe widerumb in Druck gegeben/Durch Anton Menonem Schuppium. Gedruckt im Jahr 1660. [Hanau].

References

177

Schwab, Gustav (Hrsg.). 1843: Die deutsche Prosa von Mosheim bis auf unsere Tage. Eine Mustersammlung mit Rücksicht auf höhere Lehr-Anstalten. Zweiter Theil: Von A.W. Schlegel bis auf unsere Tage. Stuttgart. [Septuaginta Deutsch. 2010] – Septuaginta Deutsch. Das griechische Alte Testament in deutscher Übersetzung. Hrsg. von Wolfgang Kraus und Martin Karrer. 2., verb. Aufl. Stuttgart. [Septuaginta Deutsch. 2011] – Septuaginta Deutsch. Erläuterungen und Kommentare zum griechischen Alten Testament. Hrsg. von Martin Karrer und Wolfgang Kraus. Band I: Genesis bis Makkabäer. Stuttgart. Strauß, Botho. 1997: Die Fehler des Kopisten. München, Wien. [Das Tagebuch des Meister Franz. 1980] – Das Tagebuch des Meister Franz. Scharfrichter zu Nürnberg. Nachdruck der Buchausgabe von 1801. Kommentar von Jürgen C. Jacobs und Heinz Rölleke. Dortmund. [1001 Nacht/Voß. 1781–1785] – Die tausend und eine Nacht arabische Erzählungen, ins Französische übersezt von dem Herrn Anton Galland. Aus dem Französischen übersezt von Johann Heinrich Voß. 6 Bände. Bremen. Wesselski, Albert. 1909: Mönchslatein. Erzählungen aus geistlichen Schriften des XIII. Jahrhunderts. Leipzig. Wickram, Georg. 1973: Sämtliche Werke. Hrsg. von Hans-Gert Roloff. Band 7: Das Rollwagenbüchlein. Berlin, New York. Wickram, Georg. 1984: Das Rollwagenbüchlîn. Text nach der Ausgabe von Johannes Bolte. Nachwort von Elisabeth Endres. Stuttgart. [Das Zauberschloß. 1996] – Das Zauberschloß. Vergessene Märchen des 18. Jahrhunderts. Hrsg. von Thomas Eicher. Blieskastel. Zincgref, Julius Wilhelm. 1985: Der Teutschen scharfsinnige kluge Sprüch. Auswahl. Hrsg. und mit einem Nachwort von Karl-Heinz Klingenberg. Frankfurt/M.

Catalogues, Documentation and Correspondence Breslau, Ralf (Bearb.). 1997: Der Nachlass der Brüder Grimm. Teil 1. Katalog. (Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preussischer Kulturbesitz; Kataloge der Handschriftenabteilung, 2. Reihe: Nachlässe, Band 3) Wiesbaden. Briefwechsel zwischen Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. 2001. Hrsg. von Heinz Rölleke. Teil 1: Text. (Briefwechsel der Brüder Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Kritische Ausgabe in Einzelbänden; Band 1.1) Stuttgart. Briefwechsel der Brüder Grimm mit den Verlegern des ‚Deutschen Wörterbuchs‘ Karl Reimer und Salomon Hirzel. 2007. Hrsg. von Alan Kirkness unter Mitarbeit von Simon Gilmour. (Briefwechsel der Brüder Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Kritische Ausgabe in Einzelbänden; Band 5) Stuttgart. Briefwechsel zwischen Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. 2013. Hrsg. von Stephan Bialas-Pophanken. Teil 3: Kommentar. (Briefwechsel der Brüder Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Kritische Ausgabe in Einzelbänden; Band 1.3) Stuttgart. [Denecke/Teitge. 1989] – Die Bibliothek der Brüder Grimm. Annotiertes Verzeichnis des festgestellten Bestandes. Erarb. von Ludwig Denecke und Irmgard Teitge. Hrsg. von Friedhilde Krause. Stuttgart. Denecke, Ludwig/Peschke, Elke-Barbara/Hofer, Henrik/Friemel, Berthold. 1997: Die Bibliothek der Brüder Grimm. Nachträge und Berichtigungen zum annotierten Verzeichnis. Brüder Grimm Gedenken. Band 12. Nach Ludwig Denecke hrsg. von Ruth Reiher und Berthold Friemel. Stuttgart, Leipzig, S. 16–58. Dicke, Gerd/Grubmüller, Klaus. 1987: Die Fabeln des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit. Ein Katalog der deutschen Versionen und ihrer lateinischen Entsprechungen. München.

178

References

Friemel, Berthold/Peschke, Elke-Barbara/Bremberger, Bernhard/Priemer, Claudia/Vater, Judith. 2003: Die Bibliothek der Brüder Grimm. Nachträge und Berichtigungen zum annotierten Verzeichnis. Zweite Folge. Brüder Grimm Gedenken. Band 15. Nach Ludwig Denecke in Verbindung mit Roland Berbig u. a. hrsg. von Berthold Friemel. Stuttgart, S. 100–118. Gotzkowsky, Bodo. 1994: „Volksbücher“. Prosaromane, Renaissancenovellen, Versdichtungen und Schwankbücher. Bibliographie der deutschen Drucke. Teil II: Drucke des 17. Jahrhunderts. Mit Ergänzungen zu Band I. Baden-Baden. Hopp, Andrea. 1990: Jüdisches Leben an der Straße. „Die Straße“. Geschichte und Gegenwart eines Handelsweges. Textband (750 Jahre Messen in Frankfurt). Hrsg. von Willi Stubenvoll. Frankfurt/M., S. 201–217. Ottendorff-Simrock, Walther [Hrsg.]. 1966: Die Grimms und die Simrocks in Briefen. 1830 bis 1864. Bonn. Pfeifer, Klaus. 1993: Jung-Stilling-Bibliographie. (Schriften der J.G. Herder-BibliothekBibliothek Siegerland e. V.; 28) Siegen. Reulecke, Martin. 2010: Caroline Schlegel-Schelling. Virtuosin der Freiheit. Eine kommentierte Bibliographie. Würzburg. Rölleke, Heinz. 1998/22004: Grimms Märchen und ihre Quellen. Die literarischen Vorlagen der Grimmschen Märchen synoptisch vorgestellt und kommentiert. Trier. [Sagenkonkordanz. 2006] – Briefwechsel zwischen Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Teil 2. Zusätzliche Texte. Sagenkonkordanz. Hrsg. von Heinz Rölleke. (Briefwechsel der Brüder Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Kritische Ausgabe in Einzelbänden; Band 1.2) Stuttgart. Schulz, Friedrich: Briefe. 2001. Hrsg., eingeleitet und kommentiert von Gerhard Kosellek. Bielefeld. Steig, Reinhold (Bearb.). 1904: Achim von Arnim und Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm. Stuttgart, Berlin. Steig, Reinhold. 1914: Clemens Brentano und die Brüder Grimm. Stuttgart, Berlin. Theodor Storm – Theodor Fontane. 2011. Briefwechsel. Kritische Ausgabe. Hrsg. von Gabriele Radecke. Berlin. [Verhandlungen. 1891] – Verhandlungen über Fragen des höheren Unterrichts. Berlin, 4. bis 17. Dezember 1890. Hrsg. im Auftrag des Ministers der geistlichen, Unterrichts- und MedizinalAngelegenheiten. Berlin. [Vulpius, Christian August. 2003] – Christian August Vulpius. Eine Korrespondenz zur Kulturgeschichte der Goethezeit. Hrsg. von Andreas Meier. 2 Bände. Berlin, New York.

Secondary Literature Adelung, Johann Christoph. 1798: Grammatisch-kritisches Wörterbuch der Hochdeutschen Mundart, mit beständiger Vergleichung der übrigen Mundarten, besonders aber der Oberdeutschen. Dritter Theil. Zweyte vermehrte und verbesserte Ausgabe. Leipzig. Antonsen, Jan Erik. 2007: Phantastische Literatur. Metzler Lexikon Literatur. Hrsg. von Dieter Burdorf, Christoph Fasbender und Burkhard Moennighoff. Stuttgart, S. 581–582. Apel, Friedmar. 1978: Die Zaubergärten der Phantasie. Zur Theorie und Geschichte des Kunstmärchens. Heidelberg. Arendt, Dieter. 2012: Märchen-Novellen oder Das Ende der romantischen Märchen-Träume. Tübingen. Arnold, Günter. 1984: Herders Projekt einer Märchensammlung. Jahrbuch für Volkskunde und Kulturgeschichte 27, S. 99–106. Assmann, Jan. 1992: Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen. München. Bausinger, Hermann. 1979: Buchmärchen. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit

References

179

Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 2. Berlin, New York, Sp. 974–977. Bausinger, Hermann. 1999: Märchen. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 9. Berlin, New York, Sp. 250–274. Bausinger, Hermann. 2002: Phantasie, Phantastik. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 10. Berlin, New York, Sp. 972–983. Benz, Richard. 1907: Märchen und Aufklärung im 18. Jahrhundert. Eine Vorgeschichte zur Märchen-Dichtung der Romantiker. Heidelberg. Blosen, Hans. 2003: Iwein in Flensburg? Bemerkungen zum Verhältnis von Artusroman und Volksmärchen. Spurensuche in Sprach- und Geschichtslandschaften. Fs. für Ernst Erich Metzner. Hrsg. von Andrea Hohmeyer, Jasmin S. Rühl und Ingo Wintermeyer. Münster u. a. Bluhm, Lothar. 1989a: Prolegomena zu einer Historisch-kritischen Ausgabe der Kinderund Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Mit einer textgenetischen Betrachtung des König Drosselbart. editio. Internationales Jahrbuch für Editionswissenschaft 3. Hrsg. von Winfried Woesler. Tübingen, S. 177–192. Bluhm, Lothar. 1989b: Neuer Streit um die ‚Alte Marie‘? Kritische Bemerkungen zum Versuch einer sozialgeschichtlichen Remythisierung der Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Wirkendes Wort 39, H. 2, S. 180–198. Bluhm, Lothar. 1992: Woher stammen die Volksmärchen? Anmerkungen aus literaturwissenschaftlicher Sicht. Die Märchen-Zeitschrift 5, S. 6–10. Bluhm, Lothar. 1995a: Grimm-Philologie. Beiträge zur Märchenforschung und Wissenschaft­ sgeschichte. (Schriftenreihe Werke der Brüder Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm, Bd. 2) Hildesheim. Bluhm, Lothar. 1995b: Märchen. Lexikon der Aufklärung. Deutschland und Europa. Hrsg. von Werner Schneiders. München (2., durchges. Ausg. München 2001), S. 258–260. Bluhm, Lothar. 1997: Die Brüder Grimm und der Beginn der Deutschen Philologie. Eine Studie zu Kommunikation und Wissenschaftsbildung im frühen 19. Jahrhundert. Hildesheim. Bluhm, Lothar. 2000: Märchen. Versuch einer literatursystematischen Beschreibung. Märchenspiegel 11 (2000), H. 1, S. 12–13. Bluhm, Lothar. 2001: Günther, Grimm und die ‚Marburger Märchenfrau‘. Zur Entstehung von KHM 57 Der goldene Vogel. Märchen in der Literaturwissenschaft. Hrsg. von der MärchenStiftung Walter Kahn (Umgang mit Märchen, 10). Leipzig, S. 10–19. Bluhm, Lothar. 2006a: Die Brüder Grimm und die Wissenschaft. Anmerkungen aus philologischer und kulturwissenschaftlicher Sicht. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen CVI (2005), H. 4, Helsinki, S. 469–485. Bluhm, Lothar. 2006b: Zur Theorie und Praxis der Grimmschen Märchenedition. Wörter – Verbindungen. Fs. für Jarmo Korhonen zum 60. Geburtstag. Hrsg. von Ulrich Breuer und Irma Hyvärinen. Frankfurt/M., S. 369–376. Bluhm, Lothar. 2007a: Märchen. Metzler Lexikon Literatur. Hrsg. von Dieter Burdorf, Christoph Fasbender und Burkhard Moennighoff. Stuttgart, S. 472–474. Bluhm, Lothar. 2007b: Kunstmärchen. Metzler Lexikon Literatur. Hrsg. von Dieter Burdorf, Christoph Fasbender und Burkhard Moennighoff. Stuttgart, S. 413–414. Bluhm, Lothar. 2010: Die Redaktion der Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Zu den Popularisierungsstrategien der Brüder Grimm. „Und wer bist du, der mich betrachtet?“ Populäre Literatur und Kultur als ästhetische Phänomene. Fs. für Helmuth Schmiedt. Hrsg. von Helga Arend. Bielefeld, S. 231–243. Bluhm, Lothar. 2011: Die Erzählung von den beiden Wanderern (KHM 107). Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Grimm-Philologie. Märchenfiguren in der Literatur des Nord- und Ostseeraumes. Hrsg. von Helga Bleckwenn. Baltmannsweiler, S. 5–31.

180

References

Bluhm, Lothar. 2013: „es war zugleich Absicht, daß […] ein eigentliches Erziehungsbuch daraus werde“. Die Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm im Wandel der Bildungsdiskurse. Bildung durch Dichtung – Literarische Bildung. Bildungsdiskurse literaturvermittelnder Institutionen um 1900 und um 2000. Hrsg. von Christian Dawidowski. Frankfurt/M. u. a., S. 179–189. Bluhm, Lothar. 2014: Leserlenkung durch Illustration. Die Titelkupfer in den Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Bilderbuch und literar-ästhetische Bildung. Aktuelle Forschungsperspektiven. Hrsg. von Gabriela Scherer u. a. Trier, S. 213–231. Bluhm, Lothar. 2015a: „Nicht zu verkennen ist ein gewisser Humor“: Komik in den Kinderund Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Das Komische in der Kultur. Hrsg. von Hajo Diekmannshenke, Stefan Neuhaus, Uta Schaffers. Marburg. Bluhm, Lothar. 2015b: Die Kinder- und Hausmärchen zwischen Philologie und Spekulation. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Forschung. In: Brinker-von der Heyde u. a. (Hrsg.). 2015, Teil 1, S. 123–132. Bluhm, Lothar. 2017: Juden und Judentum in der deutschsprachigen Literatur. Judentum und Antisemitismus in Europa. Hrsg. von Ulrich A. Wien. Tübingen, S. 187–221. Bluhm, Lothar. 2019: „Wo ist denn der Lohn für deine Barmherzigkeit und Gerechtigkeit?“ Zur exempelliterarischen Tradition der Grimm’schen Märchenerzählung Die beiden Wanderer (KHM 107). Kreuz- und Querzüge. Beiträge zu einer literarischen Anthropologie. Fs. für Alfred Messerli. Hrsg. von Harm-Peer Zimmermann, Peter O. Büttner und Bernhard Tschofen. Hannover, S. 319–336. Bluhm, Lothar. 2020: Die ‚dunkle‘ Seite des Heimatgefühls. Brentano und der Antijudaismus in der Romantik. Fremde Heimat – Heimat in der Fremde. Clemens Brentano und das Heimatgefühl seit der Romantik. Hrsg. von Stefan Neuhaus und Helga Arend. Würzburg, S. 189–205. Bluhm, Lothar/Rölleke, Heinz. 2020: „Redensarten des Volks, auf die ich immer horche“. Märchen – Sprichwort – Redensart. Zur erzähltechnischen Ausgestaltung der ‚Kinder- und Hausmärchen’. Erweiterte neue Ausgabe. Trier. Bockwoldt, Gerd. 2011: Das Bild des Juden in den Märchen der Brüder Grimm. Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 63 (3), S. 234–249. Bolte, Johannes/Polívka, Georg [Jiří]. 1913–1932: Anmerkungen zu den Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. 5 Bände. Leipzig. (Nachdruck 1963 Hildesheim). Brinker-von der Heyde, Claudia/Ehrhardt, Holger/Ewers, Hans-Heino/Inder, Annekatrin (Hrsg.). 2015: Märchen, Mythen und Moderne. 200 Jahre ‚Kinder- und Hausmärchen‘ der Brüder Grimm. 2 Teile. Frankfurt/M. Brückner, Wolfgang (Hrsg.). 1974: Volkserzählung und Reformation. Ein Handbuch zur Tradierung und Funktion von Erzählstoffen und Erzählliteratur im Protestantismus. Berlin. Classen, Albrecht. 2003: Die deutsche Predigtliteratur des Spätmittelalters und der Frühneuzeit im Kontext der europäischen Erzähltradition: Johannes Paulis Schimpf und Ernst (1521) als Rezeptionsmedium. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 44, H. 3–4, S. 209–236. Classen, Albrecht. 2009: Deutsche Schwankliteratur des 16. Jahrhunderts. Studien zu Martin Montanus, Hans Wilhelm Kirchhof und Michael Lindener. Trier. Clausen-Stolzenburg, Maren. 1995: Märchen und mittelalterliche Literaturtradition. Heidelberg. Dehrmann, Mark-Georg. 2014: Die Austreibung der Schrift durch die Schrift. Zur philologischhistorischen Reflexion von Mündlichkeit nach 1800 am Beispiel der Grimmschen Kinderund Hausmärchen. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 55, H. 1–2, S. 153–170. Dettmar, Ute/Pecher, Claudia Maria/Schlesinger, Ron (Hrsg.). 2017: Märchen im Medienwechsel. Zur Geschichte und Gegenwart des Märchenfilms. Stuttgart. Diederichsen, Uwe. 2008: Juristische Strukturen in den Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Kassel. Dingelmaier, Theresia. 2019: Das Märchen vom Märchen. Eine kultur- und literaturwissenschaftliche Untersuchung des deutschsprachigen jüdischen Volks- und Kindermärchens. Göttingen. Ehrhardt, Holger (Hrsg.). 2012: Dorothea Viehmann. Kassel.

References

181

Ehrhardt, Holger. 2016: Die Marburger Märchenfrau oder Aufhellungen eines „nicht einmal Vermutungen erlaubenden Dunkels“. Kassel. Ehrhardt, Holger. 2017a: „Von einer alten Mamsell Storch b. Henschel.“ Zu Herkunft und Textkonstitution von KHM 36. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 58, H. 3–4, S. 207–227. Ehrhardt, Holger. 2017b: Die Beiträge Philipp Hoffmeisters zu den Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Josef Mense: Von den Anfängen des Zisterzienserinnen-Klosters bis zur heutigen ev. Pfarrgemeinde. Kassel, S. 149–152. Ehrhardt, Holger. 2020: Literarische Quellen zu De drei schwatten Princessinnen (KHM 137). Verwandlung in Märchen und Mythen – Die Bremer Stadtmusikanten. Forschungsbeiträge aus der Welt der Märchen, Band 45. [Hrsg. von der Europäischen Märchengesellschaft] Königsfurt. Ehrhardt, Holger/Lange, Johann Friedrich/Lange, Marie-Louise/Schütz, Christopher F. (Hrsg.). 2019: Über Nachtfliegen, Zaunkönige und Meisterdiebe. Neue Beiträge zur Grimm- und Märchenforschung. Kassel. Eicher, Thomas: Nachwort. In: Das Zauberschloß. 1996, S. 299–324. Eicher, Thomas/Laubrock, Eva/Moersen, Tobias: Die „Kindermährchen“ Wilhelm Christoph Günthers: Autor, Gattung, Zeitgeschichte. In: Günther 1999, S. 126–159. Elschenbroich, Adalbert. 1979: Die Fabelpredigt des Johannes Mathesius. Zum Problem der Analogie und Allegorie in der Geschichte der Fabel. Formen und Funktionen der Allegorie. Symposion Wolfenbüttel 1978. Hrsg. von Walter Haug. Stuttgart, S. 452–477. Esselborn, Hans. 1996: Erschriebene Individualität und Karriere in der Autobiographie des 18. Jahrhunderts. Wirkendes Wort 46, H. 2, S. 193–210. Ewers, Hans-Heino. 1987: Zauberei im Herbste. Deutsche Kunstmärchen von Wieland bis Hofmannsthal. Stuttgart. Ewers, Hans-Heino. 2000: Literatur für Kinder und Jugendliche. Eine Einführung in grundlegende Aspekte des Handlungs- und Symbolsystems Kinder- und Jugendliteratur. Mit einer Auswahlbibliographie Kinder- und Jugendliteraturwissenschaft. München. Ewers, Hans-Heino. 2001: Deutsche Kunstmärchen von Wieland bis Hofmannsthal. Bibliographisch ergänzte Ausgabe. Stuttgart. Fehling, Detlev. 1977: Amor und Psyche. Die Schöpfung des Apuleius und ihre Einwirkung auf das Märchen. Eine Kritik der romantischen Märchentheorie. (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur) Mainz. Freund, Winfried. 2005: Ludwig Tieck. Der blonde Eckbert. Stuttgart. Friemel, Berthold. 2012: Aus der Märchen-Handbibliothek der Brüder Grimm. Rotkäppchen kommt aus Berlin! 200 Jahre Kinder- und Hausmärchen in Berlin. [Eine Ausstellung der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz in Zusammenarbeit mit der Arbeitsstelle Grimm-Briefwechsel am Institut für Deutsche Literatur der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin und Märchenland – Deutsches Zentrum für Märchenkultur; 9.11.2012 bis 5.1.2013. Ausstellungskataloge; N.F. 57: Carola Pohlmann und Berthold Friemel]. Berlin, S. 35–63. Frühwald, Wolfgang. 1989: Antijudaismus in der Zeit der deutschen Romantik. Conditio Judaica. Judentum, Antisemitismus und deutschsprachige Literatur vom 18. Jahrhundert bis zum Ersten Weltkrieg. Zweiter Teil. Hrsg. von Hans Otto Horch und Horst Denkler. Tübingen, S. 72–91. Gebert, Bent. 2014: Wissensordnungen, Wissbares und das Unbehagen der literarischen Repräsentation: Gibt es einen Mythosdiskurs des Mittelalters? Zwischen Präsenz und Repräsentation. Formen und Funktionen des Mythos in theoretischen und literarischen Diskursen. Hrsg. von Bent Gebert und Uwe Mayer. Berlin, Boston, S. 88–121. Geddes, V.G. 1986: „Various Children of Eve“ (AT 758). Cultural Variants and Antifeminine Images. Uppsala. Gelber, Mark H. 1986: Das Judendeutsch in der deutschen Literatur. Einige Beispiele von den frühesten Lexika bis Gustav Freytag und Thomas Mann. Juden in der deutschen Literatur. Ein deutsch-israelisches Symposium. Hrsg. von Stéphane Moses und Albrecht Schöne. Frankfurt/M., S. 162–178.

182

References

Genette, Gérard. 1993: Palimpseste. Die Literatur auf zweiter Stufe. Frankfurt/M. – Frz.: Palimpsestes. La littérature au second degré. Paris 1982. Gerhardt, Christoph. 1988: Gab es im Mittelalter Fabelwesen? Wirkendes Wort 38, H. 2, S. 156–171. Gerhardt, Corinna. 1995: Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm als Hochschullehrer in Berlin. Brüder Grimm Gedenken. Band 11. Nach Ludwig Denecke hrsg. von Ruth Reiher und Berthold Friemel. Stuttgart, Leipzig, S. 80–99. Giesecke, Michael. 1980: ‚Volkssprache‘ und ‚Verschriftlichung des Lebens‘ im Spätmittelalter – am Beispiel der Genese der gedruckten Fachprosa in Deutschland. Literatur in der Gesellschaft des Spätmittelalters. Hrsg. von Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht. Heidelberg, S. 39–70. Ginschel, Gunhild. 1989: Der junge Jacob Grimm 1805–1819. 2., erweiterte Auflage. Stuttgart. Grätz, Manfred. 1988: Das Märchen in der deutschen Aufklärung. Vom Feenmärchen zum Volksmärchen. Stuttgart. Grätz, Manfred. 1996: Kunstmärchen. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 8. Berlin, New York, Sp. 612–622. Graf, Klaus. 2000: Heinrich Bebel (1472–1518). Wider ein barbarisches Latein. Humanismus im deutschen Südwesten. Biographische Profile. Hrsg. von Paul Gerhardt Schmidt. 2. Aufl., Stuttgart, S. 179–194. Grotzfeld, Heinz. 2005: Dreihundert Jahre 1001 Nacht in Europa. 1001 Nacht in geteiltem Besitz von Orient und Okzident. Dreihundert Jahre ‚1001 Nacht‘ in Europa. Ein Begleitheft zur Ausstellung in Münster, Tübingen und Gotha. Hrsg. von Anke Osigus in Zusammenarbeit mit Heinz Grotzfeld. Münster, S. 9–30. Gunkel, Hermann. 1917: Das Märchen im Alten Testament. Tübingen. Gunkel, Hermann. 2004: Die israelitische Literatur [1906]. In: Hermann Gunkel zur israelitischen Literatur und Literaturgeschichte. Hrsg. von Rüdiger Liwak. Waltrop, S. 1–60. Gutsche, Victoria Luise. 2014: Zwischen Abgrenzung und Annäherung: Konstruktionen des Jüdischen in der Literatur des 17. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, Boston. Hamann, Hermann. 1906: Die literarischen Vorlagen der Kinder- und Hausmärchen und ihre Bearbeitung durch die Brüder Grimm. Berlin. Hecken, Thomas. 2007: Der deutsche Begriff ‚populäre Kultur‘. Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte 49, S. 195–204. Hedwig, Andreas (Hrsg.). 2013: Die Brüder Grimm in Marburg. Marburg. Helmrath, Johannes/Muhlack, Ulrich/Walther, Gerrit (Hrsg.). 2002: Diffusion des Humanismus. Studien zur nationalen Geschichtsschreibung europäischer Humanisten. Göttingen. Henschel, Gerhard. 2019: „etwas vorlautes widriges“. Das Judenbild der Brüder Grimm. Merkur 73 (846), S. 79–87. Herrmann, Jule Ana. 2020: Ein Denkmal aus Papier und Tinte. Zum literarischen Einfluss Benedikte Nauberts auf das Werk Ferdinand Grimms. Baden-Baden. Hexelschneider, Erhard. 1963: Fünf unveröffentlichte Briefe von Anton Dietrich an Jacob Grimm aus den Jahren 1830/31. Jacob Grimm zur 100. Wiederkehr seines Todestages. Fs. des Instituts für deutsche Volkskunde (Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin). Hrsg. durch Wilhelm Fraenger und Wolfgang Steinitz. Berlin (Ost), S. 113–123. Horch, Hans Otto. 1985: Judenbilder in der realistischen Erzählliteratur. Jüdische Figuren bei Gustav Freytag, Fritz Reuter, Berthold Auerbach und Wilhelm Raabe. Juden und Judentum in der Literatur. Hrsg. von Herbert A. Strauss und Christhard Hoffmann. München, S. 140–171. Hühn, Helmut/Matuschek, Stefan. 2014: Das aufgeklärte Märchen: Eine europäische Erfolgsgattung von Mme d’Aulnoy und Perrault bis zu den Brüdern Grimm. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 55, H. 1–2, S. 1–12. Hurrelmann, Bettina (Hrsg.). 1995: Klassiker der Kinder- und Jugendliteratur. Frankfurt/M. Jolles, André. 1930: Einfache Formen. Legende, Sage, Mythe, Rätsel, Spruch, Kasus, Memorabile, Märchen, Witz. Halle (Saale).

References

183

Karlinger, Felix. 1988: Geschichte des Märchens im deutschen Sprachraum. 2., um einen bibliographischen Nachtrag erweiterte Auflage. Darmstadt. Kiefer, Klaus H. 2004: „Die famose Hexen-Epoche“. Sichtbares und Unsichtbares in der Aufklärung. Kant – Schiller – Goethe – Swedenborg – Mesmer – Cagliostro. München. Kliewer, Heinz-Jürgen/Kliewer, Ursula. 2007: Kinder- und Jugendliteratur. Metzler Lexikon Literatur. Hrsg. von Dieter Burdorf, Christoph Fasbender und Burkhard Moennighoff. Stuttgart, S. 379–382. Klotz, Volker. 1985: Das europäische Kunstmärchen. Fünfundzwanzig Kapitel seiner Geschichte von der Renaissance bis zur Moderne. Stuttgart. Knape, Joachim. 1984: ‚Historie‘ in Mittelalter und früher Neuzeit. Begriffs- und gattungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen im interdisziplinären Kontext. Baden-Baden. Koch, Klaus. 1991: Gibt es ein Vergeltungsdogma im Alten Testament? [1955] Ders.: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Hrsg. von Bernd Janowski und Martin Krause. Band 1: Spuren des hebräischen Denkens. Beiträge zur alttestamentlichen Theologie. Neukirchen-Vluyn, S. 65–103. Köstlin, Monika. 1993: Im Frieden der Wissenschaft. Wilhelm Grimm als Philologe. Stuttgart. Košenina, Alexander (Hrsg.). 2012: Andere Klassik: Das Werk von Christian August Vulpius (1762–1827). Hannover. Kottsieper, Ingo. 1996: Die alttestamentliche Weisheit im Licht aramäischer Weisheitstraditionen. Weisheit außerhalb der kanonischen Weisheitsschriften. Hrsg. von Bernd Janowski. Göttingen, S. 128–162. Kraut, Philip. 2021: Gestaltungen der Fabel. Nacherzählungen und Inhaltsangaben der Brüder Grimm zwischen philologischer Praxis und literarischer Kleinform. Verkleinerung. Epistemologie und Literaturgeschichte kleiner Formen. Hrsg. von Maren Jäger u. a. Berlin, Boston, S. 159–172. Kreuzer, Ingrid. 1983: Märchenform und individuelle Geschichte. Zu Text und Handlungsstrukturen in Werken Ludwig Tiecks zwischen 1790 und 1811. Göttingen. Kreuzer, Stefanie. 2007: ‚Märchenhafte Metatexte‘: Formen und Funktionen von Märchenelementen in der Literatur. Metaisierung in Literatur und anderen Medien. Theoretische Grundlagen – historische Perspektiven – Metagattungen – Funktionen. Hrsg. von Janine Hauthal u. a. Berlin, New York, S. 282–302. Kühndel, Diana/Offermann, Ursula (Hrsg.). 2017: Hörendes Lesen und Sehen von Märchen. Synergien von Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit. Heidelberg. Kümmerling-Meibauer, Bettina. 2000: Kinder- und Jugendliteratur. Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft. Neubearbeitung des Reallexikons der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Hrsg. von Harald Fricke u. a. Band II. Berlin, New York, S. 254–258. Kümmerling-Meibauer, Bettina. 2012: Kinder- und Jugendliteratur. Eine Einführung. Darmstadt. Ladenthin, Volker. 2017: [Rezension zu] Stefan Neuhaus: Märchen […]. Wirkendes Wort 67, H. 3, S. 489–490. Lauer, Bernhard. 1993: Petrosinella, Persinette, Rapunzel. Zur Überlieferung eines europäischen Märchenstoffes. Rapunzel. Traditionen eines europäischen Märchenstoffes in Dichtung und Kunst. Katalog. In Zusammenarbeit mit Inge X. Husemann hrsg. von Bernhard Lauer. (Ausstellung im Brüder Grimm-Museum Kassel) Kassel, S. 7–33. Lehnert, Nils. 2014: „Sehe ich nun gnädig aus?“ Eindruckssteuerndes Verhalten, Selbst- und Fremdbilder literarischer Figuren als mögliche transepochale ‚Universalien‘ der Literatur. Universalien? Über die Natur der Literatur. Hrsg. von Endre Hárs u. a. Trier, S. 179–199. Leibfried, Erwin/Werle, Josef M. 1978: Texte zur Theorie der Fabel. Stuttgart. Lezzi, Eva. 2006: „… ewig rein wie die heilige Jungfrau …“. Zur Enthüllung des Jüdischen in der Rezeption von deutschsprachigen Romanen um 1800. Juden und Judentum in der deutschsprachigen Literatur. Hrsg. von Willi Jasper u. a. Wiesbaden, S. 61–86. Lüthi, Max. 1960: Die Herkunft des Grimmschen Rapunzelmärchens (AaTh 310). Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 3, H. 1, S. 95–118. Lüthi, Max. 1975: Volksmärchen und Volkssage – Zwei Grundformen erzählender Dichtung. 3. Auflage. Bern.

184

References

Lüthi, Max. 1996: Märchen. 9., durchgesehene und ergänzte Auflage. Bearb. von Heinz Rölleke. Stuttgart, Weimar. Lüthi, Max. 2004: Märchen. 10., aktualisierte Auflage. Bearbeitet von Heinz Rölleke. Stuttgart. Lüthi, Max. 2005: Das europäische Volksmärchen. Form und Wesen. 11. Auflage. Stuttgart (11947). Mackensen, Lutz. 1930: Zur Märchenforschung. Zeitschrift für deutsche Bildung 6, H. 7/8, S. 339–353. Maennersdoerfer, Maria Christa. 2013: Die beiden Wanderer. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 14, S. 476–483. Maierhofer, Waltraud. 2013: [Rezension zu:] Andere Klassik: Das Werk von Christian August Vulpius (1762–1827). Hrsg. von Alexander Košenina. Hannover 2012. Goethe-Jahrbuch 129 (2012). Hrsg. von Jochen Golz, Albert Meier und Edith Zehm. Göttingen, S. 267–270. Mairbäurl, Gunda/Tomkowiak, Ingrid/Seibert, Ernst/Müller-Wille, Klaus (Hrsg.). 2013: Kinderliterarische Mythen-Translation. Zur Konstruktion phantastischer Welten bei Tove Jansson, C.S. Lewis und J.R.R. Tolkien. Wien. Manger, Klaus. 2014: Natürlich übernatürlich: das aufgeklärte Märchen. „Das war nie und ist immer“. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 55, H. 1–2, S. 26–40. Markschies, Christoph. 2006: Der Römerbrief des Paulus – das Testament des Apostels. Erinnerungsorte der Antike. Die römische Welt. Hrsg. von Elke Stein-Hölkeskamp und KarlJoachim Hölkeskamp. München, S. 607–625. Martus, Steffen. 2009: Die Brüder Grimm. Eine Biographie. Berlin. Matuschek, Stefan. 2014: Es war einmal. Das Märchen als gegenwartsorientierte, dynamische Gattung. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 55, H. 1–2, S. 13–25. Mayer, Heike. 2001: Märchen. Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik. Hrsg. von Gert Ueding. Band 5. Tübingen, Sp. 945–950. Mayer, Mathias/Jens Tismar. 2003: Kunstmärchen. 4. Auflage. Stuttgart. Messerli, Alfred. 2020: Das Märchen „Die Lebenszeit“ aus den Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Entstehung und Traditionszusammenhänge in der longue durée. Alter im Märchen. Hrsg. von Harm-Peer Zimmermann und Simone Stiefbold. Volkach, S. 277–298. Moos, Peter von. 2005: Rhetorik, Kommunikation und Medialität. Gesammelte Studien zum Mittelalter, Bd. II. Hrsg. von Gert Melville. Münster. Moser, Dietz-Rüdiger. 1982a: Exempel – Paraphrase – Märchen. Zum Gattungswandel christlicher Volkserzählungen im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert am Beispiel einiger Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Sozialer und kultureller Wandel in der ländlichen Welt des 18. Jahrhunderts. Hrsg. von Ernst Hinrichs und Günter Wiegelmann. Wolfenbüttel, S. 117–148. Moser, Dietz-Rüdiger. 1982b: Christliche Märchen. Zur Geschichte, Sinngebung und Funktion einiger Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Gott im Märchen. Hrsg. von Jürgen Janning u. a. Kassel, S. 92–113. Moser-Rath, Elfriede. 1964: Predigtmärlein der Barockzeit. Exempel, Sage, Schwank und Fabel in geistlichen Quellen des oberdeutschen Raumes. Berlin. Moser-Rath, Elfriede. 1977: Ammenmärchen. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 1. Berlin, New York, Sp. 463–464. Murayama, Isamitsu. 2005: Poesie – Natur – Kinder. Die Brüder Grimm und ihre Idee einer „natürlichen Bildung“ in den ‚Kinder- und Hausmärchen‘. Heidelberg. Murayama, Isamitsu. 2019: Intermediale Wechselwirkung von Text und Bild zur Stilisierung einer idealen Märchenerzählerin. Die Entwicklung des Dorothea Viehmann-Porträts von Ludwig Emil Grimm. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 60, H. 3–4, S. 217–243. Naumann, Hans. 1921: Primitive Gemeinschaftskultur. Beiträge zur Volkskunde und Mythologie. Jena.

References

185

Naumann, Hans. 1922: Grundzüge der deutschen Volkskunde. Leipzig. Neuhaus, Stefan. 2005: Märchen. Tübingen. Neuhaus, Stefan. 2017: Märchen. 2., überarb. Aufl. Tübingen. Oerke, Catharina. 2006: Gattungsexperiment und Ägyptenkonstruktion. Benedikte Nauberts ‚Alme oder Egyptische Mährchen‘ (1793–1797). Göttingen. Oesterle, Günter. 1992: Juden, Philister und romantische Intellektuelle. Überlegungen zum Antisemitismus in der Romantik. Athenäum. Jahrbuch für Romantik. Hrsg. von Ernst Behler u. a. 2. Jahrgang 1992. Paderborn u. a., S. 55–89. Offermann, Ursula. 2017: Vom Eimer zur Spuhle. Erzählmündlichkeit im Grimm’schen Frau Holle-Märchen. In: Kühndel/Offermann (Hrsg.). 2017, S. 279–296. Olrik, Axel. 1909: Epische Gesetze der Volksdichtung. ZfdA 51, S. 1–12. Ong, Walter J. 1987: Oralität und Literalität. Die Technologisierung des Wortes. Opladen. Pabst, Stephan. 2014: Zerstreute Autorschaft. Anonymität als Autorisierungsfunktion Grimmscher Märchen. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 55, H. 1–2, S. 135–152. Pape, Walter. 1981: Das literarische Kinderbuch. Studien zur Entstehung und Typologie. Berlin, New York. Pöge-Alder, Kathrin. 2007: Märchenforschung. Theorien, Methoden, Interpretationen. Tübingen. Pöge-Alder, Kathrin. 2014: Traditionell – zeitgenössisch – lebendig. Erzähltes als Intangible Cultural Heritage in der volkskundlichen Erzählforschung. Erzählungen als kulturelles Erbe – Das kulturelle Erbe als Erzählung. Beiträge der 6. Tagung der Kommission für Erzählforschung in der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Volkskunde vom 1.–4. September 2010 im Universitätszentrum Obergurgl. Hrsg. von Ingo Schneider und Valeska Flor. Münster, S. 111–126. Propp, Vladimir. 1972: Morphologie des Märchens. München. Propp, Vladimir. 1987: Die historischen Wurzeln des Zaubermärchens. Aus dem Russischen von Martin Pfeiffer. München, Wien. Rajewsky, Irina O. 2002: Intermedialität. Tübingen, Basel. Rehermann, Ernst Heinrich. 1977: Das Predigtexempel bei protestantischen Theologen des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts. Göttingen. Reiling, Jesko. 2019: Volkspoesie versus Kunstpoesie. Wirkungsgeschichte einer Denkfigur im literarischen 19. Jahrhundert. Heidelberg. Rimasson-Fertin, Natacha. 2012: „Echt hessische“ Märchen? Französische Einflüsse und Motive in den Viehmannschen Märchen der Brüder Grimm. In: Ehrhardt (Hrsg.). 2012, S. 46–58. Röhrich, Lutz. 1962/1967: Erzählungen des späten Mittelalters und ihr Weiterleben in Literatur und Volksdichtung bis zur Gegenwart: Sagen, Märchen, Exempel und Schwänke. 2 Bände. Bern, München. Rölleke, Heinz. 1974: „Die Marburger Märchenfrau“. Zur Herkunft von KHM 21 und 57. Fabula. Zeitschrift für Erzählforschung 15, S. 87–94. Rölleke, Heinz. 1975: Die ‚stockhessischen‘ Märchen der ‚Alten Marie‘. Das Ende eines Mythos um die frühesten KHM-Aufzeichnungen der Brüder Grimm. Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 56 (NF 25), S. 74–86. Rölleke, Heinz. 1985a: Die Märchen der Brüder Grimm. Eine Einführung. München, Zürich. Rölleke, Heinz. 1985b: „Wo das Wünschen noch geholfen hat“. Gesammelte Aufsätze zu den Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm. Bonn. Rölleke, Heinz. 1999: „Adam hackte das Feld, und Eva spann Wolle“. Ein bekannter Spruch in bislang unbekannten Zeugnissen. Jahrbuch für Volksliedforschung 44, S. 127–130. Rölleke, Heinz. 2000a: Die Märchen der Brüder Grimm. Quellen und Studien. Gesammelte Aufsätze. Trier. Rölleke, Heinz. 2000b: Märchen. Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft. Neubearbeitung des Reallexikons der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Hrsg. von Harald Fricke u. a. Band II. Berlin, New York, S. 513–517. Rölleke, Heinz. 2000c: Kunstmärchen. Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft. Neubearbeitung des Reallexikons der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Hrsg. von Harald Fricke u. a. Band II. Berlin, New York 2000, S. 366–368.

186

References

Rölleke, Heinz. 2006: „Alt wie der Wald“. Gesammelte Aufsätze zu den Märchen der Brüder Grimm. Trier. Rölleke, Heinz. 2012: Die Beiträge der Dorothea Viehmann zu Grimms Kinder- und Hausmärchen. In: Ehrhardt (Hrsg.). 2012, S. 30–45. Rölleke, Heinz. 2013: Das Grimm’sche Märchen Der Gevatter Tod und eine bislang unbekannte Fassung aus dem Nachlass Ferdinand Grimms. Wirkendes Wort 63, H. 3, S. 393–409. Rölleke, Heinz. 2015a: Die Kinder- und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm und ihre Beiträger. In: Brinker-von der Heyde u. a. (Hrsg.). 2015, S. 17–28. Rölleke, Heinz. 2015b: Grimms Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Poetische Rezeption im 19. Jahrhundert von Heine bis Hofmannsthal mit einem Ausblick auf Thomas Manns Roman Der Erwählte. Euphorion 109, H. 1, S. 35–56. Rölleke, Heinz. 2017: „Der Teufel mit den drei goldenen Haaren“. Spuren mündlicher Traditionen in einem Grimm’schen Märchen. In: Kühndel/Offermann (Hrsg.). 2017, S. 263–278. Rölleke, Heinz. 2019: „Marienkind“. Textgenese eines Märchens der Brüder Grimm. Ursprünge und Tendenzen. Wirkendes Wort 69, H. 3, S. 327–353. Rölleke, Heinz. 2021: „Und wenn sie nicht gestorben sind, leben sie noch“. 36 Wege durch das Märchenforum mit den Brüdern Grimm. Trier. Röth, Diether. 1998: Kleines Typenverzeichnis der europäischen Zauber- und Novellenmärchen. Baltmannsweiler. Rompel, Matthias. 2008: Ethnizität und interethnische Beziehungen. Lehr(er)buch Soziologie. Für die pädagogischen und soziologischen Studiengänge. Hrsg. von Herbert Willems. Band 2. Wiesbaden, S. 655–664. Ruh, Kurt. 1977: Höfische Epik des deutschen Mittelalters. 1. Teil: Von den Anfängen bis zu Hartmann von Aue. 2., verb. Aufl. Berlin. Sauder, Gerhard. 2016: Goethe und die Juden. Goethe und … Hrsg. von Manfred Leber und Sikander Singh. Saarbrücken, S. 57–75. Schäfer, Barbara/Denecke, Ludwig. 2003: Die Brüder Grimm als Bibliothekare. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Erwerbungs- und Katalogisierungspraxis während ihrer Amtszeit in der Kurfürstlichen Bibliothek zu Kassel. Brüder Grimm Gedenken. Band 15. Nach Ludwig Denecke in Verbindung mit Roland Berbig u. a. hrsg. von Berthold Friemel. Stuttgart, S. 16–35. Schäfer-Hartmann, Günter. 2012: Die Grimmsche Weltanschauung. Deutsche Literaturhistoriographie im 19. Jahrhundert als „wahre“ Geschichtsschreibung. Brüder Grimm Gedenken. Band 17. In Verbindung mit Roland Berbig u. a. hrsg. von Berthold Friemel. Stuttgart, S. 273–294. Schenda, Rudolf. 1993: Von Mund zu Ohr. Bausteine zu einer Kulturgeschichte volkstümlichen Erzählens in Europa. Göttingen. Scherf, Walter. 1993: Kindermärchen. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 7. Berlin, New York, Sp. 1329–1336. Schlaffer, Heinz. 1978: Exoterik und Esoterik in Goethes Romanen. Goethe-Jahrbuch 95, S. 212–226. Schmiele, Corona. 2020: Autor im Suchbild. Geheime Verfassersignaturen in Grimms ‚Kinderund Hausmärchen‘. Heidelberg. Schmidt, Siegfried J. 1989: Die Selbstorganisation des Sozialsystems Literatur im 18. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. Schwinge, Gerhard. 1994: Jung-Stilling als Erbauungsschriftsteller der Erweckung. Eine literatur- und frömmigkeitsgeschichtliche Untersuchung seiner periodischen Schriften und ihres Umfelds. (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Pietismus, Bd. 32) Göttingen. Schwinge, Gerhard. 2014: Johann Heinrich Jung-Stilling (1740–1817), „Patriarch der Erweckung“. Beiträge aus 26 Jahren Jung-Stilling-Forschung. Heidelberg u. a.

References

187

Seifert, Siegfried. 2004: „Commißorischer Debit“ statt „ewigem Verlagsrecht“. Die Hoffmannsche Buchhandlung in Weimar. „Der entfesselte Markt“. Verleger und Verlagsbuchhandel im thüringisch-sächsischen Kulturraum um 1800. Hrsg. von Werner Greiling und Siegfried Seifert. Leipzig, S. 59–106. Sennewald, Jens E. 2004: Das Buch, das wir sind. Zur Poetik der „Kinder- und Hausmärchen, gesammelt durch die Brüder Grimm“. Würzburg. Shojaei Kawan, Christine. 2007: Rechtsverwirklichung und Rechtsverdrehung im europäischen Volksmärchen. Dunkle Mächte im Märchen und was sie bannt. Recht und Gerechtigkeit im Märchen. Hrsg. von Harlinda Lox, Sabine Lutkat und Dietrich Kluge. Königsfurt, S. 168–199. Siegert, Reinhart. 1978: Aufklärung und Volkslektüre. Exemplarisch dargestellt an Rudolph Zacharias Becker und seinem ‚Noth- und Hülfsbüchlein‘. Mit einer Bibliographie zum Gesamtthema. Frankfurt/M. Spriewald, Ingeborg. 1990: Literatur zwischen Hören und Lesen: Wandel von Funktion und Rezeption im späten Mittelalter. Fallstudien zu Beheim, Folz und Sachs. Berlin, Weimar. Stiefel, Arthur Ludwig. 1894: Über die Quellen der Fabeln, Märchen und Schwänke des Hans Sachs. Nürnberg. Ter-Nedden, Gisbert. 2015: Juden, die keine Juden sind. Lessings Modernisierungen des Samariter-Gleichnisses: Die Juden, Nathan der Weise und Der fromme Samariter nach der Erfindung des Herrn Jesu Christi. Lessing und das Judentum. Lektüren, Dialoge, Kontroversen im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert. Hrsg. von Dirk Niefanger, Gunnar Och und Birka Siwczyk. Hildesheim u. a., S. 21–52. Todorov, Tzvetan. 1972: Einführung in die fantastische Literatur. München. Todsen, Hermann. 1906: Über die Entwicklung des romantischen Kunstmärchens. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Tieck und E.T.A. Hoffmann. Berlin. Tomkowiak, Ingrid. 1993: Kinder- und Jugendliteratur. Enzyklopädie des Märchens. Handwörterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzählforschung. Begründet von Kurt Ranke. Mit Unterstützung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen hrsg. von Rolf Wilhelm Brednich u. a. Band 7. Berlin, New York, Sp. 1297–1329. Tute, Hannelore. 2016: Ludwig Meyn und die Brüder Grimm. Heimatkundliches Jahrbuch für den Kreis Pinneberg. [Hrsg. vom Heimatverband Pinneberg], S. 165–173. Tute, Hannelore. 2019: „De Snider weer en lütjen lustigen Kiekindewelt …“. KHM 107 Die beiden Wanderer in der niederdeutschen Originalhandschrift des Beiträgers Ludwig Meyn von 1842. In: Ehrhardt/Lange/Lange/Schütz (Hrsg.). 2019, S. 167–181. Tyroller, Franz. 1912: Die Fabel von dem Mann und dem Vogel in ihrer Verbreitung in der Weltliteratur. Berlin. Uther, Hans-Jörg. 1993: Zur Motivik und Ikonographie des Rapunzel-Märchens. Rapunzel. Traditionen eines europäischen Märchenstoffes in Dichtung und Kunst. Katalog. In Zusammenarbeit mit Inge X. Husemann hrsg. von Bernhard Lauer. (Ausstellung im Brüder Grimm-Museum Kassel) Kassel, S. 35–56. Uther, Hans-Jörg. 2004a: The Types of International Folktales. A Classification and Bibliography. Based on the System of Antii Aarne and Stith Thompson. 3 Bände. Helsinki. Uther, Hans-Jörg. 2004b: Die Brüder Grimm und Heinrich Jung-Stilling. Von Jorinde und Joringel und anderen Erzählungen. Paare und Paarungen. Fs. f. Werner Wunderlich zum 60. Geburtstag. Hrsg. von Ulrich Müller und Margarete Springeth. Stuttgart, S. 294–305. Uther, Hans-Jörg. 2007: Der letzte Wunsch. Zu Rechtsvorstellungen in Volkserzählungen. Dunkle Mächte im Märchen und was sie bannt. Recht und Gerechtigkeit im Märchen. Hrsg. von Harlinda Lox, Sabine Lutkat und Dietrich Kluge. Königsfurt, S. 217–233. Uther, Hans-Jörg. 2013: Handbuch zu den ‚Kinder- und Hausmärchen‘ der Brüder Grimm. Entstehung – Wirkung – Interpretation. 2., vollständig überarbeitete Auflage. Berlin, Boston. Uther, Hans-Jörg. 2021: Handbuch zu den ‚Kinder- und Hausmärchen‘ der Brüder Grimm. Entstehung – Wirkung – Interpretation. 3., durchgesehene und ergänzte Auflage. Berlin, Boston.

188

References

Wagner, Fritz. 2005: Zum Mittelalterbild der Brüder Grimm. Hamburg. Weigl, Michael. 2006: Die rettende Macht der Barmherzigkeit: Achikar im Buch Tobit. Biblische Zeitschrift (BZ) NF 50, S. 212–243. Weigl, Michael. 2010: Die aramäischen Achikar-Sprüche aus Elephantine und die alttestamentliche Weisheitsliteratur. Berlin. Wesselski, Albert. 1925: Märchen des Mittelalters. Berlin Wesselski, Albert. 1931: Versuch einer Theorie des Märchens. Reichenberg i. B. Wesselski, Albert. 1938: Das Geschenk der Lebensjahre. Archiv Orientální 10, S. 79–114. Wesselski, Albert. 1942: Deutsche Märchen vor Grimm. Einführung und Anmerkungen. Brünn, München, Wien. Winzer, Axel. 2021: Permanente Metamorphosen. Neues zur Verlags- und Editionsgeschichte der ‚Kinder- und Hausmärchen‘ der Brüder Grimm. Marburg. Winzer, Johannes. 1908: Die ungleichen Kinder Evas in der Literatur des 16. JHS. Greifswald. Wolf, Hans. 1969: Die Sprache des Johannes Mathesius. Köln. Wolfzettel, Friedrich. 2005: Le Conte en palimpseste. Studien zur Funktion von Märchen und Mythos im französischen Mittelalter. Stuttgart. Wührl, Paul-Wolfgang. 1984: Das deutsche Kunstmärchen. Geschichte, Botschaft und Erzählstrukturen. Heidelberg. Wünsch, Marianne. 2003: Phantastische Literatur. Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft. Neubearbeitung des Reallexikons der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Hrsg. von Harald Fricke u. a. Band III. Berlin, New York, S. 70–74. Zitzlsperger, Helga. 2007: Märchenhafte Wirklichkeiten. Eine Märchenkunde mit vielen Gestaltungsvorschlägen. Weinheim, Basel.