| Revision as of 06:03, 27 October 2007 editBerig (talk | contribs)Administrators32,500 editsm bypass disambiguation page← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:00, 13 November 2007 edit undoDbachmann (talk | contribs)227,714 edits rm offtopicNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| ].]] | |||
| The '''Pforzen buckle''' is a silver belt buckle found in ], ] (]) in ]. The ] grave in which it was found (no. 239) dates to the end of the ] and was presumably that of a warrior, as it also contained a lance, ], ] and shield. The buckle itself is assumed to be of Roman-Mediterranean origin, possibly the product of a ] or ] workshop. | The '''Pforzen buckle''' is a silver belt buckle found in ], ] (]) in ]. The ] grave in which it was found (no. 239) dates to the end of the ] and was presumably that of a warrior, as it also contained a lance, ], ] and shield. The buckle itself is assumed to be of Roman-Mediterranean origin, possibly the product of a ] or ] workshop. | ||
Revision as of 17:00, 13 November 2007
The Pforzen buckle is a silver belt buckle found in Pforzen, Ostallgäu (Schwaben) in 1992. The Alemannic grave in which it was found (no. 239) dates to the end of the 6th century and was presumably that of a warrior, as it also contained a lance, spatha, seax and shield. The buckle itself is assumed to be of Roman-Mediterranean origin, possibly the product of a Lombard or Gepid workshop.
The buckle bears a runic inscription on its front, incised after its manufacture:
aigil andi aïlrun
ltahu/elahu gasokun
Linguistic analysis of the inscription reveals that it was composed in early Old High German and is thus considered the oldest preserved line of alliterative verse in any West Germanic language (while the Gallehus horns inscription, roughly one century older, is considered the oldest example of a North Germanic metrical line). However, scholars have yet to reach a consensus as to its exact import.
Wagner (1995) reads the final ornament in line 1 as a bind-rune consisting of 
(angi) and connects this directly with the beginning of line 2, producing angiltahu. He translates the inscription as "Aigil and Ailrun scolded Angiltah". However, this interpretation has been criticized (Düwel 2001) on the grounds that (1) the scribe had no apparent reason to resort to a complex bind-rune for part of the inscription and (2) a ‘scolding’ does not seem to be worthy of an inscription on an object interred with the remains of a warrior.
Düwel (2001) reads the end of line 1 as a simple ornament and the beginning of line 2 as a bind-rune formed of 
(el), producing the transliteration elahu, which would represent an acc. pl. of elah(h)o "elk, stag". The whole is then read as Áigil andi Áilrun | élahu gasókun. The verb gasókun is understood as an early form of Old High German gasahhan "forsake, deny, repent", and translated as “Aigil and Ailrun damned the stags (i.e. the stag masquerades)”. This is seen as a reference to the heathen tradition of dressing up in the skins of stags as part of New Year celebrations. Thus the inscription is to be understood as the record of the declaration of a couple (Aigil and Ailrun) to forsake participation in the celebration, possibly as a sign of their acceptance of Christianity.
Nedoma (2004) also sees the end of line 2 as ornament, yet reads the beginning of line 1 as a bind-rune composed of (íl), and the whole as Áigil andi Áilrun / Íltahu gasōkun. This would translate as "Aigil and Ailrun fought at the Ilz river". This is seen as a reference to Egil, the heroic archer of Norse mythology, who is depicted on the lid of the Auzon Runic or Franks Casket together with his wife (presumably Ailrun) engaged in battle. The casket is thought to date to approximately the same time as the Pforzen buckle.
References
- Klaus Düwel, Runenkunde, Weimar (2001), 19-20. (ISBN: 3-476-13072-X)
- Robert Nedoma, Noch einmal zur Runeninschrift auf der Gürtelschnalle von Pforzen in: Alemannien und der Norden, ed. Naumann (2004), 340-370.
- Norbert Wagner, Zu den Runeninscriften von Pforzen und Nordendorf in: Historische Sprachforschung 108, 1995. 104-112.