e slept, Gudrun took Hogni's son Hnifling, who
desired to avenge his slaughtered father, and entering Atli's chamber,
the young man thrust a sword through the breast of the Hunnish king. He
awoke through the pain of his wound, and was informed by Gudrun that she
was his murderess. He bitterly reproached her, only to be told that she
cared for no one but Sigurd. Atli's last request was that his obsequies
should be such as were fitting for a king, and to ensure that he had
proper funeral rites Gudrun set fire to his castle and burnt his body
together with those of his dead retainers.

The further adventures of Gudrun are related in certain songs in the
Edda, but the Volsunga Saga proper ends with the death of Atli.

Comparisons between the Epics

We see from this account that the Volsunga Saga presents in many
respects an older form of the Nibelungenlied story. Sigurd is the same
as Siegfried; Gunnar, Hogni, and Gudrun are parallels with Gunther,
Hagen, and Kriemhild--although, strangely enough, that name is also
borne by Gudrun's mother in the Volsunga Saga. We will recall that the
events detailed in the first part of the lay of the Volsungs are vaguely
alluded to in the Nibelungenlied, which assures us that the connexion we
have thus drawn is a correct one.

Myth or History?

We come now to the vexed question as to whether the Nibelungenlied is
mythical or historical in origin. This question has been approached by
certain scholars who, because of their lack of mythological knowledge,
have rendered themselves ridiculous in attempting elucidations on a
purely historical basis. An entirely mythological origin is not here
pleaded for the Nibelungenlied, but it should surely be recognized, even
by the historian who is without mythological training, that no story of
any antiquity exists which does not contain a substantial substratum of
mythical circumstance. So speedy is the crystallization of myth around
the nucleus of historical fact, and so tenacious is its hold, that to
disentangle it from the factors of reality is a task of the most extreme
difficulty, requiring careful handling by scholars who possess a wide
and accurate knowledge of mythological processes. Even to-day, when
students of history have recovered from the first shock of the intrusion
into their domain of the mythologist and the folklorist, so much remains
to be effected in the disentanglement of what is believed to be absolute
historical fact from the