Bumke, Joachim. Geschichte der deutschen Literatur im hohen
Mittelalter, vol. 2. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuchverlag,
1990.
de Boor, Helmut. Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den
Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart, vol. 2. 11th ed. Die höfi sche
Literatur. Vorbereitung, Blüte, Ausklang. 1170–1250. Munich:
Beck, 1991.
Glaser, Horst Albert, ed. Mündlichkeit in die Schriftlichkeit.
Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1988, pp. 164–185.
Hayes, Nancy Karl. “Negativizing Narcissus: Heinrich von Mo-
rungen at Julia Kristeva’s Court.” The Journal of the Midwest
Modern Language Association 22 (1989): 43–60.
“Heinrich von Morungen.” In Lexikon des Mittelalters, vol. 4.
Munich and Zurich: Artemis, 1977, cols. 2101–2102.
Kasten, Ingrid. “Klassischer Minnesang.” In: Deutsche Literatur.
Eine Sozialgeschichte. Bd. 1.
Moser, Hugo and Helmut Tervooren, ed. Des Minnesangs
Frühling, 37th rev. ed. Stuttgart: Hirzel, 1981 [poems cited
above by no.].
Schnell, Rüdiger. “Andreas Capellanus, Heinrich von Morungen
und Herbort von Fritzlar.” Zeitschriji für Deutsches Altertum
und Deutsche Literatur 104 (1975): 131–151.
Alexandra Sterling-Hellenbrand
HEINRICH VON VELDEKE
(ca. 1150–1200)
Uncertainty surrounds the poet Heinrich von Veldeke,
known primarily for his Eneasroman (The Story of Ae-
neas), but known also as the composer of St. Servatius
and several love lyrics. Heinrich fi nished only about
four-fi fths of his Eneide between 1170 and 1175, be-
cause someone purportedly stole his manuscript from a
wedding celebration at Cleve. Through the intervention
of Hermann, count of Thuringia, he regained access
to it and completed it about 1185. Heinrich’s works
remain elusive due to a dearth of adequate critical
research; and the literature that attempts to outline
the circumstances of his life and his creative activity
is also inconclusive. Nevertheless, he is considered the
father of German vernacular literature of the Middle
Ages, a model for immediate contemporaries and later
imitators alike.
Heinrich must have been born in the fi rst half of
the twelfth century, perhaps in a place called Veldeke
or Ve l k e r Mole near Hasselt and Maastricht in what
was, at the time, Limburgian Belgium. Early witnesses
recorded his identity variously as Heinrich, Heynrijck,
Hainrich, or Heinric, from (van or von) Veltkilche(n),
Veldeckh, Ve l d eg, and Veldig, as well as Veldeke. Some
poets referred to him as “Lord” and “Master,” indicating
that he was a noble and educated. There was, in fact, a
Veldeke family of the lesser nobility in the Maastricht
region. Heinrich may have been related to and served
the counts of Loon. Reminiscences of other authors and
texts in his own work are evidence of his familiarity with
ancient and contemporary literature, suggesting that he
might have studied in a cathedral or monastery school.
He was knowledgeable in the literatures and languages
of Germany, of France, and of antiquity, employing the
Straßburg Alexander, the Old French Roman d’Eneas
and Virgil’s Aeneid as models for his own version of the
epic. He was also acquainted with Dictys and Dares,
Ovid, and Servius. Both German and Dutch scholars
claim him as their own.
Whether or not the original language of Veldeke’s
major work was Old Limburgian or a more universal
German literary language has occupied a great deal
of time and effort among Veldeke scholars. Ludwig
Ettmüller published the fi rst edition of the Eneasro-
man in 1882 based upon the larger number of Upper
German manuscripts. Ettmüller believed the original
to have been transcribed in a lowland dialect, but he
did not think it was possible to reconstruct the original
text. Some thirty years later, Otto Behaghel attempted
a Rückübersetzung (a translation back to the older lan-
guage), as did Gabriele Schieb and Theodor Frings in
the 1960s. All existing versions of the epic, however,
are Middle German, Upper German, or High German
(Ober-deutscb and Hochdeutsch).
Whatever the original language, the work’s infl uence
reached exclusively to Upper German regions rather
than to Veldeke’s supposed home in Limburg. Gottfried
von Straßburg acknowledges Heinrich as the fi rst graft
upon the stem of German literature, and his infl uence
can be traced in a number of later German authors. In
addition, one of his sources seems to have been the
Straßburg Alexander, composed in an Alemannic dialect
(and thus Upper German). The Eneide also bears a close,
but problematic, relationship to the German Tristrant
of Eilhart von Oberge. The question of language is
known in Veldeke studies as “The Veldeke Problem.”
Though no one has unequivocally settled the question,
the interpolation of a Limburg dialect seems to be the
invention of Ettmüller rather than an actual fact. Veldeke
apparently sought the widest possible German-speaking
audience for his work.
Among scholars, the most widely-discussed criti-
cal topics concerning the Eneasroman, include the
romances of Eneas with Dido and Lavinia, and the
comparison of these to the Old French versions and to
Virgil. For instance, for pursuing his fate and the will
of the gods, Virgil does not blame Aeneas for abandon-
ing Dido. The Old French and Middle High German
authors portray her love as undisciplined, unsanctioned
by society, and unrequited by Eneas, but do so more
sympathetically than does Virgil. Veldeke demonstrates
even more compassion for Dido than does the French
poet. In both vernacular versions, the poets expand upon
the relationship of Virgil’s Aeneas and Lavinia, provid-
ing a commentary on ideal love, Lavinia’s “legitimate”
love, overcoming the “illicit” love of Dido and Eneas.
According to the critical literature, the love theme thenHEINRICH VON VELDEKE