Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1999, Side 64
44
Part One
This controversy conceming arguments based on “intemal” grounds
as opposed to “extemal” arguments, dividing even scholars defending
the same cause, is highly significant in a general perspective, and rather
intriguing, so I find it appropriate to add a more personal comment.
Reliance on internal arguments may imply a dubious irrationalism, of
which German scholarship in particular has not always been exonerat-
ed;37 nevertheless, even if it is not openly stated, I think it is all but inev-
itable that every scholar’s judgement will to some extent be conditioned
by his general impression of the object of study, based on his sympathies
and antipathies, tastes and beliefs, and that in the long run these impres-
sions may turn out to overrun any sum of accumulated rational argu-
ments, which, as Wilhelm Grimm said, can always be contradicted. It
may be unjust to identify what Grimm called “intemal grounds” with a
general impression of this kind, but it is difficult to see to what extent it
is possible to distinguish clearly between them. I think Grimm’s com-
mendation of the intemal reasons is preferable to denying their exist-
ence; it has the merit of making an appeal to the scholar’s awareness of
the “voice” of his object, and I think it can be psychologically justified
to hold that a valid judgement is not infrequently motivated by reasons
which do not rise above the threshold of consciousness. Among scholars
of excellence it is sometimes possible to find a certain impatience with
colleagues who have an “excessive need for logic and calculations”, to
quote one of the great masters, who relied very much on his artistic
empathy,38 and it is not to be denied, I think, that in some cases a well-
guided impression may be a safer and shorter way toward truth than the
result of cumbersome calculation.
The problem is, however, that lesser minds are liable to follow the
same path, and “intemal” arguments are less accessible to rational delib-
alles zusammenstellen. Es wiirden sich wohl die einzelnen Theile, wie die aufgefundenen
und gesammelten Stiicke einer verschiitteten Statue, zu einem Ganzen fugen, wenigstens
es erkennen lassen, und so sich einander verbiirgen; dann wiirden wir auBerliche Beweise
beriicksichtigen, und sie aufsuchen, auch sie, wie billig, achten, und nun diirften alle kri-
tische Zweifel erwagt werden, denn es wiirde sich leicht zeigen, wie viel sie dem Ganzen
anhaben konnten: Berichtigungen fur das Einzelne aber wiirden immer statt finden” (W.
Grimm 1811: 792-93 = 1881-87, vol. 2: 30-31).
37 Cf. Conrady 1967: 48.
38 “Diese Ansicht kam zu Worte erst bei Konrad Maurer, ein Geschlecht spater bei Bjom
Magnusson Olsen: zwei Mannem mit einem UberschuB von logischem oder rechne-
rischem Bediirfnis” (Heusler 1941: 216).