Jacob Grimm

Record year1819–1837

summaryPlaced morphological and sound correspondences across Germanic languages within a large-scale system of historical grammar, allowing sound change to be compared as a regular historical process.

M rationaleM6.3 assesses the terminal outcome in terms of a cross-linguistically systematized method and reusable regularities. Open academic introductions confirm Grimm's law and Jacob's relation to it; the present materials also require substantial budget to remain for Rask and earlier comparative philology, rather than granting Jacob exclusive ownership because the law bears his name.

attribution rationaleJacob .35, Rask .20, other comparative-philological prehistory .18, textual-corpus contributors .10, original publication chain .05, unresolved .12.

overlap boundaryThe comparison of Germanic languages, morphology, and systematic sound-change organization in Deutsche Grammatik after 1819, including consonant-correspondence regularities later called Grimm's law. The whole of Indo-European linguistics, Rask's earlier observations, Verner's later law, and all modern historical linguistics are excluded.

Evidence gapsThe original text of each edition of Deutsche Grammatik and Rask's corresponding propositions have not yet been compared paragraph by paragraph. Whether the morphological and sound-change subscopes require further separation remains open; they are currently accounted for within the same family of historical-grammar methods.

Record year1828–1842

summarySystematically applied philological and folkloric materials to reconstruct legal history, and collected dispersed local customary-law materials into a searchable three-volume source collection.

M rationaleM5.6 assesses the complementary terminal outcome of a method of legal-historical interpretation and the Weisthümer source collection, above the method of 1828 assessed at 5.3 alone. ETH holdings confirm the original three parts of 1840–1842 and Jacob's role as collector; not reading the three volumes does not directly lower M, but limits judgments about geographical coverage and editorial quality.

attribution rationaleJacob .40, local legal materials and transcription/archive contributors .20, prehistory of historical jurisprudence .20, publication chain .05, unresolved .15.

overlap boundaryThe 1828 Deutsche Rechtsalterthümer reconstructs early Germanic legal concepts and customs from linguistic, folkloric, and historical materials, while the three parts of Weisthümer from 1840–1842 collect and publish local customary-law materials. Together they form one family of interpretive method and source delivery; ancient law itself, modern institutions, the lexical-corpus value, and assumptions about the truth of national legal continuity are excluded.

Evidence gapsSpecific customary-law propositions in Rechtsalterthümer have not been verified, nor have the three volumes of Weisthümer been read in full to confirm geographical coverage, editorial quality, and co-collectors; the national framework and contemporary political meanings require further historiographical assessment.

Record year1835; revised in 1844

summaryEstablished an integrated comparative framework across types of material, bringing dispersed linguistic, mythic, and customary evidence into systematic cultural-historical discussion.

M rationaleM5.5 assesses the terminal outcome of the synthetic method and reference work, including its deficiencies in source criticism: an academic biography expressly criticizes its mixing of folk materials from different periods. Its value lies in organizing research across language, custom, and myth; it does not mean that all of its historical reconstruction stands.

attribution rationaleJacob .40, contributors of source materials .20, scholarly prehistory .18, original publication chain .05, unresolved .17.

overlap boundaryThe 1835 Deutsche Mythologie organizes language, texts, customs, and legends into a cultural-historical synthesis of Germanic mythology. The truth of myths/beliefs, all Germanic culture, duplicated content from the brothers' jointly assembled fairy-tale/legend corpus, and later nationalist uses are excluded.

Evidence gapsThe original work's propositions, sources, and period bias have not been checked chapter by chapter; the precise share of materials shared with German Legends that is counted here has not yet been decomposed item by item.

Record year1838–1961

summaryEstablished an exceptionally long-term framework for historical lexicography, tracing the origins, meanings, and changing uses of New High German vocabulary through a large body of word examples, and completed by a cross-generational team.

M rationaleM6.4 assesses the final state of the complete cross-generational historical dictionary of 32 volumes and about 33 times ten thousand of entries, rather than assigning all value to the brothers. BBAW and GRIMMWELT establish that Jacob and Wilhelm founded the project and that generations of contributors completed it over more than 120 years; later editors who actually completed it therefore receive the largest budget.

attribution rationaleJacob .12, Wilhelm .10, early excerpting/correspondence team .18, publication chain .08, later completion team .32, academic institutions .10, lexicographical prehistory .08, unresolved .02.

overlap boundaryThe cross-generational Deutsches Wörterbuch project, initiated in 1838, published from 1854 and completed in 1961: it records etymologies, changes of meaning, forms, usage, and regional distribution. The brothers receive credit only for the joint initiation, early word examples, and entries completed during their lifetimes; later generations of editors enter the same terminal-outcome budget because they actually completed all 32 volumes. Subsequent A–F revision and all German vocabulary itself are excluded.

Evidence gapsThe alphabetic division of labor between Jacob and Wilhelm and the teams for each later volume have not been decomposed volume by volume; the early contributors of 60 times ten thousand of word examples and the source network have not been identified by name in a closed record.

Record year1848

summaryIncorporated scattered material on Langobardic, Salian Frankish, Burgundian, and other languages into a two-volume narrative of language history, extending historical characterization to languages without continuous texts.

M rationaleM5.3 assesses only the residual synthesis of language history not already counted in the grammar/sound-change outcome. An academic biography credits the characterization of several poorly documented languages while also making clear that Geten = Gothen does not withstand strict examination; both aspects enter the value judgment, and the addition of a book title does not duplicate M.

attribution rationaleJacob .38, Zeuß .10, comparative-linguistic/ethnographic prehistory .20, contributors of textual historical materials .12, publication chain .05, unresolved .15.

overlap boundaryThe historical-ethnographic synthesis of Germanic-language material lacking continuous documentation in the two-volume Geschichte der deutschen Sprache of 1848. Counts only the residual historical narrative and characterization of scattered languages beyond Deutsche Grammatik; sound-change regularities, duplicated value from general comparative method, and the truth of the Geten = Gothen hypothesis are excluded.

Evidence gapsThe two volumes have not been read in full, so usable language history cannot be separated from ethnic hypotheses chapter by chapter; the proportion of materials and methods shared with Deutsche Grammatik remains a provisional estimate.

Record year1806–1857

summaryTurned stories and legends from diverse sources into a large, searchable, repeatedly revised, and publicly disseminated shared corpus; Wilhelm's continuing rewriting through the 1857 final edition produced a terminal outcome of literary narration distinct from verbatim oral recording.

M rationaleM6.0 assesses the large narrative corpora built through two collections sharing methods, together with the final state of editing their 1812–1857 versions. GRIMMWELT confirms written and oral sources, women storytellers, and especially Wilhelm's continuing rewrites; expanding the version range therefore does not add a separate M, while Jacob's share is reduced and Wilhelm's increased.

attribution rationaleJacob .12, Wilhelm .23, principal women storytellers .20, other oral/written sources .18, prehistory .08, publication chain .08, unresolved .11.

overlap boundaryCollection began in 1806; Children's and Household Tales appeared in 1812/1815, German Legends in 1816/1818, and the tales underwent continuing rewriting by Wilhelm from the 1819 second edition and the 1825 small edition to the final 1857 edition. The two collections share a method of collection/editing and form one outcome family, rather than duplicating M by story, version, or title; original authorship of stories, later adaptations, and all German folklore are excluded.

Evidence gapsA table of storytellers, written sources, and version revisions has not been established item by item; the story-by-story proportions of Jacob's and Wilhelm's labor in each version and in German Legends remain provisional estimates; the 1857 extension adjusts only the budget, rather than duplicating value by version.