by William P. Reaves
The poems of the Poetic Edda are not a random collection of stories. They contain deliberate temporal clues — references to events that have already occurred, that must therefore precede others — which allow us to reconstruct the chronological skeleton of a coherent oral epic. This epic was known to the heathen audience in its fullness; the surviving poems are only fragments of what existed. Modern scholars are only beginning to trace what Viktor Rydberg traced a century before them.
This essay was posted to alt.religion.asatru in April 2006 by William P. Reaves, compiler of the Rydberg Index and one of the most rigorous English-language scholars of Norse mythology then active. It demonstrates the method through two worked examples — the Draupnir chain (linking the deaths of Thjazi and Baldur to the wooing of Gerd) and the Hymiskviða chain (linking the birth of Jörmungandr to the retrieval of Hymir's kettle) — and applies it to the identification of Svipdag with Freyja's husband Óðr, a reconstruction cautiously endorsed even by scholars critical of Rydberg.
Before I begin, I want to note the following observation made by
Professor Jónas Kristjánsson, retired head of the Arni Magnússon
Institute in Reykjavik, Iceland writing in "Icelandic Manuscripts:
Sagas, History, and Art"; [Translated by Jeffrey Cosser; The
Icelandic Literary Society, 1996]:
"We have to be content with an imperfect and patchy understanding of
the old religion. But this does not entitle us to assume that the
religion itself was correspondingly primitive or incomplete. We must
bear in mind that no extensive direct information about the pagan
religion was recorded until fully two centuries after the conversion to
Christianity, and the generations which had come and gone meanwhile
were, or were supposed to be, hostile to these pagan heresies."
"The most ancient poems in the Edda also show various signs of
abridgement and alteration - some of which of course may be due to
editing or error in the written stage. On the other hand, it seems an
inescapable conclusion that stories told in prose must always have
existed alongside stories told in verse. Many of the heroic lays are
shaped in such a way that it is evident the poets assumed more
knowledge of the subject-matter on the audience's part than the poems
themselves encompass: a whole legend is there as a backdrop to the
verse."
As noted here, professional scholars are now drawing the conclusion
that the mythology was structured into a loose chronological epic,
based on temporal clues in the source material itself. The leaders in
this area of research are:
Margaret Clunies Ross in Prolonged Echoes, Vol. I (1994), pp. 229-242
"Concepts of Time in Old Norse Myth"
ISBN 87-7838-0085-1/ ISSN 0108-8408.
Eleazar M. Meletinsky in The Elder Edda and Early Forms of the Epic
(1998), p. 94 ff.
ISBN 88-86474-16-4
John Lindow in Handbook of Norse Mythology (2001), pp. 39-45.
ISBN 1-57607-217-7
All these works were published in the last 10 years, and represent a
breakthough concept in modern scholarship. None advocates a strict
chronology of events, including Rydberg. Rydberg himself acknowleges
several times that the oral epic was fluid enough to accomodate change
over time. However, Rydberg's research demonstrates that there is
likely more order and arrangement in the mythic cycle than these
professionals currently recognize.
Mythological chronology need not be seen as foriegn or Biblical in
origin. That seems to be the crux of the problem for many accepting
this concept. In the Eddaic canon, the gods eat, sleep, and age.
Clearly, they are subject to the laws of time. They are born, they
live, have childen, and die. Time is obviously chronological and linear
in nature in the lore. Mythic events are conceived of as a chain of
sequential events, one thing leads to another (if you recognize this,
you can begin to some deeper ironies and symbolism). Völuspá suggests
such an order, and appears to tell the major events in a world-epic
framed by the days "when time was young" and the rise of a new
earth after Ragnarok. These form a natural beginning and ending to a
chronological series of events, encompassing the mythic events. Such an
arrangement would not be possible without a linear concept of time.
Unfortunately, the obscurity of many of Völuspá's references, as well
as its primary focus on Creation and Ragnarok, make it difficult to
understand the sequence, but when you do, Völuspá conforms closely to
the Chronology present in other poems and references.
How did the scholars named above arrive at this conclusion? Based on
Margaret Clunies Ross' account in her excellent essay on the subject,
she points to temporal clues in the mythic poems themselves.
The most obvious clue of this type occurs in Skírnismál 21. When
Skirnir approaches the giantess Gerd on Freyr's behalf. He offers her
gifts. One of the gifts is the ring Draupnir, created by Sindri and his
brother as a gift to Odin. Skirnir says:
"I give you the ring then, that was burnt, with Odinn's young
son" [Ursula Dronke tr.].
This statement shows that the events spoken of in the poem were
conceived of as occurring AFTER Baldur's death. From this we can
begin a simple exercise in epic- reconstruction.
According to the details of the story: Skirnir, Frey's servant, went
to woo Gerd after Baldur's death. Thus Baldur's death and the
events surrounding it had to occur before this event took place. After
the funeral, Hermod rides to Hel and returns with the ring (a gift from
Baldur), according to Snorri's Edda. Thus, from the sources
themselves, we have a logical explanation of how the ring burned with
Baldur was returned to the upper world, and what became of it later.
This knowledge was apparently part of the "prose stories" currently
circulating in the heathen world, from which poets and skalds were free
to compose new poems about.
In the Prose introduction to Skírnismál, Skadi appears as Njord's
wife. Thus, Skadi had already married Njord, and her father Thjazi had
already been killed by the gods prior to this. These events apparently
also take place before their divorce.
When Skadi first came to Asgard, she demanded Baldur as her husband, as
compensation for her father's death. Instead, the gods allowed her to
choose a husband by his feet, and she chose Njord, the gods of the sea.
Thus, Baldur must have been alive at this time (since all things wept
after his death, except one giantess, otherwise his death would have
been known to her and she would not have made this demand).
From these temporal clues in the best source documents, we can gather
that the events occurred in the following sequence. The poet need not
state this clearly, because as Prof. Kristjánsson says, the audience
already knew the stories. The poems simply retell them, these are not
"new" creations, regardless of whether the poem was recently
composed or not. I am suggesting, along with Kristjansson that there
was a whole oral mythology, widely known among the poeple, that forms a
backdrop to the Eddiac material. This is not the same as saying there
was one big complete epic such as the Odyssey and Illiad, fully formed
in all details and "inerrant". Simply that a common oral epic was
inherited and in circulation among the heathen peoples. That the
surviving poems and tales contain such clues, suggest that this
chronological order was well-known by the heathen audience of the poems
of the Elder Edda, and was likely created over the course of many
generations. Snorri's Edda relies on such poems and fragments as the
source of his material.
Thus, we get the following string of events:
The ring Draupnir is created by the dwarf Sindri in a contest with the
Sons of Ivaldi intigated by Loki.
The gods Odin, Hoenir, and Loki visit the giant Thjazi's territory
(as told by Snorri and in the poem Haustlong).
Thjazi kidnaps and abuses Loki making him swear an oath to obtain Idunn
and her apples.
Loki helps the giant Thajzi steal Idun.
The gods begin to age, and insist that Loki return Idunn.
Loki steals Idunn from Thjazi, and intices him to persue.
Thjazi is killed on Asgard's wall, in the form of an eagle, in hot
pursuit of Loki and Idunn.
Thjazi's daughter arrives in Asgard demanding compensation. She wants
Baldur as her husband.
The gods allow her to choose a husband by her feet. She chooses Njord.
Baldur has disturbing dreams
Odin rides to the underworld to seek answers [Baldur's Dreams]
Frigg asks all things to swear and oath not to harm Baldur.
Baldur is struck with a mistetoe arrow and dies
Baldur's funeral occurs, Draupnir is burned on his chest.
Hermod rides to Hel and returns with the ring Draupnir
Frey falls sick with Love
Skirnir woos Gerd on his behalf and offers her the ring, Draupnir.
Skadi and Njord Divorce
Nothing in the sources appears to contradict this order. [If you find
something, I'd be happy to discuss it]. This string can be expanded
further, by comparing the information from other poems as well.
In Lokasenna, many past events are recalled. Loki enters a hall where
the gods are feasting and exchanges insults with them one by one. From
the exchanges, we learn of many mythic events which occurred in the
past. Afterward, Loki is chained in the underworld, not to get loose
again until Ragnarok. Thjazi's death and Frey's wooing of Gerd are
both mentioned, so the events of Lokasenna clearly come after those
events. Since Loki remains chained until Ragnarok, we can place this
event closer to Ragnarok, as one of the last events before the end of
the "mythical" age, and the beginning of the "historical" age
- the era in which the ancient heathens (and we) lived.
When this technique is applied to all of the known myths (using the
direct sources as guides), various strings of events can be formed,
similar to the one above. Some of these will overlap, and can therefore
be joined into larger chains. Obviously gaps will appear in our
knowledge, based on the limited resources he have for study, and some
strings cannot be immediately connected without further research. Since
our sources are fragmentary, we should expect such gaps in our
knowledge. But as Kristjansson says, that does not entitle us to assume
that the mythology was correspondingly as incomplete! Yet we do.
In the string above, we do not know exactly when the creation of
Draupnir took place, compared to the encounter of Odin, Loki, and
Hoenir, with Thjazi. [I placed it before for a reason]. As a point of
study, we might investigate the Sons of Ivaldi, and see if the sources
tell us anything more of them, in the hopes of connecting these events.
For an example of a study of this kind, see:
I stand by the evidence presented there, and to the best of my
knowledge, it is correct.
This method is at the heart of Rydberg's reconstruction. He simply
compares the sources remaining for study and looks for correspondances
in the stories, and the accompanying names to place events. [Mythic
characters have multiple-names, and their identies are not always clear
to us, especially in the cases of minor characters]. He then tests his
theories, to see if his conclusions are supported by other documents.
He arranges the mythic events in chronological order based on the data
in the sources themselves. He considers the oldest sources, closest to
the heathen age, better testimonies of heathen beliefs than newer
sources. Each source is given weight, based on its age and content.
Thus, the information in the Poetic Edda, is preferred over what is
preserved in the Prose Edda (Snorri's Edda) while, a source such as
Saxo's History, slightly older than Snorri, but retold as fragmentary
history, is afforded less weight than Snorri's text. Both treat the
gods as human beings, but clearly Snorri's source holds more weight
as a mythological source than Saxo's, because his material is less
disjointed and closer to the heathen spirit. Snorri also preserves big
chunks of heathen verse. When contradictions arise (and there are fewer
than you might expect) the oldest, weighter source should take
presidence.
The modern scholar John McKinnell takes a similar view:
From "Both One and Many" by John McKinnell:
1.1. The Sources
"Any wise commentator on Norse mythology ought to begin by
acknowledging frankly that we know rather little about it. Many modern
descriptions rely heavily on the Prose Edda of Snorri Sturluson (SnE.),
and especially on the fluent and persuasive account of the gods in
Gylfaginning (Gylf.), its first major section ". But Snorri was writing
in the 1220's, when Iceland had been a christian country for two
centuries, and his Prologus (Prol.) begins with an unambiguous
authorial statement of the christian view of creation:
"Alm?ttigr gu? skapa?i himin ok j?r? ok alla ?? hluti er ?eim
fylgja, ok s??arst menn tv? er ?ttir eru fr? komnar, Adam ok Evu,
ok fj?lga?isk ?eira kynsl?? ok dreif?isk um heim allan.
"Almighty God created heaven and earth and all things in them, and
lastly two humans from whom generations are descended, Adam and Eve,
and their stock multiplied and spread over all the world ".
"When the heathen view is subsequently introduced, it is as a
deception practised by the ?sir (who are said to be descended from
King Priam of Troy) on an indigenous Swedish king who, along with all
the rest of heathen humanity, has lost the tradition of knowledge about
the true God.
"Of course, Snorri was obliged to put forward the heathen mythology
only as error, but he was a member of a universally christian society,
and there is no reason to think that he had any desire to present it as
truth. He was writing primarily for the benefit of aspiring poets, who
could only understand the work of their predecessors if they knew the
myths alluded to in earlier poetry .He thus had no reason deliberately
to distort the material he inherited, but he received it as a christian
from christian informants, and his understanding of it is inevitably
limited by that fact.
"When we look for genuinely heathen voices, there are three or
perhaps four types of source:
a) Mythological Eddic poems
b) Skaldic verse
c) Picture stones
d) Contemporary christian views of Norse heathenism
"It appears, therefore, that if we wish to study Norse myth through
the eyes of those for whom it was a living faith (or at worst, through
those of their close imitators), all these types of source must be
combined, but the evidence of eddic poetry is likely to be the most
useful."
End Quote
Following the poem Hymiskviða, another string of events can be built.
Here some difficlties arise, which cannot wholey be solved since we
have two sources from Iceland, but afforded different weights. In this
case, the more heathen source (Hymiskviða) should be afforded
presidence over Snorri's account.
In Hymiskviða 5 and 8, Tyr is said to be the son of a giant. Yet in
Snorri's Edda, he is the son of Odin. We might infer that Tyr, as a
god, was a son of Odin raised by a giant named Hymir (the point is
debatable). It's likely that Hymiskviða use of the word "father" is
poetic, and figurative rather than exact. The introduction ot
Snorri's Edda also provides some evidence that Odin's son Thor was
raised away from Asgard, so this may refer to a lost myth. In
Lokasenna, Loki claims to have a son by Tyr's wife, unknown to us, so
clarlye some of the details of the myths have been lost to us.
In Hymiskviða, Tyr and Thor go to the giant Hymir's in search of a
kettle to brew ale enough for the gods. On the adventure, Thor goes
fishing with the giant and catches the Midgard serpent. Near the end, a
reference to Thor's goat being lamed by Thjalfi is mentioned.
We might further infer (again debatable) that sometime later, Fenrir is
chained and Tyr loses his hand. At the end of Hymiskviða, Tyr attempts
to pick up the kettle at Hymir's and attempts to lift it, so we might
infer he is still two-handed at that point. [or did he fail because he
only had one hand? Or is this lack of strength when picking up an
object an allusion to his future loss? We simply now cannot be sure.]
Studying Hymiskviða, we get the following string of events.
Loki eats the half-burnt heart of a witch he finds and bears the
serpent Jormungand, the Wolf Fenrir, and the daughter "Hel". The
gods throw Jormungand into the sea, where he grows. Tyr takes care of
Fenrir, and is the only one who dares to feed him. (Völuspá in Skamma
11 & 12, cp. to Gylfaginning). Since Thor encounters the serpent in
Hymiskviða, the birth of the serpent much occur BEFORE these events.
Thor travels to the sea-giant Aegir's, and demands he brew ale for
the gods.
Aegir demands that Thor find a kettle large enough to do so
Tyr tells Thor his "father" Hymir possesses one.
Thor and Tyr travel to Hymir's. Along the way, they stop and leave the
goats in the care of Egil (Hym. 7)
Thor and Tyr arrive on foot at Hymir's
Thor goes fishing with Hymir and catches the serpent. Hymir cuts his
line.
Thor and Tyr escape Hymir's with the kettle.
They travel to Egil's to retrieve the goat-cart
As they leave Egil's, Thor notes that one of the goats is lamed.
(Hym. 37 & 38).
Snorri tells us the tale of how Thor received the children of a peasant
(Egil) as compensation for this damage. From this we can infer that
Thjalfi and Roskva are the children of Egil.
Hymiskviða 38 does not retell that story. Instead he says:
"But you have heard - and any mythologist can report the exact details
of this story -"
Source: hymis.html
Snorri tells the tale about Thjalfi, but only notes that the house Thor
stops at is owned by a peasant. Hymiskviða informs us the name of the
home owner is Egil.
Snorri says this story occurred on Thor's journey way to
Utgard-Loki's (since Thjalfi plays a role in that story), but knows
nothing of the tale of the retrieval of Hymir's kettle. Snorri does
however know the tale of Thor's fishing with Hymir.
Thus, in cases such as this the older, more heathen source should take
presidence. We cannot assume that Snorri knew these tales better than
the earlier poets of the Poetic Edda, or had more sources than he
quotes. His sources, which may or may not form the basis of his prose,
may or may not have been fragmentary. Nothing can be built solidly on
such speculation. Modern scholars support this view. Still, many are
simply inclined to see them as "variants" and think nothing more of
them. Realistically, 200 years after the Christian conversion, we
cannot expect the heathen oral tradition to still have been intact,
although stories must still have been in circulation. Thus a thorough
study should be performed on all the available data looking for
correspondances, before any conclusions are made. The conclusions
should be reconsidered in light of new evidence.
The poems contains many such clues, which we have been trained to
simply overlook, by force of habit. Since "we" do not understand the
reference, "we" consider it unimortant or give it little thought. Some
of the modern English translations have helped us in this regard, by
glossing over these "obscurities" making them seem clear. A careful
eye will spot many references such as these, which seem to make no
sense at first or are thought to have a general meaning, but upon
closer examination really do have specific meaning. Egil in Hymiskviða
7 isn't simply a random name thrown in without meaning. To the
heathen audience, it told them exactly who Thor was visiting, and
suggested a whole backdrop of Egil's myths, wel- known across the
lore, as Rydberg has shown. The poet had to say little more than "Egil"
and mention the goats to let them know what was happening, and thus
could move on without explanation, because the audience knew that Thor
had a common stopping place on his way to Jotunheim, where he left his
goat-cart. He typically entered Jotunheim on foot. That safehouse was
the elf Egil's. I am not speaking of the human name Egil, a common
name in later historic Icelandic sagas, but the Egil of the Eddaic
poems, who is a recurrent mythological character. The only other place
in the mythological poems that he occurs by that name occurs is in
Volundarkvida.
In Volundarkvida, Egil is an archer, and in kennings, arrows are called
"the quick herring of Egil's hands". As a dweller by the
Elivagor, where fish are known to swim (Thor and the giant Hymir fish
on the same waters), Egil no doubt was considered a fisherman, so
arrows are aptly compared to herring which fly from his hands through
the air, as herring dart through the sea. Herring (sil) is a large part
of the Scandinavian diet, so the allusion is both topical and
understandable, if the audience knows who Egil is. If Egil were a
general name of a giant, as modern scholars suggest, this kenning would
be incomprehensible. [Again, refer to the essay on Ivaldi's sons for
more details]. These are themes that J.R.R. Tolkien himself picked up
on, when he made the elves archers, and has them journey over water.
In Lokasenna, we are told that Aegir brews ale for the gods, and are
told that Tyr lost his hand to the wolf. So again, as in our first
string, the events of Lokasenna must occur afterward. Again we are left
with gaps. When such gaps are met, one can sometimes make inferences
about what they contained from the surrounding chains. An excellent
example of this is the two poems known as Grógaldr and Fjölsvinnsmál.
They are in Eddaic metres, and included in many editions of the Poetic
Edda.
Both poems tell parts of the tale of a hero named Svidpag, who seeks
and obtains a divine bride known as Menglad. In Grógaldr, the
hero's mother sings spells over him as a child for his protection in
the quest for Menglad. In Fjölsvinnsmál, Svipdag obtains Menglad. We are
not directly told what happened between the events spoken of in each
poem [I remind you once again that Kristjansson says we cannot assume
the myth was correspondingly incomplete, and suggests that the heathen
audience knew the stories behind the poems much better than we do,
because the poets often make the slightest allusion to events, we are
often ignorant of. Fjölsvinnsmál is especially cryptic, perhaps because
of its late composition - i.e. to avoid Christian censorship].
These poems are thought to be parts of a single epic, and together are
sometimes called Svipdagsmál. From clues in the spells, and the
adventures Svipdag is fated to face, we can infer the perils he
endured, before the final scene.
Thankfylly, the Eddaic poems do not exhaust our resources, we have
other sources at our disposal which are often untapped by scholars. One
of these is the Danish History of Saxo Grammaticus which contains much
material drawn from the mythology, retold as history. Many names, such
as Svipdag, and his mother Groa are mentioned in the work, and there we
learn more details which dovetail with the elements of the story we
already know, and which we can study for clues to unlock the details of
Svipdag's adventure suggested by the spells in Grógaldr. From the
clues obtained in our study of Svipdagsmál, we can identify storylines
in Saxo which fit the outline, and see how well they fill the gaps. The
better the fit, the more likely that we have found a piece of the
missing story, widely known by the heathen audience (as Prof.
Kristjánsson says above), and thus likely to appear in other sources
which draw their information from the mythology. Because they are from
different places and times, we cannot expect the pieces to match
identically. We are looking for the closest matches possible, if any
can be found at all. Fortunately, Saxo has at least two tales of a
"princess" being rescued from giants by a hero of lower status than
she that are close enough in detail that we can be reasonably sure they
refer to this myth. When Völuspá 25 asks, "Who gave Odr's girl to the
giants", it encapsulates this entire tale in a nutshell, instead
focusing on the culprit, Gullveig-Heid, who is burnt by the Aesir for
"giving" Freyja to the giants. [Although he quotes Völuspá, Snorri
makes no mention of Gullveig, and connects this episode to the tale of
the giant-builder].
In Hymiskviða, notice that Thor is not identified by name in the poem
until verse 23. He is most often called Hlorridi, and on occasion
Veurr. Other references such as "Sif's husband" and "Odin's
son" make him recognizable to us. Unfortunately in poems such as
Svipdagsmál, this is not always the case. We know that Fjölsviðr is a
name of Odin, is all. The poet makes this clearer, when he has Menglad
say:
"wise ravens will tear out your eyes on the gallows if you are lying"
(Fjölsvinnsmál 45).
Odin of course is known as Fjölsviðr (Grímnismál 47). He is the god of
the gallows, the god of ravens, and has had an eye "torn out". In
verse 14, Fjölsviðr has two dogs, Geri and Gifr. In Grímnismál, Odin's
dogs are named Geri and Freki. Could the poet make it any clearer?
As we know, beings in our mythology may have many names. Odin has 49
names (in reality, many more); Freyja is called Syr, Mardoll, and
Vanadis, etc. Heimdall is called Rig. Thor is called Hlorridi, and
Veurr. These are just some of the names we know. And we know them
because either Snorri told us, or we discover their identities in old
fragments opf poetry and were able to idebtify them. No doubt there are
others. The fact is, the poems contain many names and episodes which
remain obscure to us today, because we lack the background to
understand them clearly.
Jacob Grimm and others have suggested that the goddess Menglad in
Fjölsvinnsmál is none other than Freyja. The details of the poem support
this view. Not strangely, one of the tales in Saxo that corresponds to
the details of Svipdagsmál is the tale of Ericus and Syritha.The name
Syritha is a Latinized form of Freyja's name Syr, lending more weight
to Freyja's identification with Menglad above. It is probable that
Saxo took alternate names of the characters to retell their stories as
new "historic" episodes. Menglad simply means Necklace-glad (She
who is pleased by the necklace, she who loves necklaces, etc), and
corresponds to Freyja's characteristic ornament, Brisinga-men, the
fire-necklace (or necklace of the Brisings'). As we have seen, her
guardian in the poem is Fjölsviðr who we can easily identify as Odin.
Thus, Svipdag arrives at Asgard shaded by the branches of "Mimir's
Tree", with a golden cock sitting over head. Völuspá tells us his name
is Gullinkambi, Fjölsvinnsmál calls him Vidofnir.
Regarding the identification of Freyja and Syritha the Swedish scholar
Britt-Mari Näsström comments:
"Viktor Rydberg suggested that Syritha is Freyja herself and that
Ottar is identical with same as Svipdag, who appears as Menglad's
beloved in Fjölsvinnsmál. Rydberg's intention in his investigations
of Germanic mythology were to co-ordinate the myths and mythical
fragments into coherent short stories. Not for a moment did he hestiate
to make subjective interpretations of the episodes, based on more
imagination and poetic skills than facts. His explication of the Sirtha
episode is an example of his approach, AND YET HE IS PROBABLY RIGHT
when he identifed Siritha with Freyja."
If this is a correct identification, then Svipdag is Freyja's
husband, the same "man" that Snorri calls Odr (the same name as
Ottar in Hyndluljod), an epithet he drew from Völuspá 25 and other
kennings. From the details obtained from Svipdagsmál and Saxo. He was a
great adventurer, and truly earned the right to marry Freyja. His tale
was well-known, and has left refersnces in many places. In truth, he
was a central character in the mythology, and a mortal link between
humans and the gods. So why doesn't Snorri tell his tale???
Remember he also does not tell the tale of Thor retreiving Hymir's
kettle. Snorri does however retell the story of Thor's fishing found
in that poem, which he may have known from a different source. In
Gylfaginning, 48, he begins the tale by saying "It is no secret, even
among those who are not scholars, that Thor received redress for this
expedition that has just been recounted, ...." This indicates it was
a popular tale. Thus, Hymiskviða probably contains a fuller account,
and was probably unknown to Snorri. Although again, we cannot make any
assumptions regarding this. The poems are full of clues that help point
the way.
In an interesting connection to the chain formed from Skírnismál above,
we are told in Völuspá in Skamma 2, that Gerd is the daughter of Gymir
and Aurboda. In Fjölsvinnsmál 38, Aurboda is one of Menglad's maidens,
who sits at her feet. Thus Frey, bewitched by love, falls for a
daughter of one of his sister's servants. This may suggest another
avenue of study]. Snorri further informs us that Gymmir is another
name for Aegir. And Skírnismál 6 informs us that Gerd is so radiant
that her arms shone over "all the air and water." From these kinds
of subtle clues, we can begin to see how the gods and giants are
interrelated, and how these relationships effect their interactions.
These references would be entirely unnecessary if they did not have
meaning to the intended audience.
Today, we tend to place more weight on Snorri's accounts, because they
are easier to read and understand than the poems of the Poetic Edda,
the same poems that Snorri himself used as his own sources to a large
extent. Writing 200 years after the Christian conversion, Snorri may
not have known the myth (he makes no reference to this poem), or
perhaps the tale of Freyja and her husband was too controversial for
him to mention in the shadow of the Church. At this late date, there is
no way to tell. We can make NO ASSUMPTIONS about Snorri's knowledge
or motives, as many have done in the past, and still do today. We can
simply look for broad, detailed correspondances in the sources, in the
hopes of reconnecting separated fragments. In the case of Odr, Ottar,
Svipdag, the pieces fit extremely well, too much for the various
details found arcross the sources used to be mere coincidence. In this
way, we can tap into those "prose stories" in circulation among the
heathens, Kristjansson refers to that form a backdrop to the mythic
poems. It's all Rydberg did. Modern scholars are just beginning that
quest.
Time will tell if more of Rydberg's theories are validated. Over
time, many of his ideas are being confirmed, such as his view that a
giant-mill operates at the bottom of the sea, based on evidence from
the primary sources. In recent scholarship, Clive Tolley and Ursula
Dronke have confirmed this reconstruction independent of Rydberg in
large part, using the same evidence Rydberg did. As a poet, and someone
who put himself in the shoes of a devout heathen, his work is unique in
the field. As you know, few, if any scholars, are poets themselves, and
few poets are scholars of the calibre that Rydberg was. He has a
well-deserved reputation as a scholar, as well as being a novelist, and
a poet. He was a member of the Swedish Academy, and taught at the
University level. He is nothing like some care to characterize him in
these forums.
Colophon
William P. Reaves (1953–) is an American scholar of Norse mythology and the compiler of Our Fathers' Godsaga: Viktor Rydberg's Mythology Explained and the Rydberg Index, an extensive concordance to Viktor Rydberg's Teutonic Mythology. He was a regular contributor to alt.religion.asatru in the 2000s, defending and extending Rydberg's comparative mythological method against critics who dismissed it. This essay represents his clearest exposition of the mythic chronology argument: that the Eddic poems contain internal temporal clues enabling reconstruction of a coherent oral epic cycle, a view now increasingly supported by mainstream scholarship (Clunies Ross, Meletinsky, Lindow).
Preserved from the Usenet archive for the Good Work Library by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026. Posted to alt.religion.asatru, 26 April 2006. Original Message-ID: [email protected].
🌲