[gothic-l] Re: Odin the man - medieval scholarship at its best

[Dr. Dirk Faltin <dirk@smra.co.uk>]

> I have great respect for Snorri as a scholar. Like many of the best 
> Icelandic minds of his time, he had a deep love for his ancestral 
> faith. Legally and superficially he was a Christian, as was 
everyone 
> else. People had to be Christian - their lives depended on it. This 
> being said, the mind of Snorri was quite extraordinary for its 
time. 
> He knew how to write in such a way as to pacify Christian zealots, 
> while at the same time writing truthfully and accurately about his 
> beloved ancestral faith. One of the concessions which Snorri and 
> others of his kind had to make was to preface any writing or talk 
on 
> the subject with the standard propaganda accepted by the church of 
> his time. This propaganda basically consisted of the false story of 
> the Gods having been men who eventually migrated to Scandinavia. 



Konrad,

this story was likely not the attempt of a latent pagan who wanted to 
to apease zealous Christians. In contrast, the story of the migration 
of Odin and his followers is essentially borrowed from Frankish 
historiography which set out the origin of the Franks and adopted for 
the Norse (c.f Klingenberg and others). Snorri and other Norse 
writers borrowed and used these stories, because their main aim was 
to give his own rulers and dynasties a grant history, by connecting 
them to the heroes of Troy. Many of the main characters of the 
Illiad, that partly figured also in the history of the Franks, were 
also present in the Edda. Compare for example Memnon the father of 
Troer, whic Snorri called Munon, father of Tror, adding that 'we call 
him Tor'. Also about Trakia, Snorri writes that this is the same 
as 'Trudheim' (that kollum ver thrudheim) and about Frigia Snorri 
writes that 'we call it Frigg' ( er ver kollum Frigg). Thus, the main 
thing that Snorri was interested in was to give the rulers of the 
Norse world (including his own dynasty) a representative history, 
which would put them at par with great dynasties like the 
Merovingians. 






It 
> seems fairly clear that it is primarily this story which causes so 
> many modern readers to question his overall integrity. Whatever the 
> case may be, we moderns need to make an honest effort to understand 
> the laws and propaganda of the time, as well as the limits of all 
> medieval education, if we wish to understand what Snorri wrote.   
> 
> 
>  Snorri is describing a ancestor cult were humans later become gods 
> or rather representatives of various things, like fire, the 
elements 
> etc.
> 
> The nominal etymologies for most of the Gods and the comparative 
> evidence available from related religions speaks for the latter.
> 
> 
>  But all this could also be symbolism. So according to Snorri, the 
> Asatru's (in the beginning an ancestor-cult)origin is in central 
> East Sweden. I think that could more or less harmonize with the 
> accepted view (and the chronology).
> 
> I would agree that Sweden has long been one of the most important 
> centers for the religion. Historically, it seems fairly clear that 
> Sweden and Denmark were already powerful centers of Scandinavian 
> culture and religion at a time when Norway was truely a "nýlendi", 
> as modern Icelandic would have it. Medieval historians and modern 
> linguists concur in relating the Goths, whom we are studying, to 
the 
> easternmost part of Scandinavia. While it is still a hot subject of 
> debate, it seems fairly clear that East Scandinavian matches Gothic 
> in certain areas where it differs from West Scandinavian. I have 
> studied and written on this topic myself, as have many others.



If you consult Swedish linguists like Oesten Dahl (The Origin of 
Scandinavian Languages, etc.) or C.C. Elert, you would get a very 
different answer I am afraid.

Dirk 


You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>. 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/