Norse mythology thread

So, do you believe that Hrolf, Helgi, Skuld, Hjorvard and the rest really existed?

Now I'm wondering what a Demythtification of The Saga of Hrolf Kraki would be like. Skuld would probably be a Valkyrie seeress/priestess of Odin, and her mother would probably be something like that as well.

edited 4th Jul '13 2:52:57 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

bump

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

I think they might have been. It's a good bet that warriors and kings were real people at some point that were so famous they became legendary heroes in tales told after their death.

And it wouldn't be hard writing demythtified versions, they're pretty Low Fantasy as it stands. Irish is preobably the grittiest mythology your likely to find about equal to the darker sagas. In both cases, the most you'll find are some bits of prophecy and maybe an ambiguous appearance by a god who nudges the story along.

But as far as pantheons go, Odin and most of the other gods were pretty nice and actively looked out for humans.

Contrast with the Ananaki of Sumerian mythology who created humans as a slave race so the earth would be more comfortable wen they visited.

Would "Mythical creatures (but not gods) created by science" count as "Demythification"?

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

Beware, long post ahead...

Re: Helgi

Hah! Funny, because the elf-woman came to Helgi on a Yule eve.

But, quoting from this translation:

Definitely sounds like rape, or sex-under-coercion if you think there is a difference. He didn't use violence, but it was clear she was in his power and did not want to sleep with him (... and there is the implication he would have used violence if she hadn't complied). Also, he most definitely raped Queen Oluf earlier.

On a side note, there seems to be influence from a fairy tale/folk legend motif, about love affairs between humans and elves. In this kind of stories, such relationships always end badly, and it is always the human partners who break their word, never the elf. The broken promise then has dire consequences for the elf, the human, or both.

Regarding my earlier post, I'd like to add that you can certainly speculate that there was a mysterious force at work which hindered Helgi from remembering his promise. You know, like people in fairy tales sometimes do exactly what they have been warned against. But I don't think that would change much: It would be still characteristic for his personal flaws. Magic or not, he might have been able to keep his word if he had put more effort in it.

I also think you are wrong with your perception that Helgi is presented as a "good ruler". He is overly proud, impulsive and self-centered. In Freudian terms, he has a huge ego and a strong id but not much of a superego. It is these same faults that eventually get him killed, with many of his followers. Also, the war with Hrok and the death of Hroar might never have happened if he had made his nephew a better offer. Helgi is a great warrior, and not a Complete Monster (he housed a homeless person in his sleeping room at Yule night, how nice is that!) but from a king, one would expect qualities like wisdom, responsibility and self-control all of which Helgi lacks.

Re: Skuld

Skuld's name is certainly a nod to the divine Skuld the valkyrie/norn (she's actually both). But I don't think the saga regards them as the same. Hrolf's Saga is pretty explicit that "paganism is bad"; therefore the name alone characterizes Skuld as sinister and not to be trusted.

Note that in no other source it is said that Skuld was a half-elf. In Skjöldunga Saga, which is older than Hrolf's Sagas, she is the daughter of Yrsa and Adils (let that sink in...). So she is still Hrolf's half-sister, but on his mother's side instead of his father's, and completely human.

Re: Historicity

I don't think you can call Hrolf and Helgi "historical". There is a good chance that there have been two kings named *Hailaga and *Hrōþiwulfaz (their names in their own time, according to linguistic reconstruction). But did Hailaga impregnate an elf-woman he had freed from a curse and did Hro-guy "sow gold" on Fyrisvellir? Probably not.

Re: Demythtification

Demythtification is relative. Snorri Sturluson and Saxo Grammaticus demythtified the Aesir into human sorcerors; obviously in their time and place people could no longer believe in pagan gods, but magic was still quite plausible.

So if you want to go all the way with Skuld, she and her mother could be just be plain ordinary women — neither elves, valkyieries, seeresses nor priestesses (valkyries certainly would not be any demythtification at all).

edited 8th Jul '13 12:51:25 PM by LordGro

Let's just say and leave it at that.

How about the genetic engineering/modification explanation? It's set in the future btw.

RE the valkyrie/norn Skuld: IIRC that's only in the Prose Edda.

On the historicity: Does a historical "Helgi/*Hailaga" and "Hrolf/*Hrothiwulfaz" mean there would've been a historical "Skuld? (She probably would not have been half-elven). After all her husband Hjorvard/*Heruwarduz" is said to have existed. There's a great hall dating from the 6th century that was excavated in Lejre, Hrolf's hometown (it could've been his hall).

edited 8th Jul '13 10:04:22 PM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

bump

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

Yeah I've heard about that. It's fairly likely that there was a king Hrothgar, in the case of Beowulf.

Of course, Hrothgar existing does not necessarily mean that Beowulf existed...

edited 10th Jul '13 1:17:04 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

I guess that's demythtification too, even if it is not the first thing that comes to mind under that term.

The answer to whether Helgi, Hrolf, Hjörward, Skuld etc "actually existed" is dependent on what exactly these names mean to you. As I said, there's a good chance that there have been kings of similar names, but I don't expect the relationship between the legendary figures and the historical persons rises above a very vague similarity. Also note that legendary characters frequently get merged, split up, and renamed by oral tradition, to say nothing of moving them in time, giving them a new genealogy, or giving them a completely new life story, personality, etc. If you don't have historical sources, there is really nothing you can be sure of.

As for Skuld, she is probably the least reality-based character of the lot. Her "speaking name" is certainly an argument against her historicity; people don't have meaningful names in real life. Also, her character and role is not really fleshed out or unique; she is little more than a run-of-the-mill combination of Evil Sorceress and Lady Macbeth, two common stereotypes for female villains in the Middle Ages. Not much originality there.

It's like asking for the historical King Arthur, who would have lived at nearly the same time as King Hrolf. Despite the wealth of medieval lore about King Arthur, and a lot of speculative theories on the "historical King Arthur", it's not even sure that he existed. Rather, it seems he was concocted from several real life persons and even more creative invention. It might be pretty much the same with the Skjöldung kings of Denmark.

Let's just say and leave it at that.

OK, you are one seriously awesome dude for the all the tvtropes mythology pages.

@Gro: Some evidence of a historical King Arthur.

I share darkabominatons' opinions on your awesomeness. .

Also, yeah, there's an influence from folk tales in the episode with the elf woman. I'm thinking of Melusine, who was a dragon from the waist down and flew away when her husband saw her bathing.

edited 11th Jul '13 6:00:58 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

On historical saga characters, isn't there a bit of evidence of a Danish Viking chieftain named Ragnar who beseiged Paris in 845? Ragnar's sons, like Ivar the Boneless, certainly existed.

Several other saga heroes are definitely real, like Grettir.

edited 14th Jul '13 5:34:59 PM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

bump. Of course, even real people could become legends — somehow I think it was more likely in the Middle Ages.

Talking about Ragnars saga lodbrokar; the plot surrounding Aslaug/Kraka reminds me of a soap opera or Victorian melodrama. Young noble girl is raised as a peasant when her relative is killed and then marries a nobleman who believes she is a peasant. I always imagined "I Dreamt I Dwelt In Marble Halls" playing when she reveals her heritage.

edited 15th Jul '13 2:37:46 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

Right. But there is also a type of folktale (maybe specific to Iceland?) where a man has a child with an elf-woman and then denies his fatherhood when the elf brings the baby to church to be baptized. – I couldn't find the tale I remembered, but here's a reference to a legend about a man who was turned into a whale for rejecting his child, and here (4th paragraph) is mention of two similar tales.

Well it's a king Arthur, but is it really King Arthur? If we're optimistic, we might assume that this is the Arthur from which King Arthur got his name (but even that can't be proven). But this Arthur lived to late to lead the Britons in the Battle of Badon, the one historical event that is always tied to Arthur in the oldest Arthur tales. Also, he wasn't King of Britain, and I suppose he also didn't pull the Sword from the Stone, established the Table Round, married Guinevre, sought the Holy Grail … I guess you see where I'm getting at. There just can't be a "historical Arthur" because the Arthur we speak of is a figure of legend.

Same thing with Ragnar. Denmark, England, Iceland and Sweden all have their own variety of legends about Ragnar with considerable differences between them. Even Ireland has a tradition of its own that says Ragnar was killed in Ireland, by an Irish (!) king called Hella [sic].

There is a Ragnar who sacked Paris in 845 who is usually assumed to be the "historical core" of the legendary Ragnar Lothbrok. But some even reject this: Note that the sack of Paris is not even mentioned in Ragnar's Saga. Also, the main source on the historical Ragnar-of-845 (a 9th century hagiographic text called Translatio Sancti Germani) says that Ragnar died from a mysterious disease (read: divine punishment) only shortly after his return from France to Denmark—so he never succeeded to kingship, never invaded England and never died in a Snake Pit.

And while Anglo-Saxon sources say that the "sons of Lothbroc" (I think that name is mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for instance, IIRC) invaded England in the 860s, they don't say that "Lothbroc" is Ragnar Lothbrok. I have yet to see a source older than Gesta Danorum (c. 1190) that says that Ragnar and Lothbroc are the same person. In fact, in the legend of Lothbroc and Saint Edmund (here's a summary), Lothbroc is not even an invader but a lone castaway that makes friends with King Edmund. Obviously this Lothbroc can't be Ragnar the conqueror king.

Hinguar is also not called "the Boneless" in the history books, and his partners in crime are Hubba and Halfdan, not Bjorn and Sigurd. In short, Hinguar may be the historical model for Ivar the Boneless but he isn't Ivar the Boneless.

Can't say much about Grettir, but even if there once was a man called Grettir Asmundarson, you'll always have to distinguish between the real Grettir and the Grettir that killed trolls, wrestled with revenants and was killed by black magic.

Aw, you make me blush.

edited 15th Jul '13 11:45:11 AM by LordGro

Let's just say and leave it at that.

I was going to add something, but you said everything better than I could have on historical figures vs legend.

@Gro: On the subject of the sagas— would you like to read my takes on two of them?

Also, Ragnar's Saga is a melodrama. Seriously, the early parts remind me of a Charles Dickens novel or an early talkie. The high-born Aslaug is raised as a poor farmer's daughter named Kraka. The young, noble and impulsive Ragnar loses his good, kind, aristocratic first wife Thora, and marries the beautiful and clever peasant girl Kraka. The scheming Eysteinn convinces him to divorce her and marry Eysteinn's own daughter Ingeborg, and Kraka reveals her heritage and Ragnar stays with her. Except that Kraka is hardly passive.

IMO, the most frightening and ambiguous part of the saga is Ragnar's rape of Aslaug/Kraka on their wedding night, leading to the birth of Ivar the Boneless. The saga writer implies that it was due to his uncontrollable lust.

IRL that has very unfortunate implications; "He raped you because he thought you were hot!"

edited 15th Jul '13 7:19:00 PM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

Yeah, some folk stories can be a bit hard to filter out all the Values Dissonance.

Which makes this particular part VERY hard to adapt. I've been thinking over how to adapt it for a while. I thought having them ignore each other on The Morning After might be a good move.

Also, am I the only one who imagines a post-apocalyptic Ivar the Boneless in a wheelchair?

edited 16th Jul '13 5:09:23 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

Or as a cyborg.

I personally liked the idea of a steampunk Used Future where a lot of it is poorly understood. Only the dwarves remember how to actually build anything new and preserve the old secrets, which is why they're so legendary.

Ragnaroc could be when the last vestiges of technology break down and human civilization falls apart. Also for whatever reason, the human race is slowly dying out, so it could be Just Before the End.

And to explain the nine worlds thing, they're a series of forcefields created thousands of years ago walling off hostile races and demons trying to take what they can from the human settlements because it's the most fertile. And when the generators stop working, the forcefields keeping the abominations like the ice giants and fire demons will fail and they're free to start the apocalypse.

Yeah, I lloves me some dark fantasy.

edited 16th Jul '13 9:29:04 AM by darkabomination

Would you want to read my stuff? It's not like that, but it's a Used Future (generally) and elves, dwarves, draugrs and orcs(not actually Norse, but part of fantasy) appear along with Yggdrasil.

edited 16th Jul '13 6:06:18 PM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

Sure, why not?

Also, I've been getting into Led Zeppelin (since I watch reruns of That 70's Show) and I just discovered the song No Quarter, (yeah, how sad) which makes me think of the Ragnarssons' raids (and of Ragnar's own last raid). After all, King Aella received no quarter from Ivar The Boneless. The song reminds me of Randalin, waiting at home and knowing "they won't be home tonight.'' It could also refer to the Northumbrians that King Aella sent to deliver the news of Ragnar's death.

Am I the only one who sees this, or does anyone else see it that way too?

[Warning: Song Interpretation, bit of a stretch]

Close the door, put out the light/ No they won't be home tonight. Talking to herself; put out the light and close the door. They (Ragnar and his men) won't be home tonight because they are raiding in England.

The winds of Thor could be the storm that led to Ragnar being shipwrecked.

They're wearing steel that's bright and true/They carry news that must get through. Reminds me of Aella's messengers bringing the news of Ragnar's death to Denmark. Now it's moved a little forward in time.

They choose the path where no-one goes. Ragnar took two large ships to sail to England, which no-one had done because it was impossible.

They hold no quarter, hold no quarter. This time "they" are the Ragnarssons who want revenge and would give no quarter to their father's killer.

The snow drives back the foot that's slow/the dogs of doom are howling more. It was winter (IIRC) and the Danish forces stayed in East Anglia to avoid being driven back by the snow. The dogs of doom may be a metaphorical reference to Garm, the hound at the gates of Hel. They're walking side by side with death because they're going into battle, and the devil mocks their every step, which could refer to the Northumbrians again.

Question about Kraka/Aslaug: Some retellings state that she was mute for all the years that she spent in the cottage in Norway, but is there any real textual evidence for that, beyond one ambiguous sentence? I think it's based on one sentence translated this way:

The sentence shortly before that describes her not answering any of the questions they put to her, so I don't think that's what's really meant. I think it's saying that Ake and Grima didn't believe she could speak because she never answered their questions about her family. That particular sentence comes off as very ambiguous to me.

edited 17th Jul '13 6:42:32 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien

A bit of a stretch. For Norse music, I stick with Manowar and Iron Maiden for a general historic metal flavor.

What's your opinion on Aslaug and muteness?

edited 18th Jul '13 1:21:43 AM by MorwenEdhelwen

The road goes ever on. -Tolkien