Priests

[Liffrea]

What role do priests/ godis play in our faith?

Studying Germanic history I am led to believe that each tribes king played the part of high priest and that women were seen as having the power of prophesy. I mean no disrespect to any priests and I may even be wrong in my conclusions. :)

[The Mersey's Watcher]

Heathen priests in general where just wisemen, teachers and advisors.

I doubt heathen Kings would have taken the role of "high priest" as most of the Kings of heathen Europe where warriors and leaders. Although no doubt they would have paid respect to the Gods.

As for women. Well I don't know alot about this topic, but in the sagas that I have read, the prophets or advisors in the stories are usually women.

As for heathenism and heathen priests as a whole, in ancient Europe heathenism wasn't a centralized or a controlled religion. Unlike the Christian Priests who indoctrinate and control there followers, the heathen priests would have been there just to teach and advise there followers.

I think 'wiseman' is a better title than, 'heathen priests'.

This is all of the top of my head so don't take what I say as solid fact. I'm sure there are others on this board who could give you a better answer.

[Liffrea]

You make some good points. But Germanic kings were high priests. They were seen as sacral meaning that they had the blood of the gods. The legendary founders of England Hengest and Horsa were supposed great grand sons of Woden. I saw a programme not long ago I can't remember what it was called but it disgussed a king in heathen Denmark. Apparently his people hung him from an oak tree because he was not good at bringing the gods favour to his tribe.

[Scramaseax]

The legendary founders of England Hengest and Horsa were supposed great grand sons of Woden.

Great Great Grandgrandsons:
Their leaders were two brothers, Hengest and Horsa; who were the sons of Wihtgils; Wihtgils was the son of Witta, Witta of Wecta, Wecta of Woden.
It's interesting because this puts a date on Woden, since we know that Hengist and Horsa were roughly 25 in 449 AD, if we take the genealogy literally this Woden must have been born around 325 AD.

The first Heathen priests that come to mind for me are those mentioned in Germania chapter 10 - 98 AD:
In public questions the priest of the particular state, in private the father of the family, invokes the gods, and, with his eyes toward heaven, takes up each piece three times, and finds in them a meaning according to the mark previously impressed on them.

The second is the likes of Coifi, who Bede says was the priest of the Goodmanham temple in Northumbria in 627 AD.


CHAPTER XIII

OF THE COUNCIL HE HELD WITH HIS CHIEF MEN ABOUT EMBRACING THE FAITH OF CHRIST, AND HOW THE HIGH PRIEST PROFANED HIS OWN ALTARS. [A.D. 627.]

THE king, hearing these words, answered, that he was both willing and bound to receive the faith which he taught; but that he would confer about it with his principal friends and counsellers, to the end that if they also were of his opinion, they might all. together be cleansed in Christ the Fountain of Life. Paulinus consenting, the king did as he said; for, holding a council with the wise men, he asked of every one in particular what he thought of the new doctrine, and the new worship that was preached? To which the chief of. his own priests, Coifi, immediately answered, "O king, consider what this is which is now preached to us; for I verily declare to you, that the religion which we have hitherto professed has, as far as I can learn, no virtue in it. For none of your people has applied himself more diligently to the worship of our gods than I; and yet there are many who receive greater favours from you, and are more preferred than I, and are more prosperous in all their undertakings. Now if the gods were good for any thing, they would rather forward me, who have been more careful to serve them. It remains, therefore, that if upon examination you find those new doctrines, which are now preached to us, better and more efficacious, we immediately receive them without any delay."

Another of the king's chief men, approving of his words and exhortations, presently added: "The present life of man, O king, seems to me, in comparison of that time which is unknown to us, like to the swift flight of a sparrow through the room wherein you sit at supper in winter, with your commanders and ministers, and a good fire in the midst, whilst the storms of rain and snow prevail abroad; the sparrow, I say, flying in at one door, and immediately out at another, whilst he. is within, is safe from the wintry storm; but after a short space of fair weather, he immediately vanishes out of your sight, into the dark winter from which he had emerged. So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are utterly ignorant. If, therefore, this new doctrine contains something more certain, it seems justly to deserve to be followed." The other elders and king's councillors, by Divine inspiration, spoke to the same effect.

But Coifi added, that he wished more attentively to bear Paulinus discourse concerning the God whom he preached; which he having by the king's command performed, Coifi, hearing his words, cried out, "I have long since been sensible that there was nothing in that which we worshipped; because the more diligently I sought after truth in that worship, the less I found it. But now I freely confess, that such truth evidently appears in this preaching as can confer on us the gifts of life, of salvation, and of eternal happiness. For which reason I advise, O king, that we instantly abjure and set fire to those temples and altars which we have consecrated without reaping any benefit from them." In short, the king publicly gave his licence to Paulinus to preach the Gospel, and renouncing idolatry, declared that he received the faith of Christ: and then he inquired of the high priest who should first profane the altars and temples of their idols, with the enclosures that were about them, he answered, "I; for who can more properly than myself destroy those things which I worshipped through ignorance, for an example to all others, through the wisdom which has been given me by the true God?" Then immediately, in contempt of his former superstitions, he desired the king to furnish him with arms and a stallion; and mounting the same, he set out to destroy the idols; for it was not lawful before for the high priest either to carry arms, or to ride on any but a mare. Having, therefore, girt a sword about him, with a spear in his hand, he mounted the king's stallion and proceeded to the idols. The multitude, beholding it, concluded he was distracted; but he lost no time, for as soon as he drew near the temple he profaned the same, casting into it the spear which he held; and rejoicing in the knowledge of the worship of the true God, he commanded his companions to destroy the temple, with all its enclosures, by fire. This place where the idols were is still shown, not far from York, to the eastward, beyond the river Derwent, and is now called Godmundinghan, where the high priest, by the inspiration of the true God, profaned and destroyed the altars which he had himself consecrated.

I'd say there would have been priests at the Uppsala Hof too

[Lonnie]

Here are some links you might check out...

Viking Priest (http://gamall-steinn.org/text/other-dc1.htm) from
"The Viking Age," by Paul B. Du Chaillu, vol. 1, p. 525-531

Worship and Rites (http://gamall-steinn.org/text/other-dc7.htm) from "The Religion of the Teutons" by P. D. Chantepie De La Saussaye, trans. by Bert J. Vos, page 355-378.

Ch# 4 - Ceremonies and Ministers of Religion (http://gamall-steinn.org/text/other-scan-ch4.htm) from "The Religion of Ancient Scandinavia" By W. A. Craigie, M.A.

[Lonnie]

Heathen priests in general where just wisemen, teachers and advisors.

I doubt heathen Kings would have taken the role of "high priest" as most of the Kings of heathen Europe where warriors and leaders. Although no doubt they would have paid respect to the Gods.

I think 'wiseman' is a better title than, 'heathen priests'.


I would have to agree and disagree with the above...

What I would agree with, is I would also doubt a Heathen King would also have the role of high priest... But, a Chieftan is not a King. And we know that, at least on the continent, that there were Chieftans who were also Priest. Harugari (OHG) roughly translates into Chieftan-Priest... And while a Heathen King would not have probably had the job of Priest, it was very much a Sacral office... The luck of the people and the land resided in the King. You don't get much more Sacral than that...

So I would have to say "Heathen Priest" or Harugari or Godhi all would be a more apt title than just "wiseman". There was much more to the job than being wise...

[Liffrea]

It's interesting because this puts a date on Woden, since we know that Hengist and Horsa were roughly 25 in 449 AD, if we take the genealogy literally this Woden must have been born around 325 AD.

Arminius who beat the Romans at the Teutoneberger Wold in AD9 he became deified as well I think.

[heilwotan]

I have seen and heard that the "Dreighten / Drighten" is a warlord and priest.

[Liffrea]

I have seen and heard that the "Dreighten / Drighten" is a warlord and priest.

Thats correct. The Germanic kingship was sacral before the conversion. The king was the tribes representative to the gods, and was responsible for holding the main ceremonies.

[Asbrandsson OR]

You make some good points. But Germanic kings were high priests. They were seen as sacral meaning that they had the blood of the gods. The legendary founders of England Hengest and Horsa were supposed great grand sons of Woden. I saw a programme not long ago I can't remember what it was called but it disgussed a king in heathen Denmark. Apparently his people hung him from an oak tree because he was not good at bringing the gods favour to his tribe.

Hello,

That is actually a myth that Germanic High Kings were also High Priests. A King is a high Military leader and a Gothi/Gythja was and is a civil leader. There is quit extensive history available on this subject.

There is a tale of a King that trys to make a mock sacrifice to Odin and when the ceremony takes place the stick turns to a spear and the fake noose turns to sinue with the King dieing. This is part of the legendary life of Starkad. The moral of the story is do not make mock sacrifices.

I think that legendary kings and families where thought decended from the Gods at a later time, not at the time of their existance. Often I think that it is a way for distant descendants to claim a more elaborate ancestory.

Asbrandsson OR

[Liffrea]

That is actually a myth that Germanic High Kings were also High Priests. A King is a high Military leader and a Gothi/Gythja was and is a civil leader. There is quit extensive history available on this subject.

Well I'm going to disagree with you on that one. Nearly every book I have read says that early Germanic kings were responsible for blots and making sure the tribe had favour with the gods.

[Asbrandsson OR]

Well I'm going to disagree with you on that one. Nearly every book I have read says that early Germanic kings were responsible for blots and making sure the tribe had favour with the gods.


Hello,

What books have you read? Read some Historical texts like Sagas and Early English writings, Roman accounts. These will drastically differ from what you are reading now.

Asbrandsson OR

[Liffrea]

What books have you read? Read some Historical texts like Sagas and Early English writings, Roman accounts. These will drastically differ from what you are reading now.

Mostly works by Stephen Pollington. Quite a few others over the years. D. P Kirby, Anne Williams, Malcolm Todd, D. H. Green etc. Tacitus in Germania does distinguish between Rex and Dux. This is where I think some confusion is caused. Dux were war leaders selected for their martial prowess, Rex were kings who embodied the sacral or royal blood, but who were not necessarliy war leaders. Also Tacitus was writting at a time when the Germanic tribes still had a largely tribal character.

By the time of the migrations this had changed. War leaders were assuming the rights of kings through force of arms and building a retinue of warriors, mostly from outside the tribe, loyal to them. They used this to usurp the traditional role of kings. The confusion emanating from this can be seen later during the heptarchy in Anglo-Saxon England. Nearly all Anglo-Saxon kings claimed descent from Woden, and used this as their basis for power. There may have been priests during Tacitus time, but the social bonds had largely broken by the time of the migrations, and even if there was a priest caste it does not exclude the possibility of priest-kings. In Anglo-Saxon England, at least, the king was a priest, he was responsible for the spiritual as well as material welfare of his warband. Sacral kingship was of high importance to the English and it lived on until the Norman conquest, albeit after the conversion being seen as a blessing from god, rather than being decended from the gods.

I can't comment on the saga's as I haven't read any. But my initial view would be that there later date would give a different interpretation. Heathen beliefs by that time had been influenced by Christianity, so for example we get temples that resemble churches. I think that the idea of a "priesthood" would have been more concrete in this time as well. Evidence for priests in early Indo-European cultures show us shamanism, rather than any formal organisation. i interpret this as the seer of germanic lore. A women or man who could commune with the gods, but who was not responsible for sacrifices.

From what I remember as well Hakon 1 (the Good), of Norway, was a Christian king who was deposed for not leading the blots of his people as was Anund Gardske, who also refused to sacrifice to the gods in 1070. This to me would also suggest a priest-king role.

[Scramaseax]

I have seen and heard that the "Dreighten / Drighten" is a warlord and priest.

Not a priest
http://www.ealdriht.org/glossary.html

Drighten, Dröttin ON, Dryhten OE:
A leader, chieftain, or lord. Sometimes this term was also applied to Heathen Gods, most often to Odin..

[Scramaseax]

Ynglingsaga 2 calls the 12 priests Drotner, which is probably the same as Drighten. However the text is euhemerous, the 12 "priests" are in fact the Aesir. so Drighten is really still just a term for "lord".

[Scramaseax]

From what I remember as well Hakon 1 (the Good), of Norway, was a Christian king who was deposed for not leading the blots of his people as was Anund Gardske, who also refused to sacrifice to the gods in 1070. This to me would also suggest a priest-king role.

Hakon wasn't actually deposed, he was still King when he died. Neither were asked to lead the ritual but rather to participate in it, which I think suggests there were other people (gothi) who lead it. Hakon did participate in a minimal way. He drank from the horn, but made the sign of the cross over it, and got away with inhaling the smell of the horseflesh rather than consuming it, which is perhaps why he remained king and Anund didn't.

[Liffrea]

Hakon did participate in a minimal way. He drank from the horn, but made the sign of the cross over it, and got away with inhaling the smell of the horseflesh rather than consuming it, which is perhaps why he remained king and Anund didn't.

Bit of a sly bugger! :D

Do you have any links? As I said in the above post that was what I literally could remember.

[Asbrandsson OR]

[QUOTE=Liffrea]Mostly works by Stephen Pollington. Quite a few others over the years. D. P Kirby, Anne Williams, Malcolm Todd, D. H. Green etc. Tacitus in Germania does distinguish between Rex and Dux. This is where I think some confusion is caused. Dux were war leaders selected for their martial prowess, Rex were kings who embodied the sacral or royal blood, but who were not necessarliy war leaders. Also Tacitus was writting at a time when the Germanic tribes still had a largely tribal character.[QUOTE]

Try looking around for some of the works by Georges Dumizel. The Germanic Rikar is also the Roman Rex, which is really the head of a Konija, which is a kind of household in an extended sometimes very extended sense. A village may consist of several Rikar, it means someone who is powerful and comes from the same root as Ragin, a power in the sense of a God. King as in a Konungr, was a later migration period development.

Within Germanic history you can see that there is much in common between the people of Tacitus' Germania, Egil's Saga and modern Aryans. Something as simple as wearing pants has a long history amongst our peoples.

The problem I find with a lot of modern authors is that they are not really Odinists. E.O.G. Turville-Petre, Ellis Davidsson and even Georges Dumizel is that yes they are brilliant in many respects, but they fail often times to look at all the evidence from a religious point of view and most importantly a non-christian point of view. Try picking apart what you read and research not from a literal point of view, like people pick apart the bible, but instead look it from the point of view that you are look for transcendental essential truths.

For example the Romans sat and watched two Germanic Tribes fight over a place that the Germans considered closest to Heaven. There People melted the River ice over fire to get salt. Ellis Davidsson could not grasp the meaning of this- the real meaning of the disput. That at this place creation is re-enacted fire and ice clash from which salt is created.

Try reading some of Procopius Gothic Wars he has quite a bit to say about Germanic ritual. A good overview of what is known about the Goths can be found in History of the Goths by Wolfram. I think that you need to do a lot more research then just this to understand the common Germanic Relgion of the Odinism within that time period, but it does put into context the difference between military and militaristic leaders, ie people in charge of defense of the land, defense of the village and foreign policy. And the people that are in charge of domestic policy and are religious leaders. The Gothic bible uses Gudja for a christian priest, which at that time was an attempt by the Christian church to put a familiar face on something that would become far different then what a Gudja is. Interestingly enough the Crimean Goths did not dend people to fight the Huns in France, as they were Christianized and taught that war was un-christian. I might also add that even at that time a Gudja or Gothi was not a Shaman, but a role already created and defined.

There is some food for thought.

Asbrandsson OR

[Scramaseax]

Bit of a sly bugger! :D

Do you have any links? As I said in the above post that was what I literally could remember.

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Heimskringla/hakon.html


18. KING HAKON OFFERS SACRIFICES.

The harvest thereafter, towards the winter season, there was a
festival of sacrifice at Hlader, and the king came to it. It had
always been his custom before, when he was present at a place
where there was sacrifice, to take his meals in a little house by
himself, or with some few of his men; but the bondes grumbled
that he did not seat himself in his high-seat at these the most
joyous of the meetings of the people. The earl said that the
king should do so this time. The king accordingly sat upon his
high-seat. Now when the first full goblet was filled, Earl
Sigurd spoke some words over it, blessed it in Odin's name, and
drank to the king out of the horn; and the king then took it, and
made the sign of the cross over it. Then said Kar of Gryting,
"What does the king mean by doing so? Will he not sacrifice?"
Earl Sigurd replies, "The king is doing what all of you do, who
trust to your power and strength. He is blessing the full goblet
in the name of Thor, by making the sign of his hammer over it
before he drinks it." On this there was quietness for the
evening. The next day, when the people sat down to table, the
bondes pressed the king strongly to eat of horse-flesh (1); and
as he would on no account do so, they wanted him to drink of the
soup; and as he would not do this, they insisted he should at
least taste the gravy; and on his refusal they were going to lay
hands on him. Earl Sigurd came and made peace among them, by
asking the king to hold his mouth over the handle of the kettle,
upon which the fat smoke of the boiled horse-flesh had settled
itself; and the king first laid a linen cloth over the handle,
and then gaped over it, and returned to the high-seat; but
neither party was satisfied with this.


32. HAKON'S DEATH.

When King Hakon came out to his ship he had his wound bound up;
but the blood ran from it so much and so constantly, that it
could not be stopped; and when the day was drawing to an end his
strength began to leave him. Then he told his men that he wanted
to go northwards to his house at Alreksstader; but when he came
north, as far as Hakonarhella Hill, they put in towards the land,
for by this time the king was almost lifeless. Then he called
his friends around him, and told them what he wished to be done
with regard to his kingdom. He had only one child, a daughter,
called Thora, and had no son. Now he told them to send a message
to Eirik's sons, that they should be kings over the country; but
asked them to hold his friends in respect and honour. "And if
fate," added he, "should prolong my life, I will, at any rate,
leave the country, and go to a Christian land, and do penance for
what I have done against God; but should I die in heathen land,
give me any burial you think fit." Shortly afterwards Hakon
expired, at the little hill on the shore-side at which he was
born. So great was the sorrow over Hakon's death, that he was
lamented both by friends and enemies; and they said that never
again would Norway see such a king. His friends removed his body
to Saeheim, in North Hordaland, and made a great mound, in which
they laid the king in full armour and in his best clothes, but
with no other goods. They spoke over his grave, as heathen
people are used to do, and wished him in Valhal. Eyvind
Skaldaspiller composed a poem on the death of King Hakon, and on
how well he was received in Valhal. The poem is called
"Hakonarmal"...

[Liffrea]

Well I think we might have to agree to disagree on some points. :)

Can you give us some titles for Georges Dumizel?


Bit of a large page, Scramaseax! Busy reading the Volsunga and Egil's Saga at the moment. I thought I would take Asbrandsson's advice. I'll download it, and put it on my to-read pile.

[Asbrandsson OR]

Well I think we might have to agree to disagree on some points. :)

Can you give us some titles for Georges Dumizel?


Bit of a large page, Scramaseax! Busy reading the Volsunga and Egil's Saga at the moment. I thought I would take Asbrandsson's advice. I'll download it, and put it on my to-read pile.

Hello,

He wrote many works in his time. I have a set on Archaic Roman Religion that would probably stike a lot of cords in a more compartative way. As you can see that there are deep roots from which the indo-european faith comes. Also he shows that indo-europeans came to Europe with an already developed priestly class, one complete with a litergy and ritual practice. Not something a kin to Native american Shamanism, but something with established roots.

Asbrandsson OR

[Scramaseax]

Bit of a large page, Scramaseax! Busy reading the Volsunga and Egil's Saga at the moment. I thought I would take Asbrandsson's advice. I'll download it, and put it on my to-read pile.

Well with regards to what you said about Hakon being deposed for not leading the blot you only need to read the two chapters I quoted.

[alphaknave]

"The circles of Freya priestesses picked out the best man in the tribe to be their Freyr priest, because quality was what mattered the most, and naturally the best man could give them the best children. Because of that these chosen Freyr priests had several wives. The unhealthy children, the sick children, the weak or otherwise not ideal children were set out in the forest to be eaten by wolves. They didn't do this because they were poor, but because their natural religion dictated this." (From Paganism: Part I - The Ancient Religion (http://www.burzum.org/eng/library/paganism01.shtml) by Varg Virknes)

[Asbrandsson OR]

"The circles of Freya priestesses picked out the best man in the tribe to be their Freyr priest, because quality was what mattered the most, and naturally the best man could give them the best children. Because of that these chosen Freyr priests had several wives. The unhealthy children, the sick children, the weak or otherwise not ideal children were set out in the forest to be eaten by wolves. They didn't do this because they were poor, but because their natural religion dictated this." (From Paganism: Part I - The Ancient Religion (http://www.burzum.org/eng/library/paganism01.shtml) by Varg Virknes)
Hello,

This sounds like a lot of mixed up non-sense to me. There is no historical evidence that I have ever seen of a Gothi or Gythija having multiple marriage partners or offspring from multiple partners as some kind of holy rite. Leaving unwanted children at a cross roads is an ancient rite that parents would preform with unwanted children. There is a saying in the havamal about basically handicapped people may not be good for much but that they are good for somethings, except that a dead man is good for nothing. Especially in a time when there was no welfare state, everyone had to do their share and there was plenty of work to go around. At one time Rome had a million slaves- that is a million people doing a million jobs. The same was true for the northern villiage- which was just a large farm complex. The retarded were not held in high esteem, but they were put to work as much as the rest.

Asbrandsson OR

[Loki's Advocate]

Vikernes is a fool.

Considering he thinks it was somehow doing everyone a favour or in some way 'avenging his ancestors', burning down those stav churches (when some of them had native mythological carvings that were a thousand years old, and absolutely invaluable in a cultural sense). And considering his essays are absolutely and utterly devoid of, you know, sources, and stuff.

It seems like he makes things up based on what he would have liked to be the case, and then relies on his interpretation being one that 'stands to reason' to people. Or otherwise relies on his reputation as a black metal pioneer to give him implicit credibility when he's writing on the subject.

[Lonnie]

"(From Paganism: Part I - The Ancient Religion (http://www.burzum.org/eng/library/paganism01.shtml) by Varg Virknes)


Beeeeeepppppppp..... Try again........ The B.S. Meter just went off the chart..... :shake:

[Hengest]

Yes, I think that we should get one thing straight here. Vikernes is living in a world of fantasy and whilst he impresses rebellious BM teenagers he has very little (if any) credibilty with most heathens.

Maybe we should put his name in the swear filter so we don't get people doing a google search for him and ending up here!!

Gimme some of that old time church burning!!

[Schwarzesonne]

As far as political leaders and the priesthood goes, it is best to recognize that different nations had rather different social structures. For example, OHG Harugari (chieftain/priest) has no equivalent in OE. One could argue that the Harugari was similar in function to the Icelandic goði, but even this would only be superficially true. The goðar were a unique product of Icelandic social structure, and would have seemed quite ridiculous in, say, Sweden.

To really understand the relationship between political leaders and religious leaders one really needs to focus on the traditions of one particular region at a time.

[Asbrandsson OR]

As far as political leaders and the priesthood goes, it is best to recognize that different nations had rather different social structures. For example, OHG Harugari (chieftain/priest) has no equivalent in OE. One could argue that the Harugari was similar in function to the Icelandic goði, but even this would only be superficially true. The goðar were a unique product of Icelandic social structure, and would have seemed quite ridiculous in, say, Sweden.

To really understand the relationship between political leaders and religious leaders one really needs to focus on the traditions of one particular region at a time.

Hello,

That is not true at all. Gudja is used in the Gothic bible as a word for priest which was composed in the fourth century and one elder Futhark Runic Insciption from Norway which dates I believe from the middle of the fifth century and reads Ek Gudija. Both have a direct etymological connection with the Iceland Gothi. Which means that if you reverse engineered them they would sound exactly the same as the written word that history has provided.

As well there is proof that the Gothi Gothi that crossed into Roman territory was more Gothi then Christian priest, because the Roman made a point to complain about it. Wulfila was useing terminology and mannerisms that already existed to dress up a Christian priest so that the transition would not seem so foreign. Most scholars claim that Germanic people had not real priest class, like the Druids were to the celts, because Caeser said so in his Gaulic Wars.

Asbrandsson OR

[onionhead1112]

I have just read the atachment of mr. virknes writing,Although entitled to his opinion I feel hes hung up on the Race issue a bit too much.And I dont really know of his crimes or conviction and imprisionment To burn down Such bueatiful buildings is and was stupid.no better than the crusaders doing the same 800 years ago.I feel Odinism what ever you wish to call it is inherently an European religion and really only for those of similar heritage both culturally and genetically butIf someone was raised up in this culture and lives it has its values etc. and happens to be non european than they could and should be accepted into the pagan fold, just as some european raised in say china ar tibet and has their culture ingrained in his very fibre and such, outwardly is euro looking but internally thy would be as their neighbors.Thus mr virknes misses the point entirely in my opinion that some of who we are is culture and our heritage not just our genes.(and all you overtly racist out there I am all 100% european descent Ive know many scandinavians with darker eyes and hair and skin than mine).I do agree in that the names we call ourselves is a bit irrelavent and the fact that women may be a bit more magical than men but to concentrate only on a racisal issue is counterproductive. I also agree of his opinions of wiccans and the hippie pagans for the most part as well.But misses the point entirely on pretty much everything else. (and musically Burzum never was that good of a band either).

[beowulf]

Vikernes is a fool.

Got that right. The imbecile goes about inventing history ad hoc. Last I've heard he now calls himself christian in order to ingraciate himself to the authorities. :mgno:
He is not Tru Folk in my eyes, probably ne'er was.

As has probably already been mentioned, the North Angles at least seemed to have had some sort of priestly class as Bede described in the conversion of the Northumbrians, ie. the high priest Coifi casting a spear at the temple of the gods and making the little speech about converting. To my knowledge it's the only reference to a Heathen priest among the Old English.

[Schwarzesonne]

Gudja is used in the Gothic bible as a word for priest which was composed in the fourth century and one elder Futhark Runic Insciption from Norway which dates I believe from the middle of the fifth century and reads Ek Gudija. Both have a direct etymological connection with the Iceland Gothi. Which means that if you reverse engineered them they would sound exactly the same as the written word that history has provided.

As well there is proof that the Gothi Gothi that crossed into Roman territory was more Gothi then Christian priest, because the Roman made a point to complain about it. Wulfila was useing terminology and mannerisms that already existed to dress up a Christian priest so that the transition would not seem so foreign. Most scholars claim that Germanic people had not real priest class, like the Druids were to the celts, because Caeser said so in his Gaulic Wars.

The Gothic Gudja functioned as a priest, but did not have the same sort of political position that the Icelandic Goði did. The latter functioned more as a regional representative than anything else, and his religious functions were secondary to his political ones. This was because the Icelanders, forming a system of government devoid of kings (the only model of government their Norwegian forefathers passed on), needed primarily someone who would aid in avoiding feuds. Except for large, public events, it was generally not the goði, but the father-figure in a household that would lead most religious practices. There is an excellent discussion of this you can find in The Sagas of the Icelanders: A Selection (©2000 Jane Smiley).

I am less familiar with the Goths, but as far as I understand it the Gudja’s political functions were secondary to his religious ones; but he also functioned as an advisor to people in certain key positions in the Gothic feudal system.

BTW, runic inscriptions translated from the so-called “Elder Fuþark" cannot be used as hard evidence (although they may be used as circumstantial evidence) as we do not know for certain the phonetic values that each of these symbols represents, as all these “translations” are based on reconstructions.

[Asbrandsson OR]

The Gothic Gudja functioned as a priest, but did not have the same sort of political position that the Icelandic Goði did. The latter functioned more as a regional representative than anything else, and his religious functions were secondary to his political ones. This was because the Icelanders, forming a system of government devoid of kings (the only model of government their Norwegian forefathers passed on), needed primarily someone who would aid in avoiding feuds. Except for large, public events, it was generally not the goði, but the father-figure in a household that would lead most religious practices. There is an excellent discussion of this you can find in The Sagas of the Icelanders: A Selection (©2000 Jane Smiley).

I am less familiar with the Goths, but as far as I understand it the Gudja’s political functions were secondary to his religious ones; but he also functioned as an advisor to people in certain key positions in the Gothic feudal system.

BTW, runic inscriptions translated from the so-called “Elder Fuþark" cannot be used as hard evidence (although they may be used as circumstantial evidence) as we do not know for certain the phonetic values that each of these symbols represents, as all these “translations” are based on reconstructions.

Hello,

One of the things that Georges Dumizel strove to prove is that there is a triparte division of cultures/peoples descended from indo-eurpean times. Dumizel frames the discussion in a much broader context of both time and space so that one can see through comparative study the very roots of our folk soul. There is the priest, the warrior and the farmer. The priest looks after the supernatural function as well as the civil function, the warrior looks after defence of the land and people as well as foriegn policy and the farmer is the producer. The king is a great warrior the head of the defence of the land and people. When the Christians came they did not want the civil power of the Gothar they looked to gods law and left the rest to the kings by default. Hence Kings supported the ascention of Christianity, it was a power grab.

The whole system is set up to have checks and balances. A country that is run by the military is run into the ground, but a country with no military is soon burned to the ground.

A priestly class maintains sacred knowledge and its interpretations, as well as rites and rituals which are based around such wisdom. Everyone can and does partipate in the religious experience, as well as practicing it. The Gothi is not the mediator between the natural and supernatural, he or she is there to maintain a knowledge of the supnatural.

Ek Gudija is not just reconstructed from nothing it is eytomologically sound. You can not disregard the profound work of great scholars like Tolkien when it comes to understanding research into the roots of our language. According to the rules that guide our languages development Gothi would be Gudija at the time it was used, finding a runic inscription from that time proves not only that the Gothar existed then but also that the ways our language has shifted and changed in descernable ways is also true. Also I believe that writing in runes must of been far more wide spread and standardized that many people think. I think that as the Roman priest used and spread Latin so the Germanic Gothi used and spread Runic writing.

As far as I can tell what is known of the Goths come by way of Roman observation and subsequent writings. From those writings there is little that tells of how Gothic people were different from other Germanic peoples in there time, although archaeologists say that the Gothic graves did not contain weapons.

One of the interesting things about the Gothic bible is that it frames the stories of Jeus in ways that are very Germanic. Priests are called Gothi for example. The Roman Judia of that time was recounted as if it was a Gothic kingdom full of Gothic people and as such would be told and retold in a way that those people could relate to very easily. I would also not say that this bible is a total accurate view of Gothic life at that time, but I would say that at least some of it must be true to life.

Asbrandsson OR

[Schwarzesonne]

One of the things that Georges Dumizel strove to prove is that there is a triparte division of cultures/peoples descended from indo-eurpean times. Dumizel frames the discussion in a much broader context of both time and space so that one can see through comparative study the very roots of our folk soul. There is the priest, the warrior and the farmer. The priest looks after the supernatural function as well as the civil function, the warrior looks after defence of the land and people as well as foriegn policy and the farmer is the producer. The king is a great warrior the head of the defence of the land and people. When the Christians came they did not want the civil power of the Gothar they looked to gods law and left the rest to the kings by default. Hence Kings supported the ascention of Christianity, it was a power grab.

Quoting the theory of a particular scholar—whether this be Georges Dumézil or any other—is that scholars will, in general, each come up with a particular theory and then provide their readers with allsorts of ‘evidence’ supporting nothing but their pet theory. Consider other scholars and their theories: Viktor Rydberg, Thomas A. DuBois, Sophus Bugge, James C. Russell… This is not to suggest that the theory in question is completely wrong or that the scholars’ contribution is not to be respected. But that each of these theories, despite their weight and bearing, also has their limitations that may be overshadowed by the zealotry of the scholar promoting his particular view.

Personally I don’t think all that highly of Dumézil’s theories. But a lot of people put stock in them, and if that’s what makes the myths work for them, so be it. I’m a huge Rydberg fan myself, and I know that a whole lot of people don’t think much of him, so I guess we’re even! :p

Not trying to stir up a new argument—just trying to keep it all in perspective. :wave:

[Asbrandsson OR]

Quoting the theory of a particular scholar—whether this be Georges Dumézil or any other—is that scholars will, in general, each come up with a particular theory and then provide their readers with allsorts of ‘evidence’ supporting nothing but their pet theory. Consider other scholars and their theories: Viktor Rydberg, Thomas A. DuBois, Sophus Bugge, James C. Russell… This is not to suggest that the theory in question is completely wrong or that the scholars’ contribution is not to be respected. But that each of these theories, despite their weight and bearing, also has their limitations that may be overshadowed by the zealotry of the scholar promoting his particular view.

Personally I don’t think all that highly of Dumézil’s theories. But a lot of people put stock in them, and if that’s what makes the myths work for them, so be it. I’m a huge Rydberg fan myself, and I know that a whole lot of people don’t think much of him, so I guess we’re even! :p

Not trying to stir up a new argument—just trying to keep it all in perspective. :wave:

Hello,

I would not put lock stock and barrell into anyone scholar either, but I would say that there is good and bad in both Rydberg and Dumezil. I think that up until very recently a scholar is only as good as the evidence they have on which to base their findings. Now most lay people have more evidence at their fingertips then many scholars of yesteryear. With that being said, theory needs to at times be taken with a grain of salt.

There was a time when many scholars thought that the similiarities between Germanic, Celtic, Roman and Greek mythology was simply because of the Romanization of Europe, where as much of it is actually because all those people share a common origin.

Asbrandsson OR