Runes: Magic symbols or out-of-date letters?

This was a typical difficult subject to fully research due to lack of resources and the majority of websites repeating the same dribble over and over again. I will update this as I find more information on the subject.

What are runes?

The runes were an alphabet used by the Germanic and Scandinavian peoples from 1st century AD until roughly the 1500s. They were primarily an alphabet, that originated from the Latin alphabet (due to the contact between the southern German tribes and the Romans) and older Germanic symbols. Runic inscriptions can pretty much be found everywhere the Germanic and Scandinavian people went, from Iceland to Constantinople.

Were they magical?

That depends who you ask. Hardcore recon. Heathens will tell you that they were only used as a writing system and neo-Pagans will tell you that they’re symbols of magic, used for divination and other magical practises.

The earliest historic reference to the runes are found in Germania by Tacitus, though he doesn’t explicitly say “runes”. Instead the term used is either symbol or markings, which can be taken to be referring to the casting of lots. The use of runes as a writing system has been proven several times due to the discovery of “runestones” such as Rök Runestone in Sweden. Runestones were usually memorials to deceased men and were usually consisting of runes carved of slabs of stone or boulders.

The evidence of them being magical is somewhat lacking. It is possible that were used for divination but there is no direct evidence to prove this, so for now, we’ll ignore that possibility until there is more evidence. The magical use of runes is attested by the literary evidence in the Poetic Edda and the sagas.

In Sigrdrifumal, recommendations are given to call upon the god Tyr twice while carving the victory rune while in Skirnismal, Frey’s servant, Skirir, threatened Gerd by saying he will “carve a thurs rune” for her. The magical uses of the runes are also attested in the Eddic poem Havamal:

I know a twelfth one if I see, up in a tree, a dangling corpse in a noose, I can so carve and colour the runes, that the man walks And talks with me.

Odin, the god of magic and war, is regarded as the first being to discover the knowledge of the runes by hanging himself from Yggdrasil, the world tree. The Swedish runic stone from Nobely attests this, as the younger stone from Sparlosa, by referring to the fact the “runes come from the gods”.

But back to the question at hand, are the runes magical?

No, they aren’t. They are just an alphabet, however, they were, so it seems, used in magic as there is reference to them being used for magic in the Sagas, the one form of evidence that documents daily life in Norse society. The runes, overall, are a writing system but were used for incantations in the same manner that the English language can be used for incantations. The only real power the runes seem to have was to communicate messages to those who could read and were used for mnemonic purposes as well as to pass on messages such as “Hrafn was here” or to show ownership of an item.

So, why do people, today, use the runes for divination and magic?

In short, due to people such as Ralph Blum and Edred Thorsson. The latter is the worst for it as he studied near-Eastern and Eastern magic and based his “runic magic” and divination on those practises. Modern runic divination is nothing more than I Ching and tarot with a Norse flavour.

As there’s no direct evidence to show if the runes were used for divination and only second-hand sources (i.e. Tacitus), we must ignore any modern interpretations of runic divination. And the same goes for runic magic, as we have no instructions or books from the past to show us how the runes could be utilised into magic save for the scarce references in the Sagas and Poetic Edda.

Nico Davidson

Sources:
Dictionary of Northern Mythology – R. Simek
Viking Answer Lady
Poetic Edda
Norse & Icelandic Sagas
Asatru Lore

The Norse Afterlife

Image via Wikipedia

Disclaimer: The following article is based on my own research. I do not claim to be an academic expert on the matters of Norse belief as there are people more suited to been an expert on these matters. I don’t expect anyone with me nor my findings. The following article will be edited in the near future as I have some new information that needs to be added. Questions about the information in the article are welcome. 

Anyone familiar with Norse mythology will know of Valhalla; the glorious afterlife for warriors who die bravely in battle. But what is the real Norse afterlife?

The answer is simple. The old Nordic peoples did not believe in the concept of an afterlife as such. The grave was the end but the individual in the grave carried on being apart of the community and family. In order to understand this, one has to look at the evidence.

Hel originally meant the grave and that the concept of the goddess Hel is nothing more than a literary invention brought in via external influence [I will discuss this later in a separate article]. Now, this would also mean that Valhalla is a literary invention. Back to the point, since “Hel” is the grave, this would mean that “Hel” is the afterlife.

Now, why would the Norse afterlife be the grave? Simple. The Norse practiced ancestor worship. In fact, they revered their ancestors so much that they kept the grave mounds within the boundaries of the community because the dead were an extension of the family and the grave was an extension of the family hall/house. Norse society was more family and tribal orientated than what most people realise. Though ancestor worship isn’t just exclusive to the Norse and Germanic peoples, virtually all Indo-European cultures practiced ancestor worship at one point.

As I stated further above, in the grave, the individual carries on being a part of the community and family. Well, this goes beyond just ancestor worship. The old Norse people believed that the individual lived on in the grave. There is saga references to back this up. It is believed that this is why an individual’s personal belongings were buried with them, so that they might have them in the grave.

Archaeological evidence pointing to life outside of the grave is slim to none, depending how one looks at it. Though one must ask, if there is an afterlife outside the grave (i.e. Valhalla), why would anyone need to be buried with their belongings in the first place? Archaeological evidence also shows that the family grave mounds were used generation after generation – Literally generations of one family in one grave mound.

Like all beliefs and cultures, there has been an external influence on what has been written down about the old Norse beliefs. All written documentation of the old Norse beliefs were written after the conversion to Christianity, thus meaning there are some Christian elements in the sagas and Poetic Edda. There is also some Hellenic influence on the sagas and Poetic Edda as well – Though interesting enough, the poem “Havamal” mentions only one thing about life after death and that is that only one’s name lives on.

Let’s look at the three afterlife locations listed in the Poetic Edda: Valhalla, Helheim and Niflheim.

Valhalla is analogous to Elysium – The Greek afterlife for heroes.
Helheim is analogous to Hades – For the vast majority of the dead.
Niflheim is analogous to Tartarus – The place for the worse of the worse.

Even the idea of Asgard (The world where Valhalla is located) and Helheim being afterlives stem from para-and-post conversion eras, meaning that before the appearance of Christian missionaries and the sudden conversion of the Norse peoples, the grave was the afterlife. The concept of Valhalla as an afterlife location didn’t appear until poems such as Eiriksmal were written.

Even with the rising dual concept of Valhalla-Helheim, many Heathens expected a life in the grave. However, dying into the grave was not without reward or punishment. If one led a good life, then one’s name lived on and family status increased via ancestor veneration.

Finally, funerary practices. The most common way was obviously burial which has been proven via archaeological evidence, but William (Bil) Linzie theorises that cremation was favoured amongst the warrior class because it made it easier to carry the bones home for internment rather than carrying a whole putifying body. Many Heathens have suggested that since the old Norse have no afterlife, that the funerary practices were purely mnemonic.

In conclusion, the ideas of Valhalla and Helheim are either poetic/literary creations that occured after the conversion era or they were absorbed into old Norse belief via the Abrahamic concept of duality. Either way, the grave was the afterlife of the old Norse.

Related articles

• Helheim – Heiðindómr ok mótgangr [2011] (valkyrianmusic.com)

Loki – God or Wight?

Loki is perhaps the most controversial figure in Norse mythology. He is commonly mistaken to be a god. However, there is little to no evidence to suggest that he is a god, let alone a god of fire as is the modern concept of Loki.

First, let’s look Loki’s position within the Nordic pantheon. He was born a jotun and not a member of the Aesir, one of the two tribes of gods mentioned in the Poetic and Prose Edda. The jotun are seen as outsiders, enemies of the Aesir. Loki only became an Aesir later on because he was sworn to be Odin’s blood-brother. However, he was still a jotun by blood, despite been Aesir by law. Loki proves himself, a number of times, to be an outsider. One prime example is when he gives birth to Odin’s horse Sleipnir [A man performing a woman’s task or even acting like a woman was frowned upon in Norse society]. Loki had a habit of acting for his own benefit, rather than that of the community he lived in.

Loki is attested throughout the Poetic Edda but is not mentioned as a “god”. Interestingly enough, he has no mention in the sagaic evidence, like most other members of the Aesir. Also, in the Poetic Edda, there is no reference to Loki’s supposed association. This association came about when Jacob Grimm wrote a major theory about Loki being a god of fire. Also, there have misinterpretations caused by the similarities of names with Loki’s. One of these include “Logi”/”Loge”, who is a personification of fire mentioned in the Prose Edda and Flateyjarbók.

Historically speaking, there is no evidence of a cult dedicated to Loki. There are no theophoric place-names containing his name either. He’s not mentioned in any descriptions of blots. There are only three pieces of archaeological evidence that might point towards the existence of Loki in any form of Nordic belief.

The first is the Snaptun Stone, which was used on fires. It depicts a face that is believed to resemble Loki after his mouth is sewn shut by dwarves in one myth. The second is the Kirkby Stephen Stone in Cumbria which depicts a horned and bearded male figure. This has been theorised to be a bound Loki. The last one is the Gosforth Cross, also in Cumbria, which depicts an image of a female kneeling before a bound figure, holding an object up. This has been interpretated as Sigyn soothing a bound Loki.

When one examines the evidence it’s easy to see that Loki, despite been considered one of the Aesir, is a jotun, not a god. Any form of “Loki worship” is a modern construct built up from folklore and misinterpretation. In short, he was never venerated or even honoured until modern times and he is the only Aesir referred to as a “jotun” as opposed to a god.

Written by Nico Grymnir Davidson

Author’s note: I am still doing research into this and this post will be revised upon new findings.