shamanism

innorsemythandmagic

FFCOMMUNICATIONSNo.96

SHAMANISM
IN NORSE MYTH AND MAGIC
volumei

BY

CLIVE TOLLEY

HELSINKI009
SUOMALAINEN TIEDEAKATEMIA
ACADEMIA SCIENTIARUM FENNICA

Folklore Fellows Communications is part of the publishing cooperation

betweentheFinnishAcademyofSciencesandLetersand
theFinnishSocietyofSciencesandLeters

Copyright 009by
Academia Scientiarum Fennica
and the author
ISSN 0014-5815
ISBN (hard) 978-951-41-1027-6
ISBN(sot)978-951-41-1028-3
Sastamala009
Vammalan Kirjapaino Oy

CONTENTS
A detailed list of contents of volume I
Preface
The cover illustration
Acknowledgements
Conventions
Abbreviations
I. PROLEGOMENA
.Introduction
.Thenatureofthesources
.Norsemenandtheirneighbours
.ShamanisminEurasia
5.ShamanisminEurope

ix
xv
xvii
xix
xxi
xxiv



66
9

II. THE PLACE OF SHAMANISM IN SOCIETY

6.Purposes
7.Communityandgender




III. METAPHYSICAL ENTITIES

8.Souls
9.Spirits

67
00

IV. COSMIC STRUCTURES

0.Thepillar,postorpole
.Themountain
.Themill
.Thetree
.ThegodHeimdallr
5.Aspectsofnon-verticalshamaniccosmography

7
9
95
0
69
06

V. THE WORKINGS OF SHAMANISM

6.Vocationandinitiation
7.Performance
8.Accoutrements


6
58

VI. KINDRED CONCERNS

9.Thesmith
0.Thebear

55
559

VII. EPILEGOMENA
.Conclusion

58

volume ii
Detailed list of contents of volume II
ThepeoplesofEurasia
Sourcetexts
References
Indexofsources
Generalindex
Mapsandplates

viii


0

5
87

A DETAILED LIST OF CONTENTS

OF VOLUME I

I.PROLEGOMENA

1. Introduction
Methodology
Someconcepts

1

7

religion 7;ritual 8;myth 9;evolutionismandchange 

2. The nature of the sources

Sourcesforshamanism
NorseandothersourcesforGermanictraditions

12

6

textsonmagic 5;conclusion 9

3. Norsemen and their neighbours

31
HistoricalcontactsbetweenScandinaviansandtheirneighbours 
thenorsemen ;thefinns ;thesmi ;thevikingsin
russia 5;conclusion 9

TheFinnarandotherFinno-Ugricpeoples

9

finnswhowerenotfinns 0;finnswhowerenot
finns 

LatinandGreeksources



tacitus ;ptolemy 7;jordanes 7;procopius 8;

theravennacosmographer 9;paulusdiaconus 9;
adamofbremen 50

Englishsources

5

beowulf 5;widsi 5;theoldenglishorosius 5

Scandinaviansources

55

primitivelifestyleofthesmi 55;tradeandwar 57;

marriage 58;giants 60;magic 6

Conclusion

6

4. Shamanism in Eurasia
66
Deinition
66
Doesthenatureofasocietydeterminethepresenceofshamanism? 69
ThecharacteristicfeaturesofSiberianshamanism
7
Smishamanism
75
Finnishshamanism
78
KhantyandMansishamanism
85
Daurshamanism
87
Japaneseshamanism
90
5. Shamanism in Europe
Greece

93
9

delphi 95;dionysus 97;orpheus 99;thebacchaeof

euripides 99;conclusion 0

Thepeoplesofthesteppe
Witchcrat

0
09

thefemalebias ;maleficiaanddivination ;

consumptionandresurrection 5;thespiritmate 6;
familiars 7;flight 8;thenocturnalgatheringandthe
femaledeity 9;thebenandanti ;greatbritain 6;
witchcraftandshamanism 0

II.THEPLACEOFSHAMANISMINSOCIETY



6. Purposes
Eurasian
Norse

134

5

doctor 5;psychopomp 6;diviner 6;hunting

magician 7;sacrificialpriest 8;journeyertothe
otherworld 8;witch ;conclusion 

7. Community and gender

Eurasian

143


community ;gender-relatedissues 5(Crossing

gender 8)

Norse

9

community 9;gender-relatedissues 5(Ergi 55;The

Haddingjar 65)

Conclusion

65

III.METAPHYSICALENTITIES

67

8. Souls
Eurasiannotionsofthesoul
AncientGreeknotionsofthesoul
Germanicnotionsofthesoul

167
68
7
76

sl 77;nd/andi 79;fjr 80;mr 8;munr 8;

r 8;ge 8;sefi 8;hugr 86;hamr 9

Conclusion

9. Spirits
Eurasiannotionsofspirits

98
200
00

theshamansinteractionwiththespirits 00;themistress
oftheanimals 0;smispirits 0(Atendantspirits 0;
Shamanicspirits 0);turkicspirits 05;ewenkispirits 06;
japanesespirits 07

Norsenotionsofspirits

08

sir 09;vanir 0;lfar 7;dsir ;valkyrjur 5;

women fylgjur 6;nornir 9;dvergar ;giants 
(Primordialbeings ;Possessorsofwisdomandmagical
powers 5;Directorsoftheforcesofnature 6;Directors
oftheineluctableforcesofthecosmos 8); troll 9;
mrnir ;animalfylgjur ;vttir ;verir ;
mrur 5;gandar 6(Etymology 6;Occurrences 8
Placenames 8;Simplex 8;Compounds 50;Derivatives 5;
GandrusedinreferencetoSmimagic 58The Historia Norwegie:
gandrandSmishamanism 58;Latersources 68)

Conclusion

69

IV.COSMICSTRUCTURES

7

10. The pillar, post or pole

Eurasian

273
7

khanty 7;smi 7;finnishandestonian 76

Germanic

76

irminsul 76;rr79(The ndvegisslur 79;The

reginnaglar 8;Pillars 8;rr,thewhetstoneand
Aurvandill 8;rrandthewaters 85;rrand
Indra 87); anotherreferencetotheworldpillar? 88;
ayetmoreobscurereference 89

Conclusion

90

11. The mountain

292

Eurasian

9

Norse

9

Conclusion

9

12. The mill

295

Finnish

95

Norse

99

thewealthmill 99(GrotiinGrotasngr and Snorris Edda 99;

The sampoandGroti 0); mundilfri 0;

Conclusion

0

13. The tree

304

05

Eurasian
ewenki 06;sakha 07;smi 08;finnish 09;themordvin
greatapple/birch ;conclusion 

Norse



sacredtrees 
sourcesforthemythicalworldtree 6
(Grmnisml 6;Vlusp 7;Fjlsvinnsml 7;
SnorrionYggdrasill 8;Glasir 9;Thebarnstokkr 9)
thenamesoftheworldtree 0
(Yggdrasill 0;Lrr 0;Mimameir )
thetreeintimeandspace 
(Thesiteoftheworldtree ;ThelandscapeoftheNorse
worldtreeThehalls ;Thebridge ;Fire 5;Groves 6;
Waters 7;Thetreeandthemountain 9; Thecompassofthe
worldtree 0;Thegrowthoftheworldtree ;Fateandthe
worldtree 5;Thetreeasamediumofcommunication 6;
Thetreeastheseatofgodasrulerandinstructor 6;The
hardshipsoftheworldtree 8;Animalsattheworldtree8
Stags 8;Thegoat 0;Theeagleandserpent 0;Thesquirrel ;
Cocks ;Theworldtreeassteed ; Themultiplicityoftrees 5)
thetreeandman 6
(Mansbirthfromthetree 6;Manslifeandthetree 9;
Rebirthandthetree 50)
thetreeandsacrifice 5
(Eurasian 5;ThegroveoftheSemnones 5;Uppsala 5;
innssacriicialtreeinHvaml 58;TheRusoak 6)
thetreeasguardian 65

Conclusion

66

14. The god Heimdallr

Heimdallr,guardianoftheworld

369
69

sourcesonheimdallr 69;heimdallrsnames:thearboreal
connection 70;heimdallrsbirth 7;heimdallras
guardianspirit 75;heimdallrinhkonardrpa 76;
heimdallrsperceptivefaculties 77;heimdallrandthe
mountain 78;heimdallrswhiteness 78;heimdallr
andtheprogenitureofman 79;heimdallrswisdom 8;
heimdallr,thegjallarhornandmmir 8;heimdallrand
sheep 8;heimdallraspillar? 85;heimdallargaldrand
hyndlulj 88;heimdallrandthebrsingamen 89(The
Old English Beowulf 89;Haustlng 90;rymskvia 9;
Snorri 9;Srla tr 9;Hsdrpa9Thetext 9;
Interpretationandcommentary 9; Conclusion 0);heimdallras
angel 0;heimdallrsliminality 0

Conclusion

15. Aspects of non-vertical cosmography

Eurasian

0
406
06

obugrian 06;ewenki 06;thesmiwaterrealm 07

Norse
Conclusion

09


ConclusiononCosmicStructures



V.THEWORKINGSOFSHAMANISM



16. Vocation and initiation

Eurasian

414


thedivineorigin ;vocation 6;initiation 7

Norse

9

thedivineorigin9(The origin of the practitioners of

seir 9;Theoriginofthepracticeofseir ); vocation ;
initiation7(innonthetree 7;innandMmir ;
innandthepoeticmead ;randFreyja 50;inn
betweentheires 55)

Conclusion

6

17. Performance
Eurasian

463
6

thekamlanie 6(Thegeneralstructureofthekamlanie 6;

TheFinnishkamlanie 6;TheSmikamlanie 66;AnEwenki
kamlanie 68;AnEwenkishamanicsong 68;AYukagir
kamlanie 69); shamaniccontests 69;wisdomcontests 69

Norse

70

shamanicelements 70; vlusp 7(Theaudience 75;

Theancestralspirit 76;Trance 77;GullveigandHeir 78;
Dialogue 80;Counterroles 80;Theclairvoyantstyle 8;The
biblicalbackground 85);eirks saga raua 87 (The deceptive
allure of verisimilitude 87;The Christian background 88;
Gurraschristianisedforemother 88;orbjrgandher
biblical antecedents 90;Sibyllineprophecy,medievalparaliturgical feasts and the parody of the bishop 90;The wandering
fortune-teller 95;Ntrur 98;Varlokkur 50);ynglinga
saga 507;minorsources 5;fights 56

Conclusion

56

18. Accoutrements
Eurasian

518
58

costume 58;thehat 50;thebelt 50;thedrum 5;the

staff 55;thesteed 56

Norse

57

costume 57;thehat 5;thebelt 5;thedrum 5;the

vtt 5;thestaff 56;thehorse 5;theseihjallrandthe
raisedportaltotheotherworld 5

Conclusion

59

VI.KINDREDCONCERNS

55

19. The smith

Eurasian
Norse

551
55
55

20. The bear

Finnicbearrites

559
559

obugrianrites 559;smiandfinnish-karelianrites 56

Norsebears

56

bearsasbeastsinnorsetradition 56;thebearand
thewarrior 565;beowulf 566;berserkir 567;bvarr
bjarki 569(Thebearmate 57;TheSmioriginofthebear
motifs of Hrlfs saga kraka 57;Conclusion 576); thebear,
thewolfandtheboar 578

Conclusion

580

VII.EPILEGOMENA

58

21. Conclusion

581

PREFACE
ShamanismandmagicwithintheNorseieldhavebeenthesubjectof
several major studies in recent years. Even within the bounds set by our
limitedmedievalsources,thetopicisawideonewideenough,perhaps,
not to call for particular pleading when another study is presented. Each
scholarhashisorherownforte;myownfocusisontheliteraryuseof
mythicmotifs,andthishasinformedmyapproachthroughout,although
not all the discussion is devoted precisely to this consideration. My focus
thereforediferssomewhatfromotherrecentsubstantialstudies:NeilPrice,
in his The Viking Way,coversagooddealofthesamegroundasdoI,buthis
mostworthwhilefocusisuponarchaeologicalaspectsofthetopic;FranoisXavierDillmann,inLes magiciens dans lIslande ancienne,concentrateson
whatthetitlestates,magicians(ratherthanmagicassuch)asdepictedin
Icelandicfamilysagas;JohnMcKinnell,inMeeting the Other in Norse Myth
and Legend,ofersadetailedanalysisofbeingssuchasvlur,buthisfocus
isuponthestructuralanalysisofliterarythemes,andhisambitextendsfar
furtherintofolklorematerialsthandoesmine,thoughIdoindeedrecognise
thatwhilemotifswhichappearinliteraturemayhavemanysources,any
atempt,suchas,inpart,thepresentone,toglimpsesomethingofthe
ancient pre-Christian traditions through this literature takes us into a preliteraryworldoforiginallyoraltradition,whichformedpartofthefolklore
of the people concerned. The present study therefore involves looking at
themanipulationofmotifs,many(butnotall)derivingultimatelyfrom
folktradition,inanincreasinglyartisitic,literarymilieu;yettheoverriding
concernistoanswerthequestionofwhetherNorseliteratureindicatesthat
ancient Scandinavians had the notion of a practice which might reasonably
betermedshamanism,whetherasanactualphenomenonofordinary
life,orasamotifappearinginictionalsetings.
I hope that the length of the present study will not predispose the reader
to nod in agreement with the poet and cataloguer of the great library of
the ancient world atAlexandria, Callimachus, who proclaimed
,abigbookisabigevil;thelengthinfactrelects
afundamentalaimIhavesoughttomeet,namelytoavoidconsidering
anisolatedlistofsupposedlyshamanicfeaturesdivorcedfromtheir
context: I therefore present fairly full discussions of the myths and texts in
whichthesefeaturesoccur,dealingwithawiderrangeofinterpretations
than the purely shamanic. I do not engage in lengthy consideration of
purely historical or archaeological materials or arguments.
Thepresentworkistheresultofalongprocessofmaturation;Ibegan
my investigations in the topics under consideration in the mid-980s,

xvi

Clive Tolley

FFC96

leadingtomydoctoralthesis,submitedatOxfordUniversityin99.
Personal circumstances thwarted my intention to develop my research and
produce a more substantial and connected interpretation than appeared in
mydissertationwithinareasonableperiodthereater,but,mythoughtson
thetopichavingnaturallydevelopedovertheyears,Iamgladnowtobe
abletoofertheserelectionsinarathermoreconsideredformthanwould
havebeenthecaseiteenyearsago,andwhichinimportantareasalso
amend earlier published work of mine (the section on Hrlfs saga kraka in
Chapter0is,however,adaptedfrommyrecentarticle,Tolley007a).
Whilstthebookisscholarlyinintent,Ibelieveitmayalsobeapproached
bylessspecialisedreaders,aswellasbyscholarswhosespecialityisnot
Norse. I have presented as wide a range both of shamanic source material
(though still very selective) and of Norse texts as seemed feasible and justiiedbytheaimofcontextualisingtheNorsesourcesunderdiscussion,and
out of consideration for readers who may not otherwise have ready access
to them. I have also held to the principle that all materials discussed should
notonlybepresentedintheoriginallanguagewheneverpossible,butalso
renderedintoEnglish(astranslationisinterpretation,andthescholaris
therebyobligedtoclarifywhathebelievesatexttomean;translationsare
mineunlessnotedotherwise).ItrusttoothatthereaderwillindIhave
been able to avoid any obfuscation of academic jargon and expression.
It is my hope that this volume will contribute positively to the growing
debateinthisareaofresearch,andthatthereaderwillemergefromthis
booknotonlywithgreaterunderstanding,butalso,throughthat,with
greater enjoyment of the works considered and appreciation of the cultures
described.
Clive Tolley
Chester,Christmas008

THE COVER ILLUSTRATION

ThefrontcovershowsthepaintingbyThomasFearnley(80),aNorwegianofEnglishdescent,oftheSlindebirch,whichhecompletedin89.
ThetreegrewonanancientIronAgegravemound,Hydneshaugen,in
Sogn. It was the subject of a number of romantic paintings and poems in the
nineteenthcentury,whichhaverendereditoneofthebestknownofNorwegiantrees,yetitstaleisnotahappyone.Itisclearfromlocalresearch,
inparticularbyWilhelmChristiein87,thatthetreewasregardedas
holyintheeighteenthcentury,andoferingsofbeerwereplacedatits
footatChristmas,butsuchcustomshaddwindledbytheearlynineteenth
century.Themoundwassupposedtocontaintreasure,guardedbyawhite
snake,andtwelveinterlockingcoppercauldrons.In86,thetreehada
girthatgroundlevelof5.6metres,anditsheightwas8.8metres,whilstthe
canopyhadadiameterof.6metres.Thegravemoundonwhichitgrew,
whichwas9metresindiameterandmetreshigh,wasalocalboundary
nexus;Fearnleyspaintingillustrateshowthetreealsofunctioned,atleast
metaphorically,asaverticalaxisunitingheaven,earth(mountain)andsea,
aswellas,onatemporalplane,standingontheboundaryoflightanddarkness,dayandnightthediscussionslaterinthepresentvolumesuggest
these may not have been simply nineteenth-century romantic notions. The
treeblewdowninastormin87.In89localsdismantledthegrave
mound,nolongerawedbytheoldstoriesthatdisasterwouldensueany
damagetothemonument,andremovedthreethousandloadsofstone
fromit.Acoupleofburialcistswerefound,butnotreasure,cauldronsor
whitesnake;noarchaeologicalsurveywasundertaken.Nowadaysanew
roadandpetrolstationhave,itseems,obliteratedwhatremainedofthis
once revered site.
The Slinde birch is surely a late local manifestation of an ancient Norse
traditionofsacredguardiantrees,whichreacheditsculminationinmyth
intheformoftheworldtree,guardingandsustainingthecosmosand
relectingitspassagethroughtime,stretchinguptoheavenand,likethe
Slindebirchonitsburialmound,reachingdowntotheworldofthedead,
whereresidedtheserpentNhggrandwhereweretobefoundsprings
bestowinglifeandwisdom,aswellasthespringHvergelmir,theCauldron
Roarer,thesourceofallwaters.InSiberia,itwasalongtheworldtree
thattheshamanwasbelievedtopasstootherworldstofulilhisspiritual
missions for his community.
Asidefromitstopicalrelevance,FearnleysdepictionoftheSlindebirch
standsasaitingsymbolformuchthatisdiscussedinthepresentvolume:
itisanimaginative,artisticresponsetoanduseofanobjectrootedincult,

xviii

Clive Tolley

FFC96

asaremanyofthepoeticandliterarysourcesdiscussedhere,anditportrayssomethingoferstwhilereligioussigniicance,asigniicancewhich
hadalreadyfadedintovaguememory.TheSlindebirchteeters,athingof
beauty,onthebrinkofoblivion.

I. PROLEGOMENA
1. Introduction
Norsemythisthemaintopicofthiswork,andthemainaimistodiscuss
andclarifyaselectionofmythsandpractices,inparticularmagicpractices,
usuallyinthespeciicformofseir.Theselectionismadeonthebasisof
theirarguablyshamaniccharacter,orconnectiontomythswhichmight
besodescribed.Shamanismprovidesmaterialforcomparativeinvestigation,andisusedtohelpelucidatetheNorsemythsinquestion;Iaimto
presentafairlybroadselectionofmaterialsinordertogiveasuicient
indicationofthenatureofthesourceswhicharecompared,butitisnot
myaimtoconsiderindetailquestionsofinterpretationposedbyshamanic
texts,exceptasthisimpingesonthemainareasofdiscussion:itismyaim
todiscusstheNorsesourcesindetail.
Thescopeofinvestigationisnotconinedjusttoelementswhichrelate
directlytoshamanismasareligiousphenomenon:othercharacteristic
elementsofthebelief-systemsofsocietieswhichpractisedshamanism,
notablycosmologicalconceptssuchastheworldtree,andtheritualofthe
bearhunt,arealsodiscussed.Somehavefallenintothetrapofascribing
shamanismtotheancientScandinaviansonthebasisofcoincidencesof
imageryorpracticeinbothNorseandEurasianbelief-systemsrelatingto
suchmeta-shamanicphenomena;clearly,someinvestigationiscalledfor
toclarifywhatmayreasonablybesaidontheseissues.Equally,itseems
misplacedtoconsidertheNorseevidenceinisolationfromotherEuropean
evidenceforshamanic-typepractices,andsosomeconsiderationisgiven
tothequestionofshamanisminancientGreece,andthewitchcratof
medievalwesternEurope,andabriefconsiderationismadeofEuropean
contactswiththepeoplesofthesteppeintheearlyMiddleAges,whence
someshamanicideasmayhavebeenbrought.
Theamountofmaterialrelatingtoclassicshamanismwhichispresentedisinfactbuta
smallselection;forausefulcollectionoftextsrenderedintoItalian,seeMarazzi(98).

Imakeoneexception:theNorwegianaccountinHistoria NorwegieofSmishamanism,
whichIseektoelucidatebothfromaNorseperspectiveandfromthatofSmiandSiberian
shamanism.

IuseEurasiatorefer,approximately,totheterritoryoftheformerSovietUnion,which
includesmostoftheareasofclassicshamanism(byextension,theSmiareasarealso
includedinthecultural-geographicareaofEurasia);Idonotconsiderareassouthofthe
steppeinanygreatdetail,thoughIdomakesomeuseforexampleofIndianandJapanese
material,which,treatingthetermEurasianflexibly,maybeincludedwithinit.

IalsomakesomeuseofCelticmaterials,butamorethoroughstudythanasyetexists
ofCeltictraditionsofseersandmagicians,themselvesoftenexhibitingbroadlyshamanic


CliveTolley

FFC96

Theuseofshamanismasacriterionofselectiondeliberatelyraisesthe
question:didtheNorseinfactpractiseshamanism?Norse(orScandinavian)referstotheancient,andparticularlypre-Christian,GermanicspeakinginhabitantsofScandinaviaand(secondarily)ofcoloniesthey
setledelsewhere(notablyIceland),whoformanycenturiesbeforetheir
conversiontoChristianityaroundtheendoftheirstmillenniumhadhad
afairlyhierarchicalsocietybasedlargelyonagricultureandtrade,whilst
initsclassicformshamanism,apracticeofmediationwiththespiritworld,
isassociatedaboveallwiththescateredandotennomadicsocietiesof
northernSiberia,whichreliedprimarilyonhuntingforsubsistence,and
whichusuallylackedadevelopedsocialhierarchy.
ThereasonforexaminingthisquestionisthatfeaturesarefoundinOld
Norseliteratureandotherwritingswhichappeartorelectcharacteristic
atributesoftheclassicformsofSiberianshamanism;thefactthatthe
Norselivedonornearthegeographicalperipheryoftheclassicshamanic
worldgivesusfurthermotivationforexaminingtheissue.However,the
problemsthathinderadirectanswertothequestionaremanifold,chief
amongwhicharethediicultiesofdeiningshamanismprecisely,andthen
ofconsideringwhetherNorsepracticesdoinfactitwithinthisdeinition
ataskmadeallthemoretryingbyaninsuiciencyofextantinformation
aboutancientScandinavianbeliefsandpractices.WhilstIdonotavoid
thesediiculties,myapproachismoreoneofhighlightinganddeining
ascloselyaspossiblewhatdoesremaininourNorsesources,andseeingtowhatextentitmaycomparewithclassicSiberianshamanismand
alsowithnon-classicformsfromfurthersouth(butwithoutstrayingtoo
farintothedeinitionalmazeofwhetheritisshamanismornot).One
lineofargumentotenpropoundedbythoseeagertouncovershamanism
amountstodetectingfeaturesinNorserecordswhichmaybeparalleled
inindisputablyshamanicsocieties,andthenconcludingthattheancient
Scandinavians,eitherinthepaganperiod,oreven,inlatertimes,practised
someformofshamanism.Iseektoavoidthislogicalfallacy(formanysuch
elementsoccurindividuallyoutsideshamanism),butIalsoseektodiscuss
suchareasinsomedetail,without,however,seekingtoelicitarguments
forthepresenceofshamanismwhentheevidencedoesnotsupportit.The
scopeofthestudyis,infact,ratherwider:shamanismactsasapointof
reference,butitismyaimtoprobemoregenerallyintothenatureofpreChristianbeliefinScandinavia,andinparticularitsexpressioninmyth.
Thisinevitablyalsoinvolvesdiscussionofthenatureofoursources,many
ofwhicharecomposedwellaterthedisappearanceofpaganismasa
practisedsystemofbelieforritual.
Naturally,thetopicofthepresentworkdoesnotemergeex nihilo.Ido
notwish,however,togiveadetailedhistoryofthescholarshiponthetopic
suchsurveysaretediousandservelitlepurposebutrathertobringin
earlierworkinthecourseofdiscussionatappropriatepoints.Iwillmerely
characteristics,woulddomuchtohelpcontextualisetheNorseevidencewithinabroader
northEuropeansetting.

FFC96

1.Introduction

note that comparisons between Norse and Smi, and other, shamanic
practicesandbeliefsgobackwellintothenineteenthcentury,notablyto
FritznerscomparisonbetweenSmiandNorsemagicpractices(877);in
95DagStrmbckarguedforastrongconnectionbetweenNorseseir
andSmishamanism,whereaskeOhlmarks(99)sawtheevidenceas
notsupportingsuchalink,whilstrecognisingsimilaritieswithformsof
shamanismfromfurtheraield.Inmorerecentyears,thedebatemaybe
saidtogobacktoPeterBuchholzsshortthesisof968,whichoutlineda
numberoffeaturesinNorsemythofanostensiblyshamanicnature,and
hencerekindledthedebateabouttheextenttowhichancientNorsemen
practisedaformofshamanism.5Thereateropinionshavebeendivided
ontheissue,withforexampleRegisBoyerandFranoisDillmannarguingagainstanystronglyshamanicpresenceinNorse,whileNeilPriceis
moresympathetictotheidea,and,likeStrmbck,seeksparallelsinSmi
practicesandbeliefs.Aslongasthedebatefocusesonlyonthosefeatures
whichcanbedirectlyperceivedasshamanicornot,itwillcontinueendlessly;myownapproachistoatempttoencompassaratherwiderarray
ofmaterialinordertoprovideamuchmoresubstantialbodyofcontextual
evidenceandargument,ofwhichthedebateonshamanicfeaturesforms
part.Ratherthanrelyingon,orreferringto,thepresentationsofprimary
materialsbyscholarssuchasBuchholzorPrice,Ihavepresentedsuch
materialsanewalongwithmyowninterpretations(acknowledgingthe
contributionsofearlierscholarsasappropriate).
AsnearlyallourancientNorserecordsareliterary6inform,aconstant
leitmotivwillbetheinterpretationofthesourceswhichrelatereligiousor
mythicinformationinthelightoftheirliterarycontext.Iindmyselfmuch
inagreementwithJaneHarrison,whointheintroductiontohergreatwork
onGreekreligion,Prolegomena,pointedoutthetensioninherentinusing
literarysourcestoilluminatereligion(96:vii):whereasforliterature
Homeristhebeginning,forreligionherepresentsaculmination,acompleteachievement,analmostmechanicalaccomplishment,withscarcely
ahintoforigines,anaccomplishmentmoreover,whichisessentiallyliteraryratherthanreligious,scepticalandmoribundalreadyinitsvery
perfection.ThesewordsapplyjustasforciblytotheNorsemonuments,
Buchholzsthesisisatbestpreliminaryinnature:thenumberoftextsandmythicmotifs
discussedisverylimited,thereispracticallynodiscussionofthereliabilityandbackground
ofsources,andlittleconsiderationofthedegreetowhichsupposedlyshamanicfeaturesin
Norseadduptoanythinglikeasystematicreligiouspractice.
6
Byliteraryismeantthatthemainfocusofthepieceisontheaestheticsofthecomposition(useofwords,structuresandsoforth),whetherthecompositioniswrittenororalin
origin;thepointisthatthemainpurposeisnottocommunicateareligiousmessageor
information.Manyworksmightbetermedsemi-literary,inthatthemainpurposewas
(arguably)dividedamongvariousconcerns;forexample,AmadibnFalnsaccountof
hisjourneytothekingdomoftheBulgars,whichdescribesaVikingfuneral,waspartly
whatwemightcallethnographic,butthisisbalancedwithadesiretoproduceanaestheticallypleasingcomposition(inthiscase,wehavethefurthercomplicationthattheextant
accountisinfactonlyasummaryoftheoriginalwithvariouspassagescitedfromit;a
differentsortofproblemalsoarisesfromtheaccountbeingthatofanoutsidertotheculture
described).
5

CliveTolley

FFC96

whereourearliestpoeticrecordsalreadyappearforusashighlycrated
artefacts;noneofthetextsfunctionedashymns,forpurposesofworship,
thoughreligiousconsiderations,ormorepreciselytheartisticcratingof
religiousconceptsinliteraryform,werestillimportantinearlytextssuch
asVlusp.Harrisondeclaredherconcerntobewiththesubstratumof
religiousconceptions,atoncemoreprimitiveandmorepermanentwhich
arefoundinHomerandelsewhere,andyetheraimwastocometoabetterunderstandingofsomeformsofGreekpoetry;asimilaraimmotivates
thepresentstudy.Thesourcesareotentheworksofpoetswhousematerialwhich,whileperhapsoriginallypossessedofanessentiallyreligious
purpose,isalwaysdirectedtopoeticends.Infact,toobscurematersstill
further,religionandritearerarelyglimpsedintheliteraturewehave;
moreotenwearepresentedwithmyth,whichmayrelectreligionorrite
butdoesnotdosoinanecessarilystraightforwardway.Nonetheless,itis
thepracticeandbelieflyingbehindtheliterarypresentationofmyththat
issoughtinthisstudybutgiventheindirectwayinwhichthesehave
tobeuncovered,theyareboundtobeseenthroughaglassdarkly.Yet,
likeHarrison,myultimateaimistoachieveabeterunderstandingof
thepoetry(inthiscaseNorsepoetry).7Themoreclearlywecanperceive
thenatureofthematerialthepoetsworkedwith,thegreaterwillbeour
perceptionofwhatuse,inpoeticterms,theyhavemadeofit.Theaim
inthepresentworkisnotprimarilytoproduceabookofliterarycriticism,orevenofliterarymotifs,inthewayforexampleMcKinnell(005)
doeswithmaterialwhichoverlapswiththatconsideredhere,yetliterary
considerationsareboundtoenterthearguments,asisconsistentwiththe
natureofoursources.Iwouldliketothinkthatthisstudywillfurtherthe
appreciationofNorsepoetryinliteraryterms,mainlybecausethepoets
deservetobetreatedforwhattheyare,butalsobecausewithoutitour
understandingofthemythandreligionwillbeseriouslycompromised,
asindeedalreadyhappensalltoofrequentlyatthehandsofthoselacking
akeenliteraryawareness.

Methodology
Myapproachtothestudyofthematerialsconsideredisessentiallypragmaticandseekstoavoidbeinghide-boundtoatheoreticalframework
imposedfromwithout.Iam,ofcourse,familiarwithvarioustheoretical
approaches,andhaveemployedthem(orelementsofthem)astheyhave
seemedappropriate.TheonlytheoreticalpositionIadheretoconsistently
isthatthehumanmindisnotboundbyanyoneapproachtoreality;no
individualtheorywillservetoexplainthemultifariousexpressionsof
humanimagination.8Itismyaimtorespectthecomplexityoftheevidence
Proseworksarealsoconsidered,butarelessofafocusofthisstudy(asopposed,for
example,toDillmannsexhaustivestudyofmagiciansinancientIceland(006),whereby
contrastthepoetrylieslargelyoutsidetheworksambit).
8
AsBleeker(979:76)notes:Astomethodology,thereactuallyexistsonlyonegeneral
7

FFC96

1.Introduction

andthementalcapacityoftheoriginalthinkerswhoproducedit,andto
allowthesourcestospeakforthemselvesasfaraspossible;theconverse
approachofapplyinganideologicallyformulatedtheoryandindingevidencetoitithasbeeneschewed.
Itisfundamentaltomyapproachtoplaceanyinferencesaboutthe
presenceorabsenceofshamanismwithinasbroadacontextaspossible:
throughout,theprimequestionIseektoanswerisWhatisthenature
andmeaningofthetextormotifunderdiscussion?ratherthandirectly
Isthistextormotifshamanic?Inessence,Iindtheprimarysourcesfar
morefascinatingthananytheoreticaldiscussion;yetafewfurtherremarks
maynotbeoutofplace.
OneprincipleadoptedinthisstudyintheelucidationofNorsesources
is to work from the close to the distant. Close means other sources
closeintimeandplace,anddistantmeanssourcesfurtherremovedin
timeorplace.Problemsariseimmediately,ofcourse:mostofourNorse
sourcesarewritendowninthethirteenthorfourteenthcenturies,but
manyarebelievedtobemucholder,inwholeorinpart,andmoreover
manyderivenotsomuchfromtheirplaceofwriting,Iceland(usually),
butratherNorwayorelsewhere,withrootsgoingbackfurtherintimeand
place.Aswellasgeographicaldistance,culturaldistancealsohastobe
takenintoaccount;IndiantraditionsmaybemoreinformativethanSmi,
forinstance,sincebothIndianandNorsemythicsystemsdevelopedout
ofasharedIndo-Europeanbase(atleast,soitappears),whereastheSmi
belongedtoadiferentculturalsphere.Levelsofculturealsohavetobe
borneinmind;anagriculturalsocietywithahierarchyfrompeasantsto
princes(theNorse)isratherdiferentfromsemi-nomadichunterswith
onlyrudimentaryanimalhusbandry(theSmi).
Hultkrantz(970:8)writes:Everyallegationwhichismadeconcerningareligionoranelementofreligioniscomparativeinitsnature,this
beingduetothefactthattheidentiicationinitselfpresupposesacomparisonwithotherreligionsandotherelementsofreligion.Hementionsthe
twomaintypesofcomparison:betweenphenomenathatcanberelated
geneticallytoeachother(forexample,theybelongtoonetimeandplace,
oroneisaborrowedversionoftheother),andbetweenthosethatcannot
(theyarefromsocietieswithnolinks);thepresentstudyinvolvesboth
rule,i.e.thatoneshouldstudythereligiousphenomenabothcriticially,unbiasedly,ina
scholarlymanner,andatthesametimewithempathyIamfirmlyconvincedthatthe
averagehistorianofreligionsshouldabstainfromspeculationsaboutmattersofmethod,
whichcanonlybeadequatelysolvedbystudentsofphilosophyandphilosophyofreligion.
Thiseminentlysensiblestatementhascomeundermuchbombardmentfrompartisansof
thetheorybeforepracticeschool,butisreiteratedbyHultkrantz,who,inanimportant
workonthemethodsofcomparativereligionavailableonlyinSwedish,says(97a:7):
Itshould,however,beapparentthateverymethodisonlyahelp-mechanism,thatitonly
suitsaparticulartypeofobjective,andthatahumanistsciencelikecomparativereligion
withitsmanyturnsofinsightcannotbeboundtoanyspecificmethod.Itisalwaystheaim
ofresearchanditsobjectwhichdeterminewhichmethodologyshouldbeused,anditisup
totheindividualresearchertochoosethemethodhefindsmostpracticalandappropriate
inthecontext.Oneandthesamecomparativereligiousinvestigationcanindeedmakeuse
ofseveralmethods,accordingastheobjectiveschange.

CliveTolley

FFC96

sortsofcomparison.Ageneticrelationshipbetweenmotifsstrengthens
thecaseforinterpretingoneinthelightoftheother.Yetthepursuitof
geneticrelationshipsbetweenphenomenaisotenboundtoizzleoutin
uncertainty,giventheinevitablesparsityofinformation,andthepursuitof
geneticrelationshipposesproblems:forexample,whyshouldweaccept
a priorithatthesocietyofadherentstoanIndo-Europeanmythicsystem
wascoterminouswiththesocietyofspeakersofIndo-Europeanlanguages,
orindeedpostulatethatsuchathingasIndo-Europeanmythexistedasa
deinableentityatall?9Inthepresentstudy,Ihavenotpursuedthemater
ofgeneticrelationshipfar,butIhaveassumedthatsucharelationship
existswithotherIndo-Europeanmythicsystems,andIhaveprovideda
historicalaccountoflinksbetweenScandinaviaandsocietieswithacknowledgedshamanism,toillustratethegeneralpointthatageneticrelationshipmayhaveexistedinmanycases(butIdonotseektoproveitother
thanincertaininstances),astheNorsewereindirectcontactwiththeSmi
andFinns,andprobablywithotherSiberianpeoplesontheirtraderoutes
toBjarmalandanddowntotheByzantineEmpire.Suchrelationships,
wheretheyareofagenetickind,couldeitherrelectdirectborrowing,or
acommonparticipationinawidespreadandgeographicallycontiguous
circumpolarculture.0
Insofarasthecomparisonsarenon-genetic,theaimmaybedescribedas
typological,inotherwordstodelineatewhatNorsefeaturesareofthesame
typeasthosefoundelsewhere,andinwhatways:onlyoncethisisdone
canquestionsaboutborrowing,sharedmentalcomplexesandsoforthbe
considered.Thefurtherpurposeofmakingtypologicalcomparisonsmay,
however,betosuggestmeanings,orstructures,withinmythictraditions,
evenwhentheyarenot(apparently)related.Theassertion,whichIfollow,
isthatpeople,atleastthoselivinginroughlycomparableeconomicand
socialsetings,tendtorealiseagivennotionabouttheworldinsimilar
symbolicways,evendowntodetails;whythisshouldbeisintheprovince
ofpsychologists,buttheimplicationisthatwhenweencountersimilar
Cf. Hultkrantz (97a: 65), who objects to the principle of stopping comparisons at
languageboundaries,sincereligiousstudiesarenotthesameasphilology,andheasks
ifforexamplesufisminArabiaandIranshouldberegardedasdistinctphenomenaon
thegroundsthatthelanguagesofthetwocountriesareunrelated.Heobservesthatitis
wellrecognisedthatmythsandtaleswanderfromonepeopletoanotherirrespectiveof
language.
0
ThepossibilityofanIndo-Europeanheritageofshamanismcanalsonotbedismissed;
thusFleck(97b:57,65)notessimilaritiestoIranianpractices,forexample.Infact,lexical
borrowingsinforexampleFinnish(suchasnimi,name,orvesi,water)indicatecontact
betweenproto-Indo-Europeanandproto-Uralicspeakers,andatasubsequentperiodthere
wasstrongcontactbetweenFinno-UgricspeakersandIndo-Iraniansinwhichitappears
muchreligiousvocabularyenteredtheFinno-Ugriclanguages.Theancientandlong-standingcontactbetweenUralicandIndo-Europeanpeoplesatleastraisesthepossibilityof
shamanicideaspassingbetweenthem,andcertainlyillustratesthecomplexityoftryingto
tracegeneticrelationshipbetweenreligiousideas.

Itisworthnotingthatcommonlyacceptednotionssuchasthatofacircumpolarcultural
complex(towhichIdonotbelieveancientScandinaviabelonged,otherthanincertain
aspectswhichwereprobablyborrowed)aretypologicalinnature,andnotproved,over
all,byevidenceofculturalcontact.
9

FFC96

1.Introduction

symbolisms,onemayelucidatethemeaningoftheother.Iam,however,
farfromEliadesrealist,orneo-Platonicidealist,position,withhisnotions
ofthelogicofsymbolsandinvariantcoremeanings;thecomparisons
areintroducedbywayofsuggestion,andthelikelihoodoftheirbeing
usefuldependsonhowmuchsupportingevidencethereis,andhowfar
webelievestructuresofmythtendtobereplicatedthroughouttheworld
(forwhateverreason).Traditionis,inanycase,alwaysvariable.Meaning
residesinaninteractionbetweenaccepted(butchanging)traditionand
individualcreativity,sothatamythorsymbolcannotinfacteverbesaid
justtohaveonemeaningperse(hence,mypositionisfundamentally
informedbynominalisminawayEliadesisnot).
Needlesstosay,theresultsofcomparisonareboundtobespeculative
toagreaterorlesserextent,butuncertaintyisahallmarkofalmostany
considerationofmedievalsources.Thereisacertaininadequacyimposed
bythepracticalnecessityofisolatingmerelyoneaspectofancientreligion,
namelyshamanism,andtheinsuiciencyofcontextualisedsourcematerialsonboththeNorseandSiberiansidesleadstoadiscussionwhichmight
otherwisebemoreholisticinitsapproach.Nonetheless,theseproblemsare
relative,anddonotprecludeusfrommakingusefulobservationsabout
Norsemonuments.

Some concepts
religion
Religionhasbeendeinedinmanydiferentways.Thefunctionaldeinitionofreligionasultimateconcern,suggestedbyBaird(97:8),may
appealinageneralstudyofreligion,butisscarcelyofmuchuseinthe
Norseield:wecannot,giventhepaucityofsources,determinewhatwas
ofultimateconcerntopeople,amaterwhichnodoubtvariedfromone
persontothenextanyway;wecannotsayinanycasethatworshipofthe
pre-ChristiangodsoftheNorsepeoplenecessarilywas,orrelatedto,their
ultimateconcern.Forthepresentpurposes,especiallygiventhatthiswork
isnotprimarilyconcernedwiththenatureofreligioninitself,thedeinition
ofHultkrantz(97a:,mytranslation)isadequate:thecertaintyofthe
existenceofasupernaturalworld,acertaintywhichismainlyexpressed
invarioussortsofopinionsrelatingtobeliefandwhichinconcreteterms
ismanifestedinritesandobservances,aswellasinnarrativeaccounts.
Inmostcases,itis(theoutwardmanifestationof)Norsereligionthatis
referredto,thatistheworshipofthesirandvanirgodsandrelatedbeliefs
AusefulsummaryofEliadesapproachisgivenbyJohnCliffordHoltinhisintroduction
toEliade(996:xivxv).ForalengthyandpenetratingdiscussionofEliadesapproach,
seeDudley(977).Dudley(ibid.9),followingLakatos,makesanimportantpointabout
methodologyandfalsificationtheories:hesuggeststhatinsteadofattemptingtousemethodologicalfalsification,asystemshouldbejudgedonwhetheritisprogressive,leadingto
thediscoveryofneworunexpectedphenomenaandaccountingforknownbutunexplained
phenomena,ordegenerative,whenitceasestoclarifyunexplainedfactsandwhenthere
arealternativetheoriesthatpromisetobemoreprogressive.


CliveTolley

FFC96

andpractices,especiallyasexpressedinoursurviving,mainlywriten,
monuments.Shamanismiscountedasareligiouspracticerelectingthe
religiousbeliefsystemofthesocietyconcerned.Religionsmayimpose
ethicalcodesonadherents,asinthereligionsoftheBook;theymayalso
beprimarilyaimedatenlisting(orinthecaseofmagiccompelling)theaid
ofdivinepowerstofurthertheaimsofindividualsorcommunitiesinan
amoralfashion.MostsourcesindicatethatNorsereligionwasofthelater
sort;thesameistrueofmanyformsofshamanism.Thedivisionisscarcely
hardandfast,however,andonesortmaydevelopintotheother(Judaism,
forinstance,appearstohavemovedoverintotheethicalcategoryinthe
courseofitsrecordedhistory).
Connected with religion are terms used when two religions come
together.Baird(97:)haspointedouttheneedforamoreprecise
terminology here; thus, when elements from diferent religions come
togetherinaharmoniousunitthenthetermsynthesisisappropriate;when
theelementsco-existwithoutconsistency,wehavesyncretism;whenan
elementisabsorbedfromoutsideandtheborrowingreligionchangesas
aresult,wehavereconception.Yetdeterminingwhichprocessisatplay
inanygiveninstancerequiresanobjectiveknowledgeofthehistoryof
thereligionsinquestion,whichisrarelyavailableinthecaseofNorse
paganism.

ritual
Ritesmayrelatetomanyaspectsoflifepassagefromonestatetoanother
(suchasadolescence),theseasons,commemorations,exchange,communion,aliction,feasting,fasting,politics(Bell997:9).Althoughritual
hassometimesbeenseenasasortofdramatisedversionofmyth,sucha
viewisnowrejected;therelationshipofritualtomythisotencasual,so
theonecannotautomaticallybeusedtoilluminatetheother(G.Kirk970:
8).Ritescanonlybeunderstoodbytakingtheirwholesocialcontextinto
account,yettheyarenotmerelyrelectionsofsocialorder(orofmythic
order).Bell(997:8)argues:Theseritesalsofunctiontoreinforcethe
socialstatusquo,sincetemporaryinversionsorsuspensionsoftheusual
orderofsocialrelationsdramaticallyacknowledgethatorderasnormative.Henceritualistheoccasiontoexaggeratethetensionsthatexist
inthesocietyinordertoprovideasocialcatharsisthatcansimultaneouslyairmunityandefectsomesemblanceofit.Thegoalofritualas
suchistochanneltheexpressionofconlictintherapeuticwayssoasto
restoreafunctioningsocialequilibrium.Therehas,ofcourse,beenalong
A.Jensen(96:)regardsshamanismasmagic:Shamanismasweencounterit
todayisinseparablefromactsofvolition,whichinextremeformsdonotevenhesitateto
makethedeitysubservienttohumanwill.Thisisgenuinemagic;throughit,shamanism
attainsitsexceptionalposition.Thislegitimateviewpointraisesmattersofthedistinction
betweenreligionandmagic,whichIdonotbelieveitwouldbebeneficialtodiscusshere.
Forthepresentpurposes,magicmayberegardedasasubclassofreligion,oneinwhich
ritualisticcontrolofthesupernaturalplaysasignificantrole.


FFC96

1.Introduction

traditionofsocialinterpretationofritual(withvaryingideasabouthow
ritualrelectssociety),butthisisnottheonlydimension:ritualclearlyalso
fulilsareligiousfunction,andalsoparticipatesinthesymbolicworld
oftheadherentsthesymbolsofritualmustbeinterpretedintermsof
thepositiontheyoccupywithintheoverallsystemofsymbolsoperating
withinthesocietyconcerned(ibid.).Ritualactionmaybemetaphoric
(forexample,pouringwaterstandsforrain)ormetonymic(acrownstands
forroyalauthority).Aninterpretationofthesocio-mythicstructureof
ritualisoferedbyBouritius(979:067),whoarguesthatritualrelects
whathetermsamacro-micro-cosmicorderrelationship:mostsocieties
believethatamacrocosmicprimordialchaosisabolishedbytheestablishmentofamacrocosmicorder,whichisrealisedonthemicrocosmiclevel
asahumansociety,thelifeofwhichmaintainsorder.Yetthereisalwaysa
latenttensionbetweenhiddenchaosandorder,sothatorderisperceived
aspotentialdisorder,andallritualsaredirectedatthecontinuationand
realisationoftheeverlastingorderofmacrocosmicandmicrocosmicrelationship.Whilstorderitselfiseverlasting,theformsinwhichitisrealised
areinastateofchange,sothatritualsaretobeunderstoodasorderinga
continuum,andasightingthehiddenchaoslatentinalllife.Thereare
threetypesofrituals,dedicatedtoordering,re-orderingornew-orderingthe
macro-micro-relationship.Theirstincludesritesofpassage,whichput
allmembersofacommunityintheirjustplace,anddailyritualsneeded
inordinarylife,suchashuntingrituals;thesecondgroupincludesseasonalrituals,re-orderingsocietyanditsconcreteenvironmentofplace
andtimeontheeverlastingmodeloftheoriginalmacro-cosmicorder,and
renewingthepowersofnature,aswellasritualsdirectedagainstlatent
chaosineverydaylife,suchashealingoranti-witchcratrituals;thethird
groupincludesforexampleritualsofnewreligiousmovements,which
changetheorderofthemacro-micro-cosmicrelationshipintotallynew
circumstancesunboundedtokinship,timeorplace.

myth
Imaginationiscentraltomyth.Amythconveysanunrealitythatisimaginedasreal.Amythisatalethoughitmaybepresentedsoallusively
astolackalmostallnarrativethread.5Mythsmaybedistinguishedfrom
legends,whichpurporttocommunicatehistoricalstories,thoughsince
godsandsupernaturalbeingsinterveneinlegends,andsincelegendsmay
behumanisedversionsofdivinemyths,thedistinctionisotendiicult
tomakeinpractice.Mythsarealsoinprincipledistinctfromfolktales,in
whichthesupernaturalelementissubsidiaryandthenarrativeelement
IthankUrsulaDronkeforthissuccinctdescription.
InNorsepoetry,aso-calledkenningmaybeanallusiontoamythicorlegendarymotif
(ornarrative);forexampleDraupnis dgg,dewofDraupnir,designatesgold,sincethe
mythologicalringDraupnirdrippedgoldringsfromitself.Eveninextendedpoems,the
narrativeelementmaybelimited:forexample,amythofrrisalludedtoinrsdrpa,
butratherbymeansofaseriesofscenesthanalinkednarrative.

5

10

CliveTolley

FFC96

tothefore;again,sincemythsotenemployfolktaleelements,particularly
forinstancesofingenuity,theoneclassoverlapswiththeother.Mythsare
distinguishedasbeingaboutseriousmatersthismaybethegods,or
thecreationoftheworld,orrelectionsondeepproblems(ofsocietyor
individuals);nonetheless,amongtheseseriousmatersmaysometimes
becountedhumour.Mythsarenotnarrativeversionsofrituals:theconnectionwithritualsisotentenuousandtrivial;nordotheynecessarily
relectreligiouspracticesorbeliefs.Mythsareusuallytraditional,andexist
aspartofculturalheritage,buteachretellingalterselements,sometimes
drastically,andanon-traditionalmythisatheoreticalpossibility.Interpretationsofmythnodoubtvariedfromtimetotime,placetoplace,person
toperson.InNorse,weusuallyhaveamythpreservedonlyonceorafew
times,andoteninafragmentaryorallusiveform.Eachrealisationofa
mythisdistinct,andwemustaimtodistinguishbetweenwhatthepoet
inheritedandwhathehasaltered,rearrangedoremphasiseddiferently,
despitethediicultyofdoingsoinmanyinstances.6
Itisunacceptabletoimposeaparticulargeneralisedtheoryonallmyth,
suchasstructuralismorsocialfunction.Atthesametime,itmustbeborne
inmindthatmythsoten,ifnotalways,servedafunctionbeyondthepurely
narrative,beitreligious,political,initiatoryorwhatever,andhencethestructuringofaparticularversionmaybesubjecttotheseexternalfactors.
Iassumeonthepartofthereaderanunderstandingthatmythsare
oten expressed through igurative language; I do not undertake any
discussionofthistopichere,sincemuchhasalreadybeenwritenonit.
AsanexampleofwhatIreferto,considerthementalprocessesatwork
whenashamansaysthathisdrumisaboatwhichtakeshimtotheother
world;havingsetofonthispathofmetaphor,theshamanisthenfree
toelaboratethepictureoftheboatinquestion.Boththedrumandboat
arelegitimateobjectsofstudy(arebothreal,sotospeak)inthecontext
ofthepresentstudy;itisnecessarytobeabletoperceivethedistinction
between,forexample,physicalobjectsofritualsorconceptssuchasthe
structureofthecosmosandmythicalobjectswhichexplainormaterialise
them,whilstalsodiscerningtheconceptualinterpenetrationinvolved.7
Theessentialigurativityofmythalsoallowsfor,indeedencourages,the
iguringofconceptsinmultipleways,evenwithinonemythandtheall
toofrequentattemptstoapplylogicattheexpenseofimaginationto
theinterpretationofmythsleadstoanover-systematisedandstultified
misapprehensionofthepoeticcreativitywhichengenderedandrefined
them.Thuswhen,forexample,Isuggestthatrmaybeviewedbothas
anssmatetothevanrFreyja,andasarealisationofherowninspiredsoul,
r,itisnotbecauseIamhedgingmybetsastothecorrectinterpretation,
ThissummaryofmythisbasedlargelyonG.Kirk(970:70).Hepointsouttheunacceptabilityofpinpointingthefunctionofmythingeneral:forexample,heattacksLviStrausssnotionthatallmythsmediatecontradictions,ortheideasofthenature-myth
school,andsoforth.
7
Siikaladiscussesthisareaatgreaterlengthwithspecificreferencetoshamanictexts(00:
960,whencethedrum/boatexampleistaken;seealsotheworksreferredtothere).
6

FFC96

1.Introduction

11

butbecauseIbelievethatancientpoetsexploitedallthepotentialreadings
ofthemythstheytold,andofthewordstheyusedintellingthem.

evolutionismandchange
Evolutionismisthenotionthatreligionsdevelopalongapredictablecourse
fromprimitivetoadvanced,anditisusuallynormative,i.e.eachsuccessive
stageisregardedasbeterthantheprevious.Thisapproach,typicalof
thenineteenthcentury,8isnowdefunct;9thepointofmentioningitisto
distinguishitfromlegitimateapproachestotheuncoveringofprocessesof
religiouschange.Anexampleofthisistheecologyofreligion,whichseeksto
relatethetypeofreligionfoundinasocietytoitsrelationshiptoitsenvironmentandhencethesourceofitseconomy;thecorrespondenceispertinent
particularlyinmoreprimitivesocieties(seeHultkrantz979).
Animportantaspectofculturalchangeisthesurvivalofelementsfrom
earlierstages,whichmaybesimplepractices,superstitionsoraspectsof
theoverallworldview,whichmakestatementsaboutrealitywhichareno
longerexperiencedastrue.Inpracticethismeansthatininvestigatingany
religioussystem,weshouldexpecttoindelementswhichareinconsistent
witheachotherbecausetheyrelectdiferentratesofchange,orforthat
matermayrelectdiferentgeographicalorigins.
Intheunfurlingofreligious,andindeedcultural,changethereisan
interplayofthepolaritiesofcreativityandUrdummheit.ThetermUrdummheit
wasusedbyevolutionistswithreferencetothesupposedstateofprimordial
humanignorance,butisappropriatedbyA.Jensen(96:8)asanaptword
forsomethingfoundatallstagesofhumandevelopment:itisspiritually
uncreativeitwasinmostinstancesasigniicantforceinthedegeneration
oforiginallymeaningfulphenomenaintosemanticallydepletedroutines.
Thus,whateverstageofaculturewelookat,weshallindsuchdepleted
routines,aswell,perhaps,asnewlycreativeformsofexpression.
Thesepointsarementionedasapotentialtheoreticalmeansofjustifying
theexistenceofsomethinglikeshamanism,whichisaterallcharacteristicofsociallynon-hierarchicalhuntingsocieties,asasurvivalwithin
Norsereligioneventhoughthesocietywasclearlyhierarchical(andnot
primarilybasedonahuntingeconomy);moreover,whileitmayhavebeen
ameaningfulphenomenoninsaythetenthcentury,itcouldhavebecome
fossilisedanddepletedbythethirteenth.
ItwaspursuedbyleadingscholarssuchasMller,TylorandLang.
Thefactthatcertainhumanactivities,forexamplescientificknowledge,involveprogress
hastheunfortunateeffectofpersuadingpeoplethatallhumanactivitiesprogress;religious
evolutionismwasacruderesponsetothenewthinkingofDarwinism.A.Jensen(96:)
putsthecasewell:Ithaslongbeenapparentthattheideaofprogresscouldcontribute
statementsofonlylimitedvaluetoculturehistory.WhowouldapplyprogresstoacomparisonoftheworkofBeethoven,Bach,andCorelli?Buttheinalienable,individual
worthofaculture,whichpermitsnocomparisonwithothercultures,isnotfundamentally
(andneversolely)determinedbythesumandthedistinctivenessofrationalcognitive
elements;itliesinagenuinecreativitywhichcanneverbeanythetruer,morebeautiful,or
better,forbelongingtoamoreadvancedperiod.
8
9

. Thenatureofthesources
Thegreatmajorityofsourcesusedinthepresentworkarewriten;Idelimit
theieldofinvestigationtoexclude,otherthanincidentally,sourcesofan
archaeologicalnature,orwhichstemfromlateroralfolktradition.Inthe
caseofNorsetexts,theyarenotonlywriten,butalsochielyliterary,or
sometimeshistorical,innature,anddatepredominantlytobeforearound
00.Shamanictextsaremainlyofabroadlyethnographicnature,recorded
byoutsidersobservingthepracticesofshamanicpeoples;theyaremainly
fromtheseventeenthtotwentiethcenturies.Theprincipaltextswhich
areconsideredinthediscussionsarepresentedintheSourcessectionin
thesecondvolume(whichitisintendedshouldbeusedinconjunction
withthediscussionsthroughout);somegeneralobservationsaboutthe
sourcematerialsareoferedhere,butmoredetailedpresentationsofthe
backgroundandinterpretationoftheindividualtextsaregiven,inthe
main,inthecourseofdiscussionlaterinthevolume.

Sources for shamanism

Oursourcesofinformationonshamanismarevaried.RecordsofSiberian
shamanismbegininthethirteenthcentury,butbecomeplentifulonlyinthe
seventeenth;fullandreliableaccountsweremadefromabout880,and
fromtheearlytwentiethcenturyonwardstrainedethnologists,sometimes
nativetoshamaniccultures(forexample,Banzarov),haveundertaken
extensiveieldwork,whichhas,however,beenincreasinglythetaking
downofthelastvestigesofmoribundtraditions.
AtertheRevolution,shamanismcontinuedtobeasubjectofresearch
bySovietscientists;theyarecharacterisedbyamoreorlessovertpolitical
agenda,predictablyrelectingamaterialistMarxist-Leninistperspective.
Whilstagooddealofusefulinformationisgiven,theideologicalapproach

ForastudywhichseekstoincorporatefarmorearchaeologicalmaterialintothediscussionofNorseshamanism,seePrice(00).Iamnotanarchaeologist,andwhilstaccepting
thatarchaeologymaysometimeshaveusefulmaterialtooffer,Iremaingenerallysceptical
thatphysicalobjectsbythemselves,withoutsomepieceofwritingorotherexpressionof
humanthoughtuponwhichtohanganinterpretation,cansuggestmeanings(asdistinct
fromanyutilitarianpurposetheirformsuggests).TheclassiccaseistheScandinavianrock
paintings,whichappeartoberepletewithnarrativesofpossiblyreligioussignificance,
which,however,wecanneverfathomordefinemorespecificallythantoobserve,forexample,thatthesunplayedasignificantpartinprehistoricreligion;theextensiveliteratureon
theseisthereforemoreorlessignoredhere(seeSchjdt986,and,forasomewhatmore
positiveviewoftheusefulnessofrockartincomparativereligiousstudy,Hultkrantz986;
thereare,admittedly,someinterestingcontributionstotheinterpretationofScandinavian
rockart,suchasBradley006).

SeeSiikala(978:7787)foradetailedaccountofthehistoryofrecordingofinformation
onSiberianshamanism.

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources

1

cansometimescallintoquestiontheirvalueasscientiicstudies,andthe
self-adulatorytoneofsomeofthem,contrastingwithwhatwasactually
takingplaceintheSovietempire(inparticularprogrammesdesignedto
rootoutallaspectsoflocalcultures),canmakethemparticularlysickeningtoread.SincethrowingoftheshacklesofCommunismresearch
hasfortunatelycontinuedandismoreoverotenpublishedinEnglishor
German.
Shamanismhasalsobecome,overthelastfewdecades,amajorcomponentingeneralanthropologicalandreligiousstudiesintheWest(see,
forexample,thewholechapterdevotedtoit,withreferencestofurther
works,inMorris006).Suchworksotenexpendconsiderableeforton
materssuchasthedistinctionbetweentrance,ecstasyandpossessionin
anatempttoplumbthereligiousnatureofshamanism,aswellasseeking
toplacethestudyofshamanismwithinphilosophicalschoolsofanthropologyorreligiousstudy.Thesemoregeneralconsiderationslieoutsidethe
ambitofthepresentwork.
Sinceshamanismstillsurvives(just),therearesomeexcellentmodern
studiesbasedonieldwork.IwouldmentionasexemplaryJaneAtkinsons
The Art and Politics of Wana Shamanship(989)andCarolineHumphreys
Shamans and Elders: Experience, Knowledge, and Power among the Daur Mongols(996).TomentionsomepointsfromHumphreyswork:theemphasis
isuponshamanismasonepartoftheoverallcultureoftheDaurs,and
indeeddeterminedinitsnaturebythatculture.Notonlyisaquestioning,
comprehensiveapproachtaken,buttheveryassumptionsthataWesterner
bringstothequestioningarethemselvesquestioned.Unfortunately,such
approachesarerare,andhaveonlytakenplaceinveryrecentyears,when
shamanismhaslargelydisappearedfrommanyareasoftheworld(particularlyfromSiberia).Humphrey,however,wasinaprivilegedposition,
ofhavinganativeinformantwhohadspentmuchofhislifeintheWest,
andsocouldcommunicatehisideasclearly,andthiswassupplemented

MostofthemajorRussianresearchintoshamanismhasappearedinoneformoranother
inEnglishorGerman;thereare,ofcourse,manystudiesavailableonlyinRussian,butthese
aregenerallyconcernedwithwhatmightbetermedtheminutiaeofshamanism,whichit
isbeyondtheaimofthepresentstudytoconsiderexceptinsofarastheyarerelevantto
Norsematerials.Hence,wheneverpossible,Iusematerialswhichhavebeenpublishedin
Westernlanguages,whicharemoreaccessibletomostscholarsofNorse(myselfincluded),
bothlinguisticallyandintermsoflibraryholdings.ForadetailedstudyofSovietresearchersintoshamanism(primarilyoftheSamoyedpeoples)andtheirpoliticalagendas,see
Sundstrm(008)..

On the issue of trance/ecstasy/possession, it seems clear that in practice shamanism
includedvariousdegreesofalteredconsciousness,evenwithinasingletradition,which
stretchedfromanunalteredstatetooneinwhichtheshamanmightappearmerelyavessel
ofthespirits.Thedeterminationofthephysiologicaldifferencesbetweensuchstatesisnot
ofrelevanceinthepresentstudy,noraretheyusedtodeterminethepresenceorabsenceof
trueshamanism.Itmaybeexpectedthatingeneralpossessionwillinvolvethesummoningofspiritstotheshamantospeakthroughhimorher,whereastranceismorelikelyto
involvetheshamanssoulundertakingjourneystothespiritrealms,butexamplessuchas
theIndianSoras,wherespiritsspeakthroughtheshaman,yettheshamanisalsobelieved
totraveldowntotherealmofthedead(Vitebsky99:),showthatanysuchsimple
expectationsareoftenlikelytobefrustrated.

1

CliveTolley

FFC96

byvisitstotheareastudied,wherefurtherinterviewswereobtained.
Wecannotquestionthepastinthisway,onlyweighupfragmentaryand
biasedsources,andourresultsareboundtobemorehesitant.Essentially,
thefurtherwegobackfromthepresent,thelesssatisfactorythesources
become.
Anotherwayoflookingatourrecordsofshamanismisfromthepoint
ofviewofRezeptionsgeschichte:almostalltheaccountswehaveareetic,and
thereforerepresentaviewofonetypeofsociety(generallyamoreprimitiveone)byanother(inthemain,amodernorearly-modernWesternone).
Whilstthisisafascinatingtopic,whichindeedhasspawnedanumberof
importantstudies(suchasFlaherty99;Huton00;and,withafocus
moreuponneo-shamanism,Znamenski007),itisconcernedessentially
withtherecipient,non-shamanic,society,andhenceliesoutsidethecompassofthepresentstudy.Thereisoneareaofexception,however.The
studiesmentionedarealmostinvariablydeicientinthattheybegintoo
late,otenonlywithseventeenth-centuryaccounts.Ourearliestreasonably
detailedWesternaccountofshamanismisfromthetwelthcentury,andit
isNorwegian(theHistoria Norwegie);5anumberofother,lesssigniicant,
accountsofSmishamanismalsoexistinScandinaviansourcesbefore
themainrecordsbeginintheseventeenthcentury.Mydiscussionofthese
sourcesthereforecomplementsthepublishedstudiesofthereceptionof
shamanismintheWest.
Shamanismwaspractisedbyspeakersofmanylanguagegroups.The
neighboursoftheNorsemenwerepredominantlyFinno-Ugricspeakers
(theSmiandtheFinns,withothergroupsscateredinEuropeanRussia,
throughwhomtheVikingspassedonthewaytotheeasternMediterranean).NotallFinno-Ugricspeakershadadevelopedformofshamanism,
atleastinhistoricaltimes,buttheSmicertainlydid,asdidtheObUgrians
(theKhantyandMansi).TheHungarians,whosplitfromtheotherOb
Ugriansintheirstmillenniumadandmigratedsouth,appeartohave
preservedvestigesofshamanism,asrecordedinHungarianfolklore(see,
forexample,Oinas987,HopplinSiikalaandHoppl99:5668,Voigt
00),buttheinterminglingwithtraditionslocaltotheCarpathianarea
presentsproblemsofinterpretationwhich,whilefascinating,wouldlead
thepresentstudytoofarastray;henceIuseHungarianmaterialsonly
sporadically.MoreobviouslyrelevanttotheNorseareaarethebeliefs
oftheirneighbourstheFinns.Finnish6sourcespresenttheirownproblems.ShamanisminFinlandsurvivedinacoherentbutremnantform,as
comparedwithclassicshamanism,andtheFinnishsourcesusedinthe
5
ThenextoldestWesternaccountswouldappeartobethoseofPiandelCarpine,who
wroteofTatarpracticesseenonanexpeditionof6,andMarcoPolosaccountofChinese
shamanism(writtenin98)(Flaherty99:67).
6
IuseFinnishasashort-handforFinnish/Karelian:themajorityoftraditionalpoetic
textswererecordedinKarelia,whichspanstheFinnishRussianborder,butmostofwhich
infactliesoutsideFinland.VariousdialectswerespokeninKarelia,allcloselyrelatedto
morewesterlyFinnishbutdistinctincertainrespects(Kareliandialectshavenowlargely
beendisplacedbyRussian).

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources

1

presentvolumearenotonlyshamanicbutalsomythic,andaremostly
poetic;theyarethuscomparabletoNorsesources,preservingancient
motifsintraditionalverse.Theearliestwritertogiveinformationabout
FinnishgodsistheLutheranreformerMikaelAgricola(5057).7Serious
collectionofmythologicalpoemsdidnothoweverbeginuntilthelate
eighteenthcenturyundertheinspirationofGabrielPorthan;thereare
nowsome50,000poems(mostlyvariants)intheKalevalametreinthe
archivesoftheFinnishLiteratureSociety,ofwhicharound86,800have
beenpublishedinthemulti-volumeSuomen kansan vanhat runot(Ancient
poemsoftheFinnishpeople),nowavailableonline(Timonen000:67).8
ThedatingofFinnishpoemsposesproblems.Astheybelongirmlytoan
oraltradition,ourrecordsmerelypresentaparticularversionofapoemas
sungononeoccasion;nonetheless,thesepoems,consideredasanartistic
assemblageofthemesratherthanofspeciicwords,haveanoriginata
particularpointofhistory.Yetworkingoutwhatthatpointmayhave
beenisfraughtwithdiiculty.Kuusiproposedasystemforestablishing
broaddatesforpoems,basedonvariousfactors.Oneofthesefactorsis
style(assetoutforexampleinKuusi99a);whileKuusisanalysisofdifferencesinstyleintraditionalpoemsisinteresting,theinferencesdrawn
aboutwhatstylesarelikelytohaveoriginatedatanyhistoricalperiodare
characterisedbyrathermoreassertionthanevidentialproof;9moreover,
OnthecollectionofFinnishfolkbeliefsandpoemsseeVirtanenandDubois(000:ch.),
Hautala(95,958);abriefaccountisalsogiveninFFPE(pp.78).Althoughitscarcely
constitutesafullscholarlyedition,IrefertoFFPEforversionsofrelevantpoemswhen
possible,sinceitprovidesafairlysubstantialcollectioninFinnish,withEnglishtranslation,
ofsomeofthemainFinnishpoems(including,onoccasion,variants),aswellasbriefintroductionsandcommentaryoneach.Thereis,ofcourse,ahugeliteratureinFinnishwhich
informsthesepresentations,someofwhichislistedinFFPE,andwhichIrefertowhenit
appearsenlighteningonpointsunderdiscussion.Oneofthemainearlieranthologiesof
traditionalpoetryinFinnishisHaavio(980,ndedn),whichhasvaluablediscussionsof
mythologicalbackground,thoughitisratheroutdated(beingwrittenin95),presents
thepoemsinstandardisedFinnishwithoutascriptionofsinger,placeorcollector,lacksa
line-by-linecommentary,anddoesnotdiscusssocialcontextorpurpose.
8
ForreadersnotconversantwithFinnish,itisworthpointingoutthatasmostpoems
existinmanysometimeshundredsofvariants,theselectionof8poemseditedand
translatedinFFPEinfactpresentsafarlargerproportionofthetotalnumberofmajornarrativeandmythologicalthemes(asopposedtopoemvariants)thanmightbeapparent.
9
Asanexampleoftheproblematicnatureofthemethodologyofsuggestingdatesmay
be mentioned comparison with Norse poems (for example Kuusi 99: 8); these are
themselvesoftenofuncertaindate,andthestylisticinterpretationsheuses,byscholars
suchasFinnurJnssonandErikNoreen,haveofcoursebeensubjectedtohalfacentury
ofcriticism.Inanycase,theco-existenceofstylisticfeaturesintwotraditionsonlyweakly
suggestscontemporaneityofthesefeatures,evenifitcanbeproved;infact,itisunlikely
thatFinnishoralpoetryunderwentsimilarchronologicallydeterminedstylisticdevelopmentstoNorseskaldicverse,fromwhichitisutterlydistinctinalmosteveryaspect.Kuusis
notionsofwhatconstitutesastylewouldneedgreaterspacethancanbeaffordedhere;
itissimplyworthpointingoutthat,valuableasatypologicalanalysisoffeaturessuchas
syntaxis,itisimpossibletoassignparticularsyntacticfeaturestoparticularperiodswithout
externalcorroboratingevidence.Kuusi(978:)alsosuggestsalineofdevelopmentof
theKalevala-typeverseform,whichherelatesbroadlytoactualdates:butthischronological
schemeisbasedonnowdiscreditednotionsofwhentheFinnsoccupiedgivenpartsof
Finland,andneedswhollyreconsidering.
7

16

CliveTolley

FFC96

thecategorisationofthefeaturesofaparticularstylederiveinlargepart
fromthesubjectiveopinionsofthemodernscholaritisimpossibleto
demonstratethatanytraditionalfolk-poetrysingerwouldacceptthem.0
Thereisaclearneed,whichhasstillnotbeenmet,toatempttodelineate
thestylisticfeaturesofindividualsingers,ofparticularcommunities,and
ofthewholeKalevala-typeversearea,beforeanyirmerargumentscanbe
drawn.Thereare,ofcourse,manyotherfactorsinvolvedinassigninga
datetotraditionalpoems;nonetheless,theneedforare-examinationof
someoftheargumentsisworthnoting(tosomeextent,morerecentscholarship,asexempliiedbySiikala00,seekstoestablishbroadercultural
epochsaslikelytohavegivenrisetoelementswithinthepoems,without
beingpreciseeitheraboutdatesoraboutindividualpoemsprovenances).
Despitesuchdoubts,itis,inanycase,clearthat,asinNorsepoetry,ancient
pre-ChristianelementssurvivedtovaryingextentsintheFinnishpoems;
Siikala(986a:)forexampleisoftheopinionthatsomemythicalpoems
andtheso-calledadventurepoetrycontainsomanyfeaturesreferringto
pre-medievalculturalmilieuxthatitisimpossibletoimaginethatfolk
poetrysingersintheeighteenthandnineteenthcenturyKareliancultures
inventedthemespeciallysincenocorrespondingtraditioninprosehas
beenfoundtoexist:itistheseancientelementsfrompre-medievalculturalmilieuxwhichareofuseinthepresentstudy,whatevertheabsolute
ageofthecompositions.TheslowadoptionofChristianitymeansthatthe
gapbetweenapaganoriginandthetimeofrecordingmaynotbeasgreat
asmightbeimagined.

Norse and other sources for Germanic traditions

ThescopeofsourcesdiscussedhereissomewhatwiderthanpurelyNorse
texts,asanalogousmaterialsaredrawnfromotherGermanicandclassical
writings,buttheNorsematerialformsthefocus.
SomeevidenceonGermanicreligiouspracticeistobegleanedfrom
classicalsourcesasancientasStrabo(7bc)andTacitus(ad98);postThesecommentsarenotmeantasacritiqueoftheFinnishmethodofanalysingfolk
poetry(andfolklore)takenasawhole,assetoutinsomedetailinKuusi(980).Themethod
seekstoapplylogicalmethodstodeterminethedisseminationanddevelopmentofpoetic
redactionsthroughexaminationofrecordedvariants,andinthisrespectrelativedatings
mayemerge,butitisnotablethatKuusionlymentionsdatingwithinthecontextofthe
sectiononstylistics,asectionwhichlacksanydetail,andwherethereaderisreferredfor
morediscussiontotheintroductiontoKuusi(96)where,inturn,scarcelyanymore
detailisgiven.

AnexampleinFinnishofthedetaileduseofawidearrayofargumentsoverthedate
anddisseminationofthesampopoemsisfoundinKuusi(99);heshowsthatsomelater
poemsdealwithdatableevents,thoughnoneofthesearerelevanttothisstudy.Some
mythologicalpoemsinthesampocycleexistedingroupsofvariantsoneithersideofhistoricalborders(betweenSwedenandRussia),indicatinganoriginpriortotheestablishment
oftheborder,andsubsequentdifferentiationoneitherside(ibid.65):however,such
datableevents,whichmerelyformaterminus ante quem,againfalltoolatetoberelevant
forthepresentstudy.

ThedatesrepresentthepublicationofStrabosGeographyandTacitussGermania(Pauly
0

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources

1

classicalsourcesinLatinsuchasthelate-eighth-centuryLangobardPaulus
DiaconussHistoria Langobardorumarealsomadeuseof.Chroniclesand
histories,notablythetwelth-centuryNorwegianHistoria Norwegie,are
occasionallycited.Arabicsourcesgivefactualevidenceofthepractices,
includingsometimesthereligiouspractices,oftheRus,whowereinorigin
SwedishVikingswhotradedthroughmodernRussia;themostimportant
suchsourceforthepresentstudyistheaccountofaRusfuneralin9by
AmadibnFaln.
Asnoted,mostofthewritensourcesinGermaniclanguagesusedin
thepresentstudyareliterary:theyareartisticcompositionswhosemain
aimwasnottheexpressionofreligiousworshipreligioustextsarealmost
entirelynon-existentnor,usually,merelytorecounttheeventsofamyth,
buttoselectandremodelthem.Theywerecomposedforanaudiencethat
alreadyunderstoodthenecessaryreligiousormythologicalbackground,
aswellasthewaysthatcomplexartisticartefactslikeskaldicversework.
Togointofurtherdetailsofliterarytheorywouldtakeustoofarbeyond
thetopicofthiswork;manyworksalreadydealwiththistopicwithinthe
Norseield,suchastherecentstudyofCluniesRoss(005)onOldNorse
poetryandpoetics(wherefurtherreferencesmaybefound).
One obvious fact about almost all Norse records (some early runic
inscriptionsformanexception)isthattheywerewritendownlongater
theintroductionofChristianity,evenwhentheywerecomposed,which
notallostensiblypaganpoemswere,beforetheconversion.Thereasons
forthesurvivalofancientmythandlegendinaChristiansocietyisan
interestingone,butisnotrelevanthere;however,itisrelevanttobearin
9675,s.vv.StraboandTacitus).AsTacitusistheearliestextantauthortogiveany
detailedinformationaboutGermanicpeoples,thereliabilityofhisaccounthascomeunder
scrutiny;itisgenerallyagreedthathispictureiscolouredbyinfluencesfromhisown
Romanculture,buttheextenttowhichthisinvalidateswhathesaysisacontentiousissue.
Thematterneedsamorethoroughdiscussionthanappearstohavebeenundertakenanywhere;myownstanceistoerronthesideofacceptinghimasreliable(butbeingawareofa
certaindegreeofdistortionduetoclassicalinfluencesorrhetoricalconsiderations).Jankuhn
(966)arguesthatingeneralarchaeologyconfirmshisreliability,andinthefieldofbeliefs,
McKinnell(forexample005:5)alsoconsidershimgenerallyreliable.

Questionsofvarioussortsarisewhendealingwithsuchsources.HowfarisaMoslem
writersunderstandingofpaganpracticesreliable?Thus,forinstance,theangelofdeath,
whiledoubtlessanactualfemaleofficiandintheritualdescribed,cannothavebeenconceivedasanangelbytheScandinavianRus,towhomtheconceptwasalien.Howfarwere
RuspracticesactuallyScandinavian,asopposedtoSlavic(orBulgar,orFinnic)?Amadibn
FalnsaccountisanalysedfromthisperspectivebySchjdt(007),whoconcludes(6):
Thereseemstobenodoubtthattheideologicalframeworkbehindthisfuneralritualis
likelytohaveexistedamongthepre-ChristianScandinavians,andeveniftheremayhave
beennofuneralritualpropercarriedoutinexactlythesamewayalloverScandinavia,it
wouldbeaseriousmistakenottouseibnFadlansdescriptionasasortofmodelwhentryingtoreconstructsuchritualsfromarchaeologicalmaterialorfromtextsthataredefective
insomeway.However,whileSchjdtoffersanexcellentanalysisofpointswhichmaybe
paralleledinNorsemyths,heoffersnoconsiderationofpossibleparallelsinSlavic,Finnic
orBulgartraditions,sothequestioncannotbedescribedassettled.

See,forexample,McKinnell(007a),who,amongotherthings,argues(9)thatWhatI
wouldfinallyliketosuggest,however,isthateddicpoetryonmythologicalsubjectswas
preserved(andcontinuedtobecomposed)mainlybecause,liketheworksofOvid,itcould
beusedtoinvestigatesomeofthepersonal,social,andmoralissuesthatfacedIcelandic

1

CliveTolley

FFC96

mindthattextswhichwerethemselvesancientweresubjecttoalteration
withintheChristianmilieuthatpreservedthem,andthat,giventhatcertainancientpaganelementsdidsurviveintheseancienttexts,itwaspossibleforantiquarian-mindedChristianstofabricatepseudo-pagantexts.
TheoppositionbetweenpaganismandChristianityisbutoneaspectofthe
developmentofreligiousnotions,andtheirexpression,overthecenturies.
Norsepaganismitselfwascertainlynomonolith,unchangingovertime
andplace,andoursurvivingmonumentsdoubtlessrepresenttraditions
(orfragmentsoftraditions)ofdiferentgeographicalandchronological
origin.Yet,withsomefewexceptions,itisgenerallydiicultorimpossible
totracethedateorplaceoforiginofpaganmotifs.Theuncoveringof
parallels,forexamplefromclassicalsources,cansometimessuggestthata
motifisancient;yetevenifamotifisinitselfveryancient,itscontext,and
henceitsspeciicmeaning,maynonethelessvarygreatly.Unlessotherwise
indicated,anysuggestioninthepresentworkoftheexistenceofapagan
Norsemotif(includingthosewhicharearguablyshamanic)isintendedto
placethemotifinthereligiousbeliefsystemofsome(notnecessarilyall)
Scandinaviansofthefewcenturiesprecedingconversion,withtheimplication(sometimesmadeexplicitbyreferencetomoreancientanalogues)
thatsuchmotifsareotenderivedfromyetmoreancientandcenturies-old
tradition,butalsowiththeunderstandingthatacountlesslineofpoets
andothertellerswilleachhaveusedsuchmotifsfortheirownspeciic
purposes.
SomeofthemaintypesofNorsesourcesare:5
Skaldic poetry.Theextantversedatesbackasfarastheninthcentury
anditcontinuedtobecomposedforseveralcenturies;sincetheverse-style
lourishedforlongatertheconversion,comparisonoftheoldandthenew
providesgoodrelativedatingevidence.Itiscommonlybynamedauthors,
andcanbefairlyaccuratelydated(otentowithinafewyears).Whilewrittendowninmanycasesseveralcenturieslater,thetextsareonthewhole
reliable,representingsomethingclosetotheoriginalcomposition,since
thestrictmetricalrequirementspreventseriouscorruption,andfacilitate
emendationwhencorruptiondoesoccur.6Ontheotherhandsurviving
compositionsarerarelymorethanfragmentary,asotentheyhavebeen
preservedasillustrationsofpoeticsorofhistory,notascompletepoems;in
Snorristime(theearlythirteenthcentury)itisclearthattheskaldiccorpus
wassubstantiallymorecomplete,andhemakesuseofsources,andrefers
withoutcitationtoothers,nowlosttous.Agreatdealofskaldicverseconsistsofso-calledlausavsur,looseversesoddversesinsertedintosagas
seculararistocrats.Inanothervein,Nordal(00,esp.ch.)arguesthatskaldicverse
continuedtobefoundusefulasavernacularequivalentofsomeofthecomplexLatinverse
discussedintheschools,thatisitofferedasought-afterintellectualtraining.
5
McKinnell(005:ch.)presentsasomewhatfullerdiscussionofNorsesourcesrelating
tomythorreligion.
6
Thisstatementadmittedlymasksagooddealofdebateontheissue,aswellasvarying
levelsoftextualcorruptionbetweenpoems;forfurtherdiscussion,seeforexamplethe
earlierchaptersofCluniesRoss(005).

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources

19

andascribedtoearlyskalds,butotenbythesagawritersthemselves,or
theirimmediatepredecessors:suchversesareofuncertain(otenlate)
date.7Skaldicverseisrarelyconcernedprimarilywithcommunicating
facts(whichmaybefewandfarbetween),butwithclever,ornatepoetic
expressionwithinstrictmetricalandotherrules.Derivingactualpiecesof
informationfromskaldicverseisthereforefraughtwithdiiculty.
Astanzamaybegivenasanexampleofskaldicdictionfromtheearliest
preservedpoem,theninth-centuryRagnarsdrpabyBragiBoddason(Skj
B,st.6);theverserecountsthegodrrsishingofthemightyserpent
which,lyinginthedepthsoftheocean,encircledtheworld:
VarlVirisarfa
vilgislakr,esrakisk,
Eynisndri,
Jrmungandratsandi.
Theishing-lineofVirirsheirlaynotatallslackasunwoundon
Eynirssnow-shoeJrmungandronthesand.

Here,Viririsanameforinn,whosesonisrr;Eynirisaseakingsname,usedgenericallyasadesignationofthegiantfromwhose
boat(snow-shoe,emphasisinggiantsassociationwiththebarrencold)
rrisishing;Jrmungandristheworldserpent.Itsunwindingonthe
beachispresenteddramaticallyasasyntacticobtrusionintothestatement
relatingrrsangling.
Eddic poetry.TheseparationofNorseverseintoskaldicandEddictypes
issomewhatarbitrary,andsomepoemsareinbetweencases,butgenerally
skaldicversefollowsstrictermetricalrulesthanEddic,andisotenby
namedpoets,andassociatedwithparticulareventsorpeople,whereas
Eddicisalwaysanonymousandistraditionalinnature,dealingwith
moregeneraltopicsofmythorlegend,anditdoesnot,ingeneral,engage
incomplexkennings(poeticperiphrases);thejustiicationfordistinguishingskaldicandEddicverseisfurtherdiscussedinCluniesRoss(005:
8).Asanexample,stanzaofGrmnismlwillserve:
Valgrindheitir,
erstendrvelli
heilgfyrhelgomdurom;
fornersgrind,
enatfirvito,
hvhonerlslokin.

Gateoftheslainisitsname,
thatstandsontheplain,
holybeforetheholydoor;
ancientisthatgate,
butfewknow
howitislocked.

ThereferencetoValgrindisunique,butitmayberelatedtoothergatesas
boundariesoftheotherworld,suchasNgrindr,Corpsegates(Skrnisml5,Lokasenna6);theactualinformationinthestanza,however,isgiven
SeeforexampleMarold(99)foraconsiderationofskaldicverseasasourceforNorse
religion;shemakestheimportantpointthatthewholeofthetenthcenturyshouldbe
viewedasoneoftransitiontoChristianityandinfactChristianitywasaninfluentialforce
intheNorthevenbeforethis.
7

0

CliveTolley

FFC96

inastraightforwardmanner,andthewordorderisalmostprosaic.The
contrastwithskaldicdictionshouldbeclear.
ThelargestcollectionofEddicpoetryisfoundintheCodexRegius(GkS
65to),writendowninIcelandaround5000.8ThereisconsiderabledebateaboutthenatureanddatingofEddicpoetry(whichIconsider
somewhatmorefullybelow),buttheouterlimitsaregenerallyrecognised
(forexample,CluniesRoss005:5)astheninthandfourteenthcenturies,
thoughthemythicorlegendarymotifsmaywellgobacktomuchearlier
dates.9Onecriterionofdateistheextenttowhichtheparticularpoem
showsanunderstandingofpaganmythorreligiouspractice;0thusVlusp
forexampleshowsadepthofunderstandingofpaganpractices,yetwithin
aChristianmould:henceitscompositionmustbeplacedneartotheend
ofoicialpaganisminIcelandin000.OntheotherhandFjlsvinnsml
Lindblad(95:,5)datesthemanuscripttoc. 70(arguingalsothatitwasbased
onearlierantecedentsfrombeforec. 0);however,themarginofuncertaintyofdateis
necessarilyfairlywide,asStefnKarlssonconfirmedtome(personalcommunication),
sincewedonotpossessasufficientnumberofIcelandicmanuscriptsfromthisperiodto
makeacloserdatingpossible.
9
Fidjestl(999)devotesawholebooktothequestionofdatingEddicpoetry;thework
wasleftunfinishedathisdeath,withsomesignificanttopicsleftundiscussed,suchas
theusetobemadeofskaldicverseindatingEddicpoetry,andthequestionofloansand
allusions.Overall,whilsttheworkmapsoutsomeofthemainareasofthetopic,itcannot
bedescribedasfurtheringourunderstandinggreatly;weencounterstatementssuchasthe
following(878),whichisapetitio principii(sinceitassertsapositionaboutthenatureof
pre-writtenEddicverseforwhichwehavenoevidence):IntheverymomentthatEddic
poetrywaswrittendown,ametamorphosistookplace,inwhichitwastransferredfrom
onetypeofliteratureintoanother,radicallydifferentfrom,orevendirectlyoppositeto,
whatithadbeenbefore,namelyafixedtext.ForabrieferdiscussiononthedatingofEddic
poetry,seeSderberg(986).
0
Thematteris,ofcourse,morecomplexthanthis,sincetheidentificationofapagan
elementonlyillustratesthatthepassageinwhichitiscontainedislikelytobeofpagan
origin(ifitisnotalaterfabrication),withoutimplicationeitherfortherestofthepoem,
intowhichitmay,forexample,beaninterpolation,orfortheageofthespecificwordingin
whichitisexpressed,sincethistoomaychange.Itispossibletoadduceargumentsbased
onothercriteriatosuggestthatatleastsomepoems(notablymostofVlusp)are,infact,
coherentwholes,thoughotherpoems(forexampleGrmnisml)donothavegreatartistic
cohesion.ThedatingofpoemssuchasLokasennaisacontentiousissue,illustratingthe
difficultyofarrivingatanythinglikeafirmconclusionevenonsomeofthebasicquestions
concerningthenatureofoursources;thepoemshowsadepthofknowledgeaboutmyths
whosebasisinpaganreligiousbeliefcanbeparalleledbycomparativeresearch,aspointed
outbyU.Dronke(989),whoalso,amongotherthings,notesthefactthatwhilewehave
poeticcompositionsfromaroundthethirteenthcentury,noneofthemintheleastresembles
Lokasenna,nordowehaveanyevidencefromthistimeforanyarchaisingschoolableto
producesuchawell-wroughtfabricationofpaganismwhichwewouldhavetosuppose
thepoemtobe(thisisnottoargue,ofcourse,thattheparticularforminwhichthepoemis
preservedhasnotbeenaltered,andpossiblyitscontenteditedtosomesmallextent,sinceits
dateofcomposition).Yetotherfactorspointtoanotparticularlyearlydate,inthatthereare
possibleallusionstootherEddicpoems,andthefrequencyoftheexpletiveparticleplaces
thepoemchronologicallytenthoutofthirty-oneintheCodexRegius(Fidjestl999:)
thoughthevalidityofthisfactorasacriterionofdateisitselfopentodebate.Lokasenna
certainlyalludestomythswenolongerhaveinpoeticform,butotherEddic,andindeed
skaldic,poemscouldwellhavebeenextantinsaythetwelfthcenturywheresuchmyths
werepresented.(Onthedatingissuehere,seealsoRuggerini979:56;Sderberg986:
566;McKinnell9878.)

AsimilardatingappliesifitwascomposedinNorway,wherepaganismofficiallyended
8

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources

1

forexampleisacompositionthatmakeswidespreaduseofextantEddic
sourcesinawaythatisliteraryandcreativebutdoesnotrelectanyspeciic
paganbelieforreligiousreference(thoughitmaypreserveallusionsto
olderbeliefsotherwiselostfromrecord):hencealatedateofc.0050is
tobeassignedtoit(P.Robinson99:9706).
Snorri Sturlusons works.Theworksof(orascribedto)theIcelander
SnorriSturluson(),inparticularhisEddaandYnglinga saga(andto
someextentotherpartsofHeimskringla,ofwhichYnglinga sagaformsthe
irstsection)containmuchmythologicalknowledgeculledfromearlier
poeticsources,whichonoccasionarecited;Snorriissometimestheonly
preserverofamythologicalorreligiousrecordasaresultofthelossof
hissourcesincehistime,butalsosometimes,itwouldseem,becausehe
hasinventedthefeaturehimself.WhilstSnorriiscitedfrequently,Iuse
hisworkasaprimarysourceonlyininstanceswhenother,earlierpoetic
sourcesarenotextant.
Sagasandotherprosesources;mostusedareslendingasgur(family
sagasofIcelanders)andfornaldarsgur(sagasofancientdays),withoccasionalreferencealsotoothertypessuchasriddarasgur(chivalricsagas).
Thesedatefromthetwelthtofourteenthcenturies(andsomeevenlater).
Theymakeconsiderableuseofpaganthemes,buttheseareotenthecreationoftheauthorsmadeonthebasisofincreasinglyvaguetraditionsof
actualpaganism;nonetheless,arguablygenuineelementsdosurvive.
LawsofNorwayandIceland(andoccasionallyotherScandinavianareas).
Lawswereoriginallyhandeddownorally,butbegantobecommitedto
writingsoonaterthearrivalofChristianity,andunderwentmanyrevisionsthereater.Icelandiclawsrarelymentionanythingconnectedwith
paganism,butthemainlandScandinaviancodeshaveslightlymore.
afewyearsearlierthaninIceland.TheapocalypticthemeofVlusparguesforadatingof
c.000.Christianitywasnot,ofcourse,necessarilyadoptedwholesaleanddeeplybythe
wholepopulationinonefellswoop,butmypositionisthatitsofficialadoptionwouldhave
weakenedtheunderstandingofpaganreligiouselementswithinacoupleofgenerations,so
adateverymuchlaterthanmid-eleventhcenturyforVlusp(leavingasidethemillennium
arguments)wouldappearunlikely.Moreover,McKinnell(99:078)hasshownthatthe
poemmustalmostcertainlyhavebeencomposedbetween965and0665,sinceVlusp
mentionstwovalkyrjur,SkgulandGeirskgul,whichappearstobeamisunderstandingofEyvindrFinnssonsgeir-Skgul,spear-Skgul,asaseparatebeingfromSkgulin
Hkonarml(SkjB58),composedaround965;theterminus ante quemisgivenbyArnrr
jarlaskldsallusiontoVluspinorfinnsdrpa(Skj B)whenhementionsthesun
darkeningandthelandsinkingintothesea(cf.Vlusp5,Sltrsortna,sgrfoldmar,
Thesunstartstoblacken,landsinksintosea).

Ofcourse,ifSnorrialonerecordssomething,wecangonofurtherthantodeemitlikely
thatitisapartofoldertraditiononthebasisofotherrelevantinformation;anexampleis
theinformationinYnglinga sagach.thatthevanirbecamethebltgo,sacrificialgods,
amongthedeities.

Forexample,thatthethreemaidenswhodeterminemensfateswerenornirwhocame
fromahall(ratherthanasea)beneaththeworldtree.

CluniesRoss(99:)alsonotesSnorrisselectiveness:Whenpaganmaterialdidnot
accordwithhisChristianexplanatorymodel,hetendedtoomitit,sotheapparentcomprehensivenessoftheEddaistosomeextentanillusion.Examplesincludethemythofinn
onthetree(recountedinHvaml898c)andGullveig(recountedinVlusp).



CliveTolley

FFC96

Asagooddealoftheearliestevidenceforpaganpracticesisfound
insourcesofanoriginallyoraltype,itisworthconsideringbrielywhat
thenatureofthesesourcesis.ExtremeoraliststaketheNorsepoemsas
recordingsofaperformanceofapoem,andeachperformanceisviewedas
anautonomousrecreationofthetext,ofnogreaterorlesservaluethan
anyotherperformance.Theamountofvariationbetweenperformancesis
acceptedasbeingpotentiallygreat.Theaimofreconstructingtheoriginal
text,byconsiderationoflikelyinterpolationsandsoforth,isrejected.
ThisisscarcelyanacceptableapproachtoNorsetexts,anditmoreover
representstheimpositiononoursourcesofaparticulartheoryoforality
derivedfromoutsidetheNorseield,againsttheevidenceproferedby
thosesources,andisattheleastdisingenuousinitsignoraloftheclearly
scribalhistorybehindtherecordedversionsoftexts;5moreover,itseems
tomeanuninformedapproach,giventherecognitionafordedbyscholars
workingonindisputablyoraltraditionsthateachtraditionisdiferent,
andvaluesmemorisationtovaryingdegrees,sometimesdeeply(seethe
contributionstoHonko00,topickbutoneexample).
Thesituationisinfactboundtohavebeenacomplexone;ascribe,
andbeforehimasingerintheoraltraditionandsingerandscribemay
oncertainoccasionshavebeenoneandthesamepersoncouldaltera
texteitherthroughcarelessness,ordeliberately,orelsebecausevariation
wasanaturalpartofre-realisingasong.Atthebeginningofthewriten
periodsomerecreationoflinesincorrectmetricalformislikelytohave
takenplaceasaresultofthescribesfamiliaritywithvariantsfoundin
theoraltraditioninterplayingwithfailingsinshort-termmemoryofthe
text.Thelikelihoodofchangeoccurringinthetransmissionofaparticular
poemcanonlybeassessedonanindivualbasis;asnoted,Eddicpoems
are more likely to have incorporated changes than skaldic because of
theirlooserstructure,butalsothemoregeneralpointcanbemadethat
carefullyworkedtextsareeitherlesslikelytosuferchange(sincetheir
corruptionismorepatent),oriftheydosuferit,wearemoreabletodetect
it;forexample,hadaHsatalofextradivinedwellingsbeenaddedto
thosealreadypresentedinGrmnismlwemightwellbenonethewiser,
OntheCodexRegius,Lindblad(95:5,75,57)hasshownthatseveralstages
ofwrittendevelopmentmaybediscerned,goingbacktobefore0,andincludingtwo
distincthistories,ofthemythologicalpoemsontheonehandandtheheroicontheother
(whichappeartohavebeenunitedintoonecollectiononlyshortlybeforeorasaresultof
thecompositionoftheCodexRegiuscollection);itisthereforenotunlikelythatthepoems
gobackinwrittenformtoabout00,ataroundwhichdate,indeed,thelearnedmonk
GunnlaugrLeifssoninthemonasteryofingeyrarcomposedthepoemMerlnussp(Skj
B05),whichquotesfromEddicpoems,includingGrpissp,itselfprobablyawritten
compositionfromthestarttheinferenceLindbladdraws(978:)beingthattherewas
alreadyawrittencollectionofEddicpoemsavailabletoGunnlaugr.Ofcourse,giventhat
theEddicpoemsdonotappeartocomefromatraditionwhichespousedthesortoffluidity
foundforexampleinFinnishoralpoetry,itispossiblethatGunnlaugrssource(ifweaccept
Lindbladsargumentsfortheborrowing)existedinafixedoralform.Argumentscanbe
madeeitherwayfortheexistenceofwrittenformsofEddicpoemsbetweenabout90and
0,buttheyappeartohaveachievedsomethingapproachingtheforminwhichtheyare
recordedintheCodexRegiusduringthisperiod.
5

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources



whereastheDvergatal,orlistofdwarfs,ofVluspisclearlyanirrelevant
interpolationinasubtlepoemwithimportantplaysonkeywords,choice
ofmyths,andstructure.
Infactweonlyrarelyhavediferentversionsoftextsonwhicharguments
aboutvariationcanbebased;whenwedo,itseemstomethatthevast
majorityofdiferencecanbestbeexplainedasaresultofscribal,notoral,
change(whereas,forexample,themanyvariantsinFinnishtraditional
poems are almost entirely oral in origin). For example, the supposed
evidenceoftheHauksbkversionofVluspasindicatinganoralEddic
tradition,withwidelyvariantversionsofthisandotherpoemsexisting
wellintothefourteenthcentury,maybedismissed.UrsulaDronke,inher
editionofthepoem(inPEII),hasdemonstratedbeyondanyreasonable
doubtthatalltheHauksbkvariants,barringanoccasionallinepossibly
introducedfromotherpopularverse,canbeexplainedasscribalconfusion
ofabroken-uptextandlostpieces.6Moreover,whileSnorriinthe0sto
0sclearlyhadaccesstoawiderangeofbothEddicandskaldicpoetry
nowlosttous,thecompileroftheCodexRegiussomeityorsoyearslater
didnothewasunabletocorrecterrorsorgapsinhiswritenexemplars
fromanyoralversions;thetradition,atleastintheareastowhichthis
scribe had access, had by then become both atenuated, and perhaps
purelywriten(thoughnodoubttheoraltraditionsurvivedlongerinsome
areasthanotherswemayponder,forexample,whetherthepresenceof
GrotasngrinitsentiretywithinmanuscriptsSRandTofSnorrisEdda,as
opposedtoonlytheopeningstanzainC,derivesfromanimmediateoral
traditionlaterthanSnorristime).7
Whilsttherewasboundtobeacertainamountofvariationbetween
performancesofpoemsintheoralperiod,oursurvivingevidencesuggests
that memorisation of a notionally ixed text was the main principle
followed;possiblythismaybearelectionoftheriseintheninthcenturyor
earlierofthestrictlystructuredskaldicverse,whichofitsnaturedemands
Quinn(990)attemptstoseetheHauksbkversionasalegitimatealternativereflecting
variationsinoraltradition,butDronkesargumentsthattheversionderives(apartfroma
fewstraylinesimportedfromoralpoems)solelyfromconfusioninascriptoriumaremuch
morepersuasive,andtipthebalancetowardsliteracyratherthanoralitybeingthemore
importantcomponentinthetransmissionofEddicverseinthethirteenthcentury.
7
Quinn(000)providesausefulsurveyoforalityandliteracyinIcelandfromtheeleventh
tofourteenthcenturies,thoughsomeofthepointsshemakescallformoredetailedandcarefulconsideration:forexample,thefactthatverseinEddicmetreswasstillbeingcomposed
inthemid-thirteenthcentury(andindeed,inanantiquarianmanner,evenlater)doesnot
mean,forexample,thatthepoemsfoundintheCodexRegiuswerestillbeingre-realisedin
anoralfashion,orindeedthattheywereknownatallinanoralform,atthetimetheCodex
wascompiled.TheassumptionQuinnnotesasbeingfairlycommonlyespousedbyOld
Norsescholarsthatskaldicversesfoundcitedinvariousprosetextsderivefromimmediate
oraltraditionmayalsobequestioned(whichisnottosayitneednecessarilybediscounted,
however):thoughwehavenodirectevidenceofaskaldiccollectionequivalenttotheEddic
CodexRegius,theerstwhileexistenceofsuchamanuscriptiseminentlypossibleifthe
CodexRegiushadhappenedtoperish,forexampleononeofthemanyshipstransporting
manuscriptsfromIcelandtoDenmark(whichwereindeedwreckedonoccasion),ourview
oftheinterplayoforalityandliteracyintheEddictraditionwouldbequitedifferent,which
shouldactasawarningwhenspeakingoftheskaldiccorpus.
6



CliveTolley

FFC96

memorisationratherthanimprovisationforitssurvival.8
IndealingwithNorsematerialsweareconfrontedwiththeproblem
ofChristianity.Adheringtomystandpointassetoutabove,theearliest
recordsantedatetheoicialintroductionofthenewfaith(around000),
thoughnotitsinluence.Itakeasmystartingpointthatfamiliaritywith
theoldbeliefswanedwiththecomingofthenew;hencegreaterfamiliarity
indicatesgreaterproximity,usuallyintime,butpotentiallyalsoinplace,to
paganbeliefandpractice.Whilstallrelevantfactorsmustbeconsidered,
andmayalterourassessment,ingeneralIbelievethatthismaybeusedas
aprincipleofdating,thoughitcanscarcelybeanythingbutvagueasour
onlypointofcomparisonisthesmallcorpusofdatedskaldicpoems,which
indeeddonotnecessarilylendthemselveseasilytosuchcomparison.
Itispossibletotakethelinethatifwewishtouncoveranythingreliable
aboutNorsepaganism,ourstudyshouldbeconinedtopoemsdeinitely
composedinthetenthcenturyandbefore,alinepursuedforexample
byMarold(99).Thisseemstomeadeceptivelysimplistictemptation.
Severalveryobviousfactorsmilitateagainstsuchanapproach.Wedonot
havedirectaccesstoanyactualpaganverbalmaterial,exceptafewenigmaticrunicinscriptions:theearlyskaldicpoemswereallwritendownin
(roughly)thethirteenthcentury,andwerethereforetheoneschosenfor
preservationbyasocietylongChristian;thecenturiesoforaltransmission
beforetheirrecordingwillhavehadsomeefectonthem,andvicissitudes
subsequenttotheirrecordinghavefurtherreducedtheirnumberthrough
thelossofmanuscripts.Evenifwehadamorecompletecorpusofpagan
skaldicverse,theviewofreligionwewouldgainwouldbebiased,since
mostskaldicverseisintheformofpraisepoemsdedicatedtowarrior
princes,whereitisnosurprise,forexample,toindthatthedominant
godisrr;religionoutsidethisrareiedsetingcouldwellhavedifered
signiicantly.Wemust,certainly,beeveronguardwhenusingthemuch
fullersourcescomposedinthetwelthtoiteenthcenturies,butwhen
theirreliabilityastransmitersoflorefromthepaganperiodistakeninto
accountsuiciently,Idonotbelieveweendupwithapictureofpaganismwhichisanymoredistortedthanifwechosetoignorethem,andis
certainlyalotfuller.Maroldobjectstoastructuralisttendencytoignore
thenatureofsourcesandreconstructmeaningsonthebasisofdisparate
piecesofinformation.Thepresentstudyisnotstructuralist,inanyclassicLvi-Straussiansenseforexample,butIdousewhatmaybecalled
basicallystructuralistargumentsatvariouspoints;Ihaveatemptedto
bearinmindthelikelyreliabilityofthesourcesemployedineachcase,
butessentiallyanysuchreconstructionofamythsmeaningorstructure
mustremaintentative.Moreproblematictomeseemstheimplication,
suchasmaybeinferredfromtheabilitytoreconstructsuchstructures,
thatthesestructureswereindeedsomesortofixedmythologicalentity
inthepaganperiod,whereasthetruthwillcertainlyhavebeenthatmany
Iconsidertheoral/writtenprobleminOldNorsetextsmorefullyinTolley(00a);see
alsoLnnroth(97),J.Harris(98).

8

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources



inconsistentfeaturesexistedalongsideeachother,withpoetsandothers
makingtheirownvaryingstructuresandderivingtheirownmeanings
withinthekaleidoscopeoflivingtradition;unfortunately,wecanonly
workwithwhatwehave,whichmaytoagreatextentleavetheimpression
ofamonolithicmythicstructurewhichneverexisted.

textsonmagic
AdamofBremen,discussingtheearly-eleventh-centuryNorwegianking
StlfrinGesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontiicum ii.57,claimsthatthis
righteous monarch rid the land of sorcerers, but then switches to the
presenttensetointimatethatNorwaystillexceededotherlandsinthe
numberofsuchmonsters:
DicunteuminterceteravirtutumoperamagnumzelumDeihabuisse,ut
maleicosdeterradisperderet,quorumnumerocumtotabarbariesexundet,precipueveroNorvegiaregiomonstristalibusplenaest.Nametdivini
etauguresetmagietincantatoresceteriquesatellitesAntichristihabitant
ibi,quorumprestigiisetmiraculisinfelicesanimaeludibriodemonibus
habentur.
TheysaythatamongotherworksofvirtuehehadagreatzealforGod,so
thatheevictedsorcerersfromtheland:thewholeheathenworldoverlows
withtheirnumber,butNorwayinparticularisfullofsuchmonsters.For
divinersandsoothsayersandmagiciansandspell-castersandothersatellitesofAntichristdwellthere,bywhosetricksandwondersunfortunate
soulsaremadealaughing-stockofdemons.

Themedievalsourcescouldwebuttakethemattheirwordbearoutthe
generaltruthofAdamsstatement.9Butitisnotmyintentiontoexamine
allmagicasrecordedinmedievalScandinavianrecords(seeDillmann006
forawiderpresentationofmagiciansandtheirartinprimarilyIcelandic
prosesources),butonlysuchashasatractedatentionthroughitsapparentsimilaritytoshamanicpractices.Anysuchseparatingofofonesortof
magicisboundtobearbitrarytosomeextent,butthesourcesthemselves
nameaparticularsortofmagicseir,anditisthiswhichhasatracted
mostatentionforitsshamaniccharacter,andwhichishencedealtwith
inmostdetailhere.
Thepracticeisatributedtobothgodsandmen.Thepractitionerof
seiriscalledbyvariousnames,mostcommonlyseirman/woman,
butalso,inthecaseofwomen,vlvathoughtheactivitiesofthevlva
arenot(explicitly,atleast)coninedtoseir;othertermssuchasspkona,
prophecywoman,vsindakona,wisewoman,andperiphrasessuch
Adamtoo,ofcourse,isoneofthesemedievalsourcesinquestion,whichcannotberelied
on,generallyspeaking,togiveatruepictureofmagicontheground.Adamhadhisown
reasonsformisrepresentingorexaggeratingthelackofChristianobservanceinNorway,a
countrywhichforsometimehadbeenconverted,butwhichwasnot(yet)underthecontrol
ofAdamsGermanmaster,thewould-bepatriarchoftheNorth,ArchbishopAdalbert.Yet
theremaybesomegrainoftruthinhisstatement.
9

6

CliveTolley

FFC96

asawomanwhoisfr ok framsn,wiseandforesighted,alsooccur.As
McKinnell(005:956)pointsout,thereispracticallynodistinction,such
asbetweendivinatoryandeicatoryroles,intheuseoftheterms.Idonot
oferanycomprehensivesurveyofthemanyterms,usuallycompound
words,connectedtoseirorothermagic:doingsowouldtellusnothing
morethanthatthewritersofmainlythirteenth-centuryworksofiction
couldeasilycomeupwithwhatevertermseemedappropriatetothemin
agivencontextwehavenoreasontosupposesuchtermsderivefrom
ancienttradition;moreover,thetermsareconsideredbyDillmann(006,
passim),and,gatheredtogetherinamoreconvenientmanner,byPrice
(00:ch.).
Itisclearthatalthoughseirremaineddistinctasaterm,thepractices
referredtodonotnecessarilyformadiscretetypeofmagic,atleastbythe
timeofmostoftheprosetextswhichmentionseir;anoverallexaminationofmagicalpractices(whichitisimpossibletoundertakehere:but
seeDillmann006,whichsurveysthiswholearea)wouldrevealthatthe
assigningofthetitleseirtoanyparticularexampleismoreorlessrandom.
Forexample,badweatherisatributedtoseir(oratleasttoperforming
onaseir-platform)inLaxdla sagach.50,butinEyrbyggja sagach.
0orgrmagaldrakinnispaidtocausebadweather,withoutseirbeing
mentioned;thesameistrueofGrmainFstbrra sagach.0,whouses
oldchantsshehadlearntinherchildhoodtochangethewindtohelpher
protgKolbakr(seeDillmann006:9).
Theetymologyofthewordseirisunclear,andhenceitisimpossibleto
laytoomuchemphasisoninterpretationsofpossibleprehistories.Abrief
surveymay,however,beofsomevalue(derivedfromAeW,s.v.sei;
recentlyHall007:9presentsefectivelythesameetymology).Theword
mayberelatedtoOldEnglishlfsiden,elfmagic;alongwiththefact
thatinOldNorsearelatedstrong(henceprobablyancient)verbsa,to
practiseseir,isfound,thissuggestsatleastafairlyancientGermanic
heritage.RelatedmayalsobeWelshhud,magic(<*soito-).OthersuggestionslistedbydeVriesseemimplausible,inparticularthesuggestion
ofaconnectionwithFinnishsoida,toring;0theredoesnotappeartobe
anyFinno-Ugricorigintotheword.Anoriginalmeaningofbindfor
therootfromwhichseirderivesispossibleititswellwithdesignations
elsewhereofsorcery,forexampleLatinfascinum,evileye,bewitchment,
alongsidefascia,band,bandage,andwouldsuggestabindingbythe
practitionereitherofspiritstoherpower,orelseofhumanvictimsunder
aspell.
TheearliestmentioninskaldicverseofseirisinKormkrsSigurardrpa,
c.96098;thereateritismentionedfairlyfrequently,thoughnotinskaldic
0
ThedentalsintheFinnishformscitedaredeceptive:-daissimplyaninfinitiveending,
andtherootissoi-,whichimmediatelybearslesssimilaritytotheNorseword.

Karsten(955:)proposesaconnectionwithSmisieidi,butthedifferenceinmeaning
posesproblems,andlaterscholarsdonotfavouranyetymologicallink:asieidiisanatural
objectperceivedasinsomewayabnormalforexample,anunusuallyformedrockand
henceregardedassacred;offeringsaremadetosieidi.

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources



verse,andonlyrarelyinEddicbuttheEddictextsincludeLokasennaand
Vlusp,bothofwhichcontainmucharchaicmythic(andpotentiallyritual)
material(onwhichseeinparticularU.Dronke989:068).Mostofthe
sourcesmentioningseirareprosesagas,mainlyofthethirteenthtofourteenthcenturies,ofwhichahighproportionarefantasticalfornaldarsgur.
Onthewhole,thecorpusoftextsrepresentsamotleycollectionscoring
fairlylowonthescaleofreliabilityforprovidinginformationaboutan
actualpractice;someofthetextsareofconsiderableliteraryinterest,however(thoughmanyarefranklynot).
AllthesourcesonseirwereassembledandcitedbyStrmbck(95,
withsupplementbyAlmqvist000),butitseemsbeneicialtogivethem
allintheSourcessectionofthepresentstudy,alongwithanEnglishtranslation,asitisotherwisediiculttogainanoverallviewofthematerial
andwhatsortofsourcesthetermoccursin.Wereawidersurveytobe
producedofallreferencestomagicalactivities,itwouldnot,Ithink,difer
greatlyintermsofdistributionamongthesevarioustypesofsource,butit
wouldbeconsiderablylarger.
Thequestionofhowfarliterarysourcesmentionsofmagicindicatethe
realpresenceofmagicalpracticesinmedievalScandinaviaisamaterof
importance.ThecollectionofsourcesonseircitedintheSourcessection
willdemonstratethatonanaxisrangingfromthefactualhistoricaltothe
fantasticimaginative,theoccurrencesofseirareverymuchconcentrated
towardsthelaterend;thestudybyBoyer(975)onpagansurvivalsin
samtarsgur(contemporaryhistories)suchasSturlunga sagaistherefore
particularlyvaluable.Thereislitledoubtthatofthevarioustypesofmedievalsagathesecomeclosesttorevealingwhatlifeinthirteenth-century
Icelandactuallyinvolvedataroundthetimewhenmostofourliterary
sourceswerecomposed,or(inthecaseoforiginallyoralpoetry)recorded.
AmongthesigniicantpointsBoyermakesarethenumbersofoccurrences
ofvariouspaganfeaturesknownfromothersources:
gods
manymentions,esp.inverse,butno
religiousvalueisatachedtogods.
placenamesimplyingcult
aboutascore(asopposedtomanyin
slendingasgur)
day/seasonnames
almostnone
festivals
survive,buttoastsetc.arechristianised: no actual pagan elements are
found

TheverseoccurrencesofseirandrelatedwordsarelistedbyMcKinnell(005:967).
Seiroccurstwiceinaliteralsense(Vlusp5;Orms ttr Strlfssonarch.607),
andfourtimesinskaldicverseinkenningsforbattle(8).Seikonadoesnotoccurinverse,
andspkona,prophecywoman,andspmr,prophecymaiden,onceeachinallegedly
tenth-centurystanzas(Kormkr,lv5(SkjB8);rarinnmhlingr,lv7(SkjB07),ina
kenningformissiles,dangerousprophecymaidensofbattle).Theverbsaorseiaoccurs
sixtimes:twiceinmythicEddicpoems(Vlusp;Lokasenna),threetimesinsupposedly
tenth-centuryverses(twiceinVitgeirrsverseonRgnvaldrrttilbeini(SkjB9),andin
Kormkr,Sigurardrpa(SkjB69)),andonceinaverseattributedtoagiantessinGrms
saga loinkinnach.90(alate,archaisingtext).



CliveTolley

FFC96

assimilatedtoChristmas
assimilated to St Michaels feast
(exceptinonesaga)
bltassacriice
none(bltjustmeansswear,revile
insamtarsgur)
ndvegisslur
none(ndvegiisreplacedbyhsti)
tannfpaymentonirsttooth
none
(orgils saga skara)
reincarnation(endrborinn)
hugraswanderingsoul
 (in the late Geirmundar tr
heljarskinns)
fylgja/hamingja
;fylgjaconceptmergedwithguardianangel
landvtir

lfar
 in kennings;  in miracle stories,
representingimpishbeings,notthe
paganspirits
troll
assimilatedtodraugrorlag,regarded
asdemons
seir
none
jlkyngi

vlva
none
galdr
none
gandrei
none
runes
5(withoutmagicalpowers)
propheticpowers
nearly all important people have
them,butasasignofsanctity.
none
paganbaptism(ausa barn vatni)
betrothal/marriagerites
none
deathrites
none
political/juridicalsystems
survive(formulaschristianised)
law
nopaganelementslikenstng
hlmgangaduelling
none
fstbrralagfostering
none
Suchreferencesastherearetopaganmatersoccurlargelyinskaldic
verseorinconnectionwithartisticobjects,suggestingaliterary/artistic
convention.Allthedetailsofthegodsandmyths,eventhekennings,can
bederivedfromSnorrisEdda;Boyer(ibid.56)concludesthatasfaras
mythologyisconcernedinthesamtarsgur,theso-calledpaganrevivalor
pagansurvivalsareapurelyliteraryfeaturedevoidofalllivingreligious
signiicance.Mostofthepagansurvivalsareconcentratedinthelatest
piece,Geirmundar tr heljarskinns,ofc.00;mistakessuchastheparity
ofgoldtosilverbeingto0insteadofthecorrectto8oftheVikingAge
showanantiquariandesiretoreconstituteanimageofthepast:theauthor
hasendeavouredtorecreateasocietyandanatmosphereasheimagined
Jl
vetrntr




ThisisnotedbyGsliPlsson(99:6).
ThisisnotedbyMcKinnell(005:98).

FFC96

2.Thenatureofthesources

9

thattheyshouldhavebeen(ibid.65).Onwitchcrat,Boyer(ibid.6)
notesthatnoneofthedistinctivelyNorsefeaturessuchasseiroccur,and
suchmentionsastherearecannotbedistinguishedfromcontinentalmodels.Heconcludes(ibid.8):
Theso-calledpaganrevivalinIcelandistheresultofforeignandliterary
inluencesthereisakindofdisplacementoftime(dcalage)ordeliberateatempttofusepastandpresentbyincludingarchaicelementsinthe
textsThepaganfeatureswhichmayappearinthesamtarsgurhave
notinfrequentlyanoriginwhichisnotlocal.

TheimportanceofBoyersconclusionsmustnotbeunderestimated.To
formapictureofVikingAgeshamanismonthebasisofthirteenth-and
fourteenth-centuryfornaldarsgurandthelike,compositionswhichare
manifestlyfantasticinintentionanddrawnupatatimewhenthemagic
theydescribewasatbestanantiquarianmemory,wouldbeonlyslightly
morereliablethan,say,determiningthenatureofmagicalpracticesincontemporaryEnglandonthebasisoftheHarryPoternovels.Whenmagic
ismentionedinlatesourcesitneedstobetreatedwithspecialcaution.It
ispossiblethatsomegenuinetraditionderivedfrompagantimesispreservedonoccasionbutitmayequallywellbeanantiquarianinvention
oftheauthor,orifitisindeedtraditionalloreitmaystillhavebeenmisrepresentedoratenuated.Norshouldthedegreeofliteraryborrowingbe
underestimated:anumberofexamplesarediscussedlaterinthevolume,
buttheoverallefectofsuchborrowingistoreducethenumberofindependentwitnessestotraditionsoverwhichahugeDamocleanquestion
markwasalreadyhanging.ThusMcKinnell(005:97)commentsonhow
remarkablyconsistentthepictureofseirisinthesources:butwhatisthis
evidenceof?Ifthesourcesareassumedtobeindependent,thenwemight
concludewearebeinggivenapictureofsomethingrealintheeveryday
worldthatthewriterscoulddescribe.Butifthewritersareallborrowing
fromeachother,wearriveatthediametricallyopposedviewthatthereis
norealitytothepracticedescribedotherthanasaliterarytradition;this,
aswehaveseen,istheviewthatBoyerarrivedat,withgoodreasonasfar
asIcelandisconcerned.

conclusion
Despitetheapparentabsenceofpaganisminthirteenth-centuryIceland,
itsurvivedintheliterarycultureofthepoetsandwasrecordedinsome
detailbySnorriSturluson,whoseknowledgeofpaganmythsandtosome
extentpracticeswasconsiderable,evenifhisunderstandingofthemcan
otenbefaulted;somepracticesmayinadditionactuallyhavecontinuedin
continentalScandinaviatheircontinuedcondemnationinthelaws,and,
arguably,eventssuchasthatrecordedinVlsa tr,setinanout-of-thewayfarm,aresomesortofindicationofthis.5Unlesswetakeanextreme
5

McKinnell(005:989)notesthatearlyNorwegianlawcodesforbidseir,definedas

0

CliveTolley

FFC96

positionofassumingthatallsupposedlypaganornear-paganpoemsare
infactthecreationofatwelth-andthirteenth-centurypseudo-pagan
revival,thepoetryprovidesatleastabeterprospectofhavingpreserved
ancientloreaboutboththegodsandpracticessuchasseir.Itistherefore
uponthepoetrythatthepresentstudyisfocused;insomeareas,weonly
haveevidencefromprosesources,sothereisnochoicebuttousethem,
butonthewholetheprosesourcesareregardedwithagreaterdegreeof
scepticism.

at segja sprorat fara me spsgum,totellfortunesortogoforfortune-tellings;those

seekingpropheciesaresaidtogera Finnfarar,orfara at spyrja sp,orfara Finnmarkr at spyria
spdm,ortra Finna.InIceland,thereisareferenceinHkonarbk978ctospfararbut
thisisderivedfromNorwegiancodes:nootherprohibitionsexistinIcelandiclaw.Norwegiancodesalsoprohibitatveciatrlluppocfremiaheinimev78.Hkonarbkisthe
onlyIcelandiccodetomentionsitja ti.AnapparenthistoricaleventisrecordedinHkonar
saga heribreisch.68,in6,whenawomancalledrdsskeggjawascommissioned
tositouttodiscoverifHkonmightbevictorious.

VII. EPILEGOMENA
1. Conclusion
Ihavesoughtinthisbooktopresentameasuredapproachtothequestion
ofNorseshamanism.Intheirstplace,myaimhasbeentypological:this
hasinvolvedtracing,insomedetail,whatclassicshamanismactuallyis,to
seehowfarNorserecordsyieldanythingwhichfollows,inanysystematic
orcohesivefashion,thefeaturesofthisshamanism.Thisisanecessaryirst
stepbeforethepresenceofshamanismcanbeadjudicatedon.Ihavealso
soughttohighlightmorespeciicfeatureswhichresemblethosefoundin
shamanism,butwiththeprovisothattheycanonlybejudgedshamanicif
theycanbeaccommodatedwithinawidersystem,suchasthatproposed
byVajda;itisnot,Ithink,necessaryabsolutelytodemonstratethepresence
ofallthesefeatureseachtime,sinceourevidenceistoomeagretoallow
forthis,butwithoutatleastsomeindicationofawidercontextitbecomes
impossibletoargueforthepresenceofshamanism,asasystemofbelief
(orratherofbelief-relatedritual),onthebasisofisolatedresemblances.
Norisitacceptabletoassembleaseriesofsuchisolatedresemblancesand
thenforcethemintoasystemwhichthesourcesthemselvesdonotgive
anyindicationof.
Myinvestigationhas,overall,foundlitlegroundsforproposingthe
presenceofshamanisminpre-ChristianorlaterScandinavia,ifbythatis
meanttheclassicformofshamanismtypicalofmuchofSiberia.Theevidence
does,however,supportthelikelihoodofsomeritualandbeliefofabroadly
(butnotclassically)shamanicnatureasexistingandbeingrememberedin
tradition.Yetmostofwhatweuncoverfrominvestigatingliterarysources
isbound,inmyview,tobeliteraryinnature:wearediscoveringmotifsand
themes,workedonbypoetsoverthegenerations,andonlylooselybased
onrealpractices(evenwhensuchpracticeswerecurrent).Theunderlying
assumptioninmyargumentsfortheantiquityofamotifhasbeenthatwe
aredealing,intheirstplace,withaliterarymotifoflongstanding,and
itspresenceinreallifeisyetafurtherstepback,andhenceallthemore
debatable.Thedistancebetweenoursourcesandlivedexperienceisgreater
thanisotenallowedforinstudiesofpaganNorsebeliefs.
Themostrecentlengthydiscussionofsomeofthecorethemesdealt
withinthepresentvolumeisthatofPrice(00).Despitethemanyinterestingdiscussionsandmaterialsheofers,Iindmyselfessentiallyatodds
withhisviewpoint:hehasarguedforanextensivepresenceinVikingAge
ritualandbeliefofshamanism,inparticularintheformofseir,andfor



CliveTolley

FFC96

itsintimateconnectionwiththewarmentalityofthetime.Heisinclined
touseseirinawider,catch-allfashionforpracticeswhichheregardsas
shamanic,whichisnotjustiiedfromthesources.Iseescantevidencefor
aparticularlymilitaryaspecttoseir,anymorethananypracticeinour
medievalsourcesisimbuedwithmilitaryovertones.Pricesarguments,as
farastheliterarysourcesareconcerned,arebuilt,itseemstome,toomuch
onanassumptionofthesesourcesgeneralreliability,andrelevanceindeed
foraVikingperiod;Iwouldnotliketoincludetheliterarycultureof
thirteenthandfourteenth-centuryIceland,whichproducedmostofthese
sources,withinthedeinitionoftheVikingAge.Informationelicitedfrom
thesesourcesshouldbeusedtoconstructapictureofpaganpracticesof
somecenturiesearlieronlywiththegreatestcircumspectionandscepticismbeingappliedintheanalysis,whichiswhatIhaveendeavouredto
do.TheremotenessofoursourcesfromtherealityofpaganlifeissomethingthatinmyviewPricetakesinsuicientaccountof,allowinghim
toconstructapictureofpaganScandinaviawhichisexciting,butwhose
weightacarefulconsiderationofthesourceswillnotbear.Formeasanonarchaeologist,Pricesarchaeologicalevidenceformsthemostinteresting
partofhispresentationthoughheretooIwouldbefarmoresceptical
ofsomeoftheinterpretations;archaeologicalartefactsaredependenton
inputfromintellectualmonumentsfortheirinterpretation,and,aswe
haveseen,thesesourcesarefarfromaccommodatingintheclarityoftheir
meaning.Inshort,archaeologycannotinitselfdemonstratethepresenceof
shamanism,andthewritensourcesaremainlytoolateandunreliableto
useasevidenceofiteither:toleanonelimsycardagainsttheotherinthe
hopeofsecuringsomestabilitydoesnotmakeforanenduringorreliable
structure,howeverhighitmaytowerintheshortterm.
IwouldlikenowtosumupinmoredetailwhatIthinktheexamination
conductedinthispresentvolumehasshown.
The comparison with Greek sources, in particular the Bacchae, has
shownilluminatingsimilaritiesinthewaytwoIndo-Europeansocieties,
roughlycomparableintheirsocialstructuresandsourcesoflivelihood
(asopposedtothegenerallysimplerhuntingsocietieswhereshamanism
prevails),reactedtothepresenceofshamanicelements,andparticularly
howthisreactionwasmanifestedinliterature:suchelementsareregarded
asother(evenwhentheymaywellhavelargelybeenindigenous),and
henceareotencharacterisedasforeign;thisothernessisrealisedinvarioussimilarways,sothattheNorseseirandtheGreekbacchicritesare
bothessentiallytherealmofwomen,thoughledbygods(innand
Dionysus)willingtoaccepttheconcomitantefeminacy,andthepractices
areregardedasbeingbroughtbynewcomers(thevanirandDionysus).
TheGreeksourcessoundawarningshot,thatmuchofthedepictionof
suchpractices,inbothsocieties,reliesontheliteraryartiiceofpoets,the
reconstructionofactualcultpracticesfromtheirworksbeingfraughtwith
diicultiesanduncertainties.
Nonetheless,suchpracticesdidliebehindatleastsomeofthedepictions.Theexaminationofmedievalwitchcrat,thesourcesforwhichare

FFC96

21.Conclusion



notliterary,illustratesthisthoughherewehaveanequallylimiting
problem,ofthereligiousmanufactureofpseudo-systemsofbelief,from
whichgenuinefolkpracticeshavetobededuced,andthediicultyis
compoundedbymuchofthedetailedinformationbeingverylate(relative
toNorsesources).Whenweareabletoelicitlikelyfolkpracticesorbeliefs
inthisway,witchesappearaspractitionersofmagic,makingcontactwith
thespiritworld,otenonbehalfofthecommunity,workingforhealing,
divinationandtheprotectionoflivelihoods,thoughtheirskillswerealso
clearlyresortedtoformaliciouspurposessuchascursinglivestockand
sexualrelations.Thereisprobablyenoughofacrediblenaturethatcanbe
sitedfromthesourcestodescribethebeliefsandpracticesuponwhich
thedescriptionsofwitchcratarebasedasbroadlyshamanic.Scandinavia
should(probably)beincludedwithintheareaofsuchpractices.
However,whenwestarttoexamineinmoredetailhowfartherecorded
NorsepracticesormythscorrespondtowhatisfoundinclassicSiberian
shamanism,thecaseforanycloseconnectionbeginstoevaporate,though
therearestrikingresemblancesincertainareas,nonetheless.Thereare
severalfeaturesofNorsesourcesthatpermeatethewholeinvestigation.
Theirstistheirscarcity:wesimplydonothaveevidence,onewayorthe
other,formanythingsthatarefoundinshamanism,soitisimpossibleto
determinetowhatextentNorsepracticesmayhavecoincided.Thesecond
istheotentantalisingnatureofthesourceswedohave:forexample,
shouldthesearchoftheoriginatorofseir,Freyja,forherlosthusbandr,
whosenamemayindicatethesoulorlife-givingprinciple,beseenasparalleltotheshamanicretrievalofsoulsfromtheotherworld?Thethirdisthe
isolatednatureoffeatureswhichappeartobeshamanic:wecoulddescribe
theatemptedreturnofBaldrfromtheunderworld,withHermrasthe
activeagent,assimilar,again,totheshamansjourneyaterlostsouls,but
wehavenocontext,noallusionstoanyothershamanicfeatures,tosuggest
thatanyshamanicframeworkwasconceived;thisisaproblemwithagreat
manyfeatureswhichareotenadducedasindicatingshamanism(byno
meansallofwhichhaveevenseemedworthdiscussing).Thefourth,ina
wayanextensionofthethird,isthepresenceofconceptualstructuresin
Norseofafar-reachingkind,whicharefullycompatiblewiththepresence
ofshamanism,butdonotinfactprovidestrongevidenceofanyshamanic
use:anexampleistheconceptsofthevarioustypesofspirits.
SeirdifersinitspurposesfromclassicSiberianshamanisminseveral
respects.Mostnotably,thecentralshamanictaskofretrievingthesoulsof
thesickisabsent;evenhealingofamoregeneralsortisabsent,whereasit
isstillacentralfeatureofevenvestigiallyshamanicpractitionerssuchas
theFinnishtietj.EventhoughtheconceptwasfamiliartotheNorse, seir
doesnotseemtohaveinvolvedthesendingoutofthefreesoul,whichis
characteristicofmany,andparticularlycircumpolar,shamanisms.DivinationappearstohaveplayedacentralroleintheNorsepractices,and
thiswasprobablyanancienttradition,sinceclassicalsourcesmentiona
numberofGermanicseeresses;inshamanism,divinationisofsecondary
importance,andotenperformedbyothersthanshamans.Seirwaslargely



CliveTolley

FFC96

thedomainoffemales,whereasclassiccircumpolarshamanismisusually,
andcertainlyamongtheSmi,dominatedbymenthoughthisisnotthe
casewithshamanismofthenon-classictype,aspractisedinmoreagrarian
societiessuchasJapanorIndia.Unlikeshamanism,seirseemsalwaysto
havecarriedtheonusofsocialrejectionwithit.Thepractitionerofseir
emergesnotsomuchasamediatorwiththespiritworldwhoresolves
conlicts,aseitheramedium,communicatingsupernaturalknowledge,
oramanipulatorofthespiritworldwhousesspells(galdrar)inawaythat
otenincreasesratherthandissipatestensionthoughthispictureisbuilt
upinlargepartonthebasisofunreliableprosesources.
Asthevlvaappearsalwaystobeinsomesenseanoutsider,shedoes
notitintoanyofthefoursocialbasesofshamanswhichSiikalaoutlines;
giventhehierarchicallevelofNorsesociety,wewouldexpectsomeform
ofterritorialprofessionalshamanism,suchaswaspractisedbytheBuryats,
butweindnosuchthing.Thesourcesratherpresentthevlvainlinewith
thewitchoflaterEuropeansources,someoneinbutnotofthesocietythey
livein;nonetheless,thesameisclearlynottrueoftheclassicalseeresses,
orthepriestessesoftheCimbri,encounteredinaccountsofactualpagan
practices,sothesocialpositionofthevlvaasdepictedmaywellbethe
resultoflaterliterarytradition,or(additionally)ofsocialchangeoverthe
centuriesaterTacituswrote.
Seirexplicitlyinvolvedasexualelement:itissaidtobeassociated
withergi.Formen,thisprobablyindicatedalossofthestrengthwhich
deinedtheirvirility,whichmayhavebeenconnectedtothenotionof
penetrationbyspirits(whichcouldbeseenasstandingmetaphorically
forsexualpenetration),andmayalsohaveinvolvedafeminisation,as
thepractitionersofseiridentiiedwiththegoddessFreyja,itsfounder
andmistress(suchidentiicationisnowheredirectlyindicated,thoughit
isimpliedinthecaseoftheirstpractiserofseir,Heir,inVlusp);for
women,ergiimpliedpromiscuity,whichwascertainlyafeatureofthe
vanir,amongwhomseiroriginated,andmayhaveplayedapartinthe
practiceamongwomen,though,again,thisisnotdirectlywitnessedinthe
sources.Asafemalepractice,seirislikelytohavebeenconcernedwith
birth,andrebirth:itisthereforenoticeablehowitisreferredtoincasesof
engenderinganheir,suchasVli,andalsoappearsasameansofrebirth
(accordingtoDronkesarguments)orofindomitablelifeonthebatleield
inVlusp.Thisisconsistentwiththepracticesoffemaleshamanssuchas
theDaurotoshi.
Some,butnotall,ofthevarioussortsofNorsespiritswereinvolved
inseir.Asnoted,thepracticeoriginatedamongtheclassoffertilitydeities,thevanir.Itinvolvedthesummoningandmanipulatingofdangerous
spiritscalledgandar,whichitwouldappearbothprovidedinformation
andcarriedouttasks,andwouldoten(orperhapsalways)assumeanimal
form.Giants,inoneoftheseveralguisesinwhichtheyappear,seemto
correspondtotheanthropomorphic(andotenancestral)spiritsofclassic
shamanism,whoaresometimessummonedforinformation,butwhose
mainroleistoinitiatetheshaman.ThevlvaofVlusplearntherartfrom

FFC96

21.Conclusion



theseancestralbeings,andpossiblyinnshangingonthetreewasan
initiatoryexercisesupervisedbysuchbeings;hecertainlyissaidelsewhere
tohavelearntfromthegiants.Thepracticeofmagiccondemnedinthe
Norwegianlawsinvolvedthesummoningoftroll,awordwhichdesignatedanypractiser(orevenvictim)ofsupernaturalactivities.Itseems
thatthevlvawouldalsocallforthherprotectivespirit,vrr,probably
representingherinnatepowers,beforeundertakingaritualcontactwith
thespiritworld(thisinterpretationrelies,admitedly,onjustoneword,of
thegreatestinterpretativediiculty,survivinginanotherwiseunreliable
source).Thevlvascontactswithandmanipulationofthespiritworldthus
correspondinmanyrespectswithwhatisfoundinshamanismthough
parallelscanalsobeadducedfromEuropeanwitchcrat,soagainthefeaturecanonlybedescribedasbroadlyshamanic.Theexaminationofgandr
hasshownthatdiferencesexistedbetweenNorseandSmiconceptsof
whattookplaceduringashamanickamlanie,indicatingaratherdiferent
basetoNorsemagicfromthecircumpolarshamanismoftheSmi.
ManyfeaturesoftheNorsespiritualcosmographyindparallelsin
shamanicandotherEurasiansocieties.Thepredominantimageisofthe
worldtree,associatedhypostaticallywiththegodHeimdallr,actingas
vrr,protectiveguardian,oftheworld,inthewayananimateprotective
treestoodguardoverthefarmstead,andsacriiciallywithinn.Thetree
connectsScandinaviatypologicallyprimarilywiththesub-circumpolar
shamanicsocieties,whichwerenotsoreliantonhunting.Thereissome
evidencetomakeatentativeidentiicationofasecondaryNorseimage
oftheworldaxisasapillar,associatedinparticularwithrr;thepillar
istypicalofcircumpolarsocieties,includingtheSmi.Itislikely(butthe
evidenceistenuous)thatthepillarwasbelievedtoculminateintheNorth
Star,whichperhapswasrepresentedmythicallybythewhetstoneinrrs
headandincultinthenailsattheheadofthehallpillars,thendvegisslur.
SimilarideasarefoundamongtheSmiandFinns,andthisislikelyto
representacommonNordicmotif(itisalsofoundinthefareastofSiberia,
however,possiblyindependently,orpossiblyaspartofamoregeneral,but
ratheramorphous,circumpolarculture).Thespiritualcosmographyofthe
Norsewasthusconsistentwiththelayereduniversetypicallyencountered
inshamanism.However,itspresencedoesnotdeterminetheexistenceof
shamanism.Wedohavestrongindicationsofcultoferingsbeingmade
torepresentativeworldtreesintheNorsearea,butwedonotencounter
anythingparalleltotheshamansritualclamberingonthetreetorepresent
hispassagethroughtheworlds.Manyoftheparallelstothereligious
signiicanceoftheworldtreeinfactseemtolieinIndiaratherthanSiberia,
soitemergesasaratherdubiousindicatorofshamanism.
inn was also associated with seir, and some of the myths he is
representedinhaveostensiblyshamanicelementstothem.Theinitiatoryexperiencesofinncanalsobeilluminatedbycomparisonwith
shamanicanalogues,butacloserexaminationofthemhasshownthatthe
explicitlyshamanicelementswithinthemarefairlyminimal.Thereare
notablediferencesevenintheareasofgreatestsimilarity:thusalthough

6

CliveTolley

FFC96

theworldtreeisatypicalfeatureoftheshamaniccosmology,theshaman
isnothangeduponit,likeinn,butremadebyasmith,anideawhich
doesnotoccurinNorse.TheNorseinitiatorymythsalsoinvolveaspects
notfoundinshamanism,suchasthecomplexityoftheretrievalofSn,
thesacriicial(andlife-giving)blood,intheformofpoeticmead.inns
otherworldjourneysareessentiallyconnectedwithknowledgeandskill,
ratherthanwithhealing(thoughthereissomeevidenceofWoden/inn
asahealerinbothOldEnglishandOldNorse).Howevershamanicthey
mayultimatelybejudged,innsinitiatoryormartyricactsarenotassociatedwithhuman(ordivine)practiceslikeseir,andaredivorcedfrom
anyritualcontextwhichcouldberegardedasshamanic(theymaybe
connectedtosacriicialpractices).
Seirisnotsaidtoinvolveanyinitiation;thismaybearelectionofthe
lackofsources,butthefemaleshamanismoftheIndianSorasalsodidnot
involveanyinitiatoryexperiencecomparabletothatoftheSiberianshaman.Asafemalepractice,seirmaywellnothaveinvolvedsuchessentially
malewarriorimagery,soitsabsencecannotbeusedasanargumentagainst
thepotentialshamanicnatureofseir,butitdoesremoveanotherelement
whichmightbeusedtoarguethatseirwasindeedshamanic.
Theaccoutrementsfoundinassociationwithseirarenot,onthewhole,
particularlyshamanic.Wecansaylitleaboutanydress,sincethesources
describingitareuntrustworthy.Thevlvaalmostcertainlyhadastaf,
which may, just possibly, have been conceived as stemming from the
worldtree,andwhichalmostcertainlywouldhavebeenendowedwith
numinouspower,probablytocommandthespiritsandtoefectcurses.
Thebeltorgirdlemayalsohavebeenused:Freyjawaspossessedofthe
Brsingamen,whichwasassociatedwithbirth(andrebirth,probably);
ifthevlvarepresentedFreyja,shemaywellhavebeenendowedwitha
representationofthegoddesssgirdle,thoughthisisnowhereclearlythe
case.Theimportanceofthebelttothedivinatorypriestessesoftheancient
Cimbrisuggeststhatthepossessionofabeltbytheirspiritualsuccessors
wasquitelikely.Themainaccoutrementofthevlvawastheseihjallr,the
platformonwhichsheperformed.Thishasnoparallelsinclassicshamanism;itrathercharacterisesthevlvaasamedium,cutoffromthemembers
ofheraudienceandnotinteractingactivelywiththem.Itsuggeststhrough
elevationtheideaofincreasedspiritualvisionovertheworld,butitdoes
notimplythelayeredcosmostraversedinshamanickamlania.Overall,it
isadistinctmarkofthenon-shamanicnatureofseir.
Thesmithotenassumedacentralroleinshamanicinitiations(though
wedonothaveevidenceforthisamongsttheNorsemensneighbours,
theSmiorFinns).Leavingasidedwarfsmiths,thereisessentiallyone
smithheroinNorseliterarytradition,Vlundr.Thepoemdedicatedto
hisstory,Vlundarkvia,showsanawarenessofaspectsoffarnorthern
society,probablyderivedfromfamiliaritywithSmiculture,yetthisdoes
notamounttoasystematicawarenessofreligiousaspectsofsuchanalien
society:rather,thepoethasmanipulatedmotifstocreateanimpression
ofnorthernnessbymeansofliteraryartiice.Itseemslikelythatthepoet

FFC96

21.Conclusion



hasemployedsomefeaturestypicaloftheSmitoreinforceVlundrs
otherness,andthedangerofofendingtheOther,ratherthanbecauseof
anydeepconnectionofthesmithwiththeSmiorothershamanicsocieties;
SmifeaturesaremuchlessevidentintheVlents trversionofthestory
(whichwasofGermanorigin).
The examination of the bear similarly illustrated a distinct chasm
betweenScandinaviansandcircumpolarpeoplessuchastheSmi,though
italsoshowedthelikelihoodthatsomemotifswereborrowedfromthe
Smi(evidentparticularlyinthemanbeartransformationandassociated
narrativeinHrlfs saga kraka).Innorthernhuntingsocietiesthebearisa
sacredanimal,aliminalbeastwhoactsasamediatorbetweentheworlds
ofmenandthegods.Thebearishunted,butwithspecialapotropaicceremonieswhichensurethesacrilegeofkillinghimisnotvisiteduponthe
perpetrators.NoneofthisexistsinNorsetradition.Whenitcametohuntingactualbears,itwascarriedoutwithnoreligiousrespectwhatever.The
bearisstillliminal,butinaverydiferentsense:hefunctionsasametaphor
forthewarrior.Thebearwarriorpar excellencewastheberserkr:hewould,it
seems,rushintobatleinasortofecstasy,whichhasinclinedsometosee
ashamanicelementatplay.Thisismisplaced:ecstasycanexistinmany
contexts,anddoesnotinitselfindicateshamanism.Nordoesanything
elseabouttheberserkrlinkhimwithshamanism.
IfweallowtheNorsetohavehadpracticesorsystemsofmythicbelief
whichmightbetermedshamanism,itisnot,onthewhole,tothetundra
shamanismofthefarnorth,aspractisedbytheSmi,thatweshouldlook
fortheclosestparallels,buttotheformsofshamanismpractisedfurther
south,inareaswhereagricultureplaysalargepartinthewinningofa
livelihood,andwherefemaleshamanismismoreevident.TheshamanismofJapanisilluminatinginthisrespect:here,anearlierecstaticform
ofshamanismwasgraduallyformalisedoverthecenturies,toproduce
asystemwithprimarilyfemaledivinatorymediums,answeringquestionsfromatemenoscomparabletotheareaoftheseihjallroftheNorse
vlva,andnothavinganactiveinteractionwiththeaudience,inmarked
contrasttoclassicshamanism,butinagreementwiththeNorsesources;
manyofthequestionswereaboutthecrops,whichagaincorresponds
totheNorsesituation.Eventhewaythatanitakowouldbeawandering
seeress,whowaswelcomedintohouseswithalldueatentionpaidtoher
welfare,correspondstosomeofthedescriptionsofsimilarvisitsbyvlur
inNorse.Thereis,ofcourse,nogeneticconnectionbetweenScandinavian
andJapanesepractices,butthereisatypologicalone,resultingfromthe
presenceincomparablehierarchicalagrariansocietiesofecstaticdivinatorypractitioners,whosepresenceandroleneededtobeaccommodated
withinthenormsofthosesocieties.
ItisnotablethatwherewedoindfeatureswhichareclosetoSmishamanicpractices(orbeliefsaboutpractices),suchasthevisitfrommainland
ScandinaviatoIcelandwithinthreedays,orthelyingasifdeadforperiods
oftime,thepractitionersareexplicitlydescribedasFinnar;similarly,the
authorofHistoria NorwegieincludedhisdescriptionofaSmikamlanieout



CliveTolley

FFC96

ofamazementatthediferencefromwhathewasusedto.TheNorsemen
werewellawareofSmimagic,buttheywerealsoawarehowfaritvaried
inmostpointsfromtheirown,justastheywereawareofthedrastically
diferentlifestyle,basedonhuntingasthemainmeansofsustenance,that
manySmipractised.Myoverallpositionisessentiallyinagreementwith
Ohlmarks(99),whoiercelyopposedStrmbcksargumentsforaclose
linkwithSmishamanism.Ohlmarkshadawideracquaintancewithother
formsofshamanism,whereasStrmbckwas,perhaps,seducedbycertain
similaritieshesawinthepracticesoftheNorsemensnearestneighbours,
theSmi,whilstnottakingsuicientaccountofthehugediferences.I
havesoughttofollowOhlmarkssexampleinoferingawiderpanoramaof
shamanismthanjustthatoftheSmi,andtheexamplesexamined(which
donotcoincideparticularlywithOhlmarkss)backupOhlmarkssgeneral
position.
Allthingsconsidered,then,itseemstomeunsafetoargueforthepresenceofshamanismwithinNorsepre-Christianbeliefandpractice,ifby
shamanismismeantsomethinglikethetundrashamanismoftheSmi
itisclearatleastthatneitherseirnortheexploitsofinnwillitwithin
thestringentdeinitionofshamanismsuggestedforexamplebyVajda
butitislikelythatapracticeinvolvingcontactwiththespiritsdidexist
(andwasalludedtoandelaboratedinpoetry),whichcouldbedescribedas
broadlyshamanicinnature.Butthesamecouldprobablybesaidformuch
ofEurope:theevidencefromancientGreeceandfrommedievalwitchcrat
inEurope,contentiousasitis,pointsinthisdirection.Thisisinlinewith
theproposalbyHultkrantz(99:0):
Iconsidertrance,directcontactwithspiritualbeingsandguardianspirits,
togetherwiththemediatingroleplayedbytheshamaninaritualseting,to
constitutetheminimumrequirementforacaseofshamanism.Thepresence
ofguardianspiritsduringthetranceandfollowingshamanicactionsis,as
Iseeit,amostnecessaryelement,andonethatdelimitsshamanictrance
fromotherstatesoftrance.TheabovedescribeswhatIwouldcallthesalient
featuresofgeneralshamanism,thesimpleformofshamanismthatwe
indeverywhere,incontradistinctiontothemorespecializedshamanic
paternsuchasArcticshamanism,Siberianshamanism,andMongolian
shamanism.Maybegeneralshamanismshouldbeseenasadefoliatedbut
neverthelessideologicallymeaningfulshamanism,akindofspiritualplatformfromwhichthemorespecializedanddevelopedformsofshamanism
havegrown.

Theevidenceofseirandotherpracticesconsideredinthisvolumesuggests
thattheNorsepracticescanwellbeaccommodatedwithinthisgeneralshamanism.Ifear,unfortunately,thatsuchanapparentlyanodyneconclusion
willdolitletodampentheenthusiasmofthosemanymoderndevotees
whoseemdeterminedtoconjureupshamanismtakenimplicitlyasthe
excitingSiberiankindfromancientsourcesasiffromthinair;indeed,
suchprestidigitationappearstodonotalitletoenhancetheirstanding,
asonceitdidfortheshamansthemselvesintheircommunities.
Ithasbeenanimportantpartofthisstudytomakeareassessmentof

FFC96

21.Conclusion

9

thevalueofsomeofthesesources.Inparticular,theclassicaccountof
seirfoundinEirks saga rauahasbeenshowntobealmostwhollyunreliable,andtorelectprimarilyChristianconcerns.Thedescriptionofseir
inrvar-Odds sagaisderivedinlargepartfromEirks saga.Similarly,the
accountofinnsperformanceofseirinYnglinga sagaisunreliable:it
derivespartlyfromsurvivingpoeticsources(whichcanbeconsideredon
theirownmerits),andpartlyfromSnorrisuseoftraditionsconcerning
Smipractices,probablythroughtheHistoria Norwegie.Withothersources,
ithasprovedimportanttoemphasisetheirallusivenature:thusGrmnisml
isbynomeansanaccountofritualinitiation,butadramaticpresentationof
thegodinninadiicultsituationinwhichherevealsdivineknowledge,
whichmakessuggestivereferencetothegodsinitiatoryexperiences,as
onthetree,butrefrainsfrompretendingthatthisdramaconstitutesan
initiationinitself.Vlundarkviacontainsanumberofshamanicelements:
theauthorusestheseaslocalcolouring,toaidtheprocessofverisimilitude
inhisdepictionofthisfarnorthernhero;theelementsareberetofreligious
signiicance,butrichlyendowedwithliterarymeaning.Skrnismland
Vlusphavebeendeeplyminedfortheirapparentshamanicreferences.
Theremay,indeed,havebeensomeawarenessonthepartoftheauthors
oftheritualdimensionsofpracticessuchasseir,whichmaybeinferred
fromthetextsaswehavethem.Butagreatdealofcautionisnecessary.In
thecaseofSkrnismltheshamanicstructurethevisionintootherworlds,
thejourneythitherundertakenbyanalteregoigure,thesalvationfrom
anunderworldlyrealm,thewandandthemagicalcharmsmayappear
shamanicmerelyasaresultoftheauthorsmanipulationoftraditional
motifsintothisparticularform.ThesameistrueofVlusp:thepresenceof
theworldtree,forexample,doesnotnecessarilyimplyanyrealritualuse
ofthetreebyvluritoccursinthepoemforessentiallyliterarystructural
purposes,notritualones;somefeatures,however,perhapsrelectnotions
thatmayhavebeenpartoftheoldertraditiononvlur,suchastheway
thatHeir,theirstseikona,istobeidentiiedinsomewaywithFreyja,
thedivineoriginatorofthepractice,andhowsheissaidtobecomeleikin,
entranced,asshepractices,andusesgandartosecureherprophetic
knowledge.ButinitscompositionVluspalludes,itwouldappear,tononNorsesources,suchasthesibyllineoraclesortheBible,sothatitbecomes
impossibletodeterminequitehowfaritmayrelectgenuineNorsepractices,particularlygiventheartisticmasterytheauthorshowsinordering
hiscomposition.Itistheperceptionofthisartisticmastery,whateverthe
sourcesinvolved,thatisintheendthechieftargetofinvestigation.
Vito r enn, ea hvat?
N mun hon skkvaz