How do the Esan compare to their Norse counterparts? Are they the same, or are there some differences in how they're worshipped, popularity, attributes, stories, etc.?
The short answer (all I can give at the moment, since I don't currently have access to one of my primary books) is that... this question isn't as easy to answer as one might hope. While some Norse Lore is decently preserved in some surviving Lays, Snorri's Edda, and the Icelandic Sagas, Anglo-Saxon Lore is almost completely lost. This is partly owing to the fact that the Anglo-Saxons were Christianized almost half a millennium before the Norse finally were. So if there's one thing that separates the two, it's that we know a LOOOOOT more about the Norse forms than the Anglo-Saxon.
Something of note, however, is that there's not always a clear one-to-one counterpart between the two sets of Lore. While there are Gods who make appearances is both (Woden/Odin, Thunor/Thor, Frige/Frigg, etc), there are Gods who appear in one but not the other. Seaxneat is an Anglo-Saxon God who's name doesn't appear at all in the Norse Lore, and there's some speculation that he's the "Patron" God of the Saxons. There's also the Goddess Eostre, who's a bit controversial since she's only named in one source, largely in reference to a month. There's every chance that this is not actually an historical Goddess at all, but a misunderstanding. (She is a Goddess now, though.)
https://larhusfyrnsida.com/fundamentals/godu/
http://fyrnsidu.com/node/118
https://ealdrice.org/trow-thew/the-gods-of-anglo-saxon-heathendom/
You may note a bit of a bias on my part to stick to websites that are for modern Anglo-Saxon Heathens. In many ways that's deliberate, since the form of AS Heathenry called Theodish Belief is often HIGHLY reconstructionist, which means that there's a strong emphasis on historical accuracy and research. (Not that they're always perfect, but they can at least provide some sources.)
