Odinist Fellowship Threatens to Continue Protests until Demands are Met

[Sanzbir]

All sides fought and did wrong, - however - none was so evil and methodical as the Christians in their destroying of Pagan statues, knowledge, religion, Temples, and culture.

*

Eh... evil is subjective. But let's just say I don't have any hopes that my ancestors were interested in preserving the Christian cultural artifacts they looted.

Well except Olaf Sandal who was a Christian when he looted a few of the monasteries he sacked (and then went on to become a monk, strangely enough). He might have cared about that. But I don't think the others did.

Other pagan faiths I believe have a much stronger case. But Odinists and Christians in Britain have a sort of tit-for-tat thing that makes me think it would be hard, to say the least, at determining who owes who what.

 

[Sanzbir]

Doing some research, on the topic of Blood Eagle. It was proposed that it was a kenning for leaving people for the birds, but I find no clear evidence of that in the posts that claimed this nor the links provided.

But I did find evidence in the Orkneyinga Saga. It mentions Turf-Einar carving a blood eagle, and then cites a poem that Turf-Einar composed upon taking vengeance for his father which reads:

Ever am I glad since spears,
----Good ‘tis daring deeds to do,---
Spears of warriors fond of fight,
Bit the boy-son of the king;
Him I hide not they mislike,
There flew gray across the isles
Bird that feasts on body-wounds,
Wounds of Halfdan, joy of hawks

So here we have an instance where a Skaldic source mentions leaving the body for the birds, and then a later Saga-source mentioning the killing as a blood eagle. Which is, I think, a link that provides evidence for the blood eagle kenning theory.

 

[Ponder This]

I think I have ancestors who lived in almost every area of the world... I think the world needs to apologize to me for taking land from my ancestors and give me back all the land they've taken. I realize that this makes me the effective owner of the world and that many of these events took place thousands of years ago, but justice is very important and these locations have ancestral religious significance to me that cannot be denied.

Don't worry, there's actually an island in the Pacific Ocean called Easter Island that I don't have any ancestors from. The rest of the world can live there!

 

[Kemosloby]

First of all they did not say the magic word "please", but would Odin be satisfied if they took it back by any other way than brute force?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

First of all they did not say the magic word "please", but would Odin be satisfied if they took it back by any other way than brute force?

You actually have a point. Lol

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

But can we... not discus Vikings in relation to a discussion on historical accuracy of the Norse Sagas.

They get much wrong, yes, but they also get a few things right. And chariots (or carts) were a thing for the Norse. (But yes, them using Loðbrók as a surname was very annoying)

I doubt the man who conquered Northumbria and parts of Ireland needed to be demonized all that much...

The Christians of the time were really no better. Which is why making the enemy (of both faith and culture) that much more barbaric was utilized.

You'll question me on the historicity of the blood eagle but assert the historicity of Ragnar Lodbrok?

Surprisingly, I think there's more historical evidence for Ragnar than the blood eagle; but I don't question you, I question it. He has numerous saga mentionings, sons that are named Ragnarsson, etc. A pit of vipers need not be maintained, just prepared long enough to kill someone. There's also quite a bit of historical mention of Ragnar, including Book IX of the Gesta Danorum, Tale of Ragnar Loðbrók, Ragnarssona þáttr, Ragnarsdrápa, Krákumál, and even the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. It is thought that Ragnarr Loðbrók is either King Horik I, King Reginfrid, the Reginherus who besieged Paris in the mid-9th century, and possibly the Ragnall (Rognvald) of the Irish Annals.

it seems more likely that Ivar was just a guy who showed up and started conquering the Danelaw for himself.

Ivar, as well as Ubba and Halfdan, led what was known as the Great Heathen Army against the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. The only known cause of the invasion, as cited, is retaliation for the slaying of Ragnarr.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

First of all they did not say the magic word "please", but would Odin be satisfied if they took it back by any other way than brute force?

I'm still trying to determine if you're seriously asking this - I doubt it - but I'll provide an answer anyway for posterity.

Firstly, one must not ask or say "please" to recover that which was stolen. Christians never said please for what all they took, they just slaughtered and took it. At the very least, the Odinists aren't doing that.

Secondly, while I can't exactly speak for Odin, or say what he would think, he is a god of wisdom and tact. So yes, I think he would be quite pleased with a peaceful, wise reclamation rather than just brute force.

 

[EverChanging]

I wonder how much of a connection in terms of ancestry and culture do the members of this group even have with the peoples who were originally stolen from. I'm always skeptical when 21st century middle class people who were raised Christian try to claim the victim status of an ancient dead culture they have freely chosen to appropriate to base their entirely modern religions on.

 

[HonestJoe]

It all seems very silly. The Church of England only came in to existence in the 1500s so I’m not sure why they’d be responsible for the acts of Christians 1300 years ago and even if there was justification for some kind of recompense, I don’t see why this "Odinist" organisation should receive anything solely on the basis that they claim to follow similar faiths to the historic victims.

There was plenty of bad things happening in that time period (and probably plenty of good too, but that makes for boring history) but I don’t see the justification in attaching any of it to generic religious, political or social labels. A lot like things happening today in fact.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Ralph Harrison, Director of Odinist Fellowship and leader of British pagans, had sent a letter to Justin Welby , Archbishop of Canterbury, demanding they 'return' two church buildings. Harrison claims the properties were stolen from pagans about 1,300 years back. Over 1,000 pagans are members of the Fellowship.

Thoughts??

Personally I find it a bit ridiculous, given the history of the region and Christians and Odinists in it.

I'm well versed in my genealogy, and I am descended from the Norse who came and raided England before settling down in Ireland and Iceland following the battle of Hafrsfjord that unified Norway (and expelled anyone who was against Harald Fairhair). And... with those Odinist ancestors of mine I can't really say that discrimination between these two religions was one sided.

One ancestor of mine carved a blood eagle into a petty king's back offering him as a sacrifice to Odin. He further went on to martyr an Anglo-Saxon Christian saint. Not to mention all the church-looting my ancestors did. It just seems like the discrimination went both ways, and that both sides should just let it go by now.

So should the church give the Odinists the land??

If so, should the Odinists apologize for my great-great-great-great-etc grandpa Ivar literally martyring Christian clergymen??

What do modern Odinists have to do with ancient Pagans?

If merely being inspired by an ancient culture is enough to claim inheritance of their property, then somebody owes the Toronto Argonauts football team a golden fleece.

 

[Sanzbir]

Ivar, as well as Ubba and Halfdan, led what was known as the Great Heathen Army against the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. The only known cause of the invasion, as cited, is retaliation for the slaying of Ragnarr.

Here's my problem with the historicity of the Sons of Ivar Lodbrok narrative.

Anglo-Saxon sources mention Ivar showing up and conquering. They don't mention Ragnar or his attempted invasion. The Irish sources mention him showing up in Ireland and conquering, allying with other Norsemen and Cerball of Ossory against the Irish High King.

The only sources that mention Ragnar's death as motive for Ivar's attack are the Norse ones... which also mention things like giant serpents, Swedish demon cows (best part of the Saga, in my opinion, ), and claim Ragnar's wife was the daughter of Sigurd and Brunhild (who were, in the Volsunga Saga, contemporaries of Atilla the Hun, so the timeline there is all off).

But the thing for me that makes me almost certain that the Saga of Ragnar Shaggy-Breeks and his Sons was the result of an author inventing non-existent links between existing characters was when doing my own genealogy and finding a significant generational gap in the story.

Basically my biggest problem is that, given what the Irish, Anglo-Saxon, and Norse sources say about the descendants of Ivar the Boneless and Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye, it seems incredibly unlikely that they were brothers as is claimed. According to the sources that claim Ragnar as the father of both, we have Ivar being the eldest son (of Ragnar and Aslaug) and Sigurd being the youngest, and Sigurd recorded as being a young boy when Ivar and the other brothers were adult men.

In my geneology, picking through Irish Annals and Norse Sagas I find the following: Ivar the Boneless, along with another viking Olaf the White and Cerball MacDungaill, King of Ossory, were united in various campaigns in Ireland. We can be fairly certain of Ivar's identity in the Irish Annals because the Irish never mention Ivar being active in Ireland when the the Anglo-Saxon mention him active in England, and the Anglo-Saxon record of Ivar likewise doesn't mention him active in England when the Irish sources mention him active in Ireland.

This is a big problem for the historicity of Ragnar being Ivar and Sigurd's father, as the sagas tell us that Ivar's ally Olaf was the son of Ingjald the White, the son of Thora, the daughter of Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye.

If we accept Ragnar as the father of Ivar and Sigurd, then we have to accept the idea that Ivar campaigned in Ireland alongside the great-grandson of his youngest brother. Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye, by all accounts, seemed to have lived an operated much earlier than Ivar the Boneless.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I wonder how much of a connection in terms of ancestry and culture do the members of this group even have with the peoples who were originally stolen from.

Probably quite a bit, as they're actually over in Europe. They're not the American group of Odinists (which are basically supremacists), they're European Odinists--different groups entirely.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I wonder how much of a connection in terms of ancestry and culture do the members of this group even have with the peoples who were originally stolen from. I'm always skeptical when 21st century middle class people who were raised Christian try to claim the victim status of an ancient dead culture they have freely chosen to appropriate to base their entirely modern religions on.

I agree.

Realistically, the direct descendants of the people who worshipped at and maintained these sites when they were Pagan places of worship are almost certainly Christian, or at least descended from centuries of Christians.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Ralph Harrison, Director of Odinist Fellowship and leader of British pagans, had sent a letter to Justin Welby , Archbishop of Canterbury, demanding they 'return' two church buildings. Harrison claims the properties were stolen from pagans about 1,300 years back. Over 1,000 pagans are members of the Fellowship.

Thoughts??

Personally I find it a bit ridiculous, given the history of the region and Christians and Odinists in it.

I'm well versed in my genealogy, and I am descended from the Norse who came and raided England before settling down in Ireland and Iceland following the battle of Hafrsfjord that unified Norway (and expelled anyone who was against Harald Fairhair). And... with those Odinist ancestors of mine I can't really say that discrimination between these two religions was one sided.

One ancestor of mine carved a blood eagle into a petty king's back offering him as a sacrifice to Odin. He further went on to martyr an Anglo-Saxon Christian saint. Not to mention all the church-looting my ancestors did. It just seems like the discrimination went both ways, and that both sides should just let it go by now.

So should the church give the Odinists the land??

If so, should the Odinists apologize for my great-great-great-great-etc grandpa Ivar literally martyring Christian clergymen??

I supported this at first but after actually sitting down and thinking about it, this sounds like a PR gimmick to me. Worship of Odin is as foreign to these shores as the worship of Christ - neither originated here. These guys are Icelandic Pagans, not Danes, and don't even have a remotely historical claim to the land. Assuming they did, how far back should this **** go? Maybe we can sue Italy for the Romans or Germany & Holland for the Anglo-Saxons?

They don't speak or act on behalf of the wider Pagan community; they do so only for their own ends. Ralph Harrison is no more a leader of British Pagans than that egotistical quack, John 'Arthur Pendragon' Rothwell. I can't see the Odinist Fellowship suing the Church of England and winning, only to turn over the land for use by a local Dianic coven or to see it used to construct a Graeco-Roman style temple. They'll want a hof for their own uses and, frankly, this smacks of an attempt to spread their influence further afield.

Aside from all this, Christianity does well in an environment where it can deploy its 'good vs evil; God vs Devil' narrative. Pushing at the CofE will allow them to do this. The best thing to do is sit back and watch Christianity in Britain wither on the vine. The Anglican Church is having problems keeping churches & chapels open as is. If they were serious, the Odinist Fellowship could attempt to buy a church that has been closed.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Anglo-Saxon sources mention Ivar showing up and conquering. They don't mention Ragnar or his attempted invasion.

At that point, or earlier? Because at that point, he'd be dead. Ragnar Lodbrok is mentioned, however, in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles.

I think it possible - and I'm surprised that it hasn't been suggested - that "Ragnar" might be a title or nickname, rather than someone's actual name.

The only sources that mention Ragnar's death as motive for Ivar's attack are the Norse ones

They would be the only one to list any motive, I'd think. Any reliable one, at least. Do American history books tell the motives of the Taliban? No, they're just concerned with that an attack happened by those mean, nasty people--no one ever concerns themselves with why the enemy does what they do.

which also mention things like giant serpents, Swedish demon cows

If you're referring to the Voluspa, that's different from the sagas. One is mythology, the other is legend.

and claim Ragnar's wife was the daughter of Sigurd and Brunhild (who were, in the Volsunga Saga, contemporaries of Atilla the Hun, so the timeline there is all off).

There's actually no timeline given for when Auslaug lived in the Volsunga. Or Sigurd and Brynhildr, for that matter. So I'm not sure where you're getting that they lived at the same time as Atilla. There is an "Atli" named, but I'm not finding anything to strongly suggest that it was the Atilla the Hun, as though a) that's who they meant with a name that's only kind of similar, and b) he was the only person to ever be named Atilla. He's apparently given the name "Etzel" in the Nibelungenlied (again, how?), and has no less than three separate accounts of his death. It's a shaky hook to hang when Sigurd and Brynhildr lived.

According to the sources that claim Ragnar as the father of both, we have Ivar being the eldest son (of Ragnar and Aslaug) and Sigurd being the youngest, and Sigurd recorded as being a young boy when Ivar and the other brothers were adult men.

As I'm reading it, Ivar is told to be younger than Sigurd. Which books are you reading? Ivar is told as having died in 870-3. The Danish King Harthacanute, born in 880, is regarded as the grandson of Sigurd.

This is a big problem for the historicity of Ragnar being Ivar and Sigurd's father, as the sagas tell us that Ivar's ally Olaf was the son of Ingjald the White, the son of Thora, the daughter of Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye.

Eyrbyggja Saga claims that Olaf was a descendant of Sigurd. However this has been academically deemed unlikely, and it's not a huge issue as Sigurd was older than Ivar.

 

[Sanzbir]

At that point, or earlier? Because at that point, he'd be dead. Ragnar Lodbrok is mentioned, however, in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles.

Huh?? Where?! I've read through the book's record of that time, and I'm fairly certain he's not in there, unless there's something I missed.

Closest I can find in there is the entry in 794, but that's only a nameless "heathen leader" dying in Northumbria, and in battle, not a pit of vipers.

They would be the only one to list any motive, I'd think. Any reliable one, at least. Do American history books tell the motives of the Taliban?

Well what are your sources on motive. Ragnar's Saga I would fairly doubt.

If you're referring to the Voluspa, that's different from the sagas. One is mythology, the other is legend.

Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar. Swedish. Demon. God-Cows.

There's actually no timeline given for when Auslaug lived in the Volsunga. Or Sigurd and Brynhildr, for that matter. So I'm not sure where you're getting that they lived at the same time as Atilla. There is an "Atli" named, but I'm not finding anything to strongly suggest that it was the Atilla the Hun, as though a) that's who they meant with a name that's only kind of similar, and b) he was the only person to ever be named Atilla. He's apparently given the name "Etzel" in the Nibelungenlied (again, how?), and has no less than three separate accounts of his death. It's a shaky hook to hang when Sigurd and Brynhildr lived.

Why would you cite the Nibelungelied in this discussion??

Of what relevance is the later German adaptation of the Volsunga Saga to the characters mentioned in the original Saga??

Even if you don't want to follow through with the idea that Atli refers to Attila, and that the Volsunga Saga just happens to refer to a different, explicitly Hunnish King, who just happens to have a similar name, the Huns, who are mentioned in the Volsuga Saga as a contemporary peoples, were gone before the life of Ragnar Shaggy-Breeks.

As I'm reading it, Ivar is told to be younger than Sigurd. Which books are you reading? Ivar is told as having died in 870-3. The Danish King Harthacanute, born in 880, is regarded as the grandson of Sigurd.

Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar ok sona hans. Ivar is conceived on the wedding night of Ragnar and Aslaug, with Aslaug warning Ragnar that if they copulate on that night they will give birth to a crippled child, and Ivar is the result of Ragnar not heeding that warning. Sigurd is born later when Aslaug makes the claim she is the long lost daughter of Sigurd and Brunhild (which Ragnar rightly finds laughable, given the nonexistence of Hunland at the time) but she says that a snake (or dragon) mark in their next son's eye will prove her claim, and so Ragnar believes her after the birth of that son, hence Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye.

I've never seen a source claim that Sigurd was the elder brother, unless you are going with the argument "well Ivar lived at a later period of time than Sigurd" which would point to their supposed brotherhood being a fiction in my mind more than "Oh well I guess Ragnar's Saga just mixed up the birth order!!"

Eyrbyggja Saga claims that Olaf was a descendant of Sigurd. However this has been academically deemed unlikely, and it's not a huge issue as Sigurd was older than Ivar.

Source??

and it's not a huge issue as Sigurd was older than Ivar.

Well if we could trust Eyrbyggja Saga it would be a big issue. When have you heard of the younger brother of a man being a contemporary of that man's great-grandson. But if you have a source that shows the Eyrbyggja Saga is not valid then I suppose it is not as much of an issue. It seems like there's still a pretty big generational gap between the brothers, though.

A forty year gap when the alleged youngest brother Sigurd's grandsons were active compared to when Ivar, the eldest brother's grandsons were active. Such things are possible to be sure, but I haven't seen any claim that they were brothers outside of sources that straddle the line of history, legend, and mythology.

 

[Jumi]

Ragnars Saga Loðbrókar ok sona hans. Swedish. Demon. God-Cows.

Men det här är inte svenska. It's an older language and demons were not part of their religion. The cow Audumbla in nordic mythology is not a god from what I know.

Is @Nietzsche still around by the way? I think he'd have something interesting to say in this thread too.

 

[Sanzbir]

Men det här är inte svenska. It's an older language and demons were not part of their religion. The cow Audumbla in nordic mythology is not a god from what I know.

Well, it doesn't say "demon", but the descriptions are pretty fitting of the English concept:

And after they went from the ships, Ívar said that the garrison had two cattle, which were young geldings, and men turned and fled before them, as they could not stand their bellowing and their troll-like form. Then Ívar said: “Bear yourselves as best you can, although you feel some fear, because nothing will harm you.” Then they departed with their troops. And when they drew near the fortress, it happened that they who lived in that place became aware of them, and they loosed the cattle that they had great faith in. And when the geldings were let loose, they leapt forward fiercely and roared terribly. Then Ívar saw them from where he was borne upon a shield, and he told his men to bring his bow, and it was done. Then he shot at the evil geldings, so that they both received their deaths, and then the battle that the men had most feared was ended.
...
They had great faith in one cow, and they called her Síbilja. She had been sacrificed to so much that men could not stand before her bellowing. The king was wont, when an overwhelming army was expected, to send this cow in front of the host; such great devilish power filled her that all his foes became so maddened as soon as they heard her that they fought among themselves and cared not for their own safety. Because of this, Sweden was unharried by assaults, for men dared not contend against such power.
...
He then had with him the cow Síbilja, and many were the sacrifices to her before she would travel. And when they were in the forest, King Eystein spoke: “I have news,” he said, “that Ragnar’s sons are on the field beside this forest, and it was said to me truly that they do not have a third of our troops. Now we shall arrange our host for battle, and a third of our troops shall go to meet them first, and they are so unflinching that they will think they have us in their power. Immediately afterwards we shall come at them with all our might, and the cow shall go before our troops, and it seems to me that they will not hold before her bellowing.”
...
And then it was so done. And as soon as the brothers saw King Eystein’s troops they thought that their foes did not have power greater than theirs, and it did not occur to them that there might be more troops. And soon after all the troops came from the forest and the cow was set loose, and she leapt before the troops and went about fiercely. So great a din arose that the warriors who heard it fought among themselves, except for the two brothers holding their ground. But the evil creature struck many a man with her horns that day.
...
And then it was thus done, that Síbilja was let loose. And then Ívar saw her charge and heard the hideous bellowing which was coming out of her. He thought that all the troops should make a great noise, both with weapons and war-cry, so that they would barely hear the voice of that evil creature when she charged towards them. Ívar spoke with his carriers, telling them that they should bear him forward so that he might be closer to the front.
...
Such a great din arose when Síbilja bellowed that they heard it just as well as if they had been silent and standing still. Then that caused it to happen that the troops fought amongst themselves, all save the brothers.

Dear goodness, if you're in Sweden, don't try cow tipping!!

 

[EverChanging]

Probably quite a bit, as they're actually over in Europe. They're not the American group of Odinists (which are basically supremacists), they're European Odinists--different groups entirely.

But that is probably true of lots of people, not just this Fellowship.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

The cow Audumbla in nordic mythology is not a god from what I know.

Correct, she's not one of the Æsir or Vanir, but she is regarded with honor as being the nourishment of creation.