Fully agree, Snorri was a giant in the scholarly world and did much to preserve some of the best stories ever told. I despise his negative rep when he should be honoured and revered for his accomplishments. A great essay as always!
Because you can’t succeed in explaining literary references to pagan mythology if you are actively trying to corrupt the mythology. Such a thing would be a doomed attempt at achieving two mutually exclusive goals."
Faithfully recounting pagan mythology was not his goal. Preserving the poetic meter was. He had no interest whatsoever in making a reliable record of heathen beliefs. Why would he?
It's because his interest was academic, not religious. If all Snorri cared about was preserving the poetic meter, there wouldn't have been much point in writing Gylfaginning, which doesn't discuss poetic meter at all. That book in particular is nothing but explanations of myth done in a way that redirects readers back to the pagan poetic sources where the information is coming from.
The reasons why Snorri would want to faithfully recount pagan mythology become clearer when reading Skáldskaparmál. This book contains several explanations of "heiti" (names for things) which include different names and phrases used in skaldic poetry that refer to the gods, as well as different names and phrases referring to normal things that include mentions of pagan concepts. Again, had he only cared about meter, this would have been useless information. Consider, for example, the names provided for the sky in Skáldskaparmál 23 (Faulkes transl):
"How shall the sky be referred to? By calling it Ymir’s skull and hence giant’s skull and toil or burden of the dwarfs or helmet of Vestri and Austri, Sudri, Nordri, land of sun and moon and stars, constellations and winds, helmet or house of air and earth and sun. Arnor the earls’ poet said this: 'Never will as generous a young ruler step on to shield-plank [ship] — this prince’s magnificence was ample — under Ymir’s old skull.'"
Snorri very much cared about teaching poets how to understand skaldic poetry. Preserving meter is one thing, but in order to be able to appreciate and comprehend poems in this style, a person has to understand the mythological references in them. We can see this in the quote Snorri provides here from Arnórr Þórðarson jarlaskáld. The phrase "as generous a ruler ... under Ymir's old skull" does not make sense if one does not know the myth wherein the gods create the sky from Ymir's skull. All of these references Snorri provides are presumably found in poetry that was available to him. In this light it is quite easy to see why Snorri felt the need to recount myths in order to educate others on skaldic poetry.
Evidence for this continues to mount as we continue to read. From section 33:
"Why is gold called Ægir’s fire? The origin of it is this story: Ægir, as was told before, went as a guest to Asgard, and when he was about to return home, he invited Odin and all the Æsir to visit him after an interval of three months. ... And when the gods had taken their places, Ægir had glowing gold brought into the middle of the hall which illuminated and lit up the hall like fire, ..."
Snorri then goes on to paraphrase the same story that is found in the poem Lokasenna in the Poetic Edda, which he did not participate in creating, accurately. The point being, Snorri is explaining a skaldic kenning by way of telling the story that gave rise to the kenning. And even though he doesn't refer readers back to Lokasenna to check his accuracy in this instance, Lokasenna just so happens to have survived, allowing us to know that Snorri told the story accurately. His purpose in recounting myths is very clear in passages like this.
The thing is, whenever we _can_ check Snorri's accuracy against other sources (whether that's surviving poems or picture stones from across northern Europe) it turns out his information is good. Knowing that he did make a largely reliable record of heathen beliefs, it becomes pretty hard to claim that he had no interest whatsoever in making a reliable record of heathen beliefs. Whatever his motivation was is less important than the fact that the record exists.
1, 2) Haha Gaiman is not so bad. His book is ok for beginners but if you become more serious about studying Norse mythology you will need to be prepared to let go of a few of the ideas in his book.
3) Actually hel and hole do both derive from the same Proto-Indo-European root, specifically *kel- meaning “to cover or conceal”. But they are not exactly the same anymore by the time we get to the Germanic linguistic period. Hel comes from a sense of concealing the dead in the ground, but the word has taken on a religious underworld connotation in the Germanic language branches. Helsinki is different. It’s actually borrowed from Swedish Hälsing which derives from a word meaning “neck” and refers to a narrow body of water in this context.
4) If you’re referring to Bock Saga, no I haven’t read that. Modern mystical stuff isn’t really in my wheelhouse :)
5) Not just atheists, but there is a pretty common idea out there that Christianity was brutally forced upon the vikings (not true) and that all Christians ever wanted to do was ruin longstanding cultural ideas. Obviously Christianity was opposed to paganism, but the story is far more complex than people often make it out to be and people sometimes don’t realize that a medieval Christian could exist who was genuinely interested in pagan mythology for academic reasons.
6) To some degree yes. People don’t change their entire way of life overnight. Even today we have a Christ-centered holiday called Easter which is literally named after a pagan goddess, and which involves a bunch of rabbit and egg traditions that don’t come from Christianity. There was surely a lot more stuff like this in the times that immediately followed Christianization. There are examples of healing charms and things of that nature from the historical record that mention both Jesus and Odin. So for some, things were a lot less cut and dry.
Ooooh it’s happened again... an essay about one of my favourite subject.. Norse myths, gods, and Snorri ... now I’m compelled to pick up my copy of the ‘Edda’ and Snorri’s ‘On the Norse gods’ again. He should indeed be honoured.
Fully agree, Snorri was a giant in the scholarly world and did much to preserve some of the best stories ever told. I despise his negative rep when he should be honoured and revered for his accomplishments. A great essay as always!
"Why should we trust the Prose Edda?
Because you can’t succeed in explaining literary references to pagan mythology if you are actively trying to corrupt the mythology. Such a thing would be a doomed attempt at achieving two mutually exclusive goals."
Faithfully recounting pagan mythology was not his goal. Preserving the poetic meter was. He had no interest whatsoever in making a reliable record of heathen beliefs. Why would he?
It's because his interest was academic, not religious. If all Snorri cared about was preserving the poetic meter, there wouldn't have been much point in writing Gylfaginning, which doesn't discuss poetic meter at all. That book in particular is nothing but explanations of myth done in a way that redirects readers back to the pagan poetic sources where the information is coming from.
The reasons why Snorri would want to faithfully recount pagan mythology become clearer when reading Skáldskaparmál. This book contains several explanations of "heiti" (names for things) which include different names and phrases used in skaldic poetry that refer to the gods, as well as different names and phrases referring to normal things that include mentions of pagan concepts. Again, had he only cared about meter, this would have been useless information. Consider, for example, the names provided for the sky in Skáldskaparmál 23 (Faulkes transl):
"How shall the sky be referred to? By calling it Ymir’s skull and hence giant’s skull and toil or burden of the dwarfs or helmet of Vestri and Austri, Sudri, Nordri, land of sun and moon and stars, constellations and winds, helmet or house of air and earth and sun. Arnor the earls’ poet said this: 'Never will as generous a young ruler step on to shield-plank [ship] — this prince’s magnificence was ample — under Ymir’s old skull.'"
Snorri very much cared about teaching poets how to understand skaldic poetry. Preserving meter is one thing, but in order to be able to appreciate and comprehend poems in this style, a person has to understand the mythological references in them. We can see this in the quote Snorri provides here from Arnórr Þórðarson jarlaskáld. The phrase "as generous a ruler ... under Ymir's old skull" does not make sense if one does not know the myth wherein the gods create the sky from Ymir's skull. All of these references Snorri provides are presumably found in poetry that was available to him. In this light it is quite easy to see why Snorri felt the need to recount myths in order to educate others on skaldic poetry.
Evidence for this continues to mount as we continue to read. From section 33:
"Why is gold called Ægir’s fire? The origin of it is this story: Ægir, as was told before, went as a guest to Asgard, and when he was about to return home, he invited Odin and all the Æsir to visit him after an interval of three months. ... And when the gods had taken their places, Ægir had glowing gold brought into the middle of the hall which illuminated and lit up the hall like fire, ..."
Snorri then goes on to paraphrase the same story that is found in the poem Lokasenna in the Poetic Edda, which he did not participate in creating, accurately. The point being, Snorri is explaining a skaldic kenning by way of telling the story that gave rise to the kenning. And even though he doesn't refer readers back to Lokasenna to check his accuracy in this instance, Lokasenna just so happens to have survived, allowing us to know that Snorri told the story accurately. His purpose in recounting myths is very clear in passages like this.
The thing is, whenever we _can_ check Snorri's accuracy against other sources (whether that's surviving poems or picture stones from across northern Europe) it turns out his information is good. Knowing that he did make a largely reliable record of heathen beliefs, it becomes pretty hard to claim that he had no interest whatsoever in making a reliable record of heathen beliefs. Whatever his motivation was is less important than the fact that the record exists.
Lots of thoughts.
1 I probably wouldn’t be here by for Neil Gaimen
2 Neil Gainen I get ya!
3 isn’t Hel - hole. If maybe some sort of prison in Helsinki?
4 has anyone come across as the Bok saga
5 maybe the prose has been lambasted because modern atheists look at old Christians in a bad light
6 which then leads me to say that were not earlier Christian’s more mystical than modern humans are and more connected to the pagan ways.
Finally, thank you!
1, 2) Haha Gaiman is not so bad. His book is ok for beginners but if you become more serious about studying Norse mythology you will need to be prepared to let go of a few of the ideas in his book.
3) Actually hel and hole do both derive from the same Proto-Indo-European root, specifically *kel- meaning “to cover or conceal”. But they are not exactly the same anymore by the time we get to the Germanic linguistic period. Hel comes from a sense of concealing the dead in the ground, but the word has taken on a religious underworld connotation in the Germanic language branches. Helsinki is different. It’s actually borrowed from Swedish Hälsing which derives from a word meaning “neck” and refers to a narrow body of water in this context.
4) If you’re referring to Bock Saga, no I haven’t read that. Modern mystical stuff isn’t really in my wheelhouse :)
5) Not just atheists, but there is a pretty common idea out there that Christianity was brutally forced upon the vikings (not true) and that all Christians ever wanted to do was ruin longstanding cultural ideas. Obviously Christianity was opposed to paganism, but the story is far more complex than people often make it out to be and people sometimes don’t realize that a medieval Christian could exist who was genuinely interested in pagan mythology for academic reasons.
6) To some degree yes. People don’t change their entire way of life overnight. Even today we have a Christ-centered holiday called Easter which is literally named after a pagan goddess, and which involves a bunch of rabbit and egg traditions that don’t come from Christianity. There was surely a lot more stuff like this in the times that immediately followed Christianization. There are examples of healing charms and things of that nature from the historical record that mention both Jesus and Odin. So for some, things were a lot less cut and dry.
Thank you again and I look forward to learning more. Lots to think about.
Ooooh it’s happened again... an essay about one of my favourite subject.. Norse myths, gods, and Snorri ... now I’m compelled to pick up my copy of the ‘Edda’ and Snorri’s ‘On the Norse gods’ again. He should indeed be honoured.
Thank you for a great essay