This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
My articles with sources have been censured. You have motivation I suppose, (I know that my Englih isn’t so good! I’m only a Viking) but there’s still a big problem to be impartial in Wiki ! When articles speak about Norse mythology we have only the Christians’ opinion! What's about Asatruar opinion? For us it isn’t mythology! Today Christians are quiet and honest and I respect them, but history claim and prove that Christians were like ayatollahs during thousand years! How can one thinks that they give us the truth on our Viking’s believes and pagan one?: All serious Historians agree with this(Boyer, Renaud, Mabire, Musset, Barthelemy…) Here my article: We have to remember that it's the Christian clerks whom wrote and translated sagas, written a few centuries after the Viking era! (Inspired by Vitae Latina and Bible) This legend adapted for the Scandinavian Pantheon is in fact the means of the servants of the Church, not the original version! Christians wanted making fall into the collective spirit from the pagan people, the image of honourable Freyja (in German or Frigg in Norse), one of the Goddesses most respected, the symbol of the Woman, the Mother of the hearth, the maternal love, the romantic love… by humiliating her in this myth where she looks like a “prostitute” and covetous woman! The most strange is that the great Odin her husband misled and dishonoured don’t avenged himself! It is the same intention for the most powerful God, Thor , the symbol of virility, ridiculous by a absurd disguise, and give a bad image which he represents: a honourable fighter rather than to using comedy. Also for Freyr who is supposed having incest relation with his sister! I think that you have to consider that those calumnies are insults for Asatruar believers. I propose that in each article we expose the opinion of non Christians. Thorgis 15:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
I was about to put a similar tag myself on the page, motivated in large part by the exclamation marks and incoherent sentences. As to "with sources", the reference to other wikipedia pages do not seem to qualify, imho. Note for example that although you equate Freyja and Frigg, the very Frigg article you quote discusses this and makes it questionable. Solonix 18:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Here my new article: Historians know (1) that a large majority of Norse Mythology have been wrote or translate by Christians few centuries after Viking period, they wanted to give a bad look for Norse Gods. Another point of view for Norse believers explains that Freyja is one of the Goddesses most respected. She was the symbol of the Woman, the Mother of the hearth, the maternal love, the romantic love… she can’t be a “prostitute” and covetous woman. Odin her husband can’t be dishonored without avenged himself. Same for the most powerful God, Thor , the symbol of virility, ridiculous by an absurd disguise , or for Freyr who is supposed having incest relation with his sister. sources: (1) "L'Islande Médiévale" Régis Boyer, Guide belle lettres des civilisations ISBN 2-251-41014-7 "Le Christ des barbares" Régis Boyer, les Editions du cerf 1987 ISBN 2-204-02766-9 Thorgis 14:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
As the article now stands it is fairly informative, NPOV, and coherent, and there are far worse articles out there in need of cleanup. I suggest that we remove the cleanup tag shortly unless there are cogent reasons for retaining them. If so, it would be helpful to have them outlined. Sjc 06:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Removed tag. No one has bothered to respond and I see no logical reason why this should remain tagged. Sjc 06:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
While I'm all for attacking the actions of people who claimed to be acting in the name of Christianity or the Christian god, Wikipedia is meant to keep a neutral point of view, and to allow readers to draw their own conclusions based on demonstrable facts. I don't believe that we need to say that Christian sources were biased if we can show that they euhemerized or otherwise altered the deities of other cultures in their accounts. Lucky number 49 14:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
This Haukurth, who claims to be an Icelander, tried to remove the following:
I guess Haukurth has his motives to try to hide those facts? So state your reasons. Or I guess you are proud that your ancestors are the only people on earth who worshiped a "hooker"? Let's see what Greek do to their Athena? Virgin goddess with virgin birth. Freyja? Hooker (according to 2 christian priests) who receives half of the slain heroes... oh... Frigg? Oh... another prostitute (hooked up with a servant, according to an archbishop's follower). We have the Olympic games, most things invented by Greeks... what did Norsemen invent? Axe? I heard the never bath (read in the Viking article). What do I think when I read the story about the "hooker goddess"? No, I don't laugh at the goddess. She never lived, she is what people "write" her to be. So I laughed at the people who created the story of "hooker goddess". I think they are human trashes, savages, etc.
The funny thing is that these people left this article like s--- and never cared about it, but when others trying to improve it, they start to show up and revert. 123.19.62.190 ( talk) 16:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Flateyjarbók was mostly written in the 14th century as, indeed, our own article explains. Haukur ( talk) 09:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, user 123.19.62.190... shouldn't you be on Conservapedia instead of messing with Wikipedia? I don't know if you've noticed, but we don't insult christians or Jews here, so neither do we insult Pagans. So, as the average WikiUser, I would like you to sod off and die. -- Midasminus ( talk) 15:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
As per user:Haukurth's edit summary [1], I doubt that Sörla þattr can be considered to have been written in conjunction with the compilation of Flateyjarbok. The Flateyjarbok is a collection of manuscripts in which the stories, as far as I know, can be considerably older than the collection itself.-- Berig ( talk) 20:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Don't pretend like you don't know how to read. Or do you just revert and call admins who knows nothing about the subject to block.
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Brisingamen&diff=199673566&oldid=199672396
What's your reasons for reverting that? I wrote: "Sörla þattr" is a story in the Flateyjarbok, which was written in 15th century. It's a fact.
And where's your source that Sörla þattr was not written by the priests who write the sagas of Olaf Tryggvason?
I have been helping improve Norse articles for almost a year, and this is what I got? Attacking me because I use IPs? 123.19.43.70 ( talk) 21:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I wrote FACTS:
What's your reasons for reverting? Where's your reference that Sörla þattr existed outside/before Flateyjarbok?
I have been helping improve Norse articles for almost a year, and this is what I got? Attacking me because I use IPs? 123.19.43.70 ( talk) 21:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I repeat: I wrote FACTS:
What's your reasons for denying that Sörla þattr is in Flateyjarbok and Flateyjarbok is written by 2 Christian Priests in 15th century? Answer it.
I have been helping improve Norse articles for almost a year, and this is what I got? Attacking me because I use IPs? The guy Harkuth never tried to improve this article, but when I do, he popped up and say " Jacob Grimm is obsolete" and things like that. He can say that? Who is he? He started the edit war, and I was blocked because "edit warrings"? 123.19.43.70 ( talk) 21:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Answer it. You people started the edit war, then I was blocked because I am an IP. Then this page is locked sothat I can't edit, and you people can revert facts without any reasons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.19.45.128 ( talk) 21:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
123..., if you have " written Norse Myth articles here for years", why don't you use your account and participate in constructive debate. If you are just here to revert-war and post annoyed rants, we'll need to semi-protect the articles concerned. If you are a veteran editor as you claim, you should know how this works. Of course Berig and Haukurth need to cite their sources like everyone else. But Wikipedia also works based on editors' reputations. Both Berig and Haukur are very well known as experts on Norse mythology. If the two of them agree on a point, it is very likely alright and they should be given leeway to work it out in context. Unfortunately, anonymous editors have no reputation to work with and need to give justification for every one of their edits. dab (𒁳) 08:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Flateyjarbók was mostly written in the 14th century as, indeed, our own article explains. Haukur ( talk) 09:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Alright, Sörla thattr is obviously christianized, just like Beowulf, by the way. However, no source has been given for the claim that the story was created during the compilation of Flateyjarbok. I have seen scholars refer to Freyja's involvement as an authentic pagan story and so I will require the anon to provide a real source for his claim. There were also some non-encyclopedic words, such as "great", etc, and the claim that Odin was not part of Hjaðningavíg is highly dubious and will need sourcing since both Skáldskaparmál and the AS poem Deor mention a name for Odin: Heorenda/Hjarrandi.-- Berig ( talk) 07:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I wonder why Sörla þattr is in this "Brisingamen" article anyway. Sörla þattr does not have the word "Brisingamen". The necklace in Sörla þattr is a golden necklace, not "Brisingamen". Like Berig wrote, some scholars think the "silver pendant" is "Brisingamen". Then Brisingamen is made of silver, not gold. shrug. 123.19.52.89 ( talk) 15:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. I don't think you and Wikipedia agree with one another. I suggest you try blogspot. By the way, the very page 123 links to shows a much better understanding of the issue than he has:
The implication is that pagan sexual uninhibitedness has been superseded and demonized by Christian sexual morale. I find it mildly amusing to have somebody apparently dedicated to "defending paganism" applying this very Puritan Christian morale ("shameless hooker") unquestioningly. What's this, Calvinist Ásatrú? That said, I think 123 has been fed enough now. We should drop this topic pending the citation of anything quotable. If necessary, we can semi-protect the affected articles. dab (𒁳) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
So far Haukur admitted: Flateyjarbók was mostly written in the 14th century as, indeed, our own article explains. ( talk) 09:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC) And Berig admitted: Alright, Sörla thattr is obviously christianized. ( talk) 07:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC) And User:Dbachmann does not know anything, obviously. 123.19.39.107 ( talk) 17:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[5] <-- This article before: cite zero source. Which original pagan writings stated that When she wore it no man or god could withstand her charms, which was obviously a matter of great concern to the other goddesses during springtime when she reputedly wore it. The necklace also gave support to any army which she favoured on the battlefield. ??
Which original pagan writings stated that It was reputedly forged by four dwarves, and, in order to obtain it, she was obliged to spend a night with each of them in turn. Alternatively, King Alberich gave it to her. ?? There is no original text (christian or not) which states that Freyja hooked with dwarves for Brisingamen. I dare you to give me the mythological writing which states that.
Brísingamen also appears in a second euhemerized version in Sörla þáttr? Also? Second version? Excuse me. Where's the 1st version? Where's the original version?? They wrote as if there was a real pagan story which stated that the pagan goddess is a hooker, and Sörla þáttr only borrowed that. Wrong informations.
Why did you hide the rest like when Odin say: "Christened men" and Olaf Tryggvason? So that people won't find out that it's a christian story?
[6] <-- But when I improve this article, they started to put so much care into "where's your claim", "where's your source". Haha
Harkurth is incredible. When I wrote something and cited Jacob Grimm, he deleted it, saying "Grimm is obsolete". When I deleted some uncited information which bashed Victor Rydberg, Harkurth restored it, saying "It cites no source, but it's gererally accurate so I won't remove it". Who is this guy who is bigger than Swedish and German scholars? 123.19.52.89 ( talk) 17:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I saw the section stating the Nauglamír was the mythological equivalent to the Brísingamen which isn’t proven at all. The only similarities between the Brísingamen and the Nauglamír is that they are both beautiful dwarf-forged necklaces. That’s it.
Furthermore the rest of the paragraph made multiple errors, including one that stated Túrin Turambar was the one who brought the Nauglamír to Thingol, even though by that point in the timeline he was already dead, and the Nauglamír was really given by his father, Húrin Thalion. As far as I know, it is also not stated that Thingol wanted to remake it for his wife, Melian. In an earlier version, it is Thingol himself who wears the Nauglamír (named the Nauglafring) and this causes his downfall, but in the published Silmarillion the Nauglamír with the Silmaril set in it was worn later by his daughter, Lúthien Tinúviel.
I’m just a humble Tolkien nerd who noticed some errors and made an account to edit it! :)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
My articles with sources have been censured. You have motivation I suppose, (I know that my Englih isn’t so good! I’m only a Viking) but there’s still a big problem to be impartial in Wiki ! When articles speak about Norse mythology we have only the Christians’ opinion! What's about Asatruar opinion? For us it isn’t mythology! Today Christians are quiet and honest and I respect them, but history claim and prove that Christians were like ayatollahs during thousand years! How can one thinks that they give us the truth on our Viking’s believes and pagan one?: All serious Historians agree with this(Boyer, Renaud, Mabire, Musset, Barthelemy…) Here my article: We have to remember that it's the Christian clerks whom wrote and translated sagas, written a few centuries after the Viking era! (Inspired by Vitae Latina and Bible) This legend adapted for the Scandinavian Pantheon is in fact the means of the servants of the Church, not the original version! Christians wanted making fall into the collective spirit from the pagan people, the image of honourable Freyja (in German or Frigg in Norse), one of the Goddesses most respected, the symbol of the Woman, the Mother of the hearth, the maternal love, the romantic love… by humiliating her in this myth where she looks like a “prostitute” and covetous woman! The most strange is that the great Odin her husband misled and dishonoured don’t avenged himself! It is the same intention for the most powerful God, Thor , the symbol of virility, ridiculous by a absurd disguise, and give a bad image which he represents: a honourable fighter rather than to using comedy. Also for Freyr who is supposed having incest relation with his sister! I think that you have to consider that those calumnies are insults for Asatruar believers. I propose that in each article we expose the opinion of non Christians. Thorgis 15:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
I was about to put a similar tag myself on the page, motivated in large part by the exclamation marks and incoherent sentences. As to "with sources", the reference to other wikipedia pages do not seem to qualify, imho. Note for example that although you equate Freyja and Frigg, the very Frigg article you quote discusses this and makes it questionable. Solonix 18:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Here my new article: Historians know (1) that a large majority of Norse Mythology have been wrote or translate by Christians few centuries after Viking period, they wanted to give a bad look for Norse Gods. Another point of view for Norse believers explains that Freyja is one of the Goddesses most respected. She was the symbol of the Woman, the Mother of the hearth, the maternal love, the romantic love… she can’t be a “prostitute” and covetous woman. Odin her husband can’t be dishonored without avenged himself. Same for the most powerful God, Thor , the symbol of virility, ridiculous by an absurd disguise , or for Freyr who is supposed having incest relation with his sister. sources: (1) "L'Islande Médiévale" Régis Boyer, Guide belle lettres des civilisations ISBN 2-251-41014-7 "Le Christ des barbares" Régis Boyer, les Editions du cerf 1987 ISBN 2-204-02766-9 Thorgis 14:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
As the article now stands it is fairly informative, NPOV, and coherent, and there are far worse articles out there in need of cleanup. I suggest that we remove the cleanup tag shortly unless there are cogent reasons for retaining them. If so, it would be helpful to have them outlined. Sjc 06:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Removed tag. No one has bothered to respond and I see no logical reason why this should remain tagged. Sjc 06:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
While I'm all for attacking the actions of people who claimed to be acting in the name of Christianity or the Christian god, Wikipedia is meant to keep a neutral point of view, and to allow readers to draw their own conclusions based on demonstrable facts. I don't believe that we need to say that Christian sources were biased if we can show that they euhemerized or otherwise altered the deities of other cultures in their accounts. Lucky number 49 14:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
This Haukurth, who claims to be an Icelander, tried to remove the following:
I guess Haukurth has his motives to try to hide those facts? So state your reasons. Or I guess you are proud that your ancestors are the only people on earth who worshiped a "hooker"? Let's see what Greek do to their Athena? Virgin goddess with virgin birth. Freyja? Hooker (according to 2 christian priests) who receives half of the slain heroes... oh... Frigg? Oh... another prostitute (hooked up with a servant, according to an archbishop's follower). We have the Olympic games, most things invented by Greeks... what did Norsemen invent? Axe? I heard the never bath (read in the Viking article). What do I think when I read the story about the "hooker goddess"? No, I don't laugh at the goddess. She never lived, she is what people "write" her to be. So I laughed at the people who created the story of "hooker goddess". I think they are human trashes, savages, etc.
The funny thing is that these people left this article like s--- and never cared about it, but when others trying to improve it, they start to show up and revert. 123.19.62.190 ( talk) 16:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Flateyjarbók was mostly written in the 14th century as, indeed, our own article explains. Haukur ( talk) 09:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, user 123.19.62.190... shouldn't you be on Conservapedia instead of messing with Wikipedia? I don't know if you've noticed, but we don't insult christians or Jews here, so neither do we insult Pagans. So, as the average WikiUser, I would like you to sod off and die. -- Midasminus ( talk) 15:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
As per user:Haukurth's edit summary [1], I doubt that Sörla þattr can be considered to have been written in conjunction with the compilation of Flateyjarbok. The Flateyjarbok is a collection of manuscripts in which the stories, as far as I know, can be considerably older than the collection itself.-- Berig ( talk) 20:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Don't pretend like you don't know how to read. Or do you just revert and call admins who knows nothing about the subject to block.
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Brisingamen&diff=199673566&oldid=199672396
What's your reasons for reverting that? I wrote: "Sörla þattr" is a story in the Flateyjarbok, which was written in 15th century. It's a fact.
And where's your source that Sörla þattr was not written by the priests who write the sagas of Olaf Tryggvason?
I have been helping improve Norse articles for almost a year, and this is what I got? Attacking me because I use IPs? 123.19.43.70 ( talk) 21:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I wrote FACTS:
What's your reasons for reverting? Where's your reference that Sörla þattr existed outside/before Flateyjarbok?
I have been helping improve Norse articles for almost a year, and this is what I got? Attacking me because I use IPs? 123.19.43.70 ( talk) 21:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I repeat: I wrote FACTS:
What's your reasons for denying that Sörla þattr is in Flateyjarbok and Flateyjarbok is written by 2 Christian Priests in 15th century? Answer it.
I have been helping improve Norse articles for almost a year, and this is what I got? Attacking me because I use IPs? The guy Harkuth never tried to improve this article, but when I do, he popped up and say " Jacob Grimm is obsolete" and things like that. He can say that? Who is he? He started the edit war, and I was blocked because "edit warrings"? 123.19.43.70 ( talk) 21:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Answer it. You people started the edit war, then I was blocked because I am an IP. Then this page is locked sothat I can't edit, and you people can revert facts without any reasons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.19.45.128 ( talk) 21:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
123..., if you have " written Norse Myth articles here for years", why don't you use your account and participate in constructive debate. If you are just here to revert-war and post annoyed rants, we'll need to semi-protect the articles concerned. If you are a veteran editor as you claim, you should know how this works. Of course Berig and Haukurth need to cite their sources like everyone else. But Wikipedia also works based on editors' reputations. Both Berig and Haukur are very well known as experts on Norse mythology. If the two of them agree on a point, it is very likely alright and they should be given leeway to work it out in context. Unfortunately, anonymous editors have no reputation to work with and need to give justification for every one of their edits. dab (𒁳) 08:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Flateyjarbók was mostly written in the 14th century as, indeed, our own article explains. Haukur ( talk) 09:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Alright, Sörla thattr is obviously christianized, just like Beowulf, by the way. However, no source has been given for the claim that the story was created during the compilation of Flateyjarbok. I have seen scholars refer to Freyja's involvement as an authentic pagan story and so I will require the anon to provide a real source for his claim. There were also some non-encyclopedic words, such as "great", etc, and the claim that Odin was not part of Hjaðningavíg is highly dubious and will need sourcing since both Skáldskaparmál and the AS poem Deor mention a name for Odin: Heorenda/Hjarrandi.-- Berig ( talk) 07:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I wonder why Sörla þattr is in this "Brisingamen" article anyway. Sörla þattr does not have the word "Brisingamen". The necklace in Sörla þattr is a golden necklace, not "Brisingamen". Like Berig wrote, some scholars think the "silver pendant" is "Brisingamen". Then Brisingamen is made of silver, not gold. shrug. 123.19.52.89 ( talk) 15:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. I don't think you and Wikipedia agree with one another. I suggest you try blogspot. By the way, the very page 123 links to shows a much better understanding of the issue than he has:
The implication is that pagan sexual uninhibitedness has been superseded and demonized by Christian sexual morale. I find it mildly amusing to have somebody apparently dedicated to "defending paganism" applying this very Puritan Christian morale ("shameless hooker") unquestioningly. What's this, Calvinist Ásatrú? That said, I think 123 has been fed enough now. We should drop this topic pending the citation of anything quotable. If necessary, we can semi-protect the affected articles. dab (𒁳) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
So far Haukur admitted: Flateyjarbók was mostly written in the 14th century as, indeed, our own article explains. ( talk) 09:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC) And Berig admitted: Alright, Sörla thattr is obviously christianized. ( talk) 07:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC) And User:Dbachmann does not know anything, obviously. 123.19.39.107 ( talk) 17:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[5] <-- This article before: cite zero source. Which original pagan writings stated that When she wore it no man or god could withstand her charms, which was obviously a matter of great concern to the other goddesses during springtime when she reputedly wore it. The necklace also gave support to any army which she favoured on the battlefield. ??
Which original pagan writings stated that It was reputedly forged by four dwarves, and, in order to obtain it, she was obliged to spend a night with each of them in turn. Alternatively, King Alberich gave it to her. ?? There is no original text (christian or not) which states that Freyja hooked with dwarves for Brisingamen. I dare you to give me the mythological writing which states that.
Brísingamen also appears in a second euhemerized version in Sörla þáttr? Also? Second version? Excuse me. Where's the 1st version? Where's the original version?? They wrote as if there was a real pagan story which stated that the pagan goddess is a hooker, and Sörla þáttr only borrowed that. Wrong informations.
Why did you hide the rest like when Odin say: "Christened men" and Olaf Tryggvason? So that people won't find out that it's a christian story?
[6] <-- But when I improve this article, they started to put so much care into "where's your claim", "where's your source". Haha
Harkurth is incredible. When I wrote something and cited Jacob Grimm, he deleted it, saying "Grimm is obsolete". When I deleted some uncited information which bashed Victor Rydberg, Harkurth restored it, saying "It cites no source, but it's gererally accurate so I won't remove it". Who is this guy who is bigger than Swedish and German scholars? 123.19.52.89 ( talk) 17:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I saw the section stating the Nauglamír was the mythological equivalent to the Brísingamen which isn’t proven at all. The only similarities between the Brísingamen and the Nauglamír is that they are both beautiful dwarf-forged necklaces. That’s it.
Furthermore the rest of the paragraph made multiple errors, including one that stated Túrin Turambar was the one who brought the Nauglamír to Thingol, even though by that point in the timeline he was already dead, and the Nauglamír was really given by his father, Húrin Thalion. As far as I know, it is also not stated that Thingol wanted to remake it for his wife, Melian. In an earlier version, it is Thingol himself who wears the Nauglamír (named the Nauglafring) and this causes his downfall, but in the published Silmarillion the Nauglamír with the Silmaril set in it was worn later by his daughter, Lúthien Tinúviel.
I’m just a humble Tolkien nerd who noticed some errors and made an account to edit it! :)