The name 'Valhalla' is said to mean the 'Hall of the Slain', i.e. those slain in battle, as the spelling suggests. However, as I have mentioned on a recent Telegram post the most famous Viking of them all, Ragnar Lodbrok, was not slain in battle. Yes, he was 'slain' but not in actual combat, he was thrown into a snake-pit to die. This applies to another famous Germanic Hero, Siegfried, who was murdered, having a spear plunged into his back by Hagen. Neither Egil Skallagrimsson nor Starkad died in actual combat in a battle. Beowulf dies in old age through wounds in fighting the Dragon - again, not in actual battle. We thus cannot say that only those that died in battle can enter Valhalla; we can say that those slain by violence can enter Valhalla - but there is a difference.
Let us look at the roots of the name 'Valhalla' which is said to stem from -
IE Root *kel- meaning 'to cover'/'to conceal'/'to hide' which gives rise to our 'hall' and to 'Hel'.
IE Root *wela- meaning 'to strike'/'to wound'.
So far so good; here we see that those who die by violence seem to be the ones referred to. Is it logical to think that anyone who dies by being beaten to death will gain a place in Valhalla? This is no more logical than to think that anyone who dies in any battle will gain a place with the Gods. Of course, the above Info-European Roots are just some of the ones, those chosen to be the meaning of the word 'Valhalla'. Let us look back some 100 years in etymology to the older Aryan Roots/Germanic Roots -
Aryan Root *wal-/*war- meaning 'to cover', 'to surround', 'protect', 'guard', 'to be wary', 'to see', 'to observe'.
Aryan Root *wal-/*war- meaning 'to speak', 'to inform'.
Aryan Root *wal-/*war- meaning 'to choose', 'to like', 'to will', 'to believe'.
Aryan Root *wal-/*war- meaning 'to wind', 'to roll', thus 'to well up, as a spring'.
Aryan Root *wal-/*war- meaning 'to drag', 'to pluck', 'to tear', 'to wound'.
Aryan Root *wal-/*war- meaning 'to be warm', 'to be hot', 'to boil'.
Aryan Root
Aryan Root *kar-/*kal- meaning 'to move', 'to speed', 'to run'.
Aryan Root *kar- / Germ Root *hal- meaning 'to project', 'to stand up'.
Aryan Root *kal- /Germ Root *hal- meaning 'to cover'
(Skeat's 'Concise Etymological Dictionary of the English Language' - 1894)
Of course, back in 1894 there was no stigma nor fear of using the term 'Aryan' which merely changed to 'Indo-European' or 'Indo-Germanic' because of its use in Germany and the Volkisch Movement. Now let us look at the word 'Valkyrie' -
IE Root *wela- meaning 'to strike'. 'to wound'.
IE Root *geus- meaning 'to choose'. (Ger. Root *keusun).
'Choosers of the Slain' seems to be the meaning here, just as 'Hall of the Slain' applies to Valhalla. But again, the term 'slain' does not necessarily infer a death in battle, and we know that some of the finest heroes did not die in actual combat in battle. This concept, in any case, is from the Viking Age, and as far as I know it was not recorded in other Germanic Lore. One of the most-recorded concepts of a glorious death in battle was that the Germanic Warrior would not allow his chief, ruler or king to fall in battle without being protected to the death.
Let us now turn to other ideas on death and the after-life, especially in regard to death in battle. Firstly, the Judaeo-Christian concept of death was that those who believed went to 'Heaven' and the unbelievers went to 'Hell', the latter being taken from the Germanic 'Hel'. This, of course, was there as a means of control over people. But this was not the only Christian concept in regard to death, and during the Crusades we find a totally different concept arise, that of a death in battle where the warrior achieves his place in Heaven. This concept was also held by the opposing Muslims, whose place in Heaven was ensured by dying for their cause. But this concept has a difference, and was not in 'war' as such, but in a 'Holy War'. Here they fight for 'God' or 'Allah' and not just any old fight or battle - noting that this is the reason given by their leaders for this. This was an incentive to die in battle for their cause.
But the Vikings were not fighting a 'crusade' - or were they? There are many reasons, we are told, as to why the Vikings swarmed out of the Northlands to attack now lands, and to conquer new lands. Since we find that the Judaeo-Christian Religion was at this very time extending its hold in Europe by starting to wage war into the Northlands - starting with the Frisians. After a defeat at the hands of Redbad, King of Frisia, the Christian Franks were pushed back; after his death, due to the 'slaying' of two Christian Priests by the Frisians, the Franks returned and conquered Frisia. (*) At this time the Danes were busy building defences of their own - not for nothing do nations do this, but for self-defence. Clearly there was a growing danger of the Franks - extending the Judaeo-Christian yoke - attacking the lands in the North.
(*) Here we can see a typical move that has been used time and time again in history, and is one of the modern-day methods of justifying an act of war - Iraq and Afghanistan come to mind here. The one you wish to wage war against is accused of a slaying which is arranged/committed by the aggressor.
We can see the same type of scenario, but in a different circumstances, in the invasion of the English Tribes under Hengest and Horsa - as with the Vikings, the first act against the Romano-Britons was the sacking of the churches (we find this in Welsh Lore). This is clear when considering the section of Beowulf where Hengest is given the Battle-Flame - the 'Hun-Bequest', the Sword of AEtla the Hun. AEtla was the 'Scourge of God' and almost smashed into Rome itself - the seat of the Judaeo-Christian Empire. This forms part of the work of Nikolai Tolstoy in The coming of the King but he does not state where he got this from in Beowulf. The Beowulf text shows that Hengest was the 'Geist of Ing', was an Avatar of Ingwe as the 'World-Ravager' - AEtla.
We have to be slightly wary here because Tolstoy translates Norse names into Old English names, and in doing so it could be inferred that the English Tribes held the same views - which is something that we do not know for sure since much of our own English Lore was lost to us long ago. In our own Wodenic Lore this is a Holy War since it is part of the Eternal Battle between the White Dragon and the Red Dragon (Gods and Dark Joten). When this eventually comes to the Last Battle or Final Conflict those who take part would do so in a Holy War led by a Divine Leader, and thus earn a place in Valhalla. But what about all those who have been involved in the struggle for years or decades but may not see this?
In regard to the various different meanings of the same root-words, Sri Aurobindo tells us in The Secret of the Vedas that in the most ancient times, when the Sacred Vedas were 'found', they were 'found' by the Rishis (Wise Men) through the ability to achieve a Higher State of Consciousness, to 'See'. They were first unrecorded in writing, like the Germanic Tribes they passed them on through memory, a much harder thing to do. The root-words they used had a varied number of different meanings, though they had the same roots; today the etymologists, as we can see in the above, split these meanings up as if they were different from each other.
The English equivalent to the Valkyries seems to be the Waelcyrge, since the names are clearly the same; however, the Waelcyrge are more like the Norns, though in older times, it seems, the Valkyries were also Spinners of Wyrd - Wyrd in Battle. We see a similar thing in Greek Mythology with the Erinyes who were originally the Furies who were concerned with vengeance. The black-clad Furies gave way to the red-clad Erinyes; that the Furies were associated with black links to the Valkyries/Waelcyrge who were associated with the Raven - Bird of the Battlefield. The ancients obviously linked the Raven/Crow with the battlefield because they lived in very warlike times; but today the Raven/Crow still picks the flesh from the dead, but more often picking from animals killed by cars. This is symbolism, and should be seen as such, and not necessarily taken literally.
I have mentioned before how the Guardian Goddess of England was most likely the origin of the figure of 'Britannia', and that the Guardian Goddess of the English was a 'Witch-Woman' riding upon a Wolf who intervened in the battle when the Northmen came over under Harald Hardrada. In regard to these obvious Battle-Goddesses and the concept of the Furies these are perhaps more important ideas that need looking into in regard to our own struggle in our own times. The figure of Morgana appears to have developed from the Irish Morrigan who were similar to what has been said here. As well as the concept of Valhalla, we should remember that half of the 'slain' go to Freya in Folkvang. This has been pushed aside, no doubt by Judaeo-Christian thinking.
Here I will recall a vivid dream that I had over 25 years ago before we moved down to Sussex from North Wales. I had bought a small caravan to use to go round the area looking for somewhere to live, and parked up for a night at Shoreham-by-Sea between Worthing and Brighton. There I had the most vivid dream about Freya, but this showed the Goddess of Light in two totally different aspects. A great cloud appeared in the skies, shaped as a Cat, but as I watched the cloud it changed to that of a Wolf; the latter was associated with death! This is a summary, but the meaning seems to have been associated with the change in the season (and role of Freya) since this took place on the Summer Sunstead - June 21st. This is the change-point from the Light (Cat) to the Dark (Wolf), the time when the Light of the Sun is waning. It seems from this that the Battle-Goddess Freya is thus symbolised by the Wolf in this role. Indeed, this also links to the 'Witch-Woman' riding the Wolf in the dream of one of Harald Hardrada's warriors before the Battle of Stamford Bridge. Like the Valkyries, Waelcyrge, Furies and Morrigan these appear in their Dark Forms.
(To be continued........)
No comments:
Post a Comment