liindwyrm - Tumblr blog

[liindwyrm]

Some more pride-flag valknuts: nonbinary, genderqueer, and disability pride.

I should have mentioned this with my other post, but please feel free to use any that resonate with you.

[liindwyrm]

Ingwaz

[liindwyrm]

I love seeing people’s passion for their deities

I love seeing people’s eyes light up when their deities come up in conversation

I LOVE SEEING PEOPLE LOVING THEIR DEITIES 💞

[liindwyrm]

Mannaz

[liindwyrm]

Hi there! I was wondering, would you know where I could find anything on like, social taboos involving marriage? I wanted to know if there's anything in the sagas or maybe in archaeology/anthropology that touches on forbidden unions. I know the goddess Lofn is cited as one who grants permission to such people to be together, but I wanted to know if we have anything on what these forbidden unions could look like? Off the top of my head, I imagine feuding families to be a good start, but I can't find much else on the subject. Thank you!

Marriages in Old Norse society were arranged by families (usually between the prospective husband and the father or other male relative of the prospective bride), and more for political and economic reasons than for personal ones. Some people were married specifically because their families were feuding, to bring the feud to an end (often the people involved wanted out but failure to retaliate could have consequences; uniting the families could end the feud in a way that saved face. In Old English a woman who is married into an enemy family for this reason is called freoðu-webbe, 'frith weaver'). Frands Herschend went as far as proposing to see women in Iron Age Scandinavia generally as hostages (in the sense that Freyr and Njörðr are hostages in Ynglinga saga). If the sagas are relatively accurate there does seem to have been an understanding that the family should be arranging things such that the woman is happy with the result, but they weren't legally obligated to.

In this kind of situation, a marriage that's forbidden would be basically any that either side of the family, especially the woman's closest male relatives, opposes. The reasons were probably diverse and personal, and not generally based on widespread taboos. Most of it probably had to do with money and social hierarchy.

Feuding certainly played a role here, or rather we should say relations based in reciprocity, whether positive or negative, did. As I said, marriages were sometimes arranged specifically to bring hostile families into a single family and end the conflict, but if one side thought they had the upper hand and stood to gain by continuing the hostilities then they would surely not permit such a marriage. Marriages might also be arranged out of obligation to more powerful people.

In fact, it might be possible to frame any actual social or legal prohibitions on marriage that did exist as protections for the woman from being married off to someone she didn't want, rather than restrictions on her freedom, because she hardly had any. We can surely consider divorce in a similar way, which was permitted in certain circumstances.

The main restriction that we do have evidence for is marrying someone who is too close a relation. There were probably situations where the financially or politically advantageous thing to do is to get two close cousins married to each other and it may have actually happened, but it's illegal in the laws we have a record of. This may have been less regulated in heathen times.

Of course, there could have been culturally-assumed restrictions that weren't formally prohibited in the law. There's speculation that, while a Nordic man marrying a non-Norse woman was not uncommon, happening the other way around was not generally permitted. This is supposedly reflected in the mythology, where the male gods marry jötunn women but the goddesses do not marry jötunn men. However, there is archaeological evidence from the Vendel period that contradicts this (the book I'm getting this from is over 20 years old, so by now there could be contradictory evidence from the Viking age too, but I'm not sure), so if there was ever such an ethnic taboo it must have either not been universal, or developed later. I'll also remind that there is a contradiction in the mythology as well; Gefjun isn't described as marrying a jötunn but she does have kids with one, which scholars do typically count as a violation of an ethnic taboo, sometimes as grounds to reject the myth itself as "impossible" (Lindow's description).

A lot of this may have varied by class. We mostly know about the land-owning class. It's hard to say whether poorer people would have even less freedom over whom they married because of their dependence on land-owners, or if they had more freedom because there was less social and financial stake in it. It seems likely that their marriages weren't as regulated, but their ability to actually move from place to place was the major limiting factor.

I'm not aware of any sources for it, but I have no trouble believing that illegal or otherwise unsanctioned marriage happened. The thing that kept people in line was inheritance. So if people were in a position where they could turn down their inheritance (whether because they had another source of resources or because their families were so poor their inheritance was negligible anyway), and could have a place to live, they could probably just do what they wanted.

So I think for the most part, if we were to picture Lofn's intercession as historical events, we might picture the site of those intercessions as kind of distant from the actual marriage, like opening opportunities to get by while forgoing one's inheritance, or unexpected changes elsewhere in the social network. Or a simpler example would be a woman successfully convincing her father, brother, or other male representative to let her do what she wanted.

This is a little out of step with Snorri's etymological explanation of Lofn's name as related to 'permission' but as I explained here I think the actual etymological meaning of her name was 'hope'.

Of course a lot of heathens read Lofn's description in the Edda as affirming of marriages that deviate from gender and sexual norms, which the text does in fact leave room for but probably isn't what Snorri had in mind. There's a lot of room for speculation about how this may have been relevant in pre-Christian times but it would be difficult to move it beyond speculation.

Unfortunately quite a lot of this is already pretty speculative, because of how much later our sources concerning marriage are than the time when Lofn may have actually been recognized. Frankly, the same applies to our sources for Lofn, and the time when she may have been recognized. If I'm right about the etymology of her name then I think it's at least a partial vindication of Snorri but that does not necessarily mean that his description of her is entirely reliable.

[liindwyrm]

hello there! today i came across a claim that sort of baffled me. someone said that they believed the historical norse heathens viewed their own myths literally. i was under the impression that the vast majority of sources we have are christian sources, so it seems pretty hard to back that up. is there any actual basis for this claim? thanks in advance for your time!

Sorry for the delay, I've been real busy lately and haven't been home much. Even after making you wait I'm still going to give a copout answer.

I think the most basic actual answer is that it's doubtful that someone has a strong basis to make that claim, and the same would probably go for someone claiming they didn't take things literally. I think we just don't know, and most likely, it was mixed-up bits of both literal and non-literal belief, and which parts were literal and which parts weren't varied from person to person. We have no reason so suppose that there was any compulsion to believe things in any particular way.

About Christians being the interlocutors of a lot of mythology, this is really a whole separate question. On one hand there's the question of whether they took their myths literally, and on the other is entirely different question about whether or not we can know what those myths were. Source criticism in Norse mythology is a pretty complicated topic but the academic consensus is definitely that there are things we can know for sure about Norse myth, and a lot more that we can make arguments for. For instance the myth of Thor fishing for Miðgarðsormr is attested many times, not only by Snorri but by pagan skálds and in art. Myths of the Pagan North by Christopher Abram is a good work about source criticism in Norse mythology.

Though this raises another point, because the myth of Thor fishing is not always the same. Just like how we have a myth of Thor's hammer being made by dwarves, and a reference to a different myth where it came out of the sea. Most likely, medieval Norse people were encountering contradictory information in different performances of myth all the time. So while that leaves room for at least some literal belief, it couldn't be a rigid, all-encompassing systematic treatment of all myth as literal. We have good reason to believe they changed myths on purpose and that it wasn't just memory errors.

I know you're really asking whether this one person has any grounds for their statement, and I've already answered that I don't think they do. But this is an interesting thought so I'm going to keep poking at it. I'm not sure that I'm really prepared to discuss this properly, but my feeling is that this is somehow the wrong question. I don't know how to explain this with reference to myth, so I'm going to make a digression, and hope that you get the vibe of what I'm getting at by analogy. Edward Burnett Tylor (1832–1917) described animism in terms of beliefs, "belief in spiritual beings," i.e. a belief that everything (or at least many things) has a soul or spirit. But this is entirely contradicted by later anthropology. Here's an except from Pantheologies by Mary Jane Rubenstein, p. 93:

their animacy is not a matter of belief but rather of relation; to affirm that this tree, that river, or the-bear-looking-at-me is a person is to affirm its capacity to interact with me—and mine with it. As Tim Ingold phrases the matter, “we are dealing here not with a way of believing about the world, but with a condition of living in it.”

In other words, "belief" doesn't even really play into it, whether or not you "believe" in the bear staring you down is nonsensical, and if you can be in relation with a tree then the same goes for that relationality; "believing" in it is totally irrelevant or at least secondary. Myths are of course very different and we can't do a direct comparison here, but I have a feeling that the discussion of literal versus nonliteral would be just as secondary to whatever kind of value the myths had.

One last thing I want to point out is that they obviously had the capacity to interpret things through allegory and metaphor because they did that frequently. This is most obvious in dream interpretations in the sagas. Those dreams usually convey true, prophetic information, but it has to be interpreted by wise people who are skilled at symbolic interpretation. I they ever did this with myths, I'm not aware of any trace they left of that, but we can at least be sure that there was nothing about the medieval Norse mind that confined it to literalism.

For multiple reasons this is not an actual answer but it's basically obligatory to mention that some sagas, especially legendary or chivalric sagas, were referred to in Old Norse as lygisögur, literally 'lie-sagas' (though not pejoratively and probably best translated just as 'fictional sagas'). We know this mostly because Sverrir Sigurðsson was a big fan of lygisögur. But this comes from way too late a date to be useful for your question.

[liindwyrm]

genderwyrd - a gender or gender expression related to seið, Heathen animist religious practice, and the concept of wyrd. exclusive to people practicing (inclusive) Heathenry.

includes wyrdfluid- a fluid gender in which one's sense of gender feels different when doing trance work. subset of genderfluid.

can include wyrdflux, wyrdman, wyrdwoman, etc.

what the colors mean: red for fire pink for inclusion and affirmation of LGBTQIA identity periwinkle for ice blue for the sea dark green for Yggdrasil bright green for nature and landvaettir yellow for sunshine and joy in community brown for inclusion and affirmation of Heathens of color black for the dead

racism, transphobia, and other shitty behavior will be blocked and mocked 💖

[liindwyrm]

feel free to reblog or comment why !

[liindwyrm]

Oh my god holy shit...

Holy shit, I fucking understand the impact the Norse myths have...oh my god, I'm sobbing. 😭

I get it now. Like actually.

[liindwyrm]

Altar dedicated to Ingwe-Freyr 💚

(Rune cards by @thechaoticgingers )

[liindwyrm]

I think this book plagiarized my writing.

Disclaimer: Please do not harrass anyone because of this post. Please do not review bomb this author's books. The last thing I want is to sabotage another author's career or kick off a cyberbullying campaign. I am making this post to present my evidence and get the truth out there so readers can make informed decisions about the books they invest in, NOT as any sort of personal attack on this author.

In case you don't follow my blog: Hi, I'm Sam. I'm a queer, neurodivergent witch and author who writes books about witchcraft, paganism, and identity politics. I also read a lot of books about those topics because I enjoy hearing what other people have to say about them.

Recently, I was reading the book Herbal Tea Magic for the Modern Witch by Elsie Wild and realized what I was reading felt familiar. Like, really, really familiar. Like, "hey, isn't this my work?" familiar.

Herbal Tea Magic for the Modern Witch was published in November, 2021. It contains a section titled "The Four Components of a Spell," which is very, very similar to a blog post I made in April of 2020, titled "How to Cast Spells That Work." I also posted a video version of that blog post to YouTube at the same time. You can read the original blog post in full here.

Below is a table I made where I laid out my text and the excerpt from Elsie Wild's book side by side. Words and phrases highlighted in orange are identical across both texts. Words and phrases highlighted in blue are the same idea, but phrased slightly differently.

As far as I am aware, this four-part model for spellcrafting is my original creation. Although I was inspired by books on magic and spellcraft (especially Wicca For Beginners by Thea Sabin), this simplified model is one I created to make spellwork more simple and accessible for beginners.

I think there's too many similarities between the two texts to be a coincidence. To me with my journalism degree, this looks like paraphrasing plagiarism, a type of plagiarism where an author repeats someone else's ideas but changes the exact language to hide the similarity.

Wild does incorporate some of her own ideas as well, and I'm definitely not claiming that her entire book is plagiarized, but I believe the main idea of this specific passage is plagiarized from my blog.

Paraphrasing plagiarism is still plagiarism. This author may not have literally copied and pasted my work, but I think she is very much trying to pass off my ideas as her own.

All that being said, I have no reason to believe Elsie Wild plagiarized me on purpose. In 2020 and 2021, a lot of my content from Tumblr was stolen and reposted on other platforms, especially Instagram. I personally have come across several accounts that took screenshots of my blog, cropped out my username, and then posted my content without credit. There are probably many others I never caught. It's possible Wild saw my words on one of these accounts and had no idea who the original author was.

I have reached out both to Elsie Wild and to her publishing company, Ulysses Press, but as of this post I have not heard back from either. I really wish I could talk to someone who worked on this book to get more information, but it has now been several weeks with no response, so I decided to go public because I feel like people deserve to know about this.

Again, I am not trying to cancel Elsie Wild or her publisher, but I'll admit I'm hurt by the possibility of someone else taking credit for my ideas. I genuinely do hope any plagiarism was unintentional because the alternative is a full-time writer with an established career knowingly plagiarizing from online creators with smaller platforms.

If you'd like to help me out, you can do that by reblogging this post and/or buying my books. Helping spread the word about this is very, very much appreciated.

[liindwyrm]

Phases of learning about witchcraft, as I experienced them:

Taking everything you're told at face value.

Deciding you don't like/won't use/will change some of what you're told.

Realizing that most of the historical claims you're reading are absolute bullshit. Everything is a lie!

Getting more into actual history and rejecting anything tainted by historical inaccuracies. Folk magic!

Deciding not to base your practice on actual historical accounts of witchcraft which were given under torture.

Learning to enjoy useful bits of technique while ignoring related historical claims.

Appreciating people who admit that they just made up/figured some shit out and there is no lineage associated with it.

In closing, you don't need the pretense of history to legitimize your practice. We can move beyond that.

[liindwyrm]

I feel like when people get into deity work, deity worship or anything deity related we all kinda think that we NEED to communicate with them, we NEED to do tarot cards with them, we NEED to reach out and actively work with them. But I feel like that's not it. Yes, you can communicate with them if you and them want to. Yes, you can do tarot cards with them. Yes, you can actively work with them, but you don't HAVE to. I think you can also just light their candle, give them an offering and just spend 20 minutes or however long you want listening to music with them and just chatting to them about whatever is on your mind and they won't mind it. Because you are putting in the effort and your time to be with them even if it's not doing any of the things you see a lot of pagans and witches do on tiktok.

[liindwyrm]

What really hurts about religious discourse is how much we all have in common. I know being a Hellenist brings me unfathomable levels of warmth and comfort that I can’t find anywhere else. And I know there are people of other faiths that feel that way with their deities.

There’s so much emphasis on who is “right” or “wrong”, but I don’t believe there’s one truth for everyone. We all have such different lives and paths. The way religion is used as a weapon of hate and not a tool for love and compassion will always sadden me.

I may not personally worship every deity of every religion, but I acknowledge that the feeling of spiritual fulfillment that other religions give people is real. That is enough for me to find love in my heart for them all.

If Allah can bring you that feeling, THATS BEAUTIFUL!! If Jesus can bring you that feeling, THATS BEAUTIFUL!! If any deity of any faith can bring you that feeling….THATS BEAUTIFUL!!!!

Personally, I don’t see my religion as an undeniable truth for everyone. I see it as spiritual connection that brings me love and warmth like no other. I know Lady Aphrodite is real in my heart, because I feel her. I can never give you an equation or a fact that proves my feelings, but I know it’s true in my life. How could you look someone in the eyes and tell them they’ll be punished for seeking love and warmth?

I know I’m just rambling, but I just wish we could live in a world where religion wasn’t a competition of who is right, but a way for us to find more beauty and fulfillment in our worlds.

[liindwyrm]

I think one of the hardest lessons I've had to learn as a pagan, is that it's sometimes okay to not do anything.

Constantly dividing my mind between worship, work (gaining income), school, and my social life tore me apart. And I was ashamed to even talk to my deities when months had passed. But they weren't ashamed of me.

Sometimes doing your best is an act of worship. It's not about giving up what you need to survive. You matter. You always have mattered.

[liindwyrm]

The Spirits do not judge you unfairly for your humanity. Your queerness is sacred and divine, your disability is a piece of your holy puzzle and your body is a blessing no matter how it may come.

The Ancestors have lived it, the trees, the hills, the mountains, the sea and the saints have seen it.

The Spirits do not judge you unfairly for your humanity. Imperfection is wholly and entirely perfect.

[liindwyrm]

Just a smãaaaaaalll reminder that Roman deities aren't copy paste Greek deities!!

If you look deeper into Roman history, you can see that most of these "Roman Equivalent of greek gods" are actually from other people of the Italian peninsula! Such as Sabines, Etruscans, Samnites, and more!

Sorry guys but i might have a hyper fixation on roman polytheism and... Lady Minerva's kindness is noooot helping it /pos love her!!!