Talk:Odin

Anyone know: Which eye?

The left.

• The right is the eye generally imagined to be the one he plucked from his head although afaik there is no source which corroborates this either way. Sjc 05:52, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I'm not aware of any written accounts that describe one eye or the other. The only evidence I found was a statue excavated from a Swedish site, depicting his right eye missing:

http://home.enter.vg/arildhaugesruner/figur-odin.htm

This statue is authentic; however, this isn't completely ironclad. That it is supposed to be Odin is only a surmise drawn by the archaeologists. My understanding is that the backbone of the legend did not specify; thus, it became a matter for individual skalds and--in the case of physical depictions--craftsmen to determine. JoomTory 16:39, 17 Jun 2005

Contents

1 Gangleri 2 The left eye 3 Odin and the Church 4 Wodan 5 Odin's origin 6 Woden 7 Jesus 8 Pulled from "Modern References"

Gangleri

• Halló! It seems that Gangleri is a Disambiguation. I have written somthing about this at the German equivalent to User:Gangleri see w:de:Benutzer:Gangleri#.C3.9Cber_mich. Hope to get a GNU picture showing the ca. 750 year old original drowing from where [1] (http://www.simnet.is/heimskringla/gangleri.gif) was remade.
• At the .pdf file [2] (http://www.isbok.is/autgafan/downl/BrisingamenFreyju.pdf) is a list of Odins names. Search for "er nú teljast í Óðinsheitum" and look at the following list. Regards Gangleri 06:36, 2004 Oct 2 (UTC)

The left eye

It is said that it was his left eye.

The left hand has always been associated with irrationality. Thus, we can say that Odin sacrified his passions and other irrational things to acquire knowledge and wisdom, which is totally acceptable, since the path of science and knowledge means, for anyone who chooses it, sacrifice and hard work.

Odin and the Church

this section badly needs revision. It should give some historical perspective, citing important missionaries (Adam von Bremen, Columban,...) etc. dab 11:59, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC) did some of that myself. [[User:Dbachmann|dab (T) ]]

Wodan

I also suggest disambiguation of Wodan/Woden from Odin. Of course the gods are (closely) related, but there are differences. The Woden article woudl concentrate on Anglo-Saxon traditions, and the Wodan/Wothan one on German ones. dab 12:13, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

When I appeared at Wikipedia, I merged the Wotan article with the Odin article. These are my reasons:

1. If in the 8th century, a Thuringian, a Dane and an Anglo-Saxon would have discussed their gods, they would hardly have understood Woden, Wotan and Odin as different gods.
2. The beliefs varied naturally from century to century and from region to region. The beliefs in Odin were regionally alive as late as 19h century Sweden. Any disambiguation would have to be done solely on linguistic form.
3. Some of the separate articles on Wotan, Woden, Guodan, Odin and Oden would have very scant information. Last time I checked the German Wikipedia article on Wotan, most of the information came from Norse mythology, which is a strong argument against creating a separate article for Wotan.--Wiglaf 21:47, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Having checked the German article, it appears that the Germans have merged the Wotan article into the Odin article.--Wiglaf 21:54, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I understand, and agree. In this case, however, how do we discuss the differences between the (no doubt very similar) traditions? Do I start a "Woden" section in this article? [[User:Dbachmann|dab (T) ]] 22:07, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think such a subsection would be a great idea.--Wiglaf 22:11, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Woden/Wotan deserve a subsection if only because much of the Odin story is linked to Sturlson and the Prose and Verse Edda which are later and much more developed myths (I think the word is synthesised)and reflect the longer 'presence' of Odin, where Woden was left behind in the 9th century. Information on he mythology of Wotan and Woden of the periods when they were gods rather than memories is scant but the fact that this knowledge is known to be lost should be mentioned.

I suggest reference to The Lost Gods of England, Brian Branston as a source for info on Woden. GDL 27-1-2005

Odin's origin

There is a people living by the Sea of Azov calling themselves Odin.

Snorre Sturlasson's "Heimskringla" (translating to something like the globe where we live) claims that Odin was a historical figure hailing from this community Snorre uses the word Ashov and places it somewhere around the Sea of Azov. According to Snorre Odin lead his people through Germania (they were forced away from their homelands by a roman expedition), fighting several battles with the locals, and eventually settled down in Scandinavia as the ruling class.

In Thor Heyerdahl's "Jakten på Odin : på sporet av vår fortid" (The hunt for Odin: tracking our past) this idea is explored, though the findings of this expedition were scarse, they seem to point towards this as a plausible Origin of Odin.

There is also a lake in present day Turkey, south of the caucassus called Lake Van. Van being the name of the rival tribe of gods in norse mythology. This would also point towards the plausibility of this interpretation.

sure, we are referring to this. read the article, and see The search for Odin. dab (ᛏ) 16:15, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Woden

I only just realized that there is an independent article on Woden. Since this article aims at portraying the common Germanic god, should it maybe be merged here? dab (ᛏ) 10:18, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely, it was created in order to "reclaim him for the English". I have left a merger note on the talkpage, if a better reason was not provided. I have intended to merge the two for some while but haven't got around.--Wiglaf 11:40, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

doh, sorry, I failed to check the Talk page. However, the present article is growing long, and we may have to export some stuff. The popculture-references should be the first to go , though, we can do a List of references to Odin in popular culture. dab (ᛏ) 12:06, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Great idea! I think this article needs a lot of work, anyway.--Wiglaf 12:24, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

whoops, sorry for the edit conflict. Now, we need a major cleanup, mainly regarding arrangement of the material. Do we want thematic sections, or a clear separation of English/Norse/German? For example, the Wild Hunt may appear under "medieval reception", but also under each geographical variant. dab (ᛏ) 12:38, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My take is that Odin was perceived by the believers as one and the same, whether they called him Wotan, Wodan, Woden, Oden or Odin. Likewise modern believers seem to use the form they like most, without implying a division into several gods. So, I think the best way would be to have themes that start with a link to a "main article" on the theme. For instance, I have added a part on the Battle of Lena and I think it would be better to have it together with a more extensive discussion on later beliefs in a separate article.--Wiglaf 12:44, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

yes, but there are remaining parts that still show that the article was about eddaic Odin, exclusively. E.g. "Odin's love for wisdom can also be seen in his work as a farmhand for a summer, for Baugi" in the 'shamanic' section would now need a specification 'in the Edda'. dab (ᛏ) 12:51, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps the best thing would be to have this article as the "main article" and then spin off both geographical and thematic subarticles. We could make a navigation table as well.--Wiglaf 13:37, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

(And Category:Vodinaz?) -- let's think this over, first, cautiously, reviewing the material we have. It would mean we go back to a Woden article, which I have just merged here. I have exported the pop culture references, and the list of kenningars, this should give us some breathing space for now. dab (ᛏ) 13:56, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I was just considering your suggestion.--Wiglaf 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

you see, the "worship part" is supposed to be about Odin/Woden/Wotan summarily, so we shouldn't say remnants are preserved in Scandinavian folklore, since there are also traces in English and German folklore.dab (ᛏ) 14:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My mistake. I misunderstood the paragraph since a similar line exists in Scandinavian folklore.--Wiglaf 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Similar things are scattered across the article, and we'll have to go through the entire text attentively, catching ambiguity. It should be clear at any point if reference is being made to a geographical variant, to the reconstructed Migration age god, or to the variants taken together. Also, within the Scandinavian part, we have to be careful to distinguish Eddaic features, which do dominate the picture, with other information. E.g. the Valknut association is Scandinavian, but not Eddaic. I cannot do this right now -- if you cannot, either, I'll just be back at some later point. regards, dab (ᛏ) 14:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

We'll take it slowly. This article is a jungle.--Wiglaf 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

it is :) but it could be very good -- we may have to separate it into sections pointing to main articles. So will we have Woden and Wotan after all? Then, for symmetry, the Scandinavian main article should be at Odin, begging the question: where will we put the summarizing, reconstructing article? At Vodinaz? At Vatinos? These forms are not current at all. Odin (summary)? Odin/Woden/Wotan? difficult, difficult... Let's clean up the jungle first, and see where that leads us :o) dab (ᛏ) 16:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it could be a great article. I have began by cleaning up the intro :).--Wiglaf 19:07, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jesus

I don't have the time to do this right now, but we may need a separate "Odin and Jesus" section treating the similarities, including the Nazi ideas. I found a suggestion somewhere concerning Triskaidekaphobia that links Loki to Judas, and the feast in Valhalla where Loki gate-crashes with the Last Supper. dab (ᛏ) 09:57, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Pulled from "Modern References"

This needs to be revised to make it clear that, NPD aside, many modern Neo-Pagan/Asatru groups are not Nazis, nor is the comparison between Jesus and Odin solely part of Nazi ideology:

Wagner's association of Odin with Jesus is treated in the Notes of the Seminar Given in 1928–1930 of Carl Gustav Jung. Recently, the German NPD issued T-Shirts labelled Odin statt Jesus ("Odin rather than Jesus") that were popular also among apolitical Neo-Pagans, re-inforcing the Nazi idea of Odin as an "Aryan Jesus".

Also, Wagner should be on the "popular culture" page; I'm not sure about the asteroid, but it seems, if not significant, then certainly interesting. --Notcarlos 15:52, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the Jesus connection needs to be clearer. However, it clearly said here that the identification goes back to Wagner, who was not a Nazi, so your objection seems unfounded. Also, I don't see where this suggests that "Neo-Pagans are Nazis"? The asteroid belongs on Odin (disambiguation). I don't see how it is more notable than the two dozen other pop culture references. dab (ᛏ) 16:24, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Gramatically, the phrase "re-inforcing the idea that Nazi" etc. can be read as modifying "apolitical Neo-Pagans" as well as the NPD. Perhaps remove or move the Neo-Pagan reference?

Also, while Wagner himself was not a Nazi (that would have been a trick), his cultural contributions were used by the Nazis as part of their ideology, and his work does "bear the stain," as it were, for many groups. Ultimately while all your objections are valid, you might develop these ideas in separate paragraphs, so that it's absolutely clear there is no connection between these ideas.

And you're right about the asteriod. Mea Culpa. Notcarlos 16:27, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

I understand your concerns, I think, and they are valid. Well, part of them, anyway: Wagner may "bear the stain" for some people, but so does Snorri himself, or the whole topic altogether. That's beside the point. We just need to avoid making suggestive statements inadvertently. Now, even the Neo-pagans can be argued to "bear the stain". Below the line, it must be admitted, that there are apolitical and political Neo-pagans. And the political ones typically fall into the categories "green" and "brown". This is not the article to discuss this, of course, but there is a certain connection between Romanticsm, Wagner, the Nazis, Neo-Nazis and the Neo-Pagan "scene" that cannot be denied. We just have to avoid making suggestions that they may be lumped together in any way.

now, this whole article needs revision. Mainly, we need a concept as to how to organize the information already in it. For example, we need to somehow accommodate the temporal and the geographic dimensions. The fact that most information is Norse, while the article aims to be about all variants of the god doesn't make it easier. we need to accommodate

• reconstructed common germanic (Migration age) Wodinaz
• medieval
  • North Germanic Odin
  • West Germanic Woden/Wotan, especially Anglo-Saxon Woden
  • possible Christinan influence before Christianization
  • perception after Christianization, folklore
• "Viking revival", Romanticism, Wagner
• Nazi and Neo-Nazi issues
• 20th century popular culture and Neo-paganism

so for the purpose of the Odin-Jesus connection, I am uncertain whether to discuss it in the modern section, in the medieval section, or in the eddaic section, since it really pervades the whole temporal dimension. I think the best solution will be to discuss the ToC arrangement first, before we address the wording in detail, because the ToC rearrangement will have an impact on the wording anyway. Your suggestions are very welcome. I am not trying to have it "my way" at all, I am genuinely uncertain what is the best way to present you. I would just ask you to rephrase things you find objectionable, rather than just removing information. regards, dab (ᛏ) 17:44, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, to all. That would be a good article to read, I think. Odin/Jesus is a tough one; there should definitely be some mention of this in the early medieval section, but the best place for this would probably be the Eddas, since this is, if not the primary source, then certainly the most popular for "traditional" interpretations of the god. I'll think about the TOC and comment on that later.

As for the rest, I don't know what I was thinking, pulling that section; it was bad etiquette, I know. Again, mea culpa. Notcarlos 20:05, 10 May 2005 (UTC)