As non-heathens about heathenry and, if they accept that it exists at all, they may well employ the term 'warrior-cult' in their description. As any heathens, and most will try to distance themselves completely from any suggestion of such a thing.
Few will ever try to deny that the eddas, sagas and lays, the foundation of the historical evidence available to contemporary heathens, contains a lot of references to battles and the glorification of the warrior. This doesn't mean that constitutes the be all and end all of the philosophy, though. There is much more to it than that. Reading that same source material and plugging the considerable gaps with archaeological, historical and even anthropological evidence can provide a world view with a much greater scope and depth.
The vikings were great traders, they formed one of the first democratic assemblies, their sagas and lays are some of the best examples of historical literature currently available. The gods are very human and fallible and yet show such courage and fortitude in the face of their imminent demise.
But it is also wrong to ignore the role of the warrior in the mythology. Battle, acquisition through combat, testing oneself and standing up for yourself was greatly valued. Too many contemporary heathens are bench-ornaments. They shie away from confrontation and competition. Too many elect to take the passive option when disagreements arise. Is this really how our heathen ancestors would have acted. Or, at least, is this the attitude they would have valued?
Judging by the evidence that lay within the eddas, sagas and lays, I very much doubt it.
No comments:
Post a Comment