Heathenry: All form and no content?

The following article was inspired by an experience our hearth had a few weeks ago. We had arranged to meet with people we'd met online at a fairly local moot. While we hadn't met any other members of this group before, we were looking forward to the meet up, as at least one of the attendees, the organiser, had shown themselves to be what we considered a good heathen and the kind of person we'd like to hang out with (not an accolade we bestow lightly).

The gods had other ideas, though. The day of the moot turned out to be one of the first sunny days of the year, spring having sprung a week or two earlier. Due to the nice weather, every man and his dog turned up to the meeting place. This would not, necessarily, be a problem - were it not for the very limited parking available. We drove around for quite some time, but to no avail. More and more people descended upon the area, bringing their unnecessarily large automobiles with them.

So, we left a message stating that, sadly, we wouldn't be able to attend and headed home. When we got back, it turned out the moot organiser had suffered the same problem and had also been unable to attend. Shame, but we all resolved to meet again next time.

All, that was, except one guy. Let's call him 'Bill'. Apparently, Bill had turned up and had been waiting for us all to arrive. Bill felt he had been unfairly put out by our failure to arrive. Despite the heavy traffic (and limited parking) being more than evident and despite our messages of explanation and apology, Bill decided to get massively butthurt over this.

It would seem being left alone on a beautifully sunny day had really aggravated him. Being made to attend a really nice pub with a very nice menu and good range of ales was probably the last straw.

To some extent, I can understand being a little annoyed. What I can't understand is leaving a really immature message on the group's online noticeboard and complaining that the organiser had let him down. I also recall some ad hominem attacks, if I am not mistaken. Seriously, this guy was whining like crazy over one lousy cancelled moot.

Thing is, looking at his profile on social media, he seemed to have given himself a really butch viking-style name (think 'Ragnar Thunderpants, or similar) and seemed to buy into the whole heathen/viking macho ideal. Perhaps not quite full on Brosatru, but getting there.

How can this guy think of himself as a modern, tough, stoic viking and then get really upset about a long drive to a nice pub near a beautiful park that didn't quite go to plan? Does Bill consider that hardship? He should try crossing the Atlantic in a longship...

This really has me worried now that a much greater proportion of the heathen community than I had previously thought are precisely this kind of immature, 'dummies out of the pram' style whinger.

To me, one of the most important things that attracted me to heathenry in the first place was the fact that it actively discouraged this kind of attention-seeking, diva-like behaviour. I'm not saying I want a mindless, Rambo-esque Brosatru hearth or moot, but just no-one that needs suckling before we can get to the proper business of drinking and setting the world to rights.

Too much to ask?

Einherjar: Lone Fighters

I was reading somewhere else online (another heathen blog, perhaps) that the old norse name for the warriors in Valhalla, 'einherjar' literally means something along the lines of 'those who fight alone'.

The writer in question explained that viking warriors were trained in all aspects of combat and could be thought of as 'a one-man army'. Thus, they were well prepared for and perfectly able to fight alone, even outside of the shield wall, if necessary.

All of this I agreed with and admire, but it was at this point that the writer went on to use this to explain the importance, for them, of time alone.

I don't really feel that the importance of alone time (whoever enjoyable that might be) was the lesson to take from this. Rather, I think the more valuable attribute (especially in this modern age and in an overcrowded nation such as the UK) was the importance of self reliance.

Being able to operate, provide for oneself and even thrive - alone - is a very admirable trait. Especially in contemporary society, in which we are expect, and required, to rely on others for everything. Our food, our security, our entertainment, fixing our tools and even making decisions for the direction of our lives and the upbringing of our families - all are provided by third parties. This can leave us over-reliant and unable to fend for ourselves, if we are not careful.

So, perhaps, in a time where striving to be ferocious, ruthless warriors is frowned upon, being something of a Renaissance Man is the next best thing for the modern heathen?

More quotes

“The Norse ideal was a man of open, generous disposition, a man imbued with qualities of compassion and kindness, not ruthless but firm and fair, even-tempered but capable of passion, physically accomplished and strong in [a] fight, but not a bully.”
--Magnus Magnusson

“To do what lay before him openly and like a man, without fear of either foes, friends, nor fate… to be free and daring in all his deeds; to be gentle and generous to his friends and kinsmen, to be stern and grim to his foes, but even towards them to fulfill all bounden duties… to be no truce-breaker, nor tale-bearer, nor back-biter. To utter nothing against any man that he would not dare tell him to his face. To turn no man from his door who sought food or shelter, even though he were a foe.”
--George Dasent

Heroism

"In Viking times, not only did a man fight with courage, travel with enterprise, or die with nobility; the writer of his epitaph thought it worth describing these events in the language and form of heroic verse. To take a couple of examples out of many. At Sjörup, Skâne, is a memorial stone, perhaps of the eleventh century, set up by a man after his félagi (a word which, in this context, I take to mean'comrade-in-arms'). The primary record, set in an outerband of runes, is simple description: 'Saxi put up this stone in memory of his comrade Asbjorn, Tóki's son'. Within this is a second band of runes, comprising two lines of verse which show why Asbjorn needed and deserved commemoration: Sárfló eigi at Upsalumen va meó hann vápn hafdi* 'He did not run at Uppsala, but fought while he could hold weapons.' The significance of this example is that, to recount a heroic deed, its verse uses a form of words that must have been traditional in heroic poetry. The Norse en vámeó hann vápn hafdi gives the parallel to the Old English heroic formula pa hwile pe hi (he) wœpna wealdan moston(moste), 'as long as they (he) could wield weapons', used of the doomed English defiance to the invaders in the poem of As on the Söderby, Uppland, Sweden, rune-stone (L. Musset, Introduction à larunologie (Paris, 1965), p. 392). The stone was a memorial to Helgi whom Sasur killed,'and he did a nióingsverk—betrayed his comrade.'4 L. Jacobsen and E. Moltke, Danmarks runeindskrifier (Kobenhavn, 1941-2), text,cols. 332-4. The last line of verse is variously divided into its separate words, but this does not affect the argument...

....The man who put up this stone in Skâne looked upon his slaughteredfriend in the same way: as one who had perished in valiant resistance, refusing the easy option of flight. We are not surewhat this battle at Uppsala was, and it may have been a sordid little skirmish; but here it has become a great and heroic Viking adventure."

~excerpt from 'A Most Vile People': Early English Historians on the Vikings, by R. I. Page

Heathenry is more than just a warrior cult...

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.